• 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

The most important vote next Tuesday

K

kenglish

Guest
The FCC says it will take up the matter of "Unlicensed Operation in the TV Bands", aka, the "White Space Issue", at it's Tuesday meeting.

If this stuff passes, I may just give up on the idea of OTA Digital TV, and start recommending everyone "just get Cable". This makes as much sense as building new super-highways, then demolishing the entrance ramps.
 
It's odd that the FCC seems to be in such a rush to get this pushed through, when it really would at least make sense to wait until *after* the DTV transition is complete.
 
kenglish said:
The FCC says it will take up the matter of "Unlicensed Operation in the TV Bands", aka, the "White Space Issue", at it's Tuesday meeting.

If this stuff passes, I may just give up on the idea of OTA Digital TV, and start recommending everyone "just get Cable". This makes as much sense as building new super-highways, then demolishing the entrance ramps.
Click to expand...

Although from my understanding (and I can use a little more explanation on this issue) this appears to concern services such as wi-fi and wireless transmissions, can you explain the reasons for your statement on giving up on OTA digital TV (other than this will effectively kill digital DXing and receiving out-of-market stations, whatever will be left of those after the transition).
 
Althogh they have been relaxed a bit during the Digital Transition period, there have always been "forbidden" channel combinations, due to potential interference.

Any two signals will create sum (n+n) and difference (n-n) signals in addition to themselves. That's why OTA can't deal with adjacent, and to some extent semi-adjacent channels. Since they come from different sources (transmitter sites), there's no way to keep them balanced out, to minimize the effects of these sums and differences. Cable TV, which should keep everything balanced (coming from one site, the headend) can stuff things together, one channel after another, but still has to do some trick (such as lowering the aural carriers).

By allowing unlicensed transmitters on the adjacent channels, with these transmitters being "who knows where" in relation to the station you're watching and your own receive antenna, there will be unlimited potential for interference....interference that comes and goes, and that wipes out different channels, seemingly at random.
 
Also, the Cable TV industry is worried about ingress...signals from these unlicensed transmitters leaking in to their systems. Who knows where these transmitters will wind up being installed? Many might be on the walls of condos and apartments, just inches away from hidden in-wall CATV wiring. And, of course, strong RF signals can propogate along the outside shields of cables, until they find a weak spot to "crawl inside".

I suspect that many of the "Digital Cable" problems we hear about, are due to ingress from broadcast stations, 2-way radio, paging, etc. We don't need to add millions more sources.
 
kenglish said:
"White House Orders" is what they say. :mad:
Click to expand...

I know that the current administration is trying to get a bunch of regulatory changes pushed through in their last couple months (which is, I think, standard practice at the end of any presidency), but I'm surprised that this one would be on their "care about" list.
 
Well, looks like we got screwed today.

GOODBYE, DTV TRANSITION :'(
 
notalkallstatic said:
I'm confused, so what does this mean for the following:

1: TV Stations ???
2: Cable Systems ???
3: The viewer at home ???
Click to expand...

1: TV stations now get to fight with hundreds of tiny interference sources scattered across the country.

2: Cable systems now get to answer complaints when that WSD that the customer brought home destroys their cable reception.

3: The viewer at home now can't use amplifiers or, in fact, anything OTA because there'll be so much destructive interference from the WSD nearby.

The FCC just murdered OTA TV. Don't you feel all warm inside?

- Trip
 
tripinva said:
notalkallstatic said:
I'm confused, so what does this mean for the following:

1: TV Stations ???
2: Cable Systems ???
3: The viewer at home ???
Click to expand...

1: TV stations now get to fight with hundreds of tiny interference sources scattered across the country.

2: Cable systems now get to answer complaints when that WSD that the customer brought home destroys their cable reception.

3: The viewer at home now can't use amplifiers or, in fact, anything OTA because there'll be so much destructive interference from the WSD nearby.

The FCC just murdered OTA TV. Don't you feel all warm inside?

- Trip
Click to expand...

Ewww...That isn't good.


I feel all nice, warm and bubbly inside...oops, I think that is gas.
 
Transition is still happening. FCC has allowed unlicensed transmission in the TV band "white spaces". See the link from robmadden if you need more information :)
 
tripinva said:
The FCC just murdered OTA TV. Don't you feel all warm inside?
Click to expand...

Well if all ANALOG signals are not gonna be operating,it really doesnt matter i guess....

You will still get the digital garbage feeds OTA ... (I really prefer analog MUCH BETTER)
 
The Digital OTA feeds will be slaughtered by nearby WSD transmissions, especially those on adjacent ("vacant") channels...the ones that used to act as "fire breaks" to protect used channels from interference.

We're finding that most all of the DTV reception problems are due to interference, usually from too much signal (due to amplified antennas), too much gain in the "too big" antenna, or local interference from other devices. There are rarely problems with "too weak" of a signal, contrary to what the media and the competition tell you.
 
I knew they were planning to allow something like the 40 wW and 100 mW outputs from portable gear (like laptops), but I did some additional research last night and saw that they want to allow 4 WATTS on fixed-location stuff (like a house, or a business building).

That's the kind of power that an honest-to-goodness VHF TV Translator puts out to cover a town! How is a weak signal from 50 miles away going to compete with THAT monster? :mad:
 
People seem to have this idea that WSDs will allow for a nationwide mesh network that magically connects to the Internet while not having to pay an ISP. What is really going to happen is there will be a few licensed base stations on towers that chew up the "free" channels, and provide traditional internet service while trashing local TV reception.

I suppose the upside, if there is one, is that the 4W base stations are supposed to be licensed, unlike the weaker ones...

- Trip
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom