TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
1 edit | reply to jmn1207
Re: Rural General Suckitude
said by jmn1207  :said by SilverSurfer :I don't know which is worse in rural areas...the fact that the phone lines are and have always been for shit, or, the fact that you can't even use good ol' rabbit ears to pick up any TV signals anymore. Why can't you use rabbit ears? I can pick up digital stations using a wire coat hanger with no degradation in quality. It's digital, so you either get it or you don't. It's not like the analog signals that would vary in quality depending on the strength. Rabbit ears will work just fine. The issue is that the digital signal has a sharp cutoff where you either get the signal or not. The analog signal would degrade over distance but still provide a viewable channel, even if the quality sucked.
This map of the coverage in the Wilmington test shows how the analog transmission had a farther reach. The digital coverage was helped by overlapping digital signals from nearby affiliate stations on the same network. But the area in orange basically lost all NBC coverage in the switch.
»hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/a···89A4.pdf
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
 ·Verizon FIOS
2 edits | And here I thought the FCC had conducted tests to ensure that the coverage would not be diminished when the switch to digital was made.
I wonder how this will impact satellite TV and local channel distribution. In areas where local networks were not included with DirectTV or Dish, you had to live outside the range of the local analog signal's reach to be eligible to get generic network broadcasts piped to your satellite receiver. I suppose the distance requirements will have to be adjusted accordingly. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by jmn1207 :And here I thought the FCC had conducted tests to ensure that the coverage would not be diminished when the switch to digital was made. And I wouldn't be surprised if the FCC also allowed adjustments in transmitted power so that the digital stations get a further reach(similar to the analog coverage) in order to cover areas like those on the map in orange.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| said by TKJunkMail :said by jmn1207 :And here I thought the FCC had conducted tests to ensure that the coverage would not be diminished when the switch to digital was made. And I wouldn't be surprised if the FCC also allowed adjustments in transmitted power so that the digital stations get a further reach(similar to the analog coverage) in order to cover areas like those on the map in orange. Hopefully there won't be any situations that might cause one signal to bleed over the top of another. If that is even possible with this type of signal. I know with my radio stations I can make a mix of Mexican Radio meets Contemporary Jazz. This occurs late in the evening and I call this music style, Contexican Jazzio. |
|
Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
·Comcast
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :And I wouldn't be surprised if the FCC also allowed adjustments in transmitted power so that the digital stations get a further reach(similar to the analog coverage) in order to cover areas like those on the map in orange. If I recall correctly, many stations whose frequency lies within the VHF range will actually be broadcasting with less power to prevent interference with FM stations. Plus they don't pass through physical objects (walls for example) as well as UHF frequencies.
Many of those stations are currently broadcasting in the UHF frequency range, but will switch to VHF after Feb 17, 2009.
For example Philadelphia's KWY-DT (CBS) is currently broadcasting on a UHF frequency (don't have it in front of me at the moment), but will switch to channel 3 after the switchover. That means people who can receive the channel now, might not be able to get it after the transition.
See »www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthre···t=823166 |
|
older dog
Premium
join:2005-06-09
Norwich, NY | reply to TKJunkMail
The last I read for this area the FCC had cut the allowable transmit power to prevent interference to stations in the Midwest.
Creating the problem of no receivable stations even with a large fringe antenna. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to Morac
said by Morac :Many of those stations are currently broadcasting in the UHF frequency range, but will switch to VHF after Feb 17, 2009. For example Philadelphia's KWY-DT (CBS) is currently broadcasting on a UHF frequency (don't have it in front of me at the moment), but will switch to channel 3 after the switchover. That means people who can receive the channel now, might not be able to get it after the transition. See » www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthre···t=823166 Thanks for link. After looking at that thread I came across this link that will allow anyone to stay on top of the OTA digital plans and follow thru.
»www.rabbitears.info/dtr.php
And if you do a zip code search and keep the mileage option to 40, you should be able to see what is/will be available digitally on 2/17/2009 in your area.
»www.rabbitears.info/search.php
I have tested for my area and can get all the stations listed with rabbit ears and a converter box up to about 35 miles away.
Here is an example of what is available when using search and listing tools:
»www.rabbitears.info/search.php?r···miles=40
»www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/FMTV-service···000.html
»fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe···um=61111
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
StudioTech
S2409W plus SA4250HD
join:2001-10-10
Edison, NJ | reply to Morac
Actually, in Philly, it's WPVI-DT (the ABC station) that's moving their digital signal back to VHF-Lo, not KYW-DT. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | reply to older dog
They should have made USA DTV be encoded in CDMA. |
|
53059959
Temp banned from BBR more then anyone
join:2002-10-02
PwnZone
| reply to older dog
that would help increase bandwidth efficiency so you could get a better picture or sound, but not raw signal strength.
cell phones work because there are towers all over the place. If you paid $50/mo for tv service you could have similar land based radio coverage. |
|
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
 ·Hollis Hosting
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
1 edit | reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail : And I wouldn't be surprised if the FCC also allowed adjustments in transmitted power so that the digital stations get a further reach I agree there will be likely be changes allowed after Feb 2009 as stations/customers get some real world DTV experience. The real test will not be Feb 18, 2009 but spring of 2009 when trees leaf out. Folks that had good TV reception in winter may lose it in summer.
Currently with simulcasting of analog and digital TV bands things are pretty crowded. After analog goes dark, even with loss of channels 52-69, band will likely be less congested in most regions. That means interference will be less of a problem making it viable to modify signal strength.
Something many people may not be aware of is customer signal strength is a combination of many factors: 1) Transmit power, 2) Antenna gain, 3) Distance 4) Terrain 5) Multipath and other impairments.
We tend to think of TV Stations as being onmidirectional – transmitting equal signal in all directions but that is rarely the case. Stations design antenna to have difference gain in different directions. It is a lot more cost effective to double receive signal strength (3 dB change) by tweaking antenna radiation pattern to change Effective Radiated Power (ERP) then to double transmit power. There are limits to this of course but it is not just a matter of cranking up transmit power with commensurate increase in utility bill.
/tom |
|
Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to StudioTech
said by StudioTech :Actually, in Philly, it's WPVI-DT (the ABC station) that's moving their digital signal back to VHF-Lo, not KYW-DT. Oops, you're right. That's actually worse since WPVI-DT doesn't come in very well currently. I shudder to think of what it will be like after the switchover. |
|
jay_rm
join:2002-04-12
Netville
·Fox Valley Internet
 ·ViaTalk
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :The issue is that the digital signal has a sharp cutoff where you either get the signal or not. The analog signal would degrade over distance but still provide a viewable channel, even if the quality sucked. In the little testing I've done, the analog quality would have extra-high suckage. I've seen perfect DTV picture quality with no drop-outs when the equivalent analog channel was so snowy it was no more then a ghosted black & white eye-hurting remnant of itself. Looks to me that the DTV signals need very low S/N to work just great.
Maybe in some markets the DTV stations are running at reduced power before the transition date ? ? ?
This exact same argument was put forth back in the good 'ol analog cellular days. "My digital phone cuts out all of a sudden where I used to have analog coverage !" Truth be told, the analog coverage was so static-ridden and broken up it would take an experienced intercept operator to get any intel out of it "What ? What ?? Say that again - YOU'RE WHAT... ?!?!?!!?"
Welcome to the Digital Communications Revolution - where it either works or it doesn't. 
--
3500/512 5.7 GHz Motorola Canopy Wireless; FoxValley.net
"Peace through superior firepower" |
|
Mac Bridger
Beat It Again Bill
Premium
join:2001-01-11
Smithton, PA
clubs: | Some stations are running at reduced power right now. Some aren't even broadcasting... |
|
systems2000
What? You Say It's Fixed. Hah
join:2001-11-29
Cyberspace
·Embarq
| reply to jay_rm
said by jay_rm :In the little testing I've done, the analog quality would have extra-high suckage. I've seen perfect DTV picture quality with no drop-outs when the equivalent analog channel was so snowy it was no more then a ghosted black & white eye-hurting remnant of itself. Looks to me that the DTV signals need very low S/N to work just great. This could very well be caused by different Multi-Paths between the different frequencies the analog and digital are transmitting on.
--
Personal Theme Song:
RUSH - Mystic Rythms from Power Windows.
Rush Radio Website |
|
charitmnacho
@rr.com
| reply to TKJunkMail
 It's not even just as simple as you either get it or you don't, all of the tv channels I get that are digital are choppy if I don't have the antenna adjusted just right for each channel I watch I have to constantly adjust my rabbit ears or the digital channels break up into little squares and then the screen freezes for minutes at a time, then picks up the signal again for a minute or two then cuts back out. atleast with analog you could still watch the show with out interuptions even though the picture might be a little fuzzy. |
|
