Talk:ATSC tuner

"Tuner" is correct, not "receiver"

I question the "Technical discussion" claim that perhaps "receiver" is more accurate. As used in the U.S. since the All Channels Act (more commonly called the "All Channel Receiver Act") in the 1960's, if not before, the term "receiver" means a full-blown TV set which both selects ('tunes') the channel and displays ('receives') the picture. A "tuner" is the channel-selecting component of a receiver or other device (such as a VCR or digital-to-analog converter).--RBBrittain 03:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The receiver is receiving the VHF/UHF EM wave, processing it, and outputting an audio/video signal. The tuner is just one component in the box. Your perspective seems to be oriented towards what is the common lingo. And I am not disagreeing with what you said. What I am suggesting is what the common lingo should be. If you take a common stereo AV receiver and strip out many of its components but leave the tuner, then you have what is commonly called a tuner. Daniel.Cardenas 05:15, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

There are three parts to a TV set as I understand it: the tuner (in the RF sense) which receives an RF signal from an antenna and demodulates it down to baseband, the decoder which converts a demodulated NTSC or ATSC signal to component or RGB video, and the monitor which displays the image. Can you cite a part of the All Channels Act that states the definitions used by federal regulation? --Damian Yerrick (☎) 03:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with the heading; "receiver" is correct, not "tuner". A receiver is comprised of several components, only one of which is the tuner. The tuner is the part which can be manipulated to focus in on a frequency. Those of us who have been around long enough to remember when hi-fi FM radio sets were made up of an RF (or "antenna") amplifier, a tuner, a preamp, and an amplifier, will recall the introduction of "FM receivers" which incorporated all the separate components into one unit, usually with another tuner for AM radio, ("RCA phono" or "BNC") inputs for phono, mike, tape, and "AUX", bass, treble, and balance knobs, low and high filters, "loudness" switches, and perhaps separate outputs for different loudspeaker impedances. There was usually a large knob for tuning (which affected several stages), and sometimes one for "fine" tuning. Much confusion can be avoided simply by consistently using "tuner" when referring to the (RF) tunable component within the receiver and "receiver" when referring to the entire apparatus (including the tuner hidden within it) which the user employs to receive the broadcast medium. The "TV set" can be regarded as a (sometimes) separate "output device". Unfree (talk) 11:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Receiver is not the correct term anyway for the objective reason that several of the devices are not receivers, which are generally and vy all traditional a/v definitions defined by having amplification. A PC tuner card has no amplification, many set top TV tuners have no amplification. All use of the term receiver here should solely be used with eh qualification that a "receiver" is one of many devices using a ATSC tuner - the great majority of which are NOT receivers. To interchange the terms as done here with recent edits is no different than an article on motors stating that cars are motors!71.252.56.218 (talk) 01:52, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

RBBrittain and the rest who agree with the heading are correct. TVs can and do sometimes contain several tuners, but the unit is just one "receiver." You would call the entire TV a receiver. You might also call a tuner/DVR combo a receiver. You could even call a USB TV tuner a receiver, because a receiver provides a signal appropriate for the human interface (e.g. low impedance power output for loudspeakers, else composite, component or digital signal for monitor, else encoded stream for computer-based software viewer). Back to the subject: this specific element of a television (the ATSC tuner) is unambiguously a tuner (and not a receiver), just as it has been so named by the industry. And furthermore, this discussion of "common lingo" screams *original research*. It's certainly not a technical fact backed up by any reference. It should be removed from the "Technical Discussion" section unless a credible citation can be found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.115.66.42 (talk) 01:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

DTV Question

So, according to this article, I would be able to buy a portable TV, or any TV, with complete digital reception as early as March of 2007? --HG707 21:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

It's more likely that no traditional portable TVs will be sold at all as of March 2007. The closest thing I could find was this page on about, which claims that mobile phones will replace portable TVs, offering a cable-like programming package. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 03:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Merge w/ tuner

There is little rationale for this subject to be separated from that of digital tuner. At best, the facts discussed here apply equally to DVB-T and ISDB-T tuners, and all would be better covered in a combined article. algocu 17:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

>There is little rationale for this subject to be separated from that of digital tuner.

What makes you say that? I see little or no duplication of content. Perhaps digital tuner should be merged with analog tuner, since most tuners are becoming digital.

>At best, the facts discussed here apply equally to DVB-T and ISDB-T tuners, and all would be better covered in a combined article.

Please feel free to create such an article. Daniel.Cardenas 18:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't Merge: Keep this a separate article from digital tuners, this is a specific type of tuner/receiver/thing-a-ma-jig.Abebenjoe 16:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

No, it isn;t a specific type, it is a article whihc hoplessly confuses terms. Tuenrs are compnents within receivers. A "Tuner/receiver thing-a-ma-jig as discussed in the article as it is is a receiver. No Receiver exists that doesn't have a tuner. "ATSC tuners" are not receivers they are a components within devices which may or may not be (usually are NOT) receivers ATSC or not)!

ATSC tuner should be about ATSC tuners, as opposed to receivers, NTSC Tuners, AM Tuners, FM Tuners, Analog UFH tuners etc!71.252.56.218 (talk) 01:56, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Redirect from "HD tuner"?

I went to the non-existent "HD tuner" article and got redirected here. My understanding is that having an ATSC tuner does not necessarily mean that your TV can accept an HD signal--that you need an "HDTV tuner." True? 205.157.110.11 21:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

An ATSC signal can be HD, depending upon what is being broadcast. An ATSC tuner must accept an HD signal, although it may output a standard definition video as current ATSC DVD recorders do. What your TV can accept is independent of the tuner and dependent on the TV. Current standalone ATSC tuners do output an HD signal. Daniel.Cardenas 22:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

DTV Tuner = HD Only TVs?

If I bought a new TV, would I only be able to buy EDTV/HDTVs, or are there SDTVs being sold with DTV tuners inside? (I couldn't tell for certain from the above thread) - MSTCrow 21:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I believe all the small TVs with digital tuners are SDTV. For example a 20 inch TV. This forum discussion might be helpful: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=813288&highlight=smallest Daniel.Cardenas 22:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Also found two Sanyo TVs, 27" and 32" flats, that are listed as SDTV (and have both NSTC and ATSC tuners). Sad that my 20" Sanyo from 1992 is considered small now. - MSTCrow 23:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Define the acronyms NTSC and ATSC

A basic encyclopedia entry would start by telling us what the acronyms stand for, no? Bobbyrae 12:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

If you click on ATSC or NTSC in the article, you go those articles you get the acronym spelled out. If you feel it should be spelled out here also, then go ahead and edit the article. Daniel.Cardenas 16:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Never The Same Color Twice (NTSC). Abebenjoe 16:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

"Twice"? Where did that come from? It's "never the same color"! Unfree (talk) 12:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Problems with the new section on "How an ATSC Tuner Works"

There are some serious problems with this new section, first it does not explain how a tuner works, second the definitions that it attempts to give are range from poor to wrong. For example the definition of Analog to Digital Conversion:

Analog to digital conversion, sometimes called ADC or A to D refers to a technology in which an analog signal is converted into a digital signal. In the context of an ATSC tuner, an analog TV broadcast that is broadcasted over the air is received by the ATSC tuner and converted from its original analog signal to a new digital signal that can be viewed on a digital TV set.

The past tense of "to cast" is "cast". Unfree (talk) 12:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

This is actually a poor attempt at explaining demodulation (which is also incorrectly defined separately in the article). I think we should remove this section unless someone is willing to fix it. --Ray andrew 17:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

So, does this device convert the digital signals over the analog? I was reading this under the impression this is the type of tuner to buy for when they switch the analog TV signals off, and have digital takeover. This article references the shutdown a few times, but always talks about converting FROM analog TO digital.... shouldn't it be the other way around? Taking digital signals from the air, and converting them to an analog signal an older TV can understand? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.72.98.88 (talk) 01:12, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

"Convert ... over" makes no sense. The confusion about the meanings of "tuner" and "receiver" is a serious one, since there's no way to discuss what something does unless it can be identified first. As for the meanings of "analog" and "digital", they, too, are used differently in different contexts. The electro-magnetic phenomena which pass through space are inherently analog, like waves on the ocean, but the information they contain must be interpreted (after many earlier steps) as digital data before it can yield any "meaning". We must make clear to the reader exactly what occurs from the moment a broadcast signal meets an antenna until the time it produces images and sounds. It's almost impossible to get anywhere without block diagrams. Unfree (talk) 12:22, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Virtual Channels

This article needs information about Virtual channels, which map in a confusing way to arbitrary real VHF/UHF channel numbers, it seems. -69.87.203.112 (talk) 01:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Where is Generation discussion

Soemone with technical knowledge needs to write up fourth, fifth sixth generation differences since these make a large difference in ATSC reception.71.252.56.218 (talk) 01:58, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on ATSC tuner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070205073718/http://www.twice.com:80/article/CA6285719.html to http://www.twice.com/article/CA6285719.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928122240/http://www.digitaltvdesignline.com/howto/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=3PWW0CSITGSP2QSNDBECKICCJUMEKJVN?articleID=187203456 to http://www.digitaltvdesignline.com/howto/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=3PWW0CSITGSP2QSNDBECKICCJUMEKJVN?articleID=187203456

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC)