Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark Roberts" wrote in message ... SNIP The primary reason [for turning off over-the-air analog TV], though, seems to be economic: "We made the decision that our resources needed to go toward serving more students by creating a whole new telecourse 'stream', rather than paying what amounts to double rent and electricity to continue our analog broadcast." KCSM estimated that about 8% of its viewing audience will be affected. Cable and satellite feeds are to continue. Amazing. Is all that spectrum bandwidth occupied by over-the-air TV really serving only a small percentage of the population? Rural areas surely must still rely on over-the-air TV. As an aside, in the news report that Cox Cable and ESPN had made peace it was reported that Cox will pay ESPN $2.61 per month for each of their cable subscribers! [Moderator's Note: Yes, rural areas do, to a certain extent, rely on over- the-air TV, but in many cases, people probably have DSS or cable, like my parents who live 40 miles east of Cleveland in Geauga County, Ohio, and get most of their programming from Dish Network. Here in Apple Valley, CA, and throughout the (mostly rural) High Desert, there are probably more people who have to rely on over-the-air signals, but the Los Angeles stations, which are 90 miles southwest of here, all have translators sitting on a tower down in Hesperia. The tower isn't well maintained, though, and I don't know whether Victorville's lone local TV station, KHIZ-TV 64, has its transmitter in that area or not... my wife says they don't, actually, and that their transmitter is up in Victorville near their studio. But in Apple Valley/Victorville/Hesperia, unless you live outside city limits, you can get cable from Charter, and up in Barstow, you can get cable from... mmm... I think it's Time Warner. And in spite of the mountainous terrain, most homes in this area are properly situated to use DSS also. Interesting note: Until the recent mandates allowing DSS providers to carry local stations, my parents had to use an antenna to get Cleveland's TV stations. They're 40 miles from Cleveland, about the same distance from Erie, PA, and maybe 50 from Youngstown, Ohio, and they could get stations from all three cities, but the signals weren't very strong. In spite of the fact that they could pay Dish $5 per month to get Cleveland local TV, I believe they still use their antenna. I have no clue why. **SJS] |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On 20 Feb 2004 19:01:43 GMT, "R J Carpenter"
wrote: Amazing. Is all that spectrum bandwidth occupied by over-the-air TV really serving only a small percentage of the population? Rural areas surely must still rely on over-the-air TV. Some years ago, my employer's TV station (since sold) was hit by a devastating arson fire that wiped out its transmitter. The station was off the air for weeks, but kept feeding cable headends. Ratings were unchanged. Hardly any viewers noticed the on-air signal was gone. I'm sure the cable penetration is even higher now, although it's been several years since I checked. Mark Howell |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
R J Carpenter had written:
| | "Mark Roberts" wrote: | | KCSM estimated that about 8% of its viewing audience will be | affected. Cable and satellite feeds are to continue. | | Amazing. | | Is all that spectrum bandwidth occupied by over-the-air TV really serving | only a small percentage of the population? In the San Francisco Bay Area, it is quite likely. Yet NBC did suffer a hit when it got into a snit with KRON (from losing the bidding to buy the station) and flipped the affiliation to KNTV in San Jose. An estimated 25% of the geographic area lost NBC service over-the-air, but KNTV quickly arranged with Comcast's predecessor to ensure cable carriage on area systems. In any event, KNTV has filed to move to Mt. San Bruno (the site that KCSM-TV is leaving). But the hit in ratings may have come more from KNTV's image (or lack of image) in the market and having to compete with the San Francisco incumbent stations in news. KNTV doesn't seem to be really committing the resources or the brains to do it consistently right. It's passable but feels like about Kansas City in quality. Anyhow, due to the terrain of the Bay Area, as well as its geographic expanse, there is no site that will serve all areas well. There will be significant dead spots no matter where the transmitter is located -- obviously, that's true for FM as well. The best combination for FM stations seems to be a Sutro (SF) or Beacon site with on-channel repeaters in the I-680 corridor in the East Bay. TVs haven't tried that combination, possibly due to the relatively heavy reliance on cable. KDTV does have a translator in Santa Rosa (far North Bay), and KRON did have one there until KQED-DT came on and wiped out channel 30. -- "You're about to see a great sunset if you're in the right place." -- KCBS morning traffic anchor, 6.58 am, February 9, 2004 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
R J Carpenter wrote:
Is all that spectrum bandwidth occupied by over-the-air TV really serving only a small percentage of the population? This varies dramatically from market to market -- national "penetration" numbers for cable and satellite are averages, with some areas much lower, and others much higher. In the Dallas-Fort Worth area, off-air viewing of the local stations is still common, since we have one of the lowest cable penetration rates in the country, and not all satellite subscribers opt to pay the satellite company to provide what they can receive off-air for free. TV stations. They're 40 miles from Cleveland, about the same distance from Erie, PA, and maybe 50 from Youngstown, Ohio, and they could get stations from all three cities, but the signals weren't very strong. In spite of the fact that they could pay Dish $5 per month to get Cleveland local TV, I believe they still use their antenna. I have no clue why. **SJS] Why pay $5/month to get what they're currently getting for free? It seems a very rational decision to me...especially since the antenna apparently provides signals from mulitple markets, something that Dish can't legally offer to them. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Ben wrote:
WKRN really does have a nice signal. So much better than the analog with all it's co-channel. IMHO that's only half the problem. Even without the CCI here, the computer noise/leaky insulators are pretty bad - and when they aren't present, the signal can be just plain snowy. But when the sporadic-E kicks in, well, you'd better have a DTV if you want to watch ABC... There have been days when I've had a snow-free signal from XEFB with some weak WKRN CCI in the background! (then again, if you'd seen a picture of the XEFB transmitter site (I have), you'd know why they get out so well!) I don't think BKO will ever go for a bigger stick. They never have been on the cutting edge and they seem to be happy with covering the surrounding counties. They have 4 antennas on the tower now with 13 and 24 both on it. I wonder if there might be some concern over WKRN (and as a result, ABC) getting bent out of shape if WBKO puts too much RF down into Tennessee? Wonder when 8 will turn on a transmitter? 8 just took out a STA for roughly 45kW ERP. Strange, as I thought I read their full-power transmitter was already ready to go & they were just waiting on the STL and encoder. What's the deal with the Sinclair stations? They looked bad enough before DT but now they look like pixalated mush. I don't watch often enough to know... They've got five transmitters at the same site now (all three digitals and the analogs for 30 and 58) so I suppose STL bandwidth is at a premium... -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
John Byrns wrote:
In article , (Michael Black) wrote: Take note that there is a 6MHz gap, a whole channel, between channels 4 and 5, which actually would be "in the way" more than the FM band clustered with those other services that will not move. Isn't that a 4 mHz gap, not 6 mHz, between channels 4 and 5 that whatever takes up? Ch 2 - 54-60 mHz Ch 3 - 60-66 mHz Ch 4 - 66-72 mHz 72-76 - used by pagers, model airplanes, etc. Ch 5 - 76-82 mHz Ch 6 - 82-88 mHz FM Band - 88 - 108 mHz etc. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Tom Desmond wrote:
TV stations. They're 40 miles from Cleveland, about the same distance from Erie, PA, and maybe 50 from Youngstown, Ohio, and they could get stations from all three cities, but the signals weren't very strong. In spite of the fact that they could pay Dish $5 per month to get Cleveland local TV, I believe they still use their antenna. I have no clue why. **SJS] Why pay $5/month to get what they're currently getting for free? It seems a very rational decision to me...especially since the antenna apparently provides signals from mulitple markets, something that Dish can't legally offer to them. Because none of the stations come in clear. I guess they don't mind having snow on the TV as well as on the front lawn... -- JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 03:06:59 +0000, Robert Hovland wrote:
Dear Newsgroup, Does anyone know the latest info about what is going to happen to the FM band when the FCC forces all of the VHF television stations to give up their broadcast band and switch to the new freqency allocations for digital TV? As you may or may not know, the FM band is located in between channels 6 and 7, I believe, and I would be surprised if the FCC would leave the FM band alone when the TV stations get out. They want to auction these soon-to-be-obsolete TV channel frequencies off to the highest bidder. Who would be interested in this spectrum if its not used for Broadcast? Not real practical for a mobile communications use since most systems now use hand held radios and antennas at this band are not user friendly. Maybe Rural high-speed Internet services? The consequences I think of when I consider the moving of the FM band are monstrous: what about all of the car radios, portable FM radios and walkmen, and collector hifi FM tuners that will suddenly become unusable without maybe some kind of adaptor which may or may not work very well? To me, it just doesn't seem right that we need to have change for the sake of "progress", unless the progress is real and necessary. Many times it seems that these huge changes in the basic infrastructure of our communications industry are done for the sake of the economic enrichment of those companies who stand to profit richly from such a change, without giving much, or any, consideration to the consequences. When a land developer decides to make major changes to a piece of undeveloped land, an environmental impact report has to be made before the developer can go ahead with their plans. Where is the impact report for this huge planned change in the FM band? I would like to get comments from others who know more about this proposed change and when it is to occur. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
I wonder if there might be some concern over WKRN (and as a result, ABC) getting bent out of shape if WBKO puts too much RF down into Tennessee? I'm surprised 4 allowed 40 to go NBC. Most of 13's coverage area is in KY of course and they used to claim they covered more counties of KY than any other VHF. I kinda think WAVE may have taken that honor now. I don't watch often enough to know... They've got five transmitters at the same site now (all three digitals and the analogs for 30 and 58) so I suppose STL bandwidth is at a premium... 58 has really come up in analog power and 58's digital is strong now where it was pretty much flea power before. 30's analog went down here when they went to the new tower. Oh well, I'll keep watching for your posts. Ben |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Steven J Sobol wrote:
TV stations. They're 40 miles from Cleveland, about the same distance from Erie, PA, and maybe 50 from Youngstown, Ohio, and they could get stations from all three cities, but the signals weren't very strong. In spite of the fact that they could pay Dish $5 per month to get Cleveland local TV, I believe they still use their antenna. I have no clue why. **SJS] Because none of the stations come in clear. I guess they don't mind having snow on the TV as well as on the front lawn... Cable isn't cheap - last I looked, the basic "lifeline" service (just the local OTA stations and a couple of shopping channels) is $300/year here. I know people who spend over $1,200/year for cable. Personally, I'm willing to live with a fair amount of snow to save $300! One year's "lifeline" cable charges here would buy a digital tuner. It can be connected to their existing analog TV and antenna and will deliver a fantastic picture & sound. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|