Why did the ZX Spectrum use an internal speaker?
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
|
show 3 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
1
Did any computer used with a TV-set use the TV for sound?
– UncleBod
yesterday
6
@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
yesterday
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
yesterday
4
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
yesterday
1
@TobySpeight If it makes you happy...
– tofro
5 hours ago
|
show 3 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
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
zx-spectrum sound
edited 9 hours ago
Peter Mortensen
1555
1555
asked yesterday
rwallacerwallace
9,165445134
9,165445134
1
Did any computer used with a TV-set use the TV for sound?
– UncleBod
yesterday
6
@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
yesterday
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
yesterday
4
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
yesterday
1
@TobySpeight If it makes you happy...
– tofro
5 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
1
Did any computer used with a TV-set use the TV for sound?
– UncleBod
yesterday
6
@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
yesterday
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
yesterday
4
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
yesterday
1
@TobySpeight If it makes you happy...
– tofro
5 hours ago
1
1
Did any computer used with a TV-set use the TV for sound?
– UncleBod
yesterday
Did any computer used with a TV-set use the TV for sound?
– UncleBod
yesterday
6
6
@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
yesterday
@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
yesterday
1
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
4
4
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
1
1
@TobySpeight If it makes you happy...
– tofro
5 hours ago
@TobySpeight If it makes you happy...
– tofro
5 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
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.
6
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
yesterday
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
21 hours ago
1
@Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
– Toby Speight
9 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.
7
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
2 hours ago
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.
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
20 hours ago
1
@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
10 hours ago
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
});
}
});
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
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
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
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.
6
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
yesterday
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
21 hours ago
1
@Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
– Toby Speight
9 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.
6
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
yesterday
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
21 hours ago
1
@Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
– Toby Speight
9 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.
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.
answered yesterday
John DallmanJohn Dallman
2,866715
2,866715
6
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
yesterday
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
21 hours ago
1
@Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
– Toby Speight
9 hours ago
add a comment |
6
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
yesterday
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
21 hours ago
1
@Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
– Toby Speight
9 hours ago
6
6
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
Besides the price, could it be because of video interference, and needing a better modulator to handle that?
– Rui F Ribeiro
yesterday
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
21 hours ago
@RuiFRibeiro: Possibly, but I don't know either way.
– John Dallman
21 hours ago
1
1
@Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
– Toby Speight
9 hours ago
@Rui - that still comes down to price in the end (more expensive modulator vs cheap internal buzzer).
– Toby Speight
9 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.
7
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
2 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.
7
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
2 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.
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.
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
RaffzahnRaffzahn
51.2k6120206
51.2k6120206
7
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
2 hours ago
add a comment |
7
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
2 hours ago
7
7
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
2 hours 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
2 hours ago
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.
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
20 hours ago
1
@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
10 hours ago
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.
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
20 hours ago
1
@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
10 hours ago
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 yesterday
FrankFrank
811
811
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.
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.
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
20 hours ago
1
@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
10 hours ago
add a comment |
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
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
20 hours ago
1
@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
10 hours ago
2
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
2
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
yesterday
@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
yesterday
1
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
yesterday
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
yesterday
1
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
20 hours ago
@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
20 hours ago
1
1
@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
10 hours ago
@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
10 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Did any computer used with a TV-set use the TV for sound?
– UncleBod
yesterday
6
@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
yesterday
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
yesterday
4
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
yesterday
1
@TobySpeight If it makes you happy...
– tofro
5 hours ago