wales@ucla-cs.UUCP (01/28/85)
I am considering buying a 25-inch TV. I would like to get something
which is cable-ready, can receive stereo, and has at least one composite
video input that bypasses the tuner.
I am not irrevocably committed to buying something RIGHT NOW. If I'd be
better off waiting a few months for something new to come out that is a
lot better than what I could get at the moment, that's fine.
Here are some of my questions (forgive me if these were discussed in the
past, but if they were, I don't remember what was said):
(1) Various units I have seen have tuners with anywhere from 105 to 157
channels. (Since I understand that these figures include VHF, UHF,
and cable, "105 channels" would appear to mean cable channels 2-36
-- which would certainly be adequate for where I currently live (Los
Angeles with Group W Cable -- except for the local "Z Channel",
which I don't subscribe to). However, if I decide to move somewhere
else, perhaps I would really need lots of channels.
(a) What is a reasonable minimum requirement for number of channels
on a cable-ready device?
(b) Instead of a cable-ready TV set, should I seriously consider
getting a monitor (without a tuner) and a separate cable-ready
tuner?
(2) Some sets already have a built-in capability to process the new
stereo/bilingual TV broadcasts, while others apparently have a
multiplex output jack in the back to which you can connect an out-
board converter. The second option, of course, is less expensive
initially -- though the long-run cost obviously depends on the qual-
ity and cost of the separate converter.
Would it be better to:
(a) Get a TV now with built-in stereo?
(b) Get one with stereo expansion capability and wait to see whether
stereo TV "catches on" before buying a separate converter?
(c) Simply bypass the feature entirely on the assumption that it's
just a passing fad and won't really last?
(3) I was looking at a Fisher PC-340 the other day. This is a 25" set
with built-in stereo sound, a set of video/audio input jacks, and a
112-channel tuner. Except possibly that the number of channels on
the tuner might not be sufficient (see my question #1 above), this
looks like a good unit to buy.
I believe there is also a PC-300 model, which is identical except
that it has a MPX output jack instead of built-in stereo circuitry.
The prices I saw were around $850 for the PC-340 and about $700 for
the PC-300.
(a) Does anyone "out there in net-land" have any experience with the
Fisher PC-340 or PC-300?
(b) Is there some other set that I would be better off with?
Please mail replies directly to me if possible. If I find out anything
of general interest, I will post a summary to the net.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Rich Wales
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)
Computer Science Department
3531 Boelter Hall
Los Angeles, California 90024 // USA
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Phone: (213) 825-5683 // +1 213 825 5683
ARPANET: wales@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA
UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!wales
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-