Poll: are A/V jacks "cheating"?

[Electronic M]

Originally Posted by MadMan

So wait, is injecting video as simple as hijacking the grid of the video amplifier tube? I feel like I tried exactly that on my Admiral, and though it worked, the video looked like crap. I was under the impression that a transistor was needed to make the video signal inverted first. Or something like that.

I see my morning post dissapeared....here it is again:
Depends on the set some sets had positive video some negative, and detector output level could be lower, higher, or the same as composite. Some sets need gain or attenuation some need signal inversion...Some you can just clip composite on after the detector and audio somewhere and enjoy.

Originally Posted by AlanInSitges

I don't think it's cheating anymore than running a DVD player through an agile modulator is. I mean, technically if you aren't receiving an OTA signal from a commercial analog transmitter the chain is broken.

If your enjoyment comes from knowing that all the electrons are flowing, the coils are resonating, the capacitors are capacitating, and that whole marvelous Rube Goldberg contraption has all its parts working in harmony, then using the tuner is the only way to go.

If seeing the absolute best picture you can on that set is what you enjoy most, then running the Y half of an s-video output from an HDTV box or DVD player into the video stage is the most "true" option.

I have to disagree. TV station gear was in constant flux over the years so really anything that generates NTSC signal close enough to broadcast tolerances is a pure experience.... many of our Blonder Tongue modulators in their previous lives were in the head end of cable TV systems (and usually were just fed from a commercial grade Satelite reciever tuned to the satellite network feed) and some hotel cable head ends. In the 80's-early 2000s people watching cable created by the better modulators we use now didn't consider it sub broadcast quality or impure and neither do I.

Receiving signal wirelessly from your own transmitter is a more correct user experience for set that wasn't built with monitor capability. And in cases of a large collection like mine the only practical way to supply all ~90 TVs without spawning a Godzilla sized flying spaghetti monster that, once it becomes sentient, will destroy your house and anything else blocking it's path to Italy and or Tokyo...

[peter scott]

I think the response of the RF/IF stages is a big factor in the quality of the receiver design and taking them out of the equation loses a lot for those interested in more than just a pretty picture.

Let's continue to see the bandwidth and step responses of the original design. Screen shot below from a 1937 EMI 405 line receiver

Peter.