-
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
Poll: Should TV stations abandon thier analog signal they have had for years?
- Thread starter 4dude
- Start date
They have to, don't they?
The Dude said:
OMG WTF!
The question:
Should TV stations abandon thier analog signal they have had for years?
Yes -- Who cares about quality and ease of viewing..
NO!! - They have always been analog and should always be analog!
So this is what happens to political pollsters during the off season. 8)
Digital is a weak, girly-man signal. Long live Analog!ajc_trw said:OMG WTF!The Dude said:
The question:
Should TV stations abandon thier analog signal they have had for years?
Yes -- Who cares about quality and ease of viewing..
NO!! - They have always been analog and should always be analog!
So this is what happens to political pollsters during the off season. 8)
We can definitely tell the bias of the pollster - Dude, was this yours?
The Dude said:
You must have a bad TV. My digital pictures (both OTA and cable), look better than analog when viewed on my old (and I do mean "old" - all '80s-vintage except for the "new" set I bought in 2002) NTSC televisions with their respective converter boxes attached.
The drawback, of course, is the breakups on weak signals. But analog has snow and/or ghosts, so its a case of "pick your problem." Having a good antenna helps in both cases, which I don't have at the moment.
Sorry, old-timers, but analog is dead and won't be coming back. DTV (even SDTV) will be a better system once the high-powered analog stations go away, the stations that want to (or must) return to their original channels do so, and the bugs (mostly power-related, I'm guessing) get worked out. The full effect of the transition won't be seen until June 12th at the earliest.
As long as the digital isn't compressed all to hell (and I've seen some like that), digital is far superior to analog. As long as you have line of sight and a decent antenna, you can receive a completely clear image at phenomenal distances.
The bigger problem is the overcrowding of the band and stations that made poor channel choices. (I'm looking at you, low-VHF stations)
- Trip
The bigger problem is the overcrowding of the band and stations that made poor channel choices. (I'm looking at you, low-VHF stations)
- Trip
tripinva said:
One can say the same thing about analog (at least with audio - listen to your average CB or a ham with his speech processor set too high, as well as some poorly-engineered AM stations). Too much compression is a bad thing in all cases.
Using a 6" piece of wire in the back of my cheap Target DTV box, I can get 3 Tucson channels from about 90 miles away. They break up a lot, but I can receive them at least partially.
You can probably add the remaining high-powered UHF stations as well. I live about 5 miles from the top of South Mountain in Phoenix (where our TV and FM sticks are located). I suspect I'm having a problem with overload on my converter boxes, what with Channels 15, 21, 33, 45, and 61 (the analog signals on 39 and 51 were turned off yesterday) still blasting their multi-megawatt analog signals from a relatively close range. I think my DTV reception will get better once these transmitters and their many-volts-per-meter field strengths are gone.
The question as phrased, as we know, has already been answered by FCC and Congress.
Assuming they've a choice in the matter, a better question would be, "Should TV stations abandon their analog Channel they have had for years?".
But either way, based on already-taken actions, the questions are moot.
Assuming they've a choice in the matter, a better question would be, "Should TV stations abandon their analog Channel they have had for years?".
But either way, based on already-taken actions, the questions are moot.
KeithE4 said:
Of course, just that pixelization tends to annoy me more.
I received a 17.9 kW DT-34 signal over 53 miles and it maxed me out. A 1.1 kW DT-17 signal covered 79 miles while adjacent to a 460 kW DT-18 and was borderline--a tiny bit of extra power would have made it perfectly usable, but they eventually went up to 400 kW anyway. Digital TV can work really well.
- Trip
I've been opposed to digital signals from the beginning unless they were an option you could pay for.
Where I live, it's possible I could do more. But I am too far away from the stations for digital to be a good thing.
I am getting some pictures perfectly, though the sound wasn't good.
Other stations I was getting I don't get at all. I got cable for those stations and so I could use existing VCRs which sets the channels and time in advance. For those, digital is useless. I have one VCR where setting the time has never worked, although with the delay that one's still analog.
You wouldn't believe the expense for taping shows with digital TV. I did get TiVo, which turned out to be cheap and will let me watch one channel while taping TWO others. But did I get it cheap because they were phasing out the old cheap units? I was told this worked with digital (I still haven't gone through the process of setting it up), but then why was the TiVo at Sears so expensive? It did say HD. I hope tha's it.
Where I live, it's possible I could do more. But I am too far away from the stations for digital to be a good thing.
I am getting some pictures perfectly, though the sound wasn't good.
Other stations I was getting I don't get at all. I got cable for those stations and so I could use existing VCRs which sets the channels and time in advance. For those, digital is useless. I have one VCR where setting the time has never worked, although with the delay that one's still analog.
You wouldn't believe the expense for taping shows with digital TV. I did get TiVo, which turned out to be cheap and will let me watch one channel while taping TWO others. But did I get it cheap because they were phasing out the old cheap units? I was told this worked with digital (I still haven't gone through the process of setting it up), but then why was the TiVo at Sears so expensive? It did say HD. I hope tha's it.
Re: Poll: Should TV stations abandon thier analog signal they have had for years
Granted, I'm a near-idiot on the technological
aspects of the analog-to-digital transition, but
I know that mapping is designed to prevent viewers
from having to learn a whole bunch of new channels
(so, in my area, WFMY analog 2, digital 51, maps to 2,
and people think they're still watching 2, as they have
for 60 years). Indeed, DirecTV still shows Raleigh-Durham
channels 22, 28, and 30, which went digital on Feb. 17,
as being on those analog channels; with satellite there has
been no loss of picture quality--indeed, it's much better.
Granted, I'm a near-idiot on the technological
aspects of the analog-to-digital transition, but
I know that mapping is designed to prevent viewers
from having to learn a whole bunch of new channels
(so, in my area, WFMY analog 2, digital 51, maps to 2,
and people think they're still watching 2, as they have
for 60 years). Indeed, DirecTV still shows Raleigh-Durham
channels 22, 28, and 30, which went digital on Feb. 17,
as being on those analog channels; with satellite there has
been no loss of picture quality--indeed, it's much better.
Most of you say that digital is superior, but then add a if, or but, to your statement. I will stand by my earlier statement, all things being equal, rabbit ear antenna in place, I'd rather have the analog signal over the digital signal, until I can save up and purchase a better outdoor antenna.KyDXIn said:Digital is a weak, girly-man signal. Long live Analog!ajc_trw said:OMG WTF!The Dude said:
The question:
Should TV stations abandon thier analog signal they have had for years?
Yes -- Who cares about quality and ease of viewing..
NO!! - They have always been analog and should always be analog!
So this is what happens to political pollsters during the off season. 8)
KyDXIn said:
Analog is superior if the signal level is less than ideal - only if you believe that a snowy picture is beter than no picture at all. DX-geeks may believe that, but most viewers don't, at least not since cable took off in the '80s. The era of the outside TV antenna in urban/suburban areas is pretty much gone for many reasons (cable & HOAs being the biggest, but cost also being a factor). For most of us, it's not coming back.
The average viewer expects a perfect picture and with digital it's pretty much perfect or nothing, with a small window where it breaks up - the modern equivalent of "snow" - but that window is smaller than that of analog. Plus, there are no ghosts with digital like there are with analog (at least I haven't seen it - anyone in midtown Manhattan or some similar urban canyon verify or dispute that statement?).
If all one has is rabbit ears for an antenna, you're on your own unless you're in the middle of a city where the signals are good. They're bad enough for analog TV, but almost useless for digital in "iffy" signal areas.
Overall, though, I believe most viewers will prefer digital to analog, all other things being equal. But "all other things" won't be equal until all high-powered analog stations are gone and the digital transmitters are running at full power. This, of course, won't happen until after June 12.
Well one summer years ago the DX was rolling and after my local channel 10 went OFF THE AIR,i noticed WHUC from rochester rolling in right on the cable network (300 miles) for about 3 hours basically 0db!! (For about 1 hour it was crystal clear (I watched 3 shows)),i wouldnt have been able to do that if it was all DIGITAL back then!!
The farthest Cable DX i ever got was Channel 17 from Phili (WPHL) .. I have that on tape still (After my local 17 went off)
Analog rules!!
The farthest Cable DX i ever got was Channel 17 from Phili (WPHL) .. I have that on tape still
(After my local 17 went off)Analog rules!!
- Status