atomically correct time

Rich The Newsgroup Wacko · Aug 5, 2005

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 02:43:31 +0000, eli wrote:

I was wanting to design a clock that updated by both
-the atomic clock radio signal
-cell phone towers

this is because the atomic clock signal sometimes is hard to get so I
figured that cellphone towers are more reliable

does anyone have any suggestions

No, but the first time I saw the subject line, I read,
"anatomically correct time". What? They have time with
genitals now? ;-P
--
Cheers!
Rich

Rich Grise · Aug 5, 2005

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 07:37:57 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

On 5 Aug 2005 14:34:46 GMT, et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black)
wrote:

Ben Bradley (ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net) writes:
I at first thought the subject was "Anatomically correct time."
Surely that's no reflection of what's on my mind...

No, for some reason the same thought crossed my mind.

Michael

Me too ;-)

OK, did anybody _NOT_ read "anatomically correct time"? ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

Jim Yanik · Aug 5, 2005

Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in
news:ng27f11nh0c9fgi4m4eakoogvl4epuqs49@4ax.com:

On 5 Aug 2005 15:08:53 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:

"Glenn Gundlach" <stratus46@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1123218967.629549.110440@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

For a cheapy frequency reference, the color subcarrier from a
network TV station should be really close to 3579545 Hz. FCC
requires them to be +/- 10 Hz but they're usually much closer than
that.

GG

Note that NTSC standard TV signals are due to go off the air in
2006,IIRC. Due to the forced move to HDTV.

Nonsense. It's DTV not HDTV and...

"The change to digital TV is triggered no sooner than the end of 2006,
but only when 85% of U.S. homes can receive a digital television
picture. Apparently that doesn't mean 'are capable of receiving the
signal,' but rather 'have the equipment to view a digital television
signal.'

I find it difficult to imagine digital TV market penetration being
anywhere close to 85% less than <two> years from today."

I have SEVEN NTSC sets in the house.

I receive signal via Cox Cable.

I did say "off-air" which would exclude CABLE,although any off-air NTSC
feeds would disappear from cable too.

Unless Cox Cable can provide me with a signal that the new sets can
tune WITHOUT A SET-TOP BOX, there is no way I will switch.

But I could probably just cease TV altogether. For instance my office
TV is always tuned to Fox News and my back is to it, so radio would
suffice.

In the evening we generally just watch a movie from our collection of
nearly 300 DVD's.

...Jim Thompson

Eventually,the Federal gov't wants to RECLAIM the bandwidth used by analog
TV for resale auctions. So,NTSC -is- going away,just a matter of when.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Jim Yanik · Aug 5, 2005

Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in
news:r787f1dg3hhdjktjeh3g7fdlklbvh0h0pp@4ax.com:

On 5 Aug 2005 15:08:53 GMT, the renowned Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.
wrote:

"Glenn Gundlach" <stratus46@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1123218967.629549.110440@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

For a cheapy frequency reference, the color subcarrier from a
network TV station should be really close to 3579545 Hz. FCC
requires them to be +/- 10 Hz but they're usually much closer than
that.

GG

Note that NTSC standard TV signals are due to go off the air in
2006,IIRC. Due to the forced move to HDTV.

Does anyone still receive terrestrial analog TV signals over the air?

Some CABLE companies still get their local channels from air-
broadcast,unless they arranged a direct feed from the local stations.
Some local stations now want a FEE for cable companies to carry their
signals.

I wonder where the subcarrier frequency is generated for the NTSC
signals we get out of the coax (which are converted from digital, it
looks like). Anyone know? I'm guessing it's in the distribution
boxes.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Jim Yanik · Aug 5, 2005

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:42F3D221.80F243EB@earthlink.net:

Spehro Pefhany wrote:

I wonder where the subcarrier frequency is generated for the NTSC
signals we get out of the coax (which are converted from digital, it
looks like). Anyone know? I'm guessing it's in the distribution
boxes.

Most tv stations use a framestore at the transmitter site to remove
switching glitches and regenerate the sync with a 4* colorburst crystal,
like the cheap ones used on computer boards. There is no oven or
temperature control,

Most TEK signal generators had temp-controlled ovens and gen-locked to
incoming signal or a station reference.(black burst or subcarrier)

and most stations don't have an in house frequency
standard to tweak the circuit after it is at normal operating
temperature.

Uh,this I disagree with.It is usually some rubidium-based reference.
Otherwise,you get all sorts of problems with sync,SCH-phasing.

(I serviced TEK TV test equipment for 15+ years while at TEK.)

Add changes in temperature due to time of day, heat load
on the air conditioning and how the cold air is distributed in the
control room its a crap shoot. I had to try to sync to framestore
systems for a telethon using multiple studios for a telethon once. It
took both engineers over four hours to get them locked and to less than
one degree of phase error.

All of the hard work only worked for a couple days before it had to be
adjusted again. We were forced to use two different models which made
it worse, but I doubt that station will try it again.

I may have the schematic of a framestore in my collection. if I run
into it anytime soon I will scan that page and post it to ABSE.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Jim Thompson · Aug 5, 2005

On 5 Aug 2005 22:41:08 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:

[snip]

Some CABLE companies still get their local channels from air-
broadcast,unless they arranged a direct feed from the local stations.
Some local stations now want a FEE for cable companies to carry their
signals.

[snip]

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Ken Taylor · Aug 6, 2005

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news:7du6f15iac4kke9bfb7jqhuq06p4rnqnnf@4ax.com...

On 5 Aug 2005 14:34:46 GMT, et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black)
wrote:

Ben Bradley (ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net) writes:
I at first thought the subject was "Anatomically correct time."
Surely that's no reflection of what's on my mind...

No, for some reason the same thought crossed my mind.

Michael

Me too ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
I feel a lot better - I thought it was just me! What does this say

about us??

Ken

Ken Taylor · Aug 6, 2005

"Rich Grise" <richgrise@example.net> wrote in message
news

an.2005.08.05.22.13.34.454826@example.net...

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 07:37:57 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

On 5 Aug 2005 14:34:46 GMT, et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black)
wrote:

Ben Bradley (ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net) writes:
I at first thought the subject was "Anatomically correct time."
Surely that's no reflection of what's on my mind...

No, for some reason the same thought crossed my mind.

Michael

Me too ;-)

OK, did anybody _NOT_ read "anatomically correct time"? ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

I keep reading it that way *every* time I see the damn thing!

Ken

Jim Thompson · Aug 6, 2005

On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 13:28:49 +1200, "Ken Taylor" <ken@home.nz> wrote:

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news:7du6f15iac4kke9bfb7jqhuq06p4rnqnnf@4ax.com...
On 5 Aug 2005 14:34:46 GMT, et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black)
wrote:

Ben Bradley (ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net) writes:
I at first thought the subject was "Anatomically correct time."
Surely that's no reflection of what's on my mind...

No, for some reason the same thought crossed my mind.

Michael

Me too ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
I feel a lot better - I thought it was just me! What does this say
about us??

Ken

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

Glenn Gundlach · Aug 6, 2005

Jim Thompson wrote:

On 5 Aug 2005 15:08:53 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote:

"Glenn Gundlach" <stratus46@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:1123218967.629549.110440@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

For a cheapy frequency reference, the color subcarrier from a network
TV station should be really close to 3579545 Hz. FCC requires them to
be +/- 10 Hz but they're usually much closer than that.

GG

Note that NTSC standard TV signals are due to go off the air in 2006,IIRC.
Due to the forced move to HDTV.

Nonsense. It's DTV not HDTV and...

"The change to digital TV is triggered no sooner than the end of 2006,
but only when 85% of U.S. homes can receive a digital television
picture. Apparently that doesn't mean 'are capable of receiving the
signal,' but rather 'have the equipment to view a digital television
signal.'

I find it difficult to imagine digital TV market penetration being
anywhere close to 85% less than <two> years from today."

I have SEVEN NTSC sets in the house.

I receive signal via Cox Cable.

Unless Cox Cable can provide me with a signal that the new sets can
tune WITHOUT A SET-TOP BOX, there is no way I will switch.

But I could probably just cease TV altogether. For instance my office
TV is always tuned to Fox News and my back is to it, so radio would
suffice.

In the evening we generally just watch a movie from our collection of
nearly 300 DVD's.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Analog TV WILL go off the air. FCC, NAB and congress are currently
talking Jan 1 2009. Does that 'end of analog' apply to cable? I would
think that they're allowed to do as they please and if there's a market
for analog TV, I'm sure they'll supply it. BUT, having lived with off
air free DTV/HDTV for 20 months, why would anbody WANT those marginal
pictures? OK, it's only important to me. BTW, NAB and MSTV requested
proposals from the consumer electronics industry for supplying
inexpensive DTV converter boxes to help along the transition. 12
companies responded.

Heck, the last 3 weeks I've been transferring 25 and 35 year old
analog video (all there was then) from 2" Ampex Quadruplex machines to
digital Betacam for the restoration department for DVD. Seems that even
though I'm a maintenance engineer there, I'm one of 2 who can set the
machines up properly, so I get to be a tape operator. Haven't had this
much fun in a while.

GG

xray · Aug 6, 2005

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 08:56:28 -0700, Jim Thompson
<thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

For instance my office
TV is always tuned to Fox News and my back is to it, so radio would
suffice.

Ha ha! No surprise there. Feed your right-wing brain directly from the
tap. Fox News. The American equivalent of Al Jazeera.

-

BTW, I've had a DTV/HDTV TV for several years now. I get my local
stations OTA. It's just like FM radio. If you have a strong enough
signal it's perfect. If you don't, nada. I also have Directv via
satellite, so almost all my TV watching is digital now. It works, Jim.
You should learn to embrace technology.

I do think the prices are way to high for the consumer. I bought my TV
around year 2000. It has a good large picture and built-in
Standard/DTV/HDTV/Directv reception. All for about $2000 ($1500 shortly
after I bought.) I look from time to time, but I don't see buys like
that anymore. Sometimes an ok buy on a TV, but with nothing DTV built-in
so hundreds of dollars away.

Happy in general with my digital TV experience, except for the
disappointment of the crappy video quality of most of the Directv
channels due to the low bandwidth they are providing. Less noticable to
the average consumer with a current crappy TV.

I've got the HDTV monitor too in my TV. Very impressive to watch the
programming that is done for it. Started watching "Desperate Housewives"
on OTA just because it looked so good in HDTV, then got sorta hooked on
the clever soap opera. On Directv, the only thing in HD (that I'm
willing to pay for) is HBO. Looks good when they broadcast something
that I can stand to watch. I think HBO has gone way down hill in the
last few years.

Our local PBS station (KQED) is a leader in HDTV broadcasting. They have
it technically more under control than most of the network stations. On
the ABC big shows (Desperate Housewives, Lost) they kept screwing up the
HDTV OTA broadcasts in multiple ways. Sheesh! I think it was probably a
protest against cost cutting by the local ABC workers. But maybe it was
just incompetence.

----

On the original Atomic Time theme, I have a couple Rb oscillators.

xray · Aug 6, 2005

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 18:33:11 +0200, martin griffith
<martingriffith@XXyahoo.co.uk> wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:16:20 GMT, in sci.electronics.design Ben
Bradley <ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net> wrote:

snip

, perhaps someday society
will break down and all these signals will be gone, then how will
anyone know what time it is?

If that happens, a sundial will be all that is required, and a
knowledge of when to plant crops

What about "Mad Max" and all those other end-of-the-world movies that
followed? Your brave new world seems really boring.

Is that the good news?

Ken Taylor · Aug 6, 2005

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news:1688f1de8llhd7b53ic5aqna4jeqslpk5m@4ax.com...

On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 13:28:49 +1200, "Ken Taylor" <ken@home.nz> wrote:

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news:7du6f15iac4kke9bfb7jqhuq06p4rnqnnf@4ax.com...
On 5 Aug 2005 14:34:46 GMT, et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black)
wrote:

Ben Bradley (ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net) writes:
I at first thought the subject was "Anatomically correct time."
Surely that's no reflection of what's on my mind...

No, for some reason the same thought crossed my mind.

Michael

Me too ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
I feel a lot better - I thought it was just me! What does this say
about us??

Ken

Engineers are all alike ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
I guess we see what we expect to see. On a similar note, my wife and I were

driving through the country-side a few months back and I saw a house with a
series of antennas beside it. She saw a house with a boat next to it and the
masts sticking up out of the river. It'd be a more interesting example of
seeing what you expect, if I'd been right rather than her......

Ken

martin griffith · Aug 6, 2005

On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 07:28:56 GMT, in sci.electronics.design xray
<notreally@hotmail.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 18:33:11 +0200, martin griffith
martingriffith@XXyahoo.co.uk> wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:16:20 GMT, in sci.electronics.design Ben
Bradley <ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net> wrote:

snip

, perhaps someday society
will break down and all these signals will be gone, then how will
anyone know what time it is?

If that happens, a sundial will be all that is required, and a
knowledge of when to plant crops

What about "Mad Max" and all those other end-of-the-world movies that
followed? Your brave new world seems really boring.

Is that the good news?

I hope so, but the real wars to come won't be about GWB, WMD,
terrorism etc. Those are just little skirmishes really. The real tough
ones will be about water that is drinkable

martin

keith · Aug 6, 2005

On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 07:17:51 +0000, xray wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 08:56:28 -0700, Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

For instance my office
TV is always tuned to Fox News and my back is to it, so radio would
suffice.

Ha ha! No surprise there. Feed your right-wing brain directly from the
tap. Fox News. The American equivalent of Al Jazeera.

You're confusing CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN with FNN. FNN is by far rhe more
balanced of the five. Guess why FNN viewership is up and *all* the others
down?

-

BTW, I've had a DTV/HDTV TV for several years now. I get my local
stations OTA. It's just like FM radio. If you have a strong enough
signal it's perfect. If you don't, nada. I also have Directv via
satellite, so almost all my TV watching is digital now. It works, Jim.
You should learn to embrace technology.

Why? Why watch high-resolution digital crap?

I do think the prices are way to high for the consumer. I bought my TV
around year 2000. It has a good large picture and built-in
Standard/DTV/HDTV/Directv reception. All for about $2000 ($1500 shortly
after I bought.) I look from time to time, but I don't see buys like
that anymore. Sometimes an ok buy on a TV, but with nothing DTV built-in
so hundreds of dollars away.

The prices are high because they demand isn't there to move volume. Hint:
the government is forcing HDTV down our throats, whether we want it or
not. Most don't, or at least don't want to pay a nickel for it. I may
buy in when a >36" 16:9 flat-panel TV drops under $1K.

Happy in general with my digital TV experience, except for the
disappointment of the crappy video quality of most of the Directv
channels due to the low bandwidth they are providing. Less noticable to
the average consumer with a current crappy TV.

A friend complains about the crappy TeeVee sets. HDTV makes them look
flat and cardboard-like, which they are. Sports, OTOH.

I've got the HDTV monitor too in my TV. Very impressive to watch the
programming that is done for it. Started watching "Desperate Housewives"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

....and you bitch about FNN! Yikes!

on OTA just because it looked so good in HDTV, then got sorta hooked on
the clever soap opera. On Directv, the only thing in HD (that I'm
willing to pay for) is HBO. Looks good when they broadcast something
that I can stand to watch. I think HBO has gone way down hill in the
last few years.

Our local PBS station (KQED) is a leader in HDTV broadcasting. They have
it technically more under control than most of the network stations. On
the ABC big shows (Desperate Housewives, Lost) they kept screwing up the
HDTV OTA broadcasts in multiple ways. Sheesh! I think it was probably a
protest against cost cutting by the local ABC workers. But maybe it was
just incompetence.

Thanks to the taxpayer.

--
Keith

keith · Aug 6, 2005

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 08:56:28 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

<snip>

But I could probably just cease TV altogether. For instance my office
TV is always tuned to Fox News and my back is to it, so radio would
suffice.

I use my XM MyFi and FM receivers around the house. I generally don't
*listen* to Fox. ...too balanced. ;-)

In the evening we generally just watch a movie from our collection of
nearly 300 DVD's.

I've been recording a collection off HBO/MAX/SHO/etc. The 160GB drive
on my DVR/DVD-RW is almost full. I gotta catch up burning the discs.

--
Keith

keith · Aug 6, 2005

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 14:33:12 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 17:57:23 GMT, the renowned Rich Grise
richgrise@example.net> wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 13:49:51 -0400, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On 5 Aug 2005 15:08:53 GMT, the renowned Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.
"Glenn Gundlach" <stratus46@yahoo.com> wrote in
For a cheapy frequency reference, the color subcarrier from a network
TV station should be really close to 3579545 Hz. FCC requires them to
be +/- 10 Hz but they're usually much closer than that.

Note that NTSC standard TV signals are due to go off the air in 2006,IIRC.
Due to the forced move to HDTV.

Does anyone still receive terrestrial analog TV signals over the air?

Yup. I've even built a little Yagi for channel 56.

Thanks,
Rich

What's so interesting about channel 56?

Back in the 70s we had a channel 79 (now channel 57 broadcast
frequency) which showed racy movies every Friday night. People bought
directional UHF antennas just to get them (they didn't really have
much of a broadcast antenna either at the time). Now the signal from
the world's tallest free-standing structure is powerful, but the
movies are long gone.

I'm told people around here spent big bux on antennas to get the soft
porn channel out of Montreal, about that time.

--
Keith

Jim Thompson · Aug 6, 2005

On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 10:18:09 -0400, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 08:56:28 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

snip

But I could probably just cease TV altogether. For instance my office
TV is always tuned to Fox News and my back is to it, so radio would
suffice.

I use my XM MyFi and FM receivers around the house. I generally don't
*listen* to Fox. ...too balanced. ;-)

[snip]

480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax

keith · Aug 6, 2005

On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 08:35:12 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 10:18:09 -0400, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 08:56:28 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

snip

But I could probably just cease TV altogether. For instance my office
TV is always tuned to Fox News and my back is to it, so radio would
suffice.

I use my XM MyFi and FM receivers around the house. I generally don't
*listen* to Fox. ...too balanced. ;-)

[snip]

How do you like the XM? I've been considering XM since I live in a
mountainous "bowl" which pretty well kills FM, and AM isn't much
better.

I *love* it! I always thought paying for radio was stupid, if one
wasn't an interstate trucker, or something. Of course I never thought I'd
spend $160/mo. (including Internet) for cable TV either. I got XM
mainly for trips and weekends (talk radio is all sports around here), but
end up listening to it most of the time. If you're only getting one
receiver (additional receivers are $7/mo.) I highly recommend the MyFi
or one of the other "XM2go" receivers. Also, look around the Internet for
hardware. The XM site is nutz.

--
Keith

Richard the Dreaded Liber · Aug 6, 2005

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 20:42:13 -0700, Glenn Gundlach wrote:

Analog TV WILL go off the air. FCC, NAB and congress are currently
talking Jan 1 2009. Does that 'end of analog' apply to cable? I would

So, will the Feds make some kind of provision for the poor, who can't
afford cable? Maybe a subsidy? Or do they really want to go to the
kind of society where there's underground channels and stuff? Remember
the "Voice of Freedom" stations back in the war days? Ever seen "Max
Headroom?"

Thanks,
Rich

atomically correct time

Rich The Newsgroup Wacko

Guest

Rich Grise

Guest

Jim Yanik

Guest

Jim Yanik

Guest

Jim Yanik

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Ken Taylor

Guest

Ken Taylor

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Glenn Gundlach

Guest

xray

Guest

xray

Guest

Ken Taylor

Guest

martin griffith

Guest

keith

Guest

keith

Guest

keith

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

keith

Guest

Richard the Dreaded Liber

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor