[mythtv-users] PVR250 or HD3000?
Michael J. Lynch
mlynch at gcom.com
Mon Dec 20 21:56:36 UTC 2004
Doug Larrick wrote:
> Michael J. Lynch wrote:
>> Preston Crow wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 14:56, Michael J. Lynch wrote:
>>>> Other than cost, is there any reason to choose a PVR250 over a pchdtv
>>>> hd3000 since the latter can MPEG2 encode both NTSC and ATSC?
>>> You need to go back and do some more research, as the HD-3000 doesn't
>>> MPEG encode anything. (ATSC is broadcast as MPEG, so no encoding is
>>> required by the recipient.) Most HD-3000 users also use a PVR-250 card
>>> for NTSC.
>>> Check the list archives.
>> That's not what the pcHDTV website says. It specifically states that
>> the card
>> MPEG2 encoding. See the second line of paragraph 2 of the following
>> HD-3000 at pcHDTV <http://www.pchdtv.com/hd_3000.html>
>> The line I'm referencing is:
>> "The card receives NTSC and ATSC Signals and converts them to
>> digital streams which are transported across the PCI bus."
>> I know that ATSC is already MPEG2, does this possibly mean that
>> NTSC is converted to some digital format that is something other
>> than MPEG2?
> Yup! Digital != MPEG2. It's raw YUV data, not compressed.
> I can attest that neither the HD-2000 nor the HD-3000 contains MPEG
> compression hardware. For NTSC, they are simply dumb frame grabber
>mythtv-users mailing list
>mythtv-users at mythtv.org
Ah ha...so it's basically an ATSC (MPEG2) tuner and a "dumb" (BTTV style)
It sure would be nice if it combined a MPEG2 encoder for the NTSC stuff
with the ATSC tuner wouldn't it?
Michael J. Lynch
What if the hokey pokey IS what it's all about -- author unknown
More information about the mythtv-users