The official final DTV Table Of Allotments/channel change thread

[foxeng]

The 52-69 spectrum auction has been underway for several years.

[goldrich]

Originally Posted by foxeng

The 52-69 spectrum auction has been underway for several years.

Yes. As an example, I know that Qualcomm is already using channel 55 in Indy.

Steve

[HIPAR]

Originally Posted by Falcon_77

...

What is next on the FCC's agenda? The auction of the 52-69 spectrum?

If you want to bid you can check out the FCC auction pages.

For 700 MHz:

http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/def...actsheet&id=73

Some of the to be freed from TV spectrum has already been sold. Qualcomm already bought Chanel 55 nation wide and has been cutting 'sweetheart' deals with the stations broadcasting there to move off early. WHYY (Wilmington DE) has sacrificed many DTV viewers with its Qualcomm deal.

The press makes a big deal about the billions to be made from the auction of the 'analog spectrum'. I guess that money will cover the cost of government for a few hours.

--- CHAS

[Falcon_77]

Well, this is quite an eye-opener. Thank you for the info. I didn't know that the TV spectrum had already been reduced in some areas.

I looked at the results of Auction 49 and Qualcomm has 5 of the 6 licenses for Channel 55. Noticeably absent is the Pacific EAG group (6) on that auction. What happened to that one, is it part of Auction 73? I don't see it on the list. We still have channel 55 for TV in SoCal.

What is Qualcomm using channel 55 for?

[dr1394]

Originally Posted by Falcon_77

Well, this is quite an eye-opener. Thank you for the info. I didn't know that the TV spectrum had already been reduced in some areas.

I looked at the results of Auction 49 and Qualcomm has 5 of the 6 licenses for Channel 55. Noticeably absent is the Pacific EAG group (6) on that auction. What happened to that one, is it part of Auction 73? I don't see it on the list. We still have channel 55 for TV in SoCal.

What is Qualcomm using channel 55 for?

MediaFLO.

http://www.qualcomm.com/mediaflo/new...h_overview.pdf

In SoCal, they're testing on channel 53.

Ron

[Falcon_77]

How long do "dismissed" applications remain in the FCC database? For that matter, how often is the database updated?

I am assuming that dismissed applications were rejected, but am unable to find a definition list confirming what the various status flags mean.

At this point it seems that I will have to check APP records to see exactly what they mean.

Thank you,

[foxeng]

When ever the FCC feels they need to purge the database. There seems to be no set schedule of when that is done. Some outdated stuff has remained for years in some cases.

[HIPAR]

It's about T minus 15 months and counting towards DTV H Hour.

Currently, there seems to be more news about mobile TV, IPTV and satellite MPEG4 than over-the-air broadcasting.

So what is the current state of the transition. Is new DTV equipment being delivered? Are the stations that need extensive new construction on schedule to meet the deadline? etc ..

--- CHAS

[foxeng]

Originally Posted by HIPAR

It's about T minus 15 months and counting towards DTV H Hour.

Currently, there seems to be more news about mobile TV, IPTV and satellite MPEG4 than over-the-air broadcasting.

So what is the current state of the transition. Is new DTV equipment being delivered? Are the stations that need extensive new construction on schedule to meet the deadline? etc ..

--- CHAS

Who knows? There is no clearinghouse for that information.

[foxeng]

Consultant: Use TV Channel 6 for Radio

November 21, 2007

It's time to drop radio's protections for TV Channel 6 and re-purpose that spectrum to the FM band. So says engineering consultant John Mullaney.

In an FCC filing, Mullaney says adding 82 to 88 MHz to the bottom of the FM band would ease overcrowding; the time is also right for the agency to decide if TV Channel 5 should be reallocated to radio as well, he said.

"The assumptions that Channels 2–6 are technically equal to the remaining Channels 7–51 has proved not to be totally accurate," says Mullaney in the filing.

"We believe the problems associated with impulse noise and greater difficulty in compensating for signal cancellations are some of the major reasons why there are only 38 potential [TV] digital allotments under consideration while there are currently 302 analog full-service analog allotments."

Because only eight digital allotments are proposed for TV Channel 6, Mullaney believes, based upon this "extreme underutilization of TV 6, the commission could also consider a shared use of the channel but limit the sharing to just those full-service digital TV allotments currently under consideration."

Many of the recently filed NCE applications for radio allocations either ignored Channel 6 protection or curtailed their proposed power levels to protect those analog channels, he said.

The thousands of applications filed in the recent window, as well as more than 14,000 applications filed in the 2003 FM translator window, demonstrates pent-up-demand for FM spectrum, he argues.

One allocation for a TV channel could be used for up to 30 FM radio stations; such additions could go a long way towards easing short-spacing conditions on the FM band, he states.

http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0015/t.9859.html

[Falcon_77]

This makes sense to me, if we would have enough room remaining in the TV spectrum. Some markets may be constrained with only 7-51. I think we are throwing away too many UHF channels to be frank.

I know that ATSC handles impulse noise quite a bit better than DVB-T, but the difference only seems to be enough to utilize VHF-High.

With HD Radio (hopefully) gaining popularity in the next few years, perhaps this will be a bigger issue.

As for DTV, VHF-Lo has got to go.

[foxeng]

I am not saying Mullaney is wrong, it does make plenty of sense from a technical standpoint (in full discloser he has done work for stations I have worked for when I was working there so I have nothing against John, he is a good engineer), but remember where he is coming from. When the transition is complete not many TV stations will need broadcast services for a while and FM is pretty much topped out now with the LPFMs coming on the air filling in the holds. He stands to make a lot of money if this comes to pass. That is where his drive is coming from. Will the FCC take this seriously? Not until after the transition and then who knows how long after, if ever.

[HIPAR]

And then there are a few difficult cases such as the well known situation with WPVI in Philadelphia having no place to go except back to Channel 6. I guess the problem might be solved by not expanding FM radio in those cases but somehow that seems to be a makeshift solution.

--- CHAS

[MeowMeow]

Considering the terrible public awareness level for HDTV, I don't see HD Radio getting a giant push anytime soon.

Couple that with the fact that you're talking about more and smaller facilities with radio, and you're facing a lot of resistance just getting HD signals transmitting. How many station engineers are up to the challenge (consider that a lot of TV station engineers are having trouble)? How many stations are even willing to commit the money to HD radio (radio stations are notorious penny pinchers)?

The basic idea of using channel six isn't the worst. But, I don't know that the undertaking is going to yield a lot of benefit relative to the complications it will cause for TV on channel 6.

[kb7oeb]

I think HD Radio may be more known than OTA HD, I hear HD Radio ads all the time.

[MeowMeow]

Originally Posted by kb7oeb

I think HD Radio may be more known than OTA HD, I hear HD Radio ads all the time.

Ads promoting the basic concept (like the digital TV public service ads running) or ads selling HD radios?

I haven't heard either in my area (central/western PA). We only have a handful of HD radio stations operating right now, so I've made very little effort to buy equipment and such.

[dline]

Originally Posted by kb7oeb

I think HD Radio may be more known than OTA HD, I hear HD Radio ads all the time.

One of our local stations has an ad on the front of city buses: "You won't believe it's AM."

[Larry Kenney]

It was nice to see the write up on Digital TV, HDTV and the end of analog in "Parade" magazine, the Sunday supplement in the San Francisco Chronicle this past weekend. It was well written... and correct. It gave the date for the change to full digital, mentioned how analog TVs would no longer work unless you had analog cable or satellite service or got one of the converter boxes that will be available. It even told how to get one come January.

I hope this and the new PSAs on TV are just the start of public information on the transistiion!

Larry
SF

[dline]

Originally Posted by MeowMeow

Ads promoting the basic concept (like the digital TV public service ads running) or ads selling HD radios?

I haven't heard either in my area (central/western PA). We only have a handful of HD radio stations operating right now, so I've made very little effort to buy equipment and such.

The issue there is that HD Radio doesn't have the urgency of (H)DTV. The benefits of DT are immediately apparent: it looks better, it sounds better, and it's a more efficient way to use spectrum. Plus, there's a lot of pressure to get all those TV stations to get rid of the extra channel they're using during the transition.

HD Radio, on the other hand, transmits within a station's allotted channel, so the pressure to get rid of the existing service isn't quite as severe. (The flip side is that converting FM to digital could help clear up the crowding in the band. Plus, flutter-resistant reception would be nice.)

Also, as far as I know, the FCC has no deadline for getting rid of analog AM/FM radio. As far as I know, it's just the desire for better sounding radio that's driving this HD Radio thing.

[MeowMeow]

Originally Posted by dline

One of our local stations has an ad on the front of city buses: "You won't believe it's AM."

See? I live in a town that has one public bus, with no ads on it and it only runs from 8 am to 4 pm.

You live in the middle of somewhere. Me? Not so much.

[kb7oeb]

Originally Posted by MeowMeow

Ads promoting the basic concept (like the digital TV public service ads running) or ads selling HD radios?

No PSAs, there are ads from retailers like radio shack pushing radio sales and there are ads from the radios stations themselves promoting their HD2 channels.

Originally Posted by dline

The issue there is that HD Radio doesn't have the urgency of (H)DTV. The benefits of DT are immediately apparent: it looks better, it sounds better, and it's a more efficient way to use spectrum. Plus, there's a lot of pressure to get all those TV stations to get rid of the extra channel they're using during the transition.

Most people I talk to think HD comes from cable and satellite and are in disbelief that you can get HD OTA. There is no promotion of the HD OTA signal. I can only think of three times I've heard mention of OTA digital; when one local stations news went HD they mentioned Antennas, when a local station added a weather sub channel they added 5.2 to the on screen graphic but usually only audibly mention the web stream and when the MNTV station got Suns games in HD they said they could be received on 45.1 or cable 709.

Our big independent added HD news but only mentioned it available on DirecTV and Cable. The year prior they carried Diamond Backs games in HD but did not promote it at all because they were not on cable and they didn't do HD news until the day they were added to cable.

I don't think the the tv stations want people to pick them up OTA, I think they would rather people subscribe to pay tv and get carriage fees.

[MeowMeow]

Originally Posted by kb7oeb

Most people I talk to think HD comes from cable and satellite and are in disbelief that you can get HD OTA.

Most people I know are convinced that HD is just another round of unnecessary technology upgrades. HD uptakes requires sitting a person down and showing it to them done right.

I've heard every quip possible about OTA HD. Antenna's are outdated. HD isn't all that good looking. Too much effort. The old-fashioned "Huh? Too complex."

But, people are impressed when you sit them down and show them the finished product.

[foxeng]

Originally Posted by dline

Also, as far as I know, the FCC has no deadline for getting rid of analog AM/FM radio. As far as I know, it's just the desire for better sounding radio that's driving this HD Radio thing.

After talking with my old radio buddies still in the biz about this, actually their big fear is that the FCC WILL mandate a radio digital conversion after the TV digital conversion is completed. That is the real push for HD Radio by station owners. The fact that HD Radio is IBOC and not a separate channel like TV makes it much easier and much, much cheaper for installation and operations for radio to go ahead and install HD Radio now, even though there is no real audience for HD Radio yet. There are more digital TV tuners in the US than HD Radios at this point.

For about $75k average (in some instances cheaper, some more expensive), you can set up a complete HD Radio system from programming to antenna and transmitter mods verses the several million dollars and FCC permitting to install just a SD digital TV system. Unlike TV which has no real marketplace force, just legislative pressures to do digital TV; satellite radio along with the problems TV has had in converting to digital TV (technically as well as legislative), has convinced terrestrial radio to do something now and not wait and get caught with their pants down when they can't beat the 800 lb gorilla.

My guess is by 2020, analog terrestrial radio will be history as well.

[Trip in VA]

Originally Posted by HIPAR

And then there are a few difficult cases such as the well known situation with WPVI in Philadelphia having no place to go except back to Channel 6. I guess the problem might be solved by not expanding FM radio in those cases but somehow that seems to be a makeshift solution.

--- CHAS

If WPVI wanted to get off of channel 6 badly enough, they could have. A consulting engineer staring at the maps long enough could have figured out a way for WPVI to get a nice UHF. (Move WTVE-DT back to channel 51, put WPVI-DT on channel 25)

And as for foxeng's comments, if that's true, that's very sad. Nothing I've seen of IBOC has proven to me that it's suitable to replace analog radio. The analog is strong and clear long before the digital starts to decode in my experience, even using an FM roof antenna. If they want to kill off radio entirely, going digital-only is a great way to do it.

- Trip

[Thomas Desmond]

Originally Posted by foxeng

My guess is by 2020, analog terrestrial radio will be history as well.

I'm less convinced of that. I think of the age of the various radios that I have around my house that see occasional use, and don't see broadcasters being able to shut down the analog component of their HD-radio signals for many years.

Consider it this way. Almost every clock radio and table radio sold today is analog only. That isn't going to change anytime soon. Whenever the day comes that all new radios support digital, it will still be 15 or 20 years before the old radios will mostly fall out of use. And what radio station is going to want to go digital only when that means that they lose the listener who wakes up to their station on an analog clock radio or listens on a little portable analog radio at work?

I suspect that 2030 is being optimistic for when radio can go digital only.

[foxeng]

Originally Posted by Thomas Desmond

I'm less convinced of that. I think of the age of the various radios that I have around my house that see occasional use, and don't see broadcasters being able to shut down the analog component of their HD-radio signals for many years.

Consider it this way. Almost every clock radio and table radio sold today is analog only. That isn't going to change anytime soon. Whenever the day comes that all new radios support digital, it will still be 15 or 20 years before the old radios will mostly fall out of use. And what radio station is going to want to go digital only when that means that they lose the listener who wakes up to their station on an analog clock radio or listens on a little portable analog radio at work?

I suspect that 2030 is being optimistic for when radio can go digital only.

Those same things were said in 1998 about TV sets.

[Trip in VA]

I'll put it like this, I have my HD Radio with me at UVA, in downtown Charlottesville. There are two stations broadcasting IBOC here, and I can get neither one with my antenna in any configuration I've tried. The analogs are completely listenable (WVTW has some slight static, WCNR is completely clear, and all the non-digital stations come in fine), but I've never gotten the IBOC to decode.

Is this what the radio stations want?

- Trip

[dline]

Originally Posted by foxeng

Those same things were said in 1998 about TV sets.

Of course, in 1998 I think we were still talking about going all-DT by 2006.

[foxeng]

Originally Posted by dline

Of course, in 1998 I think we were still talking about going all-DT by 2006.

And EVERYONE and I mean EVERYONE was saying it would take until at least 2015 before you could THINK about turning off analog. Well here we are. Remember, TV's cost 100,000 times more than most radios. It isn't the same thing.

[kb7oeb]

I saw IONs dtv psa today, it actually tells people they can get free digital and HD http://ionline.tv/dtv/

If you want a laugh you can become a DTV Deputy and print out a FCC approved certificate http://dtv.gov/dtvquiz.html