Sfrgttk

Negotiating 1-year delay to my Assistant Professor Offer

Run a command that requires sudo after a time has passed

Candle stand modeling question

What prevents people from lying about where they live in order to reduce state income taxes?

How to know if I am a 'Real Developer'

Animate an airplane in Beamer

Taking an academic pseudonym?

How do I add numbers from two txt files with Bash?

Why does the includeonly command not stepcounter the chaptercounter for omitted chapters?

Was Opportunity's last message to Earth "My battery is low and it's getting dark"?

Sing Baby Shark

How to explain one side of Super Earth is smoother than the other side?

Is the "hot network questions" element on Stack Overflow a dark pattern?

Sci fi book, man buys a beat up spaceship and intervenes in a civil war on a planet and eventually becomes a space cop

Why does Python copy numpy arrays where the length of the dimensions are the same?

How can I learn to care less because it makes me sick?

Why are these receptacles so difficult to plug into?

Manager has noticed coworker's excessive breaks. Should I warn him?

Does limiting the number of sources help simplify the game for a new DM with new and experienced players?

if else in jq is not giving expected output

How to create a cover page like this?

Bitcoin automatically diverted to bech32 address

Finding Gaps in Date Ranges

The Hilbert symbols of quaternion algebras over a totally real field

Why did the ZX Spectrum use an internal speaker?

Measuring frame length on the ZX SpectrumZX Spectrum+ with SCART Interface doesn't display anythingWhy did the Sinclair ZX-Spectrum use a membrane keyboard?How and why did the ZX Spectrum use so many voltages?Why did the ZX Spectrum use edges for its tape storage routines?Why did POKEing ROM addresses mask port writes?Spectrum clones 512x192 mode usable text resolutionZX BASIC REM statement overheadWhy did the IBM PC need a sound card?Why did SAM on the Apple II use its own DAC?

20

I was surprised to note recently that the Sinclair ZX Spectrum used an internal speaker. I knew the BBC Micro used one, presumably because it was designed to be optionally used with a monitor which likely would not supply one, but as far as I know, the ZX Spectrum was always used with a TV set.

Given that Sinclair designs were very heavily optimized for cost, why did the Spectrum go with an internal speaker instead of just using the one in the TV set and saving a small amount of money?

zx-spectrum sound

share|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1555

asked 2 days ago

rwallacerwallace

9,185446134

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Did any computer used with a TV-set use the TV for sound?
  
  – UncleBod
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  9
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @UncleBod TI 99/4, Atari 400/800, Commodore VIC, C64, C16, Tandy CoCo, MSX - pick your favorite. Eventually the majority of home computers did. The Apple II is a notable exception, but then again, it's a whole generation before home computers came.
  
  – Raffzahn
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  All Sinclair computers had a built-in (very cheap) speaker, even the QL (arguably, it needed one, as it was intended for use with a video monitor) and the Cambridge Z88
  
  – tofro
  2 days ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  5
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The ZX Spectrum issue 1 schematics show a composite video out option. This might be a very simple reason. spectrumforeveryone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/…
  
  – tofro
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @TobySpeight If it makes you happy...
  
  – tofro
  23 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 6 more comments

20

I was surprised to note recently that the Sinclair ZX Spectrum used an internal speaker. I knew the BBC Micro used one, presumably because it was designed to be optionally used with a monitor which likely would not supply one, but as far as I know, the ZX Spectrum was always used with a TV set.

Given that Sinclair designs were very heavily optimized for cost, why did the Spectrum go with an internal speaker instead of just using the one in the TV set and saving a small amount of money?

zx-spectrum sound

share|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1555

asked 2 days ago

rwallacerwallace

9,185446134

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Did any computer used with a TV-set use the TV for sound?
  
  – UncleBod
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  9
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @UncleBod TI 99/4, Atari 400/800, Commodore VIC, C64, C16, Tandy CoCo, MSX - pick your favorite. Eventually the majority of home computers did. The Apple II is a notable exception, but then again, it's a whole generation before home computers came.
  
  – Raffzahn
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  All Sinclair computers had a built-in (very cheap) speaker, even the QL (arguably, it needed one, as it was intended for use with a video monitor) and the Cambridge Z88
  
  – tofro
  2 days ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  5
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The ZX Spectrum issue 1 schematics show a composite video out option. This might be a very simple reason. spectrumforeveryone.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/…
  
  – tofro
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @TobySpeight If it makes you happy...
  
  – tofro
  23 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 6 more comments

I was surprised to note recently that the Sinclair ZX Spectrum used an internal speaker. I knew the BBC Micro used one, presumably because it was designed to be optionally used with a monitor which likely would not supply one, but as far as I know, the ZX Spectrum was always used with a TV set.

Given that Sinclair designs were very heavily optimized for cost, why did the Spectrum go with an internal speaker instead of just using the one in the TV set and saving a small amount of money?

zx-spectrum sound

share|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1555

asked 2 days ago

rwallacerwallace

9,185446134

share|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1555

asked 2 days ago

rwallacerwallace

9,185446134

share|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1555

asked 2 days ago

rwallacerwallace

9,185446134

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1555

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1555

asked 2 days ago

rwallacerwallace

9,185446134

asked 2 days ago

rwallacerwallace

9,185446134

3 Answers
3

active

oldest

votes

36

I strongly expect that an RF modulator, which is needed to create the TV-style signal, would cost more if it had to handle sound too. A small speaker is very cheap, and often a useful device for debugging a circuit board or firmware.

The Spectrum 128K+ did make sound output through the TV, and also had much more sophisticated sound hardware, with an AY-3-8910 sound chip.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

2,946715

• 
  
  
  

  
  8
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  This is almost certainly it - Sinclair corp's entire modus operandi was to produce a computer as cheaply as possible, to get as many of them out the door as they could at the lowest price imaginable. Their computers cost £50; by comparison the Commodore VIC-20 cost £150 and the BBC Micro cost £235-£335.
  
  – fluffy
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Besides the price, could it be because of video interference, and needing a better modulator to handle that?
  
  – Rui F Ribeiro
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @RuiFRibeiro: Possibly, but I don't know either way.
  
  – John Dallman
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
  
  – Toby Speight
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The BBC Micro had an internal speaker too, and was equally incapable of playing sounds via a television set. (Though you did get some cool squeaks and blips if you turned up the volume and then poked random bytes into the video control registers.) I think the UHF modulator hardware just didn't have support for sound, and it wasn't cheap to add it.
  
  – Ed Avis
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

21

Always hard to guess why something simple hasn't been done.

In case of the Spectrum it might have been to save on component price. The modulator used is the same as for the ZX81, so Sinclair was for sure already at the optimum price point. On the down side it's a simple video modulator (*1) without a mixing stage for sound, after all, in its quest of maximum reduction the ZX80/81 did skip sound as well. Next to all other home computers (*2) of that era had sound and used the TV set. Without sound not only the sound circuit could be saved (*3), but more important money was saved on the modulator.

Sinclair could have voted to use a modulator capable of adding sound to the Spectrum, but buying them would have started at a higher price point due lower (start) volume - or to add a cheap speaker on board and share buying power for components with ZX-81 production.

---

*1 - In fact it's so simple, that they already had to add quite some analogue gears to make it work.

*2 - TI 99/4, Atari 400/800, Commodore VIC, C64, C16, Tandy CoCo, MSX (pick your favorite), eventually the majority of home computers did. The Apple II is a notable exception, but then again, it's a whole generation before home computers came.

*3 - Not much, as this could have been done with a single signal pin and maybe a driver transistor.

share|improve this answer

edited 2 days ago

answered 2 days ago

RaffzahnRaffzahn

51.3k6120206

• 
  
  
  

  
  8
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Its probably worth pointing out that the ZX81 used a video-only modulator because it has no sound output whatsoever, just to make your point more clear.
  
  – mnem
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I've just checked in its old advanced manual: my Oric Atmos definitely had a speaker. And it had very good sound compared to Spectrums and similar (using AY3-8912). And it could output to a standalone amplifier, too.
  
  – Gábor
  2 days ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  If one didn't mind require users to adjust the "fine-tuning knob" on their sets, one could get by with a really crummy RF modulator that doesn't use any particularly-high-precision components, but the optimal knob position for the best picture would often differ from that required for best sound. I'd guess that the component tolerances to produce a usable picture could be sloppier than those that would be needed if the sound had to be usable simultaneously.
  
  – supercat
  21 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

10

Because of different TV sound IF frequencies around the world, modulating the sound on a subcarrier would mean different modulators would be needed in different regions. An internal speaker is cheaper and reduces the chances of sending the wrong unit to a different region.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

FrankFrank

1012

New contributor

Frank is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Do you have a source on that? As far as I can see, PAL (which is the system the Spectrum was first made for) have the same spectrum per channel all the time. If you change to SECAM or NTSC you would anyway have to adjust the hardware in some way (sometimes a simple switch, sometimes it was a completely different hardware) to get a picture.
  
  – UncleBod
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @UncleBod See the table at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAL#PAL_broadcast_systems, particularly "Vision/Sound carrier spacing", which shows that the UK has a different sound subcarrier to the rest of Europe.
  
  – pndc
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Uk was 6MHz and other regions @4.5, 5.0 or 5.5MHz. Modulators were tunable to tweak sound IF during final testing, but time costs money. Cheaper to use a different component.
  
  – Frank
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @UncleBod Your comment brings bad flashbacks from the early 90's. Poland switched from SECAM to PAL so people imported PAL TVs and VCRs en masse and many ended up with no sound because of the dreaded "b/g vs d/k" problem.
  
  – Agent_L
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Agent_L I had the same problem when I came to the UK and suddenly the sound on my playstation would not come through the TV.
  
  – Wilson
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "648"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9213%2fwhy-did-the-zx-spectrum-use-an-internal-speaker%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

36

I strongly expect that an RF modulator, which is needed to create the TV-style signal, would cost more if it had to handle sound too. A small speaker is very cheap, and often a useful device for debugging a circuit board or firmware.

The Spectrum 128K+ did make sound output through the TV, and also had much more sophisticated sound hardware, with an AY-3-8910 sound chip.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

2,946715

• 
  
  
  

  
  8
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  This is almost certainly it - Sinclair corp's entire modus operandi was to produce a computer as cheaply as possible, to get as many of them out the door as they could at the lowest price imaginable. Their computers cost £50; by comparison the Commodore VIC-20 cost £150 and the BBC Micro cost £235-£335.
  
  – fluffy
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Besides the price, could it be because of video interference, and needing a better modulator to handle that?
  
  – Rui F Ribeiro
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @RuiFRibeiro: Possibly, but I don't know either way.
  
  – John Dallman
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
  
  – Toby Speight
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The BBC Micro had an internal speaker too, and was equally incapable of playing sounds via a television set. (Though you did get some cool squeaks and blips if you turned up the volume and then poked random bytes into the video control registers.) I think the UHF modulator hardware just didn't have support for sound, and it wasn't cheap to add it.
  
  – Ed Avis
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

36

I strongly expect that an RF modulator, which is needed to create the TV-style signal, would cost more if it had to handle sound too. A small speaker is very cheap, and often a useful device for debugging a circuit board or firmware.

The Spectrum 128K+ did make sound output through the TV, and also had much more sophisticated sound hardware, with an AY-3-8910 sound chip.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

2,946715

• 
  
  
  

  
  8
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  This is almost certainly it - Sinclair corp's entire modus operandi was to produce a computer as cheaply as possible, to get as many of them out the door as they could at the lowest price imaginable. Their computers cost £50; by comparison the Commodore VIC-20 cost £150 and the BBC Micro cost £235-£335.
  
  – fluffy
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Besides the price, could it be because of video interference, and needing a better modulator to handle that?
  
  – Rui F Ribeiro
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @RuiFRibeiro: Possibly, but I don't know either way.
  
  – John Dallman
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
  
  – Toby Speight
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The BBC Micro had an internal speaker too, and was equally incapable of playing sounds via a television set. (Though you did get some cool squeaks and blips if you turned up the volume and then poked random bytes into the video control registers.) I think the UHF modulator hardware just didn't have support for sound, and it wasn't cheap to add it.
  
  – Ed Avis
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

I strongly expect that an RF modulator, which is needed to create the TV-style signal, would cost more if it had to handle sound too. A small speaker is very cheap, and often a useful device for debugging a circuit board or firmware.

The Spectrum 128K+ did make sound output through the TV, and also had much more sophisticated sound hardware, with an AY-3-8910 sound chip.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

2,946715

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

2,946715

answered 2 days ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

2,946715

answered 2 days ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

2,946715

21

Always hard to guess why something simple hasn't been done.

In case of the Spectrum it might have been to save on component price. The modulator used is the same as for the ZX81, so Sinclair was for sure already at the optimum price point. On the down side it's a simple video modulator (*1) without a mixing stage for sound, after all, in its quest of maximum reduction the ZX80/81 did skip sound as well. Next to all other home computers (*2) of that era had sound and used the TV set. Without sound not only the sound circuit could be saved (*3), but more important money was saved on the modulator.

Sinclair could have voted to use a modulator capable of adding sound to the Spectrum, but buying them would have started at a higher price point due lower (start) volume - or to add a cheap speaker on board and share buying power for components with ZX-81 production.

---

*1 - In fact it's so simple, that they already had to add quite some analogue gears to make it work.

*2 - TI 99/4, Atari 400/800, Commodore VIC, C64, C16, Tandy CoCo, MSX (pick your favorite), eventually the majority of home computers did. The Apple II is a notable exception, but then again, it's a whole generation before home computers came.

*3 - Not much, as this could have been done with a single signal pin and maybe a driver transistor.

share|improve this answer

edited 2 days ago

answered 2 days ago

RaffzahnRaffzahn

51.3k6120206

• 
  
  
  

  
  8
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Its probably worth pointing out that the ZX81 used a video-only modulator because it has no sound output whatsoever, just to make your point more clear.
  
  – mnem
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I've just checked in its old advanced manual: my Oric Atmos definitely had a speaker. And it had very good sound compared to Spectrums and similar (using AY3-8912). And it could output to a standalone amplifier, too.
  
  – Gábor
  2 days ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  If one didn't mind require users to adjust the "fine-tuning knob" on their sets, one could get by with a really crummy RF modulator that doesn't use any particularly-high-precision components, but the optimal knob position for the best picture would often differ from that required for best sound. I'd guess that the component tolerances to produce a usable picture could be sloppier than those that would be needed if the sound had to be usable simultaneously.
  
  – supercat
  21 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

21

Always hard to guess why something simple hasn't been done.

In case of the Spectrum it might have been to save on component price. The modulator used is the same as for the ZX81, so Sinclair was for sure already at the optimum price point. On the down side it's a simple video modulator (*1) without a mixing stage for sound, after all, in its quest of maximum reduction the ZX80/81 did skip sound as well. Next to all other home computers (*2) of that era had sound and used the TV set. Without sound not only the sound circuit could be saved (*3), but more important money was saved on the modulator.

Sinclair could have voted to use a modulator capable of adding sound to the Spectrum, but buying them would have started at a higher price point due lower (start) volume - or to add a cheap speaker on board and share buying power for components with ZX-81 production.

---

*1 - In fact it's so simple, that they already had to add quite some analogue gears to make it work.

*2 - TI 99/4, Atari 400/800, Commodore VIC, C64, C16, Tandy CoCo, MSX (pick your favorite), eventually the majority of home computers did. The Apple II is a notable exception, but then again, it's a whole generation before home computers came.

*3 - Not much, as this could have been done with a single signal pin and maybe a driver transistor.

share|improve this answer

edited 2 days ago

answered 2 days ago

RaffzahnRaffzahn

51.3k6120206

• 
  
  
  

  
  8
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Its probably worth pointing out that the ZX81 used a video-only modulator because it has no sound output whatsoever, just to make your point more clear.
  
  – mnem
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I've just checked in its old advanced manual: my Oric Atmos definitely had a speaker. And it had very good sound compared to Spectrums and similar (using AY3-8912). And it could output to a standalone amplifier, too.
  
  – Gábor
  2 days ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  If one didn't mind require users to adjust the "fine-tuning knob" on their sets, one could get by with a really crummy RF modulator that doesn't use any particularly-high-precision components, but the optimal knob position for the best picture would often differ from that required for best sound. I'd guess that the component tolerances to produce a usable picture could be sloppier than those that would be needed if the sound had to be usable simultaneously.
  
  – supercat
  21 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Always hard to guess why something simple hasn't been done.

In case of the Spectrum it might have been to save on component price. The modulator used is the same as for the ZX81, so Sinclair was for sure already at the optimum price point. On the down side it's a simple video modulator (*1) without a mixing stage for sound, after all, in its quest of maximum reduction the ZX80/81 did skip sound as well. Next to all other home computers (*2) of that era had sound and used the TV set. Without sound not only the sound circuit could be saved (*3), but more important money was saved on the modulator.

Sinclair could have voted to use a modulator capable of adding sound to the Spectrum, but buying them would have started at a higher price point due lower (start) volume - or to add a cheap speaker on board and share buying power for components with ZX-81 production.

---

*1 - In fact it's so simple, that they already had to add quite some analogue gears to make it work.

*2 - TI 99/4, Atari 400/800, Commodore VIC, C64, C16, Tandy CoCo, MSX (pick your favorite), eventually the majority of home computers did. The Apple II is a notable exception, but then again, it's a whole generation before home computers came.

*3 - Not much, as this could have been done with a single signal pin and maybe a driver transistor.

share|improve this answer

edited 2 days ago

answered 2 days ago

RaffzahnRaffzahn

51.3k6120206

share|improve this answer

edited 2 days ago

answered 2 days ago

RaffzahnRaffzahn

51.3k6120206

answered 2 days ago

RaffzahnRaffzahn

51.3k6120206

answered 2 days ago

RaffzahnRaffzahn

51.3k6120206

10

Because of different TV sound IF frequencies around the world, modulating the sound on a subcarrier would mean different modulators would be needed in different regions. An internal speaker is cheaper and reduces the chances of sending the wrong unit to a different region.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

FrankFrank

1012

New contributor

Frank is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Do you have a source on that? As far as I can see, PAL (which is the system the Spectrum was first made for) have the same spectrum per channel all the time. If you change to SECAM or NTSC you would anyway have to adjust the hardware in some way (sometimes a simple switch, sometimes it was a completely different hardware) to get a picture.
  
  – UncleBod
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @UncleBod See the table at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAL#PAL_broadcast_systems, particularly "Vision/Sound carrier spacing", which shows that the UK has a different sound subcarrier to the rest of Europe.
  
  – pndc
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Uk was 6MHz and other regions @4.5, 5.0 or 5.5MHz. Modulators were tunable to tweak sound IF during final testing, but time costs money. Cheaper to use a different component.
  
  – Frank
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @UncleBod Your comment brings bad flashbacks from the early 90's. Poland switched from SECAM to PAL so people imported PAL TVs and VCRs en masse and many ended up with no sound because of the dreaded "b/g vs d/k" problem.
  
  – Agent_L
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Agent_L I had the same problem when I came to the UK and suddenly the sound on my playstation would not come through the TV.
  
  – Wilson
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

10

Because of different TV sound IF frequencies around the world, modulating the sound on a subcarrier would mean different modulators would be needed in different regions. An internal speaker is cheaper and reduces the chances of sending the wrong unit to a different region.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

FrankFrank

1012

New contributor

Frank is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Do you have a source on that? As far as I can see, PAL (which is the system the Spectrum was first made for) have the same spectrum per channel all the time. If you change to SECAM or NTSC you would anyway have to adjust the hardware in some way (sometimes a simple switch, sometimes it was a completely different hardware) to get a picture.
  
  – UncleBod
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @UncleBod See the table at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAL#PAL_broadcast_systems, particularly "Vision/Sound carrier spacing", which shows that the UK has a different sound subcarrier to the rest of Europe.
  
  – pndc
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Uk was 6MHz and other regions @4.5, 5.0 or 5.5MHz. Modulators were tunable to tweak sound IF during final testing, but time costs money. Cheaper to use a different component.
  
  – Frank
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @UncleBod Your comment brings bad flashbacks from the early 90's. Poland switched from SECAM to PAL so people imported PAL TVs and VCRs en masse and many ended up with no sound because of the dreaded "b/g vs d/k" problem.
  
  – Agent_L
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @Agent_L I had the same problem when I came to the UK and suddenly the sound on my playstation would not come through the TV.
  
  – Wilson
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Because of different TV sound IF frequencies around the world, modulating the sound on a subcarrier would mean different modulators would be needed in different regions. An internal speaker is cheaper and reduces the chances of sending the wrong unit to a different region.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

FrankFrank

1012

New contributor

Frank is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 days ago

FrankFrank

1012

New contributor

Frank is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 2 days ago

FrankFrank

1012

New contributor

Frank is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 2 days ago

FrankFrank

1012