Another Bachmann / DCC question

wrote

Thanks Nigel, that's worth noting. I've used LE1035Es in the larger (Classes 40 & 46) locos because they didn't seem to like the 1014s, but no doubt all will come out in the wash when I've more DCC experience.

John.

John Turner wrote:-

More wheels = more friction through curves and points. Nigel Burkin has also commented that only two axles on each bogie are driven where he would have preferred three.

(kim)

"kim" wrote

But the LE1014s are ok on the class 37s which also have basically the same drive.

John.

John Turner wrote:-

But one less set of wheels on each bogie.

(kim)

I well remember being banned from using my Triang set when my parents wanted to watch Television because it caused Havoc with the TV. This was despite having extra power clips with integral suppressors attached to the track which ISTR was a suggestion in one of the manuals to alleviate the problem.

The television set we had then was on the VHF 405 line standard so possibly any requirement for suppression dates back to that era and has never been amended.

G.Harman

TV Interference has never seemed to be a problem in North America, probably due to us using the vastly inferior NTSC (Never The Same Colour) system and

110vac 60hz wiring.

-- Cheers Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway (Site now back up and working)

Roger T wrote:-

I had the same problem with my Scalextric which of course used the same Triang motor.

UK sets (and some european) used AM sound with positive-going signal, ie: white = 100& signal strength which is very susceptible to interfernece such as car ignition.

US (and most europena) sets use FM sound with negative-going signal, ie black =

100% signal strength which is much more resilient to electrical interference. The mains supply and color system are largely irrelevant. A lot of video enthusiasts in europe also rely on NTSC. It is neither inferior nor superior to PAL, merely different.

(kim)

^^^^^^^^^^^^ Phil: VERY MUCH in the PAST

Phil: Your description is of the old 405 line monochrome TV system which stopped beig used many many years ago. Negative modulation of the video is used in PAL I (UK 625 system) on UHF, for the reasons you mention. Sound was originally, and is still available in monphonic, on FM. Digital NICAM sound has been in use for about 20 years, in parallel. (Only cheaper TVs use the analogue FM sound except when demodulating signals from the users VCR if foolishly connnected by an aerial instead of SCART lead)

na) sets use FM sound with negative-going signal, ie black =

NTSC (525 lines) 4.5MHz b/w is considerab;ly inferior to 625 line (5.5MHz) TV / video as used in Europe (including the UK), and I do not know of any number of 'video enthusiasts' over here who would use it!

The new Digital standards in the USA (which could also be called NTSC, since it is a committee name, and the monochrome 525 line 60Hz system was so described before the color NTSC 525 almost60Hz was introduced) ARE an improvement over the 625 standard, at 1080/60, and perhaps 720p.

European (including the UK) digital transmission of 625 (is not 'PAL' since it is component digital, and not composite) is vastly superior to NTSC analogue, or PAL or SECAM transmissions... but not HD

Phil wrote:-

Some european countries (notably Belgium) still make use of AM sound and positive modulation for geo-political reasons.

85% of DVD owners in the UK make at least some use of Region-1 discs which rely on the NTSC video system. Prior to that many personal importers of VHS movies and almost all laserdisc users in the UK relied on NTSC. The general consensus of users is that the NTSC system as a whole is at least as good if not better than PAL.

(kim)

"kim"

Your Kidding!

Why do you think NTSC earned the nickname "Never The Same Colour"? Because it's not. Put 50 NTSC TVs side by side and you'll get 50 variations in colour. Put someone with a stripped shirt on an NTSC TV and you'll get that jagged line effect. Put an NTSC TV next to a PAL TV and you'll be constantly adjusting the focus because the NTSC TV will always look fuzzy and out of focus compared to the PAL TV.

-- Cheers Roger T.

Home of the Great Eastern Railway (Site now back up and working)

Roger T. wrote:-

Why do you think PAL earned the acronym of "Picture Always Lousy"?

There have been three different implementations of NTSC in the United States in my lifetime. One of these used a color reference signal to cancel out variations in color tones. This was later dropped in preference to a ghost-cancelling system which was of more importance to most American viewers. Since the advent of the THX program all pre-recorded NTSC programmes are now produced to a much tighter color specification than before.

You will get the same effect on any TV system including HDTV. Put someone with a bright red or orange shirt in front of a PAL TV camera and you will get horrendous colour noise.

There is no user focus control on a TV set. VHS, S-VHS, laserdisc and DVD recordings have exactly the same overall picture bandwidth whether intended for PAL or NTSC playback. It is only analogue NTSC broadcasts which have a more limited bandwidth. North American viewers will complain that PAL broadcasts suffer from excessive flicker, colour dropout and a lack of dynamic resolution.

(kim)

I don't think the use for DVD and VHS has much to do with the merits of the two systems for broadcast (which is what is relevant here). For DVD and VHS there are advantages to using whichever format was the original source format (and thus avoiding transcoding artifacts). The susceptibility of the format to interference when broadcast is irrelevant to what you see from DVD/VHS.

Other factors which affect TV interference are the transmission frequencies in use --- Europe mostly uses UHF frequencies for TV broadcast, while other areas still have VHF broadcasts. Differences in suppression components in trains may reflect regulation differences more than actual differences in susceptibility of the equipment.

As an aside, it isn't all that many years since 405 line transmission stopped (1985 I believe).

Mark Thornton

Mark Thornton wrote:-

Almost everyone in North American has cable. When that is taken into account the differences between NTSC and PAL or SeCAM transmissions are much less significant. Cable is of course also far less susceptible to interference.

(kim)

(snipped so much incorrect information)

Phil: I suggest you look up some technical information on the subject, since your assertions have been so inaccurate.

If you cannot see the difference between the various quality/bandwidths of NTSC VHS v DVD (component in 525 or 625 -but never in PAL!!) or Laservision even, then it says a lot about the low quality of the TV you have been judging it on 8-(

Any this group is supposed to be about railways (uk models) there are video groups too

Phil Spiegelhalter wrote:-

I suggest you post your assertions as to the relative qualities of NTSC/PAL, Region-1/Region-2 to uk.media.dvd or uk.media.home-cinema and see what response you get.

Which particular TV would that be? During the years I conducted public demonstrations for Naam Hi-Fi Vision (later Cleartone), Colorvision and others I used a considerable variety of top-of-the-range multi standard TV monitors. Even on the less exalted monitor I used at home for writing technical reviews the general superiority of NTSC recordings over PAL was apparent.

The maximum bandwidth of a VCR, laserdisc, or DVD player is fixed. The recording system used makes no difference to it. "Laservision" as you call it was superceeded in 1988 by LaserDisc although the latter was not adopted in the UK until 1992. There was insufficient bandwidth to allow a PCM audiotrack, PAL subcarrier and AC-3 signal to coexist side-by-side so PAL releases suffered significantly compared to their NTSC counterparts.

Yes and I've run one of them for the last ten years!

(kim)