Salü, Tobias...
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009, Tobias Stoeber wrote:
> You are right. 562 MHz as nominal frequency is correct, because for
> It's just a centre frequency used for tuning purposes. The DVB-T signal > should (ideally) use a 8 MHz width space from 559.25 MHz to 567.25 MHz > for Ch 32.
Is this correct, or should the range be from 558 to 566MHz,apart from locations (such as the UK and Australia) where anoffset may be used?
I'd assume the 1,25MHz offset you list is due to the use ofanalogue suppressed sideband, where the actual carrier tobe modulated would be, for E21: 21 471.250; the soundcarrier at some offset to this which I don't remember, nothaving interest much in the many different analogue norms...
> Looking through your files in the zip archive, it rose some questions in > my mind:> > a) is it really useful to have scan files by federal state (Bundesland)?
Maybe. It's better, in my mind, than the existing case ofindividual sites, which again, may or may not cover the caseof nearby areas.
I'm trying to decide if a de-all type of file would make anysense, and how to go about it, because I'm dissatisfied withthe current state of de-Wherever files.
In the case of ch-all, it makes sense, because it's a simplecase of generally a single multiplex per language region, basedon the GE06 frequency allocations, in a smaller geographic area.
> Just let me explain with an example. I live in Sachsen-Anhalt on the > north of the Harz Mountains area. To effectivly ("best") use DVB-T I do > combine both transmitters in Sachsen-Anhalt (Mt. Brocken) and from > Niedersachsen (Braunschweig). This is because some channels are only
I've posted in the past my suggestion for a de-BW file, madeby hand, which tries to address this issue, as well as providean overview for anyone trying to make sense of the frequenciesand broadcast policies, as well as to help with antennaorientation, towerspotting, or anything else that might interestme, in a single location.
Have you seen this file? If not, would you care to find it inthe archives (or I'll mail you a copy) and tell me what youthink of it?
> => I personally would prefer to stay with or alternatively provide a > region based file, so I could look up and combine the regions of > interest. What do you think?
A Bundesland-based set of files is a region-based set, or canyou better describe the regions you are thinking of? In anycase, due to the nature of overlap, there will always be edgecases regardless of region, bar island nations or those wherepenetration is not aimed at close to 100%...
The division by Bundesland works also because of differentmanagement in each Land, which plays out in channel assignments,SFNs, and common use of a particular modulation, I am seeing bythe overview presented in the first pdf file.
> b) Conflicting information> > In your "Sachsen-Anhalt" scanfile you list on Ch 24 the ARD multiplex > with (Halle-Stadt):> > T 498000000 8MHz 2/3 NONE QAM64 8k 1/4 NONE> # CH24: Das Erste, arte, Phoenix, EinsFestival> > which is for a large part of Sachsen-Anhalt useless (we can't receive > that), as we actually receive on Ch 24 (from Braunschweig)> > T 498000000 8MHz 2/3 NONE QAM16 8k 1/4 NONE> # CH24: RTL, RTL II, Super RTL, VOX
I intend to take Christoph's files and massage them to addbits of info, reviewing the info by hand, adding missing infoand generally trying to come up with something like the BWfile I created.
But I want feedback about that file too, rather than to havemy changes be rejected after I've done the review and work.
> => Does it matter, e.g. would instead of the unreceivable Ch24 from > Halle-Stadt the Braunschweig Ch24 be found? (I did not test this).
This all depends on the device. At least some of my tunerseffectively will lock a signal as if I've specified `AUTO'in place of everything, even when what I specify is wrong.
In reality, when I've been in a new location and done a scanwithout knowing transmitter site details, I've just used ageneral purpose scanfile I've created which goes from 474 in8MHz steps up to 850 or so, like### Kanal 68 UHFT 850000000 8MHz AUTO AUTO AUTO AUTO AUTO AUTO
> c) You clearly missed out some information. I noticed for instance Ch 37 > in Leipzig (Sachsen) which is the "Leipzig 1" multiplex
> On the other hand I doubt, that it would be a useful entry into a > "Sachsen" scanfile because reception is limited to the area of the city > of Lepzig.
For cases like this, I don't know if it's better to havea separate de-Leipzig file as today, plus something coveringa larger region. I would argue the case for keeping, say,de-Stuttgart but losing everything else in favour of de-BW;however, at least two locations there do not just list thelocal transmitter frequencies (Ravensburg and Mannheim) but listout-of-Bundesland frequencies (the Privates from FFM for thelatter, and austrian and maybe swiss frequencies receivablearound the Bodensee in the former).
That is, for the largest well-known cities, go ahead and keepthem, simply because they are so large. Also if their situationincludes something to make them unique, be it the presence ofprivate multiplexes or special projects, which so far would notyet include Stuttgart.
But that's just my idea, and really, I would like to hearwhat you think of the contents of my de-BW file, as thesingle bit of feedback I got on it was negative.
Adé,barry bowusmamaw, the innernet's broke again...
_______________________________________________linux-dvb users mailing listFor V4L/DVB development, please use instead linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@linuxtv.orghttp://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
