[mythtv-users] Quick and dirty workaround

Bruce Markey bjm at lvcm.com
Wed Aug 11 00:35:20 EDT 2004


Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 03:00:07PM -0700, Bruce Markey wrote:
> 
>>  "FWIW, the reason that most cities (in fact, all cities)
>>   do not have both is because there are minimum distance
>>   requirements for both same-channel and adjacent-channel
>>   frequency reuse, and they don't permit it."
>>
>>This says nothing about what happens in a location halfway
>>between the stations that are a minimum distance apart or
>>the fact that a station on one of these channels will cause
>>interference on the other adjacent channel which is why a
>>rule exists.
> 
> 
> Would you be happier, Bruce, if I said SMSA's?

Very little would make me happy and any acronym or citation
that supports what I'd hoped to say in the first place (without
getting bogged down in the minutia) wouldn't make any
difference...

> The original rule is quote here, from 1949:
> 
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ggninfo/93.htm

...yet there it is. The rules that govern what station broadcast
from where are moot. The point is that devices that output RF
normally have a a mechanism to select the output frequency and
the choices are suspect at best. This is why super VHS included
a new type of connector to get away from issues of broadcast
interference entirely.

>>>>So I really have no clue where this idea came from :P
>>
>>I certainly agree that you've demonstrated having no clue
>>concerning any facet of the subject or even what "idea" had
>>been discussed =).
>>
>>As for the subject from last week before the off-topic pissing
>>contest,
> 
> 
> It wasn't, actually, a pissing content, until you so declared it.

Perhaps you could start a thread explaining why your definition
of a pissing contest is superior to all others but substituting
"most cities" with "all cities" is an attempt to piss farther.
Pissing over Niagara Falls is more of the same ;-).

>>The relevant information is that there will be some degree of
>>RF interference no matter where you are or which preset channel
>>is chosen for output from one of these devices. Therefore, it is
>>better to avoid RF altogether by using s-video or composite from
>>the device if at all possible. However, if RF coax is used, the
>>preset channel needs to be selectable and this is why there has
>>to be a configuration option for myth because it cannot assume
>>the preset channel for the signal coming from the device will
>>always be "3" or will always be "4".
> 
> 
> All this is well and goo (and accurate), but was not the original
> posters' question: "what do I do about the 'tune card to' option since
> my external box sends out video, not RF?"?

In your zeal to out piss, you've put words in quotation marks
which do not appear in Matt Morgan's message of Mon, Aug 2, 2004
titled "Quick and dirty workaround":

http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/2004-August/050210.html

  "How can I keep mythtv from trying to control the channel
   internally?"

He was concerned about the channel of the tuner on the capture
card being changed because he was using the RF tuner input even
though it took multiple promptings before he clarified this. He
did not ask about the "'tune card to' option" as you suggest. The
problem was that he was unaware of the "Preset tuner to channel"
option and that this was the solution that he was looking for.

> Cause that's what *I* thought he was asking about.

I have to admire your willingness to at least admit here that
you were wrong. Perhaps if you read the actual text rather than
making up your own quotes you wouldn't make these mistakes.

--  bjm



More information about the mythtv-users mailing list