 levI am RadiodocPremium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
kudos:2
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | reply to Jan Janowski
Re: Anyone able to pick up WBBM-2.1 now? Jan, I did a clear and then a scan, and later on did another scan. But my tuner has a frequency signal section that will let me select any channel, scanned or not. That is why I said I can see low signal.
I can still get WBBM HD via DIRECTV's signal, so it doesn't affect me. However, methinks they have a bigger problem. Could you explain the ongoing love affair with VHF? Even if it is the upper band, wouldn't UHF have made more sense? |
|
 VegasManAre We There Yet?Premium
join:2002-11-17
Schaumburg, IL | You're closer to downtown than I am aren't you? I get BBM fine with a 78 on my sat receiver. Now if I could just get something that looked decent from WLS 60-64 and all macroblocking.
--
In need of a Vegas vacation.
|
|
levI am RadiodocPremium,Ex-mod 2002-08
join:2001-05-30
Chicago, IL
kudos:2 Reviews:
·AT&T Midwest
| said by VegasMan:You're closer to downtown than I am aren't you? I get BBM fine with a 78 on my sat receiver. Now if I could just get something that looked decent from WLS 60-64 and all macroblocking. Yep, I'm closer, but on a different line. My WLS/WBBM results are the exact opposite of yours, except my WBBM is far worse than your WLS. |
|
