|
 |
andrel <a_l### [at] hotmail com> wrote:
> The signal to noise ratio is much better for digital. Simply because
> they broadcast the artifacts so if you receive them correctly that is
> within specifications. What you would have preferred is a better signal
> to disturbance ratio, where the signal is the original uncompressed
> signal and the disturbance is anything, noise or artifact that is in the
> received image different from the original. These are two entirely
> different concepts and you can not blame an advertiser to choose the one
> that suits the paying company best.
White noise has been exchanged for mpeg artifacts. Not much of an
improvement, IMO.
Moreover, one could argue that in areas with bad reception the situation
has got worse. With analog TV bad reception means more white noise, but
at least you get to see and hear something, which may be quite important
if you are eg. watching the news or weather report.
With digital TV, however, bad reception means that the broadcast stops
playing at moments.
The human visual system is more permissive of noise than intermittent
playback. Intermittent playback may even mean incomprehensible message.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
