Although I'm amazed by the clarity of HDTV, to me it still doesn't hold a candle to seeing color tv back in the 50's. It almost seems now like something out of place in the era. Programs in color! when most of the world was just getting used to B & W.

Sorry I guess it still brings back a very magical time for me.

if you look closely at any hdtv signal on a quality set it still looks like crap. there are digital artifacts everywhere in the picture. what was wrong with the analog system we are using now. the government had no business whatsoever sticking their stupid noses into the tv business as far as analog signal goes. hell fire what about the starving kids we have here and the government is going to issue $40.oo coupouns toward the purchace of hdtv to analog converters. hell they ought to have to furnish everyone with a new quality {ha,ha,ha,} hdtv set. steve

if you look closely at any hdtv signal on a quality set it still looks like crap. there are digital artifacts everywhere in the picture. what was wrong with the analog system we are using now. the government had no business whatsoever sticking their stupid noses into the tv business as far as analog signal goes. hell fire what about the starving kids we have here and the government is going to issue $40.oo coupouns toward the purchace of hdtv to analog converters. hell they ought to have to furnish everyone with a new quality {ha,ha,ha,} hdtv set. steve

Good luck if you live in a fringe area and are stuck with ATSC tv. Plus, its great having the black bars take up half the screen on everything you watch due to the fact that HD programming in 16:9 has to be resized to fit on a 4:3 screen.

The issue of leaving analog and moving to all digital is purely about the issue of bandwidth and picture quality. The airwaves are a very very valuable and finite comodity. The bandwidth must be used for many many many different purposes. The most economical way to do that is to use the latest technology to transmit the information in an encripted digital manner, and be able to send 10 or more times the information in the same bandwidth.

(BTW the government has every right to tell the public how the airwaves must be used. The FCC has been doing that since it was established. The airwaves are the property of the government. Every government has the right to control the airwaves over it own airspace. The various frequencies allocated to various things such as Television and Radio are only "licensed" to the TV and radio stations and if the stations do not comply with the mandates of the FCC the license to use a given frequency can be revoked.)

As for the $40 coupon the government will be issuing, I figure I pay taxes, and the money is mine to begin with. But the fact is that those coupons will be used mostly by poor people who can not afford to buy a new TV with a digital tuner.

AS for picture quality... I live within the shadow (less then 1/4 mile) of no less than 6, 1000+ foot tall tv transmission towers in Milwaukee. I emphasize the word SHADOW. I have lived here since 1951 and have had problems with signal overload, ghosting, and cross chanel interference since the beginning because I am so close and the transmissions either overload my tv sets or the signal is blocked because I am to close to the base of the towers.

I recently purchased a Phillips 42" LCD HDTV with ATSC digital tuning. I now, for the 1st time in over 50 years, can receive PERFECT picture quality on every station that is broadcasting in digital format. The same station's analog signals continue to give me very shitty picture quality.

AS far as artifacts on a digital tv, that is due to either a much to highly compressed signal (one with less information than needed to fill a given screen size) or a very crapy digital tv that does a poor job of processing the digital information. A good digital transmission containing a sufficient amount of picture information, shown on a quality digital TV will run rings around the clarity and sharpness of any analog tv you can produce.

I get most of my program material from the master broadcast signals via a digital C-band satelite dish. (not the highly compressed and shitty Direct TV pizza dish... I am talking about the Big 10 foot type dish). I get both High definition and Standard Definition program material from more than 20 satelites in the Clarke belt. I can assure you that there is nothing that compares to a true High Definition broadcast shown on a quality HDTV receiver.

I enjoy my collection of old tv sets. I even enjoy watching them for the sake of nostalgia. But I will be the first to admit that their picture quality can not hold a candle to todays technology.

With reapect to fringe area broadcasts, you should be able to pick up digital broadcasts with a basic UHF roof top antenna up to 50 miles away from most digital transmitters without any degradation in picture quality. (no degradation in picture quality is the big plus of digital transmissions)

AS for the black bars on the sides of your screen, If you have a HDTV like my Phillips, there is a feature that automatically sizes the incomming signal to fit the entire screen regardless of the transmited picture format. I have no black bars on any picture I watch. The picture is automatically resized to fit the full screen

Thank you, thank you, thank you ohohyodafarted. It is good to read "notes of wisdom" from someone who can make honest, balanced opinions after having seen both sides of an issue, rather than just bash new technology because it is new. (How ironic is the concept of complaining about the new TV standards and government involvement, in a forum specifically dedicated to enjoying and preserving what was at the time a new TV standard that owed its availability to the government??) :rolleyes:

What most people do not realize yet is that digital TV signals almost always are much lower power than the same station's analog signal. When the analog stuff gets turned off in 2009, finally, the stations should be boosting their digital signals up to "normal" power levels. Fringe reception will then be a non-issue for many people, and remember, the signal they receive will be flawless, ghost- and snow-free.

Black bars are a good thing. The real travesty, still perpetrated by ignorant programmers such as HBO even in its HD version, is to mutilate movies to make them fill a 4:3 screen. Are there really people out there who would want every picture in an art gallery, every Picasso, Rembrandt, or da Vinci to have its top and bottom, or left and right sides, cut off so they all fit some matched-size frame? Do people not understand the concept is the same with motion visual programming? It is now the 21st Century... If you want to watch modern TV programming and have it fill your screen, get a wide-screen TV. Do not worry, no high-def TV programs will be produced in any aspect ratio other than the 16:9 that will fill all of your new screen with light, if that is so important. (Of course, all the "old" stuff will have black bars on the sides of the new TV; should we then complain about them not "fixing" those shows?) :)

I'm not disputing the advance in technology thru the years, only the initial impact of color vs hdtv.

Today with all the other distractions hdtv almost gets lost in the crowd

Back then tv was the thing, you didn't have cable, internet, video games and so on.

To add color back then was a pretty bold move and futuristic by any stretch of the imagination.

I hear you Oldtvman. I know what your are saying and I too feel no excitement with HDTV like I did when I got my first color set in the mid 60's. And when you think about what a grand engineering accomplishment the pioneers of early color had done, it is nothing short of miraculous. The state of technology at the time was very crude compared to what we have today. Jumping from a B&W tv to color and doing it in the same bandwidth with the crude circuitry that was available was a miracle of engineering. I guess we in this hobby of collecting and restoring these old sets all feel the same nostalgia for these old relics.

But time marches on and technological progress will not be stoped just because we long for the good old days.

In my short lifetime we have gone from the beginnings of tv in 1947 when a Dick Tracey wrist radio was a peice of science fiction, to a cellular telephone in everyones pocket that will take digital photographs and now also, watch live television on that palm sized device in nothing less than Living Color from NBC.

It's called MediaFlo and is available as we speek from Verizon in many major cities. And will be available in 2008 via Cingular (now AT&T wireless) It was invented by Qualcomm and will be in almost every city as soon as the tv stations vacate chanel 55 in the UHF spectrum. That will happen around February 2009 when all analog tv transmission is slated to shut down as mandated by the FCC. Unfortunately here in Milwaukee I will have to wait until the local chanel 55 station is forced to vacate it's spectrum, and give it over to MediaFlo.

I hate to poop on the parade, but I'm not all that impressed with most "new" innovations. Excepting the fields of nano-tech, DNA and other molecular level science, there isn't much out there now that didn't exist 20-30 years ago at a higher pricetag.

I laugh when the engineers I work with dismiss the technological feats of 20-30+ years ago as "crude". Half of them are out of their element when asked to do something out of thier comfort zone, (or do math without a calculator) let alone conceptualize an entirely new idea.

It's akin to shade-tree mechanics (on the other AK board) calling some kind of car "crap", but they're usually just mouthing what they've heard and can't back-up the "why".

You want to know what's crap? Ignoring the wants of the free-market to impose a system that will make the airwaves even more inaccesable to Joe Citizen. Putting a gun in my proverbial face and saying "Broadcast on analog and you will lose your freedom, because mega-corp X paid more to use it." Don't hand me the load of bull that says "We need the airwaves for police/fire/FBI/anti-boggieman" Since when have those organizations wanted to use the jammable open airwaves; 1935, when digital/sat. technology didn't exist?

the government has every right to tell the public how the airwaves must be used. The FCC has been doing that since it was established. The airwaves are the property of the government. Every government has the right to control the airwaves over it own airspace.

This quote scares the crap otta me to think people actually think this way... Man our schools suck! The last two sentences should be followed by:

Each to his need, each to his ability.

How many independant TV stations have become worthless because of the digital expense? Only the biggest handful of media monopolies can afford this tech + the FCC license. So long as I watch FOX or CBS, I should be getting both sides, hahaha!

The first time in 2009 a Tornado comes through and I have to turn on the old basement set but get nothing but static, I'll thank Sony, Hitachi, JVC and all the other foreign companies who lobbied my government to drop the "backwards compatible" FCC requirement for HDTV.

I'll make a point to do the same when landfills are overun with millions of TV sets made practicallyuseless overnight. Everytime a bird flies overhead and my OTA digital signal turns into a blue screen, I'll say "Thank God I didn't have to see some ghosting!" But then, I don't live under a TV tower, your reception may vary.

Seeing as how only the most epic of movies make use of a 16:9 aspect ratio, while most all camerawork ends up being facial close-ups, dumping a "square" ratio seems the height of stupidity for any visual medium. But at least newspeople won't be able to just get by with a pretty face now, seeing as how the camera will need to be way the hell back just to frame a shot.

I can't wait for TV to seem so real it feels like Fahrenheit 451

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g256/blackenroe2/fahrenheit_451.jpg

I hate to poop on the parade, but I'm not all that impressed with most "new" innovations. Excepting the fields of nano-tech, DNA and other molecular level science, there isn't much out there now that didn't exist 20-30 years ago at a higher pricetag.

I laugh when the engineers I work with dismiss the technological feats of 20-30+ years ago as "crude". Half of them are out of their element when asked to do something out of thier comfort zone, (or do math without a calculator) let alone conceptualize an entirely new idea.

It's akin to shade-tree mechanics (on the other AK board) calling some kind of car "crap", but they're usually just mouthing what they've heard and can't back-up the "why".

You want to know what's crap? Ignoring the wants of the free-market to impose a system that will make the airwaves even more inaccesable to Joe Citizen. Putting a gun in my proverbial face and saying "Broadcast on analog and you will lose your freedom, because mega-corp X paid more to use it." Don't hand me the load of bull that says "We need the airwaves for police/fire/FBI/anti-boggieman" Since when have those organizations wanted to use the jammable open airwaves; 1935, when digital/sat. technology didn't exist?



This quote scares the crap otta me to think people actually think this way... Man our schools suck! The last two sentences should be followed by:



How many independant TV stations have become worthless because of the digital expense? Only the biggest handful of media monopolies can afford this tech + the FCC license. So long as I watch FOX or CBS, I should be getting both sides, hahaha!

The first time in 2009 a Tornado comes through and I have to turn on the old basement set but get nothing but static, I'll thank Sony, Hitachi, JVC and all the other foreign companies who lobbied my government to drop the "backwards compatible" FCC requirement for HDTV.

I'll make a point to do the same when landfills are overun with millions of TV sets made practicallyuseless overnight. Everytime a bird flies overhead and my OTA digital signal turns into a blue screen, I'll say "Thank God I didn't have to see some ghosting!" But then, I don't live under a TV tower, your reception may vary.

Seeing as how only the most epic of movies make use of a 16:9 aspect ratio, while most all camerawork ends up being facial close-ups, dumping a "square" ratio seems the height of stupidity for any visual medium. But at least newspeople won't be able to just get by with a pretty face now, seeing as how the camera will need to be way the hell back just to frame a shot.

I can't wait for TV to seem so real it feels like Fahrenheit 451

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g256/blackenroe2/fahrenheit_451.jpg


Dam right, That was a good post. :yes:

In europe we're going to lose analog TV in 2012... but our digital TV will be basically just a digitized 4:3 PAL signal ,not a 16:9 HDTV signal

As far as i'm concerned, i'm going to watch TV as long as i'm able to do so with my 1976 Philips... i'm not going to spend a buck on any kind of Chinese made, SMD filled, robot assembled, disposable, stinkin' flat panel junk...

By the way, do people really need HDTV? (apart from teens techies) i don't think so... i still see a lot of very old sets and even B/W sets in regular use here...

Francesco

Actually Carmine if your are going to quote Karl Marx at least you could get the qoute correct.

Actually it goes like this

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

The basis of communism. To take from the haves and give to the have nots.

That is the exact philosophy of the liberal Democrats.

Anyhow I digress. Apparently you feel that the government should not have the right to control the airwaves. So lets extend your philosophy to the ultimate. Lets say that the US Government no longer regulates the airwaves (which according to you is the way it should be)

Now any Tom, Dick or Harry can transmit anything he wants at any power level on any frequency he chooses. Oh yes Carmine, that would be a wonderful way to use the airwaves. No more regulation, just a total bunch of chaos on the airwaves.

Please don't misunderstand me Carmine. I am not a proponent of big government. I happen to be an independent businessman and I lothe government interference. However there is a place for government regulation and the FCC is one of those areas that is necessary. Just as we need laws to prevent robery, murder, rape, and other types of social disorder.

Or would you have us go back the the 1950's-60's when cars didn't have a catlytic converter and spewed huge amounts of polution into the air we all breathe. I think we can all agree that clean air is a good thing and dirty car exhaust is not. Well.... there's another example of the government mandating an improvement that the private sector would not have taken upon themselves to impliment.

And the FCC decision to go digital with TV in order to open more chanels in the same amount of spectrum is a wise decission which efficiently uses the available bandwidth. And contrary to your postulation that it will eliminate many small marginal stations, the contrary is true. Going digital will allow a huge number of additional television licenses to be issued to many small marginal would-be broadcasters who would otherwise not have been able to afford the cost of a license because there wasn't enough bandwidth. I predict you will see a lot of new special interest group chanels such as public access which is only available now over cable. You need to open your mind to the possibility of having 10 times the number of chanels we now have under the analog system. All living in peaceful co-existance with each other, with no cross chanel interference. In essence, we will start to approach the kind of chanel diversity we can only have now over cable or satelite dish. With digital transmissions over the air subscription tv like HBO or Pay-Per-View will be possible. It wil open up more competition to the cable and satelite dish companies, fostering price competition and the elimination of the natural monopoly they now have. The future of digital television is bright and exciting.

I have said enough on this subject and strongly suspect that I will not be swaying anyones opinion. Therefore I am wasting my time trying to educate those who have a closed mind to this issue.

"10 times the number of channels" ? Yep, & they'll ALL be playin' that stupid "Head On ! Apply Directly to the Forehead !" commercial...Or have 10 stations playin' reuns of "Lawn Order" instead of 2.. Remember Bruce's spot-on song, "57 channels & nothin' on"..

Gosh Francesco,

Are you still riding from one village to another on horseback, getting your water from a well with a bucket, and craping in an outhouse overthere?

Do we "NEED" HDTV, probably not. the world would not come to an end if HDTV did not exist. But if you had it, you would not want to watch anything else. The picture detail is incredible.

To bad they chose not to do HD in your country Francesco. I guess you will just have to get a DVB (direct view broadcast) receiver and a dish to get your HD. Here in the USA our government made the "correct" decision and every American citizen will all have the opportunity to view the highest quality television picture that modern techonology can produce...over the airwaves and for FREE. I guess the EU will have to suffer with second rate quality television until your governments get with the program.

BTW I realy enjoy my
"SMD filled, robot assembled, disposable, stinkin' flat panel junk"
It has a better picture than your best euro-centric PAL tv set.

Don't get me wrong, I have a 37" Westinghouse LCD panel. I love watching HD programming on a set thats made for it, but i think this forced transition is going to cause alot of confusion. Not to mention the fact that most folks dont know what the difference between ATSC and NTSC in the first place. I've seen more people watching analog TV on an HD set, thinking its HD just because the label on the bezel says it is, than I ever wanted to. And to refine my previous post, I meant that everyone who will be using a coverter box on an older TV will have half of their screen taken up by black bars when watching 16:9 programming, heck, even the local news here is in 16:9 now. If we would just follow the british freeview DVB system and start with 4:3 digital, or simulcasts of both HD and standard format programs in digital, I think it would be a much easier transition.

:headscrat

Oh well on behalf of the US, I apologize for that.

As to the need for government regulation, I completely understand the need to regulate the airwaves. Digital & Analog have been peacfully co-existing for several years now.

Let the market decide. I'm sure any pro-capitalist would agree with that. :thmbsp:

I am curious how the "fringe area" reception will actually play out. My mother lives in a rural area around 70 miles from the nearest main network and PBS transmtters. Analog TV has worked well in this area (with an external antenna) for the 50+ years that I have been alive. There may have been snow at some times, but the channels were always watchable. I am not at this point sure that HTDV will work as well. Time will tell. If it does not, there will be a lot of complaints and there are a fair number of people in this situation.

My mother cannot use her digital cell phone at home as she is to far from the tower. When she had the older 3 watt output(seperate antenna and handset) analog cell phone, she had no problems. So much for digital in that area.

Well I don’t have a closed mind at all. But I do feel over the air FREE TV is dieing and this will kill it. People say that close to 80 % now pay for their TV service either from satellite or cable. The networks are turning into program suppliers not broadcasters.
When the public has to mess with digital they are just going to be confused big time. While the picture is great if the broadcasters start adding more channels their bandwidth for HDTV shrinks so don’t count on have great pictures if they add more channels.

And as for local channels they will never fly because the only reason they are on cable is because they have to be carried. There is very little viewer ship and this is after most of them being on for over 20 years. It is all about content and the local public access stations will never have content the public will watch. Just won’t happen. And I do agree how many times do we need to see “Law and Order”. Try and watch a movie on commercial stations with the spot load running at 15 min per hour most people can’t stand it. Really has helped the DVR market. Just my rant from a person in the bizz.

Once the transition to digital takes place there will be no "over the air and free". That will eventually go away it will be over the air and pay tv. That was the real push from broadcasters since it allowed local stations to compete with the cable station revenue streem. Charge advertisers to advertise, and then charge viewers to watch.

What good is all the eye popping high quality picture with such low quality programing? Besides we already had high definition tv. You can buy analog monitors now with over 800 lines of resolution, and the analog broadcast signal has always been viewed at a lower resolution. A properly set up professional monitor has just as good a picture (in many cases better since there are no digital artifacts) as most HDTV I have seen.

16:9 is fine if I have room for a 20 foot screen to watch it on. On a 50 inch it is a waste.

Bill R

---

No outhouse, and i have an electric pump for my water, but i do ride my horses, it's far safer and relaxing than driving a car in traffic

Let me say that i know what HDTV looks like, and i think i can live without the ability to see a billion of details on a 50" screen... 625 line PAL looks really good on my vintage 26" Philips CRT...

The EU and the Italian government had to retain the 4:3 625 line PAL standard to ensure compatibility with older CRT sets, which still account for about 80% of Italy's TVsets and are being replaced really slowly, it's not uncommon to see 20-30 yrs old sets and even some tube B/Ws in regular use here, especially in poor rural areas, they just get repaired and patched up over and over,

That's also why many DVB-T set top boxes sold here are fitted with an analog RF output, that's needed to feed the converted analog PAL signal in the antenna input of older sets without AV inputs.

Don't forget that many people cannot afford to buy a "new & exciting" HDTV set just because it's cool... they just need something to watch the news or a soccer match into...

Francesco


Gosh Francesco,

Are you still riding from one village to another on horseback, getting your water from a well with a bucket, and craping in an outhouse overthere?

Do we "NEED" HDTV, probably not. the world would not come to an end if HDTV did not exist. But if you had it, you would not want to watch anything else. The picture detail is incredible.

To bad they chose not to do HD in your country Francesco. I guess you will just have to get a DVB (direct view broadcast) receiver and a dish to get your HD. Here in the USA our government made the "correct" decision and every American citizen will all have the opportunity to view the highest quality television picture that modern techonology can produce...over the airwaves and for FREE. I guess the EU will have to suffer with second rate quality television until your governments get with the program.

BTW I realy enjoy my
"SMD filled, robot assembled, disposable, stinkin' flat panel junk"
It has a better picture than your best euro-centric PAL tv set.

I LOVE my color roundies and it gives me a nice warm fuzzy feeling watching stuff on them and all that, but sorry, the picture quality, sharpness, lack of any noise and great detail of my OTA hdtv makes anything on my roundies look fuzzy and downright painful to look at in comparison. If I had to watch something in HD and then immediately switch to a roundie, I'd need some aspirin cuz it would give me a pounding headache.
Even when I'm watching something 4:3 on it that isn't HD it blows away my old color sets. Maybe it's cauze I'm using a late-model CRT projection set and not one of the inferior LCD sets, and have great reception where I am, and don't have cable or dish with their compression artifacts, but that's still where I fall on this subject. I love both technologies, roundies for the nostalgia and HD for the modern advantages.
As far as lack of decent programming, that has always been the case, and maybe even worse back then. Only 7 or 8 channels, and the vast majority of shows were junk or filler material just like now. Less commercials then yes. But 50 years of history gives one the luxury to start imagining that every show back then was the Honeymooners, I Love Lucy, etc etc., but it wasn't.

Well, 60s roundies have a coarse phosphor dot pitch and relatively simple tube circuits... my 1976 Philips K11 daily watcher instead has a tank-like solid state chassis with about 50 transistors and 20 ICs, an electronic tuner and an inline CRT with a really fine phosphor stripe pitch and produces a bright, crisp, wonderful, absolutely noise free picture just like a brand new PAL set... i can't really ask for more...

I'd like to see the picture quality of a 31 yrs old plasma... but there will probably be no surviving plasma sets 31 years from now, especially in working conditions... while my then 60 yrs old Philips will probably keep kickin'ass with its original capacitors :yes:

Francesco

===I'd like to see the picture quality of a 31 yrs old plasma===

Might have a sliiiiiiiight burn in problem... : )

Well, 60s roundies have a coarse phosphor dot pitch and relatively simple tube circuits... my 1976 Philips K11 daily watcher instead has a tank-like solid state chassis with about 50 transistors and 20 ICs, an electronic tuner and an inline CRT with a really fine phosphor stripe pitch and produces a bright, crisp, wonderful, absolutely noise free picture just like a brand new PAL set... i can't really ask for more...

I'd like to see the picture quality of a 31 yrs old plasma... but there will probably be no surviving plasma sets 31 years from now, especially in working conditions... while my then 60 yrs old Philips will probably keep kickin'ass with its original capacitors :yes:

Francesco


Other than the clearity of HD, the old crt does a pretty good good of color accuracy. I've seen several of the flat screen technology that has reds that seem to wash out and flesh tones sometimes appear to have a silvery tone to them.

I LOVE my color roundies and it gives me a nice warm fuzzy feeling watching stuff on them and all that, but sorry, the picture quality, sharpness, lack of any noise and great detail of my OTA hdtv makes anything on my roundies look fuzzy and downright painful to look at in comparison. If I had to watch something in HD and then immediately switch to a roundie, I'd need some aspirin cuz it would give me a pounding headache.
Even when I'm watching something 4:3 on it that isn't HD it blows away my old color sets. Maybe it's cauze I'm using a late-model CRT projection set and not one of the inferior LCD sets, and have great reception where I am, and don't have cable or dish with their compression artifacts, but that's still where I fall on this subject. I love both technologies, roundies for the nostalgia and HD for the modern advantages.
As far as lack of decent programming, that has always been the case, and maybe even worse back then. Only 7 or 8 channels, and the vast majority of shows were junk or filler material just like now. Less commercials then yes. But 50 years of history gives one the luxury to start imagining that every show back then was the Honeymooners, I Love Lucy, etc etc., but it wasn't.


But Frenchy, the whole point of this thread is that back in the fifties, such things as detail and definition were'nt considered quite as important, but to add color back then, just to see shows in color was enough amazement for me, I wasn't fixated on DC restoration, detailing and so on.

I hate to poop on the parade, but I'm not all that impressed with most "new" innovations. Excepting the fields of nano-tech, DNA and other molecular level science, there isn't much out there now that didn't exist 20-30 years ago at a higher pricetag.

I laugh when the engineers I work with dismiss the technological feats of 20-30+ years ago as "crude". Half of them are out of their element when asked to do something out of thier comfort zone, (or do math without a calculator) let alone conceptualize an entirely new idea.'

I'm with ya, man. I come from the "Bert Lantz" school (he was Secretary of State under President Carter) of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." I think instead of forcing NTSC to go dark, there should have been a compromise where part of the UHF spectrum would be HDTV, we could go back up to channel 83, the old AMPS cellphone standard will be phased out this year. The other part of the UHF spectrum and the VHF spectrum would remain NTSC.

My 1982 Zenith can whoop some HDTV's in picture quality or at least give them a good run.

Don't forget that many people cannot afford to buy a "new & exciting" HDTV set just because it's cool... they just need something to watch the news or a soccer match into...

Francesco

There are people like that over here too, I could hear my grandmother now if she was still alive. She passed on in 1997 but if she was still here, sometime in 2009, she'd be complaining that "I cannot get my 'stories' (soap operas) on my TV anymore." She used a 1962 RCA B&W TV, no UHF tuner, up to almost the time she died.

I watched Archie Bunker al ot and there is one time I have to agree with Meathead, his son-in-law, where he read on a box where it said, "new and improved," he said "what were we using before, old and lousy?"

I know someone else said this but I'll second it and say that I apologize on behalf of most Americans about that snide comment, there are times that we can be too arrogant for our own good.

Myself, I can't afford a lot of cool and new stuff,I struggle from time to time economically. Many say, "just buy a new TV," well there are times money is tight that it would take an Act of God to do that. Heck, I've been watching the same set for almost 25 years, a 1982 Zenith System III, I was a 16 year old sophomore in high school when we bought it new and now I'll be 41 next month.

By the way,

The shutdown last year of two out of three national AM public radio broadcasts has created a serious nationwide protest... they probably thought that no one was still listening to AM radio... they were wrong...

I can only imagine the reaction to the shutdown of analog TV broadcasts in 2012... millions of low income people and retirees which are struggling to pay the bills and make it to the next month will be forced to go out and spill 100 bucks for ABSOLUTELY no perceived benefit... or either stop watching TV...

And, by the way, our DVB-T (Digital Video Broadcasting - Terrestrial) set top boxes all have smart card slots and a couple of channels are already requiring payment, so we're probably going to lose free TV someday...

Francesco

Personally I do think HDTV usually looks a lot better than NTSC...however the difference does not mean enough to me to make me want to spend the dough for the new set! I do think my old sets do fine for me.
Every year though, the price of the HDTV sets goes down and there is more HDTV programming available.

I really don't see what any to-do is about this when conversion units for digital to analog will be available with US government funding for those who cannot afford them plus all new TV receiveing devices including TV sets, VCRs, digital recorders etc. must have digital capability.

Also I know several people who, even though they have cable, have hooked up their antenna again so they can get over the air digital HDTV broadcasts. I don't see how digital will decrease over the air viewing.

boy i can here the hackers now having fun with those cards that some stations are going to require you to pay a fee on to watch local tv. ha, ha, ha. i hope they get just what directv got in the beginning. and i made a lot off of directv not on fixing the cards mind you just selling the cards. i made thousands and not just a few thousand. that was the good old days wish i hadnt spent it all. steve

I can only imagine the reaction to the shutdown of analog TV broadcasts in 2012... millions of low income people and retirees which are struggling to pay the bills and make it to the next month will be forced to go out and spill 100 bucks for ABSOLUTELY no perceived benefit... or either stop watching TV...
We are getting a better deal here in the USA. The government will send two US$40 coupons to buy tuner boxes starting next January or so, to any household that requests them. Digital tuner boxes are already available for US$80, and will probably be about $50-60 next year. Regarding "perceived benefit", with any halfway-decent antenna, these boxes will tune in perfect, ghost-free signals, and many stations already have two or more channels in the space of one analog channel. I have the choice of two 24-hour local weather channels, a 24-hour news channel, 24-hour children's commercial-free channel, and others, all crystal-clear (but those ones are not hi-def). At worst case, some people might need to add a US$10 RF modulator to the box. With that, for $25 I can watch all those added channels as well as all of the existing ones except they are clearer, on any TV made since 1946 in the USA... Certainly, anyone in the USA who thinks this is a bad "value" simply has no idea what really deserves complaining about.

The only real gripes I have with digital are bad reception (worse here than analog on the same channel) and the lack of backward compatibility with existing sets. It is not so bad for the large sets using a converter since they usually have something connected to them already such as a VCR, DVD player, etc. I'm really going to miss pulling one of my portable sets off the shelf, sitting it on the kitchen counter or out on the deck, plugging it in and watching. Now all my vintage portables will have to become table models with converters and modulators. I do like the fact that DVD recorders with digital tuners are out now. For my roundie I have one box connected to it which is a VCR-DVD Recorder-ATSC Tuner combo. I use a set of amplified rabbit ears on top of that and a modulator hidden behind the combo unit. It is weird, however, to see digital artifacts and pixelation on a 1960s TV.

If free TV ever goes away, I will reluctantly get cable for the house and use my Archos 604 WiFi media player as my portable set to watch recorded programs and converted DVDs.

As someone once said: Progress was alright once but it went on too long.

Other than the clearity of HD, the old crt does a pretty good good of color accuracy. I've seen several of the flat screen technology that has reds that seem to wash out and flesh tones sometimes appear to have a silvery tone to them.

I've noticed that HD has such a good distinction between facial tones that you can see that people really do have more than one color in their face, as opposed to old sets where a person just seems to have a single 'flesh' color.
But then that's what Hollywood make-up is for : )

We are getting a better deal here in the USA. The government will send two US$40 coupons to buy tuner boxes starting next January or so, to any household that requests them. Digital tuner boxes are already available for US$80, and will probably be about $50-60 next year. Regarding "perceived benefit", with any halfway-decent antenna, these boxes will tune in perfect, ghost-free signals, and many stations already have two or more channels in the space of one analog channel. I have the choice of two 24-hour local weather channels, a 24-hour news channel, 24-hour children's commercial-free channel, and others, all crystal-clear (but those ones are not hi-def). At worst case, some people might need to add a US$10 RF modulator to the box. With that, for $25 I can watch all those added channels as well as all of the existing ones except they are clearer, on any TV made since 1946 in the USA... Certainly, anyone in the USA who thinks this is a bad "value" simply has no idea what really deserves complaining about.


When analog tv goes away what is the incentive for price reductions in digital tuners. The only ones available here (they are no longer available) were $149 not $80. Even if the price drops to $50 I would have to buy 7 of them. Now the government is graciously going to give me two coupons, but what about the other $270 for my sets? I havn't seen a ten dollar rf modulator either, not here. Even at Wal-Mart they are $19.88. So lets see I am now at $409.16 plus tax that's $449.05. Thats almost four hundred and fifty dollars to watch the same sets I can watch now for free with a large antenna. Some "value".
Add to this the fact that I live between Memphis and Nashville. Here we have one ABC station, and one PBS station in Lexington. Memphis is about 80 miles away, and Nashville 130 miles away. Even the Lexington transmitter is about 30 miles away. With a large antenna I could receive the Memphis stations and the local stations, and if I turn the antenna the other way I could receive the stronger Nashville stations. Since the new digital stations will be UHF, at best I will be able to get our 1 local channel, and if there are no birds or bad weather I will get the 1 PBS station maybe, and those will eventually not be free. Some "Value".
Now if I had cable what would happen? Well if JEA of Charter follow the lead of Comcast I may have to still have a box for each set. At a cost of lets say $5.00 per box per month that would be an additional $35 per month to the cable bill, that's an additional $420 per year. Some "value".
Either way the average consumer gets screwed. I think this is something worth complaining about. The digital conversion could have been mandated to coexist or be backwards compatible with the current system. But then nobody would have any incentive to subscribe to the new digital channels other than for HDTV. Bottom line is that digital broadcasting was not consumer driven. It was purely corporate driven for profit. I am not against any company making profits, but I am against forcing it on people. Why not open UHF up to digital HDTV, and leave the rest alone? That way I have the option of buying digital with it's potential HDTV or not. The government does have the right to regulate the air waves spectrum usage, they always have. As a citizen I have the right to use them, and the forced change is going to force some people to simply not watch tv. I am not so sure that is a bad idea (not watching tv that is).
How about this a massive consumer revolt. Leave the system alone, or make it compatible, or we all stop watching broadcast television. For what it's likely to cost me I could buy the DVDs for the programs I watch most.

Just a thought.

Bill R

I cringe when I hear commercials advertising digital "HD" radio. They have already screwed up TV by going digital. If they mess with radio and make all my radios sets obsolete I'll really be mad. I agree with the earlier post. Make it backward compatible or limit it to a special band of frequencies and leave the current system in place. Sometimes good enough is good enough.

I have no less than 8 TV sets in use by now... including one in the barn i'm watching while i'm cleaning the horses stalls...

I'd have to get 8 boxes... that's 800 bucks... no way...

I think i'm going to buy one and feed its RF signal to all TVs in my home, and another one for the barn... as soon as they keep the current 625 line PAL system...

As i've said, i'm not going to buy a new HDTV... i'd rather quit watching TV

Francesco

I cringe when I hear commercials advertising digital "HD" radio. They have already screwed up TV by going digital. If they mess with radio and make all my radios sets obsolete I'll really be mad. I agree with the earlier post. Make it backward compatible or limit it to a special band of frequencies and leave the current system in place. Sometimes good enough is good enough.

"HD" radio is one of the biggest false advertising campaigns i've seen in a while. They market it as "High Definition", yet the HD in HD radio Means Hybrid Digital, not High definition. The quality is worse than a standard FM broadcast, and FAR below the "CD Quality" they claim. The highest bitrate HD radio can transmit is 96 kbit/s or 128 kbit/s, equivalent to a very low quality MP3 file. Is it me or is the "CD quality" misnomer slapped on every lossy compressed digital audio format?

I cringe when I hear commercials advertising digital "HD" radio. They have already screwed up TV by going digital. If they mess with radio and make all my radios sets obsolete I'll really be mad. I agree with the earlier post. Make it backward compatible or limit it to a special band of frequencies and leave the current system in place. Sometimes good enough is good enough.

HD (digital) radio in the U.S.A. is compatible with analog, as the digital and analog are broadcast simultaneously. The digital is broadcast on a subcarrier or sideband of the signal, both on AM and FM. The only degradation of the analog signal occurs on AM, where the analog channel is restricted to 5 Khz audio and more interference can be generated to weak adjacent frequency signals from the digital signal.

I have not heard either digital AM or FM to tell how it sounds...however it does not seem to be catching on as I think few receivers are available.

It does allow for different programming on the digital channels and public stations have been using the digital multi-channels to offer such things as continuous classical music and news streams.

hippy crap I say

the forced change is going to force some people to simply not watch tv.
I have no idea how spending $10-25 as a one-time purchase will be impossible for anyone who has a home and a TV already. You got me there...

US$80 ATSC tuner:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882107049

US$9 RF modulator:

http://www.beachaudio.com/Video/Accessories/Switches-Selectors/Jensen-Dvd647-Modulator-p-17759.html

US$95 complete digital TV:

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=5691091

If a person is lucky enough to have a home big enough to have seven or eight separate places/rooms to watch TV, then I cannot imagine how $300 is going to be a big financial problem.

I have not heard either digital AM or FM to tell how it sounds...however it does not seem to be catching on as I think few receivers are available.
Despite (surprise!) the complaints about bit rates and interference, etc., HD Radio sounds surprisingly good, even at 48 kb/s as used on the stations with two music channels. Yes, it does indeed sound better than analog FM. The bit rates used on HD Radio are not comparable to MP3 bit rates, any more than you would compare the gas mileage of a hybrid car to a 1994 Mercury sedan when both are traveling at 60 miles per hour.

Even AM HD Radio can sound pretty good with its 32 kb/s bit rate, but it can sound pretty bad too. It all depends on how the radio station has its equipment set up.

One more thing...

For those who like to collect "early" examples of new technology, such as the RCA CT-100 color TV, you may want to consider buying the equivalent in the ATSC digital-TV tuner world. RCA led the market there, too, with the DTC-100 (notice the similar model number?). It sold for around US$650 in 2000, when other tuners were well over $1000. There is one on Ebay right now for $30.

(Am I going too far to suppose that collectors like "firsts and early examples" of lots of things, as opposed to getting themselves stuck in one specific time period?)

In my short lifetime we have gone from the beginnings of tv in 1947 when a Dick Tracey wrist radio was a peice of science fiction

Heres the Dick Tracy watch for real.Only 2 grand from Fossil.

(Am I going too far to suppose that collectors like "firsts and early examples" of lots of things, as opposed to getting themselves stuck in one specific time period?)Heck no! :nerd: Am straining to keep myself from ordering that cool $95 ATSC CRT set you found at Walmart.

Now if you can get TV modulators that use channels other than 3 or 4, you could build yourself your own "cable head end". You'd need one ATSC reciever box per desired TV station, and a modulator to place its NTSC output onto a selected VHF or UHF TV channel. Then mix everything together by using a multiport cable splitter. You'll probably have to skip alternate channels as the lower sideband supression of TV modulators are likely non-existant. So you'd probably pick channels 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 11 and 13 (6 and 7 are not adjacent in terms of RF carrier frequency).

Well, that can get expensive quickly.

---

One more thing...

For those who like to collect "early" examples of new technology, such as the RCA CT-100 color TV, you may want to consider buying the equivalent in the ATSC digital-TV tuner world. RCA led the market there, too, with the DTC-100 (notice the similar model number?). It sold for around US$650 in 2000, when other tuners were well over $1000. There is one on Ebay right now for $30.

(Am I going too far to suppose that collectors like "firsts and early examples" of lots of things, as opposed to getting themselves stuck in one specific time period?)


No way... modern digital stuff is stinkin' Chinese robot assembled junk and deserves to get recycled, crushed, landfilled & forgotten forever once obsolete...

Francesco

I have no idea how spending $10-25 as a one-time purchase will be impossible for anyone who has a home and a TV already. You got me there...

To some people with little income even $10 is a hardship. Just because you do not know them doesn't mean they do not exist. I have been there, and it's not fun. Like I said it has been forced on the consumers, it could have been done in a way that would let me chose if I want digital tv or not.

Bill R

I started to read this thread but then I started to fell like :beer::bash:

US$80 ATSC tuner:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882107049

US$9 RF modulator:

http://www.beachaudio.com/Video/Accessories/Switches-Selectors/Jensen-Dvd647-Modulator-p-17759.html


Believe it or not some people do not buy from the internet. Neither of these stores are in my area.

US$95 complete digital TV:

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=5691091

Yep, a 13 inch durabrand. So I should replace my 52 inch tv with a 13 incher?

If a person is lucky enough to have a home big enough to have seven or eight separate places/rooms to watch TV, then I cannot imagine how $300 is going to be a big financial problem.


I do have a home big enough, wheither it would be a financial problem or not it is not right. By the way luck had nothing to do with my owning a home big enough. It was paid for, with a lot of hard work, and right now paying $300 to $500 would be a big financial problem.

Bill R

I have a feeling that professional quality NTSC modulators will be really cheap soon (as cable companies move to digital). I've already seen them start to show up in surplus stores. They let you select any cable channel using dip switches. I even picked up a BTSC (MTS) encoder.

Yeah-- I was actually going to post something wondering if that was starting to happen. A month or two ago I got an agile RF modulator from MCM (www.mcmelectronics.com) on sale for about $32 (item # 33-2740). It has digital sysnthesized tuning (pushbutton channel selection, LED display) from UHF channels 14-69 or CATV channels 65-139. It's designed for inserting into a distribution network, but this low-cost model doesn't have a built-in combiner. So far, I've only informally tried it out, but it seems to work pretty nice and stable.

Anyway, I don't *think* this particular model happens to be in any of the current sale circulars, but I have noticed it (as well as a lot of other-- but higher-end/more expensive-- agile modulators) appearing in a lot of their sale circulars in recent months.

Heck no! :nerd: Am straining to keep myself from ordering that cool $95 ATSC CRT set you found at Walmart.

Funny, I was at Wal*Mart last week and noticed all those new ATSC "SDTV resolution" CRT sets. I've actually been kinda thinking of getting one of the 14" RCAs just because this probably marks about the last generation of small CRT TVs (possibly excepting certain special markets). That 14" RCA flat-tube set costs $119.97. Interestingly for that screen size, it's not only stereo, but has *component* video inputs in addition to composite (but no S-Video input). They've got a similar RCA flat-face CRT set in 20" for $149.96 (or $188 with a built-in DVD player). [BTW, just my opinion, but those three RCA sets are about the nicest looking low-end CRT TV's I've seen in a while. Maybe it's just the fact that the manufacturers have finally started to get away from that cheezy silver-painted plastic look (which I always really disliked)]

Now, considering that you can get a 15" LCD *HDTV* at Wal*Mart for under $200 nowadays, I'd say (and as others here have long pointed out) it won't be long before the end of road for CRT sets, especially in the 19"-and-under category. In addition, it seems like practically all of the new CRT sets with ATSC tuners are "SDTV" resolution. The only CRT HDTV's I can recall seeing in stores recently are the Samsung "SlimFit" sets.

...those three RCA sets are about the nicest looking low-end CRT TV's I've seen in a while. I agree. It was too good to pass up, what with component input and such. Once the little set is adjusted (factory contrast is set at 90 percent!) it reminds me of the similar small-size trinitrons. Bright, contrasty, and impressive. BTW, the sensitivity of the ATSC tuner appears to be superior to earlier RCA HDTV's.

Here's a picture I use to convince myself the $119 was well spent: it completes my RCA COLOR TV collection: CT-100 to first RCA HDTV to this little gem that, as you say, may be among the last of the CRT sets.

I agree. It was too good to pass up, what with component input and such. Once the little set is adjusted (factory contrast is set at 90 percent!) it reminds me of the similar small-size trinitrons. Bright, contrasty, and impressive. BTW, the sensitivity of the ATSC tuner appears to be superior to earlier RCA HDTV's.

Of course, when I said "nicest looking" I was thinking in terms of the cabinet styling, but I will say that I did notice that they didn't seem half-bad performance-wise either (for low-end sets), especially the 14" version (though with whatever video distribution system they use in the store, it's hard to tell too much about performance in the store). Glad to hear from someone here that they actually aren't that shabby after all..! Y'know, I think I'm going to have to go pick up one of those cute li'l suckers at that.

Also, regarding that photo, another interesting aspect to that juxtaposition is when you notice that the screen size of that new ATSC digital 14" set is very similar to that of the CT-100. :)

Also, regarding that photo, another interesting aspect to that juxtaposition is when you notice that the screen size of that new ATSC digital 14" set is very similar to that of the CT-100. :)Nice catch. Actually, they measure the same. Here's what I wrote for that photo on my site:

On the right of this little cell picture, the first RCA color set. Made in Bloomington, Indiana in late March 1954, it cost $1000 1954 dollars. It weighed 165 pounds. It has a "15-in." screen that's actually 8.5 by 11 inches.

On the left is the first RCA high definition television set with its huge and heavy 38-in. wide-screen CRT. It was made June 2002 in Mexico. Cost about two-thousand 2002 dollars. Weighs in at 216 pounds without the stand. Its screen is 19.5 by nearly 34 inches.

And the baby of the bunch running there on the floor is special why? It has a flat screen CRT with both NTSC and ATSC tuners, and it has component (composite too of course) inputs just as its big brother on the left. Made in April 2007 in China, it cost just $119, which is slightly less than the New Jersey sales tax on the hi-def set. It has a "14-in." screen that, coming full circle, is actually 8.5 by 11 inches.

Thats a nice little set for $119. ATSC, NTSC tuners and Component input? I'm impressed.

you know there is no repair on those sets. exchange only under warranty. after warranty. guess what in the dump it goes. no support or parts from rca. steve

you know there is no repair on those sets. exchange only under warranty. after warranty. guess what in the dump it goes. no support or parts from rca. steve

That's wasteful. I won't buy I set I can't service. I wonder how serviceable the typical LCD set is going to be.

---

I've finally figured out precisely what I want. It's just a matter of finding it. I want one box that will do the following:
*Have an HDTV tuner that will receive digital signals. 480i will be fine.
*Record those HDTV signals without a broadcast flag onto rewriteable discs; in essence, a DVD based VCR
*Have a built-in RF modulator to play back the signal in analog NTSC on channel 4
*Cost less than $100
My family has three fine analog NTSC television sets. I cannot afford new ones, and a $40 tuner box will not help me one bit in timeshifting and archiving off-air programming unless the output is useable for standard VCRs, of which I have three also. I do not have cable TV, but a mast-mounted outdoor antenna that is also used for FM. I refuse to pay to watch television. I am also in no hurry whatsoever to pay for new television sets when the ones I have work just fine.

I gave up "appointment TV" back in 1989 when I got my first VCR. For me, the ability to record off-air is vital; if I can't do what I've been doing since then, I will be one very unhappy camper.

Simply put, if there are too many roadblocks in my path, I will indeed use my television sets for pre-recorded shows and nothing else. Most American television is garbage anyway, and I can get news, entertainment, and information from books, radio, newspapers, and the Internet.

Call me a Luddite if you want to, but ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! :gigglemad

I've finally figured out precisely what I want. It's just a matter of finding it. I want one box that will do the following:
*Have an HDTV tuner that will receive digital signals. 480i will be fine.
*Record those HDTV signals without a broadcast flag onto rewriteable discs; in essence, a DVD based VCR
*Have a built-in RF modulator to play back the signal in analog NTSC on channel 4
*Cost less than $100

Okay, you'll have to add your own RF modulator and it costs $179.99 right now (though wait a year or two and you'll probably hit the $100 price point for something similar), but here ya go:

http://www.jr.com/JRProductPage.process?Product=4156935

[for those who don't want to click, it's a Panasonic DMR-EZ17K DVD Player and Recorder, selected because it happens to be the least-expensive DVD recorder with a built-in ATSC tuner that happens to currently be offered on the J&R web site] Yer on yer own regarding the "broadcast flag" though.

Just what the doctor ordered. :thmbsp: At least they're out there; local TV salespeople don't even know what I'm talking about. I always had good luck with Panasonic VCRs and TVs, too. Thankyew.
Tom

I agree. It was too good to pass up, what with component input and such. Once the little set is adjusted (factory contrast is set at 90 percent!) it reminds me of the similar small-size trinitrons. Bright, contrasty, and impressive. BTW, the sensitivity of the ATSC tuner appears to be superior to earlier RCA HDTV's.


Okay, curiosity got the best of me, and I plunked down my $119 for one of these li'l sets. It's an RCA 14F514T built in March 2007. When I got it home it occurred to me that this is the first color TV I've bought *new* since the 25" Zenith I got in 1993. Er, actually, come to think of it, that's the *only* other color TV I've ever bought new (that wasn't a gift for someone else, at least).

Anyhoo, I've only made a quick informal check of it at this point, but so far I think it is actually fairly impressive from a price/performance standpoint. Now, I'll point out that this is the first digital set I've had any experience with, so I don't have anything to compare it with, but I'd say I'm pretty pleased with its reception of OTA digital signals. After all the "horror stories" I've heard about how bad digital reception is, I didn't have very high expectations in that regard, but I gotta say, the local digital channels come in nicely enough even with an ordinary VHF/UHF indoor antenna (with a plain UHF loop), but more stably with an old-style RadioShack twin-bowtie-with-reflector UHF indoor antenna. Compared with analog, it is rather disconcerting when the signal momentarily falls below the set's threshold and suddenly "drops out", but that mostly seems to be sensitive to proper antenna orientation. OTA digital reception looks very nice indeed. As Pete says, the factory default for contrast is set too high, but when set up correctly, picture quality with a good source is definitely not too shabby at all for a "standard-def" TV in this size. This set also apparently has a built-in QAM tuner for (unscrambled) digital cable, but I don't have digital cable.

Sadly, by comparison, its NTSC tuner has poor sensitivity. It's probably okay for analog cable (though I haven't tried it on cable yet), but for OTA use it's definitely sub-par to say the least.

The automatic channel set-up process appears to be well designed, and automatically searches all bands for both analog and digital channels.

Perhaps this weekend, I'll see if I can arrange a comparision "shoot out" between this quite-possibly-last-generation 14" CRT set and the other small-screen color sets I've got around here just to see what this thing can do when put up against some competition. :)

Oh, BTW, one bit of "keeping old trademarks active" I spotted on this TV is that the jack panel on the back sports the old "meatball" round RCA logo. It's small, but it's there. Gee, I wonder if any of the other current RCA-branded TVs still have the old "Victor" logo somewhere, just to keep that trademark active too?

Just what the doctor ordered. :thmbsp: At least they're out there; local TV salespeople don't even know what I'm talking about. I always had good luck with Panasonic VCRs and TVs, too. Thankyew.


I originally wasn't going to mention this (because I didn't want it to sound too much like a commercial... :) ), but it so happens that I bought a Panasonic set-top DVD recorder back when they were still pretty "gee-whiz", and I've been very happy with it. It just runs like a champ. ...And I know exactly what you mean, as I've long watched most of my "live TV" using a video (either tape or DVD) recorder as a timeshifting/archival device.

Anyway, I was pleasantly suprised that it was actually a Panasonic that happened to be the lowest-cost option in that category when I checked that particular web site (note: the choice of J&R was just because they generally have a broad selection of consumer electronics products; not a specific endorsement thereof)

For $189 at Wal-Mart you can get a Magnavox VCR/DVD Recorder ATSC Tuner combo. You still have to use a modulator for analog TV output. It works great, will accept front panel input from camera, video game, etc. You can schedule recording to rewritable DVD just like a VCR. You can also dub between the VHS and DVD in either direction. It is what I am feeding my Zenith roundie with now. I highly recommend it.

That's wasteful. I won't buy I set I can't service. I wonder how serviceable the typical LCD set is going to be.

Ive actually replaced a backlight on an LCD panel that took a spill off a table before. Most computer stores sell cold cathode lamps that gamers use to illuminate their fancy computer cases. These lamps are pretty similar ones to the ones used in the backlights of LCD panels. All i did is remove the fragile glass lamp from the colored plastic tube and solder it to the inverter board. Once I put it back together, you couldn't tell the difference.

http://microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0248872

About LCD durability... just 50k hours for the backlights and the LCD panel is subject to aging, some are showing dead pixels or lines or a sort of cataract after a few years,

The high voltage inverters used to power the backlights are prone to failure and are virtually impossible to repair, you will need to get a new one,then you'll likely find out that you can't get a new inverter for your 5 yrs old LCD and you need to scrap the whole thing.

I don't think anyone coluld even dream about fixing a bad LCD signal board...

That's the digital revolution for you... it's all about crappy disposable miniaturized SMD cards, flimsy flat wires, junky chinese chipsets, brittle silver painted plastic cabinets and so on... nothing that fits in my home...

Francesco

While countries like the USA and Germany are still far behind their original schedules for full implementation of digital TV, the brazilian government, led by the drunk-in-charge Mister Lula da Silva seems to be in a very strange hurry to make Brazil jump quicly in the digital bandwagon. Digital transmissions will begin in December, but it seems that very few people will be able to receive the signals. The gang called "brazilian government" set a few years ago a completely irrealistic goal of having digital converters for sale for US$ 100.00 by the time of the beggining of the transmissions. Now it's clear that, at least on the beggining, those converters will not cost less than US$ 800.00 . The answer of the idiots that run this country is simple: the brazilian industry must be "punished" for it's "incompetence" , and the way to "punish" the industry is by massive imports of converters ... made in China.

I hate to have to say it about my own country, but, it seems that Charles De Gaulle once said: "Brazil is not a serious country" , and I have to agree. The government told us that the brazilian standard of digital TV was unique in the world, so how the hell the chinese have the know-how to produce millions of converters on that standard? I thought that this information was very well kept under secrecy by the government and the brazilian industry. If this were a serious country, a press and congressional investigation would be under way to find out how the chinese know something that only the brazilians and the japanese ( who helped us creating that standard ) were supposed to know.

Today the chinese will produce converters, tomorrow...they will produce TV sets on that standard, and that will be the end of the almost 70-year History of the brazilian electronic industry. We will disappear in the same way the american electronic industry disapeared - crushed by cheap, low quality Asian imports.

Welcome to the 21ist Century.

NOTICE ALL STORES- OUT OF STOCK 6/27/07:thumbsdn:
Check In-Store Availability

Durabrand 13" Tube TV w/ Digital Tuner, DTV1307
Model #: DTV1307
Price may vary by location. See our pricing policy for details.
Search Results
We found 5 stores near Miami, FL that carry this item. (Item availability status is approximate and updated every 24 hours.)

Sort by: Availability City Name Distance
StoreDistanceAvailabilityMiami
Wal-Mart# 2091
8651 N.W. 13Th Terrace
Miami, FL 33126
(305) 470-45108.87 miles
View Map & DetailsOut of StockHialeah Gardens
Wal-Mart Supercenter# 2814
9300 N.W. 77Th Avenue
Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016
(305) 819-06729.93 miles
View Map & DetailsOut of StockNorth Miami Beach
Wal-Mart Supercenter# 3235
1425 Northeast 163Rd Street
North Miami Beach, FL 33162
(305) 949-588110.63 miles
View Map & DetailsOut of StockMiami Gardens
Wal-Mart Supercenter# 3397
17650 Norhwest 2Nd Ave.
Miami Gardens, FL 33169
(305) 651-466111.1 miles
View Map & DetailsOut of StockHialeah
Wal-Mart Supercenter# 1590
5851 N.W. 177Th St.
Hialeah, FL 33015
(305) 558-606912.64 miles
View Map & DetailsOut of Stock

NOTICE ALL STORES- OUT OF STOCK 6/27/07:thumbsdn:
Check In-Store Availability Hay Richard, I don't care how I spend your money so why not spring for an RCA 14F514T like Whirled One and me. It's only $119.:D

About LCD durability... just 50k hours for the backlights and the LCD panel is subject to aging, some are showing dead pixels or lines or a sort of cataract after a few years,

The high voltage inverters used to power the backlights are prone to failure and are virtually impossible to repair, you will need to get a new one,then you'll likely find out that you can't get a new inverter for your 5 yrs old LCD and you need to scrap the whole thing.

I don't think anyone coluld even dream about fixing a bad LCD signal board...

That's the digital revolution for you... it's all about crappy disposable miniaturized SMD cards, flimsy flat wires, junky chinese chipsets, brittle silver painted plastic cabinets and so on... nothing that fits in my home...

Francesco

Hi horseman!
Actually, in my opinion, LCDs are good devices for computers, but LCD in my Compaq Presario laptop from 2004 is not so bright than a new one...:dunno:

But...
Is there an high voltage device in it?
There are only some LEDs, i think.

Speaking of digital TV and CRT displays, I'm using a VGA monitor with a screen with viewable area that measures 19" diagional, and an ATSC Samsung tuner. Looks really good. I might house all this in that empty CTC19 cabinet I have around here.... To create a console HDTV set :D

Hi horseman!
Actually, in my opinion, LCDs are good devices for computers, but LCD in my Compaq Presario laptop from 2004 is not so bright than a new one...:dunno:

But...
Is there an high voltage device in it?
There are only some LEDs, i think.

Yes, there's a high voltage generator (the inverter) to feed about 2kv to a cold cathode fluorescent lamp, that's basically a tiny neon sign tube...

Laptop computers usually have just one lamp, monitors and TVs usually have two.

LED backlights are used only in smaller LCD screens such as cellphones or digital cameras

Francesco

Hay Richard, I don't care how I spend your money so why not spring for an RCA 14F514T like Whirled One and me. It's only $119.:D

Hi Pete, I was not complaining about the price for the ATSC TV, just the fact that they advertise that all the Florida stores will have plenty of stock by the begining of June and you see that not one store in the South Florida area has one. I am going to keep the four sets I have until after the analog cutoff then get my one "free" converter from Comcast for the large Mitsu CRT rear projection that still has an excellent picture after 9 years with no service, no several hundred dollar replacement lamp, no color wheel motor, no "wobbulation" to make the micro-mirrors act like they are pointing in two places at once, no micro-mirrors, no cold cathode light tubes. When it dies then I will buy a "modern large scren. Yeah I am old fashioned and I like it! I know I am beating a dead format but when color came around it was backward compatible with monochrome
sets and I feel that should apply to digital and HD. BAH, HUMBUG.
Richard:no:

Speaking of digital TV and CRT displays, I'm using a VGA monitor with a screen with viewable area that measures 19" diagional, and an ATSC Samsung tuner. Looks really good. I might house all this in that empty CTC19 cabinet I have around here.... To create a console HDTV set :D

I do NOT like empty cabinets:nono: (Why mister Harry Poster kills his TVs?:tears:)
Actually, your idea for the CTC19 is good; in my opinion my Irradio set ("Per tritwi") has an ideal cabinet for an "Apple" Philco TV set (or "proto Apple TV") from the 50s (except for 70 degrees deflection).
My Irradio TV will never be cannibalized until my death, of course. :nono:

Yes, there's a high voltage generator (the inverter) to feed about 2kv to a cold cathode fluorescent lamp, that's basically a tiny neon sign tube...

Laptop computers usually have just one lamp, monitors and TVs usually have two.

LED backlights are used only in smaller LCD screens such as cellphones or digital cameras

Francesco

Nonlosapeeeeeeeeevoooooooooo!
Thank you!
Do you like my recent posts in "Per tritwi", Francesco?
What TVs have you picked up with tritwi in Florence, as you wrote to me in your e-mail?:thmbsp:

Thank you!
Do you like my recent posts in "Per tritwi", Francesco?
What TVs have you picked up with tritwi in Florence, as you wrote to me in your e-mail?:thmbsp:

Yes, i enjoyed reading your posts, nice to know another Italian TV nut ;)

Tritwi's TVs were a 26" 1976 Philco Magicolor w/delta CRT, a 23" 1963 Emerson tube B/W set and a 26" 1992 Philips "Match Line" W/built in subwoofer.

Francesco.

I just purchased one of the RjTECH RJ 1000ATSC tuners mentioned by ChrisW6ATV and below has been my experience so far. (I already have a modulator.)

I had two small 1960s vintage B&W analog TVs in the same general location., one connected to the ATSC tuner and one tuned to the same station's analog signal(UHF channel 36). The ATSC was connected to new amplified rabbit ears (claiming to be HDTV compliant). The other TV just has a loop antenna across the UHF terminals. I am about 30 miles from the transmitter.

The picture on the analog TV is somewhat snowy, but watchable. The snow level varies somewhat. I can vary it somewhat by walking between the TV and the transmitter. The ATSC picture is perfect when it works. However, the reception seems to be on the edge. The picture frequently pixelates and the sound stops, then it comes back. Walking between the rabbit ears and the transmitter direction also seems to make this worse. To me this is more irritating than the snow(for one thing, none of the dialog is missed on the analog connected TV). I am sure that if I had a taller antennal on the ATSC tuner, this could be reduced or elminated since I am only 30 miles from the transmitter. This re-inforces my concern about people in rural areas. If HDTV does not work better than this, a lot of these people will be screaming.

Another unknown in my situation is the relative strength of the UHF vs HDTV transmitted signals from the station. As this station has been advertising their HDTV transmissions, I would think that they would use a fairly strong transmitter.

One more note-If you buy one of these, be sure and follow the directions in the manual and not sit anything on top of it. It runs quite warm.

Reception around here can be quite patchy, but digital is affected far more than analog.

I've recently moved. At my old location I could get perfect analog reception of all channels except the low power community station with a pair of rabbit ears. Digital was non existant with the rabbit ears or glitchy reception of 2 out of 5 channels with the roof top antenna.

My new location is no more than 5km from the old one. My analog reception here isn't as good. With a roof top antenna I get some slight ghosting and 1 out of 5 channels is slightly snowy, but still watchable. Digital reception here is much better, perfect reception of all channels.

Even with perfect reception I find the picture quality varies a lot between programs and the variations are a lot more noticable than when watching the analog signal. I'll make some direct comparisons when I set up my Sony VTX-100EC analog tuner.

With the RGB output from a Thomson DT1500AU standard definition set top box going into my Sony PVM2130QM monitor the picture is amazing on some programs, but others are plagued by digital artifacts (particularly locally produced programs).

I've tried 3 different set top boxes so far, but I'm not completely satisfied with any of them. A Teac that was prone to glitches even when it was getting full signal strength. A Centrex that was frustratingly slow to change channels (but was the only one so far with a built in RF modulator). The Thomson has a noisy analog audio output. All run hot (even the Thomson which has an external power supply). When I find a box I'm happy with I will be modifying it to improve cooling.

I have not noticed any variations in picture between programs. Could be the TV that I am watching.

I have done some more experimentation with the other stations in my area. All of the HTDV transmitters are about in the same location(the tallest hill in the area, about 30 miles away). I have found that the CBS(analog 42) channel is better than NBC (analog 36). The ABC(analog 24) channel is quite a bit worse than NBC(hard to even watch).

Although the HDTV receiver indicates a channel where FOX is supposed to be located, no picture shows up, just a blank screen. I have heard that the FOX HDTV transmitter is weak(Supprising as they are one of the strongest analog channels(analog 7) in the area). Also got a channel indication for a local independent channel(analog 54), but no picture(Not supprising as I have a hard gettiing their analog signal as well). The PBS(analog 18) channel did not show up on the HTDV converter search. I am aware that the national PBS organization has HDTV shows, but I am not sure if they are broadcasting them in this format locally yet.


If you are wondering why there is only one analog VHF channel, thank LBJ. I live near Austin, Texas and he owned the only TV station in town in the 1960s. Did not like competition.

I think the picture quality variations here are due to the way the channels manage their bandwidth. Each channels broadcasts both an analog signal (to be switched off in 2010?), a SD digital signal, a HD digital signal (our cheap SD boxes won't down convert a HD signal to SD) and an EPG.

This leads to the channels having to cut down to bandwidth of the SD signal to provide more bandwidth for the HD signal. Some channels (particularly the 7 network) are more aggressive at this than others. The 7 network jumps all over the place sometimes changing the signal between programs and even in ad breaks at times. Every so often the aspect ratio gets broken leaving you with a distorted image regardless of whether you are watching on a 4:3 or 16:9 set. Their EPG looks like a bad youtube video. I have to laugh at them sometimes, but I'll be less amused if they ever get some programs I want to watch. Once they actually did something that switched by box to SECAM mode.

The two government run stations actually have the best SD picture quality. They broadcast 576p as HD, so the SD doesn't get squeezed as much.

US$80 ATSC tuner:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882107049

US$9 RF modulator:

http://www.beachaudio.com/Video/Accessories/Switches-Selectors/Jensen-Dvd647-Modulator-p-17759.html

US$95 complete digital TV:

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=5691091

If a person is lucky enough to have a home big enough to have seven or eight separate places/rooms to watch TV, then I cannot imagine how $300 is going to be a big financial problem.

Hmmm, well, one good thing, if they have RCA output jacks, I can use the convertor box with my 1984 vintage Commodore 64 Monitor. B-) Would be kind of tough with my 1982 Zenith console we have as the main set though, unless I use a video modulator since it has no AV inputs.

While countries like the USA and Germany are still far behind their original schedules for full implementation of digital TV, the brazilian government, led by the drunk-in-charge Mister Lula da Silva seems to be in a very strange hurry to make Brazil jump quicly in the digital bandwagon. Digital transmissions will begin in December, but it seems that very few people will be able to receive the signals. The gang called "brazilian government" set a few years ago a completely irrealistic goal of having digital converters for sale for US$ 100.00 by the time of the beggining of the transmissions. Now it's clear that, at least on the beggining, those converters will not cost less than US$ 800.00 . The answer of the idiots that run this country is simple: the brazilian industry must be "punished" for it's "incompetence" , and the way to "punish" the industry is by massive imports of converters ... made in China.

I hate to have to say it about my own country, but, it seems that Charles De Gaulle once said: "Brazil is not a serious country" , and I have to agree. The government told us that the brazilian standard of digital TV was unique in the world, so how the hell the chinese have the know-how to produce millions of converters on that standard? I thought that this information was very well kept under secrecy by the government and the brazilian industry. If this were a serious country, a press and congressional investigation would be under way to find out how the chinese know something that only the brazilians and the japanese ( who helped us creating that standard ) were supposed to know.

Today the chinese will produce converters, tomorrow...they will produce TV sets on that standard, and that will be the end of the almost 70-year History of the brazilian electronic industry. We will disappear in the same way the american electronic industry disapeared - crushed by cheap, low quality Asian imports.

Welcome to the 21ist Century.


I remember George Carlin said that the "two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." Stupid is as stupid does, stupidy is a common trait, it is not unique to the United States or Brazil. I still watch a "made in USA" TV set as my main one but it was made in 1982 by Zenith when it was still known as "Zenith Radio Corporation" at the Chicago plant. It's been our daily watcher since we bought it new in early 1983, just think, I'll be 41 on Sunday (July 8th) and I'm watching the same TV I did when I was 16 years old in high school. :D

I'm getting a little OT on this one, but it seems like Red China will dominate the world with consumer items and otherwise, they already dominate here in the US and it seems like they are going to do the same for Brazil. Along with stupidity, I thin politicians do have two chips in their minds, a stupidity chip and a "sellout to the highest bidder" chip. They don't really care if they serve the interests of Brazil, the U.S. or wherever they come from and should serve the people therof but they worship the "almighty Dollar" instead. It seems like your politicians need the same "wake up call" as ours do.

I have a cartoon somewhere that was made in 1953 on how the Red Chinese will dominate the US and later the world, it seems like it is coming true.

BTW, getting back to the subject, which standard will Brazil use, ATSC or some other standard? I'm not a big fan on how they are ramming HDTV down our throats but it would make a good opportunity for have a one world standard although from what I hear, Europe will be different from us. Looks like we got another "Tower of Babel" on our hands. :thumbsdn:

I just purchased one of the RjTECH RJ 1000ATSC tuners mentioned by ChrisW6ATV and below has been my experience so far. (I already have a modulator.)

I had two small 1960s vintage B&W analog TVs in the same general location., one connected to the ATSC tuner and one tuned to the same station's analog signal(UHF channel 36). The ATSC was connected to new amplified rabbit ears (claiming to be HDTV compliant). The other TV just has a loop antenna across the UHF terminals. I am about 30 miles from the transmitter.

The picture on the analog TV is somewhat snowy, but watchable. The snow level varies somewhat. I can vary it somewhat by walking between the TV and the transmitter. The ATSC picture is perfect when it works. However, the reception seems to be on the edge. The picture frequently pixelates and the sound stops, then it comes back. Walking between the rabbit ears and the transmitter direction also seems to make this worse. To me this is more irritating than the snow(for one thing, none of the dialog is missed on the analog connected TV). I am sure that if I had a taller antennal on the ATSC tuner, this could be reduced or elminated since I am only 30 miles from the transmitter. This re-inforces my concern about people in rural areas. If HDTV does not work better than this, a lot of these people will be screaming.

Another unknown in my situation is the relative strength of the UHF vs HDTV transmitted signals from the station. As this station has been advertising their HDTV transmissions, I would think that they would use a fairly strong transmitter.

One more note-If you buy one of these, be sure and follow the directions in the manual and not sit anything on top of it. It runs quite warm.

True, either people in rural areas will have to get their TV from satellite or build a huge tower with a TV antenna, then again, depending on the antenna line, the longer the antenna line, you will get some loss of signal. Maybe there will be a need for translation stations in those areas, that's the only thing I can think up.

I once joked that someone ought to write Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton a letter explaining how the HDTV switch can affect the poor in the inner city as well as rural areas, maybe if they get in the act, we will have analogue NTSC TV until the year 2200 or so. :D

BTW, getting back to the subject, which standard will Brazil use, ATSC or some other standard? I'm not a big fan on how they are ramming HDTV down our throats but it would make a good opportunity for have a one world standard although from what I hear, Europe will be different from us. Looks like we got another "Tower of Babel" on our hands. :thumbsdn:

It's a hybrid system, half japanese and half local, a system specifically created for the peculiar characteristics of the brazilian TV market - a market in which the vast majority still don't have cable or other types of subscription-TV and on which the very complicated topography of the country makes TV transmission tricky. They say this system will allow for a greater number of TV channels and for mobile reception. I am no expert on digital TV, so I will have to wait for the beggining of the transmissions ( in my part of the country it will only happen in 2009 ) to see if it is really the wonder they are trying to convince us. What really irritates me is the sellout behavior of the politicians toward the chinese interests.