Avast! I find Ye Returning from the Isle of Lost Friends

When T6 started out as a in house email - newsletter I wanted a memorable name for it to both amuse my associates and make it memorable.  Being a Lit major in college (focus on American poetry of the 19th century) I am a fan of alliteration. I also was an avid reader of Mark Schubin's Monday Morning Memo.  When Mark moved his newsletter to another venue I lost touch but named T6 as a homage to the memo. 

Truth is, if i really went looking I would have found him but I did not. Out of the blue I decided to contact him with a question.  Mark lead me to his great Podcast site, The Schubin Report http://www.theschubinreport.com/.  The podcasts are slick presentations where Mark discusses High Definition news.   

I have added his link to my blog under the inspired Tech Links' Section.  (Currently on the left hand side of the Blog).  Check him out - I'll wager that you will anticipate his next podcast after the first listen.

Its Just That Once You Accept One Into Your Neighborhood, They All Want In

If you have been paying any attention to the analog frequency sell off conducted by the FCC, you will undoubtedly have noticed that Google is just moderately interested in the proceedings.

Google has for some time been working on getting itinerant device access to what is commonly known in the industry as RF white spaces. White Space refers to the valleys which exist between the Color, Picture and Sound spikes of analog television signals.  (Typically an analog TV signal has a separate modulated RF signal for the Color, Picture and Sound, all three are received by the television and processed to complete the signal). 

White Spaces are typically where the FCC allowed the use of itinerant low power RF transmitters for wireless microphones and Intercom systems.  While TV broadcast signals are very powerful (typically 50k watts) for the most part you could hide a great deal of microphones in between the spikes. If you lived in the sticks, or just outside a major urban area, you could rely on finding some portion of the spectrum which was free of a TV channel.  In heavily saturated urban areas - such as NYC- you relied on proximity effect hoping that as the microphone would be the stronger signal - locally- to the receiver.  For the most part this usually worked out very well with only the occasional interference and then the dynamic compression circuits would kick in, minimizing the audience impact. In sections of the City, like Broadway, you also have to contend with wireless systems in adjacent theaters. The logistics are remarkable.

To this mix Google wants to add the mobile communications devices which would use access points placed within the remaining white space areas to facilitate Wifi\Wimax type  'local access'. The concern of many in the commercial market is the possible havoc this could causes to existing system and make overly complicated new installs. Google's answer is to institute a device awareness protocol which would recognize that at a device or devices are already in use and not transmit until clear. I would surmise that the withholding of transmission would only be until it could find a time slot to transmit.  Live audio is a continuous stream - whether analog or digitized in the microphone - and does not allow for a momentary pause to allow other devices access to the frequency.   As a compromise a few others have offered up a fixed licensing scheme but it has been met with minimal enthusiasm. As I no longer work in the event staging world this is a minimal concern, but for corporate\commercial installers this is an issue to keep a close eye on.

Two good articles which cover this story well are at

CTIA urges FCC to license -- and auction -- TV white spaces

http://www.rcrnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080327/FREE/120719096/1007

Google Proposal for 'Wi-Fi on Steroids'

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9901747-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20

Inevitably the spectrum will be auctioned off and utilized for a mass consumer set of services.  You may have to become accustomed to lower quality audio from you live performances or see the reemergence of old school wired, hands free microphones.  okay that was a joke, sort of. It is clear that the tiny market of wireless audio systems will be overwhelmed by the tsunami of consumer traffic. 

I touched on this in Issue 14 Volume 3 of the old newsletter (July of 07)

See   http://tuckerstuesday.typepad.com/tuckerstuesday/2007/06/index.html  for the original link and my commentary.

Can I Has a New Bogeyman?

Trolling around tonight I found an article on a town rejecting a distributed Wifi system based on fears of  health risks from the RF. 

WiFi Fear Kills Free Local WiFi Plan -   http://techdirt.com/articles/20080325/002149639.shtml

The article provides only  a snarky commentary with no background information nor links to an official news story, I was able to find a number of sites corroborating the story but only one had any real credentials - The San Franscisco Chronicle:  http://news.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/03/24/state/n100739D20.DTL

I had a bit to say about this type of hysteria back in  October 07. http://tuckerstuesday.typepad.com/tuckerstuesday/2007/10/index.html

The communities concern did not center on a relatively high power Muni-fi system but a small distributed access point setup.  The system proposed would have less radiated power then I am exposed to daily at my work -(where we have no less then 10 wifi system running  constantly).

Why do humans need to find new bogeymen whose threat to humanity becomes more ominous with each iteration ?  This is a question  which Micheal Shermer could examine far more eloquently then I;  the reality is no medical proof has been offered up after nearly 25+ years of medical studies on High Power lines, proximity to transmission towers, etc.  The unstated message here is that not only will the Internet rot your brain, it will cause a tumor as well.

You take The Low Byte, I'll Take the High Byte and I'll get to HD streaming before Ye

There seems to be a lot of chatter on Bit Torrent lately and most of it is positive!

Recently the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Canada's public broadcaster, aired the finale of Canada's Next Great Prime Minister which also included the release of the entire show in high resolution, NO copy protection via Bit Torrent.

The entire Article is at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7312460.stm

I have also noticed a number of new products which publicly include Bit Torrent mechanisms , many include the Bit Torrent branding up front.  The latest I have come across is the Myka

The source article from endgadget

http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/21/myka-sneaks-bittorrent-into-the-living-room/

Then there is the rancors saber rattling of the ISP's who are pushing hard to end Internet(s) neutrality and attack the use of unregulated ' bandwidth hogs' such as Bit Torrent. These same companies then turn around and offer similar services at a premium. 

Business Week has a very interesting article on this including a breakdown of the players and what each can possibly gain or lose.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2008/tc20080321_685942.htm?campaign_id=rss_tech

At this point is looks as if Bit Torrent or some derivation there of will become the THE method for seamless video steaming\download, the battle is over who will control it, and your viewing access.

Control Geek.net wants to kill more White Mice

John Huntington of ControlGeek.net has posed the question: Just why does most live sound suck?
See his original post at  http://www.controlgeek.net/why-does-live-sound-suck/.

John has also posted a the start of a 'Concert Goer's Bill of Rights at http://www.controlgeek.net/blog/2008/3/26/concert-goers-bill-of-rights.html

So why does most live sound suck?

My thoughts on the situation:

1. Over the last 10 years there has been a progressive decline in audio quality contained in the mass market audio mediums, from CDs to the ubiquitous iPod.  While there are most certainly very high quality digital formats available for  the connoisseur,  the majority of music consumers are quite happy with a highly compressed MP3- especially if it is free!  So we start off with a general lower quality expectation by those who would actually go to a show. 

2. The cost of commercial real estate in nearly every major urban center can be extraordinarily prohibitive to investing in a quality acoustic design and upkeep.  Let's face it, most NYC venues are concerned with getting the most out of every event by keeping costs low and margins high-(moderate ticket prices, $8 dollar beers).  a Venue providing simply adequate sound is able to cut cost by installing 'shout boxes' which provide a very middle sound quality and tons of volume.  I have lost count on the number of  venues  I have attended shows where it was very obvious that pure volume was used to create excitement at the loss of depth-(the old Ritz anyone? ) I will say that I was blown away by the sound quality at the Lion's Den -(McDougall and Bleeker) some 15 years ago. I could hear every lyric and each of the 7 instruments being played.  Not only could I hear the music, I did not leave with my ears ringing for a week!  I went to see  a multitude of bands  at 'the den' I had never heard of -and in many cases never would again- just for the quality sound of the venue. (well, that and the beers were $2 if you showed up early).

3. We have to face it, there are a lot of live sound engineers who either

• Never received any formal education in the art of live sound



• Never served an internship with a veteran sound engineer and learned from their guiding hand.



• Have blown their ears by doing it wrong but refuse to give up the back center stool.

4. It makes white mice spontaneously explode - poor white lab mice, everyone  knows high school sucks.

For the record I support John's Bill O' Rights for concert goers, but fear it will suffer the same fate as the travelers bill of rights - which appears to be suffering from lack of support and atrophy.

T6 readers: what are  your thoughts?  add them to the comment section of this post as this response is linked to John's blog.

Ah see, Dot vas the qvick fuse, Ya

After years of cajoling, pleading, and half hearted attempts to get the broadcast industry to educate the public on the 2009 transition, the FCC seems to finally a be putting some teeth behind it's mandate .  It appears that no one wanted to be the first to let us all in on the what and what nots and its affect on our television viewing. 

I heard  a report concerning the most recent escalation on NPR; the archived link its at -( with link to podcast of the original radio broadcast):

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=87898671&ft=1&f=1019

The TV broadcasters were concerned with causing a near panic ala Orson Wells War of the Worlds.

The manufactures of televisions had apparently been on a concerted program of deliberately misinforming  the public with phrases such as 'HD ready and 'HD Capable' in order to dispose of as many non native HD units as possible. I have consistently heard the terms used by the box store sales clerks to mean the same or different things, sometimes correctly.

The Cable companies up until late have been promoting the fact that they have (x) number of HD channels and that subscribers need not worry as cable had it all in hand. (what they don't tell you is that cable will continue to provide the standard analog signal for at least 3 years; this is good if you do not want to go out  and replace you 2 year old 37" monitor, bad if you wanted more HD content and upgraded you converter box to the DTV model only to have the majority of channels  stay at a lower SDTV quality.

So finally the FCC had enough with the industry surveys showing 3/4 of Americans having little or no knowledge of the transition-( or even the difference between DTV and HDTV)- and is clearly stating that a concerted attempt at public education must be made.   To this end the FCC has set up a countdown to DTV Transition site to help everyone get with the program.

The FCC  Digital convergence site -(complete with countdown clock!)  http://www.dtv.gov/

The FCC DTV FAQ : http://www.dtv.gov/consumercorner.html

WNBC TV in New York has had a great series of spots concerning the Digital transition and they archive them on their website!  Navigating the WNBC website is an arduous task -( it is an absolutely horrendously designed site). The direct Link is http://www.wnbc.com/digital/index.html

After the years of debating, arguing and endless conversation we are finally at a moment when there  no going back and all players are making efforts to get EVERYBODY on board.  After all this waiting I cannot shake the image of Liebkind in The Producers lighting the fuse only to find it is the quick one.

Personally, I blame Newton - If not for him, none of this would be a problem

I just finished reading  an article on www.Wirelessnetdesign.com about possible serious interference issues stemming from use of UWB by the proposed High Speed Bluetooth.  See the article:

Testing raises concerns over 802.11-based high-speed Bluetooth

http://www.wirelessnetdesignline.com/howto/206903929;jsessionid=YHRJOLR2A4BU2QSNDLPCKH0CJUNN2JVN?pgno=1

The article not only points out some interference concerns of UWB with standard Wifi\WiMax and  some IMT-2000 service, it is also a great primer on the technologies involved.

While I will not break down the article here -( you can read it for yourself,  it is not overly leaden with unfamiliar terminology and there are a ton of graphs)- the basic premise should be understood.  Radio frequency transmissions are an extremely poor way to transfer data as they suffer innumerable sources of signal degradation. The article focuses on the specific effects of UWB's technique of transmitting information in short low energy pulses but over a large bandwidth (typically  greater then 500 MHz), but the principals hold true for any RF installation.

We -(and especially consumers) have been influenced to view consumer RF (usually referring to the ISM bands) as a reliable well thought out standard in which every effort has been made to insure the units we use can resist interference or will not cause issue with other consumer systems.  Or as the article states

The reality is that consumers expect to be able to use multiple technologies simultaneously, without interference

Unfortunately two things make this concept a bit utopianstic.

• FCC Part 15 - Go ahead read  it, very interesting stuff there -(no, really).



• Getting a standard to market often involves trading pure concepts for workable solutions which allows for innovations and relative ease of implementation.

Regardless of the install type, the environment in which the system is put into can have a dramatic effect on the wireless reliability. Environmental factors can be external (Radio, TV, Aeronautic, STL, etc), Internal factors (wireless phone systems, multi-mode, frequency density and transceiver -(gateway)- proximity).  As the article states: 

...unless they are located approximately 8 meters apart for 2.6 GHz and 16m apart at 2.3GHz. If they are co-located in a single device achieving this level of isolation between radios is unrealistic...

For UWB the answer stated in the article is a method of  Time  And | OR   Phase intervals, which is fine for UWB but is not a current practical method for standard wifi.  Note the distances the article states for minimum separation! 8- 16 meters ! The basic concept of providing adequate distances between RF devices and their transceivers is just as important as antenna orientation and frequency allocation.

There are some great resources on the web which can help you get the basics

Air Magnet - www.airmagnet.com - have fantastic webinars on all aspects of wireless systems, if you cannot catch one of the live sessions they archive them all. In fact I just received a notice for a webinar on the 26th entitled:  802.11n Primer: What You Need to Know" --  It looks like a good one.

The fine folks at Infocomm international - www.infocomm.org  have a couple of great on-line classes concerning  network functionality of which the Audio-Video & control System Networking is full of great information.

Why Do All British Computer Geeks Look Like They Just Stepped Out of a Doctor Who Episode?

In my effort to catch up on tech news and obscura I came across a BBC article about an exhibit on the British Micro more often called the Beeb.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7303288.stm

I am struck by a number of things in the article

1.  That nearly all 'home' computers circa 1980 looked like giant typewriters

2. Just how fantastic the BBC \ Acron effort succeeded in improving general literacy and raising a generation of computer literates. I can only dream of such an effort being undertaken in this country.

3. They sold 1.5 million of these babies!

4. Fast! with an 8bit\ 2MHz processor.

5. Did the British tech society have a special set way of being photographed? I swear every picture I see looks like it is a promotional shot of a Tom Baker episode of Dr. Who.   The man who practically single handedly forced modern computing into existence - Alan Turing-  looks almost Bogart like in comparison.  ( Mr, Turning is also one of the main reasons the Germans were defeated in WWII; I would argue equal  to the impact of the heroics of the D-Day soldiers)

6. Google reader kicks all other aggregators ass.  I have avoided using it preferring the more staid and austere RSS reader, but I finally got my act together and started to work with the tool. I already cannot understand how I found items in the past. 

Every Show Has A Victim, Don't be the Victim OR Your Only as Good as Your Last Cue

John Huntington of ControlGeek.net  has made me aware of a book by Steve Alcorn of Alcorn McBride concerning his experience building  Disney's Epcot center.  I have only had the chance to read the previews and reviews, I am told that Steve  convincingly describes the harrowing scramble to get everything working  just days prior to opening of Epcot. Any one who was worked on theatrical or event based installations know all to well the truth of this posts title. 

You can find  a helpful link to Steve's book via John Huntington's Blog page - (the link through gets John  a bit of revenue, go on help a brother out!).  www.controlgeek.net. 

The direct post link is http://www.controlgeek.net/blog/2008/3/7/steve-alcorns-book.html

Mass vs. Volume or Factors in Displacement

So the FCC has finally been able to presumptively sell off the soon to be unused analog television frequencies for over 19 billion dollars.  Unfortunately the spectrum went mostly to one company. When the FCC announced the sale of the frequencies it hailed the action as a dawn of a new age of innovative communications. The fact is, it took a classic chess move on the part of Google just to insure 'open access for other vendors.  (Google convinced the FCC to accept the concept of open access if a minimum bid was received. Google then bid the minimum, made quite noise about being interested in expanding to telecom then watched as the bidding frenzy ensued.

What does this mean for the custom AV industry? For starters if may mean that Sprint and its WiMax may have lost the mobile content war, for I am sure that Verizon has plans afoot to use the acquired frequency spectrum for more then just better coverage.  Content delivery is where the future profits reside.   Verizon has stated that they intend to honor the open access clause but past closed market practices lend me to believe that they will now work to overturn the clause and elbow out all others.  It could very well be a case of  Volume vs Mass. I have this image of  dropping ice cubes in a cup of water, when the ice fully melts the level in the cup does not change-(i am excluding factors such as evaporation and condensation).

NPR had the best general coverage on this FCC spectrum sale

FCC Auctions Off Airwaves

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88690020&ft=1&f=1019

Key Part of the Wireless Spectrum Goes Unused

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88650396&ft=1&f=1019

"hello. Er, look, I'm sorry I'm a bit late. I've had the most ghastly time, all sorts of things cropping up at the last moment

Well, its been awhile - sorry for the delay I almost thought I would end up like  the Great Prophet Zarquon - late on arrival and cut off at the last min-

"Max blinked in amazement. He threw up his arms to the audience.

"A big hand please, ladies and gentlemen," he hollered, "for the Great Prophet Zarquon! He has come! Zarquon has come again!"

Thunderous applause broke out as Max strode across the stage and handed his microphone to the Prophet.

Zarquon coughed. He peered round at the assembled gathering. The stars in his eyes blinked uneasily. He handled the microphone with confusion.

"Er ..." he said, "hello. Er, look, I'm sorry I'm a bit late. I've had the most ghastly time, all sorts of things cropping up at the last moment."

He seemed nervous of the expectant awed hush. He cleared his throat.

"Er, how are we for time?" he said, "have I just got a min-"

And so the Universe ended." (Thanks to: http://www.otostopcu.org/yazi/h2g2/b2c19.php)

Truth be told I've just been damn busy my friend, that and a new house, my oldest entering the fabulous two's and my youngest, who has never been too fond of sleeping -(I am not kidding people ,this kid stayed awake for 15 hours straight a day until two months ago. He's 9 months old).  Soooo, my wife and I have been taking sleep where we can get it, which means the blog took a second to everything else.  Prior to my second child I had been very used to operating on 4 -5 house of sleep, even with our first, but it was getting ridiculous at only 3 hours a night without working. Thankfully my youngest has come to see the reasonableness of 8 straight at night, and the occasional 2 hour nap -(which as also allowed my wife to climb back into near sanity).

T6 in form and function followed the style of the music fanzines which I am an avid reader of -( such as www.TheBigTakeover.com and www.pitchfork.com ) and as an homage to Mark Shubin's Monday Morning Memo.  While I like the comprehensive magazine presentation, the process can be very time consuming and not always easy for every one to take in. With a new found energy I am back and will continue to post under the Tuesday moniker here but post my missives on more of a daily -(or semi erratic form there of) - schedule. 

I want to thank all those who have asked me about the blog when calling in for support at Crestron or by email, your interest and support have kept me from writing into T6 one final Obit for itself.

Please feel free to send me your links and observations in return for my undying appreciation and you name in Trebuchet MS 10 point font.