• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Antenna TV on WTIC

The new channel "Antenna TV" is owned by Tribune so its no surprise. On WCCT 20.2 is "This TV" So it makes sense for 61.2 to have "Antenna TV"
 
I wish these new classic TV networks wouldn't always launch on digital subchannels. Why can't cable and satellite providers be allowed to pick them up like a TBS, TVLAND, etc? I suppose if I want to see this network I have to get a DTV Converter Box/Antenna. I'll go the extra mile to see quality programming unlike that of what I can't recieve on the major cable networks.
 
My problem with stations adding digital subchannels is that the subs usually end up downgrading the main channel's HD picture. Very few stations have only one main channel and of those that I can receive with my antenna, these stations have the clearest and sharpest HD pictures by far. Stations that have more than one subchannel often have pixelated or inferior HD pictures. WTIC was one of the few without subchannels, and although it broadcasts in 720p (I assume to accomodate Fox), it still has had a better HD picture than most stations with subchannels. Hopefully the addition of Antenna TV will not downgrade the main channel's picture by that much.
 
I will bet you money if you took a station running 18.69mbps video (the highest rate you can run) and put it side by side with one running 15mbps, *most* viewers would not notice the difference at all. Start getting below 14 (for 1080i) and 13 (for 720p) and you start to notice it. In fact Id be willing to bet, if you looked at a channel running 17mbps versus 16mpbs, side by side, you'd never notice it. (Some technical qualifications to that. I am talking about running, primary with no sub channel, in CBR mode. All FOX stations run VBR through the Fox Splicer).
 
Necrat said:
I will bet you money if you took a station running 18.69mbps video (the highest rate you can run) and put it side by side with one running 15mbps, *most* viewers would not notice the difference at all. Start getting below 14 (for 1080i) and 13 (for 720p) and you start to notice it. In fact Id be willing to bet, if you looked at a channel running 17mbps versus 16mpbs, side by side, you'd never notice it. (Some technical qualifications to that. I am talking about running, primary with no sub channel, in CBR mode. All FOX stations run VBR through the Fox Splicer).



Football on CH 7 looks like crap compared to ch 4 or 5. I say move this tv etc to 62.2 etc, 62.3 etc
Click to expand...
 
For most stations running one subchannel that is not in HD but @ 420p isn't a big drain on the main channel in HD. When the subchannel is in HD there can be a problem. This came up in New York, Los Angeles and other cities with ABC O&Os during the NBA playoffs. ABC runs the Live Well network on its O&O subchannels in HD @ 720p, and many of those stations have a 3rd subchannel. The drain on the main picture during basketball caused many complaints that the main ABC picture was unwatchable. This may not be the case for regular programming which does not have the constant action issues that a sporting event does.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom