Fixing a time delay between wto Freeview boxes

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Bazzer Smith, Sep 10, 2006.

  1. Bazzer Smith

    Bazzer Smith Guest

    I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    however they take different times to process the signals so
    they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    listen to both at the same time.

    Is there anyway of fixing this time delay so they are in sync?

    I was think a good idea would be to make the cable to the faster box
    longer so the signal had to go futher, dunno how much cable I would need
    though, the delay is only about 1/5 of a second. I have some spare cable but
    I don't
    know what lenght to cut it too :O)


    TIA.
     
    Bazzer Smith, Sep 10, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Bazzer Smith

    Bill Wright Guest

    "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
    news:DM%Mg.21799$...
    >I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    > however they take different times to process the signals so
    > they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    > listen to both at the same time.
    >
    > Is there anyway of fixing this time delay so they are in sync?
    >
    > I was think a good idea would be to make the cable to the faster box
    > longer so the signal had to go futher, dunno how much cable I would need
    > though, the delay is only about 1/5 of a second. I have some spare cable
    > but I don't
    > know what lenght to cut it too :O)


    Try 40,000km. Reduce it by 5,000km increments until it's right. It's OK to
    coil it up. Signal losses will be about 8,000dB if you use CT100 so you
    might need some compensating amplification.

    Bill
     
    Bill Wright, Sep 10, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Bazzer Smith

    Bazzer Smith Guest

    "Bill Wright" <> wrote in message
    news:ee21o0$tp9$2surf.net...
    >
    > "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
    > news:DM%Mg.21799$...
    >>I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    >> however they take different times to process the signals so
    >> they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    >> listen to both at the same time.
    >>
    >> Is there anyway of fixing this time delay so they are in sync?
    >>
    >> I was think a good idea would be to make the cable to the faster box
    >> longer so the signal had to go futher, dunno how much cable I would need
    >> though, the delay is only about 1/5 of a second. I have some spare cable
    >> but I don't
    >> know what lenght to cut it too :O)

    >
    > Try 40,000km. Reduce it by 5,000km increments until it's right. It's OK to
    > coil it up. Signal losses will be about 8,000dB if you use CT100 so you
    > might need some compensating amplification.
    >


    Hmmm.. any chance of a quote on the job, I'll just use bog standard cable if
    it's cheaper :O)
    I would expect a bulk buyers discount though :O|

    And I want proper connectors too, not some twisted wires bodged job.
     
    Bazzer Smith, Sep 11, 2006
    #3
  4. Bazzer Smith

    Dr Zoidberg Guest

    Bazzer Smith wrote:
    > I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    > however they take different times to process the signals so
    > they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    > listen to both at the same time.
    >

    Do you get good reception under your bridge?

    --
    Alex

    Piece by piece the penguins have taken my sanity
    www.drzoidberg.co.uk www.ebayfaq.co.uk
     
    Dr Zoidberg, Sep 11, 2006
    #4
  5. Bazzer Smith

    Bill Wright Guest

    "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Do you get good reception under your bridge?


    Come now. The man asked an honest question and got an honest answer.

    Bill
     
    Bill Wright, Sep 11, 2006
    #5
  6. Bazzer Smith

    Paul D.Smith Guest

    "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
    news:DM%Mg.21799$...
    >I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    > however they take different times to process the signals so
    > they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    > listen to both at the same time.
    >
    > Is there anyway of fixing this time delay so they are in sync?
    >
    > I was think a good idea would be to make the cable to the faster box
    > longer so the signal had to go futher, dunno how much cable I would need
    > though, the delay is only about 1/5 of a second. I have some spare cable
    > but I don't
    > know what lenght to cut it too :O)
    >


    As you've realised, its not something that us poor mortals can achieve. You
    may be amused that DAB listeners have complained for sometime about the
    "time pips", which sound like a peel of bells as every DAB radio in the
    house goes off at a slightly different time, and all of them well behind any
    analogue radios. Of course digital radio off Freeview or Satellite goes off
    at a different time too!

    Of course DAB is of such high quality that surely people won't care about
    the fact that you can't listen around the house without all this bizarre
    "echo" affects, he said with his tongue firmly in his cheek!

    Paul DS
     
    Paul D.Smith, Sep 11, 2006
    #6
  7. On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 21:50:27 GMT, "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote:

    |I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    |however they take different times to process the signals so
    |they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    |listen to both at the same time.
    |
    |Is there anyway of fixing this time delay so they are in sync?
    |
    |I was think a good idea would be to make the cable to the faster box
    |longer so the signal had to go futher, dunno how much cable I would need
    |though, the delay is only about 1/5 of a second. I have some spare cable but
    |I don't
    |know what lenght to cut it too :O)

    I have seen a similar thing done, a long time ago, by a *commercial*
    *professional* outfit, called IIRC Wigwam, in a long thin auditorium where
    there were several TV monitors a long way from platform, and they
    introduces a time delay for each ?video? stream to give lip sync with both
    the natural speed of sound time delay and the audio out of the speakers.

    Writing the above made me realise that I do not understand what they did,
    but it worked very well.

    Introducing time delays in audio and/or video streams is definitely
    possible, and might now be down to a reasonable price now.
    --
    Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> Google Groups is IME the *worst*
    method of accessing usenet. GG subscribers would be well advised get a
    newsreader, say Agent, and a newsserver, say news.individual.net. These
    will allow them: to see only *new* posts, a killfile, and other goodies.
     
    Dave Fawthrop, Sep 11, 2006
    #7
  8. Bazzer Smith

    Roger R Guest

    "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
    news:DM%Mg.21799$...
    >I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    > however they take different times to process the signals so
    > they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    > listen to both at the same time.
    >
    > Is there anyway of fixing this time delay so they are in sync?
    >
    > I was think a good idea would be to make the cable to the faster box
    > longer so the signal had to go futher, dunno how much cable I would need
    > though, the delay is only about 1/5 of a second. I have some spare cable
    > but I don't
    > know what lenght to cut it too :O)


    This won't be any help but.. did something like this many years ago.
    However the frequency was 70 MHz rather than baseband video.
    We used a couple of reels of cable, probably about 500m, and that gave
    sufficeint delay.

    Could TV delay line technology be of use?
    A TV delay line has a delay of one line = 0.06 ms so you would only need
    about 8000 of them ..or perhaps bigger capacitors ;-)

    Roger
     
    Roger R, Sep 11, 2006
    #8
  9. Bill Wright wrote:
    > "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
    > news:DM%Mg.21799$...
    >> I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    >> however they take different times to process the signals so
    >> they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    >> listen to both at the same time.
    >>
    >> Is there anyway of fixing this time delay so they are in sync?
    >>
    >> I was think a good idea would be to make the cable to the faster box
    >> longer so the signal had to go futher, dunno how much cable I would need
    >> though, the delay is only about 1/5 of a second. I have some spare cable
    >> but I don't
    >> know what lenght to cut it too :O)

    >
    > Try 40,000km. Reduce it by 5,000km increments until it's right. It's OK to
    > coil it up.


    I beg to differ. Concerned with the low WAF of 5,000 tonnes of cable
    under the carpet, I coiled it on your advice, I might add, into a tidy
    bundle some billionth of a millimetre across, which I figured would fit
    out of sight behind the bookcase, when lo & behold, it promptly
    collapsed in on itself.

    Now I can't fit the last damned connector. Assuming you can suggest a
    suitable workaround to the termination issue, I'm still concerned the
    Hawking radiation will interfere with my reception. In your experience,
    is that likely to be a problem?

    > Signal losses will be about 8,000dB if you use CT100 so you
    > might need some compensating amplification.


    That's another thing - it doesn't seem to matter how strong a signal I
    feed into it, nothing comes back out. It appears your calculations are
    off somewhat. I have to say I'm not at all happy with your advice.

    --
    Michael
    m r o z a t u k g a t e w a y d o t n e t
     
    Michael Rozdoba, Sep 11, 2006
    #9
  10. IMHO Signal travels through cable at about a foot per nanosecond.

    So you can make up a delay line, but would it be practical?

    Good Luck

    Peter


    "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
    news:DM%Mg.21799$...
    >I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    > however they take different times to process the signals so
    > they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    > listen to both at the same time.
    >
    > Is there anyway of fixing this time delay so they are in sync?
    >
    > I was think a good idea would be to make the cable to the faster box
    > longer so the signal had to go futher, dunno how much cable I would need
    > though, the delay is only about 1/5 of a second. I have some spare cable
    > but I don't
    > know what lenght to cut it too :O)
    >
    >
    > TIA.
    >




    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
    Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity
    They are worthless spammers that are running a scam.
     
    Peter Williams, Sep 11, 2006
    #10
  11. Bazzer Smith

    charles Guest

    In article <45056e78$0$19743$>,
    Peter Williams <> wrote:
    > IMHO Signal travels through cable at about a foot per nanosecond.



    we used to consider that video co-ax had a velocity factor of 0.8.
    Resulting in: 3 x 10e8 x 0.8 m/sec or 2.4 x 10e8m/sec or 2.4 x 10e2m/usec

    or 240m/usec or .24m/nsec. (nearer 9inches)

    --
    From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

    Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11
     
    charles, Sep 11, 2006
    #11
  12. Bazzer Smith

    Pyriform Guest

    charles wrote:
    > we used to consider that video co-ax had a velocity factor of 0.8.
    > Resulting in: 3 x 10e8 x 0.8 m/sec or 2.4 x 10e8m/sec or 2.4 x
    > 10e2m/usec
    >
    > or 240m/usec or .24m/nsec. (nearer 9inches)


    Not if you use Mathew Orman's special FTL data transmission cable
    (sci.physics posts passim). The last I heard, he was claiming transmission
    speeds of several millions of times c, knocking Einstein into a cocked hat.
    The deluded fool even had a go at selling the prototype on ebay, with a
    starting price of $100,000. Sadly, there were no bids.
     
    Pyriform, Sep 11, 2006
    #12
  13. Bazzer Smith

    charles Guest

    In article <>,
    Pyriform <> wrote:
    > charles wrote:
    > > we used to consider that video co-ax had a velocity factor of 0.8.
    > > Resulting in: 3 x 10e8 x 0.8 m/sec or 2.4 x 10e8m/sec or 2.4 x
    > > 10e2m/usec
    > >
    > > or 240m/usec or .24m/nsec. (nearer 9inches)


    > Not if you use Mathew Orman's special FTL data transmission cable
    > (sci.physics posts passim). The last I heard, he was claiming
    > transmission speeds of several millions of times c, knocking Einstein
    > into a cocked hat.


    but surely, to minimise the length of cable needed you need much slower
    transmission?

    --
    From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

    Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11
     
    charles, Sep 11, 2006
    #13
  14. Bazzer Smith

    Pyriform Guest

    charles wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > Pyriform <> wrote:
    >> charles wrote:
    >>> we used to consider that video co-ax had a velocity factor of 0.8.
    >>> Resulting in: 3 x 10e8 x 0.8 m/sec or 2.4 x 10e8m/sec or 2.4 x
    >>> 10e2m/usec
    >>>
    >>> or 240m/usec or .24m/nsec. (nearer 9inches)

    >
    >> Not if you use Mathew Orman's special FTL data transmission cable
    >> (sci.physics posts passim). The last I heard, he was claiming
    >> transmission speeds of several millions of times c, knocking Einstein
    >> into a cocked hat.

    >
    > but surely, to minimise the length of cable needed you need much
    > slower transmission?


    Sadly slow speed transmission does not seem to be an area addressed by Mr
    Orman's cutting edge research. Using one of his cables, you'd probably get
    to see the programme before it had even left the aerial.

    More orthodox science may have the answer:

    http://news.zdnet.com/IBM slows light, readies it for networking/2100-9584_22-5928541.html
     
    Pyriform, Sep 11, 2006
    #14
  15. Bazzer Smith

    Bazzer Smith Guest

    "Roger R" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
    > news:DM%Mg.21799$...
    >>I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    >> however they take different times to process the signals so
    >> they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    >> listen to both at the same time.
    >>
    >> Is there anyway of fixing this time delay so they are in sync?
    >>
    >> I was think a good idea would be to make the cable to the faster box
    >> longer so the signal had to go futher, dunno how much cable I would need
    >> though, the delay is only about 1/5 of a second. I have some spare cable
    >> but I don't
    >> know what lenght to cut it too :O)

    >
    > This won't be any help but.. did something like this many years ago.
    > However the frequency was 70 MHz rather than baseband video.
    > We used a couple of reels of cable, probably about 500m, and that gave
    > sufficeint delay.
    >
    > Could TV delay line technology be of use?
    > A TV delay line has a delay of one line = 0.06 ms so you would only need
    > about 8000 of them ..or perhaps bigger capacitors ;-)



    This would do it probably!!
    http://delayplay.com/


    >
    > Roger
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
    Bazzer Smith, Sep 11, 2006
    #15
  16. Dave Fawthrop <> wrote:

    >I have seen a similar thing done, a long time ago, by a *commercial*
    >*professional* outfit, called IIRC Wigwam, in a long thin auditorium where
    >there were several TV monitors a long way from platform, and they
    >introduces a time delay for each ?video? stream to give lip sync with both
    >the natural speed of sound time delay and the audio out of the speakers.


    To match video to sound that's traveled just 13 metres, you'd need to
    store a whole frame (at 25fps). Doesn't seem that it could have predated
    high-density RAM chips. Mercury delay lines wouldn't be up to the job.

    --
    Dave Farrance
     
    Dave Farrance, Sep 11, 2006
    #16
  17. Bazzer Smith

    jasen Guest

    On 2006-09-11, Dave Farrance <> wrote:
    > Dave Fawthrop <> wrote:
    >
    >>I have seen a similar thing done, a long time ago, by a *commercial*
    >>*professional* outfit, called IIRC Wigwam, in a long thin auditorium where
    >>there were several TV monitors a long way from platform, and they
    >>introduces a time delay for each ?video? stream to give lip sync with both
    >>the natural speed of sound time delay and the audio out of the speakers.

    >
    > To match video to sound that's traveled just 13 metres, you'd need to
    > store a whole frame (at 25fps). Doesn't seem that it could have predated
    > high-density RAM chips. Mercury delay lines wouldn't be up to the job.


    They probably used likely some sort of magnetic media,


    Bye.
    Jasen
     
    jasen, Sep 12, 2006
    #17
  18. Bazzer Smith

    CWatters Guest

    "Bazzer Smith" <> wrote in message
    news:DM%Mg.21799$...
    > I have a freeview box and a freeview dongle (for my PC),
    > however they take different times to process the signals so
    > they are out of sync, this is most noticible on the sound when you
    > listen to both at the same time.


    Which is faster.
     
    CWatters, Sep 12, 2006
    #18
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?VGVzZmFtaWNhZWw=?=

    Mail delay at certain time

    =?Utf-8?B?VGVzZmFtaWNhZWw=?=, Nov 13, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    564
    =?Utf-8?B?VGVzZmFtaWNhZWw=?=
    Nov 13, 2004
  2. jing shen
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    465
    Walter Roberson
    Nov 9, 2003
  3. Ciccio

    Delay between DDR calls

    Ciccio, Nov 26, 2004, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    431
    Ciccio
    Nov 29, 2004
  4. Eric Kotz
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,273
    NO SPAMMERS
    Sep 26, 2003
  5. Stone
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    15,679
    stephen
    Sep 27, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page