AVS Official Topic - The FCC & Broadcast Spectrum - Page 107 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 35Likes
Reply
Thread Tools
post #3181 of 3202 Unread 02-23-2017, 01:23 PM
Senior Member
 
jb_ky1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 217
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by joblo View Post
So they currently transmit on RF 44, and just out of curiosity, I called and asked what their new frequency would be... "TV channel 2" they said.

But it's just a "behind the scenes" change, they said, nothing to worry about...
Yeah... Going from 44 to ch 2. I'd want to know that. Should re-brand themselves as channel 2.
jb_ky1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #3182 of 3202 Unread 02-23-2017, 02:10 PM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 15,091
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 901 Post(s)
Liked: 1768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calaveras View Post
It's beginning to sound like that enough stations are moving to low VHF that low VHF antennas will be making a comeback.
I was just thinking about that, yesterday, and the two I put out by the curb some time ago. Pack rat that I am, you'd think I'd have kept those. Certainly kept everything else.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is online now  
post #3183 of 3202 Unread 02-23-2017, 03:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
holl_ands's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 4,921
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Liked: 185
Since it appears that it is up to each station (or group of stations) to announce their NEW Channel Allocation, is anyone coalescing this information prior to release of the final FCC Notice????
holl_ands is online now  
 
post #3184 of 3202 Unread 02-23-2017, 05:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Calaveras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mountain Ranch
Posts: 5,008
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1123 Post(s)
Liked: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by holl_ands View Post
Since it appears that it is up to each station (or group of stations) to announce their NEW Channel Allocation, is anyone coalescing this information prior to release of the final FCC Notice????
Trip is keeping a list of announcements:

https://www.rabbitears.info/blog/ind...uction-Results
Calaveras is online now  
post #3185 of 3202 Unread 02-23-2017, 07:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rabbit73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 2,251
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 404 Post(s)
Liked: 164
How will tvfool keep up with all the changes? Will their reports still be useful?
DrDon likes this.

If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
www.megalithia.com/elect/aerialsite/dttpoorman.html
rabbit73 is online now  
post #3186 of 3202 Unread 02-23-2017, 08:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JHBrandt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S. Garland, TX
Posts: 4,410
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1506 Post(s)
Liked: 750
As the construction permits for all the changes are filed, TVFool.com can incorporate them into their database.

There's already an option on the TVFool.com reports to view either current or pending applications. That option will be perfect for choosing between how things stand now and how they'll look after everyone has moved.

That said, it's not uncommon for TVFool to make mistakes. I suspect their message boards will be quite busy with notices that "no, station WXYZ hasn't moved to their new channel yet" and the like.
JHBrandt is offline  
post #3187 of 3202 Unread 02-23-2017, 08:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SFischer1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sunnyvale, CA 94087
Posts: 2,936
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 492 Post(s)
Liked: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit73 View Post
How will tvfool keep up with all the changes? Will their reports still be useful?
Unknowing minds do not wish to know.

The rest of us are going to have lots of fun until 4 / 1 / 2017, April Fools Day .

In my market, the maintainer of the lists has added another column "Post Repack Channel".

We all will be guessing based on thin air ways and one surprise shutting down report which was told to us long ago has popped up again.

That ATSC 3.0 appears to be legal very soon, adds another dimension to the problem.

Only a fool would try to keep up the reports until the big list is public.

The discussion on ATSC 3.0 http://www.avsforum.com/forum/showth...8&goto=newpost has been loud and not useful IMHO.

SHF

Last edited by SFischer1; 02-23-2017 at 08:30 PM.
SFischer1 is online now  
post #3188 of 3202 Unread 02-24-2017, 12:55 AM
Senior Member
 
Smoke_signal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHBrandt View Post
As the construction permits for all the changes are filed, TVFool.com can incorporate them into their database.

There's already an option on the TVFool.com reports to view either current or pending applications. That option will be perfect for choosing between how things stand now and how they'll look after everyone has moved.
Why go to TVFool.com? You can look up those applications directly from the FCC site at:

FCC Licensing and Management System Application Search
https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/da...AppSearch.html

Right now, however, you won't get specific channel reassignment info from the applications. The following is an example of an application question:

Application Question for Construction Permit:
Post-Incentive Auction Expedited Processing -
"It will operate on the DTV channel for this station as established in the post-incentive auction channel reassignment public notice." (Yes or No)


As you can see, the actual DTV channel number is not mentioned.

Last edited by Smoke_signal; 02-24-2017 at 01:14 AM.
Smoke_signal is offline  
post #3189 of 3202 Unread 02-24-2017, 05:45 AM
Advanced Member
 
nathill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Bloomington, IN
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFischer1 View Post
The discussion on ATSC 3.0 http://www.avsforum.com/forum/showth...8&goto=newpost has been loud and not useful IMHO.
SHF
Hey, I resemble that remark!
Check it out today, there's fabulous information posted in the last 48 hours or so (I've stayed out of it by and large) by folks who truly understand the technical aspects.
DrDon likes this.
nathill is online now  
post #3190 of 3202 Unread 02-24-2017, 03:30 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JHBrandt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S. Garland, TX
Posts: 4,410
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1506 Post(s)
Liked: 750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smoke_signal View Post
Why go to TVFool.com? You can look up those applications directly from the FCC site at:

FCC Licensing and Management System Application Search
https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/da...AppSearch.html
Well, yes; but (once the new channel data is available) TVFool.com does all the work of figuring out which stations can/will be received at your exact address, how strong they are/will be, and what direction to aim your antenna. It's all that extra personalization of the data that makes TVFool.com so valuable.
JHBrandt is offline  
post #3191 of 3202 Unread 02-24-2017, 05:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ProjectSHO89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,100
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 218 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calaveras View Post
It's beginning to sound like that enough stations are moving to low VHF that low VHF antennas will be making a comeback. Hopefully ATSC 3.0 works better on low VHF.
So far, it's one religious broadcaster in Ohio and maybe a couple of PBS stations that are known to be ending up in that swamp as a result of this process. I suspect that the large station groups collectively stayed away from that morass, the engineers presumably learned enough the last time so that they know what to expect.

Until the "big boys" release their new assignments, any rush to go out and buy a low-VHF antenna is very premature.
ProjectSHO89 is online now  
post #3192 of 3202 Unread 02-24-2017, 08:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JHBrandt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S. Garland, TX
Posts: 4,410
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1506 Post(s)
Liked: 750
Obviously at this point it's all speculation, but my prediction is that VHF and particularly VHF-Lo will pretty much become the LPTV band. Of course some full-power stations are moving to VHF, but I doubt a whole lot.

Still, the point about VHF-Lo antennas is a good one. There's a lot of junk on LPTV, but there's also some good stuff that folks will want to watch. They're gonna be mad if their new "HDTV" antenna won't pick up their favorite stations after the repack.

I've long held a special disdain for the hucksters who have been selling "HDTV" or "digital" antennas by misleading their customers into believing that their old antennas won't receive digital broadcasts - then selling them a UHF antenna that works poorly on VHF-Hi and not at all on VHF-Lo.
JHBrandt is offline  
post #3193 of 3202 Unread Yesterday, 03:17 AM
Member
 
Bozzmonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Royal Oak, MI
Posts: 175
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post
.

Until the "big boys" release their new assignments, any rush to go out and buy a low-VHF antenna is very premature.
I am following this one. I was thinking of upgrading my antenna here in the Detroit Metro area but am holding off until this whole thing settles out. No sense throwing good money after bad.
Bozzmonster is offline  
post #3194 of 3202 Unread Yesterday, 07:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ProjectSHO89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,100
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 218 Post(s)
Liked: 112
If there are broadcasters who chose to go VHF low, you can bet that the actual operation of a transmitter is merely an inconvenience on the road to their actual goal - cable and satellite carriage. I really doubt that they're actually very interested in individual antenna users as they surely know that the existing crop of antennas being sold in stores is ill-suited to the reception of low V.

The current market availability for a consumer low VHF capable antenna is pretty much limited to all-channel combos. Because of their necessary size and bulk, it's probably unlikely that you'll ever see one of those is a store like Best Buy or Walmart. Knowledgeable antenna users will mail order the antenna that fits their circumstances, but those customers will be few and far between compared to the average "Joe" or "Jane" who are trying out an antenna for the first time.

Quote:
I am following this one. I was thinking of upgrading my antenna here in the Detroit Metro area but am holding off until this whole thing settles out. No sense throwing good money after bad.
In the Detroit area, at least you have the local resource of Solid Signal in Novi. While they sell a fair amount of "cheap Chinese crap", they also carry respected antenna lines like Winegard, Channel Master, Antennas Direct and more. If someone were to go and buy an all-channel combo like a WG, CM, or RCA, for example, you'd certainly expect to be covered unless one of the less obvious possibilities of the repack comes into play. That would be the possibility of a channel sharing arrangement where the desired station's programming ends up on a transmitter that happens to be ill-located for an individual user.

Last edited by ProjectSHO89; Yesterday at 07:54 AM.
ProjectSHO89 is online now  
post #3195 of 3202 Unread Yesterday, 10:54 AM
Member
 
Channel99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 182
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post
If there are broadcasters who chose to go VHF low, you can bet that the actual operation of a transmitter is merely an inconvenience on the road to their actual goal - cable and satellite carriage. I really doubt that they're actually very interested in individual antenna users as they surely know that the existing crop of antennas being sold in stores is ill-suited to the reception of low V......
There is another issue with the low channels. More than 5 years of non-usage in most areas has allowed all sorts of RF noise generating equipment to multiply more or less unnoticed. A spectrum analyzer will show huge amounts of garbage on the low channels that probably wasn't there when there were analog signals present. A signal added to one of those channels now would be competing with a lot of interference.
Channel99 is offline  
post #3196 of 3202 Unread Yesterday, 11:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ProjectSHO89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,100
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 218 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
A signal added to one of those channels now would be competing with a lot of interference.
And, with the distance propagation characteristics of VHF frequencies, any station in one market now increases the background noise levels in adjacent markets, and vice versa.
ProjectSHO89 is online now  
post #3197 of 3202 Unread Yesterday, 04:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tylerSC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mauldin SC, 29607
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 726 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Channel99 View Post
There is another issue with the low channels. More than 5 years of non-usage in most areas has allowed all sorts of RF noise generating equipment to multiply more or less unnoticed. A spectrum analyzer will show huge amounts of garbage on the low channels that probably wasn't there when there were analog signals present. A signal added to one of those channels now would be competing with a lot of interference.
There has also been a whole lot of low power FM translator stations added in recent years which may also elevate the noise levels and cause interference. Although you can add an FM trap, I still think this may be problematic.

And plus these LPFM translators also cause annoying interference with clear reception of full power distant FM stations that used to come in clear, especially in the car. The legal spacing is too close and should not be allowed within the secondary service contour, as many full power FM stations still have strong signals in the fringe. But seems like everyday some new bogus LPFM has appeared creating more interference and your favorite FM station is now disrupted.
tylerSC is online now  
post #3198 of 3202 Unread Yesterday, 04:46 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tylerSC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mauldin SC, 29607
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 726 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post
If there are broadcasters who chose to go VHF low, you can bet that the actual operation of a transmitter is merely an inconvenience on the road to their actual goal - cable and satellite carriage. I really doubt that they're actually very interested in individual antenna users as they surely know that the existing crop of antennas being sold in stores is ill-suited to the reception of low V.

The current market availability for a consumer low VHF capable antenna is pretty much limited to all-channel combos. Because of their necessary size and bulk, it's probably unlikely that you'll ever see one of those is a store like Best Buy or Walmart. Knowledgeable antenna users will mail order the antenna that fits their circumstances, but those customers will be few and far between compared to the average "Joe" or "Jane" who are trying out an antenna for the first time.

In the Detroit area, at least you have the local resource of Solid Signal in Novi. While they sell a fair amount of "cheap Chinese crap", they also carry respected antenna lines like Winegard, Channel Master, Antennas Direct and more. If someone were to go and buy an all-channel combo like a WG, CM, or RCA, for example, you'd certainly expect to be covered unless one of the less obvious possibilities of the repack comes into play. That would be the possibility of a channel sharing arrangement where the desired station's programming ends up on a transmitter that happens to be ill-located for an individual user.
The Winegard 8200 or Channel Master 3020 are the remaining all band combo antennas with Low VHF capability, as well as High VHF and UHF. And there is a Solid Signal generic version, and perhaps a RCA brand. But perhaps if necessary some manufacturer may design a more compact version rather than returning to those huge antennas. Something like a Clearstream 5 but more designed for Low VHF if possible. But it remains to be seen what the channel reassignments may be.
tylerSC is online now  
post #3199 of 3202 Unread Yesterday, 05:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JHBrandt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S. Garland, TX
Posts: 4,410
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1506 Post(s)
Liked: 750
Fry's still carries the CM-3020, but if many stations move to VHF-Lo I suspect other stores will start selling it too.
JHBrandt is offline  
post #3200 of 3202 Unread Yesterday, 05:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ProjectSHO89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,100
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 218 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Something like a Clearstream 5 but more designed for Low VHF if possible.
The C5 is essentially a C1 that has been re-scaled for the high V band. You'd have to re-scale the C5 again by a factor somewhere around 2x-3x to make it effective on low V. People already whine about its cost as it is.

Winegard has their big combo (8200) as well as a small combo (HD7000R) that they've recently brought back. They also have the Sensar with is fair enough on VHF but really sucks at UHF, even with the clip-on.

RCA sells four different all-channel combos from their ATN303x lineup. Winegard manufactures these for VOXX under contract. One of them appears to be a resurrection of a short-lived model that SS had exclusivity to back when SS was in bed with Winegard.

Solid Signal sells an "8200" model. I've never heard from someone who I consider reliable make any comparisons as to how close it is to the WG 8200. I also don't know if WG does their manufacturing for them on that model or if SS orders them out of China like they do the rest of their private label antennas.

CM has their CM3016/18/20 and their CM5016/18/20 models.

Antennacraft, of course, is out of business. However, you might want to call any local stores and see if they have any of the old style Antennacraft models still laying around. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Antennas Direct exited the low-VHF, FM, and all-channel combo market segment a year or two ago.
ProjectSHO89 is online now  
post #3201 of 3202 Unread Yesterday, 08:09 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JHBrandt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S. Garland, TX
Posts: 4,410
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1506 Post(s)
Liked: 750
I suspect a loop design would make the most compact VHF-Lo antenna that's worth a damn. It'd still be huge though.
JHBrandt is offline  
post #3202 of 3202 Unread Today, 01:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
holl_ands's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 4,921
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Liked: 185
holl_ands is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply HDTV Technical



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off