[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Bl**dy OnDigital...
- To: ukha_d <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Bl**dy OnDigital...
- From: Keith Doxey <ukha@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:29:48 +0100
- Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
The trouble is that OnDigital are using such a low bitrate to cram as many
channels onto the 6 Muxes that there is very little room for error
correction, therefore even minor errors cause noticable artifacts :-(
Keith
-----Original Message-----
From: James Hoye [mailto:james.hoye@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 21 August 2001 11:31
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Bl**dy OnDigital...
> I've done all of this. Analogue channels are better (back to as
> good as they
> were before they had to struggle through the OD box) and digital
> channels have
> loads of oomph, but still I get breakup at times.
If you fire one of those peizo gas igniters in the vicinity of an analogue
set, you get loads of interference across the screen. I suppose the
electrical interference has the same effect on the digital signal since
this
is just an RF signal. Error correction will do its best to a point, but if
the bitstream is too corrupted then you're going to get break up. Same
goes
for motorbikes and cars without supressors, light switches, in fact
anything
that generates a spark and causes an electromagnetic disturbance....
James H
For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subscribe: ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
Unsubscribe: ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
List owner: ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|