From: spam@spam.com   
      
   On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 10:08:46 -0400, "Arny Krueger"    
   wrote:   
      
   >   
   >"Don Pearce"  wrote in message   
   >news:4e270cf4.5126848@news.eternal-september.org...   
   >   
   >>>Yes, those had to be in phase with the transmitter's clocks. I remember   
   >>>some   
   >>>phase detectors in the old NTSC sets - an instant tip-off that there was   
   >>>some kind of phase locked oscillator in play.   
   >   
   >> This is where PAL really won out over NTSC. Each alternate line the   
   >> chroma phase leads or lags by 45 degrees, and the PLL locks to the   
   >> average - which is true phase. The result is that when there is an   
   >> overall phase error in the chroma signal, alternate lines lead and lag   
   >> the proper phase. Add them together and the error vanishes. With NTSC   
   >> a phase error means a wrong colour.   
   >   
   >NTSC = Never The Smae Color Twice. ;-)   
   >   
   >West German color TV was PAL, right?   
   >   
   >When I was there in the late 60s, the color was IMO better and more   
   >consistent than NTSC was at that time.   
   >   
   >With *only* about another 20 years of development, NTSC became generally   
   >quite stable and generally looked good by the 80s. ;-)   
   >   
      
   And now it is all digital, so no longer matters. Actually Germany was   
   PAL B/G, while UK was PAL I. The only real difference was in the   
   luminance bandwidth, which was a fair bit wider in PAL I. Better   
   horizontal resolution was the result.   
      
   I should have added that the two adjacent lines' chroma signals were   
   added together by means of a delay line. This happened in good quality   
   TVs. In cheap ones, almost the same effect was obtained visually by   
   the lines being close enough together to effectively merge on screen.   
   Poor beam focus helped enormously.   
      
   d   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)