Just curious for all you Tech. guys. Will stations transfer all there power (or increase) to HD channels when analog sings off on Feb. of 09 to get better reception?
-
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
Will power increase on HD signals when analog is off air?
- Thread starter FRM-Yankey
- Start date
HD radio has nothing to do with turning off analog TV signals. HD radio is a marketing term. Instead of using the term multiple channel radio, they decided to jump on the HD marketing term used for TV. TV will turn off their analog signals next year. Radio will do just what it has been doing. No changes. The reason for the TV switch in reality is to make money selling off the frequency that TV is currently on to the highest bidders. You will not necessarily get better TV signals, nor stronger. Just digital. And in fact some folks will suffer more trying to get a digital signal with an antenna as you either get it or not, there is no in between as there was with analog signals. And digital TV is not HD. You can have digital without HD. In fact with the new digital over the air signals, there is no requirement for HD, only digital transmission. But this will have absolutely no effect on you if you have cable or satellite, only if you have an antenna on your roof. In the end, HD radio is nothing more than multiple channel radio, no better or worse than what you have now, just more choice from one station. It's no more high definition that what you hear now on radio. HD is a marketing term used on everything from film cameras to radio these days.
I don't know what Walter is talking about.
To answer your question, no. Some stations will probably try to at a later point, but most are already at full power as defined by the FCC. WFSB-DT, for instance, is already at 1000 kW, the limit for digital TV.
The good news is that the analog signals going away will likely reduce interference, which should by itself make reception better. Some stations, like WTXX-DT, are moving to different channels which should help with some problems.
- Trip
To answer your question, no. Some stations will probably try to at a later point, but most are already at full power as defined by the FCC. WFSB-DT, for instance, is already at 1000 kW, the limit for digital TV.
The good news is that the analog signals going away will likely reduce interference, which should by itself make reception better. Some stations, like WTXX-DT, are moving to different channels which should help with some problems.
- Trip
Based on my experience so far with digital TV signals, I find that I get far fewer digital stations than analog. For example, when I was in CT I was able to pick up WTNH and WCTX very clear on analog, but there was no signal at all on digital. Are digital signals more prone to interference than analog? I have the feeling people who rely on an antenna are going to be disappointed after 2/17.
FRM-Yankey said:
I think the first reply is alluding to the fact that what's happening in February 2009 is not necessarily going to HD. Stations are going digital but it might be digital at standard definition. Anyway... Most major New England stations are already operating at their post-transition digital facilities. The exceptions:
Connecticut:
WTXX-20: will move from channel 12 to channel 20. Predicted noise-limited coverage will decrease from 93km to 90km but I'd bet the interference-limited coverage will increase.
Boston:
WFXT-31: Depending on whether a construction permit has been completed, may be able to increase noise-limited coverage from 80km to 101km.
WSBK-39: Existing authorized facilities are actually greater than the post-transition table facilities. My guess is they've petitioned to have the table changed, I don't think they're going to decrease power!
WHDH-7: will move from channel 42 to channel 7. Noise-limited coverage to increase from 95km to 96km.
Providence:
WNAC-12: will move from channel 54 to channel 12. Noise-limited coverage may decrease slightly from 96km to 93km.
WJAR-51: Post-transition table specifies a power increase from 900kw to 1000kw but that would only yield an 800m increase in coverage.
Vermont:
WCAX-22: will move from channel 53. Noise-limited coverage to decrease slightly from 127km to 123km.
Springfield:
WGGB-40: will move from channel 55. No change in coverage.
WGBY-22: will move from channel 58. Coverage may increase from 74km to 75km...
WSHM-67: As a low-power station it's not required to transition yet. However, WSHM does have a permit to move to DTV channel 41. The predicted noise-limited coverage of their DTV facility is 55km; the Grade B contour of their analog signal is only 27km.
Bangor:
WVII-7: will move from channel 14; coverage increase from 71km to 93km
WABI-19: coverage increase from 96km to 99km
WLBZ-2: will move from channel 25; coverage increase from 75km to 87km (but will be more noise-limited than we think?
Portland:
WPME-35: will move from channel 28; coverage increase of 600m. (you can probably walk 600m in a few minutes...)
WMTW-8: will move from channel 46; coverage decrease from 120km to 118km.
WGME-38: will increase tower height, increasing coverage by 2km
WCSH-44: will increase tower height, increasing coverage by 1.2km
WPFO-23: will flash-cut from analog to digital on the same channel. Grade B analog coverage is 86km; noise-limited DTV coverage is 87km.
New Hampshire:
WMUR-9: will move from channel 59; coverage to decrease slightly from 92km to 90km.
In cases where predicted coverage decreases, I would suggest either:
- the existing facilities with greater coverage are above channel 51, in spectrum that's going away.
- the new facilities are on VHF where transmitter efficiency is significantly greater. (and electrical bills lower)
- the new facilities are on channels with less interference. So the noise-limited coverage may decline but the interference-limited coverage may increase.
- the decrease is negligible and falls outside the station's market.
As Trip suggests, the reduction in interference when the analogs go off will probably help as well, especially in crowded New England.
ansky212 said:
I think you're going to find it location-specific...
I just rescanned my channels. Same TV, same antenna.
I get 14 analog channels. Eight of them are pretty noisy, two are fairly strong but ghosty, only five really look decent. I do get five analog channels that don't come in in digital. Two of them are -LP stations that don't have a digital signal yet.
I get 19 digital channels. 18, if you count the fact that 17-1 and 17-2 are the same thing. I get perfectly clean signals from ABC, Ion, and CW, all of which are noisy in analog. (in the summer, many mornings I get Mexico via skip instead of ABC in analog) I get ten channels that aren't available at all in analog.
My CECB ($40 coupon converter box) gets three more digital channels. (but to make it a fair fight I limited myself to the tuner in the TV...)
Connecticut is a tough case, due to the hilly terrain and the fact that WCTX and WTNH are something like 25 miles from Hartford. (they should put on-channel repeaters on Talcott Mountain...) I'll bet DTV works a LOT better in Eastern Massachusetts or Rhode Island where all the towers are pretty close together.
I'm in the south end of New Britain. The distance calculator at indo.com places Hamden, the site of Madmere Mountain and WTNH/WCTX, 28 air miles south-southwest of Hartford. Where I am in New Britain, it comes up as 20 miles. As for my digital reception? Not so good. I'm using an old set of telescoping rods, which were probably meant more for VHF. Anyways, what am I getting?
WTNH-DT New Haven (8.1-ABC)
WTXX-DT Waterbury (20.1-CW, 20.2-same as 20.1)
WHPX-DT New London (26.1-ION, 26.2-Qubo, 26.3-ION Life, 26.4-Worship) [a bit choppy]
WVIT-DT New Britain (30.1-NBC, 30.2-NBC Weather Plus) [TV identifies them as 35-1 and 35-2]
WEDN-DT Norwich (53.1-PBS)
WCTX-DT New Haven (59.1-MY, 59.2-Storm Team Doppler 8 Radar) [a bit choppy]
WTIC-DT Hartford (61.1-FOX)
No, I didn't omit WFSB-DT Hartford on 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3. I can NOT get a stable enough signal of theirs to use her in New Britain's south end. I very rarely get anything on WUVN-DT 18.1, 18.2 and 18.3 either.
WTNH-DT New Haven (8.1-ABC)
WTXX-DT Waterbury (20.1-CW, 20.2-same as 20.1)
WHPX-DT New London (26.1-ION, 26.2-Qubo, 26.3-ION Life, 26.4-Worship) [a bit choppy]
WVIT-DT New Britain (30.1-NBC, 30.2-NBC Weather Plus) [TV identifies them as 35-1 and 35-2]
WEDN-DT Norwich (53.1-PBS)
WCTX-DT New Haven (59.1-MY, 59.2-Storm Team Doppler 8 Radar) [a bit choppy]
WTIC-DT Hartford (61.1-FOX)
No, I didn't omit WFSB-DT Hartford on 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3. I can NOT get a stable enough signal of theirs to use her in New Britain's south end. I very rarely get anything on WUVN-DT 18.1, 18.2 and 18.3 either.
KML-224 said:
Sounds like you are having the opposite experience as me. I did my testing in northwest Farmington. WFSB-DT, WUVN-DT, WVIT-DT, and WTIC-DT all come in great. WTXX-DT only comes in if I move the antenna to just the right spot. Otherwise it drops off very quickly. I get no signal at all on WTNH-DT and WCTX-DT, even though I get great analog reception from both of these. I don't get anything on WHPX-DT but that is not surprising since the analog reception is very weak at my location. And WEDN is non-existent both analog and digital.
I've always had signal issues with Avon Mountain, both analog and digital. I'm near the bottom of Walnut Hill, the same hill which has both the park and the hospital on it. It's in the same direction as Avon Mountain, meaning it's going to hamper my reception, no matter what type of antenna I'm using. (Sure, a roof antenna may be my answer, but it's impractical at my location.) I know that's the problem, because when I lived in the east end of New Britain in 1991, analog reception of channels 3 and 40 (Springfield) were good and reception of channels 18 (days before they were forced off the air), 24 (at their old site) and 22 (Springfield) were very reliable.
Sorry. I thought this was under a radio board and have had folks ask if HD radio signals will be better when analog is turned off. That said...
Digital television over the air transmission in many ways is a step back, not forward. Step back as in it can be more difficult to get digital signals. The key to good quality digital reception is an antenna. Sounds obvious but it's not that simple. Whereas you may have received pretty good pictures with rabbit ears and analog, with digital, those rabbit ears may be useless and actually hurt you more. The great thing about analog signals was they degrade gradually over distance. Hence you could still get distant stations if not but snowy, but you got them. Digital suffers from what we call the cliff effect. The signal goes and goes and suddenly stops going. And digital is very adversely affected by terrain, your house, and in some cases you sitting in a room. Even trees near you house will suck a digital signal from getting to your antenna properly. Your neighbors siding may make your signal useless. The blacktop on your street may make th signal useless. In other words digital is very touchy. Digital is an "on" or "off" situation as opposed to analog which works even as the noise becomes louder than the signal which means as long as there is some signal, there is a picture with analog. It might not be great picture, but it is still picture. With digital it is a baseline of strength and if you don't get that baseline, odds are good you don't get the signal. Digital sets have signal meters. But if a digital signal is less than 40% on your set it usually means it will be intermittent. Digital signals go from 0-100 but usually the first 40% is what is needed to fight the environment around you to get the signal to your antenna. And in some cases like NYC where the antenna is on 4 Street and Times Square or the Empire State Building on 34th Street, one can't even get a signal on 82nd street due to all the buildings doing wonders to the digital signal. The best solution is a big antenna on the roof with a rotor. Sometimes the movement of an antenna with a rotor one degree can mean a 30% difference in signal. And a inline amplifier will do wonders for a digital signal if it's weak. At least a 12db booster can get you signals you could not get before. Just make sure it is a booster specific for digital TV frequencies. If you go to antennaweb.org you can actually put in your location and see what kind of antenna you need to find a station you want to pick up. Stations make detailed maps of their transmission patterns over the area of their territory. And in many cases it has been hard for them to equal the quality of what analog used to do. Or as I say, every step forward in technology is often a step back. Get cable or satellite to make up the difference.
As for HD, not all stations will have it in the near future. Digital transmission is more about sending signals over digital frequencies rather than sending higher def signals so don't count on HD as it will be scarce for many stations in the near future. But fear not, just by having a newfangled digital set, the pictures will look sharper in some cases due to higher contrast ratios. Then again they still don't eqaul what the tube sets can produce in terms of detail unless you spend $30-$60k like we have to in broadcast on a flat screen just to get highly accurate colors form our pictures.
And don't be fooled by marketing terms like 720p and 1080 when it comes to buying TVs. Even the most trained engineer can not see the difference and neither will you for the most part. Your eye has a limit to how well it can see and side by side two sets properly set up that are supposed to be different in resolution will look identical at normal viewing distances. Then again part of how well it looks has to do with how well it is being sent to your set.
Digital television over the air transmission in many ways is a step back, not forward. Step back as in it can be more difficult to get digital signals. The key to good quality digital reception is an antenna. Sounds obvious but it's not that simple. Whereas you may have received pretty good pictures with rabbit ears and analog, with digital, those rabbit ears may be useless and actually hurt you more. The great thing about analog signals was they degrade gradually over distance. Hence you could still get distant stations if not but snowy, but you got them. Digital suffers from what we call the cliff effect. The signal goes and goes and suddenly stops going. And digital is very adversely affected by terrain, your house, and in some cases you sitting in a room. Even trees near you house will suck a digital signal from getting to your antenna properly. Your neighbors siding may make your signal useless. The blacktop on your street may make th signal useless. In other words digital is very touchy. Digital is an "on" or "off" situation as opposed to analog which works even as the noise becomes louder than the signal which means as long as there is some signal, there is a picture with analog. It might not be great picture, but it is still picture. With digital it is a baseline of strength and if you don't get that baseline, odds are good you don't get the signal. Digital sets have signal meters. But if a digital signal is less than 40% on your set it usually means it will be intermittent. Digital signals go from 0-100 but usually the first 40% is what is needed to fight the environment around you to get the signal to your antenna. And in some cases like NYC where the antenna is on 4 Street and Times Square or the Empire State Building on 34th Street, one can't even get a signal on 82nd street due to all the buildings doing wonders to the digital signal. The best solution is a big antenna on the roof with a rotor. Sometimes the movement of an antenna with a rotor one degree can mean a 30% difference in signal. And a inline amplifier will do wonders for a digital signal if it's weak. At least a 12db booster can get you signals you could not get before. Just make sure it is a booster specific for digital TV frequencies. If you go to antennaweb.org you can actually put in your location and see what kind of antenna you need to find a station you want to pick up. Stations make detailed maps of their transmission patterns over the area of their territory. And in many cases it has been hard for them to equal the quality of what analog used to do. Or as I say, every step forward in technology is often a step back. Get cable or satellite to make up the difference.
As for HD, not all stations will have it in the near future. Digital transmission is more about sending signals over digital frequencies rather than sending higher def signals so don't count on HD as it will be scarce for many stations in the near future. But fear not, just by having a newfangled digital set, the pictures will look sharper in some cases due to higher contrast ratios. Then again they still don't eqaul what the tube sets can produce in terms of detail unless you spend $30-$60k like we have to in broadcast on a flat screen just to get highly accurate colors form our pictures.
And don't be fooled by marketing terms like 720p and 1080 when it comes to buying TVs. Even the most trained engineer can not see the difference and neither will you for the most part. Your eye has a limit to how well it can see and side by side two sets properly set up that are supposed to be different in resolution will look identical at normal viewing distances. Then again part of how well it looks has to do with how well it is being sent to your set.
Also remember that some digital stations may not be able to replicate their analog service.
For example, WGN-TV is analog channel 9 and digital 19. WHOI is on Analog Channel 19 and digital channel 40.
The FCC gives priority to stations staying on their digital channel.
So WGN-TV is staying on channel 19 (and will map to channel 9). WHOI is shutting of it's digital channel 40 and will operate it's digital TV station on channel 19 after the transition. But since WHOI is choosing not to stay on it's digital channel, it has to accept interference (if any) from WGN-TV. (or any other station that was assigned to channel 19 for a digital channel.
Many stations have different directional antennas for digital than from analog.
You can pretty much expect after analog goes dark the FCC will still have to shift some TV channels around, much like they did in the early 50s.
So there are many things we really won't know till analog is gone and digital is in full force.
Another thing is not all stations have their digital and analog transmitters in the same place. WJYS is pretty much a throw-a-way station on Channel 62, with a tower in Chicago's south suburbs. The signal doesn't even make it to downtown Chicago. But their digital transmitter is on top the Sears Tower making it equal to every other channel in Chicago.
For example, WGN-TV is analog channel 9 and digital 19. WHOI is on Analog Channel 19 and digital channel 40.
The FCC gives priority to stations staying on their digital channel.
So WGN-TV is staying on channel 19 (and will map to channel 9). WHOI is shutting of it's digital channel 40 and will operate it's digital TV station on channel 19 after the transition. But since WHOI is choosing not to stay on it's digital channel, it has to accept interference (if any) from WGN-TV. (or any other station that was assigned to channel 19 for a digital channel.
Many stations have different directional antennas for digital than from analog.
You can pretty much expect after analog goes dark the FCC will still have to shift some TV channels around, much like they did in the early 50s.
So there are many things we really won't know till analog is gone and digital is in full force.
Another thing is not all stations have their digital and analog transmitters in the same place. WJYS is pretty much a throw-a-way station on Channel 62, with a tower in Chicago's south suburbs. The signal doesn't even make it to downtown Chicago. But their digital transmitter is on top the Sears Tower making it equal to every other channel in Chicago.
- Status