| Author |
Message |
Jerry Avins
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2005 5:16 pm Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Tim Wescott wrote:
...
| Quote: | We have a cable modem. It really ticks my kid off that we don't also
have cable TV.
|
A buddy of mine has your setup, and the cable crews kept disconnecting
him. He wasn't signed up for cable TV, so they figured it was an illegal
tap. We finally climbed the pole and nailed a note to it near the drop.
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jerry Avins
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2005 5:16 pm Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Joerg wrote:
| Quote: | Hello Tim,
You should stick to "quantization" if you want us poor DSP types to
understand.
Ok, I'll try to be better in the future. Quantization it is. I guess
I'll also have to lose some other slang, apodization, CFAR and all that.
|
What is CFAR? Apodization is from the realm of optics, dealing with
control of diffraction. The corresponding DSP term is windowing. The
equivalence of diffraction patterns and side lobes doesn't immediately
strike one, but of course they are in essence the same phenomenon.
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter K.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2005 5:16 pm Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> writes:
CFAR = Constant False Alarm Rate
It's a way of choosing thresholds based on how many false alarms your
system can deal with. Zero is not an option; something less than 99.9%
is easier to deal with.
Ciao,
Peter K. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Underwood
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2005 5:16 pm Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Jerry Avins wrote:
| Quote: | Joerg wrote:
Hello Tim,
You should stick to "quantization" if you want us poor DSP types to
understand.
Ok, I'll try to be better in the future. Quantization it is. I guess
I'll also have to lose some other slang, apodization, CFAR and all that.
What is CFAR? Apodization is from the realm of optics, dealing with
control of diffraction. The corresponding DSP term is windowing. The
equivalence of diffraction patterns and side lobes doesn't immediately
strike one, but of course they are in essence the same phenomenon.
Jerry
|
CFAR is term generally associated with radar and sonar. You want your
radar to CFAR, don't you? So, you need a Constant False Alarm Rate
device to control the rate of detections, and maximise sensitivity
without flooding the system's back end with false alarms. Its a form of
adaptive filter, though there are many variations on the basic theme.
Steve |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joerg
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 12:33 am Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Hello John,
| Quote: | Around here, the cable company charges about $10 extra per month if you get
cable modem without some type of cable TV service. The cheapest cable TV you
can get (basic service, which includes the local over-air channels and a few
extras) costs slightly more than $10. So usually people opt to get the basic
service since it is essentially almost free. But you can choose to pay the
extra $10 instead if you want. In the hilly area I live in, over-air reception
can be bad to non-existent for many people even with a good antenna, so the
basic cable service is popular.
|
Very different here. They offer Internet for between $20 and $30 but w/o
subscribing to their TV it's $55 or more IIRC. DSL is $50 so it's a
better deal. No idea why the cable guys do that, I guess most people
must have cable TV.
AFAIK the basic cable TV is already over $40. Not worth it IMHO.
Terrestrial reception is spotty as we live in the hills. You can see
ghosting over several lines, meaning the ghost image is vertically and
horizontally separated. Sometimes you have to train your antenna on that
ghost because it's more intelligible than the direct path. I could
imagine that DTV will be a failure around here. Instead of a somewhat
intelligible screen we might just see a garbled mess of data. Oh well,
it won't be a great loss anyway.
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joerg
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 12:36 am Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Hello Jerry,
| Quote: | We have a cable modem. It really ticks my kid off that we don't also
have cable TV.
A buddy of mine has your setup, and the cable crews kept disconnecting
him. He wasn't signed up for cable TV, so they figured it was an illegal
tap. We finally climbed the pole and nailed a note to it near the drop.
|
In California this might have required a bilingual note ;-)
I wonder, if they send most basic channels unscrambled how do they avoid
somebody from tapping the line at the modem input and connect the TV to
that?
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bhaskar Thiagarajan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:16 am Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:UaYpf.35338$dO2.12978@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
| Quote: | Hello Jerry,
We have a cable modem. It really ticks my kid off that we don't also
have cable TV.
A buddy of mine has your setup, and the cable crews kept disconnecting
him. He wasn't signed up for cable TV, so they figured it was an illegal
tap. We finally climbed the pole and nailed a note to it near the drop.
In California this might have required a bilingual note ;-)
I wonder, if they send most basic channels unscrambled how do they avoid
somebody from tapping the line at the modem input and connect the TV to
that?
|
This is why most cable providers (atleast here in San Jose, CA) make you pay
the $10 extra if you want only their cable modem services. They can't block
the basic cable content since it isn't scrambled. So if you subscribe to
their broadband services, you can tap into their basic channels.
Cheers
Bhaskar
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joerg
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:16 am Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Hello Bhaskar,
| Quote: | I wonder, if they send most basic channels unscrambled how do they avoid
somebody from tapping the line at the modem input and connect the TV to
that?
This is why most cable providers (atleast here in San Jose, CA) make you pay
the $10 extra if you want only their cable modem services. They can't block
the basic cable content since it isn't scrambled. So if you subscribe to
their broadband services, you can tap into their basic channels.
|
Well, I don't want TV. It isn't just $10 here, it's more like $40 and
IMHO absolutely not worth it. Why can't they just filter the TV band out
good enough so that the resulting picture quality after an illegal tap
would be miserable?
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Owlett
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:16 am Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Jerry Avins wrote:
| Quote: | Tim Wescott wrote:
...
We have a cable modem. It really ticks my kid off that we don't also
have cable TV.
A buddy of mine has your setup, and the cable crews kept disconnecting
him. He wasn't signed up for cable TV, so they figured it was an illegal
tap. We finally climbed the pole and nailed a note to it near the drop.
Jerry
|
What! Cable employees that can read.
I hand delivered a note to local cable company giving formal notice that
their sales people were to stay away from me of suffer civil and/or
criminal penalties.
Before handing it over, I asked if the was anyone in the office who
could read [with provocation I can be sarcastic ;]
I 'gentleman', identifying himself as OFFICE MANAGER, "I graduated from
.... {the local state university}."
I replied "But I asked if there was anyone who could read."
Haven't been bothered in last ten years ;} |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Underwood
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 8:33 am Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Bhaskar Thiagarajan wrote:
| Quote: | "Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:UaYpf.35338$dO2.12978@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
Hello Jerry,
We have a cable modem. It really ticks my kid off that we don't also
have cable TV.
A buddy of mine has your setup, and the cable crews kept disconnecting
him. He wasn't signed up for cable TV, so they figured it was an illegal
tap. We finally climbed the pole and nailed a note to it near the drop.
In California this might have required a bilingual note ;-)
I wonder, if they send most basic channels unscrambled how do they avoid
somebody from tapping the line at the modem input and connect the TV to
that?
This is why most cable providers (atleast here in San Jose, CA) make you pay
the $10 extra if you want only their cable modem services. They can't block
the basic cable content since it isn't scrambled. So if you subscribe to
their broadband services, you can tap into their basic channels.
Cheers
Bhaskar
So, if they are charging you the full value of the basic unscrambled |
channels, what are they charging the other $9.98 for? :-)
Mary Christ'sMa
Steve
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jerry Avins
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2005 8:42 am Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Bhaskar Thiagarajan wrote:
| Quote: | "Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:UaYpf.35338$dO2.12978@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
Hello Jerry,
We have a cable modem. It really ticks my kid off that we don't also
have cable TV.
A buddy of mine has your setup, and the cable crews kept disconnecting
him. He wasn't signed up for cable TV, so they figured it was an illegal
tap. We finally climbed the pole and nailed a note to it near the drop.
In California this might have required a bilingual note ;-)
I wonder, if they send most basic channels unscrambled how do they avoid
somebody from tapping the line at the modem input and connect the TV to
that?
This is why most cable providers (atleast here in San Jose, CA) make you pay
the $10 extra if you want only their cable modem services. They can't block
the basic cable content since it isn't scrambled. So if you subscribe to
their broadband services, you can tap into their basic channels.
|
A frequency selective filter could stop that. Basically, they want
subscribers to boost their advertising revenue. It's no different with
print magazines.
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon Harris
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:16 am Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:y7Ypf.35336$dO2.27017@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
| Quote: | Hello John,
Around here, the cable company charges about $10 extra per month if you get
cable modem without some type of cable TV service. The cheapest cable TV you
can get (basic service, which includes the local over-air channels and a few
extras) costs slightly more than $10. So usually people opt to get the basic
service since it is essentially almost free. But you can choose to pay the
extra $10 instead if you want. In the hilly area I live in, over-air
reception can be bad to non-existent for many people even with a good
antenna, so the basic cable service is popular.
Very different here. They offer Internet for between $20 and $30 but w/o
subscribing to their TV it's $55 or more IIRC. DSL is $50 so it's a better
deal. No idea why the cable guys do that, I guess most people must have cable
TV.
AFAIK the basic cable TV is already over $40. Not worth it IMHO. Terrestrial
reception is spotty as we live in the hills. You can see ghosting over several
lines, meaning the ghost image is vertically and horizontally separated.
Sometimes you have to train your antenna on that ghost because it's more
intelligible than the direct path. I could imagine that DTV will be a failure
around here. Instead of a somewhat intelligible screen we might just see a
garbled mess of data. Oh well, it won't be a great loss anyway.
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com
|
Where is "here" for you, Joerge? For me it is Seattle, Washington (USA). FYI,
my cable company (Comcast) doesn't advertise the cheap "broadcast channels"
package at all on their web site. You have to call them up and ask for it.
There was legislation a while back that required them to offer the service, but
they try their best to make it hard to find!
--
Jon Harris
SPAM blocker in place:
Remove 99 (but leave 7) to reply |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joerg
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:07 am Post subject:
Re: Digital filter simulators? |
|
|
Hello Jon,
| Quote: | Where is "here" for you, Joerge? For me it is Seattle, Washington (USA). FYI,
my cable company (Comcast) doesn't advertise the cheap "broadcast channels"
package at all on their web site. You have to call them up and ask for it.
There was legislation a while back that required them to offer the service, but
they try their best to make it hard to find!
|
"Here" is Cameron Park, California, about 30 miles east of Sacramento.
Highway 50 to Lake Tahoe. It's also Comcast out here. When I called them
up they said that the competitive pricing offer on cable modem service
is only valid if I also take their "basic" cable TV package. That was
just under $40 back then but has gone above that now AFAIK. I just don't
need home and garden TV and all that.
In fact, when we moved here from overseas we truly forgot about TV.
Eight months later we wanted to check the local weather and only then it
dawned on us that our TV wasn't US standard and would not work. Duh. So
I went to town and bought a TV set. About five (!) years later we
re-roofed and upon taking down the antenna I realized that it had a
pre-amp that did not and could not work the whole time. After fixing
that we can receive twice as many channels. Did that enhance our TV
experience? Nope.
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in