Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | Sorry, but they're right There are a LOT of reasons to avoid white space devices. TV interference is only one. The other major reason is that there are tons of us already responsibly using the TV white spaces for wireless microphone systems, and we rely on a high degree of reliability that would be lost if white spaces become available.
The tech world is quick to dismiss us, point out that our use is already unlicensed, not guaranteed, and only affects a small few compared to the "everybody" that would benefit from other white space devices. If I recall correctly, the wireless microphone issue is what got Dolly Parton to speak out against white space devices.
Quite simply, it's a real issue, and unless you basically never enjoy any form of entertainment or religion, it affects you. Everything from church services to pop concerts to auctions to sports games to live theatre relies on these wireless microphone systems. The loss of them wouldn't just affect the production engineers, it would affect you. The systems work in both directions, and are used for wireless in-ear monitoring too.
Imagine if next time you go to church, a loud hiss interrupts a key part of the pastor's sermon. Imagine if the next time you go to a concert, hissing noises interferes with your favorite songs. Or imagine if the artist messes up due to annoying hiss and drop outs in his or her in-ear monitor. Imagine if next time you're at an auction, a flakey wireless microphone system leads to you bidding far more than you realized you were.
This is the future if white space devices become reality. |
|
 Shack
join:2002-01-17
Bloomington, IN | well you could of course go back to using wires. |
|
| said by Shack:well you could of course go back to using wires. But what if they don't want to? |
|
|
|
 DavePR
join:2008-06-04
Canyon Country, CA
 ·DSL EXTREME
| reply to Shack
That would cause all manner of accidents. There's a whole generation with no cord skills. They'll end up strangling themselves.
The FCC needs to hear from you regarding their proposal to broaden eligibility for Low Power Auxiliary licenses. If you have a license you can get the aforementioned database. |
|
 DaDawgsPremium
join:2010-08-02
Deltaville, VA | reply to Markie
said by Markie:The tech world is quick to dismiss us, point out that our use is already unlicensed, not guaranteed, and only affects a small few compared to the "everybody" that would benefit from other white space devices. If I recall correctly, the wireless microphone issue is what got Dolly Parton to speak out against white space devices. Well there you go... Unlicensed, not guaranteed, and only affects a small few...
Sadly wireless microphones started using white space LONG after the OTV folks had license to the spectrum. They were grandfathered into unlicensed because the manufacturers had deep pockets and plenty of lobbiests.
IMHO they should have been fined out of existence for their kibitzing of white space.
That is probably just me though...
--
--
 |
|
 John GaltForward, MarchPremium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:3 | said by DaDawgs:Well there you go... Unlicensed, not guaranteed, and only affects a small few... "But, but...we're entitled!
*whimper*
--
The Truth is the foremost enemy of the State now.
|
|
John GaltForward, MarchPremium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:3 | reply to Markie
said by Markie:This is the future if white space devices become reality. FUD
--
The Truth is the foremost enemy of the State now.
|
|
 dMarksMelting Faces For FunPremium
join:2007-02-09
Jackson, MI
 ·Comcast
| reply to Markie
said by Markie:There are a LOT of reasons to avoid white space devices. TV interference is only one. I for one don't watch OTA (digital now) TV. Besides, I highly doubt it's actually that big of an issue. TBH I highly doubt there'll be any actual interference at all. This is all my opinion of course, same thing you're posting.
said by Markie:The other major reason is that there are tons of us already responsibly using the TV white spaces for wireless microphone systems, and we rely on a high degree of reliability that would be lost if white spaces become available. Weren't you using that before all this white space was opened up? If so...and there were no interference issues then...what exactly will be the problem now...? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
said by Markie:The tech world is quick to dismiss us... No, just those spreading FUD
said by Markie:...point out that our use is already unlicensed, not guaranteed, and only affects a small few compared to the "everybody" that would benefit from other white space devices. If I recall correctly, the wireless microphone issue is what got Dolly Parton to speak out against white space devices. I highly doubt Dolly Parton is going to be of much help to your cause, so bringing her up really...is just plain silly actually. Again, Wireless devices such as microphones have already been in use since before the transition to digital OTA TV. My guess is you already know that interference is going to happen, since it's done so for you when OTA analog TV was still going and you couldn't do anything about it. Guess what...you still can't do anything about it.
said by Markie:Quite simply, it's a real issue, and unless you basically never enjoy any form of entertainment or religion, it affects you. Everything from church services to pop concerts to auctions to sports games to live theatre relies on these wireless microphone systems. The loss of them wouldn't just affect the production engineers, it would affect you. The systems work in both directions, and are used for wireless in-ear monitoring too. Imagine if next time you go to church, a loud hiss interrupts a key part of the pastor's sermon. Imagine if the next time you go to a concert, hissing noises interferes with your favorite songs. Or imagine if the artist messes up due to annoying hiss and drop outs in his or her in-ear monitor. Imagine if next time you're at an auction, a flakey wireless microphone system leads to you bidding far more than you realized you were. This is the future if white space devices become reality. I'll say it once again. Wireless microphone systems, for one example, have been in place for a long time. Way before this digital transition. I will not say there won't be any bumps in the road...but I highly doubt there will be any difference once White Space devices are implemented.
All I see in your post is FUD, and that's pretty messed up.
--
Windows XP Pro SP3|AMD Phenom II x4 965 BE|Asus M3N72-D Motherboard|4GB Patriot PC2-8500 1066MHz RAM|EVGA GeForce GTS 250 1GB Ram Superclock Edition x2|Corsair CMPSU 650HX 650w Modular|Lian Li Lancool PC-K62 Case |
|
Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | reply to DaDawgs
Did you read my post? My point was that it doesn't only affect a small few. That was my *entire point* - my point was that, realize it or not, almost all Americans enjoy the product of wireless microphone systems. You don't have to be a sound engineer or a performer to enjoy the shows (and the many other uses such systems have) |
|
Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | reply to dMarks
Dude, your statement makes it clear you don't understand the issue at all. Digital TV didn't "open up" white spaces. It created far less white space spectrum. A great number of wireless microphone systems in the 700MHz band are now useless paperweights. What remains of the UHF TV band is now more closely consolidated with less white space. Running wireless microphone systems, especially many channels of wireless (the largest production I've been involved in coordinating microphones for was running 26 channels of wireless microphones on stage at once), has been getting very difficult already.
What the FCC is now proposing is to open the white spaces up to users OTHER than wireless microphone systems. They propose a database of wireless microphone systems that are installed so they can be avoided, however this blatantly ignores the fact that most wireless microphone systems are part of touring shows and temporary setups! I know that to the extent possible, I will enter every possible frequency as in use in this new mythical FCC database of wireless microphone users they propose for the venue I am a house sound engineer at. I can only hope and pray every venue does the same. That should at least blacklist white space devices, in theory, if the venue's house sound engineer is on top of things, from operating near theatres/churches/arenas/etc. But it doesn't do any good for every john doe who shows up and plays in coffeehouses... and from trampling on little country churches I've shown up at to setup a system for weddings... and from city parks I've ran concerts in.
See the problem? The FCC likes to blindly pretend the white space between TV channels is unused simply because very few people have licenses to use it. However, the FCC has always tolerated (though not outright permitted until recently) the use of wireless microphones in this space. And now, the entertainment industry, religions, sporting events, etc are dependent on these systems continuing to work - and so is everybody who enjoys these productions. That includes you. |
|
Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | P.S. Two things:
1. That should read that the FCC proposes to open up WHAT REMAINS of the white spaces.
2. Before you accuse me of spreading FUD, know this - if I were a gambling man, I'd be willing to bet a large amount of money that I have more knowledge and certainly more real-world experience with UHF TV band wireless microphone systems than anyone else on this board. Including frequency coordination of large numbers of wireless channels at a time, and operation in extremely noisy environments.
P.S. I'm not going to say it'll be total doomsday. It won't. But it'll add a huge amount of unpredictability that'll make my job VERY difficult. Imagine I have a perfectly working setup in rehearsal for a concert. Audience comes in. A few turn on their new white space devices. Boom, wireless microphones not working reliably. First few songs totally ruined.
Now, I know what I'm doing, and you better believe I'll do everything I can to make sure shows don't get ruined. I can register every imaginable operating channel in the proposed FCC blacklist database. I can hide wireless receivers on stage very close to performers (the idea being the microphone is then more likely to be the strongest signal). I can have a backup plan in place. Etc.
It's the smaller users, the john does playing in a coffeeshop. They're the ones who won't have a clue and will just give up on wireless. And that'll be a sad day for America's indie performers, small churches, auctioneers, etc. |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
1 edit | reply to Markie
said by Markie:I will enter every possible frequency as in use in this new mythical FCC database of wireless microphone users they propose for the venue I am a house sound engineer at. No you won't. They are planning for every metropolitan area to have one TV channel (6 MHz) designated in the database for wireless microphone use such as channel 40 designated in Pittsburgh. Otherwise wireless microphone users will have to depend on the signal sensing of the TV Band devices. |
|
| reply to John Galt
Expect any TV Band (white space) device to have an embedded kill switch at least for channels 21-51 so when AT&T Mobility and Verizon Wireless try to take over that spectrum they can have it (at least for billions at auction) without worry about pesky unlicensed broadband devices. |
|
Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | reply to Sammer
Wow that really stinks. I had read of a plan for venues to be able to enter the frequencies they're actually using. That's REALLY bad news. And thanks for letting me know it! |
|
DaDawgsPremium
join:2010-08-02
Deltaville, VA | reply to Markie
said by Markie:Did you read my post? My point was that it doesn't only affect a small few. That was my *entire point* - my point was that, realize it or not, almost all Americans enjoy the product of wireless microphone systems. You don't have to be a sound engineer or a performer to enjoy the shows (and the many other uses such systems have) I read your post... I have not "enjoyed the product of wireless microphone systems" in 25 years.
"Other uses"? Do you mean bugging devices? I don't know of any other "other uses".
--
--
|
|
DaDawgsPremium
join:2010-08-02
Deltaville, VA
1 edit | reply to Sammer
said by Sammer:said by Markie:I will enter every possible frequency as in use in this new mythical FCC database of wireless microphone users they propose for the venue I am a house sound engineer at. No you won't. They are planning for every metropolitan area to have one TV channel (6 MHz) designated in the database for wireless microphone use such as channel 40 designated in Pittsburgh. Otherwise wireless microphone users will have to depend on the signal sensing of the TV Band devices. Which we will be able to turn off because the vendor will supply it with that option for over seas sales appeal.
The microphone people need to move their kibitzing to more appropriate spectrum. Since they just hijacked white space why not hijack something up around 1500 MHz? They did it once, why not do it again?
--
--
|
|
Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | reply to DaDawgs
You mean to tell me that you haven't gone to a concert, a play, a church service, or a sporting event - or watched a television newscast on location in 25 years? I doubt it. |
|
Markie
join:2003-07-26
Kalispell, MT | reply to DaDawgs
Do you have any clue how much money is invested in UHF white space wireless microphones? Or how many such systems have JUST been replaced recently to clear off 700MHz for the cell companies? |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | reply to DaDawgs
said by DaDawgs:Which we will be able to turn off because the vendor will supply it with that option for over seas sales appeal. The microphone people need to move their kibitzing to more appropriate spectrum. Since they just hijacked white space why not hijack something up around 1500 MHz? They did it once, why not do it again? There may not be any overseas market for a long time so IMHO there will be no user accessible option without illegal modification to turn off the signal sensing. In fact the potential for the violation of international treaties may be the biggest downside of unlicensed TV Band Devices. |
|
jcremin
join:2009-12-22
Siren, WI
kudos:2 | reply to Markie
Yeah, most of us HAVE, but not all microphones use the TV whitespace to operate. From what I have read, most high end places (such as national touring bands, tv shows, and sport events) own a license for the frequencies they use. So that mostly leaves the small people (like churches) on the list who use the unlicensed channels.
Why is your stuff more important than Internet, which is becoming a necessity to get through life? The reality is that you could put a TON of microphones into one white space channel. So rather than trying to kill this off, maybe you should be doing the responsible thing and asking for ONE white space channel in each market be dedicated to microphones. Or you could just get a license. |
|
