TV Question-What happens to analog channels next Feb?

[Hunter]

I am hoping someone can help me clear up a question regarding the switch to digital TV and what will happen to the current analog channels. I understand how the current "redirect" channel line up works with my digital tuner - that is, here in L.A. when I punch up channel 4 my digital tuner will automatically tune in ch 36 without my even knowing it. But after the Feb switch, will stations like KNBC be able of revert their digital broadcast back to their original channel (4) and abandon the current digital channel (36) or will they always remain on another frequency and the "redirect" circuit will continue to tune to 36 when 4 is punched in by the viewer?

I also understand that the FCC will allow stations to permanently move to a 3rd channel after the analog signals go away. If this is the case, could a former UHF station move to a VHF channel if it is vacated...and if so, what does this do about the traditional FCC ownership rules regarding the number of UHF/VHF stations a company can own....or under the digital conversion, does this go out the window?

 

[TomT]

I've heard of "v"'s that installed a low-power UHF digital transmitter, with the intention of returning to the V channel as their digital channel. Other stations seem to be happy being on the "U" channel. Perhaps because they realize that most viewers will get them off cable, so there is less advantage then in the analog days to be a "V."

I assume the auto-tune feature works because of a flag sent on the digital signal. Where I live, I can get just one analog channel off air (PBS). All the network stations are 65 miles away behind a 300 high hill. So naturally, I'm cable. I have these 5 networks stations in digital on the cable. One, CBS analog channel 10, appears as "10-1" on the cable, between cable channel 10 (which is something else in analog) and analog cable channel 11. The other network stations appear on the cable up at 90-1, 90-3, 110-1, 110-3. Very confusing.

Indeed, I am amazed that stations still promote themselves by channel number--and not by call-sign. Most analog channels end up somewhere else on cable anyway. They have to be in the city, because otherwise off-air signals would bleed into the cable signal in older sets. But here in the boonies channels 4,6 and 10 are on 7, 9, and 5, just as they are in Columbus.

We are going to see several years of channel switching before this settles out. I've heard that the low VHF channels are considered very problematic for digital, yet some stations want to stay there.

We are also going to see many years of confusion as set manufacturers don't quite get the concept. My set-a Viewsonic 42", was obviously designed by computer geeks. They make pretty fair monitors--I am typing this on split screen since I am in the process of moving my 17" monitor, printer, etc., are already over at the new house. But if I want to switch from an analog TV channel to a digital channel on the other side of the Picture-in Picture I have to back out of PIP. Your can either watch digital and VGA, or analog and VGA--but can't switch between the two.

More annoying is that the set will not save digital channels on the cable input. The designers assumed all digital channels would be off-air, so they provided a second RF input for off-air. But the off-air tuner can't tune to the superband cable channels where Time Warner sends down the digital signals.. So, to keep the digital channels I have to leave the set on all the time.

Getting back to the questions--I assume that once everyone goes digital, stations will have to decide how to promote themselves with the"flag" Do they keep saying "NBC-4" and assume off-air viewers with digital sets will get auto-directed? Or do they promote as "KXXX" and let the sets find the channel with the autoscan?

After the stations get down switching channels for the best signal advantage I suspect the VHF/UHF ownership issue will be re-visited. As you suggest, the present rule may well go out the window.

 

[CW]

I am hoping someone can help me clear up a question regarding the switch to digital TV and what will happen to the current analog channels. I understand how the current "redirect" channel line up works with my digital tuner - that is, here in L.A. when I punch up channel 4 my digital tuner will automatically tune in ch 36 without my even knowing it. But after the Feb switch, will stations like KNBC be able of revert their digital broadcast back to their original channel (4) and abandon the current digital channel (36) or will they always remain on another frequency and the "redirect" circuit will continue to tune to 36 when 4 is punched in by the viewer?

I also understand that the FCC will allow stations to permanently move to a 3rd channel after the analog signals go away. If this is the case, could a former UHF station move to a VHF channel if it is vacated...and if so, what does this do about the traditional FCC ownership rules regarding the number of UHF/VHF stations a company can own....or under the digital conversion, does this go out the window?

After analog sunset, it depends on the market...most lowband (2-6) VHF stations will stay digital on UHF...7-13 HIBAND VHF stations will likely return to their legacy channel with the digital signal..even though they are currently on UHF now! THUS you will have to RESCAN for signals after 2/17/09 OR even before if your favorite digital goes away (IE: MOVES)...
The number of V/U's a company can own?? There is no such rule I know of...only the total NUMBER OF TV stations period...
However in some markets, companies can own two stations (duopoly)....Thats been done for some time...

The final channel allotment is on the FCC web site....or www.dtv.gov. For you in LA, here is the final FULL POWER line up (remember, LPTVs and translators CAN remain analog.....and the digital list usually does NOT include digital LPs either!) (Damn this site for not letting me do HTML):

CALL Network Analog Digital Final Digital (after 2/17/09)

CA LOS ANGELES KTTV FOX 11 65 11
CA LOS ANGELES KTLA CW 5 31 31
CA LOS ANGELES KCOP MyN 13 66 13
CA LOS ANGELES KCAL ind. 9 43 9
CA LOS ANGELES KABC ABC 7 53 7
CA LOS ANGELES/Long Beach KSCI ind. 18 61 18
CA LOS ANGELES KWHY ind. 22 42 42
CA LOS ANGELES/SAN BERN KVCR PBS 24 26 26
CA LOS ANGELES KCET PBS 28 59 28
CA LOS ANGELES/SAN BERN KPXN ion 30 38 38
CA LOS ANGELES KMEX uni 34 35 34
CA LOS ANGELES KTBN tbn 40 23 23
CA LOS ANGELES/Ranch P V KXLA ind. 44 51 51
CA LOS ANGELES/ONTARIO KFTR tel 46 29 29
CA LOS ANGELES/HUNTINGTON KOCE PBS 50 48 48
CA LOS ANGELES/CORONA KVEA tel 52 39 39
CA LOS ANGELES/Avalon KAZA azt 54 47 47
CA LOS ANGELES/ANAHEIM KDOC ind. 56 32 32
CA LOS ANGELES/VENTURA KJLA 57 49 49
CA LOS ANGELES KLCS PBS 58 41 41
CA LOS ANGELES/RIVERSIDE KRCA ind. 62 68 45
CA LOS ANGELES/OXNARD KBEH 63 24 24​

 

[Hunter]

Great info...it confirms why I've been confused on the subject. If digital causes problems for low channel Vs, I can understand them keeping or moving to a higher channel, but looking at the list you provided, I'm surprised how many stations, that are not low Vs, are keeping the new channel. Not that it would make much difference, since cable and satellite penetration is nearing 90% or more in many markets, but for someone viewing OTA it raises some questions.

For example, consider viewers watching OTA - KTLA ch 5 analog will move to ch 31 permanently. In addition to the digital signal on 31, will the station also broadcast some sort of "redirect" signal on ch 5 to tell digital tuners to tune into ch 31? Or will some stations rebrand themselves to the new channel?

 

[dave388]

id put my money on they would just rebrand themself
(ie instead of KTLA CH5 rebrand as KTLA CH31)

 

[CW]

Great info...it confirms why I've been confused on the subject. If digital causes problems for low channel Vs, I can understand them keeping or moving to a higher channel, but looking at the list you provided, I'm surprised how many stations, that are not low Vs, are keeping the new channel. Not that it would make much difference, since cable and satellite penetration is nearing 90% or more in many markets, but for someone viewing OTA it raises some questions.

For example, consider viewers watching OTA - KTLA ch 5 analog will move to ch 31 permanently. In addition to the digital signal on 31, will the station also broadcast some sort of "redirect" signal on ch 5 to tell digital tuners to tune into ch 31? Or will some stations rebrand themselves to the new channel?

MORE than likely NO, they will NOT rebrand themselves...this is because the FCC allowed stations to brand themselves in a way to allow their digitals to match their analog by using the PSIP info within the data stream to show their channel number "Mapped" to their legacy channel...thus KTLA is likely showing themselves on digital as 5.1...and will remain that even after the analog sunset!! SO they actually will be on RF 31 but the viewers will think they are watching 5....DUMB but thats the FCC for ya...in one market, one station on 44 has their digital on 45 and is staying there after analog sunset. ANOTHER station is due to move ONTO 44 after sunset with their new digital...guess who is going to known as 44??? The legacy station? WHAT does the NEW RF44 call themselves? CANT use 44 under FCC rules as thats already taken...DUMB DUMB DUMB!!!
NO there will NOT be any signal on 5 redirecting viewers to 31......When the analog goes off the air, viewers will likely have to rescan with their TV to get the channels active after 2/17/09...note that CHannel 5 COULD turn off their analog at anytime.....they dotn HAVE to wait untill 2/17/09...the rules say they can change NOW if the proper paperwork is filed and they can show they have 91+% coverage of their analog area on digital....they COULD drop 5 analog at any day...BUT must notify the FCC 30 days before they do and then must announce on the air they are going off analog forever....but there will NOT be anything on 5 left to "point" you to 31...the VIEWERS must do that on their end.. Some legacy stations like 2-13 will likely NOT rebrand themselves....stations on UHF that stay in their new digital channel (usually a N+1 or N-1 setup) will likely rebrand....but in my market 2 VHFs are going to UHF and staying...after 50+ years you think they will change from 4 and 6 to 40 and 21 respectively??? (EVEN though thats what they WILL be!).....the other VHF, 12 is returning to 12 with their digital (currently on 50)....SOME stations will still show channels NO longer legal like 64 or 55...
the core channels will be 2 through 51.....so how/WHY would a station want to be known as 64.1 when 64 wont exist????
DUH.....

 

[frankberry]

In the case of my station, WTVT, Tampa ... Our analog channel is 13 and our digital channel is 12.
As I understand, we will continue to brand ourselves as FOX13 after analog goes bye-bye. WTVT-DT will remain on channel 12.
WEDU, channel 3 analog will move WEDU-DT to channel 13 and will continue to brand themselves as WEDU-3.

Oh well .... WFLF radio, Orlando calls itself 540-WFLA ... WFLA is licensed to Tampa. Their frequency is 970.

I remember when it was against FCC regulations to transmit "false or misleading information." I guess the FCC rules have changed.

 

[littlejohn]

No, the definition of 'false and misleading' has changed.

 

[dave388]

this is going to be confusing as hell for alot of people.

 

[fybush]

this is going to be confusing as hell for alot of people.

Only if you overthink it, as many of the posters here seem to be determined to do.

Remapping the DTV channels actually makes excellent sense, once you recognize that nobody but us actually cares whether the station identifying itself as "Channel 4" is broadcasting at 66-72 MHz.

Put yourself in the shoes of an average Los Angeles viewer come February 2009, and then imagine two scenarios:

Scenario 1: Average Viewer buys a new digital TV set. A few of the channels show up where Average Viewer is accustomed to finding them - KCAL9 is still on 9, ABC is still on 7, Fox is still on 11 - but a whole bunch of other channels have moved to different locations. KTLA is suddenly on 31, CBS is on 43, NBC is on 36.

Scenario 2: Average Viewer buys a new digital TV set. Average Viewer plugs the set in, hits "scan", the set does its thing, and now all the channels are exactly where they've been for the last half-century - CBS is on 2, NBC is on 4, KTLA on 5, and so on.

Which scenario is less confusing to the average viewer? Keep in mind that Average Viewer doesn't give a rat's heinie about whether KTLA is transmitting at 76-82 MHz or at 572-578 MHz, any more than you or I care whether our cellphone is transmitting at 850 MHz or 1.9GHz. Average Viewer expects to find KTLA on "5," and the DTV remapping system fulfills that expectation.

(In fact, there's already remapping going on all the time in many cable systems. When my digital cable box is showing me channel "10," for instance, it's not actually tuned to an analog signal at 192-198 MHz, but rather to a QAM channel somewhere up in the 80s that gets remapped to "10." As a geek, I like knowing that - but anyone else in the household who just wants to watch NBC, which happens to be "channel 10" here, is certainly much happier tuning to "10" than they would be if the box forced them to tune in "82.11" or whatever actual QAM channel is being used.)

It's really not as difficult as some people seem to want to make it.

 

[Hunter]

It's really not as difficult as some people seem to want to make it.

I think you bring up a good point in that technology will take care everything for the viewer. In nearly 90% of homes it will be seamless anyway due to cable and ADS (Alternate Delivery Service) penetration. Frankberry in Tampa for example has 91.1% of the market watching on cable which is 73.1% of the market. Another 18.5% watching via satellite or other means, and that leaves only 8.9% of the market that needs to buy a digital tuner. No need for the cable and satellite companies to reconfigure their channel lineup.

Even in L.A. which has high over the air viewing, cable is still at 49.5% with ADS at 34.2%. This would mean that the switch will affect only 17% of the market.

I don't think it will make too much sense for very many stations to rebrand to the new channel allocation.

 

[fybush]

I don't think it will make too much sense for very many stations to rebrand to the new channel allocation.

Let me make that more absolute: NO stations will be rebranding to the "new" channel allocations. The FCC has mandated that stations continue to use their analog channel numbers as their "major channel numbers" for their digital signals. So even if KTLA, for instance, decided that for some reason it actually wanted to brand itself as "CW31," it will still appear as "5" on DTV tuners all over greater Los Angeles. That's the law.

And, again, it makes perfect sense: the NBC affiliate down the road from me in Syracuse, for instance, has been on analog channel 3 since 1954. It signed on with DTV on channel 54, which is out of core, and will move to channel 24 (currently the PBS station's analog channel) in 2009. On my DTV tuner, it appears right now as "3." After it moves channels next year, I'll hit "rescan" on the morning of Feb. 18 and it will appear as "3." No confusion about "wait, it was 54, and now it's 24." No confusion about "wait, PBS used to be on 24, and now 24 is NBC." NBC was 3 in 1954, it was 3 in 1984, it was 3 last year and it will be 3 in 2010.

(This applies perfectly to frankberry's situation in Tampa - why go through the confusion of explaining that "Fox used to be on 13 and now it's on 12, and 13 is now PBS, which used to be on 3," when it's very easy to let the viewer continue to experience WTVT on 13 and WEDU on 3?)

The only reason for anyone to consider rebranding is if a lot of their viewership is on cable, on a channel (or channels) different from the over-the-air channel. (Keep in mind that most satellite customers see their locals on their analog channel numbers, and will continue to do so after the transition.) If I'm KNSD in San Diego, which is heavily cabled, and most of those cable customers are seeing me on "7" instead of my UHF channel, 39, then, sure, "NBC 7/39" makes sense as a brand. But even that doesn't change with the DTV transition - if you're watching KNSD on cable, it's on 7 now and will be on 7 after 2009, and if you're watching over the air or on satellite, it's on 39 now and will be on 39 after 2009.

In other words - the whole point of DTV remapping is to make sure that from the point of view of Average Viewer, *nothing* changes come 2009. In fact, I can think of just one reason why anyone's channel lineup might change come the transition - cable systems that have been shifting VHF locals to different channels to avoid ingress issues (like the Kansas City example someone cited earlier, I think) may be able to stop doing that - which is all the MORE reason to keep branding with the old analog channel designations.

 

[nitewatchman]

this is going to be confusing as hell for alot of people.

Only if you overthink it, as many of the posters here seem to be determined to do.

Remapping the DTV channels actually makes excellent sense, once you recognize that nobody but us actually cares whether the station identifying itself as "Channel 4" is broadcasting at 66-72 MHz.

Put yourself in the shoes of an average Los Angeles viewer come February 2009, and then imagine two scenarios:

Scenario 1: Average Viewer buys a new digital TV set. A few of the channels show up where Average Viewer is accustomed to finding them - KCAL9 is still on 9, ABC is still on 7, Fox is still on 11 - but a whole bunch of other channels have moved to different locations. KTLA is suddenly on 31, CBS is on 43, NBC is on 36.

Scenario 2: Average Viewer buys a new digital TV set. Average Viewer plugs the set in, hits "scan", the set does its thing, and now all the channels are exactly where they've been for the last half-century - CBS is on 2, NBC is on 4, KTLA on 5, and so on.

Which scenario is less confusing to the average viewer? Keep in mind that Average Viewer doesn't give a rat's heinie about whether KTLA is transmitting at 76-82 MHz or at 572-578 MHz, any more than you or I care whether our cellphone is transmitting at 850 MHz or 1.9GHz. Average Viewer expects to find KTLA on "5," and the DTV remapping system fulfills that expectation.

(In fact, there's already remapping going on all the time in many cable systems. When my digital cable box is showing me channel "10," for instance, it's not actually tuned to an analog signal at 192-198 MHz, but rather to a QAM channel somewhere up in the 80s that gets remapped to "10." As a geek, I like knowing that - but anyone else in the household who just wants to watch NBC, which happens to be "channel 10" here, is certainly much happier tuning to "10" than they would be if the box forced them to tune in "82.11" or whatever actual QAM channel is being used.)

It's really not as difficult as some people seem to want to make it.

Scenerio #3 - In some cases, average OTA viewer does a "channel scan" and only some channels in his area are found. Average OTA viewer selects the channel "7" he is "used to" ( a "remapped" channel number) and looks at his "signal meter" to try to adjust antenna for best results, but nothing happens, at all. Doesn't matter what he does, nothing will happen.

that's because The PSIP information(including virtual channel table major/minor channel numbers) being sent within the digital station's signal can't be decoded or displayed to the user from ANY given, individual station unless a signal that is sufficent for DTV reception of that station is achieved.

So, in some cases, the user needs to know the RF channel number(not widely publicized, you can get it from FCC site or sites such as antennaweb) to initially "tune to" or tell the receiver to scan for some signals "indivdually", and he needs some sort of "signal meter" to help him adjust the antenna for those signals not found via a "scan" so a signal sufficent enough to decode and use the channel remapping info is acheived ...

In some cases, many different antenna posisitions will need to be "found" for many different stations ... In some cases, "rescans" and going through this "procedure" more than once will be necessary when/if stations make certian changes to their datastream(or in certian cases when "problems" occur with their equipment), and more rarely, when stations move around on the dial, such as will occur with some stations on or around feb 18, 2009 (with their actual RF signal, not their "remapped" channel #) ....

When all stations in the market are co-located, it helps .....

I don't think that is "overthinking it", or making things more difficult than it is, that is just the way it works, and is demonstrating a situation where it can be confusing for folks .... True, as you pointed out, to some extent it is less confusing for viewers generally speaking,(so they can "tune" to the channel # they're used to) but in situations such as "scenerio #3", It can also be more confusing..... And true, It won't be a problem for those of us who know+understand "things RF", so personally, I don't really care one way or the other, but it will be a problem for "average joe" in some or many cases when he goes to try to tune in and "adjust his antenna" for stations which a channel scan doesn't find ....

 

[fybush]

I don't think that is "overthinking it", or making things more difficult than it is, that is just the way it works, and is demonstrating a situation where it can be confusing for folks .... True, as you pointed out, to some extent it is less confusing for viewers generally speaking,(so they can "tune" to the channel # they're used to) but in situations such as "scenerio #3", It can also be more confusing..... And true, It won't be a problem for those of us who know+understand "things RF", so personally, I don't really care one way or the other, but it will be a problem for "average joe" in some or many cases when he goes to try to tune in and "adjust his antenna" for stations which a channel scan doesn't find ....

There's no such thing as a perfect transition; that's for sure. And you're certainly correct that there will be points during that transition where not having the remapping going on would make setup an easier task for some DTV viewers.

However - and it's a big "however" - you're talking about what's essentially a one-time process for the vast majority of viewers. Broadcasters can certainly help viewers along with the transition; I'd expect most of them to have "DTV troubleshooting" pages on their websites, sooner rather than later, providing tips to assist viewers in getting set up. ("If KNBC doesn't appear after your initial scan, punch in channel 36 and move the antenna until a signal appears," for instance.) And it's important to note that the signal picture will only get better once the transition is over, as stations move their DTV signals from side-mounted antennas to top-mounted antennas or trade low-power interim facilities for full-power facilities, and as the new fifth-generation tuner chips move out into the marketplace.

Once past that initial setup phase, the confusion you're talking about disappears - and if you accept that there's going to be a certain amount of confusion somewhere in the process, I think I'd rather ask some consumers to deal with it once during the setup phase, rather than asking all of them to deal with it every time they turn on the TV for years afterward.

(And that's not even getting into some of the other real benefits of DTV remapping, like the ability to allow translators to identify with the channel number of their primary station, which is a huge advantage in places like Utah, where there are zillions of translators carrying the Salt Lake signals statewide.)

 

[Hunter]

I don't think that is "overthinking it", or making things more difficult than it is, that is just the way it works, and is demonstrating a situation where it can be confusing for folks .... in some or many cases when he goes to try to tune in and "adjust his antenna" for stations which a channel scan doesn't find ....

And it's important to note that the signal picture will only get better once the transition is over, as stations move their DTV signals from side-mounted antennas to top-mounted antennas or trade low-power interim facilities for full-power facilities, and as the new fifth-generation tuner chips move out into the marketplace.

I can't tell you how this info/discussion helps. The whole reason for my initial post is to understand what my folks, who live in the Prescott/Prescott Valley area of Arizona will be going through next year. It's a small and fastly growing area of nearly 100K pop, but OTA TV reception is really an issue. Main signals come in from far away in one direction or on translators in another and they will need to know what channel to tune to as they adjust their antenna. Even in analog some stations that carry Fox and NBC come in crappy. I'm wondering what this will be like for them next year.

 

[fybush]

I can't tell you how this info/discussion helps. The whole reason for my initial post is to understand what my folks, who live in the Prescott/Prescott Valley area of Arizona will be going through next year. It's a small and fastly growing area of nearly 100K pop, but OTA TV reception is really an issue. Main signals come in from far away in one direction or on translators in another and they will need to know what channel to tune to as they adjust their antenna. Even in analog some stations that carry Fox and NBC come in crappy. I'm wondering what this will be like for them next year.

I don't know what the Phoenix stations have planned for their translators - but if it's anything like the situation to the north in Utah, the translator system will probably be upgraded to digital fairly quickly. At that point, it could be a great boon to your parents - or not. That's because DTV is either/or - you either have a signal or you don't. If they can get the signal (whether from a translator or directly from Phoenix), it will be a huge advantage over the old analog translators, because it will be a perfect picture. But if the signal's weak, it may just not decode at all.

The good news here is that DTV tuners keep getting better, so a signal that might not have decoded on a tuner made a few years ago will have a better chance of decoding on the $40 converter boxes that will come out this spring. (You've signed them up for coupons at dtv2009.gov, right?)

And especially in translator-dependent areas like Arizona, Utah and Nevada, the local broadcasters will be eager to make sure people know how to tune them in.

 

[DTV-Chief]

At first TV viewers associated their local t.v. stations with the channel number for its transmitting frequencies.

Then cable t.v. came along and CATV systems routinely converted chs. 14 and above to lower numbers (and some systems even converted chs. between 2 & 13 to different numbers to avoid co-channel ingress interference).

Wouldn't you agree that viewers adapted to watching those local stations on different channel numbers via cable t.v.? (Some t.v. stations would brand with both numbers although the vast majority found that unnecessary.)

Viewer experiences with satellite dishes were similar. (DBS also uses the feature of remapping channel numbers of local stations for their subscribers' convenience.)

So why all the pessimism about different channel numbers now with digital t.v.??

Give credit to the savy viewers...they'll adapt ... and those that can't cope could ask any tweenager in their family (or neighborhood) for help.

 

[Hunter]

I don't know what the Phoenix stations have planned for their translators ... it could be a great boon to your parents - or not. That's because DTV is either/or - you either have a signal or you don't.

That's exactly why I'm concerned for them....unless the broadcasters in Phoenix and Flagstaff do something, my guess is that a couple of the channels they've been watching with slightly snowy pictures won't be there at all after the switch.

The good news here is that DTV tuners keep getting better, so a signal that might not have decoded on a tuner made a few years ago will have a better chance of decoding on the $40 converter boxes that will come out this spring. (You've signed them up for coupons at dtv2009.gov, right?)

I understand that once you apply for coupons, you must use them within 90 days of issue and I expect there will be advances in technology continuing throughout the year. Might be best to wait a little bit at least. There are a lot of coupons up for grabs.