20% of Broadband Homes Now Get TV Via Antenna → Rural area here I use OTA

I cut the cord in 2011 and never looked back.

We live about 50+ miles from most of our local stations with a couple being 80 miles away.
I can't get the ABC affiliate and they refuse to install a translator in our area. I also can't get our local PBS station either and I do find a number of good quality programs on PBS.

However I still get 13 channels and a few are actually good quality sub channels. This is just with
a pair of rabbit ears inside on the TV itself.

There are a few programs I might be interested in on paid service but not worth the cost in the end when 90%+ of the content on paid TV is complete garbage with much of it being down right
obnoxious and offensive low quality carp. !

We never had a cord to cut. We are 40ish miles from the Boston stations and a few miles from major NH stations. OTA works for us.

It will be interesting to see the effects of the FCC repack plan (the FCC auctioned off channels 38-51) and the roll out of ATSC 3.0.

Personally I'm bullish on OTA and it is an ideal way to disseminate critical warnings to lots of people.

/tom

From a technical standpoint it is all win.
Co-channel interference is less of an issue with digital so we dont need transmitters spread all apart up and down the band. And with a smaller band you can have better antenna designs with higher gain.
The 3.0 protocol makes up for all of 1.0's shortcomings. That "digital cliff" will be moved much further away.

The only question is how many stations will survive the repack costs and how many will just give up and take the compensation money and run.

quote:

---

And with a smaller band you can have better antenna designs with higher gain.

---

Part 76 STILL COVERS channels 2 thru 6 which is 54 to 88 MHz as well as the VHF-H 7-13 174 to 216MHz, NOT just the 470 to 692Mhz UHF band. So in some cases the antenna for a good portion of OTA users is not going to change much from what it was in the 50's! It actually might return to those who need it.

With the repack those lower channels are going to be needed in most areas especially the top 1-5 markets. There just won't be enough channels to go around. ATSC 3.0 IS OPTIONAL regardless of the zeal of Sinclair et al. And the FCC REQUIRES 1.0 for now of any 3.0 via their Lighthouse.

If the US had moved to a SINGLE BAND plan for TV ie: 470-800 14-68 less the 69-83 for the original cellular implementation and Part 90 LMR bands. Then SINGLE BAND UHF antennas with high gain can be achieved. As it is if you have a mix like I do, you need a good at minimum VHF-H and UHF antenna. Some areas in my region do need VHF-L as a couple stations use it for translators or really fill in to replace coverage lost in the digital conversion. Those floppy disks as antennas only work if are within 5-10 miles ot TX farms, or mount it on a roof. I actually might try mine with a USB battery and feed it down.

Look for a LOT of the PBS stations to CASH OUT. The one in my area did, they are keeping the NPR FMR's. I know of another that basically has went from red to BLACK INSTANTLY by selling off their 2nd station and remuxing things. This station and its sister in a western state might not have survived as they were eating up the actual endowment capital. Others who have been speculating like OTABroadcasting (YES that is its NAME) , is selling off stations it can when it benefits them with $$$. Others they keep, for now. They cash in there, sell of the TX, antenna etc. if they have it... and thats more $$$.. Maybe they are smart and keep some for spares for the ones they keep.

DRM was not a part of 1.0. 3.0 has DRM, copy flags, digital watermarking, etc. Subchannels are going to require a monthly fee to unlock.

quote:

---

DRM was not a part of 1.0. 3.0 has DRM, copy flags, digital watermarking, etc. Subchannels are going to require a monthly fee to unlock.

---

While I disagree with this on OTA or online ie; web.

BUT there is NOTHING that REQUIRES the subchannels to be sent encrypted. If you think that, please give a proper FCC site for this requirement. ie 47 CFR 1.90...

Now that might BE YOUR OPINION that subchannels might appear that require a subscription. If you think that Cozi, AntennaTV will get subscribers. In their present form with ads?? With those ADS???? You are dead wrong on that! I only watch the OTA stuff, when I record it, and then FF @ 32x.. Or its on time shift, and then the same thing FF @ 32x.

In no case will I purchase these subchannels. Ad free or not. Most of these diginets would go out of business the second this transitioned. Their target audience, is even cheaper than me! Its not a matter of whether I can, I can, I paid $150/month in the past, I refuse to pay that for video services.

Now what I THINK will happen is that channels like TCM, Food Network etc. will go ... HEY we can get access to users via a deal with stations, and offer them via a group like Sinclair. These would probably be offered via a subscription basis, in their current format, with the ads. Those won't last long, they dump the ads, and then might be moderately successful enough to be worth it. I think there might be some new ones show up that are AD FREE too. Depends on the content. I wouldn't be in the least surprised to see the RSN's etc. show up as subscription subs.

Alot of this is also contingent on changing the way the RF side of things work in the US. Yes, I have personal agenda in getting the US RF network to be a copy of the UK FreeView/FreeSat system, BUT it benefits the content source AND the CONSUMER. Getting the various conglomerates out of running both sides of things, ie the actual RF stations, and the content itself. THIS will DEFINITELY TAKE SOME TIME, but its inevitable. The current US model is just not sustainable in the future.

I also think that any use of encrypted signals will lead to converters which till take the KEYS and/or CAM cards to allow reception. Much like the various FTA receivers can if you want to play the never ending game of keeping up with the keys for Dish etc.. Look at key servers for the FTA boxes. This was done to VideoCypher, SSAVI, TOCOM, SA3 VCII, Digicipher, Nagra, etc.. There are few of the private systems that are used which because they are not used widely in the consumer market were not hacked widely. I never paid much attention to AirTV, but I am sure there were likely hacks to the CAM to receive the signals.

BUT, you are FLAT OUT WRONG on a REGULATED REQUIREMENT for the transmission of the subchannels in an encrypted format. Now some might be eying that model... it won't work for Cozi etc..

The FCC only requires maintaining the 1.0 signal for five years after the 3.0 signal begins. After that they can drop the 1.0 signal. For good or bad MANY stations are trying to get exemptions from this requirement. PBS is probably the largest (geographically) asking for the exemption.

Yes. But UHF TV antennas now where designed to cover in to the 700s or if they are a really old design in to the 800s. A "14 dbi" antenna is really only that at it's center frequency(or what ever the peak is). So it might be 14 at 686mhz but only 7dbi at 470.
The further you get away from that peak freq the worse it performs. The more broad banded you have to make it the more compromise you have to put up with. Redesign the antenna so that it only covers 14-36 and you can have an antenna that is higher gain over the whole remaining band.

Low band and even high band stations are much fewer now. Our channel "2" and "3" are really on UHF. Most antenna makers just slap a dipole on the back of their UHF antenna and call it good.

years ago, people got sick of only having 13 channels, so they got cable.. I really couldn't imagine having to sit through commercials anymore, they got REALLY Stupid!.. and you can't get any cable only channels OTA.. 13 channels is really boring!..

You do realize that there are a lot of PVR solutions out there? Most of them have commercial skipping capability. With the ATSC 3.0 transition you are likely to see an increase in the number of channels. This will be because of the signal improvements in 3.0 (vs 1.0)(actually getting the channels you should) and because there will likely be an increase in the number of sub channels.

But the bottom line is that even with pay TV there isn't enough of interest to me to spend big money to get it. Most of what I am interested in I find on YT,
DailyMotion, and Vimeo. I'm a big fan of DIY videos.