• 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

WTNH makes Public Access look professional

R

RadioMan203

Since I'm currently without cable due to a house move I've been watching once of the few stations that come it. To say the least, I can always get a laugh from their news programming.

It seems on the weekends they always get another camera operator in the shot. During the week it's not much better. More and more often they have the opposite anchor on camera when the other one is finishing a story. This morning, the graphic about a school closing was misspelled as "Shool". These little incidents just touch upon some of the common mistakes made by them, not to mention inaccuracies in stories, etc.

I'm happy I'm only a month out from my new home so I can look forward to watching tv with a little more professionalism.
 
Kevin Lagasse said:
How are you only getting WTNH-TV and nothing else?
Click to expand...

I'm only using a wire coming out of the back of my television. OK, if you really want to split hairs over it, I get 49 (hell, Booth Hill is only up the hill from where I'm staying), I get a hint of 13, 20, 30 - all being too snowy to watch. My friend who owns where I'm staying hasn't put up an antenna yet and won't get cable until he's done doing some of the more money intensive remodeling work so I have to fend for myself with a set-top antenna (the piece of wire is actually much better than the skimpy antenna).
 
Bill DeFelice said:
Kevin Lagasse said:
How are you only getting WTNH-TV and nothing else?
Click to expand...

I'm only using a wire coming out of the back of my television. OK, if you really want to split hairs over it, I get 49 (hell, Booth Hill is only up the hill from where I'm staying), I get a hint of 13, 20, 30 - all being too snowy to watch. My friend who owns where I'm staying hasn't put up an antenna yet and won't get cable until he's done doing some of the more money intensive remodeling work so I have to fend for myself with a set-top antenna (the piece of wire is actually much better than the skimpy antenna).
Click to expand...

I don't mean to nitpicklike that. I just thought that sounded strange in a densely populated state like ours! :)
 
I have to agree. WTNH has had some major problems ever since LIN TV consolidated master control for all of their southern New England stations at a central location in Springfield, Mass. There have been tons of discussions in the old board on this since it happened in the late 90s or early 2000s. I'm not sure if the central master control is still the reason for these problems, but the errors are still there. I'm a Channel 8 guy all the way, but even FOX61 doesn't have these kinds of issues. In the morning for example, I don't think they've ever been able to properly match up the weather segments during Good Morning America since the days when they were Action News. They either cut in from New Haven 30 seconds too early or 30 seconds too late. The same thing happens going back to New York. Which means you will see either a black screen, the generic national map, or an interruption of Good Morning America either going in or out. During other newscasts, poor Ann Nyberg looks like a deer caught in headlights more often than not. I don't see how they don't just go irate and say enough is enough. It reflects not only their station, but also themselves indirectly, sitting at the desk. Last spring and summer, it sounded like air traffic controllers were coming in over their microphones, both in studio and on the road. But they are good about it... they always make a joke out of it, or try to break the ice, but it was rediculously repetitive. Another thing, I've never seen so many instances where a reporter ended up on the air while either walking away, or coming toward the camera, totally caught off guard and speaking to the videographer. Then there is the myriad of other audio and graphic problems, incorrect screen shots, and just terrible mistakes, like poor grammar, incorrect spelling, you name it. I just don't understand how this could be allowed for so long now. Neither WFSB, WVIT, WTIC, nor even CPTV make these kinds of mistakes. But with WTNH it's constant! Even my cable company does a better job with its weekly news and special event productions. So, I totally agree with you Bill.
 
Kevin Lagasse said:
Bill DeFelice said:
Kevin Lagasse said:
How are you only getting WTNH-TV and nothing else?
Click to expand...

I'm only using a wire coming out of the back of my television. OK, if you really want to split hairs over it, I get 49 (hell, Booth Hill is only up the hill from where I'm staying), I get a hint of 13, 20, 30 - all being too snowy to watch. My friend who owns where I'm staying hasn't put up an antenna yet and won't get cable until he's done doing some of the more money intensive remodeling work so I have to fend for myself with a set-top antenna (the piece of wire is actually much better than the skimpy antenna).
Click to expand...

I don't mean to nitpicklike that. I just thought that sounded strange in a densely populated state like ours! :)
Click to expand...

I'm in the same position as Bill, and seemingly not too far away from him to the north. With the exception of WTNH/WCTX, all of the other major affiliated stations in Connecticut are coming from Greater Hartford. So this is good if you live in the the more placid hills of eastern Connecticut, or the relatively flat I-91 corridor, which carries the signal up to Massachussetts, and down to the shore.

But once you make that climb from Cheshire into Waterbury for example, and draw a line south to Bethany/Woodbridge, and north to Harwinton/Barkhamsted, you're cutting over a second ridge, which is actually higher in elevation than the area where the Hartford stations broadcast from. In essence, the signals just don't have an easy time making it across the second ridge, and over the hills and into the valleys. The terrain totally cuts down on the signal (where it can be reached). The signal contour maps that you find for these stations often paint a pretty picture, but they just don't take into consideration all of the variables.

This is why I still get very upset knowing that once WTXX-TV goes off the air in Prospect, that station ultimately is unviewable in the Naugatuck Valley/Waterbury area, because WTXX-DT is coming from Farmington, and barely makes it over that second ridge, into the Route 8 corridor. As far as the Route 7 corridor goes, forget it! And since the city of license is Waterbury, it's just absurd to have stations like WWYZ, WPHH, and WTXX with their towers more aligned in the I-91 corridor.

I assume the only reason Bill or I get WTNH so well is because it is located on that second ridge in the Bethany/Woodbridge/Hamden area and can easily permeate Western Connecticut, the Naugatuck Valley, Litchfield County, and Fairfield County. I also get 20, 43, 49, 55, 59, and 62 without a problem.

This is why we all watched 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, and 20 growing up, before cable TV brought us 3, 18, 30, and 61 (and even 38 for a while!). ;D
 
Which line or ridge would West Peak of Meriden be a portion of? I know it had a TV transmitter on it at one time.
 
West Peak of Meriden is along the same ridge line (about 13 miles to the south), as is Rattlesnake Mountain in Farmington.

Now, Rattlesnake Mountain is at 789 feet above sea level. But moving toward the west, toward the second ridge line, in western Bristol, for example, the elevation jumps to nearly 1050 feet above sea level. So anything on the other side of that ridge, for example in the Thomaston area along the Naugatuck River, is cut down in signal.

Likewise, the highest point of West Peak is a little over 1000 feet above sea level, but moving west toward that second ridge line, and you find hills in Wolcott for example over 1500 feet in elevation. So signal strength anything west of there, in the Waterville/Oakville sections of Waterbury and Watertown, or in the Woodbury/Southbury area, is cut down.

Just for comparison purposes, in New Britain, near the Berlin line at Rt. 72, the area is roughly 41 feet about sea level, while the Walnut Hill Park area is 300 feet. I know you talk about what kind of reception problems exist in New Britain, so imagine what happens when the elevation is in the 1000s of feet above sea level. It does quite a butcher job on the signal.

Next time you're driving along I-84 through Waterbury or catch NBC30's SkyCam there, give a good look at some of the terrain. I'm not sure if this explanation helped or not. You can actually take a look at some topographical maps at the local library or possibly online and you can calculate some of the contours for yourself. Most of the station engineering maps print a much rosier picture than it really is. ;D
 
For what it's worth, WTNH has always seemed to lag behind the other stations in the state as far as the crispness of the station's audio and picture. And this isn't a Parkervision issue, this has been going on as far back as I remember. While FSB and VIT always had nice crisp colors, good lighting, and sharp audio...WTNH's newscasts always sound like they are originating next to a giant blowing fan. And there colors have always seemed a little muddy and dull. Has station management over the years not perceived this or is it this way on purpose?
 
oldschooltv said:
I'm in the same position as Bill, and seemingly not too far away from him to the north. With the exception of WTNH/WCTX, all of the other major affiliated stations in Connecticut are coming from Greater Hartford. So this is good if you live in the the more placid hills of eastern Connecticut, or the relatively flat I-91 corridor, which carries the signal up to Massachussetts, and down to the shore.

But once you make that climb from Cheshire into Waterbury for example, and draw a line south to Bethany/Woodbridge, and north to Harwinton/Barkhamsted, you're cutting over a second ridge, which is actually higher in elevation than the area where the Hartford stations broadcast from. In essence, the signals just don't have an easy time making it across the second ridge, and over the hills and into the valleys. The terrain totally cuts down on the signal (where it can be reached). The signal contour maps that you find for these stations often paint a pretty picture, but they just don't take into consideration all of the variables.

This is why I still get very upset knowing that once WTXX-TV goes off the air in Prospect, that station ultimately is unviewable in the Naugatuck Valley/Waterbury area, because WTXX-DT is coming from Farmington, and barely makes it over that second ridge, into the Route 8 corridor. As far as the Route 7 corridor goes, forget it! And since the city of license is Waterbury, it's just absurd to have stations like WWYZ, WPHH, and WTXX with their towers more aligned in the I-91 corridor.

I assume the only reason Bill or I get WTNH so well is because it is located on that second ridge in the Bethany/Woodbridge/Hamden area and can easily permeate Western Connecticut, the Naugatuck Valley, Litchfield County, and Fairfield County. I also get 20, 43, 49, 55, 59, and 62 without a problem.

This is why we all watched 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, and 20 growing up, before cable TV brought us 3, 18, 30, and 61 (and even 38 for a while!). ;D
Click to expand...

I'm actually living in a valley in Trumbull until my house deal goes through. Another interesting thing is I'm not all that far from the Booth Hill Tower and I think some of the RF is actually overloading the front end of my cheapy television (since my good one is in storage with the majority of my belongings). I grew up with the 2,3,4,5,7,9,11,13 as well as a handful of UHF stations, but that was with a decent antenna up on top of the house ... and the house was approximately 100 higher above the terrain as well as about 10 miles more North.
 
oldschooltv said:
I have to agree. WTNH has had some major problems ever since LIN TV consolidated master control for all of their southern New England stations at a central location in Springfield, Mass. There have been tons of discussions in the old board on this since it happened in the late 90s or early 2000s. I'm not sure if the central master control is still the reason for these problems, but the errors are still there. I'm a Channel 8 guy all the way, but even FOX61 doesn't have these kinds of issues. In the morning for example, I don't think they've ever been able to properly match up the weather segments during Good Morning America since the days when they were Action News. They either cut in from New Haven 30 seconds too early or 30 seconds too late. The same thing happens going back to New York. Which means you will see either a black screen, the generic national map, or an interruption of Good Morning America either going in or out. During other newscasts, poor Ann Nyberg looks like a deer caught in headlights more often than not. I don't see how they don't just go irate and say enough is enough. It reflects not only their station, but also themselves indirectly, sitting at the desk. Last spring and summer, it sounded like air traffic controllers were coming in over their microphones, both in studio and on the road. But they are good about it... they always make a joke out of it, or try to break the ice, but it was rediculously repetitive. Another thing, I've never seen so many instances where a reporter ended up on the air while either walking away, or coming toward the camera, totally caught off guard and speaking to the videographer. Then there is the myriad of other audio and graphic problems, incorrect screen shots, and just terrible mistakes, like poor grammar, incorrect spelling, you name it. I just don't understand how this could be allowed for so long now. Neither WFSB, WVIT, WTIC, nor even CPTV make these kinds of mistakes. But with WTNH it's constant! Even my cable company does a better job with its weekly news and special event productions. So, I totally agree with you Bill.
Click to expand...

Well summed up. Heck, I work in lower Fairfield County and have cable in my office. Cablevision's News12 is slick and greatly more professional than WTHN is in recent times. Mind you I'm not a big fan of Cablevision, but they are easily kicking WTNH's butt as far as presentation goes (at least most of the time).

Oh, how I long for the days of Ken Vennet, Dick Gallette, the old Al Ham "Action News" theme and how about Mike Boguslawski for good measure.
 
During channel 8's noon news today, Doctor Mel's microphone wouldn't work just before 12:30. Tricia Taskey, sheepish grin and all, throws to an ABC News entertainment package. They went back to Mel a few minutes later. It was even more fun on WTNH-DT! I saw a garbled mess from ABC-HD, something zoomed in with the graphics "720P" (progressive) flickering on the screen. Then there was a shot of some guy with a director's style clipboard ("Action!") with a date from late 1999 written in chalk. That's what we get for LIN Broadcasting switching several stations all at once!
 
I can't figure out how they can consolidate their Master Control in one location for a multitude of stations, espeically controlling the CT stations from MA. Wouldn't the latency between sites cause a mess? I'm always seeing some feed getting cut off, be in a network feed or a local presentation.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom