XPost: rec.music.gdead, sci.electronics.design   
   From: trevor@home.net   
      
   "Arny Krueger"  wrote in message   
   news:G_-dnfIFNr1ErevQnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d@giganews.com...   
   > In many locations the analog signal will never be totally free of ghosts,   
   > while the digital signal will be unchanged from optimal.   
      
   Right, and in some locations you can get a picture on analog that many found   
   watchable, but NO picture on digital at all.   
   And so far no one has mentioned bit rates. The trend here unfortunately has   
   been to constantly lower bit rates to fit in more channels, so that what was   
   once a FAR better picture on digital, is often no better than analog. We   
   have just swapped noise for pixelation. At least we have a few more channels   
   to choose from however, so it's not all bad. But to make the problem worse,   
   we now have most of our High Definition channels broadcasting 1960's re-runs   
   that are obviously NOT high definition in any sense of the word, and not   
   even wide-screen format. What a waste of all those new big screen HiDef TV's   
   people have bought! Obviously a ploy to force people onto pay TV channels.   
   Is it as bad in the USA?   
      
   And how about digital radio. Such low bit rates it's always worse than FM.   
   Add in real reception problems in cars where people often listen to radio,   
   and one is almost forced to the conclusion that there is a deliberate   
   conspiracy to create problems rather than solve them! The technology is   
   certainly not to blame, just it's implementation by non technical   
   politicians paid by vested interest groups :-(   
      
   Trevor.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)