FCC STOPS PLAN TO ELIMINATE OTA DIGITAL TV

[alg2468]

http://www.wirelessweek.com/news/201...ers-axed-fcc/?

 

[KeithE4]

Here is a working link to the story. The previous one doesn't work

 

[WPPCProductions]

Maybe they should eliminate, the signal is useless, No TX power. The digital receivers now these days have almost 0 gain and 0 sensitivity and forget the selectivity. This digital thing was the biggest mistake I've seen in my life,I'm there for progress but it looks like it still has to go back to the drawing board.It's in the same boat as Iboc.

 

[landtuna]

This digital thing was the biggest mistake I've seen in my life...

I'm not sure it is the biggest mistake (there are a couple of wars that would certainly be considered bigger) but it is perhaps the worst technical mistake.

Unfortunately, I see no path back to analog.

 

[flytrap]

Well one problem is that they don't let the new digital station run enough power. I understand that it takes less power for digital but in some cases as in VHF some stations went from 100kw to less than 10kw, and with trucks passing, planes flying overhead and powerline static, its a miricle that anyone can pick anything up. Plus a lot of people will spend over a thousand dollars on a TV but hook it up to a $5 antenna. and have no desire to put a decent antenna on the roof, and then complain to the station because they can't pick anything up. Then you have the cell phone vultures taking away channel 53-69. Stations can't up the power because they might step on a neighboring station. We went from 82 channels in the 1950's down to 69 channels in the 80's, now we only have 51. I know digital stations can be placed closer together but they still don't have enough room in order to crank the power. It would be nice if they could have kept some to the old channels that way stations that wanted to crank it up to 5 million watts would have plenty of room to do so. These pip squeek digital signals these days just don't pick up unless you live in near the tower or have a massive outdoor antenna. The FCC seriously needs to let them crank up the juice.

 

[Skynet74]

Before digital I picked up about 12 stations. Half of them were snowy from a city 40 miles away. Now with digital I get 30 stations which are crystal clear. So I'm not complaining. Digital is working just fine for me.

 

[mjlarochelle]

I stand by my previous comments - there is no need for 50 TV channels. The spectrum can be easily shrunk down to half that number. There are far too many transmitters broadcasting programming not fulfilling the public interest such as infomercials. Canadian authorities do not permit such stations to broadcast over-the-air, and in most areas (save for a couple border areas) there is no over-crowding of the dial at all.

 

[Markxxx]

MJ has a piont. I feel a large portion of the problem with digital is the way it was implemented, side by side with analog. I feel this limited the most effective way to use the spectrum.

Now it's a hodgepoge of direction antenna and odd power levels all designed to keep stations from interfering with each other.

I have read a few histories on TV/radio and the situation right now is so close to how AM radio developed. This is why frequencies with FM and TV were pre allocated.

Of course most of us here know in the 50s many stations had to be moved from channel to channel to get things right as the original allocations were not spaced correctly.

You can make good arguments for reallocation TV spectrum resources. I don't see the need for a TV station, that broadcasts all infomercial to be sitting on a frequency and taking up what could be six standard def TV station and using only one of those stations to broadcast ads and just sitting on the rest.

Another problem to consider is cable/dish. Some stations simply don't care about OTA anymore. There's not enough views in SOME, but certainly not all markets, to make TV owners pressure the FCC like they did in the 50s. If I can put the minimum signal out and save the electricity I would.

 

[mjlarochelle]

You can make good arguments for reallocation TV spectrum resources. I don't see the need for a TV station, that broadcasts all infomercial to be sitting on a frequency and taking up what could be six standard def TV station and using only one of those stations to broadcast ads and just sitting on the rest.

Another problem to consider is cable/dish. Some stations simply don't care about OTA anymore. There's not enough views in SOME, but certainly not all markets, to make TV owners pressure the FCC like they did in the 50s. If I can put the minimum signal out and save the electricity I would.

Allowing a subchannel for infomercials would be okay with me - WQED in Pittsburgh, for example operates ShopNBC station WQEX. Instead of operating a wholly separate license, they could just stick ShopNBC on a subchannel of WQED, or better yet, let Channel 11 take that service over if they so desired.

In some cases with OTA, it may be more financially viable to operate at a high enough power to cover your city of license and possibly the surrounding metro/micro area, and if there is a big enough need to reach a separate community, use a translator.

 

[mime257]

As for infomercials I can't believe ION. Its been wall to wall infomercials for years now.

Talk about a complete waste of a signal.

 

[mjlarochelle]

As for infomercials I can't believe ION. Its been wall to wall infomercials for years now.

Talk about a complete waste of a signal.

In terms of what you and I are saying, the biggest barrier to getting rid of stations we call "wasted signals" is the First Amendment. Free speech is a far more cherished value in the United States than it is in Canada where the government managed to get away with blocking Nickelodeon for almost 30 years, finally allowing its entrance late last year. The FCC will have an uphill battle if it wants to do what I have suggested.

 

[azumanga]

...the [Canadian] government managed to get away with blocking Nickelodeon for almost 30 years, finally allowing its entrance late last year.

Though it will be unknown if the US Nick will ever appear on Canadian cable or satellite, especially since Corus' "Discovery Kids" became the Canadian version of Nick last month.

 

[dave73]

As for infomercials I can't believe ION. Its been wall to wall infomercials for years now.

Talk about a complete waste of a signal.

In terms of what you and I are saying, the biggest barrier to getting rid of stations we call "wasted signals" is the First Amendment. Free speech is a far more cherished value in the United States than it is in Canada where the government managed to get away with blocking Nickelodeon for almost 30 years, finally allowing its entrance late last year. The FCC will have an uphill battle if it wants to do what I have suggested.

Ion in my opinion is a waste. They do have the right to air infomercials, but they really need to get some better programming than what they have now. Ion Life has a lot more programming (some of it new) than Ion. Maybe Ion Life needs to be moved to the main channel, and put Ion on the subchannel that Ion Life is on. While I don't care too much for Qubo, at least it has programming, and it's aimed toward children (something that's scarce on commercial TV these days). WJYS Hammond/Chicago is another station that still airs mostly infomercials (religious sermons seems to be secondary programming). They don't have a subchannel of their own, but they do simulcast WEDE-CA Arlington Heights/Chicago on their subchannel, since WEDE-CA doesn't serve the entire market, and was WJYS's original translator for when WJYS was transmitting their main signal from Tinley Park, IL. The digital signal is on the Sears Tower, but is being upgraded to eliminate the null toward Milwaukee. While I'm not a fan of religious shows, at least WEDE-CA has shows.

WCIU has the best programmed main channel, plus 3 subchannels (MeTV, MeToo, & FBT, WCIU's original brokered ethnic programming). This TV is ok, but not my favorite, but does have a purpose on the subchannel. WTTW is next with the main channel, WTTW Prime (locally programmed 24 hour primetime channel, instead of PBS World, which many PBS stations have in other markets), & national feeds of Create, & V-Me. Now if Ion TV ever goes out of business and the stations are up for sale, I hope Weigel Broadcasting buys WCPX in Chicago. That way, they have another channel for programming, and maybe move MeTV & MeToo on that channel, and add something else either on the LP stations (or sell those), and even add other subchannels on WCIU. Plus with WCPX (if Weigel owned that station), that station could be 480i, and add as many subchannels as they can.

 

[kenglish]

Maybe all those folks who say that "Digital doesn't work" should be sure and let the potential bidders on the new spectrum know that, so they don't waste their money buying up the space .

 

[vchimpanzee]

Here is a working link to the story. The previous one doesn't work

I think you forgot the link.

Wait, never mind. I saw the link when I quoted and clicked before I realized it.

http://www.wirelessweek.com/news/20...try-plan-take-spectrum-broadcasters-axed-fcc/

 

[TheRover]

Before digital I picked up about 12 stations. Half of them were snowy from a city 40 miles away. Now with digital I get 30 stations which are crystal clear. So I'm not complaining. Digital is working just fine for me.

With Digital, it Really is Location Location Location ! !

A friend of mine lives 5 miles from the broadcast tower array, he gets his digital channels with just a 99 cent antenna.

I live further away, about 15 miles, and I get my digital chammels with an indoor amplified UHF/VHF antenna ($40).

Even further away is a relative, 25 miles from broadcast hill, and she only gets a few digital channels with an indoor amplified antenna. Someday, a roof antenna will likely solve that problem.

 

[KeithE4]

Before digital I picked up about 12 stations. Half of them were snowy from a city 40 miles away. Now with digital I get 30 stations which are crystal clear. So I'm not complaining. Digital is working just fine for me.

With Digital, it Really is Location Location Location ! !

A friend of mine lives 5 miles from the broadcast tower array, he gets his digital channels with just a 99 cent antenna.

I live further away, about 15 miles, and I get my digital chammels with an indoor amplified UHF/VHF antenna ($40).

Even further away is a relative, 25 miles from broadcast hill, and she only gets a few digital channels with an indoor amplified antenna. Someday, a roof antenna will likely solve that problem.

Depends on how good the tuner and antenna are as well. One of my TVs is a Dynex 19" HDTV with a Terk HDTVa amplified indoor antenna connected (VHF rabbit ears + UHF 7-element log-periodic). I get all Phoenix digital and analog (LPTV) stations plus 6 Tucson stations. It depends on which way I point the antenna, of course, but most Phoenix stations come in perfectly even with the antenna pointed toward Tucson.

The other TV is a 2001-vintage Toshiba analog TV with a no-name $40 coupon special converter, attached to a $10 pair of conventional rabbit ears with a UHF loop. The main Phoenix stations come in well, but forget the low-powered ones, both digital and analog.

I'm 5 miles SE of South Mountain in Phoenix and about 90 miles NW of Mt. Bigelow in Tucson, inside a stucco-encrusted apartment building (read: Screen Room) with a southern exposure.

The Terk antenna is not cheap ($75 at Best Buy), but it's worth it. The preamp, plus the fact that the UHF antenna is unidirectional seem to make a big difference. I haven't swapped antennas to see if the antenna or the tuner has more effect (I'm guessing it's the antenna).