Portland, ME - HDTV [Text View] - Page 8

bwebb

01-17-07, 05:57 PM

Hello all,

I have been lurking for about a week. Actually just spent about 3 days reading the entire thread, yes the entire thread. And I think it was a good read. Thanks to all for a wealth of information that I could not have gotten anywhere else for "free" (you will understand the quotes later). The only reason I even ended up here was a trip to walmart last weekend to get my wife a birthday present. While there I happened to take a look at the TV's. While looking I realized I didn't have a clue what the new standards stood for. I knew there were HD sets, I THOUGHT one would need a special signal to take advantage of it, but wasn't sure. Had not heard of SD and wasn't sure of ED. So when I got home I decided to do a "quick" search on the internet and "educate" myself. Three days later I think I have learned more that I want to know about TV and the methods that are in place to deliver those images to us.

I have also learned that there are some very informed and motivated posters on this site, and this thread in particular. There is no way to thank all that have contributed to the thread individually, but rest assured That if you have posted then you have contributed to my education, for that, Thank You.

I was pleased to see that some of the engineers from local broadcasters posting to keep local people informed. That is most definitely above and beyond their normal duties, and deserves more than any Thank You could possibly convey. I will admit that I personally do not have any interest in the information they have provided at this time, that does not diminish in the least my gratitude for their participation in this thread.

Well, the short story is no, I did not buy and HD set, and probably will not any time soon. The reasons are as many and varied as there are posters in this thread. No it was not any one thing from this thread, a better description would be it was the many facts I was forced to discover as a result of the thread.

Thanks again all,

Bwebb

drbonbi

01-17-07, 06:56 PM

Bwebb,

We're delighted that you chose our thread for your first post! And thrilled that you found this thread of value. I think we have a great group of posters here and while we have differing viewpoints - which only adds to its value - the level of civility is tops. As we would expect of Mainers. :)

Don't hesitate to ask any questions you may have from time to time. Meanwhile, you're poised at the cutting edge of technology.

Dana

bwebb

01-17-07, 09:43 PM

Thanks for the welcome,

Points of view was one of the things I found interesting. Unfortunately (fortunately, actually), I followed one bit of advise about googling broadcasters (ie time warner stock) then followed that to find financial info on local media offerings. I will just say that I am not impressed with the activities, motivations of any of them. With a little research it becomes crystal clear where loyalties lay. Unless you are a stockholder you are a "revenue generating unit", period. I found that to be the most accurate statement in the the three annual reports that I perused.

I hope I don't start a blistering debate on the thread, I just wanted to share one of the best (I think) things that I gleaned from the thread. If you have never looked into the finances of these businesses (you will have to remind yourself, these are business, I did), I think you will change your opinion of them. At the least I think you might at least raise an eyebrow the next time a corporate executive steps up to a microphone and says "our customers will always come first".

I gotta stop now before I begin a full fledged rant. lol

thanks again

Bwebb

mphinne2

01-18-07, 08:59 AM

I am not quite sure why the finances of all the companies involved should make a difference to me. Three companies offer a high definition product to me. I have decided to use Time Warner, and other than CBS not being offered I am VERY VERY happy with the product they offer.

If you don't want the product don't buy it. If the only reason you aren't buying high definition is because the companies who offer it are only interested in making a profit thats fine too. However, I think those companies probably aren't to much different than most other companies out there.

drbonbi

01-18-07, 09:50 AM

Stan54

01-18-07, 12:08 PM

What I get from bwebb's conclusion that these are profit-driven companies is to be a skeptic when you read a cable co. corporate PR statement that the reason it can't settle with (insert name of local broadcaster) is "We don't feel our customers should pay extra to watch free TV." (That's an actual quote from a news report of an impasse in another state.)

On the other hand, I have zero tolerance for local broadcasters who can't settle at the bargaining table so try to hold their cable viewers for ransom by denying their signal to them. Huh? How does that work? I'm supposed to support $inclair broadcasting when my TV goes black because they want more money?

Binding arbitration is one solution. Bringing these outfits under the regulation of a public utilities commission would be another. They are entitled to a reasonable profit in the performance of a public service. No more. No less.

Dana

Dana, don't take offense if I take the other side here, but this is something that stirs me up a little bit.

Quote: "They are entitled to a reasonable profit in the performance of a public service. No more. No less."

It is always interesting to explore another person's logic whether it is concerning war, peace or television.

My logic says cable is a service the public can use, but it is not public service in the classic sense. I see it as business and the participants are free to make as much money as they can possibly make. If I can see my way clear, I can seek to become a customer of that business if they have a product that I want. If I can afford to pay their price, they MIGHT let me have their product. If I find myself receiving insufficient or inferior product, I can stop making payments at any time.

I would go so far as to say that they are NOT entitled to a "reasonable" profit. They are entitled to an "UNreasonable" profit if they can find a legal way to acquire it.

Naturally, this belief of mine does not fit my personal purposes because I would prefer to believe that Time Warner and Sinclair actually owe me something including good intentions. In fact, they don't even owe me that. They only owe me what I pay for and for only as long as I continue to pay.

Since there is another source for the product in question, I can't even claim monopoly. I think I could put up an antenna for WABI HD if I really wanted to do it. I could buy DBS as another alternative. In the meantime, I will watch two businesses duke it out and hope for the best (for me). Neither business OWES me anything.

Sorry to take issue with the "reasonable profit" theory that many, many people share with you, I am sure.

DrJoe

01-18-07, 12:50 PM

Stan54

01-18-07, 05:53 PM

Stan ,

Just like the broadcasters use the "public airways", the cable companies use the public right-of-way. As such, they ARE a public service in the classic sense. The same as the electric company, the telephone company, the natural gas company, a television broadcaster, or a cellular phone company. This is why all of these companies are government regulated. They give up some level of independence by taking advantage of public resources. This is why the cable television company is NOT a "private company" in the sense you mean. The cable company did NOT have to purchase the land on the side of the road that they burry their cables under. When the public right of way crosses private land, the landowner is required to give them access to their property -- including digging up peoples' yards. If they had to purchase access rights from the property owners for all of the cable they've laid, they would be BILLIONS of dollars in the red.

As far as "reasonable" profits go, well, we've argued about this before. I would agree that they are responsible to their stockholder to earn every cent of legal profit they can.

However, I would point out that when companies like Standard Oil and AT&T did this, they were broken up as monopolies. I think that this should happen to cable companies too. Perhaps not in a corporate breakup sense, but in a competition sense. While it is true that they "own" the cable they laid, they laid the cable in public (and some cases private) property. They should be required to allow competition to use those cables at "reasonable" cost, just like the phone companies are required to allow the competition to use their telephone lines. I think we should also do away with local regulation of cable companies. Our city and towns are complicit in keeping the cable company monopolies alive.

Joe

The electric company, telephone company and natural gas company are clearly public service in the classic sense and as such are regulated by the State. The broadcasting companies do not seem to be such quite as clearly although they are required to perform a certain amount of public service. Because they use the public airwaves, they are regulated by the federal government in technical and taste matters. They are otherwise free to operate and charge as they wish. They run wide open business making as much money as they possibly can. Cable companies are a little different due to their nature of operation, but they function with a certain amount of government involvement once the power and telephone companies authorize the use of their poles. Digging and burying permission comes from government.

I will say at this point, that I claim no special knowledge in this area. In another life I performed legislative program evaluations and when I did you may be sure that I knew a lot more about the subject I was writing about than this one. I speak, now, only from the perspective of general personal observation.

You say the cable companies should be broken up for competition purposes. You say that they should be required to allow competition to use the cables at a reasonable cost. You say we should do away with local regulation (which is illusionary anyway). These are all "should be's". ............ They ain't.

I am glad that you agree the cable companies (and broadcasters) are free to make as much legal profit as they can possibly make. I would add, however, that they owe us nothing other than what the law requires. The cable company and the broadcaster are neither good guy or bad guy. They're just trying to make a buck and I only cheer for the guy that suits my own selfish purposes.

bwebb

01-18-07, 07:32 PM

For me the decision to not get involved in the HD market is a simple case of economics. I do not have the disposable income available to justify the added cost, and am not willing to go further in debt to do it (which would also require a level of disposable income). Don't misunderstand me, I do spend money foolishly, Just not on HD. :)
I am again delighted to see the the civil exchange of opinions. I just hope the moderators agree that these discussions are relevant to the state of HD viewing in our area, as well as viewing in general (I do). Hopefully it will serve to remind new members and or those just trolling the forum(s) to garner information on HD viewing options and equipment requirements that there are several options available to them. And maybe they should consider that it is not just the equipment that they should be thinking about.
I think we tend to get tunnel vision when we consider new products and services that become available to us as consumers. Ideally these new (in this case services) would be compatible with the products that we already own. This is somewhat true of HD technology, the cable that delivers the signal to my home will remain the same. :rolleyes: But most of us forget that we do not require cable service to receive TV programing in our home. Granted, the variety of options available through cable or satellite services will never be matched by OTA options, not even in NYC, but it is an option.
I guess I'm just rambling here. I'm about to go way off topic if I continue rambling here. There are just way to many factors that affect our decisions as individuals that it almost impossible to convey accurately to each other why we made our individual choices. It boils down to our personal experiences and how we process those experiences and to come to our own conclusions.

Bwebb

Davinleeds

01-18-07, 07:39 PM

Well, OTA options are limited. Sat and Cable can provide more options but quality and "correct" quantity is an open ended "discussion". But glad you're here.

bwebb

01-18-07, 07:45 PM

You are right, good summary. I just get wrapped up in the topic, and forget to unwrap. LOL

Davinleeds

01-18-07, 08:00 PM

You read the thread-you're not the first. Just keep posting.

bwebb

01-19-07, 09:44 AM

Just read yesterdays Morning Sentinel (Waterville). Interesting article concerning Verizon, Fairpoint deal. Short story, Fairpoint taking over Verison (not really a "takeover" per se, just a business deal) in Maine, Vt, NH (except wireless services). The comment I found interesting concerned Verizon. Part of their motivation for this move is their plans to begin installing fiber optic phone lines in other service areas, which, according to them, will allow them to begin offering TV service as well. Just the first time I have noticed the potential for such a service. I'm sure it has been mentioned before, I just had not noticed, probably because it has not been mentioned with regards to Maine, and won't be for some time. Although I do seem to recall protests by phone service providers when cable companies first discussed the possibilities of offering phone service over cable lines (if i remember correctly, at least something similar, haven't searched topic).
So, maybe another option on the horizon for some. Have to do a search on the web, may already be offered in some locations...?
Actually the article stated Verizon wanted to replace coper lines with fiber optic, just for clarity.

DrJoe

01-19-07, 10:11 AM

First, this handover is supposed to take at least 11 months before it actually happens.

Verizon is getting out of Maine because they want to focus their resources on markets with higher populations and higher population densities than in rural New England. In other words, where the get a higher return for infrastructure investment.

In communities in Maine served by Verizon, there is a very low penetration of DSL service because DSL equipment needs to be located close to the consumer. They would rather support infrastructure improvements in urban communities where there are more potential customers per square mile than in Maine. Those urban communitites get service improvements like DSL, television over phone line, etc.

FairPoint has focused (says they focus) on rural communities. Communities in Maine served by FairPoint supposedly have a higher penetration of DSL service than Verizon communities. They're business model appears to be to support infrastructure development in regions with smaller customer bases in order to avoid the competition they would face in regions with larger customer bases. They get less return on their investment dollar, but the face less competition for each dollar they earn.

It turns out that broadband over phone requires a specific type of fiber optic cable technology, FiOS, that Verizon had begun to install in New Hampshire. This will apparently end now. Fairpoint is not presently installing this technology in New England. So there is little prospect for television over telephone in Maine.

See the following article regarding FairPoint and television service:
http://www.telecommagazine.com/newsglobe/article.asp?HH_ID=AR_2711

Excerpts:
FairPoint plans to accelerate a focus on broadband in the region and could offer entertainment television services, although that is less of a surety than the carrier’s goal of saturating the market with high-speed data services, said Gene Johnson, chairman-CEO of the Charlotte, N.C.-based carrier.

“Our well-known commitment to broadband throughout the 31 systems we currently serve in 18 states will carry over into the New England properties and we are already making plans to increase broadband availability through the first year of our ownership,” Johnson said.

and

That broadband will not be FiOS in either a strict or loose sense.

“Our (Verizon's) DSL network is very similar to the network that FairPoint uses today,” Ruesterholz said. “We have a small amount of FiOS in New Hampshire that will be moving over to FairPoint.”

FiOS’ main attraction is its ability to deliver video entertainment via FTTH networks. Video, said Johnson, is “an important part of our product mix” that is being delivered in six FairPoint market, “some of it over the traditional DSL network using Internet Protocol TV (IPTV).”

Joe

AccidenT

01-19-07, 10:14 AM

The fiber-optic service is known as FIOS, which can include FIOS TV. It's available in a few areas in various parts of the country.

According to a coworker who has a friend that works for Verizon, the greater Portland area was originally slated to be a test market for FIOS, but then plans changed. He claims the fiber is already laid everywhere in the greater Portland area, but I haven't heard any word of a timeline for when the FIOS service might be available here.

Here's a link to the FIOS thread in the HDTV programming forum: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=590208

bwebb

01-19-07, 02:48 PM

Thanks AccidenT and DrJoe, it will be interesting to see how things develop.

Short story for you. I asked my 13 yo daughter last night, "What channels would we get without cable?", I wasn't sure she would know. She surprised me with "local". After pausing a moment, she ran to her mother screaming that I was going to do away with cable (actually just in a rather excited manner, maybe not "screaming"). Come to find out one of her friends doesn't have cable (or satellite either I would guess). But she became a bit excited (not happy, more concerned) that we might be without cable. "But I won't be able to watch my shows!". "What shows could we watch" I asked. "Crappy ones!". To see where her loyalties were I suggested "How about if you could get an additional $5 in your allowance a week?". ".......$5?......ok". That surprised me a bit also. Needless to say when the wife was consulted it was a short discussion. LOL

mphinne2

01-19-07, 02:55 PM

Anyone here anything from Time Warner and Sinclair yet today? The extension on cbs only ran throughthe 19th, today. I keep hoping they will reach an agreement that will allow us in Greater Portland to get CBS in high def.

RickEdwards

01-19-07, 07:44 PM

Got a report that Time Warner and Sinclair have reached an agreement. WGME-HD will be on 513. Should be switched on any time now.

capsfan

01-19-07, 08:07 PM

Excellent news finally!! See notice below from Time Warner. :D

Time Warner Cable is pleased to announce a long term agreement has been reached with Sinclair Broadcasting to continue providing WGME TV to our customers. This includes WGME's HD signal as well which will be available to most of our customers with access to WGME and HD programming beginning Saturday, January 20. WGME HD will be available on channel 513 in Cumberland County and portions of York County, and channel 713 in the Augusta, Lewiston/Auburn, Conway, New Hampshire and Sebago areas.

We thank our customers again for their patience with this issue and look forward to serving you in the future.

jkurlanski

01-19-07, 08:46 PM

ITS UP. Channel 513 here in Cumberland County! I never thought I'd see the day.

drbonbi

01-19-07, 09:02 PM

Congratulations! I'll just have to hope that Comcast will follow suit!

Dana

jkurlanski

01-19-07, 09:09 PM

Just about spit my gum across the room as I was flipping channels and it skipped across 513. :)

Valve1138

01-19-07, 10:48 PM

Just about spit my gum across the room as I was flipping channels and it skipped across 513. :)

You and me both!

drbonbi

01-19-07, 11:02 PM

A story out of Ohio indicates it's a three year deal with more details to be made available Monday.

Dana

Stan54

01-19-07, 11:24 PM

I came on WGME on TWC 713 at about 8:15 tonight and had to wait until my wife got off the computer to make a post.

This is great. Just in time for Sunday's big game. All of the programming I saw in the last 3 hours looked really good. It's funny what HD will do for programs that I wouldn't ordinarily be interested in.

One thing on an Ohio newspaper's website said this:
"The companies have negotiated so long over an agreement because Sinclair wanted to charge Time Warner a fee to carry the two local channels, while Time Warner officials said they disagreed with paying for something customers could get for free with an antenna."
I wonder if Time Warner had to pay or is Sinclair content to wrestle Mediacom to the ground this time around.

I can honestly say that I know of no other HD channels that I really am longing for TWC to pick up. We have a damn good lineup from what is currently available.

mphinne2

01-20-07, 06:00 AM

Now if we could just get the NFL network I will be very very happy.

jkurlanski

01-20-07, 06:50 AM

I'll admit it, I'm greedy: ESPN2, Cinemax, Starz, and NFL Network. Then I'll be happy. :)

drbonbi

01-20-07, 09:17 AM

An Iowa journalism prof who also was dean of the Drake University School of Journalism and Mass Communication explains in an article the lay of the land regarding the dispute between Sinclair Broadcasting and cable cos. http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070115/OPINION01/701150304/-1/SPORTS09

In her mind, nothing short of Congressional action will fix the situation. (If Sinclair pulls the plug on 30 stations in 23 Comcast cable markets as of Feb. 5 affecting three million cable viewers, it may provoke Congress to do so.)

Dana

Stan54

01-20-07, 11:29 AM

Time Warner Augusta has ESPN2, Starz, Cinemax, The Movie Channel and HBO in HD. The NFL is gone now and it is good riddance. I love NFL regular season games, but they only offerred 8 of them and it wasn't worth the bandwidth that they occupied all year long. Bandwidth is a precious commodity.

zutmin

01-20-07, 01:26 PM

WooHoo! WGME HD 713 is finally here. No more OTA signal issues to deal with out here in the middle of nowhere (Waterford). As a former Adelphia customer I've also got ESPN2 HD :)

bwebb

01-21-07, 11:59 AM

January 8, 2007

NAB ANNOUNCES FORMATION OF DIGITAL TELEVISION TRANSITION TEAM

"to spearhead a national campaign to increase awareness of the federally mandated transition to digital television."

"A successful transition to digital television is in the best interest of every TV station in America and is the number one priority of the NAB Television Board," said NAB President and CEO David K. Rehr. "NAB's DTV transition team will be charged with educating the American public on the many benefits of DTV so that no TV set goes dark on February 18, 2009."

http://www.nab.org/AMTemplate.cfm?Section=Press_Releases1&CONTENTID=7805&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm

I'm sure their only concern is to ensure my TV doesn't "go dark", especially when you look at the background of the members. Three of the four members have some pretty deep political roots. It will be interesting to see what is generated.

I'm a little disappointed the FCC has not taken the initiative to better inform the public as to the actions it has mandated, and what effect it will have on viewers in the near (currently February 2009) future. Unfortunately I think there will be many rural viewers that will be left "in the dark" in spite of their best efforts to stay up to date.

If I understand it correctly then the three stations listed below will be continuing to broadcast on UHF after the analog signal is turned off. So those in these stations viewing areas will need to have both VHF and UHF OTA antenna setups to receive their local stations OTA after the switch is flipped. Not a huge deal, since most that want or currently choose to get their viewing OTA may already have both antenna already. But I suspect that those that currently have (for example) a UHF antenna to receive specific local stations in HD may be surprised. Basically, if anyone wants (or for whatever reason needs) to get their TV OTA then they will need to have both VHF and UHF antenna. I suppose it's a mute point, since most people in a situation where they need to get their TV OTA now may already have both, unless they have been satisfied to just continue viewing the analog signal via VHF without getting into the HD world (which I think many rural maine viewers do, just my opinion). In that case, if they are viewing one of these stations as their "primary" in VHF, without staying up to date up to date on DTV transition (which is quite possible in rural maine), then, when the analog signal is switched off, they will be without a signal (until they update or augment their antenna with UHF capability). All the local broadcast stations need to do a better job of informing their viewers of the effect the switch will have.

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1082A2.pdf
from the above link
call sign, current dtv channel, current ntsc channel, tenative channel desig

wabi 19 5 19
wcsh 44 6 44
wgme 38 13 38

The more I learn about the current goings on in the broadcast/media world, the less I like it. It is going the way of computers (perhaps because of the similarities). The first years of development there was an effort to maintain backwards compatibility, due to the rapid development of new technologies. The same is happening to TV. The difference is consumers are being left behind (in my opinion). That is where the similarities end though. Computers are not a necessity nor do they necessarily provide a "public service" in the sense the TV broadcasters do. TV's are not a necessity either, but they are used to provide emergency notifications to the public in general, and many depend on it for local news and weather in general.
Granted, the viewing experience may be considered by many to be worth the expense, but the many are not the majority. If there is a viable market for these new technologies, then market to that audience, along with the associated costs of the R&D. Don't drag the average consumer along by removing any other options. For now most consumers will be able to continue using existing equipment, providing they receive their programing through cable, satellite or some other service provider. How long before these providers decide it is not "financially viable" to continue to offer this capability?

DrJoe

01-21-07, 01:10 PM

If I understand it correctly then the three stations listed below will be continuing to broadcast on UHF after the analog signal is turned off. So those in these stations viewing areas will need to have both VHF and UHF OTA antenna setups to receive their local stations OTA after the switch is flipped.

For now most consumers will be able to continue using existing equipment, providing they receive their programing through cable, satellite or some other service provider. How long before these providers decide it is not "financially viable" to continue to offer this capability?

First, it has been posted on this thread (albeit a long time ago) as to what frequency the Portland area broadcasters were going to broadcast on longer term when the switch is thrown. At one point I sent out emails to each of the stations asking their intentions. It is completely up to the local station to choose (Except WPFO, which does not have a digital assignment). The collective wisdom seems to be that VHF is better, but as you point out there are several stations choosing the UHF option.

Second, I wouldn't worry about satellite or cable services shutting down standard definition programming. Cable TV may end "analog cable service" -- it would give them a large increase in standard and HD digital service bandwidth -- but the set top boxes all support "down conversion". It isn't an "expense" per se, and it is a feature they can advertise. Take a look at any digital cable box or satellite receiver and you will see that there are always composite (yellow RCA jack) and s-video outputs on the boxes. Often there aren't RF coaxial outputs on more modern boxes, so people with very old TV's without video inputs may have to purchase converter boxes.

Joe

PS: I guess mphinne2's threat to purchase a receiver payed off. Who'd have thought that Sinclair would ever make nice with Time Warner. To steal a line from a classic: "Dogs and Cats, living together -- mass hysteria!"

Stan54

01-21-07, 01:16 PM

Quote from bwebb:

"...................For now most consumers will be able to continue using existing equipment, providing they receive their programing through cable, satellite or some other service provider. How long before these providers decide it is not "financially viable" to continue to offer this capability?"

If I am understanding you correctly (and I might not be), I would offer the following thought.

The sooner cable and satellite providers stop sending analog signals to their customers, the sooner they will be able to begin using the increased available bandwidth for more HD channels.

The press has enjoyed painting a grim picture of tv sets across the country "going dark" when the country goes from analog to digital. In fact, simple digital to analog converters will be available for purchase and things will move right along as usual. The converters have been projected to cost between $25 and $50. This is a small price to pay for the country to be able to move to a highly improved method of sending, receiving and viewing television.

The real danger as I see it is that cable companies will simply receive digital signals, convert them to analog and send them down the line to customers thereby obviating the need for household converters. I suspect this might be done and it would be a terrible solution in my mind. This technique means that they would be selling more and they would find a way to convert that into business income. Bandwidth would be very scarce and I can imagine cable companies playing the broker role with customers by making a big deal out of slowly and grudgingly lopping off analog channels to "make room for new HD channels that the public is demanding."

Perhaps a year ago, I saw cable company CEO's on CSPAN discussing the digital conversion before a congressional committee and one of them made the "gererous" offer to convert digital signals to analog at each headend so that customers would not have to lay out $50 for a converter. I thought at the time that for sure that technique would do nothing but screw up the big picture of what is happening. Certainly, there had to be something in it for them. Why would they volunteer to give up so much bandwidth on their systems if there was not?

Damariscotta

01-21-07, 01:36 PM

Stan54.....A week or so ago, TWC corrected the problem that prevented me from receiving the 4 new HD channels. Simply, they forgot to pitch the change to the Newcastle Hub.

I have another question for you. Do you receive the station identifier for both the analog and digital signals through the cableCARD? For example, when I select Channel 6, the only info in the banner is "Cable 6". When I select 773, the only info in the banner is "DTV 773". Previous to the Adelphia/TWC migration, I used to receive the station identifier (i.e., WCSH and NESN).

I read in another forum where a gentleman in Bangor experienced the same around the Nov 06 timeframe.

loudo38

01-21-07, 01:37 PM

Quote from bwebb:
The sooner cable and satellite providers stop sending analog signals to their customers, the sooner they will be able to begin using the increased available bandwidth for more HD channels.

Only cable companies are using analog signals. DBS satellite (DirecTV and DISH) are both using digital signals. The only place you will still find a few analog signals may be on a few services and back hauls on C & KU - Band.

Stan54

01-21-07, 02:21 PM

Only cable companies are using analog signals. DBS satellite (DirecTV and DISH) are both using digital signals. The only place you will still find a few analog signals may be on a few services and back hauls on C & KU - Band.

You are absolutely correct (as far as I know). I was careless by including satellite providers in my comment. Of course, that is one of the major selling points for DBS. They provide digital signals to the receiver from the satellite.

As I think more about DBS, however, I am realizing that the DBS provider is receiving both analog and digital signals, depending on the origin, even though they transmit them digitally to the customer. How do they handle TNT, ESPN, A&E etc.? Those stations send out 2 signals. One is digital and capable of HD. The other is analog. Does the DBS provider only receive and send the digital (includes HD) signal leaving the customer's receiver to sort out the appropriate display for the customer's tv type?

AccidenT

01-21-07, 02:36 PM

You are absolutely correct (as far as I know). I was careless by including satellite providers in my comment. Of course, that is one of the major selling points for DBS. They provide digital signals to the receiver from the satellite.

As I think more about DBS, however, I am realizing that the DBS provider is receiving both analog and digital signals, depending on the origin, even though they transmit them digitally to the customer. How do they handle TNT, ESPN, A&E etc.? Those stations send out 2 signals. One is digital and capable of HD. The other is analog. Does the DBS provider only receive and send the digital (includes HD) signal leaving the customer's receiver to sort out the appropriate display for the customer's tv type?

I'm pretty sure DBS providers have a large # of real-time MPEG encoding hardware. For analog signals, they MPEG encode it and event for digital signals, they often de-code it, adjust the bitrate and resolution, and re-encode it before sending it to the customer. The latter is where "HD-lite" comes from. I imagine these encoders also take care of the encryption that makes the signal only de-cryptable by STBs for that DBS provider which have an authorized access card.

DrJoe

01-21-07, 06:06 PM

You have to be careful using the expression "digital" and "analog". Generally, it is used to refer to the format the signal is in between the broadcaster (the local broadcaster, cable head end, or satellite) and the consumer (you TV set's coaxial input, satellite box, or digital cable box).

Before this stage there are lots of other "analog" and "digital" points in the life of the video. First, they film it. This can be using an analog camera with film, or a digital camera. Using a digital camera, it can be standard definition (480i), or one of the HD formats. Then they edit it, again it can be analog or digital. Eventually it gets turned into a broadcast stream and is sent to the head end. Very likely this step is digital (even for standard definition programming). Some channels send one standard definition feed to the "head end" (like Nikelodeon), some send two (like ESPN, one in high definition, one in standard definition). Both are very likely "digital" at this point, digital being the means of transmission from the network studio to the head end (cable company or DBS).

Then, at the head end they are either converted to anlaog (by the broadcaster at their antenna tower or cable head end) or sent in a digital format (by the broadcaster into an ATSC digital transmission, at the cable head end into a digital cable transmission, or by the DBS provider into a digital transmission the consumer recieves). At this point, the signal is converted back to analog (either by the set top box, which then sends an analog signal to the box, or if you are using a digital input like DVI, the set does the last conversion itself.

I don't know HOW many times the signal is actually converted from digital to analog (and back).

The majority of noise that gets added to the signal will be in that last step. That's why DBS providers have good pictures compared to over-the-air NTSC and basic cable.

But this has nothing to do with the actual video content -- 480i/p, 720p, 1080i. This is what it is (and all are included in the ATSC video format). It will likely be a long time before all of the content producers switch to a high definition video standard. Especially for networks that produce little or no "original" programming. While there are advantages to converting old shows to high def (like HDNet did for Hogan's Heroes, the Avengers, and a number of other shows), the advantages aren't compelling enough that I think will justify the expense.

Anyway, I want to point out that "digital" doesn't mean "high definition". It just is how the video is transmitted in one step in the chain from camera to television set. Stan is right that the "analog" basic cable feed will go away as soon as the cable companies can force it to go away (they have been fighting to get rid of it for years, but are required to keep it by the government) because they can fit 5 standard definition "digital" channels in the band width of one standard definition "analog" channel (if I remember the bandwidth correctly). This does not mean that 480i broadcast are going away any time soon, it just means you may need a converter box to view them on an NTSC television.

Later

Joe

bwebb

01-21-07, 07:49 PM

Nice post DrJoe. Very clear explanation of the processes.

I think it is the way the video is handled by digital technology (less bandwidth, able to handle more content with compression) that makes it appealing to cable and satellite companies. That will allow them to send more to their customers.
That is where I think local broadcasters will have the opportunity to do the same, just as they are doing now to some extent. I understand (as has been posted often) that HD content requires more bandwidth that SD. But I also think there will be many more customers still watching older sets that do not have HD capability when the conversion to all digital takes place. Which would make more sense from a business perspective- cater to the few that want the HD, which requires more (bandwidth) resources, or cater to the majority of views that will still gain (better PQ) from a digital signal but offer additional programing on the same "channel" (ie 13.1, 13.2 etc). I expect to see additional programing. Of course locals could use it to their advantage in negotiations with cable companies as well. By using their ability to withhold retransmission permissions for parts of their signal. HD will be/is a premium right now. How many people are screaming for sports in HD (again, I think it is a minority, but the squeaky consumer gets the programing). I'm sure the timing of these negotiations between sinclaire and time warner weighted heavily on the "agreement" that was finally reached. Especially since the broadcasters will be able to "pitch" their case on their own signal to viewers.
And as DrJoe points out, many people still think digital equals HD, and no one is really making any effort to educate the public otherwise. As long as that is the general impression, it only serves media distributors interests, because the general public thinks they are getting a better product. Just as many people still think they can buy a tv, hook it up, plug it in, and watch HD. In fact they would be getting the same product delivered in a different package, albeit in some cases it may actually be a bit of an improvement in quality (but not most).

I hope I am not giving the impression that I'm trying to bash HD.

If I have, then I apologize.

I guess I'm just trying to get a feel for where the future is going and enjoy the posts on this thread. I probably will buy a new set in a year or so. I really think the landscape will have changed a bit even in that short time. Unfortunately I'm not so sure it will be much better then than it is now though.

Stan54

01-22-07, 02:03 PM

Stan54

01-22-07, 02:07 PM

bwebb

01-22-07, 04:40 PM

Stan54

01-23-07, 07:57 AM

Stan54

01-23-07, 08:18 AM

"Assuming you are still fairly young"

A very relative description, but thanks for the benefit of the doubt. I'm afraid I cannot give you much completion, still have a couple years to go to make 50 :) . But I can remember growing up with my grandparents and getting our first color tv, and watching only local VHF channels (5 or 13, depending on the conditions that day/evening, 8 i think, and 6 or 2 depending on the conditions. and of course 10 {pbs}), all we got in manchester (ME). And I remember hearing the other kids talking about having cable at their house and "all the channels". If I remember correctly, we still did not have cable at my grandparents house when I graduated from High School and moved on (another story). So, with a little luck I will see a few more changes in tv down the road, and HD will just be another step on the way. :)

Interesting. Whether we wish to acknowledge it or not, tv plays a big part in our lives as did radio before that.

I was in my parents' living room in Gardiner in January 1953 when WABI channel 5 flickered to life for the first time. The yagi antenna on the roof was just about able to pull in the signal which I believe was 5000 watts at the time. I had seen television once before on a visit to Iowa in 1949, but seeing it in your home was something else again.

The best times were when signals bounced in from Boston. The picture would be much better than channel 5 during those times because 5 had such a weak signal and the reflected Boston signals were virtually full power effect. Those were heady times and we couldn't believe all the treats we were given especially Red Sox games which was a dream come true.

Sometime later, channels 6, 8, 10 and 13 showed up on the dial and channel 5 increased its power somewhat. Things were off and running. Fulltime network colorcasting came along in 1966 about the time that cable was threading its way through Maine. Not many years later the cable brought us out-of-State channels. Digital cable appeared and, now, HD digital cable.

As far as television goes, we're living pretty high off the hog.

drbonbi

01-23-07, 10:53 AM

Just for the record a trade publication reports the details here http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6409025.html?display=Search+Results&text=sinclair

Time Warner Cable’s new retransmission-consent deal with Sinclair Broadcast Group covers all of its subscribers in markets that carry Sinclair TV-station signals, not just those where Time Warner acquired systems from now-bankrupt Adelphia Communications.

Time Warner said Monday that it will carry the analog and digital signals of 35 TV stations owned or operated by the broadcaster in 22 markets for the next three years.

No financial details are included in the report.

Dana

Damariscotta

01-25-07, 09:03 AM

Damariscotta, the only station identifier I get is C6 or C773 in the example you cited. There is more information concerning lines of resolution and laced or interlaced, but not the station call letters. That info hasn't been there in the year that I have been watching HD.

I'm glad you are getting all of your channels via cablecard. It's nice to have channel 13 (713) there isn't it?

When I went to HDTV last March, I got and appropriate antenna to pickup the OTA signals, particullarly WGME for HD sports programming. Now that WGME is HD on 713, I can swing the antenna towards WABI (Bangor) to pick up the UMO hockey games and leave it there. No rotary on the antenna. Even when pointed to Bangor, I can get WGME through the back of the antenna. But I lose NBC, ABC and PBS. But they are all carried by TWC.

When TWC informed me they had resolve the issue with the 4 new channels at the Newcastle Hub, the technician made the comment that I should be receiving the station identifers. Stan...do get the HD OTA? I see the station identifier OTA. And as I mentioned earlier, I used to with Adelphia til the early Fall 2006.

Stan54

01-25-07, 01:41 PM

When I went to HDTV last March, I got and appropriate antenna to pickup the OTA signals, particullarly WGME for HD sports programming. Now that WGME is HD on 713, I can swing the antenna towards WABI (Bangor) to pick up the UMO hockey games and leave it there. No rotary on the antenna. Even when pointed to Bangor, I can get WGME through the back of the antenna. But I lose NBC, ABC and PBS. But they are all carried by TWC.

When TWC informed me they had resolve the issue with the 4 new channels at the Newcastle Hub, the technician made the comment that I should be receiving the station identifers. Stan...do get the HD OTA? I see the station identifier OTA. And as I mentioned earlier, I used to with Adelphia til the early Fall 2006.

My only signal is from cable, but I was considering an antenna for WABI before the settlement. I don't think WGME would have worked well in my location.

Now that you can compare WGME OTA with WGME via cable, can you give an opinion on any picture quality difference or is it too close to call?

dueysutra1979

01-25-07, 06:07 PM

Stan54

01-25-07, 06:25 PM

As a subscriber of twc on the augusta circuit, I am revieving fsn 779 only as a screen saver 24/7. I thought I would at least see the celtics in hd, but no such luck. Does anyone know if there is any content expected on fsn new england twc agusta 779? It seems like a waste of bandwidth. I would like to also see the inclusion of wb hd since it carries Smallville, which is my favorite Thursday program. If anyone knows what is to come with twc and wb, that would be great

Forgive me wb is now cw

I am on the Augusta system, too. Fox Sports New England on 779 doesn't amount to much for sure. It does carry Celtic home games in HD and I have noticed a couple of out-of- New England sports events as well. I think they might have come from Fox Sports Ohio, but I don't really remember. It wouldn't surprise me too much if there was a little more as time goes on and, perhaps, studio based sports talk similar to NESN HD.

Back along, I heard that CW and My Network were looking to join TWC sometime in the future, but I haven't heard anymore. Perhaps, their engineer who is on this thread could give us an update.

drbonbi

01-25-07, 08:54 PM

A trade journal reports that Comcast will employ new technology to offer more HD channels.

Houston -- Comcast is conducting trials of switched digital video in two markets and expects to deploy services based on the technology in the second half of 2007, vice president of production-platform engineering Rick Rioboli said.

Rioboli, speaking on a panel at the Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers’ Conference on Emerging Technologies here Wednesday, said switched digital video will be the key mechanism to let operators deliver more HD channels.

...

Switched-digital-video systems can deliver channels more efficiently than broadcasting them by sending video streams to a subscriber only when a channel is requested. The assumption is that not every channel in a switched group will be viewed simultaneously.

The full article is here http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6410009.html?display=Breaking+News

Dana

Damariscotta

01-26-07, 08:54 AM

My only signal is from cable, but I was considering an antenna for WABI before the settlement. I don't think WGME would have worked well in my location.

Now that you can compare WGME OTA with WGME via cable, can you give an opinion on any picture quality difference or is it too close to call?

I remember a discussion about picture quality when comparing cableCARD vs cablebox. If I switched back an forth, I could convince myself that the quality was better with the cableCARD. It was too close to call. When comparing OTA with cableCARD, the reception is noticeable better OTA. Most times when watching NBC, ABC or PBS I would switch over to OTA. Now that WGME HD is provided by TWC, I don't think I would purchase an antenna if I didn't already have one. It's one thing to get CBS HD sports programming. That was a no-brainer for me. Its another to get UMO hockey in SD. But since I already have it, it is now pointed towards WABI. Now that I think about it, WABI does a better job broadcasting state high school athletics. They broadcast the state high school football games and they do some high school basketball during tournament week.

EdSeckler

01-26-07, 02:25 PM

Webini

01-26-07, 02:28 PM

Does anyone have any idea why I can get WPME-DT (35-1) Freq 28 at 85% but get nothing on WPXT-DT (51-1) Freq 43?

Are they not from the same location, perhaps even the same antenna?

Thanks,
Ed
Casco.

I have exactly the same issue in Topsham.

And please WPME get rid of the light blue sidebars on SD material!

DrJoe

01-26-07, 04:58 PM

I get both WPME and WPXT equally well.

You can run a TV query at the FCC website:

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html

Put in the call letter and choose the detailed output.

You will get a list with the location, height and power of the transmitter, and there are links to maps that show where the towers are.

Originally, WPXT was at low power and a different site than WPME. I believe it has moved to the same ste as WPME and went to higher power (Higher than WPME -- WPME is 49.5 kW erp and WPXT is 137.4 kW erp, but both locations are listed in the FCC file. The tower WPME is on is near Gray. WPXT was originally in Westbrook. Like I said, I'm fairly certain it has moved to the Gray site. If you read back a year or so in the thread, I believe the station engineer talked about it.

I live in Greene (on Sabattus Pond), with a rooftop antenna with a preamp. I get both stations very well.

Joe

Davinleeds

01-26-07, 06:59 PM

Even though PME and PXT are on the same antenna, I need to adjust(turn) my antenna slightly at different times of the year to receive one or the other well. Sometimes I get a sweet spot and can leave the antenna alone. With this new Samsung STB, reception is much better. Once again topography is usually everything.

Stan54

01-28-07, 02:43 PM

Craig, I have to say that WGME HD looks very good here in the Augusta TWC area.

AccidenT

01-28-07, 08:16 PM

Craig, over the past few weekends I've noticed that 13-1 is again dropping to SD for station identifications. Sometimes this is preceded by some weird pink artifacting. Is the HD graphics hardware broken (hence the pink artifacting when it was attempted?) or is has the weekend crew struck again? ;) I'd prefer an SD-less Super Bowl next weekend, if possible. :)

Crclark

01-28-07, 10:11 PM

This is disappointing, there is no need to drop to SD for I.Ds. Thanks for letting me know. I will look into this.

Craig, over the past few weekends I've noticed that 13-1 is again dropping to SD for station identifications. Sometimes this is preceded by some weird pink artifacting. Is the HD graphics hardware broken (hence the pink artifacting when it was attempted?) or is has the weekend crew struck again? ;) I'd prefer an SD-less Super Bowl next weekend, if possible. :)

jkurlanski

01-29-07, 09:54 AM

Stan54

01-29-07, 02:27 PM

This is disappointing, there is no need to drop to SD for I.Ds. Thanks for letting me know. I will look into this.

Would you mind giving WMTW a call for the same thing, Craig? I'm sure that they would be happy to hear from you. .............. Just kidding, but it IS pretty nice to have your ear (eye) on this thread. Thank you.

Here's hoping for a flawless HD Super Bowl.

drbonbi

01-31-07, 10:33 AM

Here in Brunswick on Comcast Fox 23 is off the air. Anyone else having the same problem.

Chris

Same here so it must be system-wide on Comcast. The Guide still shows so hopefully it's temporary.

Dana

Webini

01-31-07, 11:19 AM

cmaine

01-31-07, 11:49 AM

Speaking of Comcast in Brunswick, can anyone tell me exactly what is available for HD now on that system? Calling the 800# gets me inconsistent answers and I don't have time to run down to the office.

Have any additional channels been promised (NESN, FSNE, etc)?

Just got a notice from Comcast saying they will be adding Fox Reality and TV One on digital cable as of March 1.

Chris

drbonbi

01-31-07, 12:04 PM

Speaking of Comcast in Brunswick, can anyone tell me exactly what is available for HD now on that system? Calling the 800# gets me inconsistent answers and I don't have time to run down to the office.

Have any additional channels been promised (NESN, FSNE, etc)?

At the moment the rundown is:

WMTW-HD (ABC) 501
WGME-HD (CBS) 502
MPBN-HD (PBS) 503
WCSH-HD (NBC) 504
ESPN2-HD 523
TNT-HD 524
ESPN-HD 525
DISC-HD 526
HDNET 527
HDNET MOVIES 528
UHD 529

I did not include Showtime HD etc.

I just inquired today of the area V-P what plans there were for NESN-HD and getting FOX23-HD on closed circuit feed. That's a follow-up to an earlier request. I'll report back what I hear. Probably deafening silence. :rolleyes:

Dana

drbonbi

01-31-07, 03:30 PM

Hello all,

I just received a paper bill from Comcast, which is unusual since I have selected paperless. It's the enclosures they wanted me to receive. Here's what I can glean from them of general interest:

• Rate increases effective Feb. 1 for standard cable but none involving HD services.

• Amongst the self-promotion, Comcast cites "up to 14 HDTV channels." Those would be the eleven mentioned in my previous post plus premium HD channels from HBO, Showtime and Cinemax.

• BUT WAIT! On the enclosed HD channel lineup, there is no mention made of HDNET 527 and HDNET MOVIES 528. These are hold-overs from SusCom Brunswick and are not on Comcast lineups elsewhere. So, it looks as if the "up to 14..." will soon be "up to 12..." :( This is progress? :confused:

• The listing for HD "Available Broadcasters" includes ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS with a footnote "... subject to availability."

• No mention of NESN HD or FSN HD. :(

• The rate card now lists CableCard availability @ $1.99. A second card for the same device is $1.50.

Dana

Webini

01-31-07, 04:05 PM

drbonbi

01-31-07, 05:54 PM

Great, just great. So my choices are Comcast with an inferior DVR, less HD (no Fox), and more $/mth or upgrade my DirecTV DVR and dish for $99 and get more HD (I have a Fox HD waiver), OTA local, and the promise of NESN and FSNE at some point this year. With the new buggy non-TIVO DVR... And the bigger 5-lnb dish on my roof which may or may not fit and be able to see the sats... Assuming the installer actually shows up...

I love this. :(

I agree. Very frustrating. :(

BTW. When I was with DirecTV last spring the new 5-inb dish was being rolled out and the word was no roof installs. Pole/post mounts or a sturdy side wall only. That dish is BIG and HEAVY. Maybe that's changed but maybe not. More to think about. :confused:

Dana

AccidenT

01-31-07, 06:51 PM

I agree. Very frustrating. :(

BTW. When I was with DirecTV last spring the new 5-inb dish was being rolled out and the word was no roof installs. Pole/post mounts or a sturdy side wall only. That dish is BIG and HEAVY. Maybe that's changed but maybe not. More to think about. :confused:

Dana

I moved in October and they installed a 5-lnb dish as part of the mover's program. They attempted a roof install but it was so windy that day that they decided to use a pole instead. They waived the $90 fee that they normally charge for the pole, but I had to dig the trench for the cables myself.

Webini

01-31-07, 08:14 PM

I agree. Very frustrating. :(

BTW. When I was with DirecTV last spring the new 5-inb dish was being rolled out and the word was no roof installs. Pole/post mounts or a sturdy side wall only. That dish is BIG and HEAVY. Maybe that's changed but maybe not. More to think about. :confused:

Dana

Side mount won't work in my lot due to trees. The only spot is on the roof. A pole does not pass the wife test.

We'll see on Saturday if an installer shows up.

AccidenT

01-31-07, 10:25 PM

Make sure to tell them I referred you so I get the referral credit :D

drbonbi

02-01-07, 02:01 PM

A trade journal publication posted a story here http://multichannel.com/article/CA6412272.html?display=Breaking+News last evening. It says in part:

... Sinclair granted Comcast an extension to continue carrying all of its stations -- in-market and out-of-market -- until March 1.
Dana

PS. You know the reason Sinclair granted the extension. February is sweeps month. So, apparently Sinclair thinks that cable carriage does have value to it as a broadcaster - when it wants to sell advertising based on market stats at least. ;)

jkurlanski

02-01-07, 08:10 PM

Just flipped through to find that TWC had added Cinemax-HD on Channel 502 and Starz-HD on Channel 525 here in Cumberland County.

First WGME-HD, then this? What's next, ESPN2-HD? Nah.... :)

AccidenT

02-02-07, 10:58 AM

Hi Craig, I noticed that 13-2 is still active. Any chance of getting it temporarily removed for the Super Bowl? :)

DrJoe

02-02-07, 01:01 PM

I'm not sure that it matters that 13-2 is "active". Without any signal does it take up any badnwidth? Can you post a reference that shows the HD signal will be better without it? For that matter, do you know of any references that show that the video quality (however measured) is degraded by one standard definition multicast channel (does the bandwidth loss matter, or is there full bandwidth for both signals)?

Thanks,

Joe

AccidenT

02-02-07, 01:45 PM

I'm not sure what you mean by "Without any signal", because I'm seeing an SD simulcast on 13-2.

Everything I've read says that a 1080i HD signal can easily take up the full bandwidth of an OTA frequency. That means that any bandwidth dedicated to additional subchannels will cause the need for more aggressive compression on the subchannel. The more motion that is present in the particular program at the time, the more noticeable this increase in compression will be. Football in particular has a lot of shots where there is a lot of motion (Many players moving during the play, Zoomed in shots of a running player where the background is panned quickly, shots of thousands of people moving in the crowd, etc.)

Here's a link explaining the #s, (although his example is for a 720p signal which wouldn't be as adversely affected by an SD subchannel.):
http://broadcastengineering.com/digital_handbook/broadcasting_hdtv_data_multiplexing_5/

As far as how much bandwidth that is in this case, I'm not sure because I don't have any measurements on the bitrate for 13-2. It looks slightly better than the SD version I receive through DirecTV, however, which means it's probably around 2-3 MB/s, which cuts the bandwidth for 13-1 considerably.

My real point is that one of the following has to be the case:
1. 13-1 PQ is being compromised for satisfactory PQ on 13-2
2. Both 13-1 and 13-2 PQ are being compromised for the sake of having both

Either option seems silly when there, IMO, isn't any real target audience for 13-2. I can't imagine anyone with an ATSC wouldn't prefer the HD version, even if they have to downscale it for display on their particular TV.

drbonbi

02-02-07, 02:06 PM

AccidenT's point seems to be borne out by this article:

Washington, D.C. (February 2, 2007) -- A top CBS executive says the network's HDTV picture quality is diminished when a local station decides to add a subchannel to its digital feed.

Known as multicasting, many local stations today are broadcasting multiple feeds instead of just one high-def channel via their digital spectrum.

The extra feeds, which often include local weather channels, splits the digital transmission into parts, thereby possibly diluting the high-def picture quality. The local stations hope the extra channels will generate more advertising.

But Ken Aagaard, CBS Sports' senior vice president of operations and production services, tells the Syracuse Post-Standard that his network's engineers believe any digital subchannel takes away from the HD quality...

The link is http://www.tvpredictions.com/cbs020207.htm

Dana

DrJoe

02-02-07, 03:02 PM

I'm not sure what you mean by "Without any signal", because I'm seeing an SD simulcast on 13-2.

At least initially when they shut off the Tube I thought I wasn't getting anything... It could be I remember wrong and was thinking of 6-3. Haven't been back to 13-2 since just after the Tube went off. I guess they "fixed" it so to speak. For that matter, I don't know if 6-3, 10-3, and 10-4 1are still "there" anymore -- I deleted them from my active channel lineups.

I know that the SD simulcast takes up some bandwidth, but I had also heard that the HD simulcast itself does not make use of the entire bandwidth available. It isn't at all clear to me how "measureable", if at all, the reduction to picture quality is. What I'd like to see is a comparison of resolution for the same image in HD by itself and with an SD subchannel. I haven't seen anything other than rough "it is X Mbps for the HD feed" and "it is Y Mbps for the SD feed". How does this translate to picture quality? Is a side by side comparision available anywhere? Would you be able to tell the difference in still images? Or is it just in active video?

Joe

Davinleeds

02-02-07, 05:58 PM

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/features/2061/the-big-squeeze.html

Not exact but something.

Stan54

02-02-07, 07:50 PM

I find it very difficult to imagine how an HD picture cannot be negatively affected by multicasting. The latter was a bone tossed to broadcasters to cause them to be cooperative in bearing the cost of the transition to digital broadcasting.

Naturally, the local broadcast station would swear to the high heavens that HD picture quality would not be negatively in any way, shape or manner. Such a claim just can't pass the straight-face test, however.

DrJoe

02-02-07, 11:53 PM

Stan54

02-03-07, 01:04 PM

Well, I haven't heard anyone "swear to the high heavens" about HD picture quality either way, Stan. Which local broadcaster are you referring to in particular?

As far as imagining the HD picture cannot be negatively affect, the aritcle Devin linked to says that the maximum bit rate used is 19 Mbps and that it usually is lower. It complains when there are three 3 Mbps SD simulcasts and the HD channel is lowered to 8-13 Mbps. It also sites the quality of Comcast's 17-18 Mbps broadcast.

The total bandwidth available is 20 Mbps, right? Lets say you have a good encoder and are able to very the bit rate well. If you have a standard def simulcast at 1-3 Mbps, and an HD simulcast at 17-19 Mbps with the maximum bit rate avaiable on demand, I see no reason to expect that the quality would be lowered compared to the HD only broadcast. I don't know if, on consumer equipment, one can tell the difference between a 19 Mbps signal and a 17 or 18 Mbps signal even side to side. All of the complaints I see are about the signal being throttled WAY back, like the 8-13 Mbps HD signal cited in the article. I have no doubt that THAT will effect picture quality.

Joe

I should have said "a" local broadcaster meaning 'any'.

There's a good thread on this subject under "Programming."

I did pick up this quote:

"We do as much as we can. But when it gets to affiliates or DirecTV, or when it gets to some of the cable guys, it's hard to say what happens," says Ken Aagaard, CBS Sports senior vice president of operations and production services.

Aagaard says engineers at CBS believe adding any subchannel to a digital TV signal takes away from the quality of the HD.

Complete Article is here."

I'm thinking the engineers might be correct.

Edit: The link didn't appear in my post, but it is in the thread on this subject under Programming.

Stan54

02-03-07, 02:18 PM

smacksmackums

02-03-07, 09:15 PM

Anyone in Cumberland County here using QAM tuner for their HDTV?

I just recently seem to have lost FOX HD and ABC HD.
What's going on?

NBC just got moved around too.

AND JUST IN TIME FOR THE SUPERBOWL, CBS HD just showed up on 93.1.

So now I have CBS HD, but lost ABC and FOX.

EDIT
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevermind. Found 'em all. Just quite a bit different than before. Wish my TV had a better way to search for stations.

79.13 Classic Rock Music Choice
82.1 MPBN
82.2 MPBN 2
82.3 PBS
82.4 Create
82.5 MPBN HD
82.6 NBC HD
93.1 CBS HD
110.1 ABC HD
110.2 FOX HD
114.1 Starz HD
114.2 Cinemax HD

jkurlanski

02-04-07, 07:02 PM

First real comparison I've been able to do between WGME OTA and WGME TWC (Superbowl...obviously!) and I'm surprised to say that I'm seeing a much richer picture via OTA. There's some pretty bad pixilations and poor production so far over all on both, but the OTA side has a better looking picture. More texture in the grass. The colors are richer.
Anyone else able to compare?

Davinleeds

02-04-07, 07:15 PM

Only OTA here but ABI and GME are equal except for sound, ABI is louder. Pixelation on both during camera transitions and the group tackles.

And both have sub channels. (Added)

jkurlanski

02-04-07, 07:20 PM

Station identification went by without switching to SD! Whohoo! :)

And I shouldn't have said poor production..just bad pixalations on the logos spinning between plays. And they seem to be going away. Still a better picture OTA though. The TWC just seems a little washed out.

Davinleeds

02-04-07, 08:02 PM

ABI Station ID in SD, along with Irving, local,ford commercials.

Webini

02-04-07, 09:08 PM

I actually cannot see a difference between OTA and my DirecTV HD Mpeg4 local. I'm really surprised.

Davinleeds

02-04-07, 09:11 PM

Then you're getting your money's worth.

DrJoe

02-05-07, 09:09 AM

I didn't see any pixellation on WGME OTA in Greene. Signal strength was good. I had a couple of friends over to watch and they were blown away by the resolution -- hadn't seen HD video before. Went on and on about the grass clods flying.

Joe

Bobcalkin

02-05-07, 10:46 AM

For those Comcast subscribers out there I just received a pre-recorded message saying that the interactive menu will soon be changing. I hope this means On Demand and of course the new HD channels (NESN, ect) that we have been waiting for :)

drbonbi

02-05-07, 11:04 AM

Bobcalkin

02-05-07, 11:11 AM

You optimist, you! :)

Dana

That maybe true :) But I do remember getting a similar message a few years ago when On Demand was first introduced in Philly. We can only hope, but if I'm right it would mean that they have finally upgraded the infrastructure and should be ready to introduce new services. By the way, I emailed the VP as you did, still haven't got a response yet.

Stan54

02-05-07, 01:01 PM

I actually cannot see a difference between OTA and my DirecTV HD Mpeg4 local. I'm really surprised.

I've read some good things on the Forum about the recent Mpeg4 improvement for home satellite. If this is the case, it will create stronger competition with cable once the channel capacity is increased this summer.

ChetCook

02-06-07, 08:11 AM

Chet, have you heard anything lately about your stations going on TWC? I read something recently that said TWC did not plan to add those networks from locals unless the stations invoked the must-carry provision. I imagine TWC's point is that they don't want to pay.

Is there anything you say about what you may have heard?

WPXT, CW Portland is still in negotiations with Time Warner. Currently, the latest draft is being evaluated at Time Warner. This has gone back and forth between their lawyers and ours. I don't know the details, but you know how lawyers can be.

As far as WPME, MYPortland, there has been no discussion. If viewers want to see the HD of MyNetworkTV, they need to write or call Time Warner.

drbonbi

02-07-07, 07:31 AM

Hello all,

Mary McLaughlin, V-P for Comcast NE responded to my inquiry about Comcast Brunswick, ME. getting FOX23 via closed circuit and NESN HD saying:

FOX23 continues to be work in progress, as is NESN HD. My goal is to launch NESN HD as soon as possible.
:)

Dana

Bobcalkin

02-07-07, 04:55 PM

Hello all,

Mary McLaughlin, V-P for Comcast NE responded to my inquiry about Comcast Brunswick, ME. getting FOX23 via closed circuit and NESN HD saying:

:)

Dana

Glad to see that she responded, I haven't got one yet. It sounds like maybe we might get NESN HD before the Red Sox season starts. I received a letter and instruction card from Comcast today detailing the new DVR software they are introducing. From the pictures on the card it looks like the same software they were running in Philly which is good because it is much better than the Passport software they are running now. The bad news is that it will be installed overnight on Feb 20/21 and all current setting and recordings will be lost. Figures I will be out of town from the 10 to the 25th which means I will be losing all that programing :mad: Guess I will be downloading a lot of torrents :rolleyes: In the notice it does not say anything about on demand but does say that the new software will allow them to introduce new services in the future. At least this is progress!

Webini

02-07-07, 05:34 PM

That is good news for the local Comcast customers.

I was seriously considering Comcast but ultimately decided to update my DirecTv install to the new Mpeg4 DVR. The cost increase notice from Comcast last week was the final straw. It would be way more expensive for me to move to Comcast.

So far so good with the H20 DVR. Now DirecTV just needs to rollout the 100+ HD channels promised for Mpeg4 this year. If they give me NESN and FSNE I'll be happy. Already have Fox in HD.

AccidenT

02-07-07, 07:29 PM

Webini, is Fox HD one of the Mpeg4 locals? I thought I remembered reading that it wasn't being carried for Portland customers yet, and I've heard that they remove any DNS HD feeds (i.e. Fox HD 88) if you had the HR20 and Mpeg4 locals, regardless of whether or not that particular network is available. I've been considering adding an HR20 to my account but don't want to lose access to ch. 88 if ch. 23 isn't available yet.

Webini

02-07-07, 08:57 PM

Sorry, I should have been more specific. Fox HD is not Mpeg4. I have a waiver from Fox25 and get the DNS HD Fox feed on 88. I've had the waiver for about 4 years.

So I do have both the HR20 and channel 88.

smacksmackums

02-07-07, 10:20 PM

Grr.

The QAM channels have changed again.
What's going on?

Now I have to find em all again. Should be fun.

Damariscotta

02-09-07, 10:16 PM

Stan54

02-10-07, 04:34 PM

CableCARD update.

I reported that last Fall I lost the station identifiers when tuning into a station (i.e., WCSH, NESN, etc). I had read where a gentleman in Bangor reported a similar problem. So since then I only had the channel number to work with. Today I noticed that I am now receiving the station identifiers again.

That's correct, Dam. Last night, I noticed that I had station identifiers for all of the HD channels on TWC for the first time. This settles a question that I have had for a while. The cable company adds these identifiers. I wondered if it was encoded in the station signals, but all of the stations wouldn't have added them at the same time.

dchayer

02-12-07, 08:00 AM

Grr.

The QAM channels have changed again.
What's going on?

Now I have to find em all again. Should be fun.

Any luck on finding them? I just got a new plasma with a QAM tuner and all I am able to find is WBZ.

Also, is anyone using a cableCard on TWC in southern Maine? If so how do you like it?

Thanks

Damariscotta

02-12-07, 08:29 AM

That's correct, Dam. Last night, I noticed that I had station identifiers for all of the HD channels on TWC for the first time. This settles a question that I have had for a while. The cable company adds these identifiers. I wondered if it was encoded in the station signals, but all of the stations wouldn't have added them at the same time.

Last fall I had lost identifiers for ALL stations in my subscription package (i.e., HD, digital, and analog stations). I did notice on Sunday that I had got all identifiers back with the exception of WGME-HD (#713).

AccidenT

02-12-07, 09:24 AM

Damariscotta

02-12-07, 10:40 AM

I was experiencing frequent audio droputs on WGME-HD OTA during the golf coverage yesterday. Did anyone else notice this as well? It was the same behavior that Craig attributed to a hardware issue before: video is fine, audio drops out completely for 2-3 seconds every 15-30 seconds. My receiver's display indicated that it was losing the audio stream entirely when the sound would drop out.

I experienced the same problem with WGME reception for both OTA and TWC during the same timeframe you mentioned. I tuned in WABI-HD (OTA) and no problems for the rest of the broadcast.

Stan54

02-12-07, 01:37 PM

Any luck on finding them? I just got a new plasma with a QAM tuner and all I am able to find is WBZ.

Also, is anyone using a cableCard on TWC in southern Maine? If so how do you like it?

Thanks

Cablecard on TWC's Augusta system is great.

90SPGred

02-12-07, 06:31 PM

A couple questions, I'm not too bright with tuners! I have TW (Adelphia) basic cable (Coax, no box) and OTA Antenna Coax for 6.1, 8.1, 10.2, 13.1 and 35.1 in High Definition. I'm in Lisbon (ME), using a Radio Shack indoor double-bowtie 15-624. My current Plasma has NTSC/ATSC/QAM tuners, but it died a premature death. I am looking for a replacement Plasma with tuners. The best candidate so far has NTSC/ATSC - no QAM tuner. Now, I don't know what a QAM tuner "Tunes", but my question is - Do I need a QAM Tuner to continue receiving same inputs? Might upgrade to TW digital at some future date, not immediately. TIA. What is a QAM Tuner for?

-Vern-

Stan54

02-12-07, 07:29 PM

A QAM tuner tunes cable digital channels that do not require decoding. Some sets have QAM tuners, but you wouldn't know it unless you read the specifications. Go to the manufacturer's webpage listing their tv's and call up the specifications page to learn which tuners the set actually has.

AccidenT

02-12-07, 09:25 PM

More specifically, most cable systems send local HD channels in unencrypted QAM so the same coax bringing you basic cable could be used to tune into the local HD channels that your cable system offers. Some will try and tell you that you need digital cable and a cable box to get them, but they're either misinformed or intentionally misleading you. According to TWCs site, in Lisbon you should be getting WCSH (NBC/6.1), WPFO HD(Fox), WMTW HD (ABC/8.1), PBS HD (10.2), and WGME HD (CBS/13.1). You would gain Fox HD, but would need to keep your antenna if you wanted to keep 35.1.

Some people have reported problems with the QAM channel #s changing fairly often, forcing a re-scan to find the stations again, however. Perhaps someone else on the forum has experience with QAM on your particular system and can provide more info.

90SPGred

02-13-07, 12:52 AM

Stan54 said:
A QAM tuner tunes cable digital channels that do not require decoding. Some sets have QAM tuners, but you wouldn't know it unless you read the specifications. Go to the manufacturer's webpage listing their tv's and call up the specifications page to learn which tuners the set actually has.
Thanks for your reply. I have checked all three sets I've had in last 1-1/2 years (Zenith Z42PX2D and Z50PX2D; LG 50PC3D). All three claim to include ATSC/NTSC/QAM tuners.

AccidenT said:
More specifically, most cable systems send local HD channels in unencrypted QAM so the same coax bringing you basic cable could be used to tune into the local HD channels that your cable system offers. Some will try and tell you that you need digital cable and a cable box to get them, but they're either misinformed or intentionally misleading you. According to TWCs site, in Lisbon you should be getting WCSH (NBC/6.1), WPFO HD(Fox), WMTW HD (ABC/8.1), PBS HD (10.2), and WGME HD (CBS/13.1). You would gain Fox HD, but would need to keep your antenna if you wanted to keep 35.1.
Okay! Sounds logical and that's what I thought I read over a year ago in these forums when I was deciding to try HDTV. Yet, I know I've done channel scan 7-9 times with the 3 QAM sets, and the only HDTV that ever did come from the cable coax was Discovery HD, on maybe 103 or 108. Discovery HD was there for 3-4 months (Nov '05 thru Jan '06 or so), and then it disappeared forever. Scanning would also get several DTV signals (23, 35, and others) but they were never watchable so I would manually delete them. Could the cable system have changed around Jan. 2006 and no longer be sending local HD channels in unencrypted QAM over the cable? Maybe?

Either way, it seems that I never got any use from the QAM tuners (except my short-lived Discovery HD), so I may as well use the indoor antenna for HDTV and be happy! The antenna does a great job! Thanks to you for the helpful info!

-Vern-

Stan54

02-13-07, 09:39 AM

Stan54 said:

Thanks for your reply. I have checked all three sets I've had in last 1-1/2 years (Zenith Z42PX2D and Z50PX2D; LG 50PC3D). All three claim to include ATSC/NTSC/QAM tuners.

AccidenT said:

Okay! Sounds logical and that's what I thought I read over a year ago in these forums when I was deciding to try HDTV. Yet, I know I've done channel scan 7-9 times with the 3 QAM sets, and the only HDTV that ever did come from the cable coax was Discovery HD, on maybe 103 or 108. Discovery HD was there for 3-4 months (Nov '05 thru Jan '06 or so), and then it disappeared forever. Scanning would also get several DTV signals (23, 35, and others) but they were never watchable so I would manually delete them. Could the cable system have changed around Jan. 2006 and no longer be sending local HD channels in unencrypted QAM over the cable? Maybe?

Either way, it seems that I never got any use from the QAM tuners (except my short-lived Discovery HD), so I may as well use the indoor antenna for HDTV and be happy! The antenna does a great job! Thanks to you for the helpful info!

-Vern-

Well, I have to tell you that I have had very little luck with my QAM tuner in the last year. When I remove the cablecard and scan the channels, I come up with a few channels, but not many that are useable (missing sound, small picture, etc.). Currently, there are a number of channels in the 75.2, 75.3, etc series on TWC along with a couple of odds and ends, but it appears to me that TWC and its predecessor, Adelphia, does not want people freely dialing in channels. The cablecard works nicely for $1.75 monthly if you are equipped for it. I suppose the box works ok for $10 monthly if you want to pay for it, but they do not seem willing to let you dial in even the local channels (with an exception or two) using only your set's tuner.

In my case, I simply plug the card back in after periodically checking for QAM channels and enjoy all 17 HD channels available with the card. I also receive the FLIX digital channel for some reason, but rarely look at it. I did not ask for the non HD digital channels with my card, since there is nothing there that I ever want to see.

One way to look at this is, if you bought a set without cablecard capability, you saved enough money in the purchase price to rent a box for a year. After that you would have to find a different justification. Perhaps, since you were already able to expend considerable money to watch HD, you might be fully capable of spending another $120 a year to rent a box.

How well I remember the days when you used to stick up an antenna and plug in your tv and be more than happy with the result. Cable made us greedy for more and, now, it seems that we can't get enough. Good Luck.

jkurlanski

02-24-07, 04:36 PM

Getting a lot of audio drop-outs on WGME during the Florida v LSU game. Anyone else? Watching via TWC.

Stan54

02-25-07, 01:06 PM

Getting a lot of audio drop-outs on WGME during the Florida v LSU game. Anyone else? Watching via TWC.

I only saw bits and pieces of this game, so I can't help.

jkurlanski

02-25-07, 01:14 PM

So far so good today (UConn v Louisville right now).
And yesterday I confirmed the sound problem was also present via OTA, so it was a station issue.

drbonbi

02-25-07, 01:31 PM

Crclark

02-25-07, 05:23 PM

I'm OTA also and yes it seems our 5.1 decoder / encoder has a problem. I'll call our master control........ Best I can do to stableize the audio is switch out of 5.1 mode and go to stereo only mode until the problem is found.

Craig

So far so good today (UConn v Louisville right now).
And yesterday I confirmed the sound problem was also present via OTA, so it was a station issue.

Stan54

02-25-07, 05:26 PM

jkurlanski

02-25-07, 05:41 PM

Thanks!
I just got back from actually spending some time outside on this beautiful day, and so far it seems to be steady, and still 5.1

Stan54

02-25-07, 05:45 PM

I know that this is Maine HS basketball playoff time. I can well understand why it is appropriate for MPBN to simulcast the games on their analog and digital channels. But, I don't know why they carry the same feed on their HD channel. It looks poor on Comcast: HD always exposes the flaws inherent in the SD signal. But, who would be watching these games in SD on the HD channel since they are available on the other two?

Is it just easier to simulcast on all three while the tech crews are at the basketball games?

Oh well. Another of life's little mysteries.

Dana

Interesting! I have been attending the tournament in Augusta, so I haven't spent as much time as usual with the tube, but I haven't noticed the tournament on the PBS HD channel on TWC. This supports my supposition that TWC takes the PBS HD signal from satellite and not the broadcast from the tower.

This would explain why I see facial and other smearing in HD on PBS when others receiving the signal over the air do not. You would think that the satellite signal direct to cable would be better than the same satellite signal to OTA broadcast, but not so in this case. ............. As I have said before, TWC provides beautiful HD except for the tendency to smear on the PBS HD channel.

drbonbi

02-25-07, 06:04 PM

Interesting! I have been attending the tournament in Augusta, so I haven't spent as much time as usual with the tube, but I haven't noticed the tournament on the PBS HD channel on TWC. This supports my supposition that TWC takes the PBS HD signal from satellite and not the broadcast from the tower.

This would explain why I see facial and other smearing in HD on PBS when others receiving the signal over the air do not. You would think that the satellite signal direct to cable would be better than the same satellite signal to OTA broadcast, but not so in this case. ............. As I have said before, TWC provides beautiful HD except for the tendency to smear on the PBS HD channel.

Stan,

I don't know what TWC does, but on Comcast the PBS HD channel has the MPBN logo continuously in the lower right-hand corner.

Dana

DrJoe

02-25-07, 06:31 PM

As far as I know, MPBN does not broadcast ANY local material on their HD channel (I have never seen anything other than the PBS network HD feed). The HD channel that MPBN provides is the PBS network HD channel. If you go to the PBS website, you can see a program guide for it. Maine PBS broadcasts in two digital channels. 10.0 is a digital simulcast of the regular analog NTSC broadcast while 10.1 is the PBS network HD feed. Very likely the cable companies do not provide a digital version of the local broadcast (which WOULD be better quality than the NTSC signal). They aren't going to want to waste bandwidth on program "duplication".

I should note that I get MPBN over the air, and have noticed there are definitely two different qualities of PBS HD video. I think that the "washed out look" you are seeing from PBS is due to their source material. It appears to me that they have a very crisp look to material that was obviously produced in high definition (like Nature, Science, Austin City Limits, etc). But the majority of their programming looks like it was transferred from film. This material appears much "softer" and washed out.

Joe

drbonbi

02-25-07, 06:43 PM

Stan54

02-25-07, 08:42 PM

The Comcast Guide carried the PBS HD program info but HS basketball was on the channel.

Dana

Dana, maybe you were looking at 10.0 (digital) somehow. Like Joe says, 10.1 would very likely be the network HD programming and 10.0 would have been basketball in digital but not (obviously) HD format.

Joe, PBS is not washed out for me. In fact, it is bright, sharp and quite beautiful. It is simply that faces can smear or blur when there is movement. This is something that is frequently complained about with LCD tv sets and manufacturers have been producing faster and faster response times to compensate. I believe it can also happen in the transmission process if insufficient bandwidth is allotted to the video.

Stan54

02-25-07, 08:51 PM

I have just been watching the Oscars with my wife and channel 8 is having a problem with lots of dropouts in video and sound on the digital channel. Sound drops out frequently and the video freezes once in a while for a second or two.

Perhaps, we'll have to sent Craig over to straighten it out for them. It is frustrating to think that they might not even be paying attention or if they are, have no idea how to cope with it. My wife only joins me to watch American Idol in HD, so I had to tell her that I have seen very little of a problem like this in the year or so that I have been watching HD on TWC. Thank goodness it hasn't happened on something significant like ............. 24.

DrJoe

02-26-07, 07:17 AM

It is frustrating to think that they might not even be paying attention or if they are, have no idea how to cope with it.

Interesting observations about PBS. I don't notice problems with pixellation during movement on "good HD" shows on PBS-HD. It would seem that TW is compressing the channel more than MPBN is compressing it to fit the MPBN standard def subchannel "over the air".

I strongly agree with your comment above. It is so hard to tell whether a problem is due to a problem at the station, a problem at the cable company, a problem at the roof top antenna, or a problem at the network satellite. While the engineers who post on the forum here are very knowledgable and helpful, they aren't at the station 24 hours a day. Calling the station usually doesn't help because the techs who are there don't have a clue what the problem is or how to fix it.

I remember last year, I was watching one of the Triple Crown races and it was in SD.... I made two calls the station, nothing... Found out later from posts on the forum that there were problems at the satelite. Very frustrating, because at the time no one could tell me why it wasn't in HD like it was supposed to be.

It is too bad we remember frustrating moments like those instead of the times that the HD is crisp clean and fun to watch (like it is most of the time).

Joe

Stan54

02-26-07, 02:31 PM

Interesting observations about PBS. I don't notice problems with pixellation during movement on "good HD" shows on PBS-HD. It would seem that TW is compressing the channel more than MPBN is compressing it to fit the MPBN standard def subchannel "over the air".

I strongly agree with your comment above. It is so hard to tell whether a problem is due to a problem at the station, a problem at the cable company, a problem at the roof top antenna, or a problem at the network satellite. While the engineers who post on the forum here are very knowledgable and helpful, they aren't at the station 24 hours a day. Calling the station usually doesn't help because the techs who are there don't have a clue what the problem is or how to fix it.

I remember last year, I was watching one of the Triple Crown races and it was in SD.... I made two calls the station, nothing... Found out later from posts on the forum that there were problems at the satelite. Very frustrating, because at the time no one could tell me why it wasn't in HD like it was supposed to be.

It is too bad we remember frustrating moments like those instead of the times that the HD is crisp clean and fun to watch (like it is most of the time).

Joe

Smearing and blurring during movement isn't usually referred to as pixellation, but I suppose it is in a sense, since the picture is made up of pixels. Looking at it that way, I guess all picture problems are pixellation problems. PBS looks great except for the tendency to smear flesh and certain other moving objects.

The sound and video problems on WMTW HD continued all during the Academy Awards last night according to my wife. She liked the HD picture too much, however, to switch to the analog station. I didn't like the problem, so I moved to another room. Thank goodness, I hardly ever experience those kinds of annoyances. The signal via TWC has been just great here in the Augusta system and I am grateful for that.

drbonbi

02-28-07, 09:41 AM

Stan54

02-28-07, 02:11 PM

Bobcalkin

02-28-07, 05:19 PM

This may be the last day we'll see WGME/CBS on Comcast Brunswick for awhile since it is owned and operated by Sinclair Broadcasting which is in a dispute with Comcast over payment for carriage. If there's a blackout and it extends into the summer when Patriots football starts up again, I'll hoist another OTA antenna as I can get WGME's HD signal at my location.

There's a story in the Boston Globe on line today http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2007/02/27/comcast_shooting_for_celtics/ that Comcast "... is near the end of negotiations to buy the remaining 50 percent of Fox Sports Net New England that it doesn't own..." That would be nice if it meant we'd see Fox Sports Net on Comcast Brunswick and other Maine cable cos in HD - or even digital. But, no mention of such in the story. Don't hold your breath.

Comcast placed a half page ad in color - $$$ - in the Tuesday Feb. 27 Brunswick Times Record promoting the Red Sox upcoming season and Comcast Digital Cable. The ad noted that Comcast is a "Proud sponsor of the Boston Red Sox." Very nice. Except that NESN isn't carried by Comcast Brunswick on its digital cable service - nor in HD either. We're stuck with the low rez analog 4:3 NESN channel we had with SusCom.

The ad also promotes "High-Speed Internet" but then in small type at the bottom of the ad it notes that it is based on "the service features provided under the previous SusCom brand" and is not to be confused with Comcast High-Speed Internet i.e., "the real McCoy."

That about sums up our experience with Comcast since it acquired SusCom on May 1, 2006.

Dana,
I just received a reply from Mary McLaughlin, who as you know is one of the regional VP's for Comcast. I actually received it a couple of weeks ago but I have been out of the country so I just read it. She gives some pretty detailed info about the technical problems they are having with the Suscom takeover. While, I'm not thrilled that they appear to still be a ways away from being fully functional I have to say I was impressed to get such a detailed response from someone that high in the company. She even called my house but I was already out of the country. I will post my email and her response. You may note that she misunderstood my complaint about the SA box which was not that it was defective but that it is older and not as good as other DVR's I have had. Hope the info helps.

Dear Ms McLauglin,

I writing this email to express my disappointment with Comcast since they took over Suscom here in Brunswick, Maine. Being in the Military I have moved around quite a bit and have had the opportunity to subscribe to both satellite networks as well as Comcast in Philadelphia. I am an HDTV enthusiast and have had HDTV for several years with all three services. I was very happy when I heard that Comcast was taking over Suscom because of the three services Comcast was my favorite. I found that, in Philadelphia at least, that it offered outstanding picture quality and a good selection of channels. Both me and the rest of my family really enjoyed the On Demand service and used it quite often. I had been a Dish Network subscriber since moving to Maine and followed the take over closely. When I read on the Comcast website, under an FAQ section pertaining to the Suscom take over, that all Comcast services would be available in November I decided to switch. November came and went with no new services or channels so I went to local office and was told that these would be delayed until the new year. I am a subscriber to the AVS FORUM bulletin board on the internet and have learned that other subscribers were told the same thing. After the new year came and went I inquired again and was told that it wouldn't be until "at least" spring. Yesterday, I received a flyer in the mail announcing new channels were being added on 1 March. Unfortunately, none of them were HD nor was there any mention of On Demand or VOIP. I am now worried that this announcement constitutes the "new" services and is all we will get for the foreseeable future. I certainly understand that the Suscom system probably needed updating but it seems to me that there has been more than enough time. I am left to wonder if Brunswick, Maine is such a small market that Comcast just isn't interested in upgrading. Meantime, the Satellite companies continue to upgrade and add new channels. Direct TV has already added locals in HD and Dish will soon as well. I understand that NESN HD which is at the top of my list of desired channels will soon be added to both services. I am particularly displeased to see that the neighboring towns who are serviced by Time Warner are currently receiving both NESN HD and Fox 23 (via a closed circuit feed). I guess the main piece of information I would like from you is to find out what Comcast's plans and timeframe is to add new HD channels and services such as On demand and VOIP. Again, as member of AVS Forum I constantly read about wonderful new channels and services that are being offered throughout the country on Comcast while Maine gets nothing. I am also wondering if there are any plans for an updated DVR. I find the SA 3250 to the worst of all the services with limited options and inferior picture quality. I understand that it was Suscom's box and isn't generally used on the Comcast system (I had a Motorola in Philly). In closing I am really hoping that Comcast plans to update it's system soon as I really do not want to go through the hassle of switching services again but there will soon come a point when Direct TV's and Dish's superior selection will be to hard to resist. Thank you for your attention.

Robert Calkin

Dear Mr. Calkin –

Thank you for talking the time to contact me with your concerns. I apologize that it has taken me so long to respond and I am sorry to hear of your disappointment with Comcast services in Maine. I did try to reach you by phone yesterday to discuss your concerns, but I understand you are away for a few weeks. Please feel free to contact me on my cell when you return

As you correctly noted, our current offering in Maine is limited. There are essentially two technical reasons for this. The first reason is the lack of interconnection between the Brunswick, ME area systems and Comcast’s other Northern NH and Maine systems. This interconnection is a prerequisite to launching both VOD and digital voice. We are currently working on this interconnection, but this is a work in progress with no firm completion date. The second reason is a capacity issue; there is abut 100 miles of lower capacity (550Mhz) plant throughout the system that needs to be upgraded. Until we rebuild this plant, it will be a gating factor.

Going forward, and post interconnection, we will continue to operate this system utilizing Scientific Atlanta equipment. Approximately 40% of Comcast’s systems nationwide utilize this technology with good results. I am not aware of any defects with the SA 3250s, so I am not sure why you would be experiencing inferior picture quality. I would be glad to schedule a tech visit to your home at a time convenient for you – just give me a call.

There are some HD additions in the works. I have had several requests for NESN HD and Fox 23HD and I hopeful that we will some launch information for these services in the very near future.

I look forward to our discussion when you return to town. In the meantime, I hope this info is helpful to you.

Best, Mary

drbonbi

02-28-07, 06:24 PM

Bob,

You did good!! I'm impressed with her detailed response! She provides more info than I've seen elsewhere. Certainly more than in her responses to me. :rolleyes: On the one hand, VOD and digital voice are important to Comcast as new revenue producers so one might think these features would drive the interconnection with Comcast's backbone. But, I don't like the sound of "... a work in progress with no firm completion date."

And a 100 miles of lower capacity plant to be upgraded isn't very positive, either. (I'm guessing some towns never did get the fiber optics cable upgrade from SusCom.)

I think you hit the nail on the head when you wrote "I am left to wonder if Brunswick, Maine is such a small market that Comcast just isn't interested in upgrading." With the base closing, the number of households served by Comcast will shrink in the short term at least. Frankly, at this point I wish Comcast would engineer a territory trade with Time Warner rather than leave the SusCom system in limbo.

Thanks a lot! I wish there was something we could do pro actively.

Dana

Bobcalkin

02-28-07, 07:06 PM

drbonbi

02-28-07, 07:20 PM

Dana,
As I posted a few weeks ago I have seen many Comcast trucks in the Topsham area stringing new cable so they are actively working on the issue. Let's hope that we at least get NESN before the Red Sox season starts.

Bob

I'm with you. That's what I wrote her a month ago - NESN HD along with Fox23 HD. The latter seems like low hanging fruit. No backbone issues. And since it is Comcast, money shouldn't be an issue. They're apparently willing and able to spend $200 to $300 million for FSN NE. But, there is a small issue called ROI.

I guess I'll just have to be patient. But, as you pointed out in your excellent letter, part of the problem is what they've said up to now hasn't come to pass when they said it would.

I wrote her again today, incorporating some of what I put on the site. I'll let everyone know if/when I hear back.

Dana

drbonbi

02-28-07, 08:04 PM

I did a Google search to see what I could learn about cable system capacities. I found this from a Canadian government web site circa 2001 http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2001/PB2001-26.htm

... a bandwidth of 750 MHz nominal can accommodate 110 analog channels. In digital mode, with the current average compression ratio of 1:8, the same transmission capacity allows a distributor to provide about 77 analog channels and 200 to 250 digital video channels. This is in addition to digital audio channels and Internet service. A bandwidth of 550 MHz nominal can accommodate 77 analog channels. On average, distributors use 70 of these channels to distribute analog signals, which leaves enough bandwidth for them to provide about 30 to 50 digital video channels, plus digital audio channels and Internet service.

Comcast Brunswick presently offers 64 analog channels, 25 digital channels, 54 digital premium channels, 13 pay-per-view digital channels and 11 HD channels. Music audio channels not included.

Dana

theo871

03-01-07, 03:14 AM

Oh yeah, did anyone else experience the frequent audio dropouts and picture freezes during the Academy Awards? The Academy Awards thread on the Forum did not reveal anyone else around the country with a problem, so it must have just been something at WMTW. ............ Maybe if I begin paying a fee for WMTW's signal, I won't be having any problems with it. ..... Do you suppose? And in any event, if I did have a problem, I'm sure that they would be quick to provide a fee adjustment to compensate me for interruption of service. Again, ....... do you suppose?

I watched most of the awards on WMTW through TWC (channel 508) here in York County. I experienced no audio or video dropouts, unless you count the awful drop to SD for legal ID's once an hour.

drbonbi

03-01-07, 06:50 AM

For those not on the Brunswick area Comcast system, Sinclair-owned WGME is still being carried by Comcast this morning. The cutoff was supposed to be 2 AM if a settlement hadn't been reached.

News reports from Baltimore, the home of Sinclair Broadcasting, indicate that the two sides are still talking.

Dana

Damariscotta

03-01-07, 08:16 AM

I also experienced significant audio and sometimes video dropouts during the Awards program (WMTW-HD on Sunday night). I had also seen similar problems (to a lesser degree) with WGME-HD and have seen individuals report the problems in this forum. In the few cases that I had the audio dropouts, I was able to select WGME-HD OTA. I did not experience the dropouts when OTA. In the case of Sunday night during the Awards program, I had my antenna pointed towards Bangor (no rotary) so I was not able to attempt WMTW-HD OTA to see if that would solve the problem.

drbonbi

03-01-07, 08:30 AM

Dana,
...You may note that she misunderstood my complaint about the SA box which was not that it was defective but that it is older and not as good as other DVR's I have had. Hope the info helps.
...
Bob,

One possibly reason for her confusion is that you reference the SA 3250 as a DVR. The SA 3250HD is a set top box only. You probably have a SA 8300HD DVR. The reason she says that going forward, Comcast Brunswick will continue to use Scientific Atlanta (now a subsidiary of Cisco) equipment is that beginning with the head end equipment, cable cos have a choice of SA or Moto. But, the two don't mix.

Dana

drbonbi

03-01-07, 09:18 AM

The Baltimore Sun now reports

Sinclair Broadcast Group and Comcast Corp. extended a current contract between the companies, allowing the cable provider to continue carrying popular programming such as American Idol for at least nine more days while the two continue negotiations on a new deal over retransmission fees.

Comcast spokeswoman Jenni Moyer said this morning that the two sides have agreed to extend the contract through March 10.

Link http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bal-sinclairupdate0301,0,1369466.story?track=rss

Dana

Stan54

03-01-07, 09:22 AM

I watched most of the awards on WMTW through TWC (channel 508) here in York County. I experienced no audio or video dropouts, unless you count the awful drop to SD for legal ID's once an hour.

Thanks for your response. You are TWC in York County and did not experience the Academy Awards dropouts on WMTW HD which has significance because Damariscotta did experience the dropouts on TWC in Damariscotta. I had them very noticeably on the Augusta system.

Dam, where is your headend located?

So far, one could assume that the problem is not network or station related, but why would it be cable company related in two TWC systems and not so in another? Perhaps, Dam's headend and system is the same as mine. Actually, the headend for the Augusta system is in Hallowell, but I don't know how far they move the signal.

I see this as an opportunity to understand things a little better when trying to diagnose a problem. Already, I am surprised to find that the extent of the problem was actually quite narrow.

jkurlanski

03-01-07, 09:56 AM

Sorry for the late chime in:

WMTW - no audio problems during Academy Awards, except for already mentioned REALLY annoying switch to SD during station identification. Seriously people, get it together.

Stan54 (response to another thread) TWC HD (pay) Tier adds HDNET, HDNet Movies, INHD, and Universal HD according to the web site. Used to also have INHD2, now defunct.

Damariscotta

03-01-07, 11:16 AM

Thanks for your response. You are TWC in York County and did not experience the Academy Awards dropouts on WMTW HD which has significance because Damariscotta did experience the dropouts on TWC in Damariscotta. I had them very noticeably on the Augusta system.

Dam, where is your headend located?

So far, one could assume that the problem is not network or station related, but why would it be cable company related in two TWC systems and not so in another? Perhaps, Dam's headend and system is the same as mine. Actually, the headend for the Augusta system is in Hallowell, but I don't know how far they move the signal.

I see this as an opportunity to understand things a little better when trying to diagnose a problem. Already, I am surprised to find that the extent of the problem was actually quite narrow.

I've been told my headend is Augusta via the Newcastle Hub.

Stan54

03-01-07, 12:53 PM

I've been told my headend is Augusta via the Newcastle Hub.

OK. This is something to take into account if I ever have another problem of this type. Since my HD is so good on this system and free of glitches like dropouts, I am surprised to have had dropouts and freezes that were apparently unique to the Augusta system. It's a good thing to know and not blow off as being a network or station issue.

Stan54

03-01-07, 12:56 PM

Bobcalkin

03-01-07, 04:57 PM

Bob,

One possibly reason for her confusion is that you reference the SA 3250 as a DVR. The SA 3250HD is a set top box only. You probably have a SA 8300HD DVR. The reason she says that going forward, Comcast Brunswick will continue to use Scientific Atlanta (now a subsidiary of Cisco) equipment is that beginning with the head end equipment, cable cos have a choice of SA or Moto. But, the two don't mix.

Dana

Dana,
Your right I messed up the model number, I do have an 8300. The one thing I am hoping is that Comcast has been rolling out new boxes including a TIVO based one. I remember reading that they would roll these out first to markets with old and out dated equipment which Brunswick would certainly qualify for :rolleyes: The new SARA software that they installed last week is an improvement in some ways over the Passport that it replaced but worse in others. Either one is far inferior to anything I have had before and I have had DVR's with Dish, Directtv and Comcast (Moto).

Webini

03-01-07, 10:18 PM

Either one is far inferior to anything I have had before and I have had DVR's with Dish, Directtv and Comcast (Moto).

Exactly the reason that I upgraded my Directv DVR to the HR20 instead of going to Comcast. The last version of the HR20 SW downloaded this week has been rock solid for me.

loudo38

03-01-07, 10:25 PM

Exactly the reason that I upgraded my Directv DVR to the HR20 instead of going to Comcast. The last version of the HR20 SW downloaded this week has been rock solid for me.

Love my HR20 also. Check out the new feature of one click menu, from yesterdays software upgrade. Once you set it up you only need to click guide once to go right to the menu, instead of seeing the filter menu first.

drbonbi

03-01-07, 10:35 PM

Webini

03-01-07, 10:40 PM

Love my HR20 also. Check out the new feature of one click menu, from yesterdays software upgrade. Once you set it up you only need to click guide once to go right to the menu, instead of seeing the filter menu first.

Yeah I saw that on DBStalk.com and it worked great. Why they implemented it the original way is beyond me!

I still miss the TIVO suggestions and the DLB, but the latter is coming.

Bobcalkin

03-02-07, 07:14 AM

Apparently, new SARA software got pushed out to Comcast Brunswick SA 3250HD boxes last night. The display on mine this AM was rolling continuously. When I switched the box on, the SA blue screen came up first, then the Guide. Checking later today I found that the box now has SARA 1.59.18.1. One welcome change. I now can shut off the TV without losing the audio over digital connection to my receiver. Great for music channels.

The video colors seem a bit more vivid and deeper blacks. But, maybe I'm imagining things.

I actually like the SA 3250 HD. ;)

Dana

Dana,
I don't think you are imagining things. I noticed the same thing on the picture quality, the colors are more vidid and the overall picture is sharper. I commented on it in my follow up email to Ms. McLaughlin. It is one the "good" things about the SARA software and it alleviates my concerns over the soft picture quality :) . Unfortunately, the software is missing some basic DVR features such as the ability to pick up a show where you left off or record first run shows only (it doesn't flag repeats). It is the first DVR I have had that doesn't have these features. :mad:

drbonbi

03-02-07, 06:10 PM

A couple more digital channels popped up on Comcast Brunswick today. I just noticed the addition of FOXR (Fox Reality?) on cable channel 123 and TVONE on cable channel 124. The Guide still shows The Tube Music Channel on cable channel 163 but it is in fact a simulcast of WGME analog Channel 13.

Dana

BlueDevil

03-02-07, 08:24 PM

Anyone heard the latest on receiving NESN in HD via DirecTV up here?

The first spring training games have just made it to air, and I haven't heard anything on this in a while...

drbonbi

03-03-07, 03:07 PM

For those who doubted my earlier post, I can report that Maine women's HS basketball is again being simulcast on Comcast channel 503 at this hour which is MPBN HD and usually is carrying the national PBS HD feed with a MPBN logo.

If the broadcast was in high def, I'd better understand it but it isn't and the same program is already on MPBN analog and MPBN DT. Oh well.

Dana

DrJoe

03-03-07, 09:14 PM

Dana,

I don't doubt what you said, but the listings on the MPBN website say that at 2:00 they had highschool basketball on MPBN digital channel 10.1 and they had "History Detectives" from PBS-HD on MPBN digital channel 10.2.

It sounds to me like Comcast is pulling a fast one on you.

Actually, this may be a "feature" -- they are carrying 10.1 instead of 10.2 because of the local flavor. The picture could be sharper than the analog broadcast.

Joe

drbonbi

03-05-07, 03:37 PM

I just received this response to my email inquiry.

Dear Mr. Baggett:

Thank you for contacting The Maine Public Broadcasting Network. The decision to broadcast the Maine High School Basketball Tournament on MPBN-HD was made by MPBN and not by Comcast.

Thanks again for contacting MPBN.

Sincerely,

Maurice Doyon
Audience Services Associate
Maine Public Broadcasting Network
1450 Lisbon St.
Lewiston, ME 04240
Phone: 207-783-9101
Fax: 207-783-5193
www.mpbn.net

Dana

Stan54

03-05-07, 04:39 PM

I just received this response to my email inquiry.

Dana

Thanks for sharing this. I should have offerred this observation earlier: TWC Augusta used 2 channels (9 & 10) to carry the tournament, presumably because games were being played in 3 locations with overlapping times. I imagine that one of the above channels was using MPBN's digital signal.

Sometimes, the games displayed were the same games and, sometimes, they were different games depending on what was happening at that particular time of day.

drbonbi

03-09-07, 01:44 PM

by P.J. Bednarski -- Broadcasting & Cable, 3/9/2007 1:19:00 PM

Comcast Corp. and Sinclair Broadcast Group agreed on a four year extension of their retransmission agreement on Friday that will keep Sinclair’s stations on Comcast cable systems reaching about 3.8 million customers in 23 markets.

Sinclair was ready to cut off Comcast on March 1, but extended the deadline to March 10 as talks continued.

Comcast said it “has achieved its objective of not paying cash for broadcast carriage that would need to be passed on to our customers” but agreed on a package that gave comparable value.

Usually that means a cable system buys a certain amount of advertising from the station seeking compensation, but Comcast did not elaborate.

David Smith, Sinclair’s president and CEO, has been vocal in his insistence that it would not allow cable systems to continue to carry Sinclair channels without a cash payment. Sinclair owns 58 stations, more than any other broadcaster. In January, Sinclair yanked its stations from Mediacom cable systems serving 700,000 subscribers in some smaller Midwest markets, and settled just before the Super Bowl, apparently getting as much as 40 cents per subscriber.

Brian Roberts, Comcast’s chairman and CEO, as recently as this week warned Comcast would not pay retransmission fees.

His stance is significant because, as the largest cable operator with 24.2 million subscribers, Comcast’s flexibility will be of great interest to other station groups that face contract renewals with Comcast in the future. “We are not interested and will not pay cash for retrans if that’s all you do,” Roberts said at a Bears Stearns media conference in Palm Beach March 6. Later he said, “That line is drawn. That’s not changing. I don’t anticipate that changing anytime soon.”

Had Sinclair and Comcast not come to some agreement, Sinclair threatened to remove its signal in markets including Pittsburgh, Minneapolis, Tampa, Fla., and parts of Baltimore, Sinclair’s headquarters city.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6423120.html

Dana

PS. There's a little more insight here http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6423098.html?display=Breaking+News as to the reasons for the settlement, contrasted with some other negotiations with Sinclair that involved a lengthy stalemate during which service to the public got a back seat.

While terms were not disclosed, Sinclair had more to lose in a protracted battle with the nation’s largest cable operator. Sinclair stations represented just 15% of Comcast’s total 24.2 million-subscriber footprint, while the Comcast markets accounted for more than 30% of Sinclair’s total advertising revenue. In addition, Comcast carries another Fox station in the Baltimore-Washington, D.C., market, so losing Sinclair’s Baltimore Fox affiliate would have had little effect on the cable operator.

Davinleeds

03-13-07, 08:23 PM

Just when I start to watch 35, My Portland, they change to 480i, they were 720p. Been like this for at least since last weekend. Anyone with info?

Stan54

03-14-07, 11:25 AM

Just when I start to watch 35, My Portland, they change to 480i, they were 720p. Been like this for at least since last weekend. Anyone with info?

Chet's the engineer for that station and he'll probably fill you in when he checks this thread the next time.

Davinleeds

03-14-07, 08:48 PM

720p on 35 tonight. Thanks -Chet?

ChetCook

03-16-07, 07:43 AM

We had equipment failure on WPME My Portland. It has since been fixed. That was why we had to drop down to 480i.

wberryment

03-18-07, 11:36 AM

loudo38

03-18-07, 11:49 AM

Does anyone know if Direct TV will air Fox in HD like Time Warner does?

Direct Tv has all of the other affiliates except the CW but I can get the OTA.
Fox isn't broadcasting OTA unitl 2009 I think.

wayne

Not sure if this will answer your question or not, but go to this link and enter your zip code and it will tell you what is available for locals, in your area, from DirecTV.
http://directv.com/DTVAPP/packProg/localChannels.jsp?assetId=900018

Webini

03-18-07, 04:53 PM

Does anyone know if Direct TV will air Fox in HD like Time Warner does?

Direct Tv has all of the other affiliates except the CW but I can get the OTA.
Fox isn't broadcasting OTA unitl 2009 I think.

wayne

Local Fox 23, no. Fox 5 from NY you can get if you can get a waiver from Fox 23. Call Directv about that. Tell them that Fox 23 does not broadcast HD OTA and that you would like to know the procedure to get a waiver.

I got my waiver a few years ago so I get Fox 5 in HD. I pay a couple bucks a month. That having been said the rules may have changed so that you cannot get a waiver any more. Others here may know for sure.

LongbowJim

03-18-07, 05:06 PM

same waiver here... my question is, Why don't they give us Channel 10 as an HD local?

Davinleeds

03-18-07, 05:07 PM

Your waiver is specific to HD? Last round of court rulings cleaned out all my waivers. They didn't care I had them.

Webini

03-18-07, 05:15 PM

same waiver here... my question is, Why don't they give us Channel 10 as an HD local?

No clue. I get 10-2 OTA. The quality is pretty variable with all of the subcarriers they use. And the guide data is never right.

Webini

03-18-07, 05:15 PM

Your waiver is specific to HD? Last round of court rulings cleaned out all my waivers. They didn't care I had them.

Yes, specific to HD. If they touch my Fox HD I promise to go postal.

drbonbi

03-19-07, 08:37 AM

Yesterday I sent the following message to the area Veep for Comcast:

Mary,

The Red Sox 2007 season starts on April 2 with a game in Kansas City that NESN will carry in HD. Any chance Comcast Brunswick will carry the game in HD?

:)

Dana

I'll share her response if/when.

Dana

JCByrd24

03-19-07, 08:48 AM

Since the subject of Fox 23 HD came up...has there been an attempt, i.e. petition, mass emailing, etc. to Fox 23 to try to get them to get on the ball on broadcast OTA. I'm assuming there are some infrastructure issues they have to go through, but if they are broadcasting HD to TW or whoever, some of that must already be in place correct. Fox has some great programming that I tend to lean away from because I don't have it in HD. I'm all OTA, no subscriber service, so Fox is a big chunk of my programming and its quite disappointing in SD compared to the HD I've become accustom to.

jkurlanski

03-19-07, 09:24 AM

Based on my last email from the station in the Fall of '04, Fox provides a direct fiber feed to TWC in Cumberland Co and has all High Def equipment installed at their station. They were eager to broadcast OTA, however the previous owners of the station (Paxson) failed to apply for a Digital Channel assignment. That left them in the dark.
According to FCC.GOV, they still don't have a digital channel assignment, so I think they're stuck until the "switch is flipped".

Webini

03-19-07, 11:23 AM

Quite right - close to zero chance of Fox OTA until 2009.

Stan54

03-19-07, 02:15 PM

Why couldn't they apply for and be granted a channel assignment, now? It would be in the best interests of furthering the implementation of digital broadcasting.

Stan54

03-19-07, 02:24 PM

Some time ago, I posted regarding the slight smearing of the picture on TWC's PBS HD channel as objects or the camera moved. DRJOE referred to this effect as pixelation and I quibbled with the use of this term to describe the problem.

Upon further consideration and checking, I would say that DRJOE's terminology is right on. It is what is referred to as pixelation. It in turn relates to data speed and bandwidth availability, but the effect should be termed as pixelation.

Unfortunately, I have seen no improvement on that channel, although for the most part, the PBS HD picture is quite good.

Webini

03-19-07, 02:50 PM

Why couldn't they apply for and be granted a channel assignment, now? It would be in the best interests of furthering the implementation of digital broadcasting.

I believe the deadlines have passed and everything has been allocated.

Webini

03-19-07, 02:51 PM

drbonbi

03-19-07, 03:07 PM

Stan54

03-20-07, 04:48 PM

I believe the deadlines have passed and everything has been allocated.

They are, eventually, going to have a channel. It would seem that the FCC could look into the future and identify that channel now rather than later. I know there has to be a good reason, but it would be nice to know why. I suppose I could ask the station. It doesn't make any difference to me thanks to TWC, but I am a little curious.

Stan54

03-20-07, 04:49 PM

I have the pixelation problem problem with PBS HD quite frequently. I'm getting it OTA so I think the problem is at the source. Overcompression and/or too many sub channels.

It's nice to know that someone else sees it.

Stan54

03-20-07, 04:51 PM

The pixelation could be due to multiple causes and may involve the response time of the display. More here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Response_time

Dana

The cause can very well be the response time of the display, but I doubt that it would be a condition that is visible on only one channel of the display.

Webini

03-20-07, 04:54 PM

The cause can very well be the response time of the display, but I doubt that it would be a condition that is visible on only one channel of the display.

I was just about to make the same post. The issue is only on PBS.

Response time tends to be more of an issue on LCDs anyway. I'm running a plasma.

AccidenT

03-20-07, 05:03 PM

They are, eventually, going to have a channel. It would seem that the FCC could look into the future and identify that channel now rather than later. I know there has to be a good reason, but it would be nice to know why. I suppose I could ask the station. It doesn't make any difference to me thanks to TWC, but I am a little curious.

I can look into the future for you - it will be the same channel they're using now. :D

They can switch over to broadcasting digitally on it any time they want before the cutoff, but for now I assume they figured they'd lose more viewers than they'd gain by doing so.

jkurlanski

03-20-07, 07:26 PM

That's what I read too. So I guess folks could begin a campaign of getting them to cutover early!

Davinleeds

03-20-07, 07:49 PM

Channel 23, 1 Jan 09, in a rather curt response to my what the HE double toothpicks is going on inquiry. Early? He said NO!

Or hockey sticks!

drbonbi

03-20-07, 08:09 PM

That's what I read too. So I guess folks could begin a campaign of getting them to cutover early!

What's in it for the station? They would leave the analog spectrum which means most of the current TV audience so they no longer could claim the same coverage for advertisers they do now = suicide.

DMA Counties/TV Households
Androscoggin/43,030
Cumberland/112,150
Franklin/11,800
Kennebec/48,390
Knox/17,300
Lincoln/14,680
Oxford/22,700
Sagadahoc/14,280
York/80,930
Carroll (NH)/19,150
Coos (NH)/14,090

http://www.fox23me.com/advertise-with-fox23.php#coverage

Dana

Stan54

03-21-07, 12:05 PM

Channel 23, 1 Jan 09, in a rather curt response to my what the HE double toothpicks is going on inquiry. Early? He said NO!

Or hockey sticks!

OK. This would seem to explain it. They can't use the channel 23 frequency for both analog and digital broadcasting. It has to be one or the other. Not a lot of people depend on over the air broadcasting for digital, so they would hold off until the mandatory switchover date.

I'm wondering, however, if they couldn't have the best of both worlds by applying for and being granted a different frequency even though the time has gone by. Another OTA broadcaster of a digital signal has to be a good thing for the FCC and the public interest.

My favorite entertainment programming has been on Fox for some time, including a couple of discontinued programs. Thank goodness for cable.

AccidenT

03-21-07, 11:31 PM

Channel 23, 1 Jan 09, in a rather curt response to my what the HE double toothpicks is going on inquiry. Early? He said NO!

Or hockey sticks!

Well, 1/1/09 is about a month and a half earlier than the cutoff date of 2/17/09. :D

He probably meant to say 2/17/09, though.

DrJoe

03-22-07, 08:48 AM

Stan,

Back in the late 90's the FCC offered existing television stations a second channel to broadcast a digital signal on. There was a "cut off" date after which no additional digital assignments would be given. I believe this is because it was difficult to assign additional stations especially in regions like ours where we have to get the permission of a foreign government (Canada) before any broadcast assignments can be made. They also wanted to limit the number of digital assignments made so that there would still be spectra left for new broadcasters. Please read the following FCC documents:

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Orders/1997/fcc97115.pdf
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98315.pdf

you can follow the trail of FCC thought at http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/

Unfortunately, WPFO did not yet exist at the time the digital assignments were given. After they came into existance, they were given the choice of broadcasting either ATSC (digital) or NTSC (analog). Being good business persons, they chose to broadcast NTSC -- the vast majority of their OTA audience has NTSC tuners and not ATSC tuners. When the analog switch is turned off, they will convert to ATSC/digital on their existing channel. At that time, existing dual broadcasters will shut down one of their two channel assignments and broadcast only in ATSC/digital on the one they keep (I believe that the deadline for choosing which to keep has recently passed).

So it is not up to WPFO whether they broadcast on two channels or not, it is up to the FCC and the FCC sounds to be inflexible on the matter.

Joe

Stan54

03-22-07, 01:02 PM

Stan54

03-22-07, 02:13 PM

I don't think I have previously posted this email from channel 6's Bill Green:

"Stan,

Just wanted to let you know that we are doing a second high definition show on Tuesday night March 27 from 8-9.

Hope you'll tune in!

Bill"

We discussed the fact that it is on during network time. They have had some complaints from what he told me. I suggested that his HD shows go on 7:00, so that we could have 4 rather than 3 hours of HD programming. ........... I try to make him feel guilty, but he's just interested in putting on a good show.

I have told him in the past that I'm pretty impressed that channel 6 can originate HD programming (tape). He's excited to have access to the HD equipment once in a while. I haven't picked up any clue as to when other local HD programming might be forthcoming.

Davinleeds

03-22-07, 05:41 PM

Well, 1/1/09 is about a month and a half earlier than the cutoff date of 2/17/09. :D

He probably meant to say 2/17/09, though.

It's also on their website

WPFO plans to begin broadcasting in HD over-the-air by January 1, 2009.

http://www.fox23me.com/general-info.php

jkurlanski

03-22-07, 08:18 PM

Anyone else having problems w/WGME-HD on TWC? Its a black screen, although I caught a brief picture that broke for just a sec. Looks great OTA.

Stan54

03-23-07, 11:20 AM

Anyone else having problems w/WGME-HD on TWC? Its a black screen, although I caught a brief picture that broke for just a sec. Looks great OTA.

Sorry, but I didn't watch the HD set last night. Hopefully, your picture is back. If not, I can check it out tonight. The WGME HD picture is a good one for sure.

AccidenT

03-23-07, 12:09 PM

jkurlanski

03-23-07, 12:15 PM

If I remember right, the equipment Bill Green uses is on loan. It travels from station to station.

Stan54

03-23-07, 03:03 PM

HD cameras are one thing. Those can be acquired even temporarily. It is the control room equipment and wiring that they must possess that surprises me. I don't know enough about the technology to discuss it intelligently, but I know that it takes more than an HD Camera and a station's signal transmitter to get an HD local program to us.

WCSH must have done a number of things to prepare for both this and studio HD programming. In my correspondence with Bill, he has never offered a technical explanation other than the borrowed field camera and recording equipment.

drbonbi

03-23-07, 03:50 PM

I'm really surprised they have the resources to originate HD programming but still haven't sprung for the equipment to be able to pass through DD5.1 audio on the HD network programming.

You and me both. :(

Dana

guiness4me

03-27-07, 09:23 PM

Webini

03-27-07, 09:45 PM

Try this link (http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/Address.aspx).

It will give you direction and the type of antenna you will need.

IMO stay away from anything branded "Terk". solidsignal.com (http://www.solidsignal.com/antennas/) has everything you would need with great service and prices.

Damariscotta

03-27-07, 09:57 PM

Just a quick question I hope someone can answer for me. I live in Whitefield about 10 miles east of augusta off of Rt 17. Need suggestions as to what ota antenna will pull in hdtv signals. I currently have directv but cannot get the hd satellite feed due to some tree trouble I need work out. Is it worth the investment in the antenna? Would any antenna pick up the signal? Thanks

From Damariscotta, I'm using a Channel Master 4228. I have it pointed slightly north of Sabego Lake and I get WCSH, WGME, WMTW, and WCBB digital signals. During the winter I point it towards Bangor and can get the WABI digital signal for UMaine hockey.

guiness4me

03-28-07, 12:27 PM

Crclark

03-28-07, 07:16 PM

A quick question for you. In the past have you ever received any of the analog channels over the air? If you have, the DT channels should work also. But, you will need a UHF antenna for the DT channels. The analog signal does not have to look perfect for the DT to come in but the better it looks may help decide what size antenna you may need and where to place- roof or inside the home.

Good luck,

Craig

[/From Damariscotta, I'm using a Channel Master 4228. I have it pointed slightly north of Sabego Lake and I get WCSH, WGME, WMTW, and WCBB digital signals. During the winter I point it towards Bangor and can get the WABI digital signal for UMaine hockey. ]

Damariscotta, is your Antenna mounted on your roof or on some sort of pole. I know some people have them set up in their attic but I guess you would need to be fairly close to the signal. Does it need a clear line of sight? I have a few trees that may cause some problems.

Thanks

Damariscotta

03-28-07, 08:12 PM

[/From Damariscotta, I'm using a Channel Master 4228. I have it pointed slightly north of Sabego Lake and I get WCSH, WGME, WMTW, and WCBB digital signals. During the winter I point it towards Bangor and can get the WABI digital signal for UMaine hockey. ]

Damariscotta, is your Antenna mounted on your roof or on some sort of pole. I know some people have them set up in their attic but I guess you would need to be fairly close to the signal. Does it need a clear line of sight? I have a few trees that may cause some problems.

Thanks

The antenna is mounted on the roof below the tree line and approx 1 mile from my residence there is a small hill that definately obstructs line-of-site. But according to the signal meter on my HDTV, the signals for all digital stations are average to strong. My HDTV indicates full signal strength for WGME. When pointing to WABI, the signal is in the weak region but I have never experienced loss of signal.

I recall when I first received the antenna, I took it out of the box (fully assembled), leaned it against the sofa, and connected it to the TV. I remember being surprised that I was receiving some digial signals from within the house. For many weeks in the early Spring I had it anchored on the deck on a 6' pole until the weather was good enough to get on the roof. Signal was a little weaker but I never experienced LOS.

The literature for the model I have states that one might be able to receive the upper end of the VHF range. I noticed that I can receive 13 and the Augusta PBS station but nothing below that (i.e., 6 and 8). I cannot receive any of the analog UHF stations simply because I am out of range.

Bobcalkin

03-29-07, 12:28 PM

Great news for Comcast subscibers! Turned on the TV this morning and was shocked to see NESNHD :) A small pat on the back for myself and Dana, I'd like to think that our constant emails to the regional VP had something to do with it being turned on in time for baseball season. I am going to send her a thank you email right now.

drbonbi

03-29-07, 12:46 PM

Great new for Comcast subscibers! Turned on the TV this morning and was shocked to see NESNHD :) A small pat on the back for myself and Dana, I'd like to think that our constant emails to the regional VP had something to do with it being turned on in time for baseball season. I am going to send her a thank you email right now.

Hey Bob. Great news indeed!!! :)

I wrote Mary back on Mar. 18 and she responded suggesting an "early April launch" but asked that I keep it quiet until the date was firm when she would "let me know." You beat her to it!

Dana

PS. I have now written her a thank you, too. Of course I intend to keep writing her about other improvements we expect from Comcast. But, this one comes at a great time.

drbonbi

03-29-07, 02:57 PM

Stan54

03-30-07, 12:54 PM

Mary, the Comcast Area Vice President, NH/ME whose offices are now in Portsmouth, NH, responded and said she's not done yet! Still working on getting WFPO/fox23 Portland in HD on Comcast Brunswick.

Gee, if this keeps up, we'll catch up with Maine TWC/Adelphia! ;)

Anyway, all good news. :cool:

Dana

I hope you are able to pick up Fox. It is the most important of the networks for me. Starts right out on Monday night with Prison Break and 24.

AccidenT

04-03-07, 12:05 PM

Craig,

Is WGME planning on carrying HD coverage of the Masters on Thursday and Friday? From what I've read it's an option open to affiliates, and I recall that you did it last year, but I didn't see it in the guide data.

Thanks,
Eric

drbonbi

04-03-07, 12:40 PM

edoug

04-03-07, 05:25 PM

drbonbi

04-03-07, 06:21 PM

I've got some bad, but not unexpected, news. It looks like we're going to lose HDNet and HDNet Movies.

527 HD Net High-Definition TV
527 VS/Golf HD
528 MHD
528 HD Net Movies
http://www.comcast.com/Customers/Clu/ChannelLineUpPopup.ashx

I don't know if they're going to have HD Net-VS/Golf and MHD-HD Net Movies share the channels or not but either way it's terrible.

You may be right. HDNet and HD Net Movies apparently are not standard fare on other Comcast systems. But, I predicted their demise back at the end of January (post 1823 on this thread) when I got a paper Comcast Brunswick lineup in the mail that didn't list them - and we still have them.

So, I guess we just wait and see. :(

Dana

edoug

04-03-07, 09:11 PM

You may be right. HDNet and HD Net Movies apparently are not standard fare on other Comcast systems. But, I predicted their demise back at the end of January (post 1823 on this thread) when I got a paper Comcast Brunswick lineup in the mail that didn't list them - and we still have them.

So, I guess we just wait and see. :(

Dana

Dana, I remember the post, I was hoping the agreement between SusCom and HD Net was long enough that Cuban and Comcast would get together.
Even with the addition of NESN HD, I'm still underwhelmed by Comcast. NESN, CBS, and possibly adding Fox are no-brainers. If they had sent out surveys, I bet that the other channels they've added wouldn't be ones we would pick.

Stan54

04-03-07, 09:13 PM

That is a bit of a hit to take. It's nice having that movie channel there and sometimes I find something on HD Net that fills the bill at the right time. I hope TWC doesn't lose them.

drbonbi

04-03-07, 09:28 PM

Dana, I remember the post, I was hoping the agreement between SusCom and HD Net was long enough that Cuban and Comcast would get together.
Even with the addition of NESN HD, I'm still underwhelmed by Comcast. NESN, CBS, and possibly adding Fox are no-brainers. If they had sent out surveys, I bet that the other channels they've added wouldn't be ones we would pick.

Agreed. But, Comcast isn't starting with a clean slate. As bobcalkin reported, the Comcast Veep noted that the SusCom system has capacity issues. Until those are squared away, I think the options are limited.

Dana

AccidenT

04-03-07, 09:54 PM

It is on Universal HD which is carried on Comcast Brunswick. FYI.

Dana

Yeah, I get UHD through DirecTV, but WGME's bitrate and PQ are typically better. It's also a rare chance to compare the PQ of the same broadcast through different sources.

Crclark

04-04-07, 09:06 PM

Sorry, but no HD Maters Thursday and Friday.

Craig,

Is WGME planning on carrying HD coverage of the Masters on Thursday and Friday? From what I've read it's an option open to affiliates, and I recall that you did it last year, but I didn't see it in the guide data.

Thanks,
Eric

AccidenT

04-04-07, 09:47 PM

Sorry, but no HD Maters Thursday and Friday.

Ah, shucks.

http://www.thurgoodmart.com/app/images/mater.jpg

But what about the golf tournament? ;)

Do you happen to know the reasoning behind the decision? (I'm correct in my memory of WGME carrying the Thursday and Friday HD coverage last year, right?) The OTA WGME PQ was noticeably better than UHD's via DirecTv.

loudo38

04-04-07, 10:50 PM

Here is the TV schedule for The Masters

Thursday, April 5
4:00 - 7:00 pm - Live Coverage - USA Network & Universal HD
8:00 - 11:00 pm - Replay of day 1 telecast - USA Network & Universal HD
11:30 - 11:45 pm - Highlights Show - CBS-TV

Friday, April 6
4:00 - 7:00 pm - Live Coverage - USA Network & Universal HD
8:00 - 11:00 pm - Replay of day 2 telecast - USA Network & Universal HD
11:30 - 11:45 pm - Highlights Show - CBS-TV

Saturday, April 7
3:30 - 7:00 pm - Live Coverage - CBS-TV

Sunday, April 8
2:30 - 7:00 pm - Live Coverage - CBS-TV

Red Text = Available in HD

jkurlanski

04-05-07, 07:28 AM

TWC Cumberland Co Update: Channel 536 ESPN2-HD is up, but says "You are not subscribed to this channel" With my cable bill, I bloody well better be! The guide does have program info.

jkurlanski

04-05-07, 03:47 PM

Its on now. Of course, Dice-K's pitching on NESN-HD right now so that's grabbing my attention first.
Happy April Snow Day everyone!

loudo38

04-05-07, 04:00 PM

Its on now. Of course, Dice-K's pitching on NESN-HD right now so that's grabbing my attention first.
Happy April Snow Day everyone!

We are getting it here in Central Fla, on DirecTV, but the picture is really jumpy. Good Quality, but it looks like it is skipping frames. All other HD broadcasts have been OK, this is the first game I have seen this in. First time I see a NESN-HD broadcast on EI package.

jkurlanski

04-05-07, 04:24 PM

Looks great here. No jumping or anything via TWC. Sorry....

I just realized that on ESPN2 Maine hockey's on! Frozen Four action started at 4pm. NOT in High Def.

loudo38

04-05-07, 04:37 PM

Looks great here. No jumping or anything via TWC. Sorry....

I just realized that on ESPN2 Maine hockey's on! Frozen Four action started at 4pm. NOT in High Def.

Watching it here also, via DirecTv, on ESPN-HD, but it is the 4x3 picture with side bars.

guiness4me

04-06-07, 06:50 PM

Quick question for those who use the Channel master antenna. Is there a retailer in Portland that carries it or do I have to order it online?

jscudder

04-07-07, 07:11 AM

Quick question for those who use the Channel master antenna. Is there a retailer in Portland that carries it or do I have to order it online?

After buying mine online from some place in Worcester, MA, I walked into our local True Value Hardware Store and found one on display there. The store wasn't in Portland, but if you have a True Value in your area, you might want to check that out first.

John

drbonbi

04-07-07, 07:46 AM

After buying mine online from some place in Worcester, MA, I walked into our local True Value Hardware Store and found one on display there. The store wasn't in Portland, but if you have a True Value in your area, you might want to check that out first.

John

guiness4me,

The Worcester, MA. outlet is Stark Electronic http://www.starkelectronic.com/

Ace Hardware used to be able to order Channel Master 4228 for free delivery to the store of your choice. But, doing an on-line search, I don't see it available any longer. However, Aubuchon Hardware carries antennas online made by Leviton and Gemini that look remarkably similar to name brand models. ;) http://search.hardwarestore.com/?query=antenna&x=156&y=20 There's a 10% first time customer discount and free shipping applies.

Lowes carries four Channel Master models according to their site on-line seach but not in any Maine store I can find. They may be able to do a special order.

Let us know how you made out.

Dana

loudo38

04-07-07, 09:33 AM

Also check out Radio Shack, that is where I got mine. I don't remember the brand of it, as it was a while ago I bought it.

Davinleeds

04-07-07, 11:25 PM

Sidebars/pillars color changed on 51. Noticed today. Other than black, it's distracting. Also on another note, guide info on pbs, never had it before today.

guiness4me

04-09-07, 08:47 PM

Here is my latest suggestion. Seems like a lot of work.My zip is 04353

When it comes to digital reception there is no room for error, it's an all or nothing proposition. As you probably know the reception conditions at your location would be considered difficult.

The biggest Channel Master antenna is the 3671, although we don't carry the 3671 it's a fine antenna. I compared the engineering specifications of the 3671 and the Winegard HD 7084P the biggest Winegard antenna we offer. TV channels are divided into 3 bands, VHF low 2-6, VHF high 7-13 and UHF 14-69. The 3671 shows a slightly higher signal gain on the VHF low band. The two antennas are about the same on the VHF high band. The HD 7084P offers better signal gain on UHF than does the 3671. All of your digital stations are currently broad casting on the UHF band. However, two will return to the high VHF band after the digital transition is complete in February 2009. Since both antennas offer similar signal gain on high VHF and the HD 7084P offers better gain on UHF I would have to say in your situation the HD 7084P is a better choice. With either antenna I would use the Channel Master 7777 preamplifier. The transmitters are in different location requiring an antenna rotor to aim the antenna for best results.

With all of that said neither antenna is the absolute best choice for the reception conditions at your location. The best signal gain can be accomplished using what I call the Bi-Powered Super System. This is a dual antenna system incorporating two separate antennas, one for VHF and one for UHF. The VHF antenna is the Winegard HD 5030 and the UHF antenna is the HD 9032. This system offers better signal gain than either of the two VHF/UHF combined antennas mentioned above. The antennas mount to the same mast pipe with the HD 9032 UHF on top. The minimum distance required between the two antennas is 3 feet. The two antennas are combined to the same coax down lead using the separate VHF and UHF inputs on the Channel Master 7777 preamplifier. These items can be viewed at the bottom of this page. http://estore.websitepros.com/1129733/-strse-TV-Antennas/searchpath/4045dec1111d62376484ef /start/17/total/20/Categories.bok

The best reception will be accomplished with the Bi-Powered system followed by the HD 7084P and then very close behind the HD 7084P is the 3671.

If I can assist you further please don't hesitate to contact me.

Best Regards,
Denny Duplessis
TV Antenna Source
http://www.dennysantennaservice.com

guiness4me

04-09-07, 08:47 PM

Here is the latest suggestion I got. Seems like a lot of work.My zip is 04353

When it comes to digital reception there is no room for error, it's an all or nothing proposition. As you probably know the reception conditions at your location would be considered difficult.

The biggest Channel Master antenna is the 3671, although we don't carry the 3671 it's a fine antenna. I compared the engineering specifications of the 3671 and the Winegard HD 7084P the biggest Winegard antenna we offer. TV channels are divided into 3 bands, VHF low 2-6, VHF high 7-13 and UHF 14-69. The 3671 shows a slightly higher signal gain on the VHF low band. The two antennas are about the same on the VHF high band. The HD 7084P offers better signal gain on UHF than does the 3671. All of your digital stations are currently broad casting on the UHF band. However, two will return to the high VHF band after the digital transition is complete in February 2009. Since both antennas offer similar signal gain on high VHF and the HD 7084P offers better gain on UHF I would have to say in your situation the HD 7084P is a better choice. With either antenna I would use the Channel Master 7777 preamplifier. The transmitters are in different location requiring an antenna rotor to aim the antenna for best results.

With all of that said neither antenna is the absolute best choice for the reception conditions at your location. The best signal gain can be accomplished using what I call the Bi-Powered Super System. This is a dual antenna system incorporating two separate antennas, one for VHF and one for UHF. The VHF antenna is the Winegard HD 5030 and the UHF antenna is the HD 9032. This system offers better signal gain than either of the two VHF/UHF combined antennas mentioned above. The antennas mount to the same mast pipe with the HD 9032 UHF on top. The minimum distance required between the two antennas is 3 feet. The two antennas are combined to the same coax down lead using the separate VHF and UHF inputs on the Channel Master 7777 preamplifier. These items can be viewed at the bottom of this page. http://estore.websitepros.com/1129733/-strse-TV-Antennas/searchpath/4045dec1111d62376484ef /start/17/total/20/Categories.bok

The best reception will be accomplished with the Bi-Powered system followed by the HD 7084P and then very close behind the HD 7084P is the 3671.

If I can assist you further please don't hesitate to contact me.

Best Regards,
Denny Duplessis
TV Antenna Source
http://www.dennysantennaservice.com