I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Cheers
--
Clive

On Friday, 26 January 2018 14:08:25 UTC, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Cheers

There's always the UK, with a set top box.


NT

I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Cheers

Wouldn't they be OK for a bedroom TV with a satellite box or Freeview
box/PVR? Either that, or dump them.

Are you really going to ship them aboard?

--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%

In article ,
Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

There is more than one standard for UHF in the world, I think.

But very unlikely to be worth the shipping cost anyway.

Have they got a line input? SCART, etc? If so they could be used with a
FreeView box - lots used on Ebay for not a lot.

--
*He who laughs last, thinks slowest.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

No cos the UK had a unique soung/vision separation of 6Mhz most of the rest
of the world used 5.5 or 6.5 mhz and many used Secam not pal.
However if they have a scart input you can still use them with the correct
convvertors as monitors ignoring the tuners. Also if you can get hold of
one, you can still use an old style video sender via analogue. I know this
is true as there is a person down the road with one and I cen get it on an
analogue set here, though he seems to mainly be watching Polish films.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Clive Arthur" wrote in message
news
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Cheers
--
Clive

Assuming it has a modulator and the set has a compatible socket, say scart
or audio and video sockets. Don't expect mega quality though. brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
wrote in message
...
On Friday, 26 January 2018 14:08:25 UTC, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Cheers

There's always the UK, with a set top box.


NT

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 2:08:25 PM UTC, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Cheers
--
Clive

They might just be of use for retro-gamers if it has composite in.

There were many variants of PAL worldwide. System I as used in the UK was one on the rarer ones. The differences being in channel spacing and how the audio signal is broadcast. Your TV will probably support many of the others though.

It's not really worth trying to take it abroad. Analog TV is being consigned to its rightful place, the history books.

Philip

On 26/01/2018 14:08, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Plug in a suitable DTV box or stick like Amazon Fire / Google Chromecast
etc and you can use them anywhere.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:19:10 UTC, wrote:
Analog TV is being consigned to its rightful place, the history books.

Yes, nobody wants pictures without conversion delays, compression artifacts and DOGs these days. Analogue TV really was awful.

Owain

wrote in message
...
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:19:10 UTC, wrote:
Analog TV is being consigned to its rightful place, the history books.

Yes, nobody wants pictures without conversion delays, compression
artifacts and DOGs these days. Analogue TV really was awful.

At its best, analogue TV was pretty good. But it was rarely seen at its
best.

Both analogue and digital have their drawbacks. For digital, conversion
delays, compression artefacts and DOGs. For analogue, PAL artefacts such as
flickering coloured fringes around contrasty edges, the need to avoid fine
detail which causes cross-colour, snowy/ghosted pictures if reception is
poor.


I'm sure if we could see studio-quality PAL and studio-quality digital,
before transmission, and compared them with what the viewer sees at home,
we'd weep at the loss of quality along the way.

On 26/01/2018 14:08, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here.Â* Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Cheers

I have an old analogue CRT set in my bedroom, I watch TV on it from a
freesat/sky box connected via the scart.

--
Best Wishes
Simon (Dark Angel)
http://www.realmofhorror.co.uk

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

On 26/01/2018 14:08, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here.Â* Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?


OK, thanks all, it's the bin then. These are Casio ~2" screen things
with no I/O. I did wonder if our analog stuff had perhaps ended up in
some third world place and that there might have been a charity who'd
have them.

Cheers
--
Clive

In article ,
NY wrote:
I'm sure if we could see studio-quality PAL and studio-quality digital,
before transmission, and compared them with what the viewer sees at home,
we'd weep at the loss of quality along the way.

Yup. Real problem with digital is it's all do easy to turn down the data
rate - to allow for a super improved service to be launched shortly.

--
*Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 26/01/2018 14:08, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here.* Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?


OK, thanks all, it's the bin then. These are Casio ~2" screen things
with no I/O. I did wonder if our analog stuff had perhaps ended up in
some third world place and that there might have been a charity who'd
have them.

Cheers

One recently changed hands on a Web forum for £0.00

https://www.vintage-radio.net/forum/....php?p=1011459


--

Graham.
%Profound_observation%

Clive Arthur wrote:
OK, thanks all, it's the bin then. These are Casio ~2" screen things
with no I/O. I did wonder if our analog stuff had perhaps ended up in
some third world place and that there might have been a charity who'd
have them.

Depending on what they are, some can be quite collectable:
http://www.guenthoer.de/index-e.htm

Many pocket TVs, even early Sinclair ones, were multistandard. You might
not get SECAM or NTSC, but they should work for many places that do PAL.
Obviously you'd have to look up what your specific model can do.
There's lots of countries still with analogue TV:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digita...ion_transition

Theo

On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:49:38 UTC, wrote:
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:19:10 UTC, wrote:

Analog TV is being consigned to its rightful place, the history books.

Yes, nobody wants pictures without conversion delays, compression artifacts and DOGs these days. Analogue TV really was awful.

Owain

It was, it only allowed 5 channels.


NT

On 26/01/2018 15:05, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

There is more than one standard for UHF in the world, I think.

Typically the manufacturers want to save costs, so they use a universal
chipset that can receive them all - not to mention, often NTSC, etc.

SteveW

On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 17:06:19 -0000, NY wrote:

I'm sure if we could see studio-quality PAL and studio-quality digital,
before transmission, and compared them with what the viewer sees at
home, we'd weep at the loss of quality along the way.

PAL was PAL, a good signal, receiver and tube could produce a high
quality and watchable picture in the home, within the limits of PAL
and SD.

SD DTTV produces, at best, pictures that are barely watchable then it
just gets worse. With very little (tending to zero) that you can do
in the way of improving picture quality by improving signal, reciever
or display.

Digits at orgination, even in SD(*1), are very good and way superior
to PAL. Pity they get so badly mangled by the time they arrive in the
home via DTTV(*2).

(*1) Pretty much everything is orginated in HD or 4k these days.
(*2) DSAT is much better but still shows some artifacts over
orgination.

--
Cheers
Dave.

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
idual.net...
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 17:06:19 -0000, NY wrote:

I'm sure if we could see studio-quality PAL and studio-quality digital,
before transmission, and compared them with what the viewer sees at
home, we'd weep at the loss of quality along the way.

PAL was PAL, a good signal, receiver and tube could produce a high
quality and watchable picture in the home, within the limits of PAL
and SD.

SD DTTV produces, at best, pictures that are barely watchable then it
just gets worse. With very little (tending to zero) that you can do
in the way of improving picture quality by improving signal, reciever
or display.

I find that I am much more aware of PAL artefacts (shimmering coloured edges
on captions or other areas of high contrast) than I am of digital artefacts.
Yes, if you analyse a still frame of some movement with DVB-T, there's
blockiness and compression artefacts which you would not tolerate in a still
photograph, but I don't *usually* notice it in a moving sequence.

In article ,
NY wrote:
I find that I am much more aware of PAL artefacts (shimmering coloured
edges on captions or other areas of high contrast) than I am of digital
artefacts. Yes, if you analyse a still frame of some movement with
DVB-T, there's blockiness and compression artefacts which you would not
tolerate in a still photograph, but I don't *usually* notice it in a
moving sequence.

Main thing I object to is jerking on movement.

--
*Never kick a cow pat on a hot day *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 00:23:36 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

I find that I am much more aware of PAL artefacts (shimmering
coloured
edges on captions or other areas of high contrast) than I am of
digital
artefacts.

PAL just looks soft to me.

Yes, if you analyse a still frame of some movement with DVB-T,
there's
blockiness and compression artefacts which you would not tolerate
in a
still photograph, but I don't *usually* notice it in a moving
sequence.

Evryones pereception is different, I find the, changing artifacts
that surround a static caption on a static background terrible. Then
you have the loss of detail in panning shots and the snap back to
detail when the pan stops. Or when the compression gets silly, the
talking static head when the only bits moving are the lips and eyes
(when the person blinks or adjusts their gaze).

Main thing I object to is jerking on movement.

Yep, rollers that don't smoothly roll and lose detail so you can't
read 'em.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 15:20:41 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 26/01/2018 14:08, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Plug in a suitable DTV box or stick like Amazon Fire / Google Chromecast
etc and you can use them anywhere.

Fire and Chromecast require an HDMI port, anything 'analogue' would surely come
with scart or a composite input at best.
--

On 29/01/2018 08:08, The Other Mike wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 15:20:41 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 26/01/2018 14:08, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here. Is there anywhere in the
world where they'd still work?

Plug in a suitable DTV box or stick like Amazon Fire / Google Chromecast
etc and you can use them anywhere.

Fire and Chromecast require an HDMI port, anything 'analogue' would surely come
with scart or a composite input at best.

Depends on the vintage of the set. There were plenty of "HD ready" sets
with analogue tuners.

However reading the OP's second post, it seems he means they were pocket
TVs and not just "portable". So chances of them having HDMI seem remote.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 26/01/2018 17:24, Clive Arthur wrote:
On 26/01/2018 14:08, Clive Arthur wrote:
I have a couple of old portable LCD TVs from a relative's estate, but
they're UHF analog PAL UK etc so no use here.Â* Is there anywhere in
the world where they'd still work?


OK, thanks all, it's the bin then.Â* These are Casio ~2" screen things
with no I/O.Â* I did wonder if our analog stuff had perhaps ended up in
some third world place and that there might have been a charity who'd
have them.

Cheers
They fetch £2-3 plus postage on eBay so hardly worth the effort. eBay is
always a good guide to what is in demand, you do get surprises sometimes
with old technology. e.g. VCRs at the moment cant get enough of them to
sell in my local charity shop.

In article ,
scribeth thus
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:49:38 UTC, wrote:
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:19:10 UTC, wrote:

Analog TV is being consigned to its rightful place, the history books.

Yes, nobody wants pictures without conversion delays, compression artifacts
and DOGs these days. Analogue TV really was awful.

Owain

It was, it only allowed 5 channels.


NT

Yes was that so bad seeing the 50 or more dross dig it all channels...
--
Tony Sayer

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
scribeth thus
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:49:38 UTC, wrote:
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:19:10 UTC, wrote:

Analog TV is being consigned to its rightful place, the history books.

Yes, nobody wants pictures without conversion delays, compression
artifacts
and DOGs these days. Analogue TV really was awful.

Owain

It was, it only allowed 5 channels.


NT

Yes was that so bad seeing the 50 or more dross dig it all channels...

Most of the additional channels that satellite or terrestrial give you are
dross. But there are a few (BBC Four, Yesterday, Drama, ITV3, Talking
Pictures) which I would miss if I didn't have them.

But as for makeover, reality TV or shopping channels - utter bilgewater and
a great waste of bandwidth!

On Saturday, 3 February 2018 21:01:51 UTC, NY wrote:
"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tabbypurr scribeth thus
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:49:38 UTC, wrote:
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:19:10 UTC, wrote:

Analog TV is being consigned to its rightful place, the history books.

Yes, nobody wants pictures without conversion delays, compression
artifacts
and DOGs these days. Analogue TV really was awful.

Owain

It was, it only allowed 5 channels.

Yes was that so bad seeing the 50 or more dross dig it all channels...

Most of the additional channels that satellite or terrestrial give you are
dross. But there are a few (BBC Four, Yesterday, Drama, ITV3, Talking
Pictures) which I would miss if I didn't have them.

But as for makeover, reality TV or shopping channels - utter bilgewater and
a great waste of bandwidth!

I thought they were all dross.

tabb wrote:
It was, it only allowed 5 channels.

No it didn't. With 8MHz per channel and an empty channel between each
used channel it allowed 24 channels.

Where I lived I could easily pick up about 12 channels.

On Sunday, 4 February 2018 04:35:43 UTC, wrote:
tabb wrote:
It was, it only allowed 5 channels.

No it didn't. With 8MHz per channel and an empty channel between each
used channel it allowed 24 channels.

Where I lived I could easily pick up about 12 channels.

that doesn't mean one could receive 24 channels of programming with differing content. That's what I was referring to. The system creaked a bit when they added the 5th.


NT

On 26/01/2018 15:17, Brian Gaff wrote:
No cos the UK had a unique soung/vision separation of 6Mhz most of the rest
of the world used 5.5 or 6.5 mhz and many used Secam not pal.
However if they have a scart input you can still use them with the correct
convvertors as monitors ignoring the tuners. Also if you can get hold of
one, you can still use an old style video sender via analogue. I know this
is true as there is a person down the road with one and I cen get it on an
analogue set here, though he seems to mainly be watching Polish films.
Brian

I seem to remember this question being asked by people
emigrating to NZ, which uses PAL, but a UK TV would
not have any sound without modification.

On 04/02/2018 04:35, wrote:
tabb wrote:
It was, it only allowed 5 channels.

No it didn't. With 8MHz per channel and an empty channel between each
used channel it allowed 24 channels.

That is not the same as building an entire *network* with lots of
channels. When the UK was developing colour TV transmission here they
were thought to be over egging it by most of our continental neighbours,
because they were designing the system to support two channels with the
possibility of expansion to a third. Most other countries were designed
for one, with an expansion option to a second.

When you take into account the inability to tolerate multipath at the
receiver, and the relatively coarse filtering available at the
transmitters of the day, you romp through available/useable channels
very quickly.

Adding channel 4 was quite a technical challenge, and channel five was
never really possible to do completely, and even then it required use of
channels previously set aside for other applications.

Where I lived I could easily pick up about 12 channels.

And how many of those were ostensibly a duplicate channel from a
different transmitter? Also keep in mind that the whole populous does
not live in your street! Some areas posed a far more complicated
geographical challenge to getting proper coverage with just the three
main channels.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article ,
scribeth thus
On Saturday, 3 February 2018 21:01:51 UTC, NY wrote:
"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tabbypurr scribeth thus
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:49:38 UTC, wrote:
On Friday, 26 January 2018 15:19:10 UTC, wrote:

Analog TV is being consigned to its rightful place, the history books.

Yes, nobody wants pictures without conversion delays, compression
artifacts
and DOGs these days. Analogue TV really was awful.

Owain

It was, it only allowed 5 channels.

Yes was that so bad seeing the 50 or more dross dig it all channels...

Most of the additional channels that satellite or terrestrial give you are
dross. But there are a few (BBC Four, Yesterday, Drama, ITV3, Talking
Pictures) which I would miss if I didn't have them.

But as for makeover, reality TV or shopping channels - utter bilgewater and
a great waste of bandwidth!

I thought they were all dross.

Agree with BBC 4 that is a decent service...
--
Tony Sayer