Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site unccvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!mcnc!unccvax!dsi
From: dsi@unccvax.UUCP (Dataspan Inc)
Newsgroups: net.video,net.analog
Subject: Q-channel bandwidth
Message-ID: <146@unccvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Feb-85 17:14:42 EST
Article-I.D.: unccvax.146
Posted: Tue Feb 26 17:14:42 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Mar-85 03:22:42 EST
Organization: UNC-Charlotte
Lines: 15
Xref: watmath net.video:1024 net.analog:172


      While we are on the subject of NTSC (again) what are the theoretical
grounds for restricting the Q-channel bandwidth to 500 kc? I know all the classic
arguments from the 50's, but given the advances in electronics since sheet
beam balanced mixers were the "in" subcarrier generation device, what are
the problems in just making both I and Q channels identical. That way, you'd
not have to include the extra delay line to match I and Q in time for wideband
demodulation.

     I didn't mean "identical" of course but identical in transmission 
bandwidth. 

dya
.