Cincinnati, OH - HDTV [Text View] - Page 28

Nitewatchman

02-22-07, 05:36 PM

I recall months ago some anecdotal reports that TV stations as a general rule would at some point migrate to MPEG4/H.264 to conserve bandwidth for substations and provide almost-the-same-quality-don't-argue-with-me picture as current MPEG2 streams. Is that migration on anyone's radar, or is this just the product of someone's imagination? Just curious; my Linkplayer can't play H.264 files, but my next computer, whatever it will be, should.

As far as it concerns "as a general rule", or some sort of "planned migration" it's a product of someone's imagination.

Agree with Terry, although ATSC standard does actually allow just about any sort of datastream to be used - the problem is, on the receiving end, few folks, if any, are equipped with hardware to be able to decode anything other than MPEG2 via a OTA "free to air" stream.

As I see it, the main issue for broadcasters is that so far, very few(almost none, or none AFAIK - don't know for instance if the D* boxes would work with MPEG4 OTA) digital TV's, HDTV's, or DTV receivers out there support anything other than MPEG2 decoding, other than via a hardware upgrade. In other words, that new digital TV or HDTV(and the millions that have come, and the millions more to come) with the mandated "ATSC" receiver in it? Well, unless they've started adding MPEG4 decoding capability to those, or the ability to "upgrade" those via firmware/software upgrade, you'd need a new TV (or STB) to be able to decode a "more efficent" codec such as MPEG4 .....

So, I think that would be like starting a "new" DTV transistion before the first one(which is difficult enough as is) is even over ...... Therefore, if they're going to do it, IMO, judging by how this DTV transistion is going so far, they need to start putting the MPEG4 decoders in the sets NOW, and, then maybe in 15 years they can transistion to using MPEG4 for the broadcasts ..... And, of course by that time, there will probably be something "better" .....

As for it "being on anyone's radar" --- I think USDTV has used MPEG4 for the "subscription services" they offer via OTA delivery from local DTV broadcasters in some areas .... And, there's nothing "techincally(AFAIK)" or legally stopping any station, even right now, from sending MPEG4(or whatever) datastreams. For instance, they could send a single 480i SD stream at say 3Mb/s max via MPEG2 "free to air"(that is all that's required by FCC - a "free to air" stream equilvent in quality to their analog signal via MPEG2 ), and use the remaining 16Mb/s(or so) for MPEG4 streams ... Say, "HD" via MPEG4 and the box to decode it for a monthly fee .... FCC even has it set up so the station must file yearly to report the revenue, as gov't gets $ on the reveune from such a "ancillary" service ....

Would anyone pay for it? Maybe, but I certianly wouldn't, nor would I be too happy about something like that, given I have 3 HD sets+3 ATSC tuners(oops, forgot it's 4 now including the Hauppage WIN-TV-HVR1600 I just picked up for PC) specifically *for* receiving+watching(and recording) OTA HD via MPEG2 ..... ;-)

terryfoster

02-22-07, 08:40 PM

Agree with Terry, although ATSC standard does actually allow just about any sort of datastream to be used

The Wikipedia article on ATSC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC#Codecs) led me to believe that MPEG2 was the only codec that was a part of the ATSC standard. I guess I'll dig more into the ATSC website to learn more.

mikemikeb

02-22-07, 10:13 PM

Another thing to think about MPEG-2 is that it requires far less processing power to decode than H.264, which is the flavor of MPEG-4 which has gained the most traction as a "next-gen" format, and is used in HD-DVD and Blu-Ray disks, as well as HD transmission in England. Most ATSC tuners have only enough processing power to decode MPEG-2 HD.

Personally, I prefer VC-1 to H.264, as it requires less decoding power, yet provides the same amount of PQ at a given bitrate. It requires more decoding power than MPEG-2, but at least more computers will be able to handle VC-1 correctly instead of H.264. The problem is that VC-1 is a mostly Microsoft creation, while H.264 is more known as an "open standard". I know that both codecs are open standards, but that's not widely known, as far as I can tell.

druber

02-23-07, 04:11 PM

Nitewatchman, that makes sense. Obviously, since the Linkplayer can handle MPEG2 and not MPEG4, compatibility with one doesn't make for compatibility with the other. Using less bandwidth is fine and dandy, but it doesn't make the picture any more realistic. Takes care of that little question.

Nitewatchman

02-23-07, 11:31 PM

The Wikipedia article on ATSC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC#Codecs) led me to believe that MPEG2 was the only codec that was a part of the ATSC standard.

It is, but other codecs(including MPEG4) or data "formats" so to speak can be used with ATSC+the MPEG2 Transport multiplex -- Probably Just about any sort of data can be transmitted by digital television stations - Besides the ATSC stuff that isn't "MPEG2" (such as PSIP and AFD), around here that I'm aware of, we've had or have Webhopper, KET's datacasting or podcasting services, WCET-DT has(and maybe is) done some datacasting/etc/etc ...

ATSC is a very "open" set of standards for the most part, and so is MPEG/MPEG2. But, unfortunetly, our "ATSC receivers" aren't quite yet so "open" ....

I guess I'll dig more into the ATSC website to learn more.

Here are some links in case it saves you some time :

Download page for ATSC white papers for standard A90 "ATSC Data Broadcast Standard" and A91 "guide to ATSC data broadcast standard (http://www.atsc.org/standards/a90.html)

Download page for ATSC candidate standard White papers, Including under the "E-VSB" section, ATSC candidate standards for adding VC-1 and AVC codecs to the "ATSC Digital Television standard." (http://www.atsc.org/standards/candidate_standards.html)

USDTV Wikipedia article mentions USDTV+broadcastersr use of MPEG4 with ATSC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USDTV)

Press Release, including some info on USDTV+Broadcasters ATSC implementation of MPEG4 (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2006_April_10/ai_n16120508)

Nitewatchman

02-25-07, 05:05 PM

I'm currently troubleshooting a problem decoding WCET-DT program streams(OTA) with Hauppage WinTV-1600HVR. Before I may attempt to contact Hauppage and or WCET folks about the issue, was wondering if anyone else with one of these, or any other hardware is having any "non reception related" problems decoding WCET-DT currently, and if so, what hardware(or software) is effected ?

Or, if anyone has any ideas concerning what may be going on here, given what I've observed as described below ----- Any input or thoughts would be appreciated.

Strange thing is, the 1600HVR was decoding WCET-DT streams just fine the first couple of days I had it. I think I first noticed the problem Wed night or Thursday, and have tried rescanning and everything else I could think of to see if I could get it to decode, again. And, all other stations are decoding fine with it -- Also, all my other receivers are+have been decoding WCET-DT fine during this time as well.

Follows is more detail concerning what I've found so far when investigating this --

At this point I'm thinking along the lines of it perhaps being a *problem issue with the WIN-TV1600 Demux/drivers, along with perhaps something WCET-DT has changed recently - which is why I'm wondering if anyone else is getting this on any specific hardware/etc.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* - update: Or, perhaps something along the lines of the following seems more likely given what I'm seeing in TSreader with the 1600HVR as described in detail below+next two posts, but I can't doublecheck it/verify it with other hardware, so can't say if that's accurate or not :

Maybe its (1)that the Video/audio stream PID's aren't defined properly in WCET-DT's PMT or PAT, or (2)for some reason software isn't finding the video/audio streams or PID's correctly in PMT with the 1600HVR -- Which, given what I'm seeing with my other receivers, doesn't seem to matter for my other hardware, but perhaps they're using the TVCT info only instead of PMT ...

concerning (1), however :

(A) If there was something wrong with their PMT or PAT, I would probably expect to see an indication of it on My Sony HDTV's Service menu transport stream info screen. Such as the "PMT" indicator on that info screen being "lit up" in Yellow, Red, or "greyed" out -- which I've observed usually indicates something is wrong -- As I've seen on several occasions with several stations, If EIT (PSIP table which contains EPG info) is lit up in Red for instance, I don't get any Program Guide info via PSIP ... But it isn't, PMT it's showing "green", which I've observed usually probably means "everything is working properly with this Table or function : see Attached Screenshot #6 - CETHDonsony.jpg (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76322)

[Update 2]

And/or :

(B) This info/screenshot from TS reader via firewire from WCET-DT 48.1 stream Sony HDTV, (as described in more detail in Post 3/Part III) seems to indicate it's finding the PID's in PMT correctly :

Screenshot 8 - wcetdtpid31firewire.jpg (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76326&stc=1)

It's very confusing trying to figure this one out from here ....

[End Update]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't take very good notes on what I did/saw on this last night, but basically -- last night TSreader was saying it wasn't finding any elementary video streams(I may not have looked at the VCT info however), but looking at PID with the most bandwidth allocated, via TSreader somehow I was able to capture the Video from CETHD to a TS file(via selecting that PID 0x0ea5 for "recording" from the PID list), and have it play back - It was a elementary PMT stream ID PID 0x0ea5 which was not specifically shown as a Video stream last night, and is now(today) shown as "user private descriptor:0xff".(I think the description on it was the same last night as well).

Today, TSreader is showing in TVCT entry the "proper" PID's for the Video streams -- 0x0031 for 48.1, and 0x0041 for 48.2, and, under TVCT those are properly identified as as elementary MPEG2 Video streams :see attached screenshot 1 - CETtsreadTVCT.jpg (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76317)

And, 0x0031, 0x0041 are shown properly in the "active PID" portion of the screen, which shows the bitrate for each stream in the transport stream via the "green bar" graphs.

BUT, I still can't decode them. In the "PID List" (see attached screenshot 2 - cetPID) (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76318) the video+audio stream PID's are listed, but they do not seem to be identified properly -- Compare to the "PID list" (see attached screenshot 3 - WPTOPID.jpg) (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76319) from WPTO-DT, where the streams/PID's for audio/video are properly identified as MPEG2 video/AC3 audio for each program stream.

<Part II follows in Next Post - as the forum does not allow attachment of more than 3 graphics per post>

Attached below are the screenshots referenced in text above :

Nitewatchman

02-25-07, 05:11 PM

<continued as needed to attach more screenshots than 1 post will allow to fully describe the issue >

Also, there isn't a entry for either the video or audio streams for 48.1 or 48.2 under PMT in the "tree" listing at left of screen -- (see attached screenshot 4 - cettsreadpmt.jpg) (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76320), as there should be ....Anyhow, today, ES PID "0x0ea5" is still shown under the PMT listing, but now that PID doesn't contain any video stream, and It's not listed on the PID list, so I can't capture video from it. While I can "record" PID 0x0031(where the video is now), individually or the entire ~19Mb/s transport stream/etc, It won't decode on playback.

See attached screenshot 5 ( wcvndttsreader.jpg) (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76321) for a bit of a comparison to the PAT/PMT/etc. "tree" listing for a station which is decoding all streams properly, and to see what the "full" TSreader screen looks like for a station that's decoding properly on all streams/etc.

So, I figured I'd look to see what I could find out from the other decoders, which are decoding WCET-DT fine --- On Sony KD34XBR960 HDTV, a undocumented service menu option indicates Video PID at 0x0031 for CET-HD, Audio at 0x0034 as is normal : See attached screenshot 6 - cethdonsony.jpg (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76322)

<Continued - Conclusion in Next post - because of 3 attachment per post limitation as described in last post, I still need one more, sorry!>

Screenshots referereced in text above are attached below:

Nitewatchman

02-25-07, 05:13 PM

<part III - Conclusion + Continuation of last post>

Hooking up the Sony's internal ATSC decoder via firewire to PC+seeing what TSreader says about it, it says pretty much the same thing, and looks "correct", with proper Identification of the PID's and video/audio streams : see attached screenshot 7 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76323) - cetpidfirewire.jpg - And compare it to screenshot #2 -CETPID.jpg (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76318) from TSreader+ the Hauppauge WinTV1600HVR.

I can't tell anything much about the various tables/or PSIP with TSreader via firewire with the Sony, as, it's only(more or less) passing the elementary MPEG2 streams for that subchannel/program service(but still encapsulated in MPEG2 transport stream) via firewire for the "subchannel" you're tuned to.

Update: But, it does seem to be saying it's finding the PMT and PID's for audio/video streams OK -- See Screenshot 8 - wcetdtpid31firewire.jpg (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=76326&stc=1) :End update

The only thing I did notice on the Sony is that there's a problem with PSIP EIT and ETT tables(as shown in Red or "greyed out" in screenshot #6 - cethdonsony.jpg), and therefore, as you might expect there isn't any EPG data via PSIP coming from WCET-DT presently -- TSreader with the Hauppage is showing the same thing, lack of EIT/ETT info from WCET-DT, currently.

Final Screenshots attached below :

Half Baked

02-25-07, 09:14 PM

I'm not getting it either, have signal just no picture or sound, also tried to rescanning, no luck on a Toshiba 52HM95, no big deal, I'll just wait it out,Hey it's just Television

Nitewatchman

02-25-07, 10:33 PM

I'm not getting it either, have signal just no picture or sound, also tried to rescanning, no luck on a Toshiba 52HM95, no big deal, I'll just wait it out,Hey it's just Television

Half baked, Thanks for the report. Glad I'm not the only one having a problem with this.

I've only had the WinTV1600 for 5 days(and used it with WCET-DT only once for a couple of minutes when it was decoding OK Wed or thrusday), so I wanted to make sure it wasn't a issue specific only to it, or a setup issue/etc. on my end -- Especially since my other receivers are all decoding pictures+sound from WCET-DT just fine ...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

WCET-DT Update :

Tried the following 2 steps :

#1). Captured several minutes of WCET-DT's "entire" Transport stream via a method which should be just capturing it "as is" +writing to a file on disk -- In other words, it should be exactly as WCET-DT is sending it, with no modification of the stream on my end whatsoever. Of course, I've already tried this previously+I couldn't decode it with various software decoders, but this is the first time I tried #2, below :

#2). Then, I ran the Transport stream through a MPEG Transport repair software -- It reported that it "can't find Video PID" ...

So, given that half baked is getting the issue as well with something "nonPC", and that it's worked before for us with the currently effected hardware + software --- I would speculate at this point that it might be more likely to be some sort of issue at the WCET end concerning the Audio+Video stream PID's --- My wild arse guess FWIW is maybe a problem of some sort occured last Wed or Thursday or so with the Video/Audio PID's in the PMT table.

Still, I find it Interesting that my other receivers are still decoding them just fine+as noted in last post, per my ability to check it with those, the PID's "seem" proper from the 48.1+48.2 streams, I wonder how that is happening? As noted earlier -- Maybe that equipment is soley using the info on the PID's from PSIP VCT instead of the PID's in PMT to identify the Elementry MPEG2 Video/AC3 Audio streams ?

I also wonder how many different models/etc. of receivers/decoders are effected(as in blank screen/no audio even though the RF signal is fine) by this issue?

Paul210

02-26-07, 10:32 AM

Jeff,

I don't understand 99% of your last three or four posts, but bottom line, my Panasonic TH-42PX60u with built-in OTA receiver couldn't decode WCET-DT the past few days.

Paul

druber

02-26-07, 11:37 AM

My HP LC2600N set was displaying 48.1 okay last night. That is, as I flipped through the channels and got to 48.1, it would show the "no signal" window. Then it would either disappear and be replaced by the proper picture, or I'd quickly switch channels up/down and it'd be fine when I came back. I tried to record the Nature show about the Andes at 11pm with my EyeTV 500. That yielded a 1-minute botched recording. I watched most of it live and it looked great.

William Smith

02-26-07, 11:39 AM

Jeff,

Contact WCET ans ask them if they are using their PSIP genertator to make the PMT/PAT tables. if so that is the best guess. They should be able to shift their system so that the PMT/PATs are generated in the mux to restore reception.

Nitewatchman

02-26-07, 02:21 PM

Thanks, William for the suggestions, and everyone else for the reports ...

A bit ago, sent Jack Dominic(Their VP and COO - I didn't have any direct contact info for their engineers handy) at WCET an email with a short description of the issue along with William's suggestions+a link to recent posts in this thread for more detail ... I received a response back from him within 5 Minutes as follows(don't think he'd mind me posting this) :

"... The PSIP Computer has had some intermittent problems. We tried to fix it but to no avail so as we speak it is being replaced.

Sorry about the problems

jack"

----------

Nitewatchman

02-26-07, 07:07 PM

Looks like they've got it fixed ... WCET-DT audio/video working just fine now with the WINTV-1600+various software decoders .... TSreader is showing their Audio/Video stream PID's in PMT properly -- and I'm getting the PSIP EPG via EIT's ...

Also, I don't see any captions currently for NBR upconvert, but noticed a bit earlier that EIA-708 digital captions on 48.1 were working on my Zenith HDV420 receiver during PBS HD feed ... I'm not sure If I have seen that before from them, if it has happened it's been a while ....

Thanks again for everyone's input on this+to the CET folks if they're reading here ....

Bill R (# 2)

03-01-07, 11:16 AM

Has anyone noticed that WCPO-DT seems to be running with reduced power today? I wonder if the storms this morning caused some problem.

bearcatscott

03-01-07, 11:32 AM

My wife called and said we have lost WCPO this morning in Springboro. It usually comes in pretty strong.

Nitewatchman

03-01-07, 11:46 AM

Has anyone noticed that WCPO-DT seems to be running with reduced power today?

Yes, I'm still getting them just fine up here from 32 Miles(about 5 miles North of downtown Middletown and about 10 miles directly west of springboro :) ), currently but the AGC readings on one of my receivers would seem to indicate that the signal appears to be much weaker than usual. Doesn't appear to be a interference issue/etc, either.

If they are running at reduced power, it would be interesting to know how much .....

Bill R (# 2)

03-01-07, 12:14 PM

jdhughes63

03-01-07, 02:27 PM

I have TW in Miami Township, Clermont County. We have lost HDNET and HDNET movie. I wonder if it is the storm or if HD Net is down. Tried rebooting the ststem which sometimes works but not today.

elparce

03-01-07, 06:27 PM

I have TW in Miami Township, Clermont County. We have lost HDNET and HDNET movie. I wonder if it is the storm or if HD Net is down. Tried rebooting the ststem which sometimes works but not today.

I am in Montgomery and I have lost both of these channels as well (TWC).

Does TWC have any plans to add a HD channel to replace INHD2?

El Parce

Nitewatchman

03-01-07, 08:02 PM

I just talked to one of the engineers (Joe) at WCPO. They got hit by lightening during this morning's storm. According to Joe, a circuit board in their transmitter is causing the low power problem (he didn't say how much their power output has been reduced). He said that they are going to run today at reduced power and take the DT transmitter down at midnight and replace the board.

thanks for the info. Bit OT I suppose as it's analog, but Looks like WBQC-CA 38(also transmits from WCPO tower) is having some problems as well, as it's also weaker here this evening ... WOTH-LP 25(also on WCPO's stick) looks fine, though ....

microbob

03-01-07, 08:17 PM

I'm not able to get them at all here at the moment. WBQC seems to be off the air

Nitewatchman

03-01-07, 09:05 PM

WBQC is still there at 9:05pm, just quite weak vs normal ....

jdhughes63

03-01-07, 09:22 PM

I am in Montgomery and I have lost both of these channels as well (TWC).

Does TWC have any plans to add a HD channel to replace INHD2?

El Parce
Last time I talked with them they said nothing planned yet. Although no price break for less service

CincySaint

03-02-07, 10:02 AM

I saw this online on the Cincy Business Journal site...

FSN Ohio said Wednesday that it's expanding its coverage this year from 100 to 145 games, including 33 that will be broadcast in the high-definition format.

Link to story --> FSN ups Reds games (http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2007/02/26/daily36.html?surround=lfn)

So will we get this in HD on TWC?

Bill R (# 2)

03-02-07, 10:50 AM

I noticed this morning that it looks like WCPO got their problem fixed.

jimp2244

03-02-07, 12:43 PM

I saw this online on the Cincy Business Journal site...

Link to story --> FSN ups Reds games (http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2007/02/26/daily36.html?surround=lfn)

So will we get this in HD on TWC?

I literally just noticed at reds.com schedule it lists certain games as "FSN" and others as "FSN-HD." I was going to ask about that but it looks like you've got the answer already. Thanks for the update.

Bill R (# 2)

03-02-07, 02:16 PM

Does anyone (cable or satellite) carry FSN Cincinnati-HD?

terryfoster

03-02-07, 02:48 PM

Does anyone (cable or satellite) carry FSN Cincinnati-HD?

Such a channel didn't really exist until this announcement, only the regular FSN Ohio has/had a HD feed.

Nitewatchman

03-02-07, 04:58 PM

I noticed this morning that it looks like WCPO got their problem fixed.

Yes, WBQC(analog) looks good now here as well ...

JunkyardDogg

03-02-07, 10:01 PM

Well I have been chatting with Joe and Tom, both the top two engineers at WCPO, about what is going on at the station, but they just wouldn't spill the beans. So, I moved onto Steve Norris. I was asking him why the station no longer used their old radar in conjunction with the one in Batavia and he added this statement,

"Right now the station is very focused on getting HD up and running which takes precedence over the 2nd doppler."

So, hopefully we will get local HD news by summer. We need to catch up to Cleveland!

mikemikeb

03-02-07, 11:26 PM

Eh, don't expect any move to HD help with ratings (see WUSA in DC, who switched about two years ago and are still in the ratings doldrums). On both occasions when I visited the Cincinnati area on vacation, I found 9's news to be the best. Maybe that was just me?

12 is pretty close in quality, but there are two words to remember with this station concerning HD: Clear Channel. Maybe Belo or Gannett, two more HD-centric companies, will buy the station and get HD news (and a 5.1 encoder!) working sooner rather than 1,400 years from now.

scottrleo1

03-03-07, 10:17 AM

Can anybody confirm how DirecTV will handle this?? 638 is basically FSOHIO(cinci) they have a seperate channel for FSOHIO.

terryfoster

03-03-07, 04:02 PM

Can anybody confirm how DirecTV will handle this?? 638 is basically FSOHIO(cinci) they have a seperate channel for FSOHIO.

Well, if they handle it like most of the other RSNs the Reds games will be available on channel 95 when air time is available. NOW, when the new sats go up and they start adding more "full time" HD channels in MPEG4, my guess is we may have two 638s like we have for local channels and such.

Nitewatchman

03-03-07, 08:18 PM

FYI,

"Cider House Rules" is Up in HD on WSTR-DT ....

Finally, something good to watch on MYTV :-)

update/correction : oops, originally I just checked to see what DD 5.1 channels were active with sound -- later noticed that it wasn't "real" DD 5.1, as there was dialogue coming out of the rears when it shouldn't have been/etc/etc .... It sounded really weird ....

zekyl

03-07-07, 04:21 PM

Hey, has anyone out there using QAM on TWC to get HD noticed that Discovery HD and TNT HD both appear to be gone? I can't find them any more. Do you think they got wise and are now scrambling them?

Bill R (# 2)

03-07-07, 05:56 PM

Do you think they got wise and are now scrambling them?

Very likely. Insight, over here in Northern Ky, seems to have the same "problem" once in a while. Sometimes they even have one (or more) PPV channels unencrypted for a few days.

TroyMclure

03-08-07, 12:51 PM

ansarar

03-10-07, 05:45 PM

Such a channel didn't really exist until this announcement, only the regular FSN Ohio has/had a HD feed.

Assuming that you'd need a separate channel to watch the HD games, I don't see an FSN-HD listing on Dish Network's website. Would they need to provide it, or would you just get the HD broadcast through the normal FSN-Ohio?

terryfoster

03-11-07, 02:01 PM

Assuming that you'd need a separate channel to watch the HD games, I don't see an FSN-HD listing on Dish Network's website. Would they need to provide it, or would you just get the HD broadcast through the normal FSN-Ohio?

I'm not exactly sure how E* handles HD RSNs. Most providers have a completely separate channel for the HD feed. Since we're in a region that didn't have a HD RSN until just recently I would believe FSN is in negotiations with TWC, Insight, D* and E* to get carriage agreements set up and so you probably won't see it on anyones channel listing.

Bubster

03-11-07, 05:36 PM

Hey, has anyone out there using QAM on TWC to get HD noticed that Discovery HD and TNT HD both appear to be gone? I can't find them any more. Do you think they got wise and are now scrambling them?

Yes, my elderly mother called me and said TNT-HD was gone. She could care less about Disc-HD. While I was over there looking into it i asked to see her bill. TWC had her duped into thinking she needed the digital variety tier to get the Hallmark channel. This company is really pissing me off. They now resort to duping elderly old ladies out of $6 a month all in the name of larger profits.

How cheap could I hook her up with one of the dish companies for basic cable and basic HD channels similar to the HD tier on TWC?

Jason110

03-13-07, 08:10 PM

Hey,

I get both WKRC (Cincinnati) and WHIO (Dayton) analog and HD substations on my OTA antenna. My question is this: What is the likelihood that the stations will show different NCAA basketball games on their analog feed and their digital feeds? It is March Madness after all and during the first round there are (usually) four games being played simultaneously.
I've heard of stations in other markets doing this to the liking of their viewers.
Anybody know this?

Thanks,

Jason
in Madeira

Jason110

03-14-07, 05:53 PM

Here is the broadcast schedule for Channels 7 and 12.

It's a shame the local marquee match-ups (Ohio State, Xavier, and Kentucky) will not be in HD. I think this is because those entire games will be shown in the local market, unlike the other games which were 'flex' games (i.e., they can turn away from the game if it's a blowout) which are actually shown in HD.

What really intrigues me, is the fact that the Kentucky game will be shown in its entirety on Friday night on Channel 12 in standard def. (NOT HD). Whereas channel 7 will be showing the game as part of a 'flex' in HD. Can't Channel 12 switch from HD to Standard def when the 'flex' folks will leave the feed??? I don't understand. Let's just hope the Kentucky game stays close so I can watch it in HD.

Jason

Link: http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs....14/SPT/70314012

DrDon

03-14-07, 06:01 PM

Can't Channel 12 switch from HD to Standard def when the 'flex' folks will leave the feed??? They can, but it's doubtful they will. Unless they've changed their setup - and I think I read a few pages back that it's still manual - it'll be easier for the MCO to leave it on Flex or leave it tied to the analog. You may get lucky and get an MCO that leaves it on flex until he notices the picture's different.

Of course, if they've installed any kind of auto switching, all bets are off.

PS: I fixed your post by adding the link. You can't link until you've hit 5 posts. But your favorite moderator can <G>

CincySaint

03-14-07, 09:52 PM

Don -- the link is bad and I can't find the story on the Enquirer site.

CincySaint

03-14-07, 10:13 PM

Found the story....

Enquirer story (http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/tv/2007/03/ch-12s-ncaa-tournament-game-plan.asp)

According to the story, this is a CBS issue not a local issue. CBS -- as has been documented before -- does not have multiple HD feed broadcasting capability at this time. So they have chosen to send the main "flex" feed (where they switch to games) in HD while the full game broadcasts are relegated to SD.

I know there is expense involved but it seems unbelievable the CBS has deals with the NFL and NCAA and can't do better than this. I always laugh when I see HD highlights of CBS NFL games on Sundays on ESPN but CBS can't show them on their halftime show.

planet_bill

03-15-07, 08:28 AM

What crap! I D* will have all game in HD in their MarchMadness plan. But, games like X and OSU will be blocked. I almost bought it this year, glad I didn't. It's awful that CBS is too cheap to step up and aquire enough equipment. Football on Sundays in SD is bad enough.

DrDon

03-15-07, 08:34 AM

Are they doing that, now? Last time I bought MM was when I lived in Cincy and none of the channels were ever blocked.

planet_bill

03-15-07, 08:44 AM

According to the article in the equirer, and D* , just called

APorter

03-15-07, 01:07 PM

Stanford/Louisville drops to SD when they go to constant feed. Dayton is currently in flex mode and is showing Maryland/Davidson in HD.

Nitewatchman

03-15-07, 01:27 PM

Looks to me like HD basketball needs more bandwidth on WKRC-DT and WHIO-DT ...

Stations sending 1080i really need to get rid of the SD multicast subchannels .....

DrDon

03-15-07, 01:41 PM

Stations sending 1080i really need to get rid of the SD multicast subchannels ..... Agreed. Though some of the newer encoders are doing a whole lot better at that. Of all stations up here, the My Network affiliate feeds pretty tight-looking HD with one subchannel (that runs the same programming in SD). True, CBS full-bore looks even better, but WMYD-20 isn't half bad. The NBC affiliate up here has also gone with new gear that's supposed to do better, but it's hard to tell with that cruddy NBC backhaul.

Nitewatchman

03-15-07, 03:07 PM

Agreed. Though some of the newer encoders are doing a whole lot better at that.

Yeah, but if they Get a newer, more efficent encoder they might just squeeze in yet another SD subchannel ... WPTD-DT has a nice Harmonic encoder for example(although a little older one unless they've upgraded it - either MV400 or MV450 I think), but, PBS HD still doesn't look too great at 1080i and 8~12Mb/s with 2 SD subs ...

The NBC affiliate up here has also gone with new gear that's supposed to do better, but it's hard to tell with that cruddy NBC backhaul.

Yep ... Same thing with WLWT-DT ... Heard somewhere along the grapevine they switched to a new Harmonic encoder in the last year or so, but because of that NBC backhaul thing it's hard to tell how well it's doing during the Sun night football/etc, can't say it really looks much different than from WDTN-DT, for example ... The bitrates on 5.1 are the highest in the area during bandwidth demanding content from stations which are multicasting ....

CincySaint

03-15-07, 10:07 PM

Looks like we have the flex feed in HD so we lose a few moments of the X game. Personally I love it since the HD picture is beautiful.

But this is not what was reported in the Enquirer.

microbob

03-15-07, 10:20 PM

The Enquirer is in error quite often. Glad the Game is in HD

microbob

03-15-07, 10:24 PM

Agreed. Though some of the newer encoders are doing a whole lot better at that. Of all stations up here, the My Network affiliate feeds pretty tight-looking HD with one subchannel (that runs the same programming in SD). True, CBS full-bore looks even better, but WMYD-20 isn't half bad. The NBC affiliate up here has also gone with new gear that's supposed to do better, but it's hard to tell with that cruddy NBC backhaul.
I was under the impression that WKRC recently upgraded their encoder a few month ago. Perhaps WebHopperWeasel could let us know if they have or not.

Nitewatchman

03-16-07, 12:45 PM

Robert,

If I recall correctly, I think it was a new upconverter they put in a few months ago.

jim tressler

03-16-07, 10:27 PM

wkrc is sd (for the kentucky game) and whio is hd.. although.. whio's hd channel is bit starved!!!

zekyl

03-16-07, 11:00 PM

Hey everyone, is anyone else missing HD on TWC for the games? I haven't had it all night and was not sure who to call. I tried WKRC main line and got voicemail.

jimp2244

03-17-07, 08:03 PM

My current situation is OTA (no cable or satellite) and I'm extremely happy with the content I've been getting. With the ability to receive HD from both WKRC and WHIO, it's very nice to get two different HD games at once, which has happend quite often. Thursday night, while WKRC was showing Xavier, WHIO was showing Wright State. Both stations cut over to the Indiana game during their respective halftimes, giving me just about all I could have asked for.

It's also nice having OTA and both CBS affilliates because several times when they were both showing the same game, WHIO was in SD while WKRC was in HD, and the other way around, meaning all I had to do was switch stations to get HD.

Also, I do agree that most (all?) of the HD coverage by CBS is not looking as good as I would think it should. Additionally, though, I think there is a noticeable difference in the quality of the individual games. One game will look "acceptable" and then they'll switch to another which will look just "fair."

jimp2244

03-17-07, 08:21 PM

Also, WBNS 10 (Columbus) is doing multicast again this year. However, they are not using digital subchannels OTA to do this like in years past. This means that OTA viewers will get the HD feed now, but won't get the multicast games. Personally I think I'd prefer the HD over the multicast. The multicast games are only available on cable (not satellite or OTA). More info on this here:

http://www.wbns10tv.com/?sec=stationinformation&story=sites/10tv/content/pool/200702/740463245.html

I suppose there isn't any reason why WKRC or WHIO couldn't do this as well.

CincySaint

03-17-07, 09:42 PM

If anyone cares...

It appears that the boxing PPV in HD is available free on TWC 976. Obviously a mistake since the SD version is $44.95.

Bill R (# 2)

03-23-07, 09:42 AM

"Cincinnati Reds fans in Northern Kentucky will see 33 Reds games in HDTV from FSN Ohio on Insight Communications this season.

But with the opener days away, FSN Ohio doesn’t have a deal with Time Warner Cable, which serves Cincinnati and Southwestern Ohio."

Full story here (http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070323/SPT04/70322022/1071/SPT)

jim tressler

03-23-07, 10:25 AM

man has this board been quiet.. everyone still alive?

jleupen

03-23-07, 05:23 PM

But with the opener days away, FSN Ohio doesn’t have a deal with Time Warner Cable, which serves Cincinnati and Southwestern Ohio.

I am shocked...NOT!! Yet another reason for me to dump TWC and get DirecTV...

Bill R (# 2)

03-23-07, 07:20 PM

man has this board been quiet.. everyone still alive?

I was wondering what happen here too. I guess with the nice Spring weather everyone is doing "outside" stuff.

While not HD related, here is an interesting note about Cincinnati TV:
David Rose is out at WCPO (http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070323/ENT/70323008)

“We have not reached an agreement with David Rose on his contract renewal, and he will not be returning to on-air work at WCPO-TV,” said Bill Fee, vice president and general manager, in a note to the staff today.

breinejm

03-24-07, 02:16 PM

I hope these are appropriate questions for this forum. General noob here.

I have a Dish Network ViP 622 HD-DVR with HDMI to Panny XR57 and HDMI to LCD HDTV all in the basement. I live in Liberty Township about 16-24 miles from most transmitters in Cincy and Dayton. I am connecting a Terk HDTVa Indoor Amplified High-Definition Antenna to the ota connection in the back of the ViP 622.

I cannot connect it in the basement and receive decent signals. I tested it by connecting through a built in cable connection on the first floor (I disconnected the cable there and connected the "HDTV" antenna and then disconnected the coax in the basement and connected it to the Dish Receiver) and I can get a couple dozen channels at 75-93 signal strength (most near the mid to top end without moving the antenna)). But this is where the WAF (wife approval factor) enters in. I cannot have the antenna in the living room (I agree it won't work there). My options are pretty limited. I wanted to hear what seasoned vets in this area might think of this (best) option:

I can run coaxial cable from the basement to an attic in the garage that would require ~120 feet of cable. I would be able to use an outlet in the ceiling of the garage for the antenna amp. This is best in terms of WAF and ease as I can run it through the basement ceiling, 1st floor closet and directly into the attic so it is minimal in terms of effort and completely out if sight.

2 major questions come to mind (you might suggest others!):

1. Is roughly 120 feet of coxial cable going to lose too much signal, even if it is amped at the antenna?

2. Will reception in the attic be ok (typically speaking, with a standard garage roof overhead)? Reception in the living room ranged from medicore to adequate. I watched the Thursday night basketball games on HDTV and the signal strength ranged from 85-93 and I'd rate the reception/PQ about an 8/10 (versus PQ of Dish's other HD channels). I would guess the attic reception to be better, but I have not done the experiment yet. I am hoping if one of you know a good reason why this would not work, it can save me a few hours of work and some holes in the floor and ceiling of a 1st floor closet.

Other than the roof, the attic is open to the surrounding area in terms of direct lines of sight and is actually better positioned in terms of the build of the house (living room is in back of house shielded by bricks and 2nd floor). Also, the house is on a relatively flat area on a relatively high (surrounding) area.

I hope that is enough info!

Thoughts and comments?

Thanks!

ScottA

03-25-07, 08:26 AM

I hope these are appropriate questions for this forum. General noob here.

I have a Dish Network ViP 622 HD-DVR with HDMI to Panny XR57 and HDMI to LCD HDTV all in the basement. I live in Liberty Township about 16-24 miles from most transmitters in Cincy and Dayton. I am connecting a Terk HDTVa Indoor Amplified High-Definition Antenna to the ota connection in the back of the ViP 622.

I cannot connect it in the basement and receive decent signals. I tested it by connecting through a built in cable connection on the first floor (I disconnected the cable there and connected the "HDTV" antenna and then disconnected the coax in the basement and connected it to the Dish Receiver) and I can get a couple dozen channels at 75-93 signal strength (most near the mid to top end without moving the antenna)). But this is where the WAF (wife approval factor) enters in. I cannot have the antenna in the living room (I agree it won't work there). My options are pretty limited. I wanted to hear what seasoned vets in this area might think of this (best) option:

I can run coaxial cable from the basement to an attic in the garage that would require ~120 feet of cable. I would be able to use an outlet in the ceiling of the garage for the antenna amp. This is best in terms of WAF and ease as I can run it through the basement ceiling, 1st floor closet and directly into the attic so it is minimal in terms of effort and completely out if sight.

This is a good question for the group and your timing is perfect. I was going to ask very similar questions so you saved me some typing! I live in Mason and have a similar Dish setup (Vip 211) and use a set of HD rabbit ears. The reception has been acceptable on all channels except ABC (WCPO is a VHF digital channel that I cannot find and WKEF's signal breaks up a lot).

I still have TW's coax running through the house and I have it tied in to a Channel Plus amplified distribution system (for a past project). I hadn't thought of using it to 1) reposition the rabbit ears to a better location or 2) getting an attic antenna and tying it into the existing coax.

It might be time to play with the coax today. :D

// Scott A

breinejm

03-25-07, 09:12 AM

Well, I am going to go buy a 100 foot RG-6 coaxial cable today. I can get it for under $20 (with shipping) at monoprice-dot-com, but it looks like for $40 I can get it at retail and I cannot wait. Watching the basketball Friday and Saturday in SD knowing I have all the equipment in the house for HD is driving me crazy. If it does not work, I have seen folks talking about an outdoor radio shack antenna ($59) that people have put in the attic. I will replace the Terk Indoor if it does not work there.

If anyone has thoughts I'd still like to hear them, but regardless, I will share my experience.

Nitewatchman

03-25-07, 12:39 PM

1. Is roughly 120 feet of coxial cable going to lose too much signal, even if it is amped at the antenna?

The length of the Coax run Should be fine. With the antenna inside and the 120ft run, amp is probably a good idea though.

2. Will reception in the attic be ok (typically speaking, with a standard garage roof overhead)?

Impossible to say without an on-site test with spectrum analyzer or digital receiver+monitor. There are so many factors which can effect reception, especially with the antenna indoors in which case signals are attenuated greatly(although signals should probably be strong enough from Dayton+Cincy at your location that an indoor antenna should generally probably be able to get enough signal from most, or all of the stations) vs. having the antenna outdoors AND anything near the antenna becomes "connected" to it(even you if you are near the antenna while adjusting it/etc), and effectively part of the antenna .... This is why issues such as multipath are often more of a problem indoors, and attics can be multipath nightmares ...

What I would suggest is taking a small TV and your recievier into the garage with you and testing the reception/optimizing the placement of antenna for best results before you make the coax run ....

I have seen folks talking about an outdoor radio shack antenna ($59) that people have put in the attic.

Since you already have it+it has a built in amp, I think I'd try the antenna you have, first. That being said, an antenna such as one of the radio shack "outdoor" VHF/UHF combo models along with a decent preamp might be a little better choice for your garage attic(even better if you can get it outdoors if it becomes necessary) Than the terk HDTVa .....

Do keep in mind that WCPO-DT(ABC) Cincy is on VHF currently, and WKRC-DT(CBS Cincy) will be moving to VHF after analog shut off. It's possible we may end up with other VHF stations in the area after analog shut off as well, but right now the way it looks, the rest will be on UHF. -- With possible exception of a new Low power station that has an application in with FCC to transmit on LO-VHF Channel 6 from a location near Oxford.

I live in Liberty Township about 16-24 miles from most transmitters in Cincy and Dayton.

Do keep in mind Dayton+Cincinnati TV stations are in different directions from your location, and that directonal antennas *aimed* AT the stations is usually the best way to go. Meaning, for best results from both dayton *and* cincinnati, you'd either want a (a) rotor(which probably isn't going to work well in the garage with a typical VHF/UHF combo antenna such as RS-VUxx(x), as it will probably be too large to turn without running into "stuff", or (b) Seperate Dayton/Cincinnati antennas on Seperate feedlines, with A/B switch near receiver to switch between them.

It's also somewhat possible you could combine seperate Dayton/Cincinnati antennas(with a 2 way splitter used "backwards") -- However, you'd just have to get really lucky there, as basically, the antenna aimed at one city will pick up some signal off the back side from the other city, which can cause problems when "mixed in" with the signal coming from the "properly aimed" antenna, as the signals will then be out of phase+the resulting "multipath" may or may not be correctable by the receiver, or may be less correctable when the wind blows the tree limbs around/etc/etc .. It might work well enough though, or it might work OK for some, but not all of the stations, as this sort of thing can be very frequency(channel) specific ...

Hope some of that helps ...

jleupen

03-25-07, 04:22 PM

Question: Does DirecTV carry the local Cincinnati stations (5,9,12,19) in HD? Or do you need a separate antenna to get them in HD??

breinejm

03-25-07, 04:42 PM

Jeff, thanks for the reply.

I have completed my setup and did not necessarily aim with conscious, but just turned it slightly towards Cincinnati. Just scanned channels via the dish receiver and on digital I got 3 channel 5's, 2 channel 9's (but no weather?), 2 channel 12's, 5 channel 14's, 2 ch 19's, 5 ch 43's, 2 ch 48's, 6 ch 54's, and 1 ch 64. All but ch's 9, 43, and 54 are 100% signal. Ch 9 is 88 and channels 43 and 54 range between 72-85.

I get no signal for ch's 2, 7, 22, 45 and 16. I am fairly sure I am missing a couple of the "extra" Cincy stations (e.g. - ch 25, ch 9 weather). Jeff, I don't mind if I do not get the Dayton stations. They would mostly be used for sports and if I have to walk up the ladder a few times during football season that is ok. I should be able to see the Bengals in HD quite often with little effort.

So I know this works and for the most part works well. With a bit of going up and down the ladder to the attic a few more times I can probably optimize the number of channels I get versus signal strength. And with the comment above about Dayton, I still plan on playing with enough configurations to see if this antenna can do double directional duty. When I had it outside it was able to pick up both cities, but I am doubtful. So we'll see.

edit: Well, I laid the antenna on its back with the rabbit ears spread one pointing towards Dayton, one toward Cincinnati. I get nearly all of hte Cincy stations at 95-100 and now I get Ch 2, Ch 7, 16, 45 at 70-80 signal strength. Somewhere around 35 total channels (I forgot exactly).

terryfoster

03-25-07, 08:06 PM

Question: Does DirecTV carry the local Cincinnati stations (5,9,12,19) in HD? Or do you need a separate antenna to get them in HD??
Yes, they are available from the dish w/o an antenna.

jleupen

03-25-07, 09:09 PM

Thanks Terry.

I think I'm going to give TWC 1 more week. If they don't get the FSN Ohio HD feed for the Reds games by Opening Day, I'm going to switch.

digital only

03-25-07, 10:19 PM

planet_bill

03-26-07, 03:02 PM

Question: Does DirecTV carry the local Cincinnati stations (5,9,12,19) in HD? Or do you need a separate antenna to get them in HD??

Yes, you do get them in HD and SD via sat. Add an antenna and you'll be able to pick up the sub channels 5.2, 9.2, 19.2 and a bunch of PBS stuff. Plus the D* box will have the guide data for these stations as well.

skylab

03-26-07, 04:28 PM

Thanks Terry.

I think I'm going to give TWC 1 more week. If they don't get the FSN Ohio HD feed for the Reds games by Opening Day, I'm going to switch.

Has D* or E* stated that they will carry FSN-Ohio-HD for the Cincinnati?Dayton DMA?

jleupen

03-26-07, 04:57 PM

Yes, it is my understanding that DirecTV has an agreement with FSNO to show the games in HD:

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/tv/2007/03/reds-on-hdtv-still-up-in-air.asp

jdhughes63

03-27-07, 03:47 PM

Last night NBC Nightly News began broadcasting in HD. (except for some of their film clips) I missed it and will try to watch tonight at 6:30 PM

Hope some locals go that path also. 5,9 or 12.

DrDon

03-27-07, 03:51 PM

Last night NBC Nightly News began broadcasting in HD. (except for some of their film clips) I missed it and will try to watch tonight at 6:30 PM

Hope some locals go that path also. 5,9 or 12. FWIW, 9's sister station in Detroit is HD for local news (though I've yet to see any HD field video).

ScottA

03-27-07, 04:22 PM

Last night NBC Nightly News began broadcasting in HD. (except for some of their film clips) I missed it and will try to watch tonight at 6:30 PM

Only the studio was in HD. All field reports were in SD (although the end sections were real pretty :D )

// Scott A

jdhughes63

03-28-07, 06:40 PM

Only the studio was in HD. All field reports were in SD (although the end sections were real pretty :D )

// Scott A
Tonight (Wednesday) the report from the White House lawn was also in HD. As time goes on we will probably see more and more "field reports" in HD.

chrisirmo

03-28-07, 09:06 PM

Tonight (Wednesday) the report from the White House lawn was also in HD. As time goes on we will probably see more and more "field reports" in HD.
I noticed that last night. I expected to see the same thing on the Today show thing morning, but instead those same shots were SD. One would presume that it's the same setup, and we know that the Today show is produced in the same control room as Nightly News. Why on earth would one be HD and the other not?

planet_bill

03-29-07, 08:04 AM

Anyone notice the commercials on NBC (5) had no volume to them last night. I'm not really complaining, its not often I will watch live instead of recorded. Maybe this is some new feature (:

planet_bill

03-30-07, 08:47 AM

Anyone notice the commercials on NBC (5) had no volume to them last night. I'm not really complaining, its not often I will watch live instead of recorded. Maybe this is some new feature (:

I guess not...

terryfoster

03-30-07, 09:09 AM

I don't watch anything on NBC Wednesday nights, so I can't help here.

jleupen

03-30-07, 05:15 PM

Anyone hear anything about Time Warner Cinci getting an agreement with FSN Ohio for the Reds games in HD??

3 days left...

jdhughes63

03-30-07, 06:53 PM

Anyone hear anything about Time Warner Cinci getting an agreement with FSN Ohio for the Reds games in HD??

3 days left...
FSN Ohio is on TW digital channel 43 in my area. It is SD only. TW has not added any HD digital stations since they dropped the second INHD station that quit transmitting. So we are still paying the higher tier price for less options. There are plenty out there to pick from. FSNHD, AEHD, ESPN2HD etc.

If they dropped a lot of the junk things that they carry there would be room for a lot of HD stuff. They could drop half of what they carry and gain a lot of bandwidth. If it is some what like their HD DVD 4 digital SD stations would make room for 1 HD. But then, I don't know the rules of HD vs SD and bandwidth.

ansarar

03-30-07, 10:35 PM

I picked up the Terk HDTVa antenna this week and I live in Mason and have it pointed towards the Dayton stations. I get 100% reception on all of them, and it even picks up the Cincy stations without half the reception (which is enough with digital signals). My previous antenna didn't come close to this amount of signal strength so I highly recommend this one.

I'm upgrading my Dish subscription to Dish HD tomorrow and plan to plug my old antenna into the receiver and my new one into the TV. This way I can watch live HDTV while recording HDTV using the Cincy channels.

Someone mentioned something interesting earlier. Rather than run coax from my bedroom (where the Cincy antenna will live), is there a way for me to use my unused cable jacks to route the signal to the TV instead? There's a jack in the bedroom as well as one behind the TV in the living room. If not, it's a drill through the wall.

Sea Ray

03-30-07, 11:07 PM

ansarar

03-30-07, 11:24 PM

Is that Terk an indoor or an outdoor antenna?

Indoor. 2 feet off the floor and strong signal. Currently on sale at amazon.com.

ansarar

03-31-07, 03:47 PM

Alright, so my install is now completed and there's good news. The Dish receiver will take your OTA Antenna feed and despite what Dish Network phone reps tell you, it will pick up every channel and program it and allow you to record. I was told that the receiver would only recognize the Cincinnati stations (5,9,12,19,48,64, etc.) but I also have the Dayton stations in my guide (2,7,22,45, etc.). So I have one OTA plugged into the receiver and the other plugged into the TV which will allow me to watch and record HD at the same time. Ironically, the installer didn't even know that you could make the receiver look for OTA stations so I'm lucky I did it in front of him.

As for the programming, I can't say that the picture quality on the Dish station look as perfect as the OTA stations, but honestly it's really hard to tell the difference unless you see them side by side.

Very pleased with the receiver and its ability to make the local channel experience seamless despite the fact that they don't feed you those channels from the Dish. In fact, I am getting more this way than they would offer. An added plus is that the receiver can record 3 programs at the same time.

ansarar

03-31-07, 03:49 PM

One more thing, Dish reps told me that an HDMI cable would be provided. That wasn't the case. The receiver box contains component cables and an s-video cable. I swapped with my DVD player (upconverting) and may get another HDMI cable soon.

Sea Ray

03-31-07, 05:49 PM

Alright, so my install is now completed .

Thanks for the update. What did you have before? Cable? How does the Dish picture compare on non HD channels to what you had?

ansarar

04-01-07, 01:14 AM

I had OTA for HD and Dish Standard for everything else. The SD channels look the same, but pretty much all the stuff I watch is in HD now. ESPN, NFL Network, Food Network and all the locals.

jimp2244

04-02-07, 01:23 PM

I had OTA for HD and Dish Standard for everything else. The SD channels look the same, but pretty much all the stuff I watch is in HD now. ESPN, NFL Network, Food Network and all the locals.

Kind of makes you wonder why you have to pay all that money for three channels...

I'm slightly considering getting cable for the Summer months just for Reds games. But it's a lot of money to pay for only one channel, that only has one thing on it worth watching. I could also take that money and go to more games in person...

skylab

04-02-07, 02:55 PM

So did Time Warner make a deal for FSN-Ohio-HD in time for the game today?

jleupen

04-02-07, 05:26 PM

So did Time Warner make a deal for FSN-Ohio-HD in time for the game today?

Don't think so. Not as far as I'm aware.

I think I'm going to switch to DirecTV. Did anyone see the Reds game on FSN-Ohio-HD on DirecTV today? Was it on 638 or some other channel?

terryfoster

04-02-07, 07:21 PM

jdhughes63

04-02-07, 07:31 PM

So did Time Warner make a deal for FSN-Ohio-HD in time for the game today?
If it was I couldn't find it. I watched it on TW 43 in SD and did a cimema zooma on my HD set. Actualy not bad but no HD.

jleupen

04-02-07, 07:31 PM

As far as i've heard the game wasn't available on D*. I don't expect to see many Reds games in HD on D* unless they do really well, play someone that is doing well, or the new satellites go up before the end of the season.

Hmm, thanks Terry. I thought it was. According to this article, the 33 games that are on in HD should be available through D*

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070323/SPT04/70322022/1071/rss08

Can anyone else confirm or deny this??

cadet502

04-02-07, 07:33 PM

I checked the stations in the 90's, and the only HD baseball game was on 95, I think it was the Toronto game. Did anyone who has MPEG4 D* find the Reds in HD?

terryfoster

04-02-07, 10:16 PM

jim tressler

04-02-07, 11:59 PM

I did not see it with the hr20 which is mpeg4 - I was under the impression that directv was uplinking your local rsn in hd.. guess not yet in our case

planet_bill

04-03-07, 01:38 PM

Hmm, thanks Terry. I thought it was. According to this article, the 33 games that are on in HD should be available through D*

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070323/SPT04/70322022/1071/rss08

Can anyone else confirm or deny this??

Misinformation!!!! In our area (DMA) we do not have RSN HD typically channel 96. The only way we'll see Reds HD is national broadcast away games that are not on FSN Ohio. This really stinks! MLB blacked out the ESPN HD feed of opening day. :mad: There's been a lot posted on this at dbstalk.

6speed

04-03-07, 02:53 PM

planet_bill

04-03-07, 04:19 PM

Is Insight cable down there, maybe that's why you got to see it? I would think you in the same market area as me, and probably live even closer to the stadium.

terryfoster

04-03-07, 04:45 PM

Misinformation!!!! In our area (DMA) we do not have RSN HD typically channel 96. The only way we'll see Reds HD is national broadcast away games that are not on FSN Ohio. This really stinks! MLB blacked out the ESPN HD feed of opening day. :mad: There's been a lot posted on this at dbstalk.

I do believe that FSN-Cinci has an agreement with D* for carriage of the games. At this time D* picks and chooses the games they want to carry on that HD special channel due to bandwidth limitations. As I mentioned earlier: I don't expect to see many Reds games in HD on D* unless they do really well, play someone that is doing well (or is popular), or the new satellites go up before the end of the season.

microbob

04-03-07, 05:39 PM

Is Insight cable down there, maybe that's why you got to see it? I would think you in the same market area as me, and probably live even closer to the stadium.

Yes, Insight Cable covers all of Northern KY.

jleupen

04-03-07, 05:46 PM

I do believe that FSN-Cinci has an agreement with D* for carriage of the games. At this time D* picks and chooses the games they want to carry on that HD special channel due to bandwidth limitations. As I mentioned earlier: I don't expect to see many Reds games in HD on D* unless they do really well, play someone that is doing well (or is popular), or the new satellites go up before the end of the season.

Yes, I believe this is unfortunately true. A friend of mine that has D* called them today and confirmed that D* would pick games and put them on channel 95, 96, or 97...

dc10forlife

04-03-07, 08:56 PM

Yes, I believe this is unfortunately true. A friend of mine that has D* called them today and confirmed that D* would pick games and put them on channel 95, 96, or 97...

The way I understand it is that most RSNs are available via D* spot beam to MPEG4 receivers. If a deal has been made, each and every game should be available in at least the Cincinnati DMA.

terryfoster

04-03-07, 09:49 PM

The way I understand it is that most RSNs are available via D* spot beam to MPEG4 receivers. If a deal has been made, each and every game should be available in at least the Cincinnati DMA.

The funny thing is I can't seem to find a HD version of the Reds game tomorrow night which leads me to believe that each and every game offered in HD won't be available in HD in the Cincinnati market for D* subscribers.

dc10forlife

04-03-07, 10:24 PM

The funny thing is I can't seem to find a HD version of the Reds game tomorrow night which leads me to believe that each and every game offered in HD won't be available in HD in the Cincinnati market for D* subscribers.

Thats why I said "should." If the LILs are up, why can't FSN-Ohio-HD also be put on a dedicated channel on the spot beam?

planet_bill

04-04-07, 11:23 AM

I think if TW had it in HD, then D* would find a way to get it to us. The LIL is just that. FSN Ohio/Cinci whatever isn't really local, its more regional.

BTW, according to the FSN schedule from the Reds site, tonights game is supposed to be HD, Fri SD, Sat & Sun @ Pit in HD.

Dimitriz

04-04-07, 12:20 PM

Time Warner gets ESPNU.

Big news today from Time Warner and Walt Disney Co.: They announced a corporate agreement for Time Warner systems to carry ESPN and Disney networks' products and services -- including ESPNU.

When? Hopefully before the college football season, and the next Crosstown Shooutout. No word from local Time Warner folks on a timetable. The announcement says "Time Warner will launch ESPN2 HD and ESPNU later this year." Some TWC systems also will add Disney Channel on demand subscriptoin VOD and ESPN Desportes. Three new HD channels -- for ABC Family, Disney Channel and ESPNEWS -- will launch in Time Warner systems when they become available in 2008.

So when will TWC get a deal done with FSN Ohio for the Reds in HDTV? The second of the 33 FSNO HD games is the Reds-Cubs at 7 p.m. today?

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/tv/

jspicoli

04-04-07, 01:22 PM

I live in Lakeside Park, KY.

I am looking for a company to mount a 42" plasma above our fireplace. The fireplace has drywall back w/ wood studs. So the HDMI cable; power can be fished through the wall to an entertainment cabinet on the right side of fireplace.

Anyone have any recommendation on who to use and approx what kind of costs I am looking at. I plan on have the tilt mount, hdmi and component cables purchased prior. I just need the installation service.

Thanks in advance.

terryfoster

04-04-07, 03:16 PM

I am looking for a company to mount a 42" plasma above our fireplace. The fireplace has drywall back w/ wood studs. So the HDMI cable; power can be fished through the wall to an entertainment cabinet on the right side of fireplace.

I can't help you with installer recommendations, but you may want to rethink mounting your HDTV above your fireplace. Generally you want the display to be level with your viewing location (couch) otherwise you will be constantly angling your head upwards in an uncomfortable angle. Also if you actually use the fireplace, depending on the amount of heat it kicks off, you could introduce unusually high amounts of heat to your new HDTV.

Also, I believe if this is professionally installed, you will need to have a new outlet installed where your HDTV will be mounted because power cords should/can not be ran behind the dry wall.

jleupen

04-04-07, 06:06 PM

Came home for work wanting to see if ESPN2HD or ESPNU was on TWC yet...

Instead I found Universal HD on Channel 972.

Nice, but not ESPN2HD...

cougars37

04-04-07, 07:05 PM

I guess the reds won't be show in hd again tonight on D*

jleupen

04-04-07, 07:12 PM

I guess the reds won't be show in hd again tonight on D*

Or on Time Warner Cable Cincinnati...

cougars37

04-04-07, 07:14 PM

If only I could build an antenna tall enough to pull in Chicago OTA!

ansarar

04-04-07, 07:57 PM

chrisirmo

04-04-07, 11:31 PM

If you ask me, TWC for your HD provider sucks. They're giving you what, 8 channels and 4 of those are channels you could get for free with an antenna? If you've got an HDTV and you're not with Dish getting 30+ channels, then I'm confused.
Yeah, TWC does suck, but they're the only option with full res HD channels. Plus, I have no desire to put a giant antenna on my house to receive local channels.

Nitewatchman

04-04-07, 11:33 PM

Yeah, TWC does suck, but they're the only option with full res HD channels.

HD from the broadcast stations which TW carries have no more resolution via TW than is the case OTA.

chrisirmo

04-05-07, 06:56 AM

HD from the broadcast stations which TW carries have no more resolution via TW than is the case OTA.
Sorry, you're correct. I was referring to the choice between cable and satellite.

planet_bill

04-05-07, 08:24 AM

Sorry, you're correct. I was referring to the choice between cable and satellite.

I've tried to tell the difference between MPEG4 (D*) and OTA (MPEG2) watching the same show a couple of times. I'm hard pressed to see a difference. In fact, I haven't as of yet. I know MPEG4 is compressed then decompressed at the box, so what, It looks outstanding. And it takes up less space on the DVR too. It still comes down to the quality of the source whether compressed or not.

gerhard911

04-05-07, 08:37 AM

HD from the broadcast stations which TW carries have no more resolution via TW than is the case OTA.

I'll agree on resolution but what about bandwidth ? After several years watching HD via a TWC Pace 550 on my Samsung DLP I recently got an LCD with ATSC & QAM tuners for a different room.

I was appalled at the quality of the NCAA tournament broadcasts OTA. Unwatchable to my eye whereas the cable feed seemed to have significantly less motion artifacting. On low motion programming OTA looks superb but even a quick camera pan causes severe breakup.

Do the locals send a higher bandwith HD feed to TWC via fiber ?

jimp2244

04-05-07, 08:52 AM

I've tried to tell the difference between MPEG4 (D*) and OTA (MPEG2) watching the same show a couple of times. I'm hard pressed to see a difference. In fact, I haven't as of yet. I know MPEG4 is compressed then decompressed at the box, so what, It looks outstanding. And it takes up less space on the DVR too. It still comes down to the quality of the source whether compressed or not.

It's very easy to tell the difference between MPEG-4 and MPEG-2, even at the same resolution and bandwidth. But when you reduce the resolution AND the bandwidth, it becomes very obvious.

What kind of display do you have?

jimp2244

04-05-07, 08:54 AM

I'll agree on resolution but what about bandwidth ? After several years watching HD via a TWC Pace 550 on my Samsung DLP I recently got an LCD with ATSC & QAM tuners for a different room.

I was appalled at the quality of the NCAA tournament broadcasts OTA. Unwatchable to my eye whereas the cable feed seemed to have significantly less motion artifacting. On low motion programming OTA looks superb but even a quick camera pan causes severe breakup.

Do the locals send a higher bandwith HD feed to TWC via fiber ?

Have you tried plugging your Pace box into the new LCD display? You really can't compare sources when you're using two different displays, especially when they're different technologies (DLP v. LCD). What is the native resolution of these displays?

terryfoster

04-05-07, 08:55 AM

Do the locals send a higher bandwith HD feed to TWC via fiber ?

I'm sure Weasel may have a better answer to this as far as WKRC goes, but I'm pretty sure everyone gets fed the same product from the single HDTV encoder employed at each affiliate (at least in this DMA). So what TWC does with the signal after that (beyond the QAM256 modulation but that shouldn't effect PQ) is a mystery.

The gold standard is OTA and everything should be compared to that as you don't have a middle man (D* or TWC) making changes to the signal.

terryfoster

04-05-07, 09:03 AM

planet_bill

04-05-07, 09:06 AM

planet_bill

04-05-07, 09:14 AM

There is a report on DBStalk (http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=899264&postcount=17) claiming that Red's game last night was available in HD via D* on 638. So I guess we should be checking that out on Saturday night.

Ch 638 is a SD channel. How do they make that work?

Wed and Sat and Sun are listed as to be broadcasted in HD but we in Cincy will get SD on 638

mlbUC

04-05-07, 09:22 AM

It's very easy to tell the difference between MPEG-4 and MPEG-2, even at the same resolution and bandwidth. But when you reduce the resolution AND the bandwidth, it becomes very obvious.

What kind of display do you have?

Explain this to me... how is it obvious? If it is encoded right the difference shouldn't be noticable. When E* switched a handful of channels over from MPEG2 to MPEG4 I didn't even notice until it was pointed out to me.

720p sanyo z2 projector, 110" screen.

terryfoster

04-05-07, 09:35 AM

Ch 638 is a SD channel. How do they make that work?

Wed and Sat and Sun are listed as to be broadcasted in HD but we in Cincy will get SD on 638

I've heard this as a possible future direction for D*. Channels that have a direct HD parallel (TNT-HD, ESPNHD, etc NOT Discovery HD or Universal HD) will be at the same channel number as the SD counterpart. So when you want to watch ESPNHD you would tune to the ESPN channel (what ever number that may end up being) and with the appropriate equipment the ESPNHD feed would be displayed. If you have SD equipment you would tune to the same channel and get the SD feed.

D* had to think of something since they plan on adding so many HD channels and they've already got 2-1574 practically consumed.

This kind of technology isn't really new, it's just channel mapping. Shoot, even TWC-Cinci is using it for digital multicasting.

planet_bill

04-05-07, 09:39 AM

Yeah, future. But not at the moment. Why else would I get SD and HD locals? They come in on different transponders. I have not read of this pratice with D*. It would be nice though. Multiple 5,9,12,19 can be a pain when surfing (I could set up favorites though, too lazy).

terryfoster

04-05-07, 09:49 AM

Personally I can see the benefit of having both the HD and SD feeds for the locals. Beyond the obvious ability to record the SD programming in SD, local digital broadcasts aren't yet 100% reliable and so we can always fall back on the SD channel if necessary.

From what I understand The 101 already works this way for it's HD programming.

planet_bill

04-05-07, 09:54 AM

well I'll check it out sat night. I'll set the box up to native and see what I really get. Sometimes the SD streched looks ok, maybe the poster over there was confused. I'm not going to be real happy until FSN Ohio HD is on a channel in the 90's

jimp2244

04-05-07, 03:15 PM

I have a Sharp Aquos 46" 1080p. Been quite happy with it. I usually
view it from around 9-14 feet away.

There are a lot of things that can go into why you may not be able to tell a difference. If you are not getting 1:1 pixel matching, then there is scaling and interpolation going on. This is more common with component connections, but can also happen with other video inputs. I'll give you an example. I have a VGA 1080p input on my 56" Samsung (1080p) DLP set. I can set the computer's video card to output 1080p. Because the TV has overscan, you can't see the edges of the windows screen (this is generally good for movies/video, but not so good for displaying a computer screen).

So, it will allow me to resize the image to fit into the frame. However, as soon as I touch the resize settings, I lose 1:1 pixel mapping. I have 1080p HD test videos that I can use to test various things. Vertical resolution is one of them. The vertical resolution image is 1920x1080 image with alternating lines of black and white 1 pixel high each. With native 1:1 pixel matching, the entire screen appears grey, and upon close look you can see the actual lines alternating. Touch the resize even a bit and it is painfully obvious that it's not right anymore. Instead of a nice grey, you get odd darker and lighter shades of lines of various sizes. This is because when I changed the size, the TV display has to scale the image which means those lines don't match up to exact pixels anymore. When you're not viewing a test image, it's not so obvious, other than the fact that the picture isn't as clear. This is the case with an fixed-pixel display technology (LCD, DLP).

Also, with 1080p displays, if you are showing an interlaced source (such as 1080i), the TV display processor must first de-interlace the image. Especially when 1080p sets were first going mainstream, there were MANY sets that did not do this properly. Some of them even just took every other line (half a full frame) and dropped the other half, effectively cutting the vertical resolution in half! I wish I still had the link to the AVS thread that discussed this, as there was a list of almost every 1080p TV model and whether it properly de-interlaced 1080i.

Explain this to me... how is it obvious? If it is encoded right the difference shouldn't be noticable. When E* switched a handful of channels over from MPEG2 to MPEG4 I didn't even notice until it was pointed out to me.

720p sanyo z2 projector, 110" screen.

With a 720p projector (assuming its native resolution is 1280x720), you will definately have scaling going on with any 1080i source because the display is not capable of displaying 1080i (1920x1080) resolution, so you will not be getting 1:1 pixel mapping. Granted any 720p source you watch should be OK, but you still could suffer from the things I listed above (especially with component inputs).

The things I'm mentioning just make it harder for you to be able to tell a difference between things. The affect the display's ability to display true, proper images.

Anyway.........

As far as me being able to tell a difference, there are certain things that mpeg-4 does differently than mpeg-2. mpeg-4 does have much better compression ratio than mpeg-2. However, it does this at the cost of losing data. While it does a pretty good job of deciding what data it needs to keep and what data it doesn't, it still ends up losing more data than mpeg-2. (Yes, both are lossy compression formats). mpeg-4 uses more advanced motion-estimation algorithms, but sometimes this becomes obvious in the resulting output. For example, watch a slow, panning image. You might notice that the background seems to have a slight "jerkiness" to its movement. This is because of the motion estimation done by mpeg-4. mpeg-2 does things differently and so instead, does not have this jerkiness.

When given enough bandwidth, mpeg-2 is better at delivering a better image. When bandwidth is limited, though, mpeg-4 is able to compress better.

Take 19Mbps 1080i broadcast video, and add a decent amount of motion to the image. mpeg-2 should be able to handle this quite well (this was in the minds of the engineers who designed the ATSC standards). However, reduce that bandwidth to about 12-14Mbps (about what WKRC-DT tends to be sending for HD these days) and you'll get a blocky mess. Take that same 12-14Mbps pipe and use mpeg-4 and you'll lose the blockiness, but you'll lose detail that was there in mpeg-2, and you'll gain other issues, such as the "jerky" background I described earlier.

For me, I want full resolution video (1920x1080i) from my provider, and I want it to be 19Mbps mpeg-2. What I DON'T want, is to get the 12-14Mbps mpeg-2 product from WKRC-DT, have it sent to D* or E* and have them compress it AGAIN with mpeg-4, AND reduce the resolution to 1440x1080i.

Right now, and for the foreseeable future, the best source of HD is OTA. It's really hard for people to believe/understand that, especially when they're used to associating antennas with fuzzy pictures and cable/satellite with clear pictures.

terryfoster

04-05-07, 04:31 PM

For me, I want full resolution video (1920x1080i) from my provider, and I want it to be 19Mbps mpeg-2. What I DON'T want, is to get the 12-14Mbps mpeg-2 product from WKRC-DT, have it sent to D* or E* and have them compress it AGAIN with mpeg-4, AND reduce the resolution to 1440x1080i.

I haven't heard any evidence that D* is reducing the resolution of the MPEG4 channels. It is my understanding that they are reducing the resolution on the MPEG2 1080i channels as a bandwidth savings measure, but since MPEG4 provides the bandwidth savings they can leave the resolution as is.

The STB can also cause PQ problems, so if you want better picture quality you may want to pitch your TWC boxes and get the TiVo S3. I've heard several people say they saw a dramatic PQ increase when switching to the S3.

I guess since you've already seen D*'s PQ first hand and performed direct comparisons on equal equipment to TWC's PQ there's no need to mention that sometimes numbers are numbers and the resulting image may be closer than you think.

Personally (as noted earlier) I saw a PQ increase on my equipment, but YMMV and I highly recommend going to a friend's house or seeing an in-store demo before choosing which provider is right for you.

jimp2244

04-05-07, 07:58 PM

Personally (as noted earlier) I saw a PQ increase on my equipment, but YMMV and I highly recommend going to a friend's house or seeing an in-store demo before choosing which provider is right for you.

This is a good idea, but there are a lot of things to keep in mind if you do this, and I don't think that the average "consumer" is educated enough to be able to compare. There are just too many variables that the average consumer is unaware of. What display technology was used? What kind of video cable was used? Has the display been properly calibrated and adjusted for optimal image? Who is doing scaling, if any... a set top box or the TV itself? Which of those two does a better job scaling in a given situation?

Additionally, in-store demos are nice, but they are there to sell you cable or satellite. They're not going to tell you that the best picture is OTA. In fact most store displays are not set up ideally. Many will run component video cables to all of the HD sets. Component video can be fine if done correctly, but it's very easy to stray from the 1:1 pixel mapping as I mentioned above. And who's to say the "comparison" isn't rigged to get you to buy what they want? I can think of a lot of ways that I could set up a "comparison" that would "prove" whatever I want.

So without the ability to show you a proper direct comparison, all I can use is numbers, and the experience of working with video compression formats for quite some time. I do understand that a qualitative analysis is more important, but as I said, it's very difficult to find one that has been properly set up.

I haven't heard any evidence that D* is reducing the resolution of the MPEG4 channels. It is my understanding that they are reducing the resolution on the MPEG2 1080i channels as a bandwidth savings measure, but since MPEG4 provides the bandwidth savings they can leave the resolution as is.

See this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=814919). DirecTV IS currently reducing the resolution (to 1440x1080i) for mpeg-4 locals. By doing this, they've effectively taken the 16:9 image and reduced the horizontal resolution resulting in a (square pixels) essentially 4:3 image that is then "stretched" to fill the 1920 pixels on your fixed-resolution display, much like DVD Anamorphic Widescreen. I absolutely despise this and think that non-square pixels have no place in video.

Just so I'm clear, I'm not trying to argue or start an argument. I do think this topic warrants discussion though. And also to come completely clean, I do have a fairly strong bias against both major pay-tv options right now, as I don't think either is handling HD properly. Time Warner has a severly limited offering. DirecTV though is much worse, misleading consumers. 1440x1080 is NOT the 1080i ATSC standard that is well known and widely accepted, yet DirecTV continues to air commercials claiming that their HD is "broadcast in 1080i." Well, what about the 720p channels? Are they broadcast in 1080i as well? Of course not. And the 1080i channels? DirecTV downrezzes them and REcompresses them. I don't care how good of a Xerox machine you have, but a copy of a copy is not as good as a copy of the original. Why anyone would want to pay DirecTV to give them a lower quality product that what they would get for free over the air is beyond me.

ansarar

04-05-07, 11:06 PM

Yeah, TWC does suck, but they're the only option with full res HD channels. Plus, I have no desire to put a giant antenna on my house to receive local channels.

You don't need a giant antenna on your house. I've got this little one behind my TV. I suppose it's possible depending on your location, but this thing picks up the Cincy stations from 45 miles away.

ansarar

04-05-07, 11:22 PM

Right now, and for the foreseeable future, the best source of HD is OTA. It's really hard for people to believe/understand that, especially when they're used to associating antennas with fuzzy pictures and cable/satellite with clear pictures.

As I mentioned earlier I just upgraded to Dish HD. I am getting the locals OTA, both for Dayton and Cincinnati with an antenna that plugs right into the DVR which then does a scan for any locals. I'd like to say that I can tell the difference between the OTA broadcasts and perhaps a ballgame on ESPN HD, but honestly that is very hard to do. Perhaps my TV is just really good at making them look the same (Samsung 46" LCD, 1080p, and about 10 feet). I have a 2nd antenna which plugs directly into the TV as well for viewing HD while recording HD and those look the same as well.

noTe

04-05-07, 11:25 PM

Came home for work wanting to see if ESPN2HD or ESPNU was on TWC yet...

Instead I found Universal HD on Channel 972.

Nice, but not ESPN2HD...

I noticed Universal HD tonight too and was surprised. Then again, I just bought my HDTV a few months ago.

Nitewatchman

04-05-07, 11:38 PM

I absolutely despise this and think that non-square pixels have no place in video.

Can't say I agree ......

Here's some good info :

http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5072024&&#post5072024

http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5757078

edit/update - here's one more good one :

http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5061652&&#post5061652

2nd update --and, Here's another one which might perhaps widen perspective a bit beyond what is available to consumer .... although it is a few years old+missing info on some of the newer HD formats -- consumerwise, perhaps most noticably Blu-ray/HD-DVD :

http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2516871#post2516871

XmtrMan

04-06-07, 02:35 AM

Do the locals send a higher bandwith HD feed to TWC via fiber ?

Nope.

At least not Local 12.

We send Warner cable the transport stream feed straight out of our main encoder; same data that goes to my transmitter. It has just a relatively minor re-formatting from SMPTE 310M to ASI for the fiber transport.

If you should think that the Warner HD feed "looks better" than OTA then it's probably more to do with the accuracy and artifacts introduced by your OTA receiver/decoder compared to your Warner STB.

jimp2244

04-06-07, 08:10 AM

Can't say I agree ......

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that reducing the number of pixels can be greatly beneficial to reducing macroblocking in mpeg compression, especially in the case of limited bandwidth such as is the case with current distribution technologies (OTA, cable, and satellite). I agree 100% with this.

What I don't agree with is using non-square pixels. If you are going to reduce resolution, you should reduce BOTH horizontal AND veritical resolutions proportionally, to retain the same ratio as the source (16:9 in the case of HD). So, if 1920x1080i is too many pixels for a quality image for the high-action source material you are using, then you should switch to 720p. With the ubiquity of fixed-resolution displays, it makes no sense to stray from this. While I understand that 1440x1080i (and 1280x1080i) are "valid" resolutions, using one of them requires horizontal stretching and scaling, and while you've retained the vertical 1:1 pixel mapping, you've lost the horizontal 1:1 mapping, resulting in a picture that has lost detail and crispness.

Take a look at the picture I've attached. This shows what happens when you scale horizontally. I used an HDTV test pattern that is 1920x1080p, which alternates horizontal pixels black and white, meaning what you SHOULD see is vertical lines, of the exact same width (1 pixel wide at 1920x1080). I resized the image and did a screen grab of the result. Notice that the lines are NOT the same width. Some are wider than others as a result of the scaling. This is very different from what you would be seeing at the correct resolution. It's a crude example but I think it illustrates what I'm trying to say.

If you want, resize the image yourself and watch the lines change width.

planet_bill

04-06-07, 09:14 AM

Well I don't see a difference, and after reviewing NiteWatchman's post and links, my box must be doing an outstanding job decoding the MPEG4 passing it to the HDMI port. I am only refering to local OTA and LIL MPEG4. I have no way of compariong the national HD feed, HBO, Showtime, etc. I do believe though that the national feeds are down res'd and manipulated.

Nitewatchman

04-06-07, 01:16 PM

If I understand you correctly, you are saying ....

I didn't really say much of anything ;)

AS I hoped was obvious, I do however agree with most of the contents of all the posts I provided links to.

That being said -- *personally*, and strictly in terms of resolution(only), and only *just barely* so ... given maximum available bitrate for the 1080i HD video at around 18Mb/s or so and especially so given the use of the best, most efficent MPEG2 encoders -- I'd prefer 1920x1080 to 1440x1080. Would even go so far to say that In such cases I can live with the occasional(generally fairly rare+generally only mostly a problem during the most bandwidth demanding portions of programming) severe blocking+other MPEG2 compression artifacts that can(and do) *still* occur at 1920x1080 when stations are NOT multicasting.

Add multicasting/higher compression ratios into the mix, however, and I'd prefer lower horizontal resolution to increased compression artifacts .... In general(speaking of stations/networks which are using 1080i), I'd probably rather they send 1440x1080i than 1280x720p. An exception to that might be if the multicasting involves 2 "high quality" SD services, such as what KET is doing.

With the ubiquity of fixed-resolution displays, it makes no sense to stray from this.

So, you're saying you would rather see conformation to limitations of fixed resolution display technology(more specifically, I think most of your argument is more based on fixed-pixel size+shape(square pixels)) in lieu of higher resolution ? I.e. 1440x1080 vs 1280x720?

If you are going to reduce resolution, you should reduce BOTH horizontal AND veritical resolutions proportionally, to retain the same ratio as the source (16:9 in the case of HD).

You retain the same aspect ratio by changing the shape of the pixels.

There are even several ATSC table 3 formats which do not use "square pixels" -- 16x9(1.78:1) and 4x3(1.33:1) 720x480, which would be 1.5:1 with square pixels.

And, as you've already mentioned, there's so-called "anamorphic" widescreen DVD (more appropiately IMO, 16x9 601 NTSC) ... Would you rather have square pixels and around 720x404.999, or say 640x359.55 for 16x9 from DVD rather than the higher resolution of 720x480 with non-square pixels?

There are no rules I'm aware of that say a pixel has to be square in shape ....

If you are going to reduce resolution, you should reduce BOTH horizontal AND veritical resolutions proportionally

Scaling is just as necessary for 1280x720 for display on a 1080i/p fixed resolution (i.e. 1080i/p "native" display) ...

Fixed pixel display technology aside, I don't think there is anything all that special about the pixels being square ....

I resized the image and did a screen grab of the result. Notice that the lines are NOT the same width. Some are wider than others as a result of the scaling.

Try resampling the image while resizing it+applying a sharpening filter or unsharp mask afterwards .....

cokebear

04-06-07, 04:11 PM

Wow you guys have really been into the whole HD argument lately. Lets just throw this in for giggles.

With most channels around here multicasting what difference do you guys really see? I mean if we are already getting lower bandwidth from OTA what difference does it make that D* or E* are screwing with it too? The chance of any new HD adopter actually seeing a true HD picture is almost non-existent. We can gripe about it until we are blue in the face but it won't get us the picture we want.

The FCC didn't promise us HD, only digital.

That being said I like most of you want to see full blown HD in all its glory regardless of source. I just don't see how that is gonna happen with the environment of today's HD landscape. The average consumer knows nothing of what is going on with all these emerging technologies. I have lurked through these forums for over a year and still I have no real idea what the best source for the channels I want to watch is.

The one thing I do know is I am disgusted with TWC so I called E* Thursday to sign up with them. Because they CURRENTLY have the most quasi-HD channels out there right now, today. I have a set of rabbit ears that I can get most (all but ABC 9) of the Cinci channels on with my built in ATSC tuner so if E*'s locals don't look good I'll use the antenna, but since one source will surely be resolution starved and the other BW starved I have my doubts as to which will be less painful to watch.

DrDon

04-06-07, 04:23 PM

I just don't see how that is gonna happen with the environment of today's HD landscape.Luckily, we have a fixed date (sort of) on when that landscape is going to change. I've said it before: Broadcasters spend stupid amounts of money to make sure their picture is better than the other guy's. A long time ago, I put a lot of food on the table playing that concept. All I had to do was sell one station in a market on a 20-thousand dollar box that would make the picture a tiny bit better. The rest of the stations would phone in their orders soon after the first guy went online. A few months later, we'd play the whole game again with a whole 'nuther box.

Once DTV is all there is, the picture quality attention will shift to that. The phone call station managers hate to get is the one from a client who says, "Howcome my commercial looks so much better on Channel 2 than it does on your station?" And that, my friend, almost makes me want to get back into the broadcast supply business.

Won't happen overnight. But it'll happen.

Nitewatchman

04-06-07, 04:25 PM

Early round HD masters coverage on WHIO-DT (CBS HD Dayton) looks good today+yesterday, except during fast camera pans/fast motion ......

jleupen

04-06-07, 04:52 PM

Nope.

At least not Local 12.

We send Warner cable the transport stream feed straight out of our main encoder; same data that goes to my transmitter. It has just a relatively minor re-formatting from SMPTE 310M to ASI for the fiber transport.

If you should think that the Warner HD feed "looks better" than OTA then it's probably more to do with the accuracy and artifacts introduced by your OTA receiver/decoder compared to your Warner STB.

This may be a dumb question, but couldn't WKRC send two 19M feeds to Warner Cable?? One for WKRC-DT and the other for The CW? The macroblocking/ pixelation during March Madness was the worst I've ever seen and I assume that is partially due to WKRC carving off some bandwidth for the CW. If this was done, the TWC feed would actually be better than OTA.

DrDon

04-06-07, 04:57 PM

Yeah, but who's going to pick up the tab for two more encoders?

jleupen

04-06-07, 05:20 PM

Yeah, but who's going to pick up the tab for two more encoders?

After watching March Madness, I'm willing to chip in... How about a bake sale?? :-)

jimp2244

04-06-07, 06:05 PM

but since one source will surely be resolution starved and the other BW starved I have my doubts as to which will be less painful to watch.

Just keep in mind that in almost all cases, what we are receiving over the air is the SOURCE that the cable and satellite companies use. They may not get it from an antenna but it is the same thing we receive with our antennas. Anything they do with that signal from that point on can only make it worse, not better. So in the very best case, their picture is "equal" to OTA. However, ANY downrezzing or recompression that they are doing will result in a worse picture. How much worse? Your eyes can judge. Maybe you can't tell on your display/set up. If that's the case, that's fine (I still don't know why you'd pay for it when it comes OTA for free though).

If you're interested in seeing the effects of downrezzing, I suggest downloading some of the sample test clips here:

http://www.w6rz.net/

I also use many of the test patterns from that site. In order to properly test with those clips though, you will need a transport stream decoder (they are .ts files) and a 1080i or 1080p display. I suggest the "park run" clip as it is a great example of high motion and how 1280x1080, 1440x1080, and 1920x1080 deal with the motion. There are also three bitrates to chose from: The 17.6Mbps streams are representative of a station that is not multicasting. The 12.0Mbps streams are representative of a station that IS multicasting, about where WKRC is right now, if not a little but lower.

Also keep in mind that all of these are mpeg-2, not mpeg-4.

ansarar

04-06-07, 07:03 PM

The one thing I do know is I am disgusted with TWC so I called E* Thursday to sign up with them. Because they CURRENTLY have the most quasi-HD channels out there right now, today. I have a set of rabbit ears that I can get most (all but ABC 9) of the Cinci channels on with my built in ATSC tuner so if E*'s locals don't look good I'll use the antenna, but since one source will surely be resolution starved and the other BW starved I have my doubts as to which will be less painful to watch.

No no. Plug your antenna into your E* DVR instead of your tuner so that you can record locals in HD. Go to the setup menu and scan for locals. You might even be lucky enough to get your ABC from Dayton on 22. The Guide will recognize your locals as HD Digital channels.

microbob

04-06-07, 07:04 PM

Yeah, but who's going to pick up the tab for two more encoders?

Yeah, 5.1 audio is not broadcast on WKRC-DT and that cost less to add than buying additional encoders.

Off topic
WKYT in Lexington is planning on broadcasting CW in 720p HD on its sub channel. I'd like to see WKRC-DT try and do this as well. They would have to downconvert CBS from 1080i to 720p though on their main channel.

Nitewatchman

04-07-07, 11:52 AM

Well, if WKRC-DT were to ever do HD for CW, I'm hoping it would be for a cable only channel, and while they're at it, it would be nice if 12.2/any multicasting would disappear from WKRC-DT OTA ... ;)

CW HD works fine for me from WBDT-DT Dayton ...

WKYT in Lexington is planning on broadcasting CW in 720p HD on its sub channel. I'd like to see WKRC-DT try and do this as well. They would have to downconvert CBS from 1080i to 720p though on their main channel.

I probably wouldn't. I'll see it on WKYT-DT when "tropo" is up .....

Nitewatchman

04-07-07, 11:53 AM

you will need a transport stream decoder (they are .ts files) and a 1080i or 1080p display.

If folks need it(you probably don't if you have newer directshow filters from Cyberlink, Mainconcept/etc), HDTVpump will help playback TS files as well :

http://www.dvbportal.de/projects/hdtvpump/

BTW, just a thought concerning the test pattern you posted earlier(the 1080p version of it) -- If it's video, you might want to try playing it back via a AVSynth script (You could do it in ffdshow as well) with :

LanczosResize(1440,1080)

There are some test pattern's on Ron's site you could use a resize via AVsynth as well, in addition to the ones he already has up in 1920/1440/1280x1080 versions (such as the Horizontal resolution burst patterns).

edit/update:

*OR* you could reencode it to 1440x1080 (or whatever) -- there are several decent freeware MPEG2 software encoders out there, I use HC encoder or ffmpeg. Or, you could for example, use WME to reencode to 1440x1080 to WMV-HD ... There are of course other ways to do it as well ...

edit/update 2:

If you want to check for 1:1 pixel mapping, the patterns/instructions on how to make the patterns posted here work nicely :

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=641143

microbob

04-07-07, 12:57 PM

Well, if WKRC-DT were to ever do HD for CW, I'm hoping it would be for a cable only channel, and while they're at it, it would be nice if 12.2/any multicasting would disappear from WKRC-DT OTA ... ;)

CW HD works fine for me from WBDT-DT Dayton ...

I probably wouldn't. I'll see it on WKYT-DT when "tropo" is up .....

At my location, WKYT-DT is on Ch 13 which for some reason I can't get a reliable signal. I can get WDKY-DT on Ch 4 VHF. WBDT-DT is impossible for because of WLEX on Ch 18.

Nitewatchman

04-07-07, 01:32 PM

Robert,

Last Had KYT digital in here one evening about a week ago .... It is true their directional antenna pattern doesn't favor North(see the entry under channel 13 licensed here) :

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?state=&call=WKYT&arn=&city=&chan=&cha2=69&serv=&type=0&facid=&list=0&dist=&dlat2=&mlat2=&slat2=&dlon2=&mlon2=&slon2=&size=9

Still, I'd think there should be some sort of possibility to receive them reliably from Dry Ridge area(unless perhaps terrain is an issue in that direction), here's the predicted coverage area map for WKYT-DT from FCC site(keep in mind, reception from a bit outside of the contour shown is often a possibility):

http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/FMTV-service-area?x=DT615908.html

That you're getting WDKY-DT seems to be a good sign(I do see WDKY-DT most often of the lexington/Central KY digitals up here, WUPX-DT or WKYT-DT probably comes in 2nd most often), perhaps a bit better VHF-HI antenna/preamp would help you out ....

WBDT-DT is impossible for because of WLEX on Ch 18.

WBDT-DT's pattern probably doesn't help much either ... As I believe I've posted here before, believe it or not, It's not exactly uncommon here (12 miles from WBDT) for me to see WLEX 18 with antenna headed south(with a bit of "Big" DTV Snow" from WBDT-DT off side of antenna), and WBDT-DT with antenna headed towards Dayton ... One thing I haven't seen since WKOI-DT(13 miles SW from me) went to full power has been WLEX-DT ... I'm glad I logged WLEX-DT(39) before WKOI-DT(39) went high power, with a higher transmitting antenna(terrain shielding made WKOI-DT quite weak here with their Old STA+lower transmitting antenna height) ....

--------------------------------------------------------

Ideally, personally I think it would have best if CW, MyTV(and perhaps "ion" as well) affiliations involved WBQC, WOTH, or WSTR - that way, cincy could have had HD affiliates(without multicasting) for both CW+MyTV HD when WOTH/WBQC digitals get on air ...

It isn't like we don't have enough stations in Cincinnati to accomodate those in some way ..... Sure, a couple of them are LP's, but they certianly seem to get out very well from nice and high on WCPO's stick, I would think the same will be true for digital as well, actually I suspect the situation will the LP digitals will be even better coverage wise vs LP analog ....

If it would have to be a full service/high power station, I know that when viacom owned WWHO Columbus, a dual UPN/WB affiliation seemed to work fairly well for them -- they even had the HD feeds from both networks, (as well as the syndicated HD one movies) -- if I recall correctly, it was the WB programming that was time shifted outside of prime time, but might have been the other way around - Or of course another possibility might be for WKRC to keep both CBS+CW, but time shift the CW programming(including HD) into other time periods ... Don't suppose that sort of thing is good from the getting CW in "prime-time" perspective, however ....

microbob

04-07-07, 02:57 PM

Nitewatchman

04-07-07, 03:09 PM

I'm about 3 miles from a Class A FM station here in Dry Ridge WNKR-FM 106.5 http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/fmq?list=0&facid=24817 and I think there is an issue with them interfering on Ch 13. Although I'm using an old indoor pre amp which could be the problem on VHF-HI.

Yep ... Are you using a FM trap? That would probably be a good idea(before preamp input) ....

However .... FM trap isn't going to help you if you're getting an interference problem from spurious transmission from their transmitter on a harmonic frequency ... I think 2nd(or do you call that the 1st harmonic, I don't recall) harmonic for 106.5 would be right at 213MHZ, right in the middle of VHF Channel 13 ... if *that's* the problem, probably best to contact WNKR first and see what/if they can do anything about it .... Might be as simple as them adding a coax stub filter on their end ....

CincySaint

04-07-07, 04:24 PM

Came home for work wanting to see if ESPN2HD or ESPNU was on TWC yet...

Instead I found Universal HD on Channel 972.

Nice, but not ESPN2HD...

Does anyone know if this is permanent or just for the weekend?

jleupen

04-07-07, 07:06 PM

Does anyone know if this is permanent or just for the weekend?

Looks like UniversalHD is permanent. It is listed on TWC's website:

http://www.timewarnercable.com/cincinnati/programming/hdtier.html

CincySaint

04-08-07, 04:20 PM

Looks like UniversalHD is permanent. It is listed on TWC's website:

http://www.timewarnercable.com/cincinnati/programming/hdtier.html

Cool...that makes up for the loss of INHD2.

Now if we could just get ESPN2 HD.....

slimm

04-08-07, 07:04 PM

Cool...that makes up for the loss of INHD2.

Now if we could just get ESPN2 HD.....

Received this from customer service for what it's worth

Thank you for your interest in Time Warner Cable Programming,

Time Warner Cable is very pleased to announce that an agreement has been reached recently that grants us the rights to carry ESPN2 HD, as well as ESPNU. These channels are set to be available on our channel line-up for our regional sports fans. Both of these channels will be available later this year. The launch dates will be widely publicized.

Time Warner Cable regularly examines its programming line up with an eye towards providing the highest quality and widest choices available at reasonable and competitive prices. We will continue to add channels as situations become favorable.

If we can ever be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us either by e-mail at customerservice@cinci.rr.com or by telephone -- 24 hours a day, 7 days a week -- at the phone numbers listed below.
Greater Cincinnati Area - (513) 469-1112 or (513) 469-1145
Outside Cincinnati Area (Toll Free) - 1-800-677-9767

Please be sure to visit our Web site at www.twcinci.com for information updates, channel lineups, and more!

Thank you again for writing,
Time Warner Cable of Southwest Ohio

rwatson73

04-08-07, 10:37 PM

What is the Best antenna? and where is the best place to get it.... I live on a Hill in Middletown, Ohio and have a Olevia LT32HV 32" HD-Ready Flat-Panel LCD TV.... Thank you.... You can contact me by messenger or e-mail... I use Time Warner Cable and sick of the High Price for it.... Thinking about switching to satellite either Dish or Directv is it worth it...
Thanks, Robert

jim tressler

04-08-07, 10:47 PM

robert.. tough call - I find directv is a better value, but I am kind of jaded since I have the sunday ticket.. as far as an antenna - get some coax and hook into nightwatchmans antenna farm.. lol.. seriously though - jeff is your best source for what works well from middletown as you and he are probably neighbors.

jim

Nitewatchman

04-09-07, 01:03 AM

Well, I'm well north of Town, almost in Montgomery County and surrounded by hills(and lots of big trees) instead of being on one ... Cable lines on the telephone poles don't quite make it out this far, which is certianly fine with me, and, at least that should take a few pennies off some folks cable bills, I'd think ;) ....

welcome to AVSforum, Robert.

I've experimented a bit with simple, inexpensive antennas indoors, here just to see what I could get. For DTV+stations currently on air, One of these ( http://www.radioshack.com/sm-uhf-outline-bow-tie-antenna--pi-2062017.html ) + Rabbit ears for VHF WCPO-DT seems to work fine here for most of the Dayton/Cincinnati stations if placed near a 2nd story window facing South for Cincinnati, East facing window for Dayton .... I also used a cheap radio shack distribution amp when I tried that, as the coax run to the HD set was fairly long. Tried it like that for a few hours, and didn't see any problems, achieved solid reception/no dropouts/etc. from just about everything except WCVN-DT as I recall. WCVN-DT is an important station for me, and is one reason I do use an outdoor antenna setup.

OTOH, It doesn't work out too well here indoors with the antenna anywhere else other than near the 2nd story windows, with a couple of exceptions. For instance, pretty much No matter what I do, with anything much more than a paperclip for an antenna, WRGT-DT/WDTN-DT is solid ... On the south side of House, that's almost true for WKRC-DT/WCPO-DT/WLWT-DT as well .... YMMV of course, and chances are good reception will be easier for your location, on a hill, than it is for me, mostly probably due to terrain shielding issues here (and presumably if you're farther south concerning the cincinnati stations) ...

As for what is best antenna a lot probably depends upon what you want, you have many possible options that might work well ...

I'd probably start with something simple+inexpensive such as along the lines of what I described above(actually, I'd probably just start with the UHF bowtie), it might be all that's needed or desired.

If not, #1). you won't have spent much(and you can take it back of course - keep the receipts just in case) + it still might have some use on a TV in the garage or kitchen/etc for some stations. And, #2). It should be able to give you a decent indication of where you might want to go next .... If necessary, You might want some extra feedline to move the antenna around a bit, as near the tv might not turn out to be a good spot for it reception wise .... for example, if you might want to try a better antenna in the attic, or are planning on an outdoor antenna setup, even putting this simple antenna in the attic oroutdoors temporarily for testing to see how it does can be beneifical concerning finding a good spot where you might place/mount your better antenna setup, later ... For instance, If a simple, inexpensive antenna won't pick up the strongest signals from, say the attic, chances are good a better, or more expensive(but not necessarily "better" when it comes to some of the antennas out there) antenna won't do very well from that spot either ...

Generally speaking, the signals from Dayton+Cincinnati stations should be fairly strong for most of Middletown area, especially if you're on hill. --- So you may not need much ... OTOH, having antenna indoors does attenuate signals greatly(among other things), and getting good, reliable OTA reception can sometimes be about more than getting good enough "signal strength". Many factors can effect reception, so it's difficult to say what might be best from any particular spot ....

That being said, generally speaking, for best reception, Outdoor, directional antenna of a proven conventional design, aimed at the towers for the stations you want to receive is often a good idea. From Middetown area, that means with rotor if you want best possibility for best reception from both Dayton+Cincinnati. Or, seperate Dayton/Cincy antennas+probably seperate feedlines with A/B switch before receiver to switch between them - Note that currently, and probably for future as well, all you need is UHF for Dayton -- UHF antenna such as CM4221 or RS-U-75R would probably be good choices for that.

In that regard, Small~medium sized VHF/UHF combo antenna such as Radio shack(VU-90/VU-120/etc. - Channel master+Winegard have somewhat similar models as well) carries would probably be a good choice for most of Middletown area, and is about the simplest "all in one" outdoor antenna solution for this area, with rotor if desired for best results from both cincy+dayton. VHF reception, is necessary because WCPO-DT(ABC HD Cincinnati) transmits on VHF, WKRC-DT(CBS HD cincinnati) will be moving to VHF after analog shut off as well. The rest are on UHF.

Do note that WKOI-DT(TBN - transmits from between Oxford+trenton) is in different direction from you than the rest of the dayton/cincinnati towers, so if you want that one two, rotor would probably be a good idea ... WWRD-LP 55(gospel Music channel mostly currently -- analog only currently) Dayton, Is as well, but you're probably a bit out of their coverage area anyway, so if you do get it, it will probably be at least somewhat "snowy" anyway ...

Anyway, for more info on antennas+OTA reception, You might also want to start by check out this thread, the OTA reception FAQ in Hardware area at AVSforum :

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=611957&page=1

rwatson73

04-09-07, 01:19 AM

[QUOTE=Nitewatchman]Well, I'm well north of Town, almost in Montgomery County and surrounded by hills(and lots of big trees) instead of being on one ... Cable lines on the telephone poles don't quite make it out this far, which is certianly fine with me, and, at least that should take a few pennies off some folks cable bills, I'd think ;) ....

welcome to AVSforum, Robert.

Thank you ..... But I live in a house... and they used to have a antenna here/ pole on the side by my TV but took it down when they got cable. and right now i have rabbit ears by my satellite radio reciever.. Just bought the tv on the day after Thanksgiving... but need a antenna that pick up both cincy and dayton.... and was wondering what other stations/citys i can pick up..... would like to know more.. thanks Robert

Thank for the welcomes....

Nitewatchman

04-09-07, 02:28 AM

and was wondering what other stations/citys i can pick up.....

Cincinnati/NKY, Oxford area+Dayton/springfield area stations+WAVE 3 Louisivlle+WCMH 4 Columbus(latter 2 analog only) are about it here on a "100%" reliable basis. That is a actually a lot, however, as it adds up to 15 digital stations(14 which do HD currently), and 40 digital "channels" OTA via the HD+ SD multicasting most of those stations are doing, and currently, 22 analogs(some of those being low power stations) .....

Of course, "more channels" doesn't allways mean "better" as far as quality(including quality of the programming, not just picture quality) goes. Personally, for the most part I'd rather have more quality+less quanitity .. In terms of HD PQ, and quality Programming(HD or SD) available OTA ...

Anyway, KET WKON 52, Owenton, KY is in here all the time as well, but generally weak and popping in+out of snow under normal "dead band" conditions. It's the same KET programming as WCVN/DT in Covington, KY, and you should be able to get that one just fine .... Beyond that digital wise, I see WDKY-DT 4 Lexington, KY, and WSYX-DT 13 columbus quite often as well as is WRTV 6(analog) Indy/WSYX 6 Columbus. So is WBNS 10(analog) columbus, but co-channel WCPO-DT Cincinnati really snows it up ..... Other Columbus, Lexington, Lousiville stations are fairly common reception here with decent~good signals as well, especially in the warmer months and evening through morning hours ..... I'm at a disadvantage especially to the West, NW+directly east as nearby terrain is higher than my antenna in those directions as nearby as 300Feet away from antenna, the "ground" is higher than it .... It especially gets even worse to West+NW .... That doesn't work very well for Local VHF/UHF reception, OR for the most part for DX via "tropo" either .... The longer wavelengths of Lo-VHF do seem to tend to "get around" the hills here a little better, however ... But luckily, there really aren't any local signals for me in the worst directions, terrain wise ...

Best I could guess, They would be quite weak most of the time(and really you'd certianly be outside of their "coverage" area) but, Suppose it somewhat possible you might be able to get a few more From Columbus(and maybe WIPB Muncie, or some of the Indy area station) if you're up nice and high+depending upon exactly where you are ...

Anything else is probably certianly going to be "out of range" for you, except at times when certian conditions occur which effect signal propagation on VHF/UHF and can allow TV stations to be received from beyond the "normal
distances possible .... Generally speaking, The better your antenna setup is, the more often+the more you have a chance to receive these more distant stations, however it can still be months between really good DX openings, So, it's not something you'd do or rely on in general to watch TV, It's more of a fun hobby ..... Here's some good reading on how this sort of thing happens if your interested :

http://www.dxfm.com/Content/propagation.htm

You might enjoy the other sections of that website as well(such as the "DX tools" section regarding antennas/equipment -- quite a bit of that is about FM Dx, but much of it is applicable to TV as well -- see his nice TV+FM antenna setup about midway down the page, for example) , main page is here :

http://www.dxfm.com/

rwatson73

04-09-07, 02:43 AM

[QUOTE=Nitewatchman]Cincinnati/NKY, Oxford area+Dayton/springfield area stations+WAVE 3 Louisivlle+WCMH 4 Columbus(latter 2 analog only) are about it here on a "100%" reliable basis. That is a actually a lot, however, as it adds up to 15 digital stations(14 which do HD currently), and 40 digital "channels" OTA via the HD+ SD multicasting most of those stations are doing, and currently, 22 analogs(some of those being low power stations) .....

Thank for all your info... but what is a good antenna to get... thinking about getting one from radio shack and just was wondering. alot of the cinci station are 200° & 29 miles away and dayton are 28° & 15 miles away... what would be the best antenna so i wouldn't have to get a router.... just have one hdtv.... alot of my tv comes in snowy right now... Thank, Robert

jim tressler

04-09-07, 08:04 AM

robert - I have two antennas - the winegard sensar for cincinnati and the the channel master 4221 uhf to pick up dayton - both work great from my location - out by kings island. The 4221 is a better antenna, and even though it is pointed at dayton - it will also get cincinnati fairly well - the nice thing about the 4221 is that it does high vhf - so I get wcpo (digital 10) with no problems and will probably get wkrc with no problems when they switch to digital 12 in 09 - wkrc currently broadcasts on digital 31 or 35 - since its pointed at dayton cincinnati is not 100% - if I rotate it, then cincinnati is perfect - but i use an a/b switch instead of a rotor. There is a slight chance that you may be able to pull both from one antenna - it all depends on the tuner in your tv.. for example, with my setup using the htpc and the fusion 5 card - I can get both cincinnati and dayton off the channel master - the hr20 from directv.. not so much.

let us know if you have any more questions -

jim

XmtrMan

04-09-07, 02:00 PM

This may be a dumb question, but couldn't WKRC send two 19M feeds to Warner Cable??

Sure.

Sounds easy enough but it would require a whole 'nother transport stream encoder.

We (and most of the rest of your world) only have one.

Now if you'd like to write a check.....

jim tressler

04-09-07, 02:04 PM

or better yet.. how bout we drop the cw :)

Nitewatchman

04-09-07, 03:44 PM

what would be the best antenna so i wouldn't have to get a router....

I know you're probably looking for a simple answer, so you can just go fork out $30 bucks or so and get the antenna that might be *best* -- While it wouldn't be difficult to provide such an answer(that may or may not be sufficent), it *WOULD* be difficult provide a single, specific answer that would be both simple AND accurate.

In short --- for what you want to do I'd probably start with something like a RS VU-90(VHF/UHF combo) or a CM4221(UHF) and go from there, keeping in mind chances are good you might need to add a second antenna (for dayton or Cincinnati) or rotor, later ..... You can of course rotate the antenna "manually" towards Dayton+cincinnati+see how that does as well(probably a good idea to try that before adding 2nd antenna anyway) .....

Anyway --- in more detail -- As you might gather from Jim's post --- as far as best possibility for best reception from Both Cincy+Dayton, best solution w/o rotor would probably be :

#1) seperate directional antennas for Dayton+Cincinnati(one aimed at Dayton one at cincinnati), Seperate coax runs from each, with A/B switch before receiver. RS VU-90 VHF/UHF combo might be a good choice for the cincinnati antenna, RS U75-R (UHF) might be a good choice for the Dayton digitals. Really, this option is *less* expensive(and more convienient) than rotor when you only have stations in 2 directions you want to recieve, and, other than needing the mast space for the 2nd antenna, doesn't involve more 'installation work" than installing rotor, as you'd have to run the control wire for the rotor just as you'd have to run the 2nd coax run for the 2nd antenna ....

As for people who complain this sort of solution "doesn't work well with DVR" --- well, actually it does as, for example you could use splitter before A/B switch and *ONLY* hook one of the antennas up to DVR, which wouldn't be any *worse* than using a single antenna for say, Cincinnati(and whatever you can get off the 'back side" of it from Dayton ....), or limiting yourself to, say, only the stations cable(or DBS LiL) carries in your area vs. what you could receive OTA .....

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#2) Next best option would be the same as #1, except you could try combining the two antennas on the mast(with a 2 way splitter used "backwards")+using a single coax run to the TV. A couple of folks between Dayton+Cincinnati have reported achieving good results, and the good news is, newer receivers are better at handling the multipath involved with this sort of thing. The potiental problem with this is that the dayton antenna will pick up a good amount of signal from Cincinnati off the "back side" of antenna, and the Cincinnati antenna will pick up a good amount of signal from Dayton off the "back side" of antenna.

These "back side" signals are out of phase with the desired signals from Cincinnati+ Dayton coming in in the direction each antenna is aimed, which can cause problems for your receiver regarding handling of those multipath echoes being exacerbated by the misaimed antenna .... There are other possibile potential issues as well regarding several of the 1st adjacent channel stations in Cincinnati+dayton+receiver senistitivity/selectivity issues.

*it might* work, but, for example, there's also good chance that it might work well only on certian channels, or might only work well when leaves are off or on trees, or when the wind isn't blowing tree limbs around or an airplane flies over your house changing the dynamic multipath conditions -- That sort of thing can be very frustrating, as you might go for a long time and think "I'm getting perfect reception", and then you try to plackback say, a HD DVR recording of your favorite show and find it's "all messed up" with "dropouts", and you might not be able to figure out why that happened ... Or, it can be annoying enough if it happens while you're watching "live" especially if it's pouring down outside, or cold+windy, which is not usually conducive to motivating folks to go outside and adjust antenna ....

#3). There is something called the CEA-909 "smartenna" interface, which allows receiver+antenna to work together to "modify" the antenna "on the fly" so that it is adjusted automatically to achieve best reception from any given station from any given direction. However, the Smartenna interface requires receiver which implements it as well as a specialized antenna. I don't think many receiver's support it yet, the only one I'm aware of was the Sylvania DTE-6900 STB. I also know of only one antenna that does the "smartenna" thing ... can't recall the part number, I think the brand name was "DXantenna"(either chinese or taiwan, don't recall), dunno where you can get those .... Hopefully, CEA909 or other similar solutions it will become more available/commonplace as time goes on ... However, a limitation with it is that you couldn't use One "smartenna" to watch one channel on one receiver, and record another channel on say a DVD recorder or DVR .... Each would need a seperate "smartenna" ....

#4) As far as antennas that were actually designed to be "bi-directional", other than the "smartenna" the indoor Radio shack "outline UHF bowtie" I provided a link to earlier is one of those, the dish Clip on antennas are another. On VHF A pair of rabbit ears, adjusted so the "ears" are "horizontal" is also an excample of a bi-directional antenna. Antennas such as Winegard Sensar and CM3010 are only bi-directional to some extent on VHF, not UHF.

All of these antennas are really not much better than the "coat hangar" approach to antenna design, they don't really have much of any signal gain to speak of(and therefore not much directivity either other than "rejecting" signals off the sides) and are more likely to produce problems with multipath. That being said, certianly, they *can* work well for many folks, especially perhaps the indoor rabbit ears/UHF folded dipole(the "outline bowtie), as they generally can be easily adjusted and put about anywhere indoors ... When installed on a DBS dish, The dish clip "on" suffers from the problem of not being oriented correctly unless the OTA stations just happen to be in the same "direction" as the dish is orientated(azimuth wise) ... Which, by pure luck however would probably be the case(more or less) for both Dayton and Cincy if you're in Middletown area and the dish is aimed (more or less) SW for sat locations such as the E* 110 and 119 birds ... I don't know quite how the HD setup works ...

There are some other potential problem issues involved with those dish clip on OTA antennas as well however(such as diplexing issues), and in general other than of the Rabbit ear+UHF bowtie indoor solutions, for the most part it's probably good idea to steer away from them, or other so-called "bi-directional" single antenna solutions ....

While the antenna design for (#4) a "bi-directional" antenna is what most "fits" the application of what you want to do(and certianly might be worth a shot) ... And in that sense "sort of" fits the "best" solution criteria you're looking for ... The problem is, in general, these antennas don't work all that well compared to directional antennas of conventional design, so I'd have an awfully hard time recommending it as a "best" antenna solution, other than as I already have with the inexpensive Radio shack indoors "outline bow tie" model ....

#5). As Jim mentioned, another possibility would be to try a single directional antenna aimed at Dayton or cincinnati, and *hope* that you could get a "good enough" signal off the back side from the stations it's not aimed towards ... This suffers from the same problems regarding the "back side" issues and multipath as #2, but only in the direction(such as for Dayton if the antenna is aimed at Cincinnati) the antenna isn't aimed. Additionally, of course the antenna won't pick up anywhere near as much signal off the back side as the front -- significantly so, which can especially be an issue with lower power stations, or stations running with Directional antenna patterns which don't favor your direction -- The latter is the case, currently with a few of the Dayton stations.

For UHF Only, if you want to try this option (#5), I suppose CM4221 might be as good as any to try, although it too will reject a LOT of signal coming in from the back ... ... That's just the nature and Physics of antenna design ... The more directional an antenna is, the more signal gain it has, and the more rejection of signal(and multipath echoes) occurs in directions it's NOT aimed ... And in general, *that's* what makes an antenna "better" in terms of its performance.

If it doesn't "work well enough" for you for both Dayton and Cincinnati(and there's a very good chance it won't if you want 100% reliable reception from all the Dayton+Cincinnati digital stations), then you could still use it as your Dayton antenna, and add a seperate VHF/UHF antenna for Cincinnati later.
As for using a UHF antenna for VHF reception --- difficult to say whether you'd have a "good enough" signal from WCPO-DT for it to work from your location, or, after Feb 2009, from WKRC-DT. See my response to Jim's post concerning CM4221 in this regard farther below.

here's some good, detailed info on CM4221's performance characteristics :

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/cm4221.html

I think this place has them : www.solidsignal.com

Lowe's carries some CM stuff, not sure, but I don't think they carry CM4221. There is also a full line CM distrubtuor in Dayton (They generally sell to contractors, but I think they sell to individuals as well - I know they used to anyway ) called " Dayton Wintronic " ... search for "wintronic" in Dayton thread(or perhaps here) and a link should pop up for them ...

#6) - This is what some of my neighbors do, although I don't know of any of those who are doing HD, yet --- those in Cincy DMA Get the locals off the Dish for cincinnati(since we're in Cincy DMA), and use antenna for Dayton. You don't get the Cincinnati LP stations this way however, and, HD/digital wise you also get only 1/2 the Current Cincinnati HD stations(just CBS, NBC, ABC and Fox) with D* currently, and none of the digital SD multicast offerings available OTA(most of those are on TW cable as well). Mostly, when I've asked a couple folks why they do that, they usually say it's because they work in Dayton and want to watch the Dayton local news. Since I have neighbors in Dayton DMA as well, it's the opposite for them ....

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the nice thing about the 4221 is that it does high vhf

Not really ... Of course, any "coathanger" can work just fine if the signal is "good enough", but CM4221 doesn't work as well on VHF(including Hi-VHF) as rabbit ears, with some exception perhaps on channel 12+13.

See the info+graph at bottom of page(labeled "using UHF antennas for VHF) here :

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

jleupen

04-09-07, 05:59 PM

or better yet.. how bout we drop the cw :)

I vote for that!! Never once watched something on that channel...

psm0110

04-09-07, 08:10 PM

This may be a dumb question, but couldn't WKRC send two 19M feeds to Warner Cable?? One for WKRC-DT and the other for The CW? The macroblocking/ pixelation during March Madness was the worst I've ever seen and I assume that is partially due to WKRC carving off some bandwidth for the CW. If this was done, the TWC feed would actually be better than OTA. That's just great if you have cable... Frankly, I'd hate to see that precedent, because it would just encourage barely more viewable multicasting on OTA while the broadcaster sends pristine HDTV to the cableco. The real solution is to use something realistically tolerable like 720P/480i splits or nothing at all. Heck, I would rather watch 480P without pixellation than compressed 1080i that constantly blurs.

jim tressler

04-10-07, 08:02 AM

works fantastic for me.. wcpo is my strongest station with the 4221

Not really ... Of course, any "coathanger" can work just fine if the signal is "good enough", but CM4221 doesn't work as well on VHF(including Hi-VHF) as rabbit ears, with some exception perhaps on channel 12+13.

See the info+graph at bottom of page(labeled "using UHF antennas for VHF) here :

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

Paul210

04-10-07, 12:30 PM

I was at Dayton Wintronic last week purchasing miscellaneous antenna stuff to rewire my whole setup. Yes, they still sell to individuals. They also had both the CM 4221 and 4228 in stock. Some of the boxes were stacked up right inside their front door--4221s, I think... They must be getting a lot of antenna business lately.

Nitewatchman

04-10-07, 02:00 PM

That's just great if you have cable... Frankly, I'd hate to see that precedent, because it would just encourage barely more viewable multicasting on OTA while the broadcaster sends pristine HDTV to the cableco. The real solution is to use something realistically tolerable like 720P/480i splits or nothing at all. Heck, I would rather watch 480P without pixellation than compressed 1080i that constantly blurs.

yep ...

Perhaps cable or DBS LiL viewers sometimes forget that OTA Viewers pay for the stations' bills just as everyone else does when we PAY for products which are advertised on TV .... In some cases, we probably pay for it where other products(such as products that involve big media companies which own stations/networks/etc) are involved as well .... Then, there are taxes, and grants and such involving some of the non-commercial stations ....

I don't think those of us who choose to use OTA should be "PQ penalized" for choosing to utilize the public airwaves and get these signals directly from the source rather than paying extra to have someone else deliver them to us .....

That being said, OTOH, can't say I would have an issue with cableco getting a feed from the station that is *higher quality* than is *possible* OTA (with say 1080i and NO multicasting) ... While that is certianly technically possible for cable, I'm not so sure cablecos would be willing in many or most cases to allocate the extra bandwidth required for such a thing ...

Also, I wonder, why would it be OK with advertisers(not to mention broadcasters) for the OTA audience to receive an inferior product vs. what cable viewers would get? I think they know we are not all outside of the demographics they want to reach.

Or, for that matter, why would it be OK with the advertisers paying the big bucks for the national spots for someone to see what they intended from say, WCBS-DT or WWJ-DT, but have it turn into an inferior mess of blocking (or lower resolution/etc) from the affiliate in say, Podunk, USA, or from DBS LiL/etc ... Shouldn't the advertisers at least get some sort of discount for that sort of thing? ...... ;)

Where is "Mr. CBS or Ad agency who travels around in a white van with mast and DTV receivers, transport stream analyzer, antenna, and HD monitor quality- checker guy" ;) ...... when you need him ..... ;)

I think I'm touching on some of the stuff Doc said -- and I also agree with Doc's post regarding PQ "of the not-too distant future" ... Thing is, I am skeptical about whether a "new box" is going to fix it for them in every case regarding MPEG2 encoding and what is possible with ATSC .... and, therefore, when that "future" does get here, I think some stations may end up having to make hard decisions regarding multicasting, HD quality, and OTA availability(and therefore also cablehead/DBS availability in cases when the Headend uses OTA to pick up the signal) of some services .....

Of course, OTOH, unfortunetly I suppose its probably true that many viewers will indeed put up with "so so" DTV quality(due to compression artifacts/etc) with not much thought about it ... Judging by what some of the E* SD channels look like these days at times(best analogy I could think of would be not a lot different from "the tube" on WXIX-DT) , anyway, I assume that's the case ..... I think however that this sort of thing is more evident and annoying with HD than is the case with SD, because of the more "startling" difference between what happens when the PQ looks so good at lower bitrates when the material is easier to encode, and then turns to looking so bad for (usually short periods) when the material gets more "bandwidth demanding"/difficult to encode ....

wcpo is my strongest station with the 4221

I'm curious concerning how you measured that, Jim ?

CM4221 *might* have a good shot at working for Cincinnati Hi-VHF DTV from Middletown, I'm not saying that isn't the case. However, there's a good chance it might not turn out so well, either ....

I have a difficult time recommending a UHF antenna for VHF in general, as they are just not designed for that(That's not saying a UHF antenna won't WORK well enough for VHF reception in many cases). Especially perhaps a UHF antenna that has less signal gain on say, VHF 10 than a pair of rabbit ears unless perhaps it is known "blow torch" signal levels are present at receive location ...

I would have a somewhat less difficult time concerning CM4228 on VHF -- but, OTOH although it does have quite a bit of gain on Hi-VHF, it's still not a "VHF" antenna, and therefore does not have the pattern of a VHF antenna, either .... CM4228 is also a rather large UHF antenna, relatively speaking compared to a typical VHF/UHF combo antenna -- Large, Heavy+more potential problem issues regarding Ice/wind loading considerations ...

I can say I had a CM4228 up for a while -- I had it aimed at Dayton, and it didn't quite receive WCPO-DT reliably off the back side, but it "almost" did, achieving a lock on WCPO-DT about 1/2 the time or so(but just barely) .... I didn't try it, but expect it probably would have have had a good chance of working fine for WCPO-DT had it been aimed south ....

Some of the boxes were stacked up right inside their front door--4221s, I think... They must be getting a lot of antenna business lately.

That's good to hear Paul ....

jim tressler

04-10-07, 03:08 PM

TSReader. I also use the signal checker on the dvico software -and am usually around 27-29dB with it

I'm curious concerning how you measured that, Jim ?

CM4221 *might* have a good shot at working for Cincinnati Hi-VHF DTV from Middletown, I'm not saying that isn't the case. However, there's a good chance it might not turn out so well, either ....

Nitewatchman

04-10-07, 08:01 PM

TSReader. I also use the signal checker on the dvico software -and am usually around 27-29dB with it

But Jim, that's not a RF signal strength measurement. If it was, and 27~34Db or so was a "strong signal", then the coverage areas of the stations would be awfully small, or in other words they would be using something probably somewhat along the lines of 5 watt transmitters(or less) ..... And no, I'm not exaggerating, 5 watts can do a lot on VHF/UHF(especially if the transmitting antenna is up nice and high), ask any Ham that works the VHF/UHF bands ....

It might be somewhat useful as such however if the signal is fairly weak, then in some cases readings such as SNR readings some receivers show may somewhat correlate to the actual signal strength .... FWIW, in my case, TSreader's signal meter with BDA source drivers(in my case with Hauppage WINTV-1600HVR) certianly do not show anything accurate regarding true RF signal strength .... SNR is not quite the same thing, and if I recall correctly(I may not be but I think it's something along these lines), it would never be much above about 33~34db or so, even if there was just a short "wire"+RF modulator and no "OTA" between WKRC-DT's encoder and your receiver ....

SNR readings/Quality readings and even when it's labled a "signal strength meter" right on the screen on any DTV receiver I've ever seen are a bit different animal than measuring the true RF signal strength .. .. For the most part, Those Readings can be or seem "high" even if the signal is relatively weak, and can be low(or bounce around like crazy) if the signal is laden with multipath or interference ---

Not that it matters as long as you are getting perfect dropout reception, and for that, you only *need* about 16Db S/N, but, for the sort of reception we want, you have to achieve that level all the time, 24/7, 365 days per year(including during any periods the station may not be running at full power/etc), if you don't want any dropouts or reception caused "pixelization" or corruption which can occur if the decoder is having a hard time of it(which can indeed happen if the signal is very marginal) ... Now, while it's true the signal strength doesn't actually "change" much(well usually), or fluctuate --- remember, multipath(which *can* change -- even in a "dynamic" manner, such as when a plane flies over your house/etc) the receiver can't correct for is just seen as "noise" by the receiver as well, just as is interference/noise, such as from say, nearby lighting strikes(often called "impulse noise", which is more of a concern the lower the frequency involved ) ...

There's also the AGC circuit(automatic gain control) in your receiver to consider -- And, indeed, if you have a AGC reading on your receiver, it CAN actually tell you something about signal strength --- although probably nothing specific enough for you to post an accurate signal strength value in DbmV (or Dbu or whatever DB "scale" you want to use) ..... For instance, The AGC reading on one of my receiver even "works" to show me good indications of signals(or anything else besides a nice clean "noise floor" so to speak) present(weak ones, and sometimes even strong ones) even when the incorrectly labled "meter" that says "signal strength" says ZERO(and something similar from its SNR reading as well) ....

What can give you a good idea of how strong the signal actually is -- but, only If you have a "clean" multipath free signal -- is to see how much additional attenuation you have to add into feedline (you can use attenuators or even splitters if you know their insertion loss) until you reach "near threshold" level of reception. If you want to estimate the losses between antenna+receiver in addition to your "extra added" attenuation, You can Figure 4db loss per 100FT of RG6, .25db or so for each F connector, probably 1~3db on the balun, about 3.5db for a 2way splitter, probably .5~1db or so for ground block, /etc/etc/etc ...

Given my antenna setup with preamp/etc and location, to get down to near threshold levels for most stations in the area, It takes about 50~60db "extra" loss between antenna+receiver to get to threshold levels(I was conservative on estimating the loss in the coax run+splitters, so it's probably a little more than that) ... I run out of attenuators at about -60db, so I never quite got down far enough for a more accurate reading where I just lost a signal lock for the strongest signals(WKRC-DT, WLWT-DT, WDTN-DT) ...but it was getting close at -60 db ... The weakest local signals (WBDT-DT probably because I'm right in the biggest null of their antenna pattern), and WCVN-DT (probably because I'm probably somewhat near the edge of their coverage area, espedcially given the terrain involveed here) require only about -20db extra attenuation added to get to threshold levels ... You don't necessarily need that much, and it's not exactly like you can do much about it in some cases if you don't have that much, but generally, I think 10~20db or so is probably a nice "fade margin" to have for your weakest desired signal .....

Note/update: to put this another way ---- Even though( --- from what I can tell, I have no way to measure it in such a way I can confirm this is entirely accurate ---) there's at least a 40db difference is signal strength between my weakest and strongest local DTV signals --- Yet, The SNR readings on my receivers *all* show in the range of 29~34db SNR for ALL those stations, and the "signal qaulity"(some labeled as signal strength) meters show all in the 90~100% range for all the stations ..... As I said earlier, however -- The AGC reading on one receiver here - does show at least an indication of how strong the signals truly are ... Given proper antenna aiming --- The readings are lowest for the strongest signals(17% AGC reading for stations such as WDTN-DT, WKRC-DT/WLWT-DT), and highest for the weakest signals (28~29% for stations such as WCVN-DT/WBDT-DT) .....

jdhughes63

04-10-07, 11:10 PM

Boston Legal on TW 909 (WCPO) was in SD tonight and not HD. Is WCPO having problems with their HD? Or did the engineer fall asleep at the switch?

jim tressler

04-11-07, 08:02 AM

ok - you are right.. but it works :)

But Jim, that's not a RF signal strength measurement. If it was, and 27~34Db or so was a "strong signal", then the coverage areas of the stations would be awfully small, or in other words they would be using something probably somewhat along the lines of 5 watt transmitters(or less) ..... And no, I'm not exaggerating, 5 watts can do a lot on VHF/UHF(especially if the transmitting antenna is up nice and high), ask any Ham that works the VHF/UHF bands ....

It might be somewhat useful as such however if the signal is fairly weak, then in some cases readings such as SNR readings some receivers show may somewhat correlate to the actual signal strength .... FWIW, in my case, TSreader's signal meter with BDA source drivers(in my case with Hauppage WINTV-1600HVR) certianly do not show anything accurate regarding true RF signal strength .... SNR is not quite the same thing, and if I recall correctly(I may not be but I think it's something along these lines), it would never be much above about 33~34db or so, even if there was just a short "wire"+RF modulator and no "OTA" between WKRC-DT's encoder and your receiver ....

SNR readings/Quality readings and even when it's labled a "signal strength meter" right on the screen on any DTV receiver I've ever seen are a bit different animal than measuring the true RF signal strength .. .. For the most part, Those Readings can be or seem "high" even if the signal is relatively weak, and can be low(or bounce around like crazy) if the signal is laden with multipath or interference ---

Not that it matters as long as you are getting perfect dropout reception, and for that, you only *need* about 16Db S/N, but, for the sort of reception we want, you have to achieve that level all the time, 24/7, 365 days per year(including during any periods the station may not be running at full power/etc), if you don't want any dropouts or reception caused "pixelization" or corruption which can occur if the decoder is having a hard time of it(which can indeed happen if the signal is very marginal) ... Now, while it's true the signal strength doesn't actually "change" much(well usually), or fluctuate --- remember, multipath(which *can* change -- even in a "dynamic" manner, such as when a plane flies over your house/etc) the receiver can't correct for is just seen as "noise" by the receiver as well, just as is interference/noise, such as from say, nearby lighting strikes(often called "impulse noise", which is more of a concern the lower the frequency involved ) ...

There's also the AGC circuit(automatic gain control) in your receiver to consider -- And, indeed, if you have a AGC reading on your receiver, it CAN actually tell you something about signal strength --- although probably nothing specific enough for you to post an accurate signal strength value in DbmV (or Dbu or whatever DB "scale" you want to use) ..... For instance, The AGC reading on one of my receiver even "works" to show me good indications of signals(or anything else besides a nice clean "noise floor" so to speak) present(weak ones, and sometimes even strong ones) even when the incorrectly labled "meter" that says "signal strength" says ZERO(and something similar from its SNR reading as well) ....

What can give you a good idea of how strong the signal actually is -- but, only If you have a "clean" multipath free signal -- is to see how much additional attenuation you have to add into feedline (you can use attenuators or even splitters if you know their insertion loss) until you reach "near threshold" level of reception. If you want to estimate the losses between antenna+receiver in addition to your "extra added" attenuation, You can Figure 4db loss per 100FT of RG6, .25db or so for each F connector, probably 1~3db on the balun, about 3.5db for a 2way splitter, probably .5~1db or so for ground block, /etc/etc/etc ...

Given my antenna setup with preamp/etc and location, to get down to near threshold levels for most stations in the area, It takes about 50~60db "extra" loss between antenna+receiver to get to threshold levels(I was conservative on estimating the loss in the coax run+splitters, so it's probably a little more than that) ... I run out of attenuators at about -60db, so I never quite got down far enough for a more accurate reading where I just lost a signal lock for the strongest signals(WKRC-DT, WLWT-DT, WDTN-DT) ...but it was getting close at -60 db ... The weakest local signals (WBDT-DT probably because I'm right in the biggest null of their antenna pattern), and WCVN-DT (probably because I'm probably somewhat near the edge of their coverage area, espedcially given the terrain involveed here) require only about -20db extra attenuation added to get to threshold levels ... You don't necessarily need that much, and it's not exactly like you can do much about it in some cases if you don't have that much, but generally, I think 10~20db or so is probably a nice "fade margin" to have for your weakest desired signal .....

Note/update: to put this another way ---- Even though( --- from what I can tell, I have no way to measure it in such a way I can confirm this is entirely accurate ---) there's at least a 40db difference is signal strength between my weakest and strongest local DTV signals --- Yet, The SNR readings on my receivers *all* show in the range of 29~34db SNR for ALL those stations, and the "signal qaulity"(some labeled as signal strength) meters show all in the 90~100% range for all the stations ..... As I said earlier, however -- The AGC reading on one receiver here - does show at least an indication of how strong the signals truly are ... Given proper antenna aiming --- The readings are lowest for the strongest signals(17% AGC reading for stations such as WDTN-DT, WKRC-DT/WLWT-DT), and highest for the weakest signals (28~29% for stations such as WCVN-DT/WBDT-DT) .....

bjmumy

04-11-07, 08:51 AM

Boston Legal on TW 909 (WCPO) was in SD tonight and not HD. Is WCPO having problems with their HD? Or did the engineer fall asleep at the switch?

I'm curious about this as well. Anybody know?

terryfoster

04-11-07, 08:53 AM

Boston Legal on TW 909 (WCPO) was in SD tonight and not HD. Is WCPO having problems with their HD? Or did the engineer fall asleep at the switch?

There was a problem at ABC's headend (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=832485).

bjmumy

04-11-07, 09:07 AM

There was a problem at ABC's headend (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=832485).

Really? So no one in the country saw Boston Legal in HD? I guess I can't blame WCPO then.

jdhughes63

04-11-07, 10:10 AM

There was a problem at ABC's headend (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=832485).
Thanks for the info. I knew someone out there would have the answer. I guess we can't blame the local affiliates all the time. I don't think that they put a crawler or any other form of announcement on the screen though. Maybe that is was not possible.

XmtrMan

04-11-07, 10:11 AM

or better yet.. how bout we drop the cw :)

Somebody writes a check to replace the revenue and that can go, too.

Love makes the world go 'round but money fuels the broadcast business.

jimp2244

04-11-07, 10:17 AM

Nitewatchman

04-11-07, 01:36 PM

Would you rather have only HD local news on 5-1

Yes.

jim tressler

04-11-07, 01:43 PM

same here

jimp2244

04-11-07, 02:36 PM

Yes.
same here

Interesting. I wonder if that's the way most people feel...

Do you feel the same way if the "main" program is in SD? Such as a rerun of Friends or Everybody Loves Raymond? Would you rather the station just send that program (in SD), or would you rather them add additional programming options to a couple of subchannels?

Nitewatchman

04-11-07, 06:21 PM

Do you feel the same way if the "main" program is in SD?

If it's being upconverted to 1080i for broadcast, yes. As far as the encoder goes, in this case it's still 1080i and requires(pretty much) as many bits as HD programming ....

There is blocking/mpeg2 compression artifacts during programming whose source is "natively" SD on WKRC-DT 12.1 just as is the case with "true" HD. Pay close attention to fast moving graphics, especially ....

Such as a rerun of Friends or Everybody Loves Raymond?

I would think many shows will be available in HD Syndication someday, just as we have Wheel+Jeopardy in HD on WCPO-DT, now ...There has even been HD transfer of some B&W "I love Lucy" episodes ...

What will never be "true HD" will be programming captured originally on SD video formats, anything on film can be transferred to HD ...

I expect there will be viable SD applications for Digital TV for a long time to come ... Some SD multicasting+720p works well, and SD multicasting on digital LP stations, or stations whose networks don't offer HD programming sources would seem to be good options as well ..."Ion"/formerly "i"/ formerly "pax" is an example .... The nearest Ion affiliate to us is in Central KY (WUPX-DT 21/67 analog -- unless they've changed their callsign with the network name change, they very well might have) ..... Was watching a bit of "Kung Fu" and "The wonder years" on there a little over a week ago ... I didn't pay much attention to how many SD subchannels they were running, I think it's varied between 4 and 6 since they've been on air ...

There are of course many other possible applications for digital TV besides what we are most familar with ("live" video+audio streams) ... A station sending 1080i HD could for example utilize it's available oppurtuistic bandwidth for say, a "HD movie download" service(for a subscription fee of course) .... Now, making $ on those kinds of things is another matter entirely ...

Would you rather the station just send that program (in SD), or would you rather them add additional programming options to a couple of subchannels?

Depends. For instance, I like how the new WHIO-DT Widescreen SD local newscasts look on my HD displays just as they are -- Widescreen SD, but upconverted(very nicely I might add) at WHIO-DT+Broadcast as 1920x1080i ...

For *most* SD source material however, generally I'd probably rather it be broadcast in it's native resolution. When it can be done, and when it can be done properly+involves content that is not "available" in HD, of course adding additional SD multicast services would be nice.

Of course, I'd also rather 16x9 SD content be sent with 480i(or p) 16x9 format, rather than sent with the letterbox "bars" in a 4x3 format. We're losing quite a bit of resolution that way, but it can't really be helped in regards to most 4x3 sets which won't "add" the letterboxing for folks, such as via AFD or a user controllable option ...

But, What happens if/when the time comes that the "main" program becomes available in HD? If they were making $ off it, Is the station going to want to drop those "couple of subchannels" during that time period that were possible when the main program was SD ? Or, would you rather, after the program becomes available in HD they continue to broadcast it in SD, or at lower quality ?