Surprise Interest in Over-The-Air TV

By Glen Dickson -- Broadcasting & Cable, 5/4/2007 6:45:00 AM

One of broadcasters’ frequent complaints about the digital television transition is that consumers don’t realize they can receive crystal-clear high-definition pictures for free, by using an over-the-air antenna, without having to sign up for high-definition cable or satellite service. And they may be correct in thinking that consumers would be very interested in that capability, if they only knew about it.

After an Associated Press story ran on April 29 that described how simple antennas might deliver better HDTV pictures than cable or satellite service, due to the level of compression that some operators use for HDTV signals, a flurry of traffic hit , a Website run by the Consumer Electronics Association that provides information on over-the-air antennas. The CEA site had 86,000 inquiries about DTV antennas that day, a huge jump from the normal Sunday traffic of 6,000 inquiries, according to CEA spokesman Jason Oxman; the site usually averages 100,000 inquiries per month (an inquiry is more than a hit, says Oxman, as it requires filling out a form to get detailed recommendations on antenna choices based on a viewer’s geographic location).

The spike in traffic for actually overwhelmed the site and caused it to start giving out error messages, such as the one a B&C reporter experienced when checking it on Tuesday. Oxman says that based on the increased interest, CEA was working with the vendor who hosts the site to increase its capacity.

"It’s a data-intensive site, so it requires a lot of bandwidth resources," says Oxman.

http://broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6439202.html

I can confirm this is true from personal experience. I was visiting a friend who has a very nice Pioneer 65" RPTV. I noticed he was watching football on NBC in stretch-0-vision and asked him why he wasn't watching in HD. Punchline: he thought he was.

I brought over an old rabbit ears antenna, connected it, and tuned in the OTA HD local station. Not only was he surprised, but angry that the B&M that sold him the set never told him about the free OTA HD.

I have been saying this for several years due to personal experience with people but everytime I would say it, some wiseaker here would then go into great deal on how I was wrong based on cable this and coverage that and appearance the other thing and it was clearly obvious they had no idea what they were talking about.

Glad some one else thinks so now.

There is a LOT of misinformation about HDTV. On another board recently, someone was complaining about an MLS soccer game and about being able to see something with his HD set. Someone else pointed out that the game wasn't broadcast in HD, and he said--didn't matter, his set had the capability to make it HD!

Not only was he surprised, but angry that the B&M that sold him the set never told him about the free OTA HD.
Best Buys get a lot of crap for poor service, but I have to admit that mine does a pretty good job of this. They have an antenna hooked up to one of their display sets so they can show people OTA HD.

I have been saying this for several years due to personal experience with people but everytime I would say it, some wiseaker here would then go into great deal on how I was wrong based on cable this and coverage that and appearance the other thing and it was clearly obvious they had no idea what they were talking about.

Glad some one else thinks so now.

Here's the downside. I have a relatively sophisticated OTA installation at my house, and receive several adjacent market stations on a regular basis. Today it's windy, and sorry, if you live in an area that has dense foliage, you'll find that UHF signals, be they analog or digital, are not stable on windy days. I cannot even watch my locals. If you could see the waveform on a spectrum analyzer, you'd understand why.

The cable operator in my market "passes" OTA signals without additional compression or grooming. I see no difference in the PQ between the ClearQAM signals from cable or the 8VSB signal off-air. This may not be true everywhere, but as cable operators roll out their bandwidth recovery strategies, compressing signals becomes unnecessary.

After reading posts on this sight for several months now, I have come to the conclusion that OTA reception is as much art as science, and is not a good solution for the mainstream consumer.

So for me, it's not an "either/or" solution. I have both OTA and cable. Most cable operators offer a lifeline basic for way less than $20/month with ClearQAM locals. Its obvious that several posters have invested $100s in OTA hardware and are still getting less than satisfactory results.

One more comment. It sounds more and more that Ka band satellite local HDs are even more prone to rain fade than thier Ku band cousins. OTA backup is highly recommended.

Bottom line. There is no "one size fits all" solution.

Have you ever had someone from the stations come out and look at your setup?

I'd hate to base the entire Digital Transition on blanket statements like, "...if you live in an area that has dense foliage, you'll find that UHF signals, be they analog or digital, are not stable on windy days", or "...OTA reception is as much art as science, and is not a good solution for the mainstream consumer."

I wonder what other things might be affecting your reception.

Have you ever had someone from the stations come out and look at your setup?

I'd hate to base the entire Digital Transition on blanket statements like, "...if you live in an area that has dense foliage, you'll find that UHF signals, be they analog or digital, are not stable on windy days", or "...OTA reception is as much art as science, and is not a good solution for the mainstream consumer."

I wonder what other things might be affecting your reception.

foxeng, maybe you can help me out.

Dense foilage wreaks havoc on UHF signals. When it's breezy, and the leaves and limbs move, we experience "dynamic multipath and burst attenuation". Even though my antenna is on the roof of a two story structure, I am in an area where trees grow over 60 feet tall and have a density of over 100 an acre. Unless you can get above tree line, you live with it.

You live in Salt Lake City, where there is very little foliage, and line of sight is REALLY line of sight.

I've engineered dozens of commerical OTA installations and struggled with every reception challenge imaginable, and I can guarantee you that there is nothing wrong with my installation. It's just simple physics at work.

So for me, it's not an "either/or" solution.

As you say, that's for you.

The gist of the OP's post is that many folks have no idea that they aren't watching HD or that it may be available to them for no monthly charge. I'd bet a high percentage of these folks won't experience you reception problem and would be grateful to have someone show them how to get free HD.

Bottom line. There is no "one size fits all" solution.

True. But the OTA "size" will fit many many folks who don't even know it's an option.

I wonder how COFDM would perform in this situation compared to 8VSB.

I wonder how COFDM would perform in this situation compared to 8VSB.

The problem is that the linearity of the waveform across the 6Mhz bandwidth fluctuates dramatically over short periods of time. If the equalization it the receiver is quick enough , the problem is reduced. Newer 8VSB tuners cope better, and it have read that CODFM is more "robust".

I will get some arguments, but it seems like we (Americans) tend to adopt solutions that are more marketplace driven than engineering driven, and as such, my bet is that CODFM is superior to 8VSB in every way except price. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I wonder what other things might be affecting your reception.

Me too :)

PS: ... and bonus points for continuing to flog the (dead) COFDM horse. ;) :D

As you say, that's for you.

The gist of the OP's post is that many folks have no idea that they aren't watching HD or that it may be available to them for no monthly charge. I'd bet a high percentage of these folks won't experience you reception problem and would be grateful to have someone show them how to get free HD.



True. But the OTA "size" will fit many many folks who don't even know it's an option.

My biggest complaint about only having OTA is that more than 50% of the broadcast day, there is NOTHING available in HD on any channel. I know over time it will change, but even in primetime its rare to have more that three HD choices.

I have had the local cable company call me twice since I bought my house asking me to sign up for service and I have to admit to rather enjoying the awkward silence on their end when I tell them I am satisfied with HD programming I'm pulling in now (which will increase dramatically when I get my roof top antenna installed and I think I have the magic 5 posts now to start my thread on that with longish description -- hooray!)

If the equalization it the receiver is quick enough , the problem is reduced. Newer 8VSB tuners cope better, and it have read that CODFM is more "robust".
I have a second generation receiver, a third generation receiver and a fourth generation receiver. The second gen was a pain to set up. The antenna placement had to be absolutely perfect and the slightest bit of multipath (off of cars) would ruin the signal for a second or two. The third gen was immune to this kind of multipath I was having and the antenna placement was somewhat less critical.

The fourth gen receiver is excellent. The antenna can be pointed in directions where the other two receive no signal and like the third gen, I have no multipath dropouts at all. So in four years I've seen ATSC receivers make dramatic improvements to the point where I don't think most people will have many problems.

foxeng, maybe you can help me out.

Dense foilage wreaks havoc on UHF signals. When it's breezy, and the leaves and limbs move, we experience "dynamic multipath and burst attenuation". Even though my antenna is on the roof of a two story structure, I am in an area where trees grow over 60 feet tall and have a density of over 100 an acre. Unless you can get above tree line, you live with it.

Remember I live 90 miles from you and my terrain isn't too much different from yours and yes, wind and leaves will cause problems. But having said that, after all of the locals went full power and I switched to a 5th gen chip receiver (both H20 and the Samsung DTB-H260F) that problem reduced to almost nothing on the locals. Now on the stations out of market, yes, it is still a problem, but most people are not DXing 3 markets over either so for the majority of people in most situations (not 100% but a majority) some kind of OTA antenna would be acceptable. I have never been a fan of the indoor antenna and I am still not. But if you have an outside antenna, a 5th gen receiver and you still have problems with local full power OTA's, something isn't right somewhere. My guesses would be too much loss or too much gain! I realize that is a broad brush, but like you said, everyone has a different situation, but of all of the people who have called me over the last 5 years, the number of people who couldn't get usable DTV OTA I can count on one hand. I know that isn't scientific and may not represent reality, but that is my experience and most of that time has been with stations not operating at full power. When we all went full power, my calls dropped off dramatically.

I had the benefit of the OTA knowledge imparted to me upon my very first actual viewing when I inquired as to what the source of the feed was in a GOOD GUYS, I think it was. I was somewhat incredulous as I never knew there was this whole other broadcast dimension out there. "Do you mean to tell me that all that is necessary to get that picture and program content right there, is one of these sets and an antenna?" It has been strictly OTA ever since.

True. But the OTA "size" will fit many many folks who don't even know it's an option.

And this statement sums it up perfectly.

OTA digital television is not for everyone. Some folks are just not able to achieve good reception, either due to terrain, distance from the transmitter, or restrictions on the sort of antenna they can install. Others have viewing preferences that won't be served without access to non-OTA channels.

But many do primarily watch programming from local broadcast stations and are able to enjoy good, reliable off-air reception. A number of us here fall into that category (including myself) and are enjoying our free OTA high definition television reception. I'm delighted to see articles like this that are telling us that more folks are discovering what I've been enjoying for years -- and I hope that those articles will multiply over the next couple of years as we approach the analog shutdown. Perhaps if that happens, fewer broadcasters will consider their OTA coverage to be secondary to their cable/satellite coverage.

So what would the penetration for OTA digital television be if everyone knew what we know? I have no idea as to whether it would be 25% or 75%, but I do suspect that it would be much higher than it currently is.

People are interested in something that's free? SHOCKING!

Remember I live 90 miles from you and my terrain isn't too much different from yours and yes, wind and leaves will cause problems.


I'm not there, but have lots of trees, and there are terrain obstructions involved in some cases(I'm in small, steep valley), and I didn't/don't have any problems with that whatsoever -- as in no dropouts or reception problems over 6 years of OTA DTV/HD reception with my main antenna setup from what is now 15 local DTV stations(there were only 4 when I started in 2001), all of them within 39 miles distant.

Exception being, when I put a second antenna(with seperate feedline and A/B switch before receiver to switch between them) a little lower to receive stations transmitting from one location(stations 12~14 miles distant) so as not to need to use rotor for them, and only on stations on certian frequencies(high UHF ch 50, 51 and 58), and only when leaves are off trees and wind is blowing and temp is above 32F or so .....

I saw enough with that however to realize that I can understand the frustration folks have that do run into this problem, and the difficulties in some cases in getting it "fixed". It can probably seem quite "finicky" if you've never experienced how easy+"dropout free" DTV reception often is.

While certianly we want DTV reception to be better than analog(and in my experience, it is, sometimes much better vs. snowy/ghosty analog signals) ---- that being said in this case analog station on a similar frequency, transmitting from same towers/location isn't even watchable because of it (even the audio carrier is affected by the multipath+fading distrubances in the signal) ...

It is just amazing the difference in ghosting on the analog station involved here when leaves are off trees and limbs getting blown around(unwatchable, really), and when leaves are on trees(including when wind is blowing tree limbs around) -- or with antenna a few feet higher in any circumstances .... No, or very minor ghosting ....


But having said that, after all of the locals went full power and I switched to a 5th gen chip receiver (both H20 and the Samsung DTB-H260F) that problem reduced to almost nothing on the locals.


I've noticed the 5th generation chipset in my Hauppauge HVR1600 PC tuner card handles the issue noted above better than earlier receivers as well, but it's still not quite dropout free with it.

I think I'd read recently they're going to be putting 6th generation chipsets in equipment soon. I think (don't quote me on this) that includes at least some of the DTV converter boxes .... Hopefully, they've improved things even more regarding this issue .....

I must say, I talked about my observations about the "trees" in another thread recently+I was hesitant to bring it up at all as I know some folks probably want everything to be simple and "black or white" answer when sometimes there's "grey area", or some folks may have read my comments and probably just picked little "pieces" out of it and think I'm someone who can't watch those stations without "dropouts" because of it ... that's not true however ...


But if you have an outside antenna, a 5th gen receiver and you still have problems with local full power OTA's, something isn't right somewhere. My guesses would be too much loss or too much gain!


I don't feel like going into all the details required to explain/prove it at present, but I can report that(too much loss or too much gain) is certianly not the problem I've observed here .....

If it's something I don't have "right", I can't imagine what it might be as I've went through everything I can think of from making sure I don't have bad or "kinked up" center conductor to using attenuators/etc making sure I have plenty of signal(or not too much)/etc/etc/etc, trying different antenna aimings, different antennas/etc/etc/etc, to using a 2 way radio+helper to try to "peak" the antenna aiming/etc. for best results while the wind is blowing a little+leaves are off(that was certianly a futile endeavor, BTW) ....

But, Raise antenna to over 30FT AGL+the problem goes away, completely ... My theory is I think it's "weird" ground reflection/multipath echo issue that are scattered/attenuated enough when leaves are on trees, or that differences in refraction "fixes" when the temp is cold enough.

I also tried different antenna locations on different mast(s) and indoors within 100Feet of where I had it, and the situation was still the same. True, there's a bit less signal with antenna at 25FT AGL where the problem does occur vs. 30FT or higher, but not that much, and these are signals where I have much more signal than I need for DTV reception ... and no, adding attenuators doesn't fix the problem either, and yes, it happens if there's nothing between antenna and receiver besides balun, about 30ft of RG6 coax+2 F connectors ....


of all of the people who have called me over the last 5 years, the number of people who couldn't get usable DTV OTA I can count on one hand. I know that isn't scientific and may not represent reality, but that is my experience and most of that time has been with stations not operating at full power. When we all went full power, my calls dropped off dramatically.

That's certianly good news! Also, along the lines of something you said earlier, a couple of engineers I've talked to privately have said they were quite surprised at how many people they've talked to or calls they get from folks who are watching OTA. And, I don't mean folks who are having reception problems.

It's good to hear these things, at least I think it is, as I don't see a lot of mention of their OTA service by broadcasters, and oftentimes, we don't hear about reception successes here, I think we hear more from the folks having problems who are asking for help. So, it seems like a "barrage" of it here at times, although I also suspect those having problems are relatively few .... Of course, those "wisecrackers" you talk about don't help much either ... ;)


But many do primarily watch programming from local broadcast stations and are able to enjoy good, reliable off-air reception.


I agree, and, while certianly there are exceptions such as folks who really do live in "white space" areas or difficult reception circumstances+are confined to using indoor antenna, I would think most people in U.S. would be able to enjoy reliable OTA reception ....

In fact, I guess I have a hard time understanding why more people don't use it(whether or not they also choose to use cable or sat) when the ATSC receiver is in the TV and all you have to do is add antenna, and really I even felt the same way about analog OTA, only now with HD/DTV it's even better ... It's there and I think quite inexpensive in most circumstances, why not use it?

I was trying to help someone with an antenna question and antennaweb.org was down due to high traffic, now I know.

i can use ota for hd if i want but, i also like to watch espn hd, discovery hd, uni hd, etc.

also i need to record because i never watch live.

so if i could watch all the other hd stuff and record in hd then i'm in.
but until i can do that i still need comcast

i can use ota for hd if i want but, i also like to watch espn hd, discovery hd, uni hd, etc.
I use both OTA and cable. I prefer OTA because I don't have to use whatever Comcast is renting me.

also i need to record because i never watch live.
If you're a geek like me, it's very easy to record OTA with a PC. You can do whatever you want with OTA recordings within copyright laws -- burn them to DVD, copy them to your laptop or PDA, and so on. Plus you'll never have to hear Comcast apologizing to you for wiping out all your recordings with a firmware update they sent to your DVR.

I often wonder, "Why don't broadcasters (maybe through the NAB or MSTV) commission someone to build a decent OTA-based PVR?".

Is that too much to ask?

I use both OTA and cable. I prefer OTA because I don't have to use whatever Comcast is renting me.


If you're a geek like me, it's very easy to record OTA with a PC. You can do whatever you want with OTA recordings within copyright laws -- burn them to DVD, copy them to your laptop or PDA, and so on. Plus you'll never have to hear Comcast apologizing to you for wiping out all your recordings with a firmware update they sent to your DVR.

But you're the exception. Most people aren't going to hassle with a HTPC when the cable/sat DVR works for them most of the time. The same reason most people won't hassle with an antenna when that cable coming out of their wall gets them locals and ESPN, Fox News, The Weather Channel, etc. For HD, cable and now D* is making it too easy to skip the antenna altogether.

And free or not, the days of the average person relying solely on an antenna for all of their TV are long gone.

The problem is that the linearity of the waveform across the 6Mhz bandwidth fluctuates dramatically over short periods of time. If the equalization it the receiver is quick enough , the problem is reduced. Newer 8VSB tuners cope better, and it have read that CODFM is more "robust".

I will get some arguments, but it seems like we (Americans) tend to adopt solutions that are more marketplace driven than engineering driven, and as such, my bet is that CODFM is superior to 8VSB in every way except price. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


Oh please. COFDM would not help you at all. There is nothing better about it. 95% of people have no problem receiving 8VSB. COFDM is not a magic pill. I am so sick of this fud. Do you know that COFDM can't deal with electrical interference at all. It kills it. I suggest you check forums where people use DVB-T. There are all kinds of problems, like hair dryers killing the reception.

I live in CT where I have dense foliage, hills and have no problems receiving OTA. I had some problems when the stations were low power, but once they went full everything has been great.

But you're the exception. Most people aren't going to hassle with a HTPC when the cable/sat DVR works for them most of the time. The same reason most people won't hassle with an antenna when that cable coming out of their wall gets them locals and ESPN, Fox News, The Weather Channel, etc. For HD, cable and now D* is making it too easy to skip the antenna altogether.


Cancel cable, save $50 to $100 or more a month and that will pay for a new HD TV set in a year, then tell me if you miss it. I rely on antenna for all of my TV and without all those "wonderful" channels I still watch too much TV. Obviously some people will still want additional services from cable or satellite, but one of the main reasons there aren't more people like me right now is because most people don't realize what is available to them.

And free or not, the days of the average person relying solely on an antenna for all of their TV are long gone.

I'd actually venture to say that with DTV, they may be coming back...

I often wonder, "Why don't broadcasters (maybe through the NAB or MSTV) commission someone to build a decent OTA-based PVR?".

Is that too much to ask?

but broadcasters don't want you to skip commercials with DVR.

I'm paying just way too much for fios. Unfortunately, there's too much sports I'd be missing if I went OTA only, and the trend now is more and more spoets moving to cable. sigh.

I can confirm this is true from personal experience. I was visiting a friend who has a very nice Pioneer 65" RPTV. I noticed he was watching football on NBC in stretch-0-vision and asked him why he wasn't watching in HD. Punchline: he thought he was.

I brought over an old rabbit ears antenna, connected it, and tuned in the OTA HD local station. Not only was he surprised, but angry that the B&M that sold him the set never told him about the free OTA HD.

That's strange, most every electronic device I have ever bought, came with an owners manual. :)

Perhaps broadcasters could/should run DTV and HDTV reception tutorials rather than P.I. infomercials overnight and weekend afternoons, or does that come too close to "serving the public interest". :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

but broadcasters don't want you to skip commercials with DVR.

Yes

I'm paying just way too much for fios. Unfortunately, there's too much sports I'd be missing if I went OTA only, and the trend now is more and more spoets moving to cable. sigh.

There is a slippery slope we are sliding down. More and more channels are being created with less and less quality content. There are numerous examples of this in the sports world. The cable networks are banking on you wanting one event bad enough to pay for their channel every day.

NFL Network had (and still has) people believing that they would not be able to see their home team play a Thursday or Saturday night game unless their provider carried NFL Network (of course the fact that home market games are always carried OTA didn't seem to get noticed much). I enjoyed the Thursday night Bengals game last fall, in HD, on our local NBC affiliate OTA. Despite my insistence, the people I had over to watch the game were not convinced that we would be able to watch the game at all until they saw it on the screen with their own eyes.

In Cincinnati, the UC versus XU "Crosstown Shoutout" basketball game had traditionally been on the local FOX affiliate or on ESPN. ESPN decided instead to put the game on ESPN-U for the sole reason of getting people to complain to the cable company that they want ESPN-U, even though most probably wouldn't watch the channel other than for that one annual game. I chose not to watch the game.

There are so many cable/satellite channels out there that carry a few special events and other than that show filler. Do we really need all these channels? There is room for most if not all of this content on broadcast television, if not on the networks at least at the local affiliate level.

If you're out of market and still want to watch, then cable can provide it via pay-per-view or some sort of sports package. But I have a hard time paying for something that I used to get for free.

My biggest complaint about only having OTA is that more than 50% of the broadcast day, there is NOTHING available in HD on any channel. I know over time it will change, but even in primetime its rare to have more that three HD choices.

Actually, in the 22 weekly prime time hours, there are four (or more) HD choices in eight of the 14 hours broadcast by five networks (not counting MNTV).

In the 10 PM ET hour, when only three networks broadcast, 19 of 21 possible hours are broadcast in HD.

Oh please. COFDM would not help you at all. There is nothing better about it. 95% of people have no problem receiving 8VSB. COFDM is not a magic pill. I am so sick of this fud. Do you know that COFDM can't deal with electrical interference at all. It kills it. I suggest you check forums where people use DVB-T. There are all kinds of problems, like hair dryers killing the reception.Since I'm the one that brought up the original question, I was only wondering in this particular situation how it would do. Each system has it's strengths and weakness, but as noted much of the early problems with 8VSB has been reduced or eliminated with later generation receivers.

It sort of reminds me of some other "inferior" technologies that rose above their competition. The Trinitron tube with the same pitch had lower resolution than than a triad CRT (we think of that advantage as pixel shift now) and for many years was thought of as a compromised consumer display, yet the trinitron became the defacto standard for professional monitors. Helical scan tape machines were considered non-broadcast quality, but the 1" C format killed 2" quad. OTA, I guess the debate whether transistors were a step forward over tubes still goes on.

As COFDM is a very touchy subject on AVS, I'll try to refrain from using the C acronym .

also i need to record because i never watch live.
so if i could watch all the other hd stuff and record in hd then i'm in.
but until i can do that i still need comcast
Looks like they've got you for sure.

I don't happen to need DISCOVERY or ESPN. I have never even had cable at any time, but when I get home at 11PM, there are from 4-10 hours of HD programming awaiting me every night.

When I stopped to consider I was saving probably upwards of a hundred bucks per month, it wasn't hard to lay out the funds for four HD recievers -- that way, I never have to decide which counterprogramming to watch.

Never have any antenna issues either. Each one has a little Radio Shack double bowtie sitting on top of it ($15), pointed at the station that that reciever regularly is set to. And there you have it.

Of course the downside is you watch way to much TV, but at least some of what I view is a great satisfaction to me -- outside of air, food, fluids, it sort of contends with shelter as indispensable to living as I know it........

Originally Posted by posg
My biggest complaint about only having OTA is that more than 50% of the broadcast day, there is NOTHING available in HD on any channel. I know over time it will change, but even in primetime its rare to have more that three HD choices.


Well, there again, I usually only watch during the day -- whatever I want from the night before or three nights earlier. Some weeks, pure HD viewing time exceeds full-time work time committed. Anything more than that might not be healthy..................

Cancel cable, save $50 to $100 or more a month and that will pay for a new HD TV set in a year, then tell me if you miss it. I rely on antenna for all of my TV and without all those "wonderful" channels I still watch too much TV. Obviously some people will still want additional services from cable or satellite, but one of the main reasons there aren't more people like me right now is because most people don't realize what is available to them.

For me and I would venture to say many, many others, I wouldn't go without cable channels like ESPN-HD and Discovery HD, to name just two. Also, the best original programming on TV comes from HBO and Showtime. Sorry, but I'll pay my $100/month to get the best programming and the channels I want, along with 2 HD-DVR's.

When a large percentage of households are already paying for internet access, landline phone service, and wireless phone service, the additional incremental cost for cable/sat TV (HD or otherwise) is just factored into the cost of living IMO.

I'd actually venture to say that with DTV, they may be coming back...

I don't believe going exclusively OTA will be the popular choice for most people. 40 years ago maybe, when choices were limited, not today.

But you're the exception.
We all are.. we watch HDTV! :)

And free or not, the days of the average person relying solely on an antenna for all of their TV are long gone.
Yes, even though I watch an average of three hours of cable a week (less during the summer), I still pay my $100+ bill every month.

But you're the exception. Most people aren't going to hassle with a HTPC when the cable/sat DVR works for them most of the time. The same reason most people won't hassle with an antenna when that cable coming out of their wall gets them locals and ESPN, Fox News, The Weather Channel, etc. For HD, cable and now D* is making it too easy to skip the antenna altogether.

And free or not, the days of the average person relying solely on an antenna for all of their TV are long gone.

"Most people" don't watch any of the cable channels that you just listed. Even ESPN, which is one of the most popular of the bunch, is never viewed in the majority of households that can receive it. Obviously, some people value those cable channels a lot, while others value them a little, and yet others are completely indifferent. It's impossible to generalize, which means that any statement that includes the phrase "most people" is almost certain to be wrong.

Television viewing habits vary quite widely, so it is generally a huge mistake to projecte from yourself and the people that you know what the "most people" would watch or not watch. That's why I hesitate to predict the *size* of the resurgence in OTA viewing, even though I believe that there will be a resurgence. While I expect that the percentage of households taking cable or satellite will ultimately drop from what it is today, I don't think that anyone can easily predict whether that will be a small (possibly inconsequential) drop, or whether it will turn out to be an industry changer in the same sense that the rise of small dish satellite in the past decade has been.

But the idea that an antenna is somehow more of a hassle than cable is just silly if you're in a decent reception area. Aside from the obvious "hassle" of paying the cable company every month, I look at the comments that I read from people complaining about service outages, rescheduled service calls, and the like. In contrast, when I had my antenna installed five years ago, the installer came out when promised, did the work as promised, and provided a product that delivered exactly what I expected. Since then, I've needed no maintanance or service calls, experienced no outages or loss of service, and haven't had to make a single payment to maintain the use of that antenna. So why is that antenna somehow considered to be more of a hassle than dealing with an arrogant cable company?

OTA might work in some areas for some people, but in the NY Metro area, if you want to watch sports, you need cable, D* or Fios. There is no way around it. Plus I know in my house if I even tried to put a big stinking roof top antenna up I would be sleeping in the garage.

OTA might work in some areas for some people, but in the NY Metro area, if you want to watch sports, you need cable, D* or Fios. There is no way around it. Plus I know in my house if I even tried to put a big stinking roof top antenna up I would be sleeping in the garage.

Not everyone lives in the NY Metro (of course many in Gotham think so ;) ) and I don't think this article states that OTA is an option for everyone, just that when presented with the OTA option, people are seriously looking at it again and yes many people ARE cutting the cable/sat ties with only OTA. Many here on AVS state they only have OTA, BY CHOICE while others are using OTA to suppliment their pay services for various reasons.

Not everyone lives in the NY Metro (of course many in Gotham think so ;) ) and I don't think this article states that OTA is an option for everyone, just that when presented with the OTA option, people are seriously looking at it again and yes many people ARE cutting the cable/sat ties with only OTA. Many here on AVS state they only have OTA, BY CHOICE while others are using OTA to suppliment their pay services for various reasons.

Well, for example, I watch D* AND OTA.

Although Jacksonville just got D* HD LIL, it doesn't include our local PBS or CW stations. Thus, the only way to get, for example, Nova, Smallville or Supernatural in HD is via OTA. And it doesn't look like that will change any time soon.

Besides, during those "rain fade" times, OTA provides a good backup.

Besides, during those "rain fade" times, OTA provides a good backup.


I'm confused as to why you're even paying for LIL? OTA picture quality is better and it doesn't go out in the rain. Maybe I'm missing some hidden benefit of LIL???

OTA picture quality is better. If I had satellite, I'd be using IT as the backup.

Well, even though some may disagree, I find that the difference between the MPEG4 D* local HD and OTA is indistinguishable.

Well, even though some may disagree, I find that the difference between the MPEG4 D* local HD and OTA is indistinguishable.


Even if that were true, why pay for it when you already get it for free? Not trying to start an argument, just trying to understand...

Even if that were true, why pay for it when you already get it for free? Not trying to start an argument, just trying to understand...

Oh, that's an easy one. OTA is a pain in the a**. Positioning the antenna is critical. I have found that sometimes having the aiming off by as little as an inch or two causes a station to pop in or out.

Digital stations are also extremely prone to multi-path interference. You can sometimes have a strong signal that is being cancelled by itself by bouncing off things and coming from different directions. A highly directional antenna helps, but then you are back to the criticality of aiming.

In my case, I have to mount the antenna in the attic, rather than on the roof. An attic mount reduces the antenna gain by as much as 50%, sometimes making reception spotty.

Finally, we have a number of stations here that brodcast sub-channels. Those degrade the HD picture by taking bandwidth away.

There is no obligation for Best Buy or any brick & mortar to tell you about OTA broadcast. They benefit nothing from it unless they're selling OTA antennas. And like someone said earlier, all the buyer needs to do is read the instruction manual.

The local stations should make their own commercials encouraging folks to watch their HD stations that are broadcast over the air. They could easily do that during non network programming like the local news or during prime time when a few local commercial spot are available.

Not everyone lives in the NY Metro (of course many in Gotham think so ;) ) and I don't think this article states that OTA is an option for everyone, just that when presented with the OTA option, people are seriously looking at it again and yes many people ARE cutting the cable/sat ties with only OTA. Many here on AVS state they only have OTA, BY CHOICE while others are using OTA to suppliment their pay services for various reasons.

People here on AVS hardly represent the typical TV viewer. I do believe AVSers use OTA at a higher percentage than the average household. This may be partly due to my (admittedly unsubstantiated) belief that a higher percentage of AVSers use satellite service, and have from its earliest beginnings. Locals weren't an option so many have been using OTA to supplement their satellite service for quite some time.

The bigger reason may be that, as enthusiasts, AVSers just don't mind fiddling with an antenna. If OTA was such an easy option for most people, why are the local programming threads here filled with posts about reception problems? Most people (non-enthusiasts) just don't want the hassle of an antenna when they can plug a cable into the back of the TV and be done with it. This is especially true with roof or attic antennas. They may have been the norm in my parent's generation back in the 50's and 60's, but they will never by more than a niche market today IMO.

As D* and E* add HD locals, new subs will have even less of an incentive to install an antenna in the first place. If you are a cable sub, using an antenna makes even less sense when most systems include HD locals in their basic package.

btw, do you have any statistics to back up your claim that "many people" are cutting ties to cable/satellite altogether?

Oh please. COFDM would not help you at all. Do you know that COFDM can't deal with electrical interference at all. It kills it. I suggest you check forums where people use DVB-T. There are all kinds of problems, like hair dryers killing the reception. . . .




Agreed.

AFAICT, COFDM was only being pushed here for its mobile video/advertising ($$$) capabilities.

The loudest screamers and worst 8VSB bashers were the dreamers being denied the biggest profits.

Typical COFDM implementations overseas appear to suck really badly for solid, long-distance HDTV.

DVB-T forums:

http://www.dtvforum.info/index.php?act=SF&f=10&st=0&changefilters=1


http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=64

Oh, that's an easy one. OTA is a pain in the a**. Positioning the antenna is critical. I have found that sometimes having the aiming off by as little as an inch or two causes a station to pop in or out.

Really? Since I had my antenna installed last fall, I can't recall any incidents of stations "popping in or out." Reception has been perfect.

Digital stations are also extremely prone to multi-path interference. You can sometimes have a strong signal that is being cancelled by itself by bouncing off things and coming from different directions. A highly directional antenna helps, but then you are back to the criticality of aiming.

My antenna set-up must be magic then... no issues here.

In my case, I have to mount the antenna in the attic, rather than on the roof. An attic mount reduces the antenna gain by as much as 50%, sometimes making reception spotty.

I would suggest not putting it in the attic. You didn't say why you have to mount in the attic. As I'm sure you are aware, no law or HOA rule can tell you that you can't mount on the roof. If it's a particular family member I guess there's not much you can do about it. You must have your dish mounted outside somewhere though. There are many antenna models that can be mounted fairly inconspicuously (if that's the issue), some even less conspicuous than your dish.


Finally, we have a number of stations here that brodcast sub-channels. Those degrade the HD picture by taking bandwidth away.

And the feed that you get OTA is the same exact feed sent to the satellite companies in almost all cases. And then the satellite company reduces resoultion and compresses it AGAIN!



There is no obligation for Best Buy or any brick & mortar to tell you about OTA broadcast. They benefit nothing from it unless they're selling OTA antennas. And like someone said earlier, all the buyer needs to do is read the instruction manual.

That's true, and it's part of the reason why people aren't aware of OTA and its benefits over the services (cable and satellite) that Best Buy can sell you.


The local stations should make their own commercials encouraging folks to watch their HD stations that are broadcast over the air. They could easily do that during non network programming like the local news or during prime time when a few local commercial spot are available.

Local stations wouldn't use up advertising space for this. In many cases they get paid by the cable and satellite providers to carry their feed. The broadcast tower is an expense. Why would they promote that?

why are the local programming threads here filled with posts about reception problems?


Because this is where they can come for help.

I don't think you hear too much from folks who have no problems with OTA, so I think you are getting a distorted view if you're thinking because you see reports of reception problems here that everyone, or most have problems with it.

"Most people" don't watch any of the cable channels that you just listed. Even ESPN, which is one of the most popular of the bunch, is never viewed in the majority of households that can receive it. Obviously, some people value those cable channels a lot, while others value them a little, and yet others are completely indifferent. It's impossible to generalize, which means that any statement that includes the phrase "most people" is almost certain to be wrong.

Television viewing habits vary quite widely, so it is generally a huge mistake to projecte from yourself and the people that you know what the "most people" would watch or not watch. That's why I hesitate to predict the *size* of the resurgence in OTA viewing, even though I believe that there will be a resurgence. While I expect that the percentage of households taking cable or satellite will ultimately drop from what it is today, I don't think that anyone can easily predict whether that will be a small (possibly inconsequential) drop, or whether it will turn out to be an industry changer in the same sense that the rise of small dish satellite in the past decade has been.

But the idea that an antenna is somehow more of a hassle than cable is just silly if you're in a decent reception area. Aside from the obvious "hassle" of paying the cable company every month, I look at the comments that I read from people complaining about service outages, rescheduled service calls, and the like. In contrast, when I had my antenna installed five years ago, the installer came out when promised, did the work as promised, and provided a product that delivered exactly what I expected. Since then, I've needed no maintanance or service calls, experienced no outages or loss of service, and haven't had to make a single payment to maintain the use of that antenna. So why is that antenna somehow considered to be more of a hassle than dealing with an arrogant cable company?

If you're typical, why don't more people do it? Do you really think it's strictly ignorance on the part of the consumer? Cable supplanted OTA for a reason. Satellite has challenged the supremacy of cable for a reason. People are not going back to OTA exclusively in droves just because they suddenly found out they could get a handful of channels for free. Sorry, but that ship has sailed.

Because this is where they can come for help.

I don't think you hear too much from folks who have no problems with OTA, so I think you are getting a distorted view if you're thinking because you see reports of reception problems here that everyone, or most have problems with it.

I'll stand by my belief that, for a great many people, OTA is just not as hassle-free as cable/satellite. You may believe otherwise.

People here on AVS hardly represent the typical TV viewer. I do believe AVSers use OTA at a higher percentage than the average household.

My impression would be the opposite. Most AVS users are people who want more technology and of course they would subscribe to cable and satellite more than someone who just watches TV every now and then.


The bigger reason may be that, as enthusiasts, AVSers just don't mind fiddling with an antenna. If OTA was such an easy option for most people, why are the local programming threads here filled with posts about reception problems? Most people (non-enthusiasts) just don't want the hassle of an antenna when they can plug a cable into the back of the TV and be done with it. This is especially true with roof or attic antennas. They may have been the norm in my parent's generation back in the 50's and 60's, but they will never by more than a niche market today IMO.

What fiddling???? What hassle???? This is what I did:

1. Called installer, got price and scheduled appointment.
2. Installer came, put antenna up, made adjustments and ran cable to TVs.
3. I watch perfect HDTV with no issues and better PQ than satellite.

How is that any more of a "hassle" than getting cable or dish installed? It is the mindset that antennas are somehow "old" and "don't work well" that causes people to miss the fact that digital TV has transformed them into a very viable alternative; one that for many people will satisfy their needs very well.

As D* and E* add HD locals, new subs will have even less of an incentive to install an antenna in the first place. If you are a cable sub, using an antenna makes even less sense when most systems include HD locals in their basic package.

This is true for the most part. However I personally wouldn't settle for the inferior picture quality and so even if I were a cable or satellite subscriber I would probably keep the antenna (not saying most people would do this).

The main point though, is that there are a lot of people out there that don't really need all the hundreds of cable channels. When they realize what they can get for free, for many it's tough to justify paying for cable or satellite.

If you're typical, why don't more people do it? Do you really think it's strictly ignorance on the part of the consumer? Cable supplanted OTA for a reason. Satellite has challenged the supremacy of cable for a reason. People are not going back to OTA exclusively in droves just because they suddenly found out they could get a handful of channels for free. Sorry, but that ship has sailed.


YES, it is ignorance on the part of the consumer! That is the whole point of this thread: "Suprise! People Are Interested in OTA HD When Told About It"

Why do people pay for something they can get for free..... let's see.....

convenience.

Using my wife as an example...
She wants to turn on the TV, look at the guide, decide what goes to DVR and what she'll watch now, click click click DONE! and now on to your regularly scheduled program.

She doesn't want to swing an antenna around to 207 degrees for *this* station and then to 165 degrees for *that* station. If she wants to channel surf a little, the satellite stations are all there and the antenna is stationary. She doesn't have to think about it.

The antenna is "my thing". She doesn't care about it.
"I can get that in HD for you"
"no thanks...this is fine"

So while I will keep my antenna and enjoy it, she's going to keep the locals on satellite and enjoy them as well. THAT is why we pay for things we can get for free. Convenience.

I can get tomatoes for free too. Minimal amount of work. But it's easier to just get them at the store. Even though we KNOW that the tomatoes I grow will taste better.

Convenience.

We pay for convenience every day.

People here on AVS hardly represent the typical TV viewer. I do believe AVSers use OTA at a higher percentage than the average household. That's a key point that escapes too many people.... We read the owner's manuals, not to mention research equipment before buying. We don't buy the cool-looking antenna that the Best Buy salesman "recommends". Can the average "Joe" say the same ??

My impression would be the opposite. Most AVS users are people who want more technology and of course they would subscribe to cable and satellite more than someone who just watches TV every now and then.

More people on AVS are using an antenna to supplement their satellite service, not OTA exclusively



What fiddling???? What hassle???? This is what I did:

1. Called installer, got price and scheduled appointment.
2. Installer came, put antenna up, made adjustments and ran cable to TVs.
3. I watch perfect HDTV with no issues and better PQ than satellite.

How is that any more of a "hassle" than getting cable or dish installed? It is the mindset that antennas are somehow "old" and "don't work well" that causes people to miss the fact that digital TV has transformed them into a very viable alternative; one that for many people will satisfy their needs very well.

I believe many people just won't install roof antennas. Indoor and attic antennas have a much greater chance with reception problems. Also, virtually every new house built (except in remote areas) has cable service installed along with phone and electical service. There is no additional installation.



This is true for the most part. However I personally wouldn't settle for the inferior picture quality and so even if I were a cable or satellite subscriber I would probably keep the antenna (not saying most people would do this).

The main point though, is that there are a lot of people out there that don't really need all the hundreds of cable channels. When they realize what they can get for free, for many it's tough to justify paying for cable or satellite.

Again, I believe people want more choices, not less, and most are willing to pay for the choices.

YES, it is ignorance on the part of the consumer! That is the whole point of this thread: "Suprise! People Are Interested in OTA HD When Told About It"

And when they get their shiny new HDTV home and realize all the additional HD channels they can get with cable/sat, I believe they'll be calling their cable/sat company. Remember, in the next few years, the number of HD cable/sat channels will explode. The number of HD OTA channels will remain virtually the same.

She wants to turn on the TV, look at the guide, decide what goes to DVR and what she'll watch now, click click click DONE! and now on to your regularly scheduled program.

I do this every day with OTA HD DVR.

She doesn't want to swing an antenna around to 207 degrees for *this* station and then to 165 degrees for *that* station. If she wants to channel surf a little, the satellite stations are all there and the antenna is stationary. She doesn't have to think about it.

My antenna is not being "swung around" to change channels. It is pointed at Cincinnati and I leave it there, receiving all the channels with no problem. If I feel like watching something in the Dayton market I may press the "B" button on the rotor to have it turn toward Dayton where I can then get all of the Dayton market channels (which would not even be available with cable or dish).

The antenna is "my thing". She doesn't care about it.
"I can get that in HD for you"
"no thanks...this is fine"

So while I will keep my antenna and enjoy it, she's going to keep the locals on satellite and enjoy them as well. THAT is why we pay for things we can get for free. Convenience.

In your case it appears to be more of a limitation of your DVR. You can't record in HD? I can and it costs me $0 a month.

I can get tomatoes for free too. Minimal amount of work. But it's easier to just get them at the store. Even though we KNOW that the tomatoes I grow will taste better.

What additional "work" am I doing to receive HD OTA?

Convenience.

We pay for convenience every day.

I'd say I have just as much "convenience" as you and I don't pay for it...

I believe many people just won't install roof antennas. Indoor and attic antennas have a much greater chance with reception problems. Also, virtually every new house built (except in remote areas) has cable service installed along with phone and electical service. There is no installation.

There is cable run to my house. I called about getting service a while back and even though the cable is there they still have to come out and "install" it.

Again, I believe people want more choices, not less, and most are willing to pay for the choices.

More choices or more channels?

My antenna set-up must be magic then... no issues here.
I've been a TV tech in a market that is UHF only (due to it's location between several major VHF markets) for 35+ years and UHF reception is truly "magic". The saying was that you can do everything right and get nothing or everything wrong and have perfect reception.

The problem is not helped by the antenna marketers pushing gimmick antennas rather than the best available. Coming from an exclusively UHF area, I would argue that the best indoor antenna is the double bow-tie, formerly offered by every antenna company, now only from Radio Shack as the 15-624 that is almost impossible to find. The best outdoor or attic versions are the 4 and 8 bow-tie grids. The ghost blocking abilities and broad reception beam along with high gain of these antennas make them ideal for ATSC. Amplification cannot be used if some stations are powerfull and some are weak.

With analog you had a visible symptom of ghosts or snow, with digital you don't. (ghosts have not been eliminated as advertised, just renamed as "multipath errors") So far no one has come up with a simple affordable tool to properly aim or set up antennas for ATSC reception.

More choices or more channels?

More channels equals more choices.

If you mean, using an antenna in addition to cable/sat gives you more viewing options, I believe most people won't take the extra step of installing an antenna when their cable/sat company gives them HD locals anyway. For those that already have an antenna and use satellite, their antenna can still give them better HD PQ and protect against rain fade. For new satellite subs, I don't think they'll see the antenna as giving them very much added benefit when HD PQ doesn't seem to be as important as the number of HD channels they receive.

As far as OTA exclusively as a choice, yes, maybe there are some that will try it. In a year or two, and cable/sat is offering 50-100 HD channels compared to their measly number OTA, they'll be back with cable/sat service. I don't believe most people will spend thousands on their HDTV and then limit their HD channels to just a few.

The biggest "I didn't know that" is not the OTA issue outlined in this thread but the availability of virtually the same via clear QAM on cable. As has been pointed out in a few posts people just don't want to hassle with an antenna (and they already have cable) but if they knew that they could get the locals in HD without an STB the number of people dropping "full" cable to the lifeline basic would be sizable.

And the only way the cable cos can slow such a possible trend would be a la carte programming. While a typical scenario is difficult to find I think when presented with the choice of paying $50+ for cable to get that one must have channel (and having to use an STB) vs $15 and getting "most" chs, many folks will drop the higher tier sub.

jimp2244,

First... I am not arguing with you. You have valid points. I am trying to remain sympathetic to my wife's way of thinking as I think she's far more of a "typical" TV viewer than I am.

You're right. My current DVR does not record HD. I can get the upgraded satellite DVR (VIP622) from E* and that will record OTA HD. My current understanding though, is that in order to see the channel listings on the guide (and therefore be able to set up DVR recording USING the guide), I have to subscribe to locals over satellite anyways.

re: swinging the antenna...
I have (basically) 4 tower groups to aim at. Oh I think I've found a "sweet spot" for the Buffalo locals by aiming a bit between the 2 tower groups that handle Buffalo locals (165 degrees for one group...mainly the abc, nbc, cbs stations...at 37 miles) and 207 degrees for the other group (mainly pbs, fox, and a couple more... and only 7 miles). So I could probably just "park" the antenna in that spot for the sake of convenience for most of our everyday viewing. If I swing around to 324 degrees I can grab Toronto (42 miles and basically shooting over the lake...should be easy) and if I aim 90 degrees I might be able to also get the Rochester stations. HOWEVER... let's say I have a sweet spot for Buffalo locals and really don't have to move the antenna on a daily basis. Other than the work I've put into installing the antenna... the work is pretty much done. UNLESS I want to put a rotor up there so I don't have to go up on the roof to turn the antenna.

Expense...
how much is a decent rotor? (I don't like to buy cheap junk....) A good one doesn't necessarily have to be the one that COSTS the most, but I won't install a cheap POS rotor. So... let's say a Channel Master CM9521A kit, with wire and remote.... about $75. That's in addition to the ... oh... about $125 I have now invested in the antenna, mast, wall mounts, grounding rod, grounding block, RG6. So with a rotor I'd have about $200 into the antenna setup and I've done all the installation myself.

Convenience....yeah we're back to that...
If I have to subscribe to locals over satellite ANYWAYS... just to be able to see my OTA listings in the guide (and, by the way, they often don't include all of the pbs stations)... where's the savings? Oh I know you could argue that I don't really need to use the guide, but that kinda tosses convenience out the window.

Again... I'm not arguing with YOUR logic as it applies to you. But all situations are different and what REALLY makes sense for some people may not necessarily make sense for others.

Really? Since I had my antenna installed last fall, I can't recall any incidents of stations "popping in or out." Reception has been perfect.

My antenna set-up must be magic then... no issues here.




No, not magic, it is just that you may be more of an exception.

Come visit our Jacksonville Local thread and you can read the number of issues people have faced trying to get OTA working. I'm not even talking about people who are at a distance. We have reports of people who can look out their windows and see the towers, and still have reception problems.

If you happen to be in an area where the digital station towers are grouped together, it is certainly possible for a "one position" setup to work. Not so if there isn't an "antenna farm". Putting up a rotor to redirect an antenna to a particular tower is not a very convenient option for some. That is especially annoying if you have set the DVR, but forgot to rotate the antenna.

Point is, you will get very different stories depending upon antenna locations, terrain, multipath issues, homeowner association restrictions [those, however are illegal], personal preference, or a host of other things.

OTA can be great, which is why I went through all the installation hassels, and continue to assist people with theirs. It is, however, not always the easiest option.

The problem is not helped by the antenna marketers pushing gimmick antennas rather than the best available. Coming from an exclusively UHF area, I would argue that the best indoor antenna is the double bow-tie, formerly offered by every antenna company, now only from Radio Shack as the 15-624 that is almost impossible to find. The best outdoor or attic versions are the 4 and 8 bow-tie grids. The ghost blocking abilities and broad reception beam along with high gain of these antennas make them ideal for ATSC. Amplification cannot be used if some stations are powerfull and some are weak.

Well, at least some of us are not bamboozled. Thank you for that zaphod7501. I could add: EXACTLY!

You know reading the last couple of posts is downright funny to me. I get an HD receiver, put an antenna right on top of it in my theater room (the antenna is about 15" high, 13" wide and 5" deep and as light as bar of soap), and have perfect reception of any broadcast channel in my area. No monthly fees, no calling cable companies, no stuffing envelopes with checks, no worries about service interruptions, no reception issues, and you guys are talking about the INCONVENIENCE?!!!

What world are you people living in? At the end of the week, I have about 25 hours of the highest quality programming ever known to man -- much more than I should even try to watch -- and you guys are talking about viewing CHOICES?!!!

I got an HD DVD player about 3 months ago -- have a stack of HD DVDs a foot and a half tall. Watched exactly 2 movies so far because I am so preoccupied with my HD TV -- I can tell you, I don't feel lacking in choices -- the choice I have been making is for the content that cost me the money of the receiver and DVHS and $15 antenna -- the HD DVDs I have cost more than that without the player.

You guys are funny.

More channels equals more choices.

If you mean, using an antenna in addition to cable/sat gives you more viewing options...

No, that's not what I meant. I probably could have worded that better. What I'm trying to say is that there are a lot of channels out there that I would never watch. in addition, there are a lot of channels that I would watch for one thing only. I would believe that is is somewhat reasonable to say that more channels just "spreads out" the quality and in-demand programming.


And the only way the cable cos can slow such a possible trend would be a la carte programming. While a typical scenario is difficult to find I think when presented with the choice of paying $50+ for cable to get that one must have channel (and having to use an STB) vs $15 and getting "most" chs, many folks will drop the higher tier sub.

And this really is the reason why I dropped cable last fall. At the end of last summer I decided to try and live with an indoor antenna only for a month. Soon that month turned into two and then I realized that I didn't feel like I was missing out on anything. In fact I was watching too much TV. At that point I called the antenna installer and had him put an antenna on my roof, not because I had any "problems" with the indoor antenna but because I wanted to receive the Dayton market stations as well.

I do agree that if a la carte offerings were there I would probably be subscribing to a few cable channels. But as it is, I am enjoying the HD DVR and plenty of programming for free, and I can't justify paying $52 a month for standard cable, let alone for the $100+ it would be required to get HD (beyond the broadcast networks) via cable.


As far as OTA exclusively as a choice, yes, maybe there are some that will try it. In a year or two, and cable/sat is offering 50-100 HD channels compared to their measly number OTA, they'll be back with cable/sat service. I don't believe most people will spend thousands on their HDTV and then limit their HD channels to just a few.

If I'm happy now, why wouldn't I be happy then? Those thousands I spent on my HDTV are being paid back to me in the form of savings from cable.

My current understanding though, is that in order to see the channel listings on the guide (and therefore be able to set up DVR recording USING the guide), I have to subscribe to locals over satellite anyways.

You may want to look into that. I am not sure because I have never had satellite (only cable), but I believe I have read that the HD DVRs will let you plug in an antenna for locals, and you will get the guide data. Again, you'll want to verify that.

I have a sweet spot for Buffalo locals and really don't have to move the antenna on a daily basis. Other than the work I've put into installing the antenna... the work is pretty much done. UNLESS I want to put a rotor up there so I don't have to go up on the roof to turn the antenna.

As you said, you don't need to rotate the antenna unless you want out of market stations, which wouldn't be available via dish or cable anyway.

about $200 into the antenna setup and I've done all the installation myself.

And that setup should last you 10-20 years if not more. That's $1.66 a month over 10 years, 80 cents over 20...

Convenience....yeah we're back to that...
If I have to subscribe to locals over satellite ANYWAYS... just to be able to see my OTA listings in the guide (and, by the way, they often don't include all of the pbs stations)... where's the savings? Oh I know you could argue that I don't really need to use the guide, but that kinda tosses convenience out the window.

Oh, no, you should use the guide. As I said above I think you can get the locals to show up in your guide via antenna. Also, my TV has TVGuide OnScreen (TVGOS) which shows listings for all of the channels I receive. My HD DVR includes listings for all the channels as well...

Again... I'm not arguing with YOUR logic as it applies to you. But all situations are different and what REALLY makes sense for some people may not necessarily make sense for others.

100% agree. I just think people should be aware of all the options and possibilities before they make a decision.

Maybe it will be instructive to list what I watch every week -- absolutely NO CABLE -- NEVER EVER HAD IT:

IFL Battleground, 60 Minutes, Simpsons, King of Queens, CSI MIAMI, Heroes, 24, American Idol, House, NICS, The Unit, Without a Trace, Veronica Mars, Bones, Jericho, Criminal Intent, CSI NY, Crossing Jordan, Medium, Lost, Survivor, CSI, Ugly Betty, Grey's Anatomy, Earl, The Office, Scrubs, ER, Smallville, Supernatural, Ghost Whisperer, Close to Home, Numb3rs plus EVERY Tonight Show and Conan and often Letterman.

Does that help bring it into focus? (that I am woefully addicted, I mean?.....)

Oh, and in football season, about 4 HD games per week.

Maybe it will be instructive to list what I watch every week -- absolutely NO CABLE -- NEVER EVER HAD IT:

Sorry, but you are the exception. If people didn't want more channel choices, most people would still be using an antenna for all of their TV viewing.

The fact is, cable replaced OTA for most people long ago. Whether it was because they wanted more channel choices, or reception problems, or for whatever other reason, there's no going back to the days when most people rely solely on an antenna for all of their TV programming, as existed in the dawn of the TV era.

What's funny to me is when people extrapolate their individual choices to the population at large and can't understand why others may feel differently.

jimp2244-

Thanks... I'll look more into that thing about needing to subscribe to satellite locals in order to use the guide. It's possible I misunderstood something.

Emaych-

I envy the ease with which you are getting local HD OTA. However I live in a rural area and while the PBS towers are only 7 miles from me, the major networks are 37 miles away. I am having to work a little to get them. This isn't a huge deal. I have locals on satellite. But they aren't HD and I *want* HD if I can get it. If it takes a little work figuring out what works best, that's ok with me. I'm having fun with this. And if all we watched was the abc, cbs, nbc stuff then this would be a no brainer and I'd drop satellite in a heartbeat and just get the locals OTA. It *does* work and I know that once I get done fiddling with it, it won't take much to keep it working. However we area admittedly spoiled and we watch HGTV, MSG, VS, Discovery, National Geographic, History Channel, and ...well you get the idea.

So while what you do is working very well for you (congratulations, by the way), it doesn't work for me. :)

100% agree. I just think people should be aware of all the options and possibilities before they make a decision.

I also agree wholeheartedly. I just disagree with the argument (not necessarily yours) that once people realize they can get some of their HD for free OTA, that there will a significant dropoff in cable/sat service. As biker19 says, maybe more will use their QAM tuner and bypass the cable box, but not dropping cable/sat service in place of an antenna.

Well, sorry folks are not getting good reception -- that was the big IF when I got all this HD stuff as I never really had any intention of getting cable, but it worked out for me.

As for cable viewing, I do all that at work -- love all the true murder stuff, Cold Case Files, City Confidential -- just excellent always. Regular viewer of O'Reilly and Oberman and Ultimate Fighting, sometimes PUNKED, American Chopper -- some VH1 and Daily Show sometimes.

...You know reading the last couple of posts is downright funny to me. I get an HD receiver, put an antenna right on top of it in my theater room (the antenna is about 15" high, 13" wide and 5" deep and as light as bar of soap), and have perfect reception of any broadcast channel in my area. No monthly fees, no calling cable companies, no stuffing envelopes with checks, no worries about service interruptions, no reception issues, and you guys are talking about the INCONVENIENCE?!!!

...

Again, you happen to be one of the people where conditions are right.

I live 20 miles from the towers. Indoor antennas do not work. I have tried many of them. Non-powered, powered, etc. No go.

We also happen to have a wonderful condition here where two of the locals are in the VHF band which complicates things even more.

I'm am sincerely happy that your experience was so easy. It isn't that way for everybody.

Again, you happen to be one of the people where conditions are right.

I think that this would be more accurately stated that you happen to be one of the people where conditions are "not right." However, this is probably not accurate either as I think with a proper antenna installation, you would have no trouble receiving your local OTA digital channels.

I live 20 miles from the towers. Indoor antennas do not work. I have tried many of them. Non-powered, powered, etc. No go.

Broadcast (OTA) television was not designed for indoor antennas.

We also happen to have a wonderful condition here where two of the locals are in the VHF band which complicates things even more.

There is nothing wrong with the VHF band...

I'm am sincerely happy that your experience was so easy. It isn't that way for everybody.

If you try an indoor antenna and don't get satisfactory results, I would suggest calling a professional for installation. As I mentioned earlier, it's a pretty simple process to get OTA HD:

1. Call an installer, get price quote, set appointment date.
2. Installer comes out, mounts antenna, makes adjustments, verifies satisfactory reception.
3. Enjoy free HDTV.

If you want to do the installation yourself, you certainly can. However, as with any DIY project you'll need to understand that there will be research, time and effort involved, and it may not provide the same results as having it done professionally.

I'm not denying that there are some cases where people live very far away from a city, or live in a very poor reception area. However, for the majority of people, done right, OTA DTV reception is not only possible, but should be just as easy as cable or satellite installation.

You know, another thing occurs to me too. With the reciever I have and being new to it as I was, you cannot program in a digital channel you want to recieve as there is no accomodation for "-1" as in 10-1, it has to be picked up when the reciever auto searches to add channels.

It took me awhile to figure out where to point the antenna during this process to get the results I was looking for -- until that time, I assumed I was out of the broadcast zone on those stations. Even a quarter inch difference might be critical to reception at a given time, but since I have 4 receivers, I just keep the antenna in the same spot for the station I record with that one (they mostly get every other station too in that same position, but I don't rely upon that because that can be variable).

I understand why OTA HD was below the radar for a long time. After all, only in the past year or two have built in OTA HD tuners became the rule rather than the exception in HDTVs. My 2003 model RCA DLP HDTV included one but most sets of that vintage did not.

As others have noted, OTA HD antennas have been getting better rapidly. OTA HD reception via rabbit ears is very dicey on my RCA, although I am less than five miles from most of the local stations’ antennas.

In January, I bought a TiVo Series3 HD DVR, with two integrated QAM tuners, which will receive either cable or OTA HD channels. The Series3's modern tuners easily receive every local OTA HD channel and I watch them a lot – something I did not do when I had to rely on my RCA’s tuner because it was just too hard and I could not record them.

In reference to what someone said earlier, about people thinking they were watching HD, when it was just a stretched picture.

I have a friend, lets say his name is Roger. Well Roger is one of these guys who knows everything about anything. He bought a Dell Plasma (for a lot more money than he should have)...well he hooked it up, and Roger, who among his many drawbacks is a huge Cowboys fan, wants me to come over, and admire his new Television.

So naturally he has it on stretch-o-rama, and starts telling me how wonderful the pciture is, and how this is the best television according to www.iknoweverything.com, well after about 30 minutes I decide its my duty to inform him that we are not watching HD....to which of course he told me I was wrong, because the television has a sticker on it that clearly says "HDTV".

Roger came to my house later that day, to watch a Jets game, on my dlp....Roger went to Radio Shack that monday, and bought himself an antenna.

LOL... roger that!

I think that this would be more accurately stated that you happen to be one of the people where conditions are "not right." However, this is probably not accurate either as I think with a proper antenna installation, you would have no trouble receiving your local OTA digital channels.

I do receive OTA. I went through the trouble of installing an antenna and aiming it correctly. Actually, anyone with the time can do this as a DIY by going to antennaweb.org and getting the aiming co-ordinates

Broadcast (OTA) television was not designed for indoor antennas.

Nothing wrong with indoor antennas if conditions are right. Read the previous post from someone who just plunked one onto the top of his set and got everything the first time.


There is nothing wrong with the VHF band...

Never said there was. The complication here in Jacksonville is that some people buy "HDTV" antennas that are UHF only, then don't understand why they can't get our NBC (13.1) or ABC (10.1).

If you want to do the installation yourself, you certainly can. However, as with any DIY project you'll need to understand that there will be research, time and effort involved, and it may not provide the same results as having it done professionally.

Agreed. It is a doable DIY, you just have to have the time and patience to do it. If not, a professional install is the better route.

I'm not denying that there are some cases where people live very far away from a city, or live in a very poor reception area. However, for the majority of people, done right, OTA DTV reception is not only possible, but should be just as easy as cable or satellite installation.[/QUOTE]

In general, true.

Broadcast (OTA) television was not designed for indoor antennas. I can't speak from personal experience, but haven't indoor antennas been around for 40-50 years ??

Broadcast (OTA) television was not designed for indoor antennas.


Correct for analog for as long as it's been around, and correct for DTV In U.S. It was designed(not so much designed but "spec'd for" really) with directional antennas, properly aimed, with approx 10db gain and about 20db F/B ratio(on UHF, I don't recall the FCC planning factors for VHF antenna gain), mounted 30FT above ground in mind.

That doesn't mean indoor antenna won't work in many circumstances however, especially given the hi-power levels broadcast TV/DTV stations operate with.

I think one of the biggest thing to keep in mind when using an indoor antenna is that *everything* near the antenna becomes "connected to it" and becomes, effectively a part of the antenna/antenna's design, including "YOU" when your adjusting it .....

Attics are often multipath(and sometimes "interference" nightmares, especially on VHF) nightmares. And Best(again best, doesn't mean it won't work if you don't follow these rules) to keep anything in "front" of directional antenna 10 wavelengths away for the lowest frequency you're going to receive with that antenna ... Spacing can be less for best results behind or in back of it ....

In first portion of text at below link there's a simple list of "rules of thumb" for this sort of thing, and info on why having antenna indoors or attic isn't best --- Note: I meant that with emphasis on "best", that's true for anything "wireless" other than applications that are say, confined to line of sight within a single room/anything that uses an antenna really, not just OTA TV/DTV .... :

Attic Antenna's Why Not? (http://www.kyes.com/antenna/stacking.html)

Also see the section "you have to get the rabbit ears away from interference" beginning about 1/2 way down the page, here :

http://www.kyes.com/antenna/rabbitear.html

We all are.. we watch HDTV! :)


Yes, even though I watch an average of three hours of cable a week (less during the summer), I still pay my $100+ bill every month.

And I thought I was bad, for watching ZERO hours of Cable each month, and paying $17.00 for it :) .

I can't speak from personal experience, but haven't indoor antennas been around for 40-50 years ??

Yes - but that doesn't mean the broadcast system was designed for them, just that in many cases they are an acceptable replacement for a roof-top (or at a pinch "in-roof") aerial/antenna.

Correct for analog for as long as it's been around, and correct for DTV In U.S. It was designed(not so much designed but "spec'd for" really) with directional antennas, properly aimed, with approx 10db gain and about 20db F/B ratio(on UHF, I don't recall the FCC planning factors for VHF antenna gain), mounted 30FT above ground in mind.

That doesn't mean indoor antenna won't work in many circumstances however, especially given the hi-power levels broadcast TV/DTV stations operate with.

I think one of the biggest thing to keep in mind when using an indoor antenna is that *everything* near the antenna becomes "connected to it" and becomes, effectively a part of the antenna/antenna's design, including "YOU" when your adjusting it .....

Attics are often multipath(and sometimes "interference" nightmares, especially on VHF) nightmares. And Best(again best, doesn't mean it won't work if you don't follow these rules) to keep anything in "front" of directional antenna 10 wavelengths away for the lowest frequency you're going to receive with that antenna ... Spacing can be less for best results behind or in back of it ....

In first portion of text at below link there's a simple list of "rules of thumb" for this sort of thing, and info on why having antenna indoors or attic isn't best --- Note: I meant that with emphasis on "best", that's true for anything "wireless" other than applications that are say, confined to line of sight within a single room/anything that uses an antenna really, not just OTA TV/DTV .... :

Attic Antenna's Why Not? (http://www.kyes.com/antenna/stacking.html)

Also see the section "you have to get the rabbit ears away from interference" beginning about 1/2 way down the page, here :

http://www.kyes.com/antenna/rabbitear.html

I often wonder if the success of the UK OTA digital system (now the most popular digital TV system in the UK - it has crept ahead of digital satellite and is massively ahead of digital cable - cable has never been massively popular in the UK) is because we have historically had rooftop aerials, pointing at a single transmitter site which radiates all the network stations, all of which are in the UHF band (and usually grouped quite close together so an optimised aerial/antenna can be used).

Indoor aerials/antennae have never been dominant for "main TV" viewing - and all new houses come with a reasonable UHF rooftop aerial/antenna, with flats/apartments usually having an aerial distribution system. I think this may be why OTA digital has been relatively painless to install for a large number of people - they just plug it into their antenna/aerial socket and it works - no messing around with rabbit ears or UHF loops - even Silver Sensors aren't that common.

Of course we're a tiny island with reasonably favourable geography, and a very tightly planned network (rather than local station) based 4+1 analogue network system (covering very nearly all of the UK population) and a 6 multiplex nationally networked digital system.

- and all new houses come with a reasonable UHF rooftop aerial/antenna, with flats/apartments usually having an aerial distribution system.


I was wondering about that, given when I see video of rooftops in U.K, they just about all have UHF antenna on them ...

Is it the case when someone wants/needs to replace their "old" aerial, it's relatively easy to find a experienced and "OTA knowedgable" antenna installer?

If so, I'm not so sure that is the case over here, currently, and even historically I think many folks who do use OTA in U.S. have went the DIY route when it comes to installing outdoor antenna ...



I think this may be why OTA digital has been relatively painless to install for a large number of people - they just plug it into their antenna/aerial socket and it works -


That's exactly how it worked for me over here as well, as I had been using Outdoor directional antenna for analog OTA reception for decades already, albeit via antenna setup I installed myself ...

Update/addition more details :

It was 23 analogs+ 4 digital/HD local stations I received when I first started watching OTA DTV in 2001, now it's up to 15 DTV stations(all the full service stations are on air with DTV), 14 of which Have HD, and several of the LP stations have construction permits for DTV (flash cut or digital companion channels) or are working on it ...

With the exception of a couple of LP stations and a TBN affiliate, stations I receive from one market (12~14 miles distant - 41~43 degree azimuth from my location) all transmit from same "antenna farm" ... different towers in some cases, but they're a "stone's throw" away from each other, pretty much ... All the digitals in that market are UHF(spread out between channel 18~58), and looks like that's going to be the case post-transistion as well, except it will be between ch 16~51.

Stations in another market(27~39 miles distant, ironically the "market" I'm supposed to be "in') are a little more spread out transmitting locations, but all are within 188~193degree azimuth bearing from my location. Except for one of those on HI-VHF band currently, the rest of the digitals in that market are between UHF channel 24 and 35, all but one(on 24) between channel 28 and 35. The way it looks right now, there will be one more on Hi-VHF post transistion, as it will be moving from UHF to it's current analog allocation.

I do have a rotor on my "main" antenna setup, but I also added a 2nd, seperate UHF only antenna setup several years ago on seperate feedline(with A/B switch before receiver(s) for the digital stations in the market that is 12~14 miles distant -- This is more convienient than using a rotor for those stations, and keeps from "distrubing" other family members watching TV in other rooms(I distribute the feeds from the antennas to multiple devices in 4 different rooms) ....

So, nowadays, I use the rotor quite rarely, mainly just for "dx'ing" when conditions allow .....

It probably sounds/seems like I'm probably getting a lot of duplicate programming from network affilates in different markets -- That's true, But, generally(and currently including several LP analogs that haven't went digital yet - a couple of which have "actual" programming, not Home shopping or infomericals) --- it works out to about 30 different programming choices OTA for me, a little less during prime time a little more at other times .... Right now, with the SD multicasting many stations are doing, it's a total 40 digital services(subchannels) from those 15 digital stations currently .... But not necessarily quite 40 "channels" at all times ... For instance, just looking at the PBS stations I recieve :

There are 4 PBS "member stations" I recieve, one which runs as many as 6 SD multicast services during the day, and they run selected HD programming in Prime time off a server which is transcoded to 720p for broadcast along with 2 SD multicast services ... Another PBS station runs PBS HD channel 24/7+1 SD service(but shuts their transmitter down 3 nights a week between 1am~6am). Another PBS station runs PBS HD channel 6pm~6am(4 SD services 6am~6pm), another PBS station runs HD off a server 6pm~8pm and has 4 SD services the rest of the time .... A couple of the SD services are "duplicated" some of the time(such as with national PBS feed, and two stations have "create"), but for the most part they are different programming, 2 of the stations are 'sister stations'(1 in each market, but both are generally carried on cable in both markets) operated by the same organization ... It's as many as 16 channels of programming just from the PBS stations .... And one of those services BTW is often running BBC world or DW "journal" News programming ...

It may be a bit unusual in U.S. that the transmitter locations(and in general 1,000FT towers) for two markets (Cincinnati+Dayton markets) are located (roughly) about 40 miles apart, and that the coverage area for most stations in both markets actually covers the metro areas of both cities and the majority of the population in both markets .....

I will get some arguments, but it seems like we (Americans) tend to adopt solutions that are more marketplace driven than engineering driven, and as such, my bet is that CODFM is superior to 8VSB in every way except price. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Wrong.

In reference to what someone said earlier, about people thinking they were watching HD, when it was just a stretched picture.

I have a friend, lets say his name is Roger. Well Roger is one of these guys who knows everything about anything. He bought a Dell Plasma (for a lot more money than he should have)...well he hooked it up, and Roger, who among his many drawbacks is a huge Cowboys fan, wants me to come over, and admire his new Television.

So naturally he has it on stretch-o-rama, and starts telling me how wonderful the pciture is, and how this is the best television according to www.iknoweverything.com, well after about 30 minutes I decide its my duty to inform him that we are not watching HD....to which of course he told me I was wrong, because the television has a sticker on it that clearly says "HDTV".

Roger came to my house later that day, to watch a Jets game, on my dlp....Roger went to Radio Shack that monday, and bought himself an antenna.

Your friend "Roger' doesn't happen to have the last name of Workman, does he?.... :eek:

Originally Posted by posg
I will get some arguments, but it seems like we (Americans) tend to adopt solutions that are more marketplace driven than engineering driven, and as such, my bet is that CODFM is superior to 8VSB in every way except price. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


Wrong.

COFDM is perfect for folks who enjoy impulse interference.

COFDM is perfect for folks who enjoy impulse interference.

Though to be honest - this is less of an issue with a decent directional rooftop aerial. It is more of an issue with interior set-top aerials, with a more omnidirectional characteristic, closer to sources of impulse interference (like poorly suppressed electrical equipment)

COFDM does have advantages in multi-path situations - particularly the 8k variant (BBC HD trial is 24Mbs 8k 64QAM and seems to be as robust as 18Mbs 2k 16QAM) - and it can support SFN or SFN-style on-channel fill-ins and repeaters.

With analog you had a visible symptom of ghosts or snow, with digital you don't. (ghosts have not been eliminated as advertised, just renamed as "multipath errors") So far no one has come up with a simple affordable tool to properly aim or set up antennas for ATSC reception.

Do most US ATSC receivers give an indication of corrected and uncorrected errors on their diagnostic screens? My cheap COFDM set-top box (a Pace DTVA) does - and it is quite useful in optimising aerial orientation. I normally align it halfway between the two positions at which errors start to creep in.

All the ATSC receivers I've seen only give a confusing if not misleading indication of "signal strength" which should really be called "signal quality".

My radio shack accurian has an SNR reading in addition to the meter. It also has an error light like my PCI tuner card that can help when pointing, the dumb thing is its on the system board and I have to look into a ventilation slot to see it.

COFDM is perfect for folks who enjoy impulse interference.Which is why the world has embraced 8VSB.

Why is anyone still arguing over the modulation picked for ATSC?

TV stations have themselves to blame (if they even care) that no one knows about digital OTA. I hear a lot more about HD radio than digital OTA tv.

Which is why the world has embraced 8VSB.

Which is why Europe is the world's leader in OTA HDTV broadcasting? :p

I hear a lot more about HD radio than digital OTA tv. You know, that's very true (around here). I have a feeling that it's "easier" too, by using, for example, your car's existing antenna.

Which is why Europe is the world's leader in OTA HDTV broadcasting? :pI guess the rest of the world doesn't count. :rolleyes:
Why is anyone still arguing over the modulation picked for ATSC?It's a moot point all right, but some think the mere mention of another modulation scheme is blasphemy. We all know each system's strength and weakness, but I guess speculating how another system would do under the dynamic multipath conditions described earlier is more than some can handle. The fact is that 8VSB is here to stay and it's gotten much better, but it still creates problems for some OTA viewers.

You know, that's very true (around here). I have a feeling that it's "easier" too, by using, for example, your car's existing antenna.
Not sure what that last part means, but sounds like the message is not getting out that you could in fact use that car antenna, or a coathanger, or a $15 radio shack antenna (for the absolute best results), and be recieving HD tonight with an HD reciever of course.

I have a feeling that it's "easier" too, by using, for example, your car's existing antenna.


I dunno. I pick up a couple of the DTV stations in the area just fine with simple indoor antenna placed haphazardly near the TV, and most of the stations in the area with simple indoor antenna placed in 2nd story window facing the towers.

With HD radio it's much the same at present but in some cases for different reasons :

I can also pick up just a couple of the stations with simple indoor antenna hapazardly placed, but require a outdoor, horizontally polarized directional FM antennna with a bit of gain on FM broadcast band to pick up the rest - some of them even require quite precise aiming to benefit from antenna gain's, and/or as well it seems regarding rejection of signals off back/rear of antenna from strong adjacent channel analog signals. A outdoor, longwire antenna also helps greatly regarding the AM band signals ...

But, I think you bring up a good point about the "easier"+the car antenna .... right along the lines of what I was trying to say when I asked sneals2000 about the "antenna installer" options in U.K. ---- and that is, unlike is the case with cable or satellite, I don't think knowlegable OTA TV antenna installers which should be able to make it "easier" for folks to get OTA TV are either widely advertised, or well known by the "masses" AFAIK in U.S. .....

Though to be honest - this is less of an issue with a decent directional rooftop aerial. It is more of an issue with interior set-top aerials, with a more omnidirectional characteristic, closer to sources of impulse interference (like poorly suppressed electrical equipment)

COFDM does have advantages in multi-path situations - particularly the 8k variant (BBC HD trial is 24Mbs 8k 64QAM and seems to be as robust as 18Mbs 2k 16QAM) - and it can support SFN or SFN-style on-channel fill-ins and repeaters.

How can you say that?. Did you compare DVB-T to ATSC or you just believe DVB camp propaganda. Also you yourself mention rooftop antenna. Most people that complain about ATSC reception, expect miracles with indoor reception. Where I live, I have big oak trees, leaves and hills yet I get perfect ATSC reception using my rooftop antenna. I receive stations 50 miles away no problem.

Analog signal on the other hand is almost impossible to watch. Most stations I receive have (no joke here) quadruple ghosts, yet again they come in perfect in digital. I am not even talking latest tuners here. I still have Samsung T165 which was second generation and reception is fine on it too.

BTW, ATSC has provision for SFN, but it is not used here as TV is set up totally different here than in UK or Europe.

I guess the rest of the world doesn't count. :rolleyes:
It's a moot point all right, but some think the mere mention of another modulation scheme is blasphemy. We all know each system's strength and weakness, but I guess speculating how another system would do under the dynamic multipath conditions described earlier is more than some can handle. The fact is that 8VSB is here to stay and it's gotten much better, but it still creates problems for some OTA viewers.

Another fact is there is little interest in 8VSB elsewhere. The deciding factor had probably as much to do with the station model of using satellite transmitters as it did with reception factors. It also facilitates mobile TV. A-VSB can also do that, but at a high cost of reducing the HD bitrate.

Problems create opportunities, and Qualcomm is trying to create a mobile TV service separate from the broadcasters. While it's too early to call it a success, at least it won't be stealing precious bits from our HD. Time will tell if people want to pay for this service.

Rest of the world does not use DVB-T. ATSC has been adopted besides US in Canada, Mexico, South Korea. Number of TV households in just those four countries surpasses TV households in almost all of Europe. Also Argentina and recently Honduras picked ATSC, and looks like Chile will also. DVB is crying foul because they do not have the biggest market and it means making billions of dollars less. COFDM is not even so called "European technology". It was actually invented in US by Bell Labs in the 1960's.

Also Japan uses ISDB-T which is based on COFDM but totally incompatible with DVB-T.
They only use 16QAM which limits data rate to about 17Mbps, because they found that higher rate is very hard to receive. Brazil just recentely adopted ISDB-T. It was purely political decision as Japanese promised to invest more money there than ATSC or DVB.

Mentioning COFDM is not blasphemy, but making blanket unfounded statements that it would fix reception problems with ATSC is not acceptable, because it is simply not true. Both systems have strengths and weaknesses.

You know, that's very true (around here). I have a feeling that it's "easier" too, by using, for example, your car's existing antenna.


The radio world is different though. Terrestrial radio stations are fighting satellite radio as competition. Terrestrial TV stations who are carried by cable and satellite don't generally fight them (for various reasons). Some terrestrial TV stations might even wish they didn't have to "deal with" their broadcast towers and equipment, as evident in our local Cincinnati thread when a local engineer called his tower a "large lightening rod." I'll leave his name out of this because I don't want to offend him, especially as this comment was made last year and in more recent times it seems that he and his station of made an effort to provide better digital service (fixing issues, etc.) although I'm still not sure if thoughts on OTA remain the same.

Heck we could take all the money for the large Lightning Rod whoops.. large transmitter tower and use it to buy another flexicoder which would allow us to have double the bandwidth.. then we could multiplex even more.. hehe

I'd imagine that feeling exists in many other places as well. It upsets me particularly because I rely on OTA for all of my viewing now, but I do believe that people are coming around as evidenced by this thread.

Mentioning COFDM is not blasphemy, but making blanket unfounded statements that it would fix reception problems with ATSC is not acceptable, because it is simply not true. Both systems have strengths and weaknesses.The case mentioned earlier was likely an extreme case. I don't see how speculating whether COFDM under those conditions might work better is a blanket statement that it would fix all reception problems. I have two 5th generation receivers and both usually do well with a Spectrum LP49-DTV indoor antenna (I like it better than the Silver Sensor I had).

One limitation for OTA I think we can all agree on is MPEG 2. If MPEG 4 streams were provided by the stations to cable and sat, it could be that their PQ could exceed OTA and would be worth paying for. Until then it's free OTA for me.

jimp2244,

First... I am not arguing with you. You have valid points. I am trying to remain sympathetic to my wife's way of thinking as I think she's far more of a "typical" TV viewer than I am.

You're right. My current DVR does not record HD. I can get the upgraded satellite DVR (VIP622) from E* and that will record OTA HD. My current understanding though, is that in order to see the channel listings on the guide (and therefore be able to set up DVR recording USING the guide), I have to subscribe to locals over satellite anyways.
re: swinging the antenna...
I have (basically) 4 tower groups to aim at. Oh I think I've found a "sweet spot" for the Buffalo locals by aiming a bit between the 2 tower groups that handle Buffalo locals (165 degrees for one group...mainly the abc, nbc, cbs stations...at 37 miles) and 207 degrees for the other group (mainly pbs, fox, and a couple more... and only 7 miles). So I could probably just "park" the antenna in that spot for the sake of convenience for most of our everyday viewing. If I swing around to 324 degrees I can grab Toronto (42 miles and basically shooting over the lake...should be easy) and if I aim 90 degrees I might be able to also get the Rochester stations. HOWEVER... let's say I have a sweet spot for Buffalo locals and really don't have to move the antenna on a daily basis. Other than the work I've put into installing the antenna... the work is pretty much done. UNLESS I want to put a rotor up there so I don't have to go up on the roof to turn the antenna.

Expense...
how much is a decent rotor? (I don't like to buy cheap junk....) A good one doesn't necessarily have to be the one that COSTS the most, but I won't install a cheap POS rotor. So... let's say a Channel Master CM9521A kit, with wire and remote.... about $75. That's in addition to the ... oh... about $125 I have now invested in the antenna, mast, wall mounts, grounding rod, grounding block, RG6. So with a rotor I'd have about $200 into the antenna setup and I've done all the installation myself.

Convenience....yeah we're back to that...
If I have to subscribe to locals over satellite ANYWAYS... just to be able to see my OTA listings in the guide (and, by the way, they often don't include all of the pbs stations)... where's the savings? Oh I know you could argue that I don't really need to use the guide, but that kinda tosses convenience out the window.

Again... I'm not arguing with YOUR logic as it applies to you. But all situations are different and what REALLY makes sense for some people may not necessarily make sense for others.

Yes, to get the local guide info for OTA, you must be subscribed to the locals through E*. And that includes OTA guide info for stations outside of the market you receive from E*.


I'm a page too late, but I was going to add that I have both E* and OTA HD. I couldn't go without either. I have content I watch on E*-provided channels that I wouldn't want to give up, but I also want to extra tuner added by the OTA HD (plus I wouldn't be getting the locals in HD otherwise). I could never go strictly OTA, and it has nothing to do with convenience.

As far as the argument of whether OTA is possible for almost everyone and whether it is a hassle or not, I will say that I think most everyone can receive it with a little effort. About 18-24 months ago I posted in the HDTV hardware thread saying that I couldn't receive OTA stations. I am about 40 miles from my locals towers with hills and trees causing problems (and a wife that refused to look at an antenna on the house). After reading a lot, I was able to install an antenna in the attic and receive every station that broadcasts in full power without dropouts. Based on this I believe that most people who claim problems just haven't spent the time trying different hardware and/or solutions.

However, I do agree that there are strange instances that make up that small couple percent where someone just can't get reception no matter what. My brother actually lives 10 miles closer than I do to our towers. He had a professional installation done, including a 50ft tower. The installer he used is very knowledgeable but couldn't get a decent reception no matter what he tried. We never could figure out what the problem is (maybe positioning wrt the hills present between us and the towers). His conditions are similar to mine, and he was using a tower and outside antenna.

How can you say that?. Did you compare DVB-T to ATSC or you just believe DVB camp propaganda. Also you yourself mention rooftop antenna. Most people that complain about ATSC reception, expect miracles with indoor reception. Where I live, I have big oak trees, leaves and hills yet I get perfect ATSC reception using my rooftop antenna. I receive stations 50 miles away no problem.



Not sure what you are getting at - I wasn't advocating COFDM over 8VSB - just answering that impulse interference, which causes COFDM problems, is less of an issue with directional rooftop aerials than it is with more omnidirectional set top aerials. Over here in the UK rooftop aerials are pretty universal on most houses - so impulse interference is less of an issue than it would be if set-top aerials were widespread.



BTW, ATSC has provision for SFN, but it is not used here as TV is set up totally different here than in UK or Europe.

Yep - SFNs aren't in use for DVB-T in the UK either (yet) - because we launched early with the 2k system which is less well suited. However as digital switchover happens we will be moving to 8k, which will allow SFN to be used for fill-ins "on channel" - though whether this is done is yet to be seen. Other countries, like Germany, are successfully using 8k SFNs (Berlin has a number of on-channel transmitters AIUI)

(We are SFN for our national COFDM Band III DAB digital radio services)

I'm not advocating 8VSB vs COFDM - just stressing the differences between broadcast environments across the world, and how different solutions work. The UK having a widespread roof-top aerial infrastructure and adopting COFDM DVB-T has been relatively popular. If you look at the percentage of OTA digital households - it is pretty high - though in absolute terms we are tiny in comparison to the US.

Rest of the world does not use DVB-T.



There is no single world standard, just as there wasn't a single composite RF standard.

There were NTSC territories, there were PAL territories and there were SECAM territories. Some areas used positive vision modulation, some negative, some used AM sound, some FM, some added analogue stereo, some NICAM 728kbps digital stereo.

Now in the digital domain, there is 8VSB ATSC, COFDM DVB-T, COFDM ISDB-T and whatever the Chinese chose. 8VSB is proving popular in the Americas - where 6MHz system M (and N) systems were popular. DVB-T is proving popular in Europe/Aus where 7/8MHz systems B/G/D/K/I were popular. ISDB-T is available in Japan ... Well because it's Japan!

Plus ca change...

Why is anyone still arguing over the modulation picked for ATSC?

TV stations have themselves to blame (if they even care) that no one knows about digital OTA. I hear a lot more about HD radio than digital OTA tv.

Over here - most of the main networks joined to create a marketing organisation for OTA digital "Freeview" - and the BBC has trailed their digital satellite, cable and Freeview services pretty extensively on-air. This must have driven market awareness of digital TV - and the ways to receive it.

There are currently public-service films running like commercials in peak-time advertising the fact that analogue will be switched off between now and 2012 - and that viewers need to move to digital if they haven't already.

The first main analogue switch-off happens this year in the UK - graphics are going to be burned into analogue services warning people of the changes soon AIUI.

I'm confused as to why you're even paying for LIL? OTA picture quality is better and it doesn't go out in the rain. Maybe I'm missing some hidden benefit of LIL???


Can you say "DVR" ? I knew you could....

Can you say "DVR" ? I knew you could....

Yes, I can say DVR. I have HD DVR which can record over 80 hours of HD content in its native mpeg2 format with no loss of quality. I'm not paying for LIL, not paying for satellite, and not paying for TV listings. I pay $0 a month for TV. Explain to me again why I'd want to pay for this?

Many people are not as lucky as you and are not able to pick up an OTA signal because they may not live close enough to the transmitter, they may live behind a mountain or in a valley. They may live in an apartment or condo that it just isn't practical to install an OTA antenna. Or their spouse will not allow an "ugly" antenna.

Need any more explaination?

Many people are not as lucky as you and are not able to pick up an OTA signal because they may not live close enough to the transmitter, they may live behind a mountain or in a valley. They may live in an apartment or condo that it just isn't practical to install an OTA antenna. Or their spouse will not allow an "ugly" antenna.

Need any more explaination?
Don't know about reception blockages because I have not experienced that, so that is my point of reference -- they do not exist for me. As to impractical antenna installation disallowing OTA -- if I only lived in my bathroom or closet, "installation" would still pose no difficulty since I use a completely indoor antenna about 15 inches high and two inches deep. As to its being ugly, some of them I have slipped a black pillowcase over, whereupon they merge invisibly into the black fabric covered walls of the theater room -- can't even see where they are.

Good for you. Consider yourself lucky. I run into people all of the time fighting for a spot to put an antenna even though I personally have no problems with it.

So lets just not tell anyone about the benefits of OTA...

By the way, you don't have to be "lucky" to be able to get OTA. You have to be unlucky to not be able to get it.

Good for you. Consider yourself lucky. I run into people all of the time fighting for a spot to put an antenna even though I personally have no problems with it.

When it comes to apartments, no doubt about it...low signal and multipath are problems. Do you think the latter will be a lot easier to deal with when the 6th gen tuners flood the market this summer through next year?

Granted, if you are in an apartment 30 miles from a transmitter or more, you will have major problems, in general. But, within 30 miles and in mobile homes, townhomes and stand-alone houses, you should be good to go. And that
includes the vast majority of people in the U.S.

So lets just not tell anyone about the benefits of OTA...

I do every chance I get and even though I have D* I do not have the AT9 or the slimline and get my HD OTA even though it would only cost me the antenna but that doesn't mean my way is the ONLY way.

By the way, you don't have to be "lucky" to be able to get OTA. You have to be unlucky to not be able to get it.

Not everyone is a geek and gets this stuff. Something so simple can be so difficult to many people.

When it comes to apartments, no doubt about it...low signal and multipath are problems. Do you think the latter will be a lot easier to deal with when the 6th gen tuners flood the market this summer through next year?

The original 5th gen that LG tested in Mark Shubin's NYC apartment did just that and that one test is what turned Sinclair around. He used an average inside antenna and picked up 90% of all of the stations on the air in NYC in his apartment, a location that has been documented to have the worst multipath in any metro area. That is the reason LG went there . Many have said that the current production models are not quite as good as the prototype tested and that it has more to do with the front end of the receivers and not the 5th gen chip. If the signal can't get to the chip, the chip can't do its job.

Granted, if you are in an apartment 30 miles from a transmitter or more, you will have major problems, in general. But, within 30 miles and in mobile homes, townhomes and stand-alone houses, you should be good to go. And that
includes the vast majority of people in the U.S.

90% of the time that is a true statement. But people too close can't receive signals because of frontend overload of the receiver too, unless they know how to cut the signal down. There is no definitive smoking gun either way.

I don't recall, did they ever test the "original" ATSC Prototype receiver in Schubin's apartment?

If not, I wonder how it would have done ....


... whatever the Chinese chose.


Looks like its called CDBMT, or DMB-T/H (Digital Multimedia Broadcast-Terrestrial/Handheld) .. It supports both ADTB-T (single carrier system, but according to article at link below suitable for mobile as well as for fixed reception and high bit rates+HDTV) and DMB-T (OFDM based) ...

I remember reading some info regarding some DTV field tests in Taiwan several years back, and was trying to remember what China did, when I came across this article earlier today :

Digital TV Reception: The Global Challenge Page 6 (http://www.digitaltvdesignline.com/GLOBAL/electronics/designline/shared/article/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=5PLFBKG23TR02QSNDLRSKH0CJUNN2JV N?articleId=199400077&pgno=6 )

There's also a good summary+description of all the other systems in use for DTV on pages 1~5 of this article ....

I don't recall, did they ever test the "original" ATSC Prototype receiver in Schubin's apartment?

If not, I wonder how it would have done ....

No reception.

I don't recall, did they ever test the "original" ATSC Prototype receiver in Schubin's apartment?

If not, I wonder how it would have done ....


Hi, Nitewatchman.
The infamous apartment was tested by Pete Putman, December of 2001. :)

I don't recall if it was a prototype receiver.

From his article:

"I quickly detected and locked up a signal from WCBS-56 with just the bow tie and no preamp".

"WNYW-44 was received with the UHF bowtie and the preamp by dangling the bow tie about a foot off the floor."

"To put it mildly, I was surprised at how easy it was to pick up not just one, but multiple DTV signals indoors...".

"As spring wound into summer, a full complement of DTV signals came on-air
from the World Trade Center, including WNBC-28, WPIX-33, WWOR-38, WABC-45,
and WNET-61. All of these signals, plus WNYW-44 and WCBS-56 from the Empire
State Building, were rock solid. Add to them the five *Philadelphia*
stations, two *Allentown* stations, and one Trenton, NJ station I already
received, and I could choose from 15 different DTV carriers for antenna
testing over a variety of terrain."

I'm impressed; a typical UHF bowtie would be the worst possible choice for testing anything.

Not surprisingly, Schubin retorted that "No
such odd locations or movements are required for indoor NTSC reception." :rolleyes:

Search (google groups) alt.tv.tech.hdtv for "Schubin's" for a "discussion". ;)

I don't recall, did they ever test the "original" ATSC Prototype receiver in Schubin's apartment?

If not, I wonder how it would have done ....



Looks like its called CDBMT, or DMB-T/H (Digital Multimedia Broadcast-Terrestrial/Handheld) .. It supports both ADTB-T (single carrier system, but according to article at link below suitable for mobile as well as for fixed reception and high bit rates+HDTV) and DMB-T (OFDM based) ...

I remember reading some info regarding some DTV field tests in Taiwan several years back, and was trying to remember what China did, when I came across this article earlier today :

Digital TV Reception: The Global Challenge Page 6 (http://www.digitaltvdesignline.com/GLOBAL/electronics/designline/shared/article/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=5PLFBKG23TR02QSNDLRSKH0CJUNN2JV N?articleId=199400077&pgno=6 )

There's also a good summary+description of all the other systems in use for DTV on pages 1~5 of this article ....

Mobile reception of HDTV will most likely never work especially in a car. No matter what system. When all the crazy stuff was going on with Bob the menthally sick COFDM proponent, engineers from Korea went to Australia to check mobile reception. Guess what, HDTV was impossible to recieve at any distance from transmitter. As soon as they started moving picture would break up. Mobile reception of SD semi worked but only up to 6 miles from transmitter. After that it was unwatchable. DVB knows that, this is why they developed DVB-H.

a typical UHF bowtie would be the worst possible choice for testing anything. Actually "Rabbit Ears" would be the worst possible test for UHF reception. Indoor UHF antennas start with the simple loop, then the bow-tie, then the double bow-tie with blocking grid. Coming from an all UHF broadcast market, bow-ties actually work OK but lack the ability to block reflected images and are fairly directional. Weak channels don't bounce much so a bow-tie can work. As the signal strength increases, you need to block those reflections. That's why the 2, 4, and 8 bay UHF antennas work so well for HDTV. It's too bad Channel Master stopped building their six foot parabolic dish UHF antenna or we could really go DXing for stations.

Mobile reception of HDTV will most likely never work especially in a car. No matter what system. When all the crazy stuff was going on with Bob the menthaly sick COFDM proponent, engineers from Korea went to Australia to check mobile reception. Guess what, HDTV was imposible to recieve at any distance from transmitter. As soon as they started moving picture would break up. Mobile reception of SD semi worked but only up to 6 miles from transmitter. After that it was unwatchable. DVB knows that, this is why they developed DVB-H.

My understanding is that in Germany mobile SD reception was difficult without resorting to using diversity [sometimes quad] receivers.


Zaphod,
you're right . . . and all those poor folks using VHF rabbit ears trying get ATSC UHF signals. :(

Hi, Nitewatchman.
The infamous apartment was tested by Pete Putman, December of 2001. :)

I don't recall if it was a prototype receiver.

From his article:

"I quickly detected and locked up a signal from WCBS-56 with just the bow tie and no preamp".

"WNYW-44 was received with the UHF bowtie and the preamp by dangling the bow tie about a foot off the floor."

"To put it mildly, I was surprised at how easy it was to pick up not just one, but multiple DTV signals indoors...".

"As spring wound into summer, a full complement of DTV signals came on-air
from the World Trade Center, including WNBC-28, WPIX-33, WWOR-38, WABC-45,
and WNET-61. All of these signals, plus WNYW-44 and WCBS-56 from the Empire
State Building, were rock solid. Add to them the five *Philadelphia*
stations, two *Allentown* stations, and one Trenton, NJ station I already
received, and I could choose from 15 different DTV carriers for antenna
testing over a variety of terrain."

I'm impressed; a typical UHF bowtie would be the worst possible choice for testing anything.

Not surprisingly, Schubin retorted that "No
such odd locations or movements are required for indoor NTSC reception." :rolleyes:

Search (google groups) alt.tv.tech.hdtv for "Shubin's" for a "discussion". ;)


No movements needed for NTSC reception. What kind of reception? Just because he got picture, it does not mean it was watchable. I lived in NYC and analog channels come in but have at least 4 or 5 ghosts. It goes for every channel and I used outdoor antenna on the roof. This kind of multipath makes them unwatchable. On top of that dynamic multipath is really bad in NYC, not to mention really bad electrical impulse noise. If we used DVB-T, people in NYC would probably never see any digital tv as impulse noise would kill it.

As I said earlier, people expect miracles. No digital TV transmission system can change laws of physics. 5th generation LG chip supposed to be very good. Canadian TV reaserch lab that tests different standards and technologies said that 5th generation ATSC chip is the best they ever tested for any system.

To get good reception you need outdoor antenna for any system. Also little knowledge helps. As said earlier trying to use rabbit ears to receive UHF is futile, but many people try it and then complain about no reception.

First, I'll say this as nicely as I can .... Concerning the most recent responses to my post, I think two of you guys are reading WAY too much into my posts .......


The infamous apartment was tested by Pete Putman, December of 2001. :)


Yes, I know. Read that article many years ago. Think I even posted a link to it fairly recently on this very forum.


Search (google groups) alt.tv.tech.hdtv for "Shubin's" for a "discussion".


I don't need to "search" anything. I've been following this stuff all along. And, am sorry to say I have seen the crap, FUD, and BS spread from both "sides", of which I am on neither.

That being said, I'm certianly mostly happy with my experience with OTA DTV/HD reception in U.S.(as well as it's performance) as I receive it, and I am also glad they've been continuing to make improvements to receivers in regards to their performance handling various multipath conditions in difficult situations.

edited/updated following paragraph for clarity :

However, that does not mean I can't read about, discuss or comment about what is going on elsewhere or regarding how one system may be better than another in certian circumstances. And, to me, FUD is FUD no matter which "side" of an "issue" it comes from ....

<snip>


The article I reffered to+was basing my comments on said ADTB-T was suitable for FIXED HDTV reception , but is also suitable for mobile DTV applications.

Cancel cable, save $50 to $100 or more a month and that will pay for a new HD TV set in a year, then tell me if you miss it. I rely on antenna for all of my TV and without all those "wonderful" channels I still watch too much TV. Obviously some people will still want additional services from cable or satellite, but one of the main reasons there aren't more people like me right now is because most people don't realize what is available to them.
What he said.

As for DVRs, I have a mythTV box but wouldn't pretend that path is viable for most of the public. However, I do recall that one of the major CE manufacturers had an ATSC tuner with recording capability a couple of years back. I suspect that if OTA DTV catches on in a big way then the market will respond with easy to use DVRs.

First, I'll say this as nicely as I can .... Concerning the most recent responses to my post, I think two of you guys are reading WAY too much into my posts .......



Yes, I know. Read that article many years ago. Think I even posted a link to it fairly recently on this very forum.



I don't need to "search" anything. I've been following this stuff all along. And, am sorry to say I have seen the crap, FUD, and BS spread from both "sides", of which I am on neither.

That being said, I'm certianly mostly happy with my experience with OTA DTV/HD reception in U.S.(as well as it's performance) as I receive it, and I am also glad they've been continuing to make improvements to receivers in regards to their performance handling various multipath conditions in difficult situations.

edited/updated following paragraph for clarity :

However, that does not mean I can't read about, discuss or comment about what is going on elsewhere or regarding how one system may be better than another in certian circumstances. And, to me, FUD is FUD no matter which "side" of an "issue" it comes from ....



The article I reffered to+was basing my comments on said ADTB-T was suitable for FIXED HDTV reception , but is also suitable for mobile DTV applications.



I guess that wasn't the specific test you specifically asked about.

What he said.

As for DVRs, I have a mythTV box but wouldn't pretend that path is viable for most of the public. However, I do recall that one of the major CE manufacturers had an ATSC tuner with recording capability a couple of years back. I suspect that if OTA DTV catches on in a big way then the market will respond with easy to use DVRs.

Sony - briefly - marketed a number of ATSC DVRs in the US I believe. Can't remember whether they were 8VSB only or also included QAM+CableCard support - as I believe the Tivo Series 3 does.

The UK experience is different as there are a pretty large number of OTA Digital DVRs available - subscription free - based on the 8 day EPG broadcast as part of the basic OTA digital infrastructure. Many have twin tuners allowing dual record + watch recorded, or watch live + record a second channel. They start at around GBP £70 for a discounted model and rise to around GBP £250 for a more versatile larger capacity unit. (i.e. approx US$140 to US$500)

All SD MPEG2 devices - most record the off-air signal losslessly, some re-compress to improve storage space at the expense of quality either on recording or in the background afterwards.

I guess that wasn't the specific test you specifically asked about.

No. I was talking about the original grand alliance prototype receiver, which for example reportedly used a double conversion tuner. Most if not all current ATSC receivers available to consumers use a single conversion tuner.

No. I was talking about the original grand alliance prototype receiver, which for example reportedly used a double conversion tuner. Most if not all current ATSC receivers available to consumers use a single conversion tuner.I've had the pleasure of sitting through Gary Sgrignoli's 8VSB seminar (http://www.mswdtv.com/index_files/Page796.htm) and one of the (many) tidbits I learned was just how much worse the first generation consumer STBs were when compared to the Grand Alliance prototype. Even now there are more techniques that could be implemented in receivers to improve reception. It's simply a matter of cost that keeps it out of consumer gear.

It is all acedemic since ATSC is what we have now and for the foreseeable future! I get my HDTV signals today and I'm happy, no need to wait another couple of years until X becomes avaliable. These other systems do intrigue me though and after I setup my multi QAM/ATSC tuner system, I have started to dip my toes into other technologies by ordering a DVB-S2 firewire tuner card. Should be here Wednesday. Now-I just need a dish and time to set it up and debug.

To point out the obvious ---

19.38Mb/s vs 19.76mb/s = about 400Kb/s difference ... Enough for a "extra" DD 5.1 alternate language audio track I suppose ...

Too bad their is nothing to watch on OTA. Even most of the prime time shows are not shot in HD. You can get HD content on OTA from maybe about 7pm to 10pm. The only channel I can watch is the local PBS which has something in HD all day. I live in St.Paul and only one news channel has their studio shots in HD. Thats ridiculous. Thank god my HD D* is being installed after the holiday.

Too bad their is nothing to watch on OTA. Even most of the prime time shows are not shot in HD. You can get HD content on OTA from maybe about 7pm to 10pm. The only channel I can watch is the local PBS which has something in HD all day. I live in St.Paul and only one news channel has their studio shots in HD. Thats ridiculous. Thank god my HD D* is being installed after the holiday.

Funny...80% of the HD I watch is on the OTA networks. Perhaps you just need to watch better shows...

For what it's worth, most of the other stations - cable or otherwise - only really show any significant amount of HD content during prime time. Most daytime shows simply aren't HD on many networks. Having more channels of the same situation isn't going to increase your HD content throughout the day.

Just having Discovery HD, History HD, and Food Network HD, is more than enough for me. Everything else is just gravy. Only thing I watch in OTA is Leno, CSI Vegas, 24, and Prison Break. Everything else that is on I just cringe at.

For me a DVR and the OTA Networks provides more HD programs than I have time to watch. Sure its full of garbage but so is cable, you just have wade through and find what you like.

From what I've read about the new HD cable channels many have little HD content because they mirror their SD channel the same as the local broadcast stations. The only 24/7 OTA HD is PBS because they are just retransmitting a satellite feed and PBS is discouraging member stations from carrying it.

The only 24/7 OTA HD is PBS because they are just retransmitting a satellite feed and PBS is discouraging member stations from carrying it.

you've lost on this one. :confused:

can you possibly rephrase, as it doesn't make sense to me?

why would they discourage it?

From what I've read on this forum, I don't think PBS is "discouraging" it, but they have changed the rate structure to the point where many stations have been forced to drop PBS-HD as a full-time channel. Public TV and radio member stations must pay for their network programming.

At least fall is approaching, and will check out some of the new shows (and new epiosdes of old ones). I would have just covered my tv the last three months if I didn't have E*, since summer network tv is reruns and SD reality shows.

My understanding is PBS does not charge extra to show the HD versions of the shows shown on the SD channel but they charge a lot for the PBS-HD feed. From what I've read they want to avoid becoming a national channel and want the member stations to create their own HD channels.

To point out the obvious ---

19.38Mb/s vs 19.76mb/s = about 400Kb/s difference ... Enough for a "extra" DD 5.1 alternate language audio track I suppose ...


Enough for a "extra" MONO audio track, which I'd really appreciate since a lot of the 5.1 mixes suck and I'm tired of constantly tweeking the volume level due to the dialnorm issues. :mad:

re: Alternate audio track :

Stations can send 2 seperate audio streams for each program service("subchannel") as it is, the 2nd one could be ,for instance, a spanish audio track. Most stations don't do that yet, at least in my area. Receivers should have a way to select which audio track you want to listen to(when there are two available). On one receiver here, it's via a "audio" button on the remote, on another it's in a menu option.

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

re: PBS HD --

Note that On Page 8 In a submisson of comments from APTS and PBS to FCC regarding FCC's ongoing 3rd DTV review which is available in it's entirety here in PDF format (http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6519611232)- it says this :


... "High-Definition. Well over 80 percent of public television stations air high-definition programming. Currently, stations both receive high definition programming from PBS and other distributors and produce
their own HD programming. By fall 2008, PBS will distribute its National Program Service (NPS) in high-definition, essentially merging the NPS and PBS’s HD channel".......

re: Alternate audio track :
Stations can send 2 seperate audio streams for each program service("subchannel") as it is:

Actually, they can send as many as the encoder and available bandwidth permits.. Most Flexicoders on have 1 audio channel, where as most of our Harmonic's have 3.. we send 3 different National Weather Service audios
with our radar, and have 3 audios available for our main HD.
Our SAP channel is mapped as it's own virtual channel, makes finding SAP/DVS easy.

Now Jeff, if you read the FCC rules, I don't believe they make a distinction between SAP for analog vs digital..which if you think about what the rules say..

I'm a big supporter of SAP/DVS, I hope the FCC mandates it for digital. At least from the network level
with local pass through.

Actually, they can send as many as the encoder and available bandwidth permits..


I'm sure they can ... I wasn't saying "they" could not ... I do know however my receivers only seem to allow a "user selection" of 2 different audio tracks per program service(without "changing" channels to a different VC for them) ...

DO please Keep in mind My original comment on ~400Kb/s being enough room for "another audio track" was solely meant to describe the bandwidth usage of a DD 5.1 AC-3 audio track in response to a post from another poster(I'm sure you could accurately *guess* whom that was) which has been removed involving the maximum payoad capacity of 8VSB vs. "another" tested modulation being a issue of some signficant importance ...

Sorry if I didn't word it correctly, I did not mean to suggest "more" than 2audio tracks weren't supported or possible ..... I suppose you could have a LOT of them if say, the only video program was a 480i SD service ...


we send 3 different National Weather Service audios
with our radar, and have 3 audios available for our main HD.
Our SAP channel is mapped as it's own virtual channel, makes finding SAP/DVS easy.


Cool!

I do know however my receivers only seem to allow a "user selection" of 2 different audio tracks per program service(without "changing" channels to a different VC for them) ...

Yea, I have seen that, poor design, IMHO. Seems most newer units have overcome that. I know most of mine will see all 3. That's why I advocate making SAP it's own virtual channel. Fortunately, I think the MFG's have learned to make receivers default to the first audio, unlike most of the analog receivers of the past. Remember the SAP debacle of the mid 80's?

The Dolby guys always told me that it was possible to create a different Dialogue channel for Second Language or DVS service, without using full BW, but "the CE manufacturers weren't supporting it".

I recently stumbled on to an old article that explained that, to do the second (or third) "track" would require a second DD encoder, and a second DD decoder in the set.
And, no one currently builds a box or set with two DD decoders.

Of course, bein' th' engineer, I opened up a spare USDTV box and looked around. It seems to be all software based, so I wonder if some of those Linux-based boxes could be re-configured to do DVS or second-language audios, and sold just for that market?

Maybe a niche market for HiSense.

BTW, the KSL-HD Demo trailer will be at the Utah State Fair for the next 10 days. We have two Sony (manufacturer-supplied thru the local dealer) Bravia LCDs, mounted side-by-side, an audio system, a TViX HD Multimedia player, and a Terrestrial Digital SR15 UHF antenna.

We'll see what kind of public feedback we get.

Make sure to post a pic from the fair !

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

Some interesting reading on ATSC audio "specs" can be found in audio related section section 6.6 "Main, Associated, and Multi-Lingual Services" in ATSC's A54 Document, Guide to the Use of the ATSC digital Television Standard (http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_54a_with_corr_1.pdf). Note: Document Link is PDF format.

Come to think of it, Since so far I've only received stations which have had at most, 2 seperate audio streams(verified with TSreader) per program service, I really don't know if any of my current receivers will support more ... Do recall reading a reference to "two" different audio streams and how to select them in one of those receiver's user manual, but of course I'll have no idea whether or not any of them with "work" with more than 2 until I get sent more than two ;)

I do know that I've had 5 different ATSC receivers(4 currently - 1 of them being in a PC, which is of course quite a different "beast" when it comes to these issues, as various software applictions are involved rather than firmware, drivers/etc), and all of them do certian things a little differently, some things a LOT differently ... EPG info from the PSIP EIT's for example .... RCA DTC-100 and Hisense DB2010 show a "complete" program grid, including for so many hours/days into the future ... Receiver internal to Sony KD34XBR960 HDTV however *only* shows the EIT info for the Current program(not very useful if you want to see what's on in the "future") .... One receiver (ZenithHDV420), PSIP wise ONLY supports VCT/Channel remapping and ratings info -- EIA 708 captions are also supported, but NOTHING else involving PSIP is displayed to the user .... No EPG from EIT's, no Service ID info(Often but not allways a station's callsign), not even STT info is displayed ... There is a clock on the thing, but it's pretty worthless except for displaying on screen what time it is, ONLY IF you actually set the clock manually, that is (The Sony HDTV is the same way, BTW) ....

Receiver standards that manufactuers are required to follow may have been(or would be) nice, and not only involving performance standards regarding the receiver front-end(i.e. "reception" issues) .... Just as one example --- Broadcasters are required to populate the EIT's with programming info out 12 hours, and yet I wonder how many receivers support utilizing that info?

Come to think of it, Since so far I've only received stations which have had at most, 2 seperate audio streams(verified with TSreader) per program service, I really don't know if any of my current receivers will support more ... ?

Many do..LG-3510's and RC-797T, Panasonic DMR-EZ17 & 27, do, as well as all of my directv receivers(Sony 300,R15,H20s)..Yet my Mits 62" only supports 1 audio.. :confused:

FULL and proper PSIP support would be nice, it's interesting that I like you have yet to find any current receiver that properly supports the complete PSIP that we are legally required to properly pass..:mad:

Demand For Free HD Over-The-Air Broadcasts Spurring Tremendous Growth In Antenna Sales For Antennas Direct™

Sales Increased 220% 3Q 2007 Over 3Q 2006 As Cable TV Looses 1.1 Million Subscribers.

St. Louis, MO (PRWEB) December 3, 2007 -- The cable industry has lost over one million subscribers this year, suggesting a year ending with a 2 percent loss of market share, as reported recently in several newspapers, trade magazines and Internet newsletters. Some of the declines actually surprised Wall Street.

But they didn’t surprise Richard Schneider, President of Antennas Direct, whose new Terrestrial Digital (www.terrestrial-digital.com) brand of antenna sales tripled during the same period.

Schneider said, “Because of the tremendous improvements in our Off-Air antenna technology and design that have taken place in the last few years, along with changing customer attitudes and needs in the new and highly competitive digital TV and HD era, we’ve found ourselves right in the middle of a thriving resurgence of Over-The-Air (OTA) antennas. Research projects that 15 percent of TV households and 23 percent of TV sets in U.S. homes don’t receive cable or satellite TV. That represents more than 70 million TV sets that only receive OTA broadcast television. It’s no wonder our phones are ringing off the hook.”

Schneider continued, “Two of the reasons suggested by most business reporters for the decline in cable numbers are TV subscribers switching to Satellite (DBS) and the emergence of telco TV. While partially true, telco numbers are much too small to be a significant factor, but a meaningful percentage of these cable TV losses come from unhappy cable customers switching to OTA antennas and dumping cable’s hundreds of unwatched channels in favor of getting all their favorite local broadcasts FREE.

Cable companies are stumping with penetration percentages hitting a 17-year low. A significant number of cable subscribers are finally getting enough of cable TV’s higher costs, billing add-ons, service outages, contact difficulties and aggravating half-day in-home service waits, resulting in lost customers, while our business is doubling about every 180 days.”

On November 29, 2007, The Bridge Data Group reported overall “customer satisfaction” with DBS at 72% and cable at only 58% and the “likelihood to switch” for both at 10%. These numbers might have accounted recently for the “attack” on a Comcast payment center in Virginia by a 75 year-old hammer wielding grandmother.

And it’s not only problems with Cable (and Satellite) providers that have caused this dramatic OTA antenna sales increase. The benefits of Off-Air antennas are compelling and numerous. There is only so much room on cable or satellite bandwidth in which to squeeze signal, so data is compressed to fit, resulting in a somewhat "soft" picture. An OTA signal is the gold standard in digital reception because it's completely uncompressed and also FREE; good news for the millions of homes not using cable or satellite. But what about those cable or satellite subscribers that want access to all their local broadcasts or all available HD local broadcasts, but can’t get them from their present provider.

Local digital TV broadcasts are everywhere. And how hot is HD? High Definition Televisions bumped digital cameras out of the top spot for the most desired CE product for the 2007. But bandwidth limitations mean that cable and satellite providers may not carry all local channels in many areas, or may not offer all of them in high definition. Contract disagreements between local cable operators and local broadcasters can mean that major networks may not be available via cable TV in several areas. DISH Network® offers local HD coverage to about 47 percent of U.S. markets, while DIRECTV® reaches about 65 percent for an additional monthly fee.

“What about those other millions of viewers who want to see their favorite local shows and in HD?” asks Schneider. “The answer is to add an OTA antenna to other signal reception sources.”

This not only gives a viewer the ability to receive all their local stations, but, with the right Terrestrial Digital antenna, some viewers may even be able to receive out-of-town channels, which may carry blacked out sports programs or network broadcasts not available in their home town. For lower income families, an OTA antenna may be the only alternative. As an added benefit, an OTA antenna provides back-up reception options for local cable or satellite signal loss due to equipment failure or rain, snow and ice fade and to smaller TVs and second sets in homes not wired for whole-house signal distribution.

The Consumer Electronics Association, which does not track antenna sales, puts antennas in their accessory category. Accessory? Try getting an OTA broadcast signal without one.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/12/prweb574003.htm

^ Thanks for that article. Good read. I would imagine that antenna sales would be even higher if more people knew this stuff.

^ Thanks for that article. Good read. I would imagine that antenna sales would be even higher if more people knew this stuff.

psst hey...jimp2244,

Let me tell you a secret..... that is a press release...from...Antennas Direct™, they sell antennas! While unlikely, as far as we can tell for sure, it has been published in two places, here and at their web site.

But seriously, I just read this entire thread, I think half the post are yours! :)

Great, you get perfect OTA for free. Spread the story free TV! But this ain't the place, most the people reading this forum are AV GEEKS! Me too.

Americans are lazy and spoiled. Most will do nothing. This transition means zilch, zip, nada to the vast majority.

This here from the "article";

Schneider continued, “Two of the reasons suggested by most business reporters for the decline in cable numbers are TV subscribers switching to Satellite (DBS) and the emergence of telco TV. While partially true, telco numbers are much too small to be a significant factor, but a meaningful percentage of these cable TV losses come from unhappy cable customers switching to OTA antennas and dumping cable’s hundreds of unwatched channels in favor of getting all their favorite local broadcasts FREE.

is propaganda. He sells antennas.

Cable lost 1.1 million they say. I'd bet Verizon would have a little different view than "telco numbers are much too small to be a significant factor". I'd be real suprised if "OTA Only" got anywhere near the number of those eyeballs that Verizon alone got.

Another point,

Research projects that 15 percent of TV households and 23 percent of TV sets in U.S. homes don’t receive cable or satellite TV. That represents more than 70 million TV sets that only receive OTA broadcast television. It’s no wonder our phones are ringing off the hook.”

US cable/sat penetration has been at 85% for years. I am sure you will continue to spread the story of free TV, nothing wrong with that. Just don't expect any of the big marketing money! The only others spreading the word will be antenna vendors. The broadcasters themselves? Nope doesn't matter to them, they want eyeballs, doesn't matter the delivery method. (Except during retrans disputes, then antennas are a great PR tool!). I doubt that 15% will ever get to 16%. Might even go down as the technology continues to converge.

Good Luck! :)

With DTV receivers in their new sets, It doesn't seem all that outrageous to me that many folks(even lazy folks) might at least try OTA DTV with some sort of inexpensive indoor antenna, especially for HD.

As for broadcasters, I've allways thought they might have something to gain from promoting their OTA service to some extent (especially for DTV+their HD services), simply because the broadcasters have no competition from cable/sat only networks for OTA-Only viewers eyeballs .... I'd bet Multichannel providers who advertise via broadcaster's signals probably wouldn't like that very much, however ... Suppose it might be a sticky issue regarding retrans consent negotiations as well ... Then again, concerning the latter, the cableco could put ATSC tuners in their STB's and start installing antennas for their customers ;) ....

BTW, I believe I pay for my so called "free OTA TV" when I purchase products advertised on TV or donate to PBS member stations, or via (in some cases) tax $ when those NCE's receive various gov't grants or state/local "Funds" .... I guess all the "lazy and spoiled americans" that don't use OTA just like to pay again for their multichannel provider to deliver the broadcast signals to them .... Which is certianly fine with me, if that is what they want to do, but I'm not so sure "lazy and spoiled" are the right words for that ....

A lot of local stations have been putting up spots explaining HD OTA. I understand that many people don't see it, but it is up to the stations to explain this. The stations stand to gain viewers, so it is their responsibility to explain it.

We have had a number of threads that push for the government to do more. The math is pretty simple to me, though. If the local stations want more viewers to get their signal via HD OTA, they need to devote some of their advertising slots to this information. If it's not important enough for them to do that, it must not be a big issue.

US cable/sat penetration has been at 85% for years. I am sure you will continue to spread the story of free TV, nothing wrong with that. Just don't expect any of the big marketing money! The only others spreading the word will be antenna vendors. The broadcasters themselves? Nope doesn't matter to them, they want eyeballs, doesn't matter the delivery method. (Except during retrans disputes, then antennas are a great PR tool!). I doubt that 15% will ever get to 16%. Might even go down as the technology continues to converge.

Good Luck! :)
If a friend of mine is any indication, this will be the case. For several years, he was getting his HD from the locals for free via an antenna. Now that D* has our locals in HD and they look as good as his antenna signal, he's pulled the aluminum tree off his roof in favor of the much less noticable dish.

Spread the story free TV! But this ain't the place, most the people reading this forum are AV GEEKS! Me too.A lot of people who read this forum just bought a new HDTV and want to know how to get HD content on it. Why shouldn't we continue to let them know about the OTA option? Most people don't realize that you can get HD for free with an antenna; they think they have to pay for it from cable or satellite. You're right, that is where the marketing money is. However, that's also why it takes a lot more effort to inform folks of the OTA option. Once they know about it, then they can make an informed decision on whether or not a cable or satellite subscription is necessary. As the title of this thread indicates, people are interested in OTA HD when told about it. That doesn't mean they will all choose OTA, but a fair number of people will.

Most will do nothing. This transition means zilch, zip, nada to the vast majority.I think this relates to the "awareness" factor. I think if people knew the huge difference between NTSC and ATSC broadcast technology it would mean a lot more. It's incredibly simple to get a perfect HD picture with ATSC. Unfortunately people still think of antennas as "old fashioned" and they think of the fuzzy pictures or "ghosting" that they get on their old TV in the bedroom that is not hooked up to cable.

Cable lost 1.1 million they say. I'd bet Verizon would have a little different view than "telco numbers are much too small to be a significant factor". I'd be real suprised if "OTA Only" got anywhere near the number of those eyeballs that Verizon alone got.I don't know what the real numbers are, but around here, and in most other parts of the country, we don't have Verizon or telco options for TV, so it wouldn't surprise me at all to see OTA numbers higher than telco. Also, when I called up the antenna installer to have them come out and install my antenna, he immediately said, "it's for HD right?" He asked if he could sell me on satellite (They're a satellite installer as well) and when I declined he said yeah we are getting a lot of calls these days from people wanting to go the antenna route for HD.

I am sure you will continue to spread the story of free TV, nothing wrong with that. Just don't expect any of the big marketing money!That's why I'll continue to spread the word... someone has to! :)

Antenna plus HD-DVR has given me more good HD content than I could ever watch, whenever I want to watch it. I get out of market NFL games each Sunday from Dayton affiliates. Friends come over to my house to watch Browns games (Bengals fan here, but I'm nice) and UD basketball games that they can't get on cable or satellite.

I am not, and don't think I have ever said that no one should subscribe to cable or satellite. I just think people should be aware of what is available to them for free, and to take that into consideration each month when they get their TV bill.

Good Luck! :)Thanks!

A coworker got an HDTV a couple of weeks ago. He had D* come out and found that he couldn't get any HD satellite services due to the large number of trees on his property. Oddly his television didn't pick up any digital OTA stations when he did a scan, I think because he didn't have a UHF antenna hooked up. He thought he had no way of getting this HDTV I've been talking about.

I told him to hook up the cheap UHF loop that came with the TV and have it scan specific channels like 48 and so on. He got all of local HD stations. Some were breaking up at times because he is not in a prime location but the sight of free HDTV motivated him enough to get an outdoor antenna hooked up as soon as he can.

A lot of local stations have been putting up spots explaining HD OTA. I understand that many people don't see it, but it is up to the stations to explain this. The stations stand to gain viewers, so it is their responsibility to explain it.

We have had a number of threads that push for the government to do more. The math is pretty simple to me, though. If the local stations want more viewers to get their signal via HD OTA, they need to devote some of their advertising slots to this information. If it's not important enough for them to do that, it must not be a big issue.

Don't quote me on this, I don't have the time to research it, but I believe that broadcasters either agreed in advance or are required to air those spots as PSAs. This is to inform the OTA only viewers that the have to do something before 2009.

As to your other point, broadcasters don't really care how you get their picture. In a lot of cases they may actually prefer you get them from cable or dbs. Because of HD, a lot of retrans deals put stuff in there pockets.

If a friend of mine is any indication, this will be the case. For several years, he was getting his HD from the locals for free via an antenna. Now that D* has our locals in HD and they look as good as his antenna signal, he's pulled the aluminum tree off his roof in favor of the much less noticable dish.

Exactly! The person that has bought an HDTV and gone through the hoops to get it working correctly is not the typical OTA only viewer.

A lot of people who read this forum just bought a new HDTV and want to know how to get HD content on it. Why shouldn't we continue to let them know about the OTA option? Most people don't realize that you can get HD for free with an antenna; they think they have to pay for it from cable or satellite. You're right, that is where the marketing money is. However, that's also why it takes a lot more effort to inform folks of the OTA option. Once they know about it, then they can make an informed decision on whether or not a cable or satellite subscription is necessary. As the title of this thread indicates, people are interested in OTA HD when told about it. That doesn't mean they will all choose OTA, but a fair number of people will.

Hey, I'm not a marketing guy. :D But if I was wearing a sandwich board that said PIZZAPIZZA I wouldn't be greeting people at the door. I'd be out on the highway.:eek:

I think this relates to the "awareness" factor. I think if people knew the huge difference between NTSC and ATSC broadcast technology it would mean a lot more. It's incredibly simple to get a perfect HD picture with ATSC. Unfortunately people still think of antennas as "old fashioned" and they think of the fuzzy pictures or "ghosting" that they get on their old TV in the bedroom that is not hooked up to cable.

I think it's the "if it ain't broke factor". Cable started out in the boonies with antenna on a mountain top, DBS exploded when it launched local in local. They both thrive in all areas now, tell you anything?

I don't know what the real numbers are, but around here, and in most other parts of the country, we don't have Verizon or telco options for TV, so it wouldn't surprise me at all to see OTA numbers higher than telco. Also, when I called up the antenna installer to have them come out and install my antenna, he immediately said, "it's for HD right?" He asked if he could sell me on satellite (They're a satellite installer as well) and when I declined he said yeah we are getting a lot of calls these days from people wanting to go the antenna route for HD.

The antenna man was playing down the telco numbers, he ignored the cable to dbs numbers, notice his emphasis on FREE, he's biased, he sells antennas. Verizon is spending billions with their Fios project. I don't know the exact numbers either, experience and common sense tell me that Verizon alone is probably gaining at least two and probably more customers for every one that all of a sudden drops cable and becomes OTA only.

About your installer, does the local cable company in your area have all of the big 4 networks? Is he taking down sat dishes when he is installing antennas? Sure antenna sales are up, that's obvious, doesn't mean they are switching to OTA only.

That's why I'll continue to spread the word... someone has to! :)

Antenna plus HD-DVR has given me more good HD content than I could ever watch, whenever I want to watch it. I get out of market NFL games each Sunday from Dayton affiliates. Friends come over to my house to watch Browns games (Bengals fan here, but I'm nice) and UD basketball games that they can't get on cable or satellite.

I am not, and don't think I have ever said that no one should subscribe to cable or satellite. I just think people should be aware of what is available to them for free, and to take that into consideration each month when they get their TV bill.
Guess you weren't around when all we talked about HD on AVS was Leno and the D* demo channel.
Thanks!

You're Welcome.

If a friend of mine is any indication, this will be the case. For several years, he was getting his HD from the locals for free via an antenna. Now that D* has our locals in HD and they look as good as his antenna signal, he's pulled the aluminum tree off his roof in favor of the much less noticable dish.

A foolish move on his part -- considering that the antenna was already up, it would have made sense to retain it as a backup. Next time a heavy storm wipes out his satellite reception due to rain fade, he might wish that the antenna was still in place.

Exactly! The person that has bought an HDTV and gone through the hoops to get it working correctly is not the typical OTA only viewer.

And this means what, exactly? While it's not scientific polling, repeated surveys here in the AVS Forum have consistently given a percentage of HD viewers who depend exclusively on OTA for HD that is very close to the 15% figure that is generally quoted for OTA viewing in general.

Presumably, AVS Forum readers are even more likely to have "gone through hoops" to get our HD sets working properly, and apparently 15% of us continue to rely on OTA for our HD.

Not everyone has to be a guru to get it working.
New sets have ATSC tuners built in and many people merely have to connect their old antenna to receive OTA HD on these sets. How difficult is that?
My brother uses the old attic antenna and wiring that was installed by the previous owner (pre 2001). Which shows that not everyone will need a new antenna.
I agree that not everyone will have it that lucky but many will.

Along with the advent of ATSC tuners being built in the sets, the current/looming credit crunch, many may be looking at a less expensive HD alternative to cable/sat. And with second/third HD TV sets not connected to cable/sat and analog shutoff coming I can easily see more people viewing OTA HD than before.

Along with the advent of ATSC tuners being built in the sets, the current/looming credit crunch, many may be looking at a less expensive HD alternative to cable/sat. And with second/third HD TV sets not connected to cable/sat and analog shutoff coming I can easily see more people viewing OTA HD than before.Going along with that, I see a lot of people who "can't" pay off their credit cards, but do pay for TV...

As for over the air digital reception, I bought a cheap 13 inch Durabrand standard definition monaural tube tv with ATSC/QAM tuner at Walmart. I bought this tv to use outdoors a few hours per week at most, therefore I looked for the cheapest tv I could find that has a digital tuner. If everything I am going to watch is on local stations, I just use a pair of rabbit ears for OTA reception. If I want to watch something on cable, I connect an extention cable to the tv. (I obviously bring the tv inside when not using it). When watching OTA, I always tune to the digital signals. With a simple pair of rabbit ears, I get excellent reception of all local digital channels (1 VHF high 3 UHF). Even in standard definition on a tube tv, digital signals give a better picture and sound than analog signals.

Not everyone has to be a guru to get it working.

This really hinges on where you live in the US.

I live in western-central PA and I can tell you that getting my antenna rig setup to get the majority of digital channels was a chore, especially at my old house.

I hear people from other parts of the country talk about picking up channels from 70 mi away with fairly minimal gear, while I have to fight to the death to pick up channels only 40 mi away.

OTA is still a crap shoot. Here in Jacksonville, our local thread is peppered with people having all sorts of frustrating experiences. It mostly stems from 2 of our stations being in the VHF band, and two of our stations having an odd radiating pattern.

However, I have still run into people who had no idea that HD was available for "free".

OTA is still a crap shoot. Here in Jacksonville, our local thread is peppered with people having all sorts of frustrating experiences. It mostly stems from 2 of our stations being in the VHF band, and two of our stations having an odd radiating pattern.

However, I have still run into people who had no idea that HD was available for "free".I think it's a "crap shoot" only if you're doing it yourself and don't know what you're doing, or you're expecting miracles from an indoor antenna. I'm sure every local thread is full of people trying to perfect their OTA reception. People come here for help. All of the people who aren't having issues aren't going to post about it, so I think that can cause it to seem like "everyone is having issues," when in reality they are not.

Of course if you want OTA without having to know what you're doing, the best route would be to have a pro install your antenna... Granted that's not "free" but a $200 antenna install (including the price of the antenna itself) will last you many years and only costs the equivalent of 2-4 months of cable/satellite subscription...

Of course if you want OTA without having to know what you're doing, the best route would be to have a pro install your antenna... Granted that's not "free" but a $200 antenna install (including the price of the antenna itself) will last you many years and only costs the equivalent of 2-4 months of cable/satellite subscription...
The problem here is that there may not be any professional installation available. The old time TV shops who did installation are disappearing. Antenna installation moved to Big Dish companies, then vanished as small dishes took over. Plus, ATSC is primarily UHF and many installers have zero experience on UHF problems. Having been in a 100% UHF market forever, I knew problems were coming. The old saying was 1MW of VHF goes 100 miles, 1MW of UHF goes 10 miles. You can't raise the power of UHF higher or it bounces off of everything including the mailman.
The Central Illinois area (100 mile radius around Peoria) has no professional antenna installers left.

The problem here is that there may not be any professional installation available. The old time TV shops who did installation are disappearing. Antenna installation moved to Big Dish companies, then vanished as small dishes took over. Plus, ATSC is primarily UHF and many installers have zero experience on UHF problems. Having been in a 100% UHF market forever, I knew problems were coming. The old saying was 1MW of VHF goes 100 miles, 1MW of UHF goes 10 miles. You can't raise the power of UHF higher or it bounces off of everything including the mailman.
The Central Illinois area (100 mile radius around Peoria) has no professional antenna installers left.

Very true. Even up in Chicago, there might be one or two. There's one left in Morris in the far southwest suburbs...there was one in DeKalb that went under in early 2007...

But think about it. OTA antenna in your attic, at least, or preferably outside with dish/cable should be on everyone's list, because:

1. Get a big ice/snowstorm, or severe thunderstorm, and you could be out of service for days, even if power is restored; my neighbors cable was out for 12 hours a month ago for no apparent reason;

2. Cable doesn't give you all the locals in many areas, and satellite definitely doesn't. There are at least one or two good subchannels to watch in many areas. Satellite doesn't carry PBS-HD, one of THE best reasons to get OTA, nor do they carry PBS analog for that matter...

3. Integrates nicely with most HDTV's; a menu change and you flip from OTA to sat/cable

4. If you live near the edge of a market, you can get out-of-market stations; on Sundays in the north/northwest and southeast suburbs of Chicago, that usually means you can watch more than one game

5. Say what you want about MPEG-4 via D*...there is NO promise that as new channels are launched, they won't have to start compressing them noticeably again, and some would argue that they already do. Ditto for cable...

6. Oh yeah, after antenna and wiring, the monthly recurring cost is zero.

I'd say if you DIDN'T have OTA as a backup and can do so, you are missing out.

I think it's a "crap shoot" only if you're doing it yourself and don't know what you're doing, or you're expecting miracles from an indoor antenna.

Please describe your receiving situation.

For example, at my old house I got to deal with the following:

1. Numerous large trees.
2. A large opposing ridgeline that blocked LOS to my nearest stations (40 mi) to the east and south.
3. Strong distant signals that added co-channel interference, because I had a clear LOS to the west and the north.

This, mind you, is while using a CM 4228/CM 7777 setup with proper wiring and re-installed grounding.

Even once I got the rig perfected, one of my local digitals still was intermittent.

Please describe your receiving situation.

For example, at my old house I got to deal with the following:

1. Numerous large trees.
2. A large opposing ridgeline that blocked LOS to my nearest stations (40 mi) to the east and south.
3. Strong distant signals that added co-channel interference, because I had a clear LOS to the west and the north.

This, mind you, is while using a CM 4228/CM 7777 setup with proper wiring and re-installed grounding.

Even once I got the rig perfected, one of my local digitals still was intermittent.I am in Sharonville, about 15 miles north of the Cincinnati towers and a bit under 40 miles south of the Dayton towers. I'm in a bit of a valley, with a fair number of trees around. I use a Winegard "small/medium" traditional-style VHF/UHF combo with rotor, installed by a pro (mainly because I did not want to climb on the roof). The rotor has two presets programmed, one for Cincinnati and one for Dayton. I have no issues with reception of any full power digital (or analog) stations in either city. All digital stations I receive are UHF except for one (WCPO-DT) which is on VHF 10, and is co-channel with analog WBNS-10 Columbus, but WBNS is not strong enough to cause me any issues with WCPO-DT.

I understand that some people are going to be in tough spots for OTA reception, but the majority of people are not. Also, keep in mind that analog shut off will help clear up a lot of the adjacent channel and co-channel issues.

There will definitely be a broader shift back to OTA.

In the UK, the Freeview digital OTA service which was launched in late 2000 has led to a significant shift back to antennas, and is now used by over 1/3rd of the British population

Right now, most Americans still are not aware of OTA HD and integrated ATSC tuners didn't become commonplace until about 18 months ago.

Once ATSC tuner penetration reaches greater levels and the general population learns of the benefits of OTA digital, expect the percentage of OTA only households to increase from the current 15% to about 25 - 30%. Add to that, many Pay TV subscribers will use antennas as a supplement, resulting in a comeback for antennas in the majority of the US households. (Either solo or as a supplement to Pay TV)

Remember, the compelling reason people went with cable30 years ago; it was the only option for decent PQ and reliable reception. Today in most markets, the best PQ comes from OTA digital. Most will stick with pay TV, but in the future a sizable percentage of the population (1/4 -1/3) will be happy with OTA digital as their sole video delivery method.

I think it's a "crap shoot" only if you're doing it yourself and don't know what you're doing, or you're expecting miracles from an indoor antenna. I'm sure every local thread is full of people trying to perfect their OTA reception. People come here for help. All of the people who aren't having issues aren't going to post about it, so I think that can cause it to seem like "everyone is having issues," when in reality they are not.

Of course if you want OTA without having to know what you're doing, the best route would be to have a pro install your antenna... Granted that's not "free" but a $200 antenna install (including the price of the antenna itself) will last you many years and only costs the equivalent of 2-4 months of cable/satellite subscription...

A number of the people I have delt with can't (or woun't or aren't allowed) to put up an outdoor antenna for various reasons. They are left with using an indoor antenna or not getting OTA at all. That can be a very frustrating experience.

Once ATSC tuner penetration reaches greater levels and the general population learns of the benefits of OTA digital, expect the percentage of OTA only households to increase from the current 15% to about 25 - 30%.

If this happens, expect to see the purveyors of pay TV services fight back like crazy. At an average of $60/month lost per household going back to OTA-only, they'll be looking at a lot of vanishing revenue.

Personally, I hope that your prediction pans out, but I think it will be a lot of years before we really find out the answer. Remember that Freeview has a cohesive marketing message behind it that is sorely lacking in the U.S. transition to digital television. I suspect that most British TV viewers are at least aware that Freeview exists, whereas the majority in this country don't believe that you can receive HDTV signals without subscribing to satellite or cable. One thing I do know: few people will choose a product or service if they aren't aware that it exists.

And this means what, exactly? While it's not scientific polling, repeated surveys here in the AVS Forum have consistently given a percentage of HD viewers who depend exclusively on OTA for HD that is very close to the 15% figure that is generally quoted for OTA viewing in general.

Presumably, AVS Forum readers are even more likely to have "gone through hoops" to get our HD sets working properly, and apparently 15% of us continue to rely on OTA for our HD.

Context sir. :)

15% of the AVSer's that rely on OTA for HD are not the same 15% of the OTA only viewers. Overlapping data points. Relying on OTA for HD does not imply OTA only.

Going along with that, I see a lot of people who "can't" pay off their credit cards, but do pay for TV...

When the money gets tight the last thing to go is the cable!

What else you going to do? :)

There will definitely be a broader shift back to OTA.

In the UK, the Freeview digital OTA service which was launched in late 2000 has led to a significant shift back to antennas, and is now used by over 1/3rd of the British population

Right now, most Americans still are not aware of OTA HD and integrated ATSC tuners didn't become commonplace until about 18 months ago.

Once ATSC tuner penetration reaches greater levels and the general population learns of the benefits of OTA digital, expect the percentage of OTA only households to increase from the current 15% to about 25 - 30%. Add to that, many Pay TV subscribers will use antennas as a supplement, resulting in a comeback for antennas in the majority of the US households. (Either solo or as a supplement to Pay TV)

Remember, the compelling reason people went with cable30 years ago; it was the only option for decent PQ and reliable reception. Today in most markets, the best PQ comes from OTA digital. Most will stick with pay TV, but in the future a sizable percentage of the population (1/4 -1/3) will be happy with OTA digital as their sole video delivery method.

25-30% :eek: Never happen my friend.

The UK doesn't compare. Antennas are required when building and I believe are required for rentals. Freeview isn't free. They pay a license fee for each television they own.:cool:

A number of the people I have delt with can't (or woun't or aren't allowed) to put up an outdoor antenna for various reasons. They are left with using an indoor antenna or not getting OTA at all. That can be a very frustrating experience.A number of people also can't/won't put up a dish either. And another number of people don't have cable lines running to their house...

A lot of people don't realize that local government laws, HOA rules, etc. can't prohibit installation of TV antennas, or even dictate where they are placed. That doesn't stop local governments and HOAs from making such laws/rules, and many of the uninformed public are unaware that those laws/rules are unenforceable because of the federal OTARD rule.

When the money gets tight the last thing to go is the cable!

What else you going to do? :)

For me when money gets tight,I may cut back on TV services (had JUST limited basic for a few months) but DO NOT TOUCH my HSI!

At an average of $60/month lost per household going back to OTA-only, they'll be looking at a lot of vanishing revenue.

The people paying $60/month are probably watching cable-only channels that they don't want to give up. The people who are more likely to switch to OTA-only are the ones on "lifeline basic" at $15/month (or whatever) who are getting pretty much only the local broadcast channels anyway.

That's basically what I did twenty years ago. When I got married, I was living in an apartment with what was then called "limited basic" cable, because we're out in the boonies where an indoor antenna can pick up only a couple of stations, with a crappy picture to boot. Then my wife and I bought a house whose previous owner had been using cable for a while, but still had her old antenna on the roof. We hooked up the antenna to the TV, and it gave good enough reception on the "local" stations that we decided not to bother with cable.

Although OTA only represents ~15% of TV households, Consumers Union estimated (6/05) 4 out of 10 US households have at least 1 TV that relies exclusively on OTA.

Press Release

Dec 10, 2007 16:11

Awareness of Digital TV Transition Grows, but Substantial Consumer Education Still Needed, Cable Research Shows

Nationwide Survey Shows Consumer Awareness Nearly 50 Percent; Knowledge of Transition Lags in ''Over the Air'' Households

ALEXANDRIA, Va. --(Business Wire)-- Dec. 10, 2007 There's growing awareness of the nation's February 2009 transition to digital television by TV broadcasters, yet the group of Americans with the lowest level of awareness about the transition includes those that are most deeply affected - households that receive television programming exclusively "over the air."
These are among the results from the CTAM Pulse, a nationwide survey of more than 1,000 U.S. consumers conducted last month by the Cable & Telecommunications Association for Marketing (CTAM), an association of cable industry marketing executives. CTAM is a member of the DTV Transition Coalition, a group created to educate consumers about the digital transition.

After February 17, 2009, the nation's broadcast television stations will begin broadcasting exclusively in digital. This means that any consumer receiving broadcast TV over the air on an older analog TV set must take some action for that TV to continue receiving programs from the local TV stations. Those options include obtaining a new digital-to-analog converter; subscribing to cable TV or other multichannel video service, or replacing the analog TV set with a new one equipped with a digital TV tuner.

Major findings of the CTAM survey show that:

-- Forty-eight percent of U.S. households are aware of the digital TV transition, compared to just 29 percent from a survey taken in July 2005;

-- Groups most familiar with the transition are subscribers to broadband services (45 percent), digital cable service (40 percent), and basic cable service (39 percent);

-- Seventeen percent of survey respondents - representing more than 19 million homes - don't have any televisions connected to a video service provider.

-- Households that don't have any televisions connected to a video service provider were least familiar with the transition at 31 percent;

The survey also indicates how much work remains in educating American consumers about the transition. Forty-seven percent of respondents said they do not know when the digital transition will occur, and 26 percent believe it will take place sometime other than the designated year 2009.

"In the months ahead, cable companies will reassure their customers that all connected analog sets will continue to display the new broadcast digital TV signals seamlessly. In addition, companies will be aggressively communicating with all consumers to alert them to the transition, help them understand what will happen in 2009, and how they can benefit from this further transition to digital television technology," said Char Beales, President and CEO, CTAM.

Other key findings of the survey that will help guide cable's consumer education campaign on the DTV transition include:

-- Of those who are aware of the DTV transition, 38 percent said they'd learned about it from TV; 26 percent had read of it in the newspaper; and 20 percent had heard about it from friends or family.

-- Fifty percent of households that watch TV exclusively over the air said they don't know where to turn for information about the transition.

-- The majority of households that currently receive cable, satellite or any other TV service have all their TV sets connected to some type of TV service - and therefore are unlikely to need digital-to-analog converters to keep their analog TV sets working. However, 25 percent of these "connected" households - or 23.3 million homes - said they also have at least one or more "unconnected" sets in their homes.

-- Two-fifths (40 percent) of households with an unconnected television set said they use those sets to watch broadcast TV programs only; 22 percent use them to watch DVDs; and 16 percent use them for video games.

The industry groups and government organizations that have united to form the DTV Transition Coalition are providing a variety of consumer information services to help educate consumers about their options in the transition. Extensive information is available the Coalition's principal website at http://www.dtvtransition.org.

Consumers can learn more about how the transition affects them at a Web site established jointly by CTAM and the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) at http://www.getreadyfordigitaltv.com.

Specific details on the U.S. government's coupon program to subsidize the consumer purchase of digital-to-analog converters, which starts in January 2008, is available from a toll-free number established by the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, 1-888-DTV-2009.

The Complete CTAM Pulse report is available on the CTAM Web site at http://www.ctam.com/news/pulse111207.pdf.

CTAM, the Cable & Telecommunications Association for Marketing, is dedicated to helping the cable business grow. As a non-profit professional association, CTAM provides marketing education and networking opportunities to more than 5,500 members, through conferences, consumer research, publications, http://www.ctam.com, a network of regional chapters, and the CTAM Executive Management Program at the Harvard Business School. CTAM also facilitates unified, national cooperative marketing efforts on behalf of its corporate members, such as the Cable Movers Hotline (SM), Business Services Initiative, and On Demand Consortium. Consumers can learn about cable's advanced services and see offers from their local providers at the CTAM-supported http://www.ThisIsCable.com (SM).

I couldn't live without ESPN.
I can't stand 95% of what is on my locals. Including almost 'all' of the most watched prime time offerings. Those shows are aweful(imo), only when sports are on do I watch my locals. Otherwise it's strictly espn, discovery, hdnet, hbo, starz, showtime, cinemax, Science ch., usa, tbs, tnt.
I don't watch my locals for my news either.
Also, though NFL ticket is a must for me.
My specific location and terrain make OTA less than perfect anyways.
I wish I didn't have to spend so much per month, but I do.

I understand that some people are going to be in tough spots for OTA reception, but the majority of people are not. Also, keep in mind that analog shut off will help clear up a lot of the adjacent channel and co-channel issues.

This is true.

But, I suspect that for the most part the damage has been done since people still associate OTA with grainy interference and crazy geeks standing on their roof with big pieces of metal and lots of wiring.

I am surprised the number of people who will not bother to put a set of rabbit ears on their TV. My old college room mate lives just NE of DC and he has not cable service (never was a big TV guy) and just has a DVD hooked up. He could be having a little TV reception party where he is!

Perhaps broadcasters could/should run DTV and HDTV reception tutorials rather than P.I. infomercials overnight and weekend afternoons, or does that come too close to "serving the public interest". :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

They truly should do something such as what you suggest. All of this reminds me of a true survey some graduate students in library science once did. They asked people on the street if they would consider using public libraries if they would be allowed to check out books for free. Many, many people answered that if public libraries would allow a person to check out books for free they would begin using the library! I suspect that many people would consider an HD TV--if only they could recieve HD broadcasts for FREE!

They truly should do something such as what you suggest. All of this reminds me of a true survey some graduate students in library science once did. They asked people on the street if they would consider using public libraries if they would be allowed to check out books for free. Many, many people answered that if public libraries would allow a person to check out books for free they would begin using the library! I suspect that many people would consider an HD TV--if only they could recieve HD broadcasts for FREE!
Wait....you can check out as many books as you want from the library....for free?! :eek: How much is the monthly fee to do that? Is there a long term commitment? ;)

Wait....you can check out as many books as you want from the library....for free?! :eek: How much is the monthly fee to do that? Is there a long term commitment? ;)The problem is, people don't know about the libraries, and the libraries don't have the marketing funds to make people aware. Big retailers like Barnes and Noble and amazon.com have all the advertising dollars and that's all anyone knows about. :D

But, I suspect that for the most part the damage has been done since people still associate OTA with grainy interference and crazy geeks standing on their roof with big pieces of metal and lots of wiring.Exactly... that is the problem. People are unaware.

I am surprised the number of people who will not bother to put a set of rabbit ears on their TV. Me too!

I recently dropped cable, and bought a Tivo HD to record OTA tv. Combine that with Netflix and I'm fine. Sure it would be great to have some of the nice HD programming like Discovery or ESPN, but to me it's not worth the money price. I mainly only watch prime time broadcast tv anyway, so for me most of what I watch is available on OTA, it wasn't a big change of habit for me.

The people paying $60/month are probably watching cable-only channels that they don't want to give up. The people who are more likely to switch to OTA-only are the ones on "lifeline basic" at $15/month (or whatever) who are getting pretty much only the local broadcast channels anyway.

Well, yes and no.

Cable systems don't exactly go out of their way to publicize the existence of "lifeline basic", so I suspect that a certain number of "extended basic" subscribers are paying for extra channels that they don't really care about. For that matter, I also wonder about how many viewers thought they wanted those extra channels, rarely watch them, but continue to pay out of inertia -- much like the folks with a gym membership that they haven't used in two years, but are still paying for.

It would be interesting to see a study on the percentage of "extended basic" and higher subscribers who mostly ignore the extra channels that they are paying for -- and I would suspect that a plausible estimate could be developed out of the data that Nielsen collects for national TV ratings. Whether the number of viewers in this category would turn out to be 5% of cable subscribers or 25% is not something that I would want to hazard a guess on...

Context sir. :)

15% of the AVSer's that rely on OTA for HD are not the same 15% of the OTA only viewers. Overlapping data points. Relying on OTA for HD does not imply OTA only.

While I would suspect that there are some AVSer's who are getting SD programs from satellite or cable while relying exclusively on OTA for HD, I also suspect that number is dropping as HD service via satellite and cable becomes more ubiquitous. The level of passion here about HD programming is such that those folks will get increasingly dissatisfied with the image quality of their SD pay programming and will either opt to upgrade their pay service to HD or will drop that service completely and go OTA-only.

While I would suspect that there are some AVSer's who are getting SD programs from satellite or cable while relying exclusively on OTA for HD, I also suspect that number is dropping as HD service via satellite and cable becomes more ubiquitous. The level of passion here about HD programming is such that those folks will get increasingly dissatisfied with the image quality of their SD pay programming and will either opt to upgrade their pay service to HD or will drop that service completely and go OTA-only.

You also have my situation. I rely on OTA for HD, because of no HD LIL. I still have D* HD as well.

Just pointing out that the polls, surveys, etc... have overlapping data. :)

I am surprised the number of people who will not bother to put a set of rabbit ears on their TV.

I tried to do my part. I was visiting a friend who was watching stretched SD. I asked him why he wasn't using the HD OTA signal. He had no clue what I was talking about.

I brought over a pair of rabbit ears, connected them and showed him the difference between what he was watching and what actual HD looked like. He seemed impressed.

A week or so later I asked him if he was enjoying all the HD. He said he had disconnected the rabbit ears because he didn't like the way they looked. It was back to stretched SD for him.

A week or so later I asked him if he was enjoying all the HD. He said he had disconnected the rabbit ears because he didn't like the way they looked. It was back to stretched SD for him.

Some people. I was having this conversation with my brother a while back, and his basic view was that antennas aren't modern.

Yup. "Not modern". As compared to, ya know, the internal combustion engine or silverware.

One real gripe Americans should have:

In most of the rest of the world the major cable channels are available free-to-air off satellite. Only in North America did someone think it was cute to have people subscribe to watch channels with ads on them.

A week or so later I asked him if he was enjoying all the HD. He said he had disconnected the rabbit ears because he didn't like the way they looked. It was back to stretched SD for him.

Strange.

Apparently he prefers an ugly picture to an ugly antenna.

Antennas aren't ugly, otherwise we'd have to tear all the cell phone towers down, right ;) ?

Some people. I was having this conversation with my brother a while back, and his basic view was that antennas aren't modern.

Yes, there's a general perception that television was snowy, full of ghosts and barely watchable back when they used antennas and cable television finally made television reception practical. Many people are certain that they can't receive any television over the air if they can't see the towers or they're just a few miles away from them.

There are people who have never in their entire lives watched television with an antenna.

In most of the rest of the world the major cable channels are available free-to-air off satellite. Only in North America did someone think it was cute to have people subscribe to watch channels with ads on them.

I suppose it's because the companies will do whatever they can get away with. Paying twice (for the subscription and for the ads) seemed very silly until I got a DVR. Wouldn't something like Freesat be nice to have available?

I could drop cable, but only if I could get ESPN OTA. I don't care about any other cable only channels, except for a rare game on FSN. When Hockey went to Versus, I just stopped watching it. With more and more niche cable networks popping up, showing mostly garbage I have become quite disenchanted with "multi-channel." What am I paying $80 a month for?

At least ESPN is dropping off the premium HD-tier for Cox locally, so I can recover that $5/mo. HDNET and HD Theater for $5/mo? No thanks!

The awareness of HD OTA seems to be lower than average in the LA area. I find that nowhere near half the people are aware of the analog switch-off.

What % are aware that DTV already exists?

What % are aware that DTV already exists?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12459241#post12459241

Strange.

Apparently he prefers an ugly picture to an ugly antenna.

Exactly. His comment was along the lines of "I have this great looking TV and who wants bunny ears on top of it?". BTW, it is a 65" Pioneer--incredible picture when actually showing HD.

A week or so later I asked him if he was enjoying all the HD. He said he had disconnected the rabbit ears because he didn't like the way they looked. It was back to stretched SD for him. Couldn't he just put the rabbit ears in a closet?

Actually, what you need to do is get one of those sleek aerodynamic style antennas, slap a Bose logo on it and he'll make sure it's out where everyone can see it... ;)

Couldn't he just put the rabbit ears in a closet?

I just decided not to put any more energy into it with him. If he is satisfied with 65 inches of stretched, fuzzy SD :eek:

Actually, what you need to do is get one of those sleek aerodynamic style antennas, slap a Bose logo on it and he'll make sure it's out where everyone can see it... ;)

You know, that might work!

This week I convinced a coworker to pick up a ATSC receiver. He's been watching what he calls "terrible" analog cable on his four year old EDTV because he believed his EDTV was incompatible with HDTV. The only reason he asked is because the other coworker, the one who couldn't get HD via satellite because of this trees, mentioned that I knew about this stuff.

I guess word is getting around that I know the "secrets" of HDTV reception that those fat cats in Washington don't want us to know about or something.

A Channel Master 4221 on the top shelf of a closet used to be common, especially in old houses with 10 foot ceilings.

A Channel Master 4221 on the top shelf of a closet used to be common, especially in old houses with 10 foot ceilings.

I wound up sticking a Radio Shack antenna in the attic. The attic mount cuts about 50% of its efficiency, but it is actually enough to bring in all the VHF and UHF stations here in Jacksonville.

All for $39 and a few feet of wire (well, ok, there was some crawling around in the rafters and possibly some drilling done when my wife was out of the house).

Another factor that hurt OTA HD are the people who won't make the effort to put together best antenna for their area.

I helped a friend a few months ago with his CM 4221 outside. He needed to get a decent pole and a pre-amp. Instead he puts the thing at ground level on a 10' piece of conduit on the wrong side of a brick building that is about 35 mi from the tower. And this is with LOS to the horizon from the roof. All he has to do is put the thing on the roof, with a pre-amp, and he will have a party. Instead he bitches he can only get two channels.

There are a lot of people who will not bother doing the thing right even if they have someone to assist them.

I wound up sticking a Radio Shack antenna in the attic. The attic mount cuts about 50% of its efficiency, but it is actually enough to bring in all the VHF and UHF stations here in Jacksonville.

All for $39 and a few feet of wire (well, ok, there was some crawling around in the rafters and possibly some drilling done when my wife was out of the house).
I lost a good wood bit helping a friend install an attic antenna. I was in the living room waiting for the wire fish from the attic while he drilled the last hole up there. Suddenly, the drill stops and I hear clang, clang, clang inside the wall and my friend say "oh, crap!".

He came downstairs and said "I owe you a new wood bit. Yours is inside my wall..." :D

I lost a good wood bit helping a friend install an attic antenna. I was in the living room waiting for the wire fish from the attic while he drilled the last hole up there. Suddenly, the drill stops and I hear clang, clang, clang inside the wall and my friend say "oh, crap!".

He came downstairs and said "I owe you a new wood bit. Yours is inside my wall..." :D

That is one of the better "Adventures in the Attic" stories. :)

Of course, given the current writer's strike, that could be a premise for a new reality series:

"Random people are placed in an attic with a variety of tasks to do equipped only with duct tape and a flashlight. Hilarity ensues."

I was very surprised to see an ad on my local ABC promoting using an antenna on your new tv to get HD for free.

http://www.abc15.com/hdtv

High Definition Television for FREE. You’ve got to be kidding right??

Nope. Here’s how.

The very best way to watch HD television is to watch the over-the-air signal, without using your cable or satellite service provider…and it’s free!

Here’s why. When you watch HD television through your local cable provider or satellite service, the HD signal is processed and compressed so that it can be squeezed in with dozens of those other channels on the cable and satellite line-ups.

That’s just not so with free, over-the-air, HDTV signal delivered by KNXV, and the other local television stations here in Phoenix. With over-the-air HDTV, you receive the highest resolution on screen with the best audio available. Only over the air HDTV is the full experience.

I was very surprised to see an ad on my local ABC promoting using an antenna on your new tv to get HD for free.

Humm ... wasn't Phoenix one of the aborted USDTV markets?

Humm ... wasn't Phoenix one of the aborted USDTV markets?
It's possible that not every station took part in the venture.

My dad got D* with Sunday Ticket, HD, etc.

He was bragging about how nice it was and how it had all the local HD channels.

I kindly reminded him that it is missing CW and PBS and all other sub channels on the local stations.

He did not realize that he was still missing local digital channels.
==============================

I will always keep an antenna up for the local HDs even if they are offered over cable/sat. I like having the local channels without being tied to a service.

He did not realize that he was still missing local digital channels.
Actually, it sounds like he wasn't "missing" them at all...

Humm ... wasn't Phoenix one of the aborted USDTV markets?
Nope. Vegas and Albuquerque are the closest 2 that I know of.

KNXV's HD channel is only running about 13.25Mbit/s because they run an SD simulcast on a subchannel that is used to feed some of the minor TV providers in the area. The primary cable company in the area, Cox, does not recompress any local HD channels. KNXV's audio switching is crap: it has pops and crackles on every switch from local SD to network HD. I applaud them for advertising OTA broadcasts, but most of their argument is flat out wrong.

Fox (or my local affiliate) had a PSA about the analog shutdown during Cops. I believe it's one of Fox's lowest rated shows but at least some people saw it.

Fox (or my local affiliate) had a PSA about the analog shutdown during Cops. I believe it's one of Fox's lowest rated shows but at least some people saw it.
I would bet the audience for it probably has one of the largest analog OTA bases of just about any show on network TV.

Fox (or my local affiliate) had a PSA about the analog shutdown during Cops. I believe it's one of Fox's lowest rated shows but at least some people saw it.

It isn't as low rated as you think. The quality of eyes make up for number of viewers. Most of the people who need to know about the transition watch Cops and AMW. That is why of all shows on TV, Cops and AMW will be around for many more years to come.

I was very surprised to see an ad on my local ABC promoting using an antenna on your new tv to get HD for free.

http://www.abc15.com/hdtv

And who says stations don't toot their own HD horn. Many stations nationwide, particularly now with the transition less than 13 months away. It will only pickup from here.

And who says stations don't toot their own HD horn. Many stations nationwide, particularly now with the transition less than 13 months away. It will only pickup from here.
NBC30 in Connecticut not only runs ads, but has a pretty good FAQ page:

http://www.nbc30.com/digital/index.html

... has a pretty good FAQ page

Most stations do. It is in their interest too.

Most stations do. It is in their interest too.
Well, I was actually pointing out their's was particularily good. Many stations have info or FAQ pages, but they kind of suck. Some leave people more confused than ever.

Well, I was actually pointing out their's was particularily good. Many stations have info or FAQ pages, but they kind of suck. Some leave people more confused than ever.

In the not too distant past, that was so true, if they had any info at all. I am now seeing many sites with LOTS of info, which I guess could cause information overload. Feast or famine! :D

In the not too distant past, that was so true, if they had any info at all. I am now seeing many sites with LOTS of info, which I guess could cause information overload. Feast or famine! :D
What a lot of these sites need is an actual demo video of how to set yourself up based on what equipment you have.

I don't think I've ever seen a FAQ that mentions the need to do a scan first. It should be listed as a troubleshooting step. They should probably list the stations real channel number to aid in antenna pointing since some equipment has signal meters.

I don't think I've ever seen a FAQ that mentions the need to do a scan first. It should be listed as a troubleshooting step. They should probably list the stations real channel number to aid in antenna pointing since some equipment has signal meters.
For that matter, I wonder how many people would be surprised at how many stations are really out there when they actually do a scan...

In our FAQ we mention to be sure to do a rescan on Feb 18, 2009.

In our FAQ we mention to be sure to do a rescan on Feb 18, 2009.

foxeng is right, but it also wouldn't hurt to keep track of the local threads for stations that jump the gun a bit.

For example, in Johnstown, PA DMA thread, WWCP's station engineer indicated they plan to convert their digital from UHF 29 back to their legacy VHF 8 channel during the summer or fall of 2008. My luck they'll probably convert just before the American Idol finale and I'll get stabbed to death by the female faction of the family.

KAZT-CA in Phoenix is flash-cutting to digital next month. Their low power analog signal on 27 suffers from interference from KUTP's DTV broadcast on channel 26, so they applied for and were granted a permit from the FCC to make the switch now. They have information posted on their website at http://arizonasown.com/Global/story.asp?S=7531350

Honestly, I'm pretty impressed by the number of people that know about digital OTA, and I'm a cynical bastard that thinks half the population is functionally retarded. It's all the more impressive when you consider that OTA was pretty much useless in terms of PQ up until just three years or so for most markets.

I think OTA zealotry is mainly responsible for this fortunate outcome. When you pull in a bunch of fantastic looking HD channels for free with some old RCA rabbit ears,it makes you want to run out and let everyone know! (I know some of my elderly relatives just about soiled themselves when they figured out that they could get their basic channels in crystal clear quality for the cost of an amplified indoor antenna.)

If OTA HD is ultimately relatively successful, I think it will be because of word of mouth.

Do most US ATSC receivers give an indication of corrected and uncorrected errors on their diagnostic screens? My cheap COFDM set-top box (a Pace DTVA) does - and it is quite useful in optimising aerial orientation. I normally align it halfway between the two positions at which errors start to creep in.

Most people getting OTA are just using an antenna and the "signal strength" meter on their TV (or not using any kind of meter at all).

^^I just climbed up on the roof and looked around at all the neighbor's antennas and pointed mine in the same general direction. I get perfect reception of all my local OTA digital channels. I'm located in the central valley of California, the transmitters are in the mountains about 37 to the east but they are separated from each other fairly widely north-south. I can't get good reception of all the analog broadcasts without moving the antenna when changing channels but the digitals are all fine.

^^I just climbed up on the roof and looked around at all the neighbor's antennas and pointed mine in the same general direction. I get perfect reception of all my local OTA digital channels. I'm located in the central valley of California, the transmitters are in the mountains about 37 to the east but they are separated from each other fairly widely north-south. I can't get good reception of all the analog broadcasts without moving the antenna when changing channels but the digitals are all fine.
In my case, I looked at where the towers are and pointed the antenna at them...

It's funny, though, I can't get crap for signal on analog, but the digitals pop right in despite the fact I can see most of the towers from my living room window. My part of town is terrible for any reception. It's only in the last month that Sprint put in a repeater so I could get any signal at all on my phone. Radio stations quit working when I start up my street.

Maybe I have some of those aliens from "War of the Worlds" hiding around me... ;)

KAZT-CA in Phoenix is flash-cutting to digital next month. Their low power analog signal on 27 suffers from interference from KUTP's DTV broadcast on channel 26, so they applied for and were granted a permit from the FCC to make the switch now. They have information posted on their website at http://arizonasown.com/Global/story.asp?S=7531350

I wish they would have included that physical channel number and transmitter location of the new DTV Tx in that post. :(

They are using the same tower, antenna, and channel as their current analog broadcast.

^^^

See, all they had to do was add one sentence to their post to avoid all those questions. ;)

BTW, thanks for the heads-up. KAZT is the last of the analog-onlys that I care about. It'll be nice to have a picture that's not full of snow for a change.

It'll be nice to have a picture that's not full of snow for a change.
Up my way, every local picture I see has snow in it this time of year... ;)

Up my way, every local picture I see has snow in it this time of year... ;)

Better you than me! :D

Up my way, every local picture I see has snow in it this time of year... ;)

What's "snow"? :confused:

What's "snow"? :confused:
It's like that stuff you get for about 10 minutes every afternoon - only colder and less wet... ;)

So kinda like those hard round balls that they also get a lot of times?

So kinda like those hard round balls that they also get a lot of times?
Hey, leave your personal problems out of this... ;)