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 .