digital fiasco

[mediamaster]

Does anyone else think that the impending digital
conversion may be nothing short of chaos, frus-
tration and confusion? I've had my system for three
years already and have yet to pick-up every single
channel consistently. Some days certain channels
come in. Some days they don't.
I use both a rooftop and an inside UHFantenna and
neither picks up all the channels all the time.
I live in Elmhurst and trees are an issue.
We tv buffs may not mind playing around with this
but the general public is not going to want to have to
deal with it.
The folks who have cable and satellite don't need to
care but for the other 25 or 30 % who rely on OTA
it's going to cause one major headache.
What do you think??




i

 

[djdanska]

> Does anyone else think that the impending digital
> conversion may be nothing short of chaos, frus-
> tration and confusion? I've had my system for three
> years already and have yet to pick-up every single
> channel consistently. Some days certain channels
> come in. Some days they don't.
> I use both a rooftop and an inside UHFantenna and
> neither picks up all the channels all the time.
> I live in Elmhurst and trees are an issue.
> We tv buffs may not mind playing around with this
> but the general public is not going to want to have to
> deal with it.
> The folks who have cable and satellite don't need to
> care but for the other 25 or 30 % who rely on OTA
> it's going to cause one major headache.
> What do you think??
>
>
>
>
> i
>

Depends i guess. Ive had my hdtv for about a year. I get a good, constant signal on all channels except for CBS 2 (don't get. i only have a uhf antenna) and PBS out of indiana (56? i get it fine if i aim my antenna right. My zenith silver sensor is very picky.) Im out in Westmont. (barely, im off of 63rd/fairview area. Darien, Downers grove, Westmont borders.)

My antenna is in the south west side of the building and has to go all the way through the apartment to get a signal. My previous antenna was horrible. I did have to get a good amp though. w/o it, its very prone to issues.

 

[eggsdannythomas]

> > What do you think??

I think the jerks at the local affiliates have been dragging their feet to convert for a long time coming, now with the deadline looming, they plan on sabotaging the conversion -- at the expense of the consumer.

I say this because I work for a broadcast equipment manufacturer, and since 1995 the local stations across the country (even O&O's) have been reluctant to spend cash on good equipment and the old codgers that run engineering just don't want to learn about the technology. Especially in Chicago, the local guys hate the fact that they have to deal with it!

I blame the FCC -- they suck in so many ways, but they have botched up the convergence. Look at the mess they have made, set-top boxes, built in tuners, ok no built in tuners, back to set-top boxes, 1080, 720, cable must carry, ok they dont have to carry this or that, subchannels, true HD. Give me a fu*$ing break.

They are so busy worrying about Howard Stern and junk, they have allowed this HD thing to get out of hand. I know people that have bought HDTV's recently and they tell me "I can't tell the difference". I go to their house and they have "Digital Cable" but no HD channels. When you explain the difference to a lay person, they look at you like your an idiot. And the ones that do have HD tuners, have their TV sets on 480 mode. I switch it for them and they are in awe. Unfortunaltely they dont have alot to watch.

Sorry for the lengthy response, but it is fustrating that this technology which has been around for so long now (Zenith had it in the '70s, here we are in 2005 and it's hardly made a dent IMO) and the government has let it go to crap. I predict that you wont see true HD conversion everywhere until the 2020's. Seriously thats what I think.

As tech hungry as the U.S. is, if they had done this the right way, everyone would have a plasma on their walls and watching true HD by 1998.

 

[Mark_Ericson]

> Does anyone else think that the impending digital
> conversion may be nothing short of chaos, frus-
> tration and confusion? I've had my system for three
> years already and have yet to pick-up every single
> channel consistently. Some days certain channels
> come in. Some days they don't.
> I use both a rooftop and an inside UHFantenna and
> neither picks up all the channels all the time.
> I live in Elmhurst and trees are an issue.
> We tv buffs may not mind playing around with this
> but the general public is not going to want to have to
> deal with it.
> The folks who have cable and satellite don't need to
> care but for the other 25 or 30 % who rely on OTA
> it's going to cause one major headache.
> What do you think??

First off, I get the feeling that a good number of people who are OTA only, like myself, are in rural areas, like myself. Huge 30-year-old antenna on the roof (neighbors all have) that does bring in stable reception of digital. I can watch CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, and WB (SD) consistantly where I am without moving my antenna. PBS is on channel 3 (like WBBM, yuck) and so is terrible, and UPN's not on at their new site yet, which will not require me to move my antenna either.

The cities are where most of the problems are. Multipath is the biggest issue, and from what I'm hearing, the 5th generation receivers are supposed to arrest that problem much better than the current generation. Hopefully some of those will be available soon, because I want to buy one. The only one available right now is the USDigital one in Wal-Mart, and I refuse to support that company, plus it's not exactly the best receiver in the world. The other tuners available are computer cards which I can't use (since my main comp's a laptop and my other is a Pentium II).

I do know that the conversion has been screwed up quite a bit IMO by allowing this whole low-powered STA deal and allowing low-VHF digitals. The other screw-up was not mandating HD on those networks that provide it, as there are a number of stations not doing HD that should be. See WOWK-13 Huntington WV, any Nexstar station, etc.

I also believe that the government should have either waited for or mandated the ability of tuners to (with a software update) decode MPEG-4, which is now available. MPEG-4 can allow for two HD streams plus a few SD streams on one channel IIRC, which is impossible with the current MPEG-2. Then, if stations were co-owned, they could share one digital station, eliminating some of this overcrowding. Example, WPWR and WFLD could share one digital station, freeing up the other for WBBM-DT.

But what do I know. I'm not being paid off by lobbyists.

- Trip<P ID="signature">______________
Visit my website, www.rabbitears.info! It's eventually going to be your one resource for television info! Digital television, histories, and technical information for the entire USA from one source!</P>

 

[HDTV52]

> I think the jerks at the local affiliates have been dragging
> their feet to convert for a long time coming, now with the
> deadline looming, they plan on sabotaging the conversion --
> at the expense of the consumer.
>
> I say this because I work for a broadcast equipment
> manufacturer, and since 1995 the local stations across the
> country (even O&O's) have been reluctant to spend cash on
> good equipment and the old codgers that run engineering just
> don't want to learn about the technology. Especially in
> Chicago, the local guys hate the fact that they have to deal
> with it!

Well, I usually just read this board, but a reply is in order today.

First, I disagree that engineers don't want to learn about new technology. I remember the first time I saw a compact disc, it was 1983 and everyone in the room (engineers ranging in age from 19 to 64) was nothing less than stunned. Same thing when I saw a beta version of Instant Messenger in 1989. A baud rate of 1200 made it a little slow, but you could see the future. Long story short, even the old codgers like new technology.

Second, there are a number of reasons local stations don't run out and buy every new item that rolls off the line.

HDTV doesn't just 'show up' in your house. It requires a TOTALLY SEPARATE plant, from the program source, to the routers, to the STL, to the processors, into the new transmitter, out through the new antenna and back through the monitors. After that new equipment is purchased from the Broadcast Equipment Manufacturer, at great expense, I might add, it has to be installed. Space rented, engineering studies, permits, applications, inspections. Lots and lots of money there. Let's not forget that ComEd won't feed that equipment for free.

Once everything is up and running, it has to be maintained -- those darned Equipment Manufacturers haven't come up with 'maintenance free' broadcasts plants -grin-.

While all of this is going on, there is the issue of having to maintain, and pay for, an NTSC transmitting plant. 40 hours in a week just doesn't seem like enough anymore. I have HDTV in my house, and I don't maintain an analog set right along side of the HDTV monitor, it doesn't make sense; but the "jerks at the local affiliates" have to do just that.

Finally, one of the main reasons Broadcast Equipment Manufacturers have trouble getting stations to "spend cash on good equipment" is because there is a limited amount of "good equipment" out there. And try to get tech support. There are a number of manufacturers that don't want to learn about new technology, but sure are happy to try to sell it.

Bottom line is that the transition is happening, programming is catching up, even local news is starting to make the switch. All with limited budgets and shrinking revenue sources (those darned cable and satellite guys sell ads too).

Just goes to show you that the old saying is true: No matter how thin the flapjack is, it always has two sides.

Thanks for letting me vent, I'm going back in the shadows to read.

P.S. to the original poster: Based on your location, you should get a usable signal on all local DTV channels. Double check your connections - one bad cable end can ruin your reception, and look for a better antenna location. CBS 2 drew a lousy channel assignment, they are doing amazing things with a severe handicap. After the conversion, they will have the second best signal in town. -grin again-

 

[sebenste]

HDTV52,

> Bottom line is that the transition is happening, programming
> is catching up, even local news is starting to make the
> switch. All with limited budgets and shrinking revenue
> sources (those darned cable and satellite guys sell ads
> too).

Yep. The pie is getting smaller and smaller. BUT...before
you head back into the shadows...

> Double check your connections - one bad cable end can ruin
> your reception, and look for a better antenna location.

Connectors. I had two bad ones in my attic installation
out here in DeKalb. Replaced 'em...now I get everything except
WBBM. I get WCIU frequently; at 15 kw, I'm amazed I get it at all!


> CBS
> 2 drew a lousy channel assignment, they are doing amazing
> things with a severe handicap. After the conversion, they
> will have the second best signal in town. -grin again-

Well, that's debatable! 1.18 kw on channel 11 isn't my idea
of a second best signal, plus they'll have a null to the
southeast protecting WLFI-DT in Lafayette, IN and to the
southwest due to interference from WWTO-DT Ottawa. Also,
methinks WGN and WCIU at 1 mw will be tied for first.
Right now, I get WGN with an attic antenna, low in a river
valley and 61 miles away from the tower...practically pegging
the signal meter. That's with less than 700 kw of power!
When WGN and the 'U' go 1 mw, they should break the glass on the
right side of the signal meter, oozing yellow ink. ;-)
And hey, HDTV52, you're in big trouble...in a few years, your
alias will be "out of core"! :-D

Great post...and quit lurking so much!

Gilbert

 

[Markxxx]

Part of the digital fiasco as was so aptly put is that everone seems to want to make money off it.

OK when the average Joe goes to buy a TV he wants to bascially take it out of the box and plug it in.

NOW we have to buy a set, BUY a tuner, the cable company charges extra to hook up a special HDTV configuration. It is recommended that you get a professional to callibrate the color (is this the correct wording)

For Mpeg2 technology. Aren't we up to Mpeg4 now?

My understanding (may be wrong) is that originally we wanted HIGH DEF TV. This would be for all stations taking up all bandwidth. Then someone came up with the idea of using the total bandwidth to broadcast "just digital" and make it so HDTV wouldn't need the whole bandwidth.

Then places like FOX said, origianlly that they wouldn't bother with HDTV just "upconvert" pictures. (this has since changed)

So now we have to pay a LOT Of money for pictures that may or MAY NOT be just upconverts of standard signals.

Instead of taking the opporutnity to reassign channel numbers, for maximum useage, the FCC now has to keep track of REAL channels and Virtual Channel assignments.

<P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>

 

[b344077]

Lets not forget that this is being done so the sireless industry can sell us more wireless business applications. All this hassle because the wireless industry (service providers and manufactures lobbied the FCC for more spectrum in a finite world.

 

[jegrant]

> Lets not forget that this is being done so the sireless
> industry can sell us more wireless business applications.
> All this hassle because the wireless industry (service
> providers and manufactures lobbied the FCC for more spectrum
> in a finite world.
>

The latest thing that Congresspeople are trumpeting is the need for "first responders" to have emergency communications. And for some reason, this is viewed as something that absolutely, positively cannot be provided at all without dramatically accelerating the DTV transition process.

Why not find some other spectrum somewhere? Or look at it market by market, based on the "risk assessment" of Homeland Security (i.e. how likely a given market is to be vulnerable to attack) and negotiate to use channels that are already free of TV?

Furthermore, why can't something be done to rework existing public safety radio spectrum to make systems cross-compatible? After all, public cellular & PCS networks have been interconnecting calls for years - surely it can't be impossible.

I also think that cable TV MSOs should be quiet and live with the idea of dual must-carry, or the new proposal of analog OR digital must-carry - as long as the 1/3rd of system capacity cap for locals is kept in place, which IMO would accommodate most DMAs, it shouldn't be taking away any spectrum that cable wasn't supposed to be holding "in reserve" anyhow.
In exchange, I would be willing to give the MSOs a tradeoff: any station or group owner of stations that elects must-carry for any analog or digital station commonly owned within a DMA may not receive monetary compensation for retransmission consent of any of its non-must-carry stations. This would be on a market-by-market basis, and it would basically boil down to "If cable has to pay, cable can pick what to carry from your cluster; if your cluster will provide all content free to cable, everything can/will be carried." I think that is fair.
The FCC should place a "chinese wall" between OTA broadcast retransmission-consent and carriage of non-OTA cable/satellite networks. Popular OTA stations shouldn't be used as leverage to cram junk-filled cable channels into systems.
There should also be a "most favored nation" provision that prevents broadcasters from charging different MVPDs (cable/satellite) within the same DMA different fees for the same station's retransmission.

Furthermore, all satellite TV boxes (and especially if there is NO dual/digital must-carry, all cable TV boxes) should be mandated to include an ATSC tuner with a separate antenna input. Such boxes should aggregate received OTA DTV channels into the same guide as purchased satellite/cable channels. So that people can't go out and buy heavily subsidized DBS receivers just for OTA DTV, I'd be willing to let DBS providers "lock" the ATSC tuner so that the box must remain subscribed, for, say, 12 months, but after that period, an "unlock" command that permanently unlocks the ATSC OTA reception must be sent.