Get rid of channels 2 through 6

[vchimpanzee]

I've heard they're useless for digital TV. When June 12 gets here, the stations that still use these channels should be allowed to apply to move to some of the vacated channels.

Elsewhere on this site, I've seen suggestions about what to do with channels 2 through 6. Given all the short spacing and adjacent channel interference on FM, and all the AM stations that just can't make it any more, channel 6 sould be a new FM band like 1610-1700 AM. Do it right from the start, like that new band did.

As for channels 2 through 5, I think I saw a suggestion that HD radio can only succeed if the stations are full power. Give the space now used for channels 2 through 5 stations that really want to be innovative with HD programming the opportunity to have signals as strong as today's regular FM stations. I don't know how these channels would be receptonwise, but maybe it would work on what is now channel 5; unfortunately, HD is like DTV--perfect signal or no signal. If that idea doesn't work, put HD on channel 6. Even channels 2 through 5 are bound to be superior to AM for regular FM radio.

 

[KeithE4]

Put FM on channels 5 & 6. Since the Asian FM band begins at 76 MHz (in some cases, using the full 76-108 MHz band), no new radio designs would be required. Those receivers already exist.

As far as channels 2-4 go, I suggest the following:

Channel 2: Expand the 6 meter ham band to 50-60 MHz and allow experimentation using digital technologies on 54-60 MHz (in other words: NOT more FM! Restrict that to 51-54 MHz).

Channels 3 & 4: Set-top boxes aren't going away anytime soon, so make this spectrum a Part 15 band. Allow license free community radio and TV (yes, even analog), with about 1 mW EIRP. Everyone would have to accept interference from everybody else. 1 mW would be about 57 mV/m at 3 meters per FCC OET Bulletin 63 (P=0.3 * E^2, where P is in watts, E is in volts per meter, and ^2 is "squared"). That would cover some ground. ;D

 

[BRNout]

Agreed 100%!

Trash the IBOC system and stick the digital only signals on those low VHF bands. It would work a whole lot better than what we have now. And, by expanding FM down to 76.1 MHz, you could go a long way toward transitioning many of those small "local service" AM graveyarders from MW to FM. That would clear up the band and allow better reception by all.

A lot of people would be shocked to learn that they can get some low-band FM reception with the radios that they already have - because those soon-to-be useless TV bands are just that.

On a related note, did you see that, instead of offering AM-FM-TV-Wx bands, the CCRadio now offers you......................the 3 meter band in place of VHF audio!?! They try to sell it as a well used "ham" band used for emergencies. Yeah, right!

 

[KeithE4]

Agreed 100%!

Trash the IBOC system and stick the digital only signals on those low VHF bands. It would work a whole lot better than what we have now. And, by expanding FM down to 76.1 MHz, you could go a long way toward transitioning many of those small "local service" AM graveyarders from MW to FM. That would clear up the band and allow better reception by all.

I would suggest moving all Class C and D AM stations to FM. They would go mostly in the "new" band but some in rural areas might fit into the existing spectrum. Turn off the digital ICRAP on AM below 1600, and then spread out the existing Class A and B stations (A on 530-1220, B on 1230-1600, digital experimentation on 1610-1800 - yes, expand the band again - who's using 1700-1800 anymore?).

And, I would make the new segment Class A FM only (6 kW ERP max), with a non-comm segment from 86-88 MHz. That would give them 6 MHz total. And NO out-of-market translators!

A lot of people would be shocked to learn that they can get some low-band FM reception with the radios that they already have - because those soon-to-be useless TV bands are just that.

Once we start having sunspots again, maybe some of those Asian FM stations will be audible here with F2 skip. It's be rare at 76 MHz, but it's not totally impossible.

On a related note, did you see that, instead of offering AM-FM-TV-Wx bands, the CCRadio now offers you......................the 3 meter band in place of VHF audio!?! They try to sell it as a well used "ham" band used for emergencies. Yeah, right!

The 3 meter band? Who calls it that? ??? ??? ???

 

[BRNout]

The 3 meter band? Who calls it that? ??? ??? ???

The new C Crane catalog calls it that. :

I had to scratch my head for a minute before figuring it out. At first glance, it would seem like they're tossing in a SW band - until you educate yourself. Ahhh, the magic of marketing.

 

[KeithE4]

The 3 meter band? Who calls it that? ??? ??? ???

The new C Crane catalog calls it that. :

I had to scratch my head for a minute before figuring it out. At first glance, it would seem like they're tossing in a SW band - until you educate yourself. Ahhh, the magic of marketing.

I couldn't find it in a quick Google search. Sounds like something as lame as "World Band Radio" for shortwave, that some marketroid invented in the '80s. Or my favorite: "Meal Solutions" (that's "TV dinners" for those of you in Rio Linda) in the frozen foot aisle at my local grocery. Why would I want frozen food that is soluble in water? ;D

 

[Markxxx]

Why take away more TV? HD radio? With file sharing up, Internet speeds up and memory becoming smaller and cheaper, HD radio will be a non-issue. You can put all your files on FLAC or WavPak or APE at about 60% of their size. Soon you will be able to play your files lossless on iPod type devices.

A new format is not going to explode. FM is good enough and Americans have consistantly shown "good enough" is OK. From cell phones to mp3 they are not the higher quality of CDs or landlines but to Americans they are "good enough."

In time DTV will improve it's ablity to transmit on the lower frequencies.

I'd rather see more free TV options

 

[kenrayc]

I agree 2-6 should go away, the thing is with digital the UHF frequencies don't have to separated 6 channels apart from the same TX site, so there more room, Radio Shack has a new antenna that is designed for High VHF and UHF that is made for digital (I posted this on the topic about antenna shortage on 6/13) Las Vegas, Albany, Memphis, and Nashville stations that are staying in the low VHF should be allowed to go to UHF, is better over all, The FM band does need to be expanded using ch. 5 and 6. 3 and 4 like what was posted earlier can be use for the VCR and converter boxes output only and some low power repeater signals.

 

[tripinva]

In time DTV will improve it's ablity to transmit on the lower frequencies.

No, it won't. All the technology in the world cannot change signal propagation and cannot change the wavelength of a given frequency. Technology cannot make lightning go away, cannot eliminate electrical noise from motors (unless the motors themselves go away). Low-VHF is a wasteland.

- Trip

 

[BRNout]

You're right Trip, no broadcaster wants to be stuck with their DT on a low-band VHF. It's a fine example of how a great wavelength in analog can be horrible in digital (and vice versa).

All this talk about how digital is "better" will fade as soon as people learn how finicky a digital signal can be and how annoying it is when those imperfections do horrible things to the show that they are watching! Can you do more whiz-bang things with digital? Absolutely! But it's also far from perfect. I'd consider the whole thing a zero-sum gain.

Come on FCC, be smart and toss the low VHF spectrum to radio broadcasters. Consider it a 'bailout' of sorts! ;D

 

[mescutia]

So how would existing radios be able to pick up the "expanded FM" band?

 

[KeithE4]

So how would existing radios be able to pick up the "expanded FM" band?

Outside of maybe 87.3 and up, it would be just like how existing radios in 1990 picked up the expanded AM band: They didn't. But since such FM radios do exist - either the soon-to-be-obsolete radios with TV audio, or standard FM receivers marketed to Asia, they could be imported to the US very easily.

 

[KML0224]

Amazing how being the local broadcaster on channels 2 to 6 really meant something! Hartford has had VHF channel 3 in the area since 1957. Today, the lowest channel number we'll have in the market with digital is WEDN-DT (PBS) channel 9 of Norwich and WTNH-DT (ABC) channel 10 of New Haven. (WEDN is seen as secondary since the identical programming already appears on WEDH-DT channel 45 of Hartford.)

Somewhere in one of my drawers, I still have a Sony AM/FM/TV/Weather Cassette Walkman. My gut says no, but will I get ANY use ouf the old VHF-TV band? Also, can that now-unused TV section be used for NOAA Weather radio?

 

[BRNout]

My gut says no, but will I get ANY use ouf the old VHF-TV band? Also, can that now-unused TV section be used for NOAA Weather radio?

Is your question whether they'll consider moving the weather band down to low VHF? I seriously doubt it for several reasons. For one thing, quite a nice cottage industry has been made from selling the weather band radios. Secondly, they're up above the high VHF band and much less prone to static than a low VHF wavelength. Third, the WB wavelengths are such that they can cram a lot of channels into a relatively tight space. It would take more space to squeeze seven audible channels into the low VHF band. That's why your walkman radio generally only gets one NOAA station; because the FM-based tuner isn't selective enough.

Expand FM down there - that makes the most sense.

 

[markwooldridge]

Roll out DAB+ in Band III - channels 5-13. Clear all TV off channels 2-6 as suggested and consider relocating some TV in the 8-13 range to other channels. Allocate one national, one regional and one state-wide multiplex license; put the rest to competitive tender with the proviso that they must offer carriage to the existing FM and AM stations in the area.

If done well, with decent bit-rates and actual extra enhanced services, this would be the next-generation radio system.

 

[BRNout]

The 3 meter band? Who calls it that? ??? ??? ???

The new C Crane catalog calls it that. :

I had to scratch my head for a minute before figuring it out. At first glance, it would seem like they're tossing in a SW band - until you educate yourself. Ahhh, the magic of marketing.

I couldn't find it in a quick Google search. Sounds like something as lame as "World Band Radio" for shortwave, that some marketroid invented in the '80s. Or my favorite: "Meal Solutions" (that's "TV dinners" for those of you in Rio Linda) in the frozen foot aisle at my local grocery. Why would I want frozen food that is soluble in water? ;D

KeithE4 - my bad, it's the CCrane Radio 2 and they call it the "2 Meter Ham Band." Check out the writeup here: http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/spcialty/0184.html

So, I stand corrected in that it's above the TV and Air bands (being at 144 to 148 MHz) - but below the weather band.

 

[landtuna]

I agree 2-6 should go away, the thing is with digital the UHF frequencies don't have to separated 6 channels apart from the same TX site, so there more room, Radio Shack has a new antenna that is designed for High VHF and UHF that is made for digital (I posted this on the topic about antenna shortage on 6/13) Las Vegas, Albany, Memphis, and Nashville stations that are staying in the low VHF should be allowed to go to UHF, is better over all, The FM band does need to be expanded using ch. 5 and 6. 3 and 4 like what was posted earlier can be use for the VCR and converter boxes output only and some low power repeater signals.

Since you seem to have a better grasp of antenna's and digital signals can you explain why using a bow-tie (UHF) to receive a digital signal on VHF channel 8 results in total loss of audio (breakup to the max) and slight pixiliation on the video yet the converter box tells me the signal is at 100%?

 

[KeithE4]

I agree 2-6 should go away, the thing is with digital the UHF frequencies don't have to separated 6 channels apart from the same TX site, so there more room, Radio Shack has a new antenna that is designed for High VHF and UHF that is made for digital (I posted this on the topic about antenna shortage on 6/13) Las Vegas, Albany, Memphis, and Nashville stations that are staying in the low VHF should be allowed to go to UHF, is better over all, The FM band does need to be expanded using ch. 5 and 6. 3 and 4 like what was posted earlier can be use for the VCR and converter boxes output only and some low power repeater signals.

Since you seem to have a better grasp of antenna's and digital signals can you explain why using a bow-tie (UHF) to receive a digital signal on VHF channel 8 results in total loss of audio (breakup to the max) and slight pixiliation on the video yet the converter box tells me the signal is at 100%?

Could be that even with a short antenna (in terms of wavelength), the signal level could be overloading the converter. Or you could have a problem with multipath, which would have caused ghosts on an analog transmission.

I have the same problem with some of the Phoenix stations (notably KPNX-DT on Channel 36 - this may change once they move to 12). KAET Channel 8 also gives me fits sometimes, now that they moved off Channel 29. I use a UHF loop, with about 6 feet of cheap 300 ohm twinlead attached, on my converter. But I'm close enough to the South Mountain towers (5 miles) where overload could be a problem.

 

[FreddyE1977]

Australia dumped "channel zero" for similar reasons. It was too interference prone, even for analog TV.

I like two of the main ideas being floated here. Drop the FM band down to 76.1, and then use the remainder to allow community LPTV stations (since at those frequencies only a fraction of the power needed for UHF would be required, which would make it rather economical)

 

[vchimpanzee]

In time DTV will improve it's ablity to transmit on the lower frequencies.

No, it won't. All the technology in the world cannot change signal propagation and cannot change the wavelength of a given frequency. Technology cannot make lightning go away, cannot eliminate electrical noise from motors (unless the motors themselves go away). Low-VHF is a wasteland.

- Trip

I read about WBRA, the PBS station in Roanoke, VA, on this site. The person complained the station became useless if a thunderstorm was within 50 miles. These things are going to become more obvious in the summer.

I've had almost no lightning trouble with my UHF stations. I once saw a bunch of squares when lightning flashed. That was it.