Poll: Should TV stations abandon thier analog signal they have had for years?

[KeithE4]

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)

That has nothing whatsoever to do with digital or analog. Years ago, cable companies picked up broadcast stations directly off the air. Nowadays they are usually fed directly from the stations via fiber or microwave link. When I watch KTVK Phoenix on cable, I am not watching an NTSC signal transmitted from South Mountain on 60-66 MHz or an ATSC signal on 530-536 MHz. Those transmitters can be completely off the air and it will make no difference to Cox Cable viewers in metro Phoenix.

I was able to see distant stations via cable as well when locals were off, but that was back in the '80s and early '90s.

Maybe some rural and/or small-market systems still get their stations OTA, but the bigger systems don't. And if that's the case, they'll pick up the digital feed rather than the analog, if they're not doing so already.

 

[4dude]

I know that my friend,but if channel 10 or 17 WERE NOT BRADCASTING ANALOG,i wouldnt have gotton them! (Even on a skip like that)

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

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.

Here, you'd be disappointed with the analog signal on those rabbit ears, particularly on VHF.

My entire life here in Northeast Ohio, without an outdoor antenna, rabbit ears have ALWAYS produced anything from noise-covered to ghosty pictures on analog, particularly on low-VHF (3/NBC, 5/ABC). Even 8, then our CBS affiliate, though clearer...had ghosts.

Then, as now, I live(d) about 20 miles away from the local "antenna farm".

Today, the digital signals of both 5 and 8 are rock solid and crystal clear, on those same "rabbit ears", from the same distance away and general area. 3 will be in the same boat, whenever they finish and move to the new UHF 17-based digital antenna. They're temporarily on VHF 2 for digital, which not many here can get.

I'd rather have the digital signals OTA in the case of 3/5/8. The strong local UHFs look good on both, on an analog set. I still think digital is sharper, though.

 

[KML0224]

Depends on the maker of your TV set and the station itself. Where I live, WFSB-DT of Hartford looks much better when not broadcasting HD compared to WVIT-DT (NBC) of New Britain/Hartford. I can read small graphics on WFSB-DT with no problem. Not always the case with WVIT-DT. As for my TV, I own a Sanyo DP-26746, a 26" LCD HDTV model I bought in June of 2006. I have Comcast cable with no box, using the TV's QAM tuner in this instance. I get the same result with the graphics quality receiving these same two stations over-the-air as well.

 

[KyDXIn]

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.

Here, you'd be disappointed with the analog signal on those rabbit ears, particularly on VHF.

I'd rather have the digital signals OTA in the case of 3/5/8. The strong local UHFs look good on both, on an analog set. I still think digital is sharper, though.

I don't know. 2 summers ago I received Channel 7 in Dayton at 11:30 am and watched "The Price is Right" on those rabbit ears. I live 20 miles west of Louisville, KY. I doubt that will ever happen with digital.