VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or Try ConvertXtoDVD and convert all your movies to DVD. Free trial ! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 18 of 18
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Spain
    Search Comp PM
    Hello, hopefully someone here can help me or steer me on the right direction... I recently moved to Spain and I brought with me my NTSC tv and my NTSC Playstation 2 from the United States.

    What would I need to do/buy (easiest and most inexpensive way, if possible) to convert the european tv signal to NTSC tv signal, so that I can watch european tv on my American tv? I believe both antenna cables are called "RF", only the american one has a thinner "pole" in the center of the plug?

    In the same manner, what'd be needed to make my american PS2 play the PAL games that I buy here in Spain (as well as the NTSC ones I already have)?

    Thanks in advance for any help you can provide!
    Quote Quote  
  2. The most convenient and simplest solution will be to buy a European PAL TV. I say that as someone who has made the reverse move twice (i.e., Europe to the US).

    To convert the broadcast RF PAL signal, you'd need a box of electronics to demodulate the signal and another box to convert from PAL to NTSC. Doing that with good quality is expensive - more so than a second TV. You also will likely need a transformer to run your 115V TV off European mains power.

    PAL broadcasts contain a lot of Teletext information as well as excellent stereo audio (NICAM). Your existing NTSC TV won't be able to make use of those. Also, many PAL broadcasts are widescreen and standard definition widescreen TVs are abundant in Europe (unlike in the US where, typically, you have to get a high def TV to get widescreen).

    If you go the second TV route, consider purchasing a multistandard one (a lot of LCD TVs will support PAL and NTSC, but you need to check).

    Can't help re. the Playstation, sorry.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member skaterboii's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Search Comp PM
    Ha ha, In New Zealand, we have multi standard tv's, compatible with SECAM, PAL & NTSC, I feel sorry for you American's who use that crappy inferior NTSC standard, PAL kicks ass. No bloody 3:2 pull down for NZ, plus it is near-film fps, 1 fps quicker than film, not to mention more visible lines (576i).
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by skaterboii
    Ha ha, In New Zealand, we have multi standard tv's, compatible with SECAM, PAL & NTSC, I feel sorry for you American's who use that crappy inferior NTSC standard, PAL kicks ass. No bloody 3:2 pull down for NZ, plus it is near-film fps, 1 fps quicker than film, not to mention more visible lines (576i).
    But 50hz. flickers 100Hz is nice.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member skaterboii's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Search Comp PM
    Who give's a #$% when LCD & Plasma TV filter the lagged refresh rate?
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member skaterboii's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Search Comp PM
    However 50Hz PAL is much closer to film shutter speed, so is more accurate than 60Hz NTSC.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Originally Posted by skaterboii
    Ha ha, In New Zealand, we have multi standard tv's, compatible with SECAM, PAL & NTSC, I feel sorry for you American's who use that crappy inferior NTSC standard, PAL kicks ass. No bloody 3:2 pull down for NZ, plus it is near-film fps, 1 fps quicker than film, not to mention more visible lines (576i).
    As someone who grew up with PAL-land but now lives in NTSC-ville, I can honestly say that whenever I go back to PAL-land, the flicker is terrible! But I never noticed it until I got used to NTSC. Still, I prefer the picture quality of PAL over NTSC anytime.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Член BJ_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by skaterboii
    However 50Hz PAL is much closer to film shutter speed, so is more accurate than 60Hz NTSC.

    the flicker in film is bad also -- remember film speed of 24fps was not chosen to be "good" or look good , but was chosen because it was cheap and the slowest (cheaper) that was possible without to many complaints..

    saying a tv standard nearly matches this is really saying it is crap ... though pal is better than ntsc in nearly every aspect to be sure
    "Each problem that I solved became a rule which served afterwards to solve other problems." - Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Spain
    Search Comp PM
    Thanks, JohnyMalaria!

    Well, the tv is already here and it's a 50" projector tv... my father likes it cause he has eyesight problems and the large screen goes easy on his eyes. I already have the transformer for 115 to 220V and there's plenty of transcoders that will convert from PAL to NTSC, provided that you have a satellite box or something of that sort with A/V output (the transcoders only support A/V inputs and outputs, and some will convert from RF input to A/V output).

    I just wanted to make sure I consulted with someone more knowledgeable than me in the matter, so that I don't spend my money to find out, 2 days after, that there's something out there that would work better, or be cheaper.

    I told my father buying a new tv set would be a lot easier, but a 50" flat tv would cost upwards of $1200 over here.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by SamGR
    Thanks, JohnyMalaria!

    Well, the tv is already here and it's a 50" projector tv... my father likes it cause he has eyesight problems and the large screen goes easy on his eyes. I already have the transformer for 115 to 220V and there's plenty of transcoders that will convert from PAL to NTSC, provided that you have a satellite box or something of that sort with A/V output (the transcoders only support A/V inputs and outputs, and some will convert from RF input to A/V output).

    I just wanted to make sure I consulted with someone more knowledgeable than me in the matter, so that I don't spend my money to find out, 2 days after, that there's something out there that would work better, or be cheaper.

    I told my father buying a new tv set would be a lot easier, but a 50" flat tv would cost upwards of $1200 over here.
    Good choice. A Projector is much easier to move back home.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by BJ_M
    Originally Posted by skaterboii
    However 50Hz PAL is much closer to film shutter speed, so is more accurate than 60Hz NTSC.

    the flicker in film is bad also -- remember film speed of 24fps was not chosen to be "good" or look good , but was chosen because it was cheap and the slowest (cheaper) that was possible without to many complaints..

    saying a tv standard nearly matches this is really saying it is crap ... though pal is better than ntsc in nearly every aspect to be sure
    Film is always projected with a 2 to 3 frame repeat in the gate to reduce flicker but the motion is still studdered @ 24 fps. It is this jerky motion and flim exposure characteristics that people call the "film look". Also the slow pans and controlled zooms necessary to work at 24fps. Film look isn't superior, it just looks like the film flaws that we grew up watching.

    Likewise PAL uses interlace to get to 50 fields per second but 50 Hz is still near flicker tolerance for human eyes. 4x frame rate 100Hz solves that problem. When I visit PAL lands, it takes a few days before I can enjoy watching a TV. Even after a week or so I still notice the flicker in peripheral vision.

    24fps film rate was chosen in the 30's to save film stock cost. They had to pick one speed to make sync sound work. 50Hz and 60 Hz were chosen to match local power frequencies in order to limit crosstalk and hum bars. No rocket science there. Just as for computer monitors, optimal TV refresh should be in the 72-120 Hz range.

    115V 60 Hz power was used in the USA because copper was cheap and the press had hyped safety concerns with AC vs. DC power. Europe went with higher voltage and 50hz to limit wire guage. They chose to limit copper cost over human safety.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Deleted (redundant).
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member skaterboii's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Search Comp PM
    Actually, NTSC is much older, it was created in the 50's and at that time NTSC had only monochromatic signals, therefore never implementing the colour signals needed in latter years,
    PAL was built with the implementation of colour signals in it's standard right from the very beginning.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by skaterboii
    Actually, NTSC is much older, it was created in the 50's and at that time NTSC had only monochromatic signals, therefore never implementing the colour signals needed in latter years,
    PAL was built with the implementation of colour signals in it's standard right from the very beginning.
    There is little difference technically between the two systems.

    NTSC color was added to the old 525 line 60Hz monochrome system.

    Europe started a new standard based on 625 lines and 50Hz interlace scan.

    PAL is near identical to NTSC as a quadrature modulation scheme where R-Y and B-Y are modulated on a 4.43MHz subcarrier (NTSC uses 3.58MHz).

    The main difference is in the name. PAL stands for Phase Alternate Line. The subcarrier colour phase is reversed each new line to average phase distortion to zero. Early NTSC had difficulty maintaining a consistant phase. This caused color to drift to green or pink requiring a hue control for correction. PAL eliminated the hue control.

    That is it as far as differences. In the US, RF channels are 6MHz wide with 4.2MHz devoted to luminance amplitude modulation. Some PAL systems also use 6MHz. Others use 7 or 8MHz. NTSC normally uses FM for sound. The various PAL systems use various ways to transmit sound.

    Component analog YPbPr and component digital YCbCr are implemented similarly for PAL and NTSC. Only frame size and frame rates vary.

    Digital televison systems vary in the way data is modulated onto analog RF carriers. The USA came up with the ATSC system based on 8-VSB modulation. This tends to work better with single transmitters over longer distance.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC

    Europe uses variations of the DVB standards based on COFDM modulation. This is optimal for distributed lower power transmitters as preferred in Europe.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB

    Regardless of RF transmission methods, the base HDTV signal is very similar with the world standardizing on square pixel 1920x1080i or 1280x720p transmission, but frame rates still vary to maintain legacy compatibility with NTSC (60Hz) or PAL (50Hz, sometimes 60Hz).
    Quote Quote  
  15. I think the debate about NTSC against PAL is mainly that North American broadcasters make very little worth wtching, so it could be in Kookky Kooky standard and it would still be crap.

    I've lived in Canada for 6 years the amount of commericals and the absolute lack of TV show quality is amazing, now the CRTC have said any amount of advertising is fine.

    Geeezze,,,where is Lord Reith when we need him.
    PAL/NTSC problem solver.
    USED TO BE A UK Equipment owner., NOW FINISHED WITH VHS CONVERSIONS-THANKS
    Quote Quote  
  16. Originally Posted by skaterboii
    Ha ha, In New Zealand, we have multi standard tv's, compatible with SECAM, PAL & NTSC, I feel sorry for you American's who use that crappy inferior NTSC standard, PAL kicks ass. No bloody 3:2 pull down for NZ, plus it is near-film fps, 1 fps quicker than film, not to mention more visible lines (576i).
    NTSC means Never Twice the Same Color. You can't beat that.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    636 days to the death of NTSC broadcasting.
    The old horse is headed to the big pasture in the sky. RIP.



    Every US TV station is now broadcasting ATSC digital on a separate channel. The analog NTSC transmitters will all be turned off on Feb 17, 2009.
    Quote Quote  
  18. I agree with JohnnyMalaria, buy a local television unit... a multi-standard one if possible, but those may be hard to find.

    As for your (US) PS2, you will need (unless you do find a multi-standard tv) a signal converter. You may have to shop around, so I would start by looking up Radio Shack and other electronics outlets in the phone book or on-line. These shouldn't be too hard to find, but I have no idea what the price ranges are. Also, check on-line for anything various users of these particular products have said about the conversion quality, especially concerning deinterlacing/reinterlacing and color conversion.

    You may also want to avoid buying any local PS2 games because of region/resolution differences... unless your PS2 has been modded, which I don't recommend for several reasons.

    One last thing: DON'T USE RF CABLES!! I haven't used those for any console since the days of the NES/SuperNes. Component cables are the ideal (in all countries), but you it's probably best to composite or s-video since they are the most widely supported. Watchout for SCART cables because those are a pain in the ass.

    Have fun.
    where bananas go to church...
    ...a monkey will be their preacher
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads