High Definition Television

Also known as advanced television (ATV), extended-definition television (EDTV), and improved-definition

television (IDTV), HDTV is an improved television system with at least double the horizontal and vertical

resolution, wider aspect ratio, and superior audio when compared to the current television broadcast

standards, e.g., NTSC and PAL.

With approximately twice as many scan lines as current television systems, a larger screen with a wider

aspect ratio, and six-channel, compact-disc-quality, surround sound, the HDTV experience will approach

projected 35mm film. According to CCIR Report 801, HDTV is described as able to replicate reality when the

viewer is seated three screen heights away from the display. Higher resolution, better color reproduction,

separate color and luminance signals, a wider and perhaps larger screen, and life-like audio will all be

combined to make the HDTV experience larger than life, especially when compared to the current NTSC

system. HDTV also has professional and business applications beyond television entertainment. Some

suggested applications for this new technology include; telemedicine, computer design, and teleconferencing.

Yet another suggestion is that HDTV will finally make possible a concept sometimes referred to as electronic

cinema. The concept is to create a network of video theaters with distribution by direct-broadcast satellite.

This approach would provide an alternative to traditional film print distribution.

Major players in the race to bring HDTV to market have been the global economic superpowers: Japan, the

United States, and to a lesser degree, the European community. The Japanese, who began working on HDTV

in 1969, have been delivering a domestic HDTV service via their multiple sub-Nyquist sampling encoding

(MUSE) system since 1991. And while the US has focused on terrestrial broadcast of HDTV signals (due to

concern for local broadcasters' interests), Japan has moved ahead with DBS delivery systems. But even after

several years of trial delivery, only 25,000 Hi-Vision sets were sold due to high cost.

Despite Japan's worldwide dominance in consumer electronics hardware and the US's role as the world's

chief supplier of programming, the European community has been determined to be a participant in the

development of HDTV standards which will impact on their electronics and broadcasting industries. The

European market had been at odds with the Japan Broadcasting Corporation (NHK) system for some time

due to its incompatible frame rate (1125 scan lines; 60 fields per second). Europe is on a 50 hertz, 25 frame

system with its PAL and SECAM systems. Converting from or to a 30 frame system is both costly and a

technical compromise, according to European sources. In fact, Europe's tentative development in 1987 of its

own HDTV system, Eureka 95/HD-MAC, along with the International Telecommunication Union's (ITU)

decision in 1986 to delay a vote on an HDTV standard, thwarted Japan's hopes for a world-wide standard.

In the United States, HDTV by the late 1980s garnered the attention of industry, government, military,

education, and research institutions. While Japan took an early lead with its analog HDTV system, the US

was in a debate about what approach it should take to join the race. In the economic, political, and business

arenas, three scenarios for transition from NTSC to ATV were being debated: the one-step, two-step, and
leapfrog approaches. One-step proponents argued for a quick and final decision on an HDTV delivery system

so that the US could get on with the business of making the transition. Two-step advocates believed that it

was too early to make a final decision as technology was changing so fast. Instead, they argued, the US

should introduce limited and NTSC-compatible improvements now with the goal of achieving full HDTV

technology a few years down the road. Leapfrog strategists argued for a stay of all current research and a

jump to a fully digital technology. This approach would allow the US to leap ahead of Japanese and European

systems. Proponents of the leapfrog approach included the computer and telephone industries and the

Department of Defense (DOD). Of course, broadcasters were not about to sit by and watch other delivery

systems bypass them. In 1987, broadcasters called for the formation of the Advisory Committee on

Advanced Television Service (ACATS) to look out for their interests.

Another interest to be protected was that of the consumer. In 1990, the FCC has determined that no matter

what HDTV system was adopted, it would have to be compatible with the current NTSC system. Current

thinking on HDTV can be divided into three interrelated but separate areas of concern: production,

distribution, and display.

Production
Production and transmission need not share the same technical system. In fact, as long as a production

standard is readily convertible to the transmission standard, it makes a great deal of sense to use two

different systems, according to many HDTV experts. For years, broadcast television has used 35mm film as

its acquisition format and as a source for transfer to NTSC video for post-production and distribution. Despite

the availability of HDTV production technology since the mid 1980s, 35mm film remains the premier

worldwide acquisition standard for high-quality television. In fact, all the talk of HDTV may have resulted in

the promotion of film as a production format. Due to all the uncertainty as to which HDTV transmission

system will finally prevail, many producers feel that the safest route is still to shoot on film; they reason that

they will eventually be able to transfer the film images to whatever HDTV system wins out. Currently, the

closest thing that the video community can promote as a worldwide production standard is D-1, which

records both 525- and 625-line systems. The NHK 1125/60 system was being promoted as a worldwide

standard with the assumption that once the material has been recorded and edited, it can be down-

converted to either NTSC or PAL, or even transferred to film. And once the HDTV distribution systems have

been standardized, the 1125/60 video could be converted to whatever HDTV transmission system is

required. The unknown variable here is the quality and cost of the conversion.

The 1125/60 Standard

The current NHK standard of 1125/60 (1125 scan lines and 60 fields per second, 2:1 interlaced) was the first

system used for both production and transmission. In the spring of 1991, NHK reported that more than 600

programs had been produced in the 1125/60 HDTV system. In what many consider to be a very controversial

move, the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) in 1988 approved a slight modification

of the 1125/60 system as the HDTV production standard for the US, officially referring to it as 240M. It is
interesting to note that another standards-setting organization, the American National Standards Institute

(ANSI), at first concurred with the SMPTE but later withdrew its approval after an appeal by Capital

Cities/ABC. With an aspect ratio of 16:9, 1125/60 is definitely widescreen TV. However, it requires the use of

30 MHz of bandwidth for recording. To achieve these frequencies, some HDTV recorders incorporated a

modified 1-inch machine that runs at twice normal speed. The 1125-line HDTV system has been in use in the

United States since the mid 1980s. Rebo Productions, 1125 Productions, and David Nile's New York-based

production company are just a few of those who pioneered shooting in the 1125/60 HDTV format. Standard

240M, however, is an analog system. In 1992 a digital version of the same system was submitted and

approved by the SMPTE as standard 260M.

In the spring of 1988, CBS selected NHK's 1125/60 system for principal photography of the film Innocent

Victims, the first US made-for-TV movie produced using HDTV technology. By taping the program in HDTV

instead of 35mm film, CBS estimates that it saved 15% in production costs. Made-for-television movies may

appear to be a natural choice to begin the transition from 35mm film to HDTV for production, but what about

films that will be released in theaters? The world's first high-definition theatrical film, Julia and Julia, was

produced by the Italian network RAI. Another early HDTV production was a 14-part Canadian series, Chasing

Rainbows, which was produced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). The first theatrical feature

film shot in the United States on HDTV, Crack in the Mirror, starred and was directed by Robby

Benson. Crack in the Mirror was shot in HDTV by Rebo Productions and was transferred to 35mm film for

release. All of these productions have been simultaneously praised and assailed on the basis of picture

quality, production ease, and overall effectiveness.

Two glitches in the HDTV production process are still being resolved. One is constructing an imaging device

that has both the resolution and the sensitivity necessary to produce an image suitable for HDTV pictures.

Tubes, which were quickly replaced by CCDs in almost every other production environment, have

disappeared more slowly from HDTV camera. Tubes still have an edge in resolution, and resolution is, of
course, central to the whole idea of HDTV. The tubes used in some HDTV cameras were high-gain, avalanche

rushing amorphous photoconductor (HARP) tubes. Unfortunately, resolution is achieved at the expense of

sensitivity. The smaller the focus of the electron beam, the higher the resolution and the lower the

sensitivity, thus requiring more light on the set. Especially when compared to the newer and faster 35mm

film stocks, HDTV production using tube cameras required extra lighting, which in production means more

fixtures and increased setup time. Another complication has involved achieving the necessary optical

resolution for the lenses used with HDTV cameras. While lenses for high-quality 35mm film production have

evolved to become high quality imaging tools, the history of video production has not, until HDTV, required

similar performance.

Distribution
The problem of production is not nearly as complicated as that of distribution-in particular, terrestrial

broadcasting. One of the principal problems is that of spectrum scarcity. As a general rule, the better an

HDTV system's performance, the greater its bandwidth needs. The NTSC video signal requires 6 MHz of

spectrum space for terrestrial broadcast, and the full-bandwidth, uncompressed HDTV signal requires 30

MHz. (By using multiplexing and digital compression, researchers have been able to reduce digital HDTV to fit

within the same 6 MHz band.) Because the FCC is the regulatory body that controls the use of spectrum,

their approval is necessary before an HDTV transmission standard can be adopted for use in the US. The

1988 draft statement on HDTV by the FCC stated that any system to be considered must be compatible with

the existing NTSC system. This means that the HDTV system to be adopted for US broadcast must be able to

transmit an NTSC-compatible signal within a bandwidth no wider than 6 MHz. One way to get around this

requirement would be to use two channels. This additional spectrum would come from existing unallocated

and "taboo" channels within the VHF and UHF spectrums and would coexist with current NTSC allocations.

The controversy is compounded by the conflicting interests of several groups: notably, broadcasters,

cablecasters, and, more recently, the phone companies. Fiber optics, direct-broadcast satellites, and

videocassettes are other technologies with the capability for the delivery of HDTV signals into the home.

Terrestrial broadcasters are greatly concerned that HDTV pictures delivered by cable, satellite, or

videocassette will make their pictures look bad by comparison. Analogies have been drawn comparing the

transition from NTSC to HDTV to the rise of FM radio at the expense of AM. Broadcasters and cable operators

are similarly concerned that the introduction of fiber optics by cable television and phone companies may

allow the delivery of additional and competing services into the home.

To protect owners of existing receivers, the FCC asked proponents of ATV systems to ensure NTSC

compatibility. Two approaches were considered: either the NTSC signal would be augmented by a secondary

signal that is broadcast on another frequency to complete the ATV information, or the two signals would be

simulcast. In the first case, the ATV receivers combine both signals to construct the ATV image. In the

second scenario, NTSC receivers continue to receive the NTSC broadcast while ATV receivers tune into the
simulcasted ATV signal. In March 1990, the FCC indicated their clear preference for the simulcast rather than

the augmentation approach. To enable broadcasters to simulcast NTSC and ATV, the FCC announced their

intention to assign to each NTSC broadcaster a second 6 MHz channel for the new ATV service. These

channels would come from currently unused and taboo channels. In the plan approved by the FCC in 1992,

once the FCC approves a standard and allots channels, stations would have six years to implement ATV

service. Simulcasting ATV and NTSC would continue until fifteen years had passed and then the NTSC

channel allocation would be surrendered to the FCC. Broadcasters, especially small stations, have argued

that even this schedule may be too demanding and may result in some stations going out of business. The

cost of passing an ATV signal, with no local production capability, is estimated at $1.8 million. As of the

spring of 1995, over 1,600 existing NTSC broadcast stations have received an additional 6 MHz channel

allocation for the purpose of ATV transmission.

FCC Testing and Approval
In 1989 the FCC Advisory Committee on Advanced Television Service set up a testing schedule for the

proponents of what were then several analog NTSC-compatible advanced television systems who wanted to

be considered for approval. Testing took place at the Advanced Television Test Center (ATTC). Initially,

testing was to have begun in the spring of 1990 and have continued through the fall of 1991. However, last-

minute conversion of several proposals to all-digital systems resulted in a delay in the testing schedule.

It was a game of high stakes, beginning with the testing procedure. Each of the system proponents had to

pay a $175,000 testing fee just to reserve a position. The initial round included: Advanced Television

Research Consortium (ATRC was composed of the David Sarnoff Research Center, NBC, Thomson Consumer

Electronics, and the North American Philips Corporation), Zenith Electronics Corporation and AT&T, Japan

Broadcasting Corporation, and the American Television Alliance (ATA), which was made up of two formerly

separate proponents: the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and General Instruments Corporation.
The four proponents submitted six different systems for consideration by the FCC (ATRC and ATA each

submitted two proposals).

Perhaps the most striking development in the quest for an improved broadcast television standard was the

transition from analog to digital HDTV proposals. General Instruments' DigiCipher HDTV proposal generated

interest in June 1990 when it proposed the first all-digital system. In quick succession the other proponents

took an all-digital approach. The Advanced Television Research Consortium announced its all-digital system

in November 1990, and Zenith-AT&T switched over to an all-digital system in December 1990. After a short

time as the only proposal based on analog transmission technology, NHK pulled out of the race altogether.

When testing was completed, the decision by the FCC was that no one system was a clear winner and that

there were elements in each proposal which were worth preserving. The recommendation was that the

proponents join efforts to create a "grand alliance" for the purpose of developing an HDTV transmission

system.

The Grand Alliance

The Grand Alliance was formed in May 1993 by seven organizations. The former competitors turned allies

were: AT&T Corporation, General Instrument Corporation (GI), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT),

Philips Consumer Electronics, David Sarnoff Research Center, Thomson Consumer Electronics, and Zenith

Electronics Corporation. Their mission was to evaluate technologies and to decide on key elements that will

be at the heart of the best of the best HDTV system.

Broadcast and cable carriage of digital HDTV signals were tested under field conditions in Charlotte, North

Carolina in the summer of 1995. On November 28, 1995, the FCC Advisory Committee on Advanced

Television Service recommended that the FCC adopt the ATSC Digital Television Standard as the ATV

broadcasting standard. On May 9, 1996, the FCC issued its fifth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making
regarding adopting the ATSC digital television (DTV) standard for terrestrial digital television broadcasting in

the United States. And on June 19, 1996, the FCC awarded the first experimental HDTV license to Raleigh,

North Carolina television station WRAL-TV.

Specifics of the proposed ATSC DTV Standard include:

o Video compression technology based on the MPEG-2 video and systems syntax, including B-

pictures, using a motion compensated discrete cosine transform (DCT) algorithm.

o Audio encoded using Dolby's Digital Audio Compression (AC-3) Standard. This is a variation

of Dolby's Surround Sound used for theatrical film projection. AC-3 allows up to 5.1 audio

channels: left, right, center, left surround, right surround and a 0.1 channel for a subwoofer

signal. Multiple audio channels permit the inclusion of multiple languages or services for the

visually or hearing impaired.

o Packetized data transport system allowing for the transmission of virtually any combination

of video, audio, and data, and facilitates interoperability with other delivery and imaging

systems. Data packets would be 188 bytes long, with 4 bytes of header/descriptor and 184

bytes of payload.

o Terrestrial broadcast transmission using 8-VSB (Vestigial Sideband) to minimize potential

interference with other service, especially NTSC transmissions. This will deliver an effective

payload of approximately 19.28 megabits per second (Mbps). Extensive error correction is

employed to counteract the harsh operating conditions encountered in terrestrial

broadcasting. For cable delivery, a 16-VSB mode provides twice the capacity of the 8-VBS

terrestrial broadcast mode.

o Support for both interlaced and progressive scanning modes.

The last two design aspects, progressive scan and square pixels, are important for the "interoperability" of

HDTV with computers, telecommunications and other media and applications.

Aspect Ratio
An attribute of HDTV closely related to screen size is aspect ratio. The aspect ratio of most HDTV systems is

considerably wider than NTSC television. In fact, the wider aspect ratio is considered by manufacturers to be

one of the most important attributes of HDTV. According to experts, for consumers to spend several

thousand dollars on a new television receiver there must be several visible and striking differences between

the new technology and the old. The aspect ratio of the picture is one such difference. However, the

perceived advantage of a widescreen experience comes with the disadvantage of receiver incompatibility.

If the HDTV image is produced in a 16:9 aspect ratio, there would have to be some sort of aspect ratio

accommodation to display the image on a 12:9 NTSC television receiver. The difference between 35mm
theatrical film and NTSC television aspect ratios is solved in one of several ways. These including the

letterbox approach, which preserves the integrity of the film's aspect ratio but introduces black areas at the

top and bottom of the television frame, and the pan and scan approach, which compromises the film's aspect

ratio but maintains a normal television image. If and when HDTV broadcasting is fully implemented, the

aspect ratio problem could become an issue once again. This time, archival NTSC video would be too narrow

to fill the HDTV frame and cropping the top and bottom of the frame would be an unlikely solution. While the

16:9 aspect ratio is all but certain, it should be noted that a group of cinematographers has proposed

abandoning the 16:9 aspect ratio in favor of 2:1, at least for transmission. Their rational is that 2:1 is a good

compromise if all of the various film formats are taken into account.

Interlaced vs. Progressive

One important consideration for HDTV picture creation and display is whether to select interlaced rather than

progressive, or sequential, scanning. This debate has pitted broadcaster against computer manufacturers.

Interlaced scanning, which is currently used by all worldwide television systems including NTSC, uses two

fields to make up each frame of video. The effect is higher dynamic (motion) resolution while conserving

precious bandwidth. Each field of video has only half the resolution of the entire frame, but because each

field is replaced at twice the frame rate, the movement appears more fluid, and less flicker results.

Sequential scanning systems do not divide the frame into two or more fields but rather increase the frame

rate to reduce flicker and other motion artifacts. Sequential scanning more accurately approximates the

motion picture imaging process. Although this increases the bandwidth requirements of the sequential

scanning systems, the dynamic (moving) and temporal (static) resolution are improved over the interlaced

systems. Most experts agree that the ideal is a progressive scanning system that has high spatial resolution

if the system's bandwidth or data rate can support it. Zenith and AT&T have proposed a progressively

scanned 787.5 line, 59.94 field system. The scanning formats selected by the Grand Alliance are focused
primarily on computer-friendly progressive scanning, while offering an interlaced mode important to

broadcasters. Both interlaced (1440 x 960 x 30 Hz) and progressive (1280 x 720 x 60 Hz) modes will be

supported.

Quality or Quantity
Some broadcasters, with Fox TV leading the charge, are especially concerned about the audience's lack of

appreciation for the improved quality of HDTV, and would like the option provided by a policy of "flexible

use." Reed Hundt, FCC Chairman, has expressed willingness to allow TV broadcasters to use the new

spectrum for broadcasting multiple standard-definition television channels, or perhaps even the transmission

of data and other non-broadcast services. The Grand Alliance transmission system, although designed

initially to deliver HDTV, can generate a 19 megabits-per-second (Mb/s) data stream. With digital

compression, one 6 MHz channel for HDTV could instead by used for as many as four or five digital standard-
definition television (SDTV) signals. The flexibility of the Grand Alliance DTV standard allows for dynamic

scalability, e.g., broadcasters could offer high definition service for movies, sports and during prime-time

programming and then switch to multiple standard-definition signals for other day parts. Datacasting, e.g.,

delivery of paging service, computer data, and other non-television services, could provide an additional

revenue stream for broadcasters and serve as a stepping-stone for the transition to digital high definition

television service. The decision to allow flexible use of the new 6 MHz spectrum is closely tied to the debate

over the process and conditions of spectrum allocation. Legislators and consumer groups have questioned

whether the allocation of new spectrum should include requirements on content, e.g., political and children's

programming, and the type of services provided. Others, citing concerns about the budget deficit, are calling

for the spectrum to be auctioned to the highest bidder.

Display
One interesting thing about HDTV is that tests have shown that the average consumer does not notice much

improvement over NTSC when viewing the images on a small display. Futuristic scenarios depict wall-sized,

flat-panel LCD displays of HDTV images, but unfortunately, these are still some years away. The choices

today include direct-view cathode-ray tubes (CRTs) and projection televisions. For people to fully appreciate

HDTV's advantages, a screen size of 36 inches is required, with greatest benefit realized with a screen size

exceeding 48 inches. But at several hundred pounds for a cathode-ray tube of that size and a price tag of

nearly $5,000, size and cost become important factors for most consumers. Despite the current growth in

"home theater" systems, electronics industry experts argue that until the price drops below $500, HDTV will

face slow adoption rates by consumers. Even if you have the money to spend, there may be another hitch:

most rooms and entryways are too small for a direct-view monitor of this size. A projection television may be

easier to get into your house, but everyone has seen poorly aligned (and even properly aligned) projection

TVs that displayed a poor image. Light output and resolution will have to increase before projection
televisions are widely accepted.

This article was written by Samuel Ebersole for the Focal Encyclopedia of Electronic Media.. Permission for
electronic posting courtesy of Focal Press, a division of Butterworth Heineman.

To contact the author, e-mail him at samuel.ebersole@colostate-pueblo.edu

Return to CSU-Pueblo Television Production Handbook home page.

MUSE - Japanese HDTV
As of today, Japan is the only country actually broadcasting HDTV services. Approximately
30,000 receivers and 100,000 converters have been sold to customers of this service. It is
widely believed that the establishment of this analog broadcast service essentially
eliminates the possibility of starting a digital satellite HDTV service in Japan.
The history of this begins in 1968, when Japan's NHK began a massive project to develop a
new TV standard. This 1125 line system, is an analog system which uses digital
compression techniques. It is a satellite broadcast system which is not compatible with
current Japanese NTSC terrestrial broadcast. (This actually makes a lot of sense for Japan,
as they are a single group of islands easily accessed by one or two satellites).
The MUSE system as originally developed by NHK was a 1125 line, interlaced, 60 Hz,
system with a 5/3 aspect ratio and an optimal viewing distance of roughly 3.3H. The pre-
compression bandwidth for Y is 20 MHz, and the pre-compression bandwidth for
chrominance was 7 MHz. As time has passed, this standard has been altered and upgraded.
The various standard MUSEs are summarized below:
lines per field rate Y C C aspect
frame bandwidth bandwidth bandwidth ratio
- wide - narrow
NHK-1980 1125 lines 60 Hz 20 MHz 7 MHz 5.5 MHz 5/3
MUSE 1986 1125 lines 60 Hz 20 MHz 6.5 MHz 5.5 MHz 5/3
SMPTE 1125 lines 60 Hz 30 MHz 30 MHz 30 MHz 16/9
1987
(studio)

In considering how to broadcast this signal, Japanese engineering immediately rejected

conventional vestigial sideband broadcasting (i.e. broadcasting methods similar to NTSC).
They immediately jumped to the idea of using satellite broadcast (no doubt helped by the
geography of the Japanese Islands, which economically support satellite broadcast.)
The Japanese initially explored the idea of FM modulation of a conventionally constructed
composite signal. (This would be a signal similar in structure to the Y/C NTSC signal - with
the Y at the lower frequencies and the C above.) Approximately 3 kW of power would be
required, in order to get 40 dB of signal to noise for a composite FM signal in the 22 GHz
satellite band. This was virtually incompatible with satellite broadcast!
So, the next idea was to use separate transmission of Y and C. This drops the effective
frequency range and dramatically reduces the required power. Approximately 570 W of
power (360 for Y and 210 for C) would be required in order to get 40 dB of signal to noise
for a separate Y/C FM signal in the 22 GHz satellite band. This is much more feasible!
There is one more power saving that appears from the character of the human eye. Lack of
visual response to low frequency noise allows significant reduction in transponder power if
the higher video frequencies are emphasized prior to modulation at the transmitter and de-
emphasized at the receiver. This method was adopted, with crossover frequencies for the
emphasis/de-emphasis at 5.2 MHz for Y and 1.6 MHz for C. With this in place, the power
requirements drop to 260 W of power (190 for Y and 69 for C).
As mentioned earlier (see the section on compression) - the problem of fitting the
combination Y/C signal into the 8.15 MHz satellite bandwidth was solved by digital
compression. Summarizing the previous discussion, the NHK HDTV signal is initially
digitally sampled at 48.6 Ms/s. This signal controls two filters, one responsive to stationary
parts of the image - one responsive to moving parts. The outputs of the two filters are
combined and then sampled at the sub-Nyquist frequency of 16.2 MHz. The resulting pulse
train is then converted by to analog with a base frequency of 8.1 MHz.
The ITU Radiocommunication Assembly, considering
a) that the MUSE system has been developed for HDTV satellite broadcasting in the 12 GHz
band; b) that the MUSE system has been tested for many years using a broadcasting satellite in
operation; c) that there exists a studio standard based on 1125 lines and 60 Hz field rate, which
is very well coupled to the MUSE system; d) that a large number of programmes have been
produced worldwide using the studio standard with 1125 lines and 60 Hz field rate; e) that a
down converter from the MUSE system to the M-NTSC system has been developed and is
operating in conventional television sets; f) that the MUSE system can be used for terrestrial
broadcasting, cable TV (CATV) distribution, and recording media, e.g. optical discs, VCRs,
recommends that, for an administration or organization wishing to initiate a MUSE* 1 125 line,
60 Hz field rate based HDTV broadcasting-satellite service, the signals should conform to the
specification contained in Annex 1. ANNEX 1 Signal specification of MUSE system 1

b) Introduction The MUSE system has been developed for HDTV satellite broadcasting in the
planned 12 GHz band. The major technical bases employed for the MUSE satellite emission
system are listed below: – a bandwidth compression technique using multiple sub-sampling and
motion compensation. This compresses the HDTV signal bandwidth of 30 MHz to 8.1 MHz
suitable for HDTV satellite broadcasting in the 12 GHz band; – time division multiplexing of
luminance Y and chrominance C signals. This makes a complete Y/C separation possible in the
decoder, resulting in the elimination of interference, such as cross colour and cross luminance
which often appear in the existing TV systems; – a technique for automatic waveform
equalization required for analogue sampled-value transmission. This enables the system to be
used not only in the case of satellite emission but also in other transmission media, such as
CATV; – a synchronization system maintaining accurate re-sampling phase in the decoder. The
system employs a positive synchronizing signal, which gives the received picture a signalto-
noise ratio (S/N) 3 dB higher than that of the conventional synchronization system; – an
efficient non-linear emphasis system suitable for satellite transmission. This gives an emphasis
gain or S/N improvement of 9.5 dB; – coding based on the principle of quasi-constant
luminance. This not only reduces remarkably the cross-talk between the Y and C signals due to
a narrower bandwidth limitation of the C signal, but also improves the S/N in highly saturated
colour pictures. It leads to a lower carrier-to-noise ratio (C/N) required for BSS direct reception;
– a baseband multiplexing of digital sound and independent data. This allows a flexible usage of
the system, as it is independent of the modulation system and transmission media.