New York, NY - OTA - Page 600 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 47Likes
Reply
Thread Tools
post #17971 of 17995 Old 03-13-2015, 04:44 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Let me get this straight metv is moving to 33.1. But they're still on real ch3. Is the virtual ch that is moving to 33 ? . Ps. Some stb might have issues tuning in metv.
uhfyagi is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17972 of 17995 Old 03-13-2015, 06:16 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Thanks. I wasnt sure if there was anything on there now to test the signal strength.
retrosonic is offline  
post #17973 of 17995 Old 03-13-2015, 07:00 PM
Senior Member
 
Giacomo Siffredi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bergen County, NJ.
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Hey uhfyagi,
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhfyagi View Post
Let me get this straight metv is moving to 33.1. But they're still on real ch3. Is the virtual ch that is moving to 33 ? . Ps. Some stb might have issues tuning in metv.
That's correct. This has been discussed here extensively and if you want to read through all the debate/discussion, it begins around page 590.

Honestly, in a few years this may not even make any difference whatsoever. PMCM TV has very valuable RF spectrum regardless of its band location which would realize tens of millions of dollars if/when (but most likely "when") they sell it.

The spectrum auction is coming up soon. The multi-billion dollar Fox Broadcasting Company is the licensee of both WNYW and WWOR-TV, and any third-grader can figure out that the corporation is NOT holding either or both. In the most likely scenario to play out, Fox cashes out RF 38 and RF 44 for over $150 million a piece. Fox then approaches PMCM TV with an offer to buy RF 3 for $100 million (PMCM TV bought RF 3 in Ely, Nevada for just over $1 million) PMCM TV then has the tough choice of whether to continue providing the New York City market with programming that is over fifty years old, or take $100 million to cash out RF 3. After deliberating for a full ten seconds, PMCM TV elects to accept Fox's $100 million offer.

Who wins? The voluntary assignment of all the licenses is approved YESTERDAY by the overjoyed FCC, PMCM TV nets $99 million (less expenses) in profit, Fox nets $225 million (less expenses) in profit, the FCC sells more spectrum to the wireless phone corporation, and the entire virtual channel number debate for RF 3 at Middletown Township (ultimately relocated to New York, NY.) is ended because Fox shall use virtual channels 5-1 and 9-1 on RF 3.
Giacomo Siffredi is offline  
post #17974 of 17995 Old 03-13-2015, 07:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Trip in VA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Alexandria, VA, US | Age: 26
Posts: 14,618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 170 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Send a message via AIM to Trip in VA Send a message via Yahoo to Trip in VA
If you get it now, you will continue to get it after, but you may or may not need to rescan. If you do not get it now, this change will do nothing to help that.

- Trip

N4MJC

Comments are my own and not that of the FCC (my employer) or anyone else.

RabbitEars

"Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand..." - Rush "Witch Hunt"

Trip in VA is online now  
post #17975 of 17995 Old 03-13-2015, 08:50 PM
Member
 
unsmiley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So I won't have to go through all those contortions I did to get channel 3.11 with my rabbit ears to pull in channel 33.1?

Last edited by unsmiley; 03-13-2015 at 08:53 PM.
unsmiley is offline  
post #17976 of 17995 Old 03-14-2015, 05:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dstoffa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by unsmiley View Post
So I won't have to go through all those contortions I did to get channel 3.11 with my rabbit ears to pull in channel 33.1?
The broadcast frequency of WJLP (~60 MHz) is not changing. That would require them a new transmitter, or one with major antenna / equipment modifications. So, if you needed to extend your rabbit ears to their full length and place them in front of a window facing the towers in order to receive this station before, you will need to continue.

Your STB or TV Tuner MIGHT begin seeing the channel as virtual 33.1 and 33.2 automatically when they make the switch. This is not guaranteed, which is why the station is asking its viewers to rescan.

The only good thing about this change is that I will no longer need to use a 4 digit custom channel mapping for my ReplayTVs to my CM-7000 STBs...

Cheers!
-Doug
dstoffa is offline  
post #17977 of 17995 Old 03-14-2015, 07:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LenL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Randolph, NJ, 725' above sea level, 30 miles west of ESB
Posts: 1,604
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by unsmiley View Post
So I won't have to go through all those contortions I did to get channel 3.11 with my rabbit ears to pull in channel 33.1?

They are still broadcasting on LOW VHF 3. Which sucks. Your TV tuner will see the station as 33.1 which is in the UHF range. Just like PBS NJ is broadcasting middle VHF 8.1 but virtual 58.1 in NJ. My tuner will see it as station 58.1. WABC 7 is real 7.1 and virtual 7.1. PIX is real 11.1 and virtual 11.1. WNET is virtual 13.1 and real 13.1.


There are many stations where the real channel number and virtual are the same and many where they are different. It is kind of silly why this was all put in place and not corrected as part of the digital transition. It is the same stupid reasoning that is used to change the clocks twice a year.
reddice likes this.
LenL is offline  
post #17978 of 17995 Old 03-14-2015, 07:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dstoffa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giacomo Siffredi View Post
Just once, could someone... anyone... prove at least one instance... ONE... in which an OTA viewer of either KYW-TV or WFSB has experienced destructive interference and/or disruption to their ability to view either respective channel due to the on-air presence of WJLP????

The question is fair seeing as this is the chief complaint plaintiffs have argued as to why WJLP should surrender virtual 3-##.
It would have been nice if the rules were written, during the digital transition / assignment phase, that a station in-market or in an adjacent market would get rights to set their virtual channel to their real channel number over those stations who elected to transition their broadcast to some other frequency. So, if KYW never left RF 3, that is the only way they keep their claim on Virtual 3 over someone in an adjacent market who is now broadcasting on RF 3...
dstoffa is offline  
post #17979 of 17995 Old 03-15-2015, 09:20 PM
Senior Member
 
Giacomo Siffredi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bergen County, NJ.
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 24
WJLP Middletown Township is now broadcasting using virtual channel 33.

No rescan was necessary. And for most tuners, a rescan will not be necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dstoffa View Post
The broadcast frequency of WJLP (~60 MHz) is not changing. That would require them a new transmitter, or one with major antenna / equipment modifications. So, if you needed to extend your rabbit ears to their full length and place them in front of a window facing the towers in order to receive this station before, you will need to continue.

Your STB or TV Tuner MIGHT begin seeing the channel as virtual 33.1 and 33.2 automatically when they make the switch. This is not guaranteed, which is why the station is asking its viewers to rescan.

The only good thing about this change is that I will no longer need to use a 4 digit custom channel mapping for my ReplayTVs to my CM-7000 STBs...

Cheers!
-Doug
Thank you for sharing that good advice and information, Doug.
Giacomo Siffredi is offline  
post #17980 of 17995 Old 03-16-2015, 06:32 PM
Member
 
unsmiley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstoffa View Post
The broadcast frequency of WJLP (~60 MHz) is not changing. That would require them a new transmitter, or one with major antenna / equipment modifications. So, if you needed to extend your rabbit ears to their full length and place them in front of a window facing the towers in order to receive this station before, you will need to continue.

Your STB or TV Tuner MIGHT begin seeing the channel as virtual 33.1 and 33.2 automatically when they make the switch. This is not guaranteed, which is why the station is asking its viewers to rescan.

The only good thing about this change is that I will no longer need to use a 4 digit custom channel mapping for my ReplayTVs to my CM-7000 STBs...

Cheers!
-Doug
Well I now cannot get WJLP on my old TV with set top box (I was getting it with this set top box before at 3.11). I will attempt to rescan and see if that does anything. My other modern LCD TV tuned the channel switch on its own (no rescan necessary) and receives WJLP, no problem.
unsmiley is offline  
post #17981 of 17995 Old 03-16-2015, 06:56 PM
Member
 
unsmiley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Update: Upon rescan of my set top box, I pull in 33.1 (labeled MeTV) as clearly as before . There is still an empty channel at 3.11 (labeled WJLP) for some reason.

I also noted that rescanning corrected my many recent EPG errors (like "No Information" on WJLP, mixed up subchannel guide info on the Channel 11's, etc.)

I still wish I could get Retro TV.
unsmiley is offline  
post #17982 of 17995 Old 03-21-2015, 11:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 1,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 333 Post(s)
Liked: 111
WJLP's change from virtual channel 3 to virtual channel 33 (while remaining on real channel RF 3, VHF-Lo) may have very little impact on OTA viewers (other than the inconvenience of causing some remote controls to get "confused"), but it could have significant adverse impacts on WJLP's marketing strategy.

If the cable companies decide to put WJLP into a slot that is far removed from the other broadcast channels, such as WCBS (virtual 2) and WNBC (virtual 4), that could cause cable TV viewers to run across WJLP less frequently while channel surfing. It would also send the message that WJLP is being deemed unworthy of a plum slot.

But, cable TV may go down the drain soon anyway. Who has money to be paying the high prices the cable companies want nowadays?
veedon is online now  
post #17983 of 17995 Old 03-21-2015, 12:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 1,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 333 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giacomo Siffredi View Post
...

The spectrum auction is coming up soon. The multi-billion dollar Fox Broadcasting Company is the licensee of both WNYW and WWOR-TV, and any third-grader can figure out that the corporation is NOT holding either or both. In the most likely scenario to play out, Fox cashes out RF 38 and RF 44 for over $150 million a piece. Fox then approaches PMCM TV with an offer to buy RF 3 for $100 million ... Fox shall use virtual channels 5-1 and 9-1 on RF 3.
I don't think a Big Four network would even want RF3.
Besides, the spectrum auction might never take place. Congress has tried to paint it as a deficit reduction measure, but nobody believes that Congress cares about that.
veedon is online now  
post #17984 of 17995 Old 03-29-2015, 03:15 PM
Senior Member
 
rothe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: 07756
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Is anybody else having trouble receiving WNET/13 this afternoon? I'm down about 14db in signal strength for this station only, just as of this afternoon, as measured by a spectrum analyzer. All of my other stations are as strong as they usually are, and I've confirmed that my antenna hasn't budged. Granted, I'm 37 miles out from the ESB, but I can't find any local cause for the signal loss. Anybody?

James Rothe
Monmouth County, NJ
(37 miles due S of the ESB)
My Own OTA HDTV Experience: http://www.jimrothe.com/hdtv_ota/
rothe is offline  
post #17985 of 17995 Old 03-29-2015, 03:27 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 5
metv being moved down the dial really sucks. I use to switch channels from metv to decades by going up or down a channel on the remote, now I gotta plugin 33.1 to receive them. is really Bs what the fcc is forcing metv to change frequencies to accomodate cbs,nbc. 😢
uhfyagi is offline  
post #17986 of 17995 Old 03-29-2015, 03:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 1,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 333 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhfyagi View Post
metv being moved down the dial really sucks. I use to switch channels from metv to decades by going up or down a channel on the remote, now I gotta plugin 33.1 to receive them. is really Bs what the fcc is forcing metv to change frequencies to accomodate cbs,nbc.
The frequency has not changed at all. It's still RF3.
And WNBC did not complain about WJLP's desire to use virtual channel number 3, did they?
It was KYW out of Philly and WFSB in Connecticut that complained.

It's not a matter of true interference.
It is a matter of Channel 3 being a better branding than Channel 33.

It's all about marketing and also about an old law that makes no sense in the modern era.
But the spirit of that old law was to make sure that OTA viewers were well served, not to protect the convenience of cable TV viewers.

WJLP won the court case and used that old law to move its license from Nevada to NYC, but the FCC has been saying that it wants to maintain the agency's control over virtual channel designations, even though the FCC lost the court case regarding the license move.

The final decision may be made by the court system.

Last edited by veedon; 03-29-2015 at 03:43 PM.
veedon is online now  
post #17987 of 17995 Old 03-29-2015, 08:00 PM
ALP
Member
 
ALP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NY
Posts: 161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by rothe View Post
Is anybody else having trouble receiving WNET/13 this afternoon? I'm down about 14db in signal strength for this station only, just as of this afternoon, as measured by a spectrum analyzer. All of my other stations are as strong as they usually are, and I've confirmed that my antenna hasn't budged. Granted, I'm 37 miles out from the ESB, but I can't find any local cause for the signal loss. Anybody?
I just checked my signal strength on 13.1 and I would say it is down some, can't say by how much in dB's. Still good reception but it is down.

Tony Plachy
ALP is offline  
post #17988 of 17995 Old 03-29-2015, 09:20 PM
Senior Member
 
Giacomo Siffredi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bergen County, NJ.
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post
I don't think a Big Four network would even want RF3.
Besides, the spectrum auction might never take place. Congress has tried to paint it as a deficit reduction measure, but nobody believes that Congress cares about that.
A full-power RF 3 television broadcast license gives the station owners the right to elect must-carry or retransmission consent, either of which guarantee their station access to the subscribers of all market-area pay-TV providers. The OTA signal quality is only meaningful to the minority of viewers in the NYC market who rely solely on that method by which to view television. As to the catv/satellite/telco MSTV providers, if the RF 3 signal proves too challenging, the licensee - at their own expense - must provide the MSTV provider the necessary equipment by which a reliable signal can be obtained.

Most people are automatically in favor of anything they believe will increase revenue to the federal government because they believe any and all revenues realized will automatically translate into lower taxes. Of course, what most people believe to be true oftentimes turns out to be completely false because most people do not wish to take the time or use the requisite brain-power to study the facts and figures, and judge for themselves whether they are being sold a bill of goods. It is easy (and quite frankly more fun) to look at choreographed charts and literature that shows billions of dollars in profits and jump at the once in a lifetime opportunity for easy money while blissfully ignoring the debit side of the equation.

All I can say is that when the spectrum auction takes place, hopefully those station owners who do jump on-board will realize a monetary sum close to the expectations dangled by Congress and the FCC. It would sure suck to be them to be going for gold and only winding up with a slightly used pot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by uhfyagi View Post
metv being moved down the dial really sucks. I use to switch channels from metv to decades by going up or down a channel on the remote, now I gotta plugin 33.1 to receive them. is really Bs what the fcc is forcing metv to change frequencies to accomodate cbs,nbc. 😢
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post
The frequency has not changed at all. It's still RF3.
And WNBC did not complain about WJLP's desire to use virtual channel number 3, did they?
It was KYW out of Philly and WFSB in Connecticut that complained.

It's not a matter of true interference.
It is a matter of Channel 3 being a better branding than Channel 33.

It's all about marketing and also about an old law that makes no sense in the modern era.
But the spirit of that old law was to make sure that OTA viewers were well served, not to protect the convenience of cable TV viewers.

WJLP won the court case and used that old law to move its license from Nevada to NYC, but the FCC has been saying that it wants to maintain the agency's control over virtual channel designations, even though the FCC lost the court case regarding the license move.

The final decision may be made by the court system.
uhfyagi's experience proves the inequity of forcing WJLP to remap to 33. While those of us on this forum have the benefit of advanced technical knowledge to understand what has happened, most average viewers do not understand. And for them, it would now appear that WJLP is broadcasting over UHF. Far segregated from its VHF-virtual counterparts, viewers (especially those in New Jersey) are being deprived of the opportunity to casually change channels from 2 to 3 to 4, or from 5 to 4 to 3 to 2. Many viewers may feel that, once again, a New Jersey-centric television station has been pushed out, banished to the backwoods of the UHF band on a channel no one even knew existed. Citizens who take pride in their Garden State may even believe that the big city to the East has, once again, unfairly exerted its muscle to push one of the few independent media voices in New Jersey off the front page and into the middle of the lifestyle section - in the Wednesday edition.

So for all intents and purposes, the spirit of the tax law is likely being defeated by this, possibly temporary, move to 33-#. If most viewers cannot associate WJLP as being a VHF television station, it's technical presence on that band may not adequately serve those same viewers. And the most important thing to keep in mind here is that the tax law did not contemplate any technical changes to the broadcasting standard, nor was the tax law ever modified. Therefore, all legal arguments will have to be argued on the language of the law as it currently stands.
Giacomo Siffredi is offline  
post #17989 of 17995 Old 03-29-2015, 09:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 1,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 333 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giacomo Siffredi View Post

uhfyagi's experience proves the inequity of forcing WJLP to remap to 33. While those of us on this forum have the benefit of advanced technical knowledge to understand what has happened, most average viewers do not understand. And for them, it would now appear that WJLP is broadcasting over UHF. Far segregated from its VHF-virtual counterparts, viewers (especially those in New Jersey) are being deprived of the opportunity to casually change channels from 2 to 3 to 4, or from 5 to 4 to 3 to 2. Many viewers may feel that, once again, a New Jersey-centric television station has been pushed out, banished to the backwoods of the UHF ....

So for all intents and purposes, the spirit of the tax law is likely being defeated by this, possibly temporary, move to 33-#.
Nah. It wasn't any kind of tax law that enabled WJLP to set up shop in NJ on RF3.
It was ancient law from back when VHF actually was superior to UHF for OTA transmissions.
WJLP was very clever. It saw an opportunity to use an outmoded law to its own advantage, and there is no shame in that. But if it cannot get the right to use Channel 3 as its virtual channel number, it may not be able to get the plum slot on the cable lineups.

As for New Jersey feeling slighted, well, NJ is used to being overshadowed by NYC and Philly when it comes to media coverage. But I really don't think many cable viewers even know the difference between UHF and VHF anymore. In many markets, local channels have been given cable slots that differed from their OTA channel number, even in the analog days.

I don't think that a high channel number carries the kind of stigma that it once did.
Years ago, UHF channels with high channel numbers (such as 40 and higher) were often low-budget operations with cheesy programming. But that is no longer the case.

I'll tell you when UHF was really annoying, and that was back when there was no remote control and if you wanted to change from channel 14 to channel 60, you had to turn the knob and make 46 clicks.

Last edited by veedon; 03-29-2015 at 09:43 PM.
veedon is online now  
post #17990 of 17995 Old Yesterday, 04:53 AM
Senior Member
 
speedlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: New York, about 40 miles north of "New York"
Posts: 459
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 22
What is more amazing is the FCC "repacking". First, get everyone OFF VHF and VHF low...mostly.
Then, repopulate VHF Low, which supposedly no one wanted.

Then, sell off the upper/upper UHF and force all the stations to re-jigger yet again the channels, replace transmitters/antennas, etc.

It is almost like they are trying to lose the OTA viewer. Some areas will end up with two crappy low bitrate feeds on one station.

For the record, I get RF 3 pretty well, and if conditions are good, the 3000 watt "translator" on RF 2, but cannot always lock that one....

The objectors to channel 3 really had no local reasoning....I think that there were a few "board meetings" with other stations for the attempt to "poach" the prime real estate at the bottom of the dial.

WNET and ABC 7 had the right ideas...stay put.

In Vienna we sit, in late night cafe. Straight Connection, on T.E.E.
speedlaw is offline  
post #17991 of 17995 Old Yesterday, 02:50 PM
Senior Member
 
Giacomo Siffredi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Bergen County, NJ.
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post
Nah. It wasn't any kind of tax law that enabled WJLP to set up shop in NJ on RF3.
It was ancient law from back when VHF actually was superior to UHF for OTA transmissions.
WJLP was very clever. It saw an opportunity to use an outmoded law to its own advantage, and there is no shame in that. But if it cannot get the right to use Channel 3 as its virtual channel number, it may not be able to get the plum slot on the cable lineups.

As for New Jersey feeling slighted, well, NJ is used to being overshadowed by NYC and Philly when it comes to media coverage. But I really don't think many cable viewers even know the difference between UHF and VHF anymore. In many markets, local channels have been given cable slots that differed from their OTA channel number, even in the analog days.

I don't think that a high channel number carries the kind of stigma that it once did.
Years ago, UHF channels with high channel numbers (such as 40 and higher) were often low-budget operations with cheesy programming. But that is no longer the case.

I'll tell you when UHF was really annoying, and that was back when there was no remote control and if you wanted to change from channel 14 to channel 60, you had to turn the knob and make 46 clicks.
The law mandating at least one VHF television station to each state is definitely part of a tax law, look it up.

It is absolutely correct that securing the channel 3 allocation on MSTV providers is significantly more advantageous than being carried on some random number in the double, triple, or even four digit channel ranges. If WJLP remains permanently on virtual 33-1, it is unclear as to whether the systems already carrying the station on channel 3 will bump the channel to another location or keep it on channel 3. I think going forward, PMCM TV will certainly have a fight to get channel 3 carriage on any system they are not presently carried on.

Just because someone is used to getting dirk kicked in their face doesn't mean that it feels better over time. You are correct that many people are likely unaware of the differences between VHF and UHF, especially those who grew up in cable TV households. Still, the law remains unchanged from when Congress passed it in the early 1980s.

I happen to think that many of those upper UHF low-budget channels were some of the best incarnations of independent local programming. It afforded access to locals and local businesses where such access was prohibitive by the major network stations. Those opportunities that existed up until the mid 1980s have all but been eliminated in major markets.

But as far as UHF tuners go, I always preferred those which clicked as opposed to those which merely fine tuned. The click tuners were less prone to drifting and often locked in the frequencies better, at least from my experiences.

Quote:
Originally Posted by speedlaw View Post
What is more amazing is the FCC "repacking". First, get everyone OFF VHF and VHF low...mostly.
Then, repopulate VHF Low, which supposedly no one wanted.

Then, sell off the upper/upper UHF and force all the stations to re-jigger yet again the channels, replace transmitters/antennas, etc.

It is almost like they are trying to lose the OTA viewer. Some areas will end up with two crappy low bitrate feeds on one station.

For the record, I get RF 3 pretty well, and if conditions are good, the 3000 watt "translator" on RF 2, but cannot always lock that one....

The objectors to channel 3 really had no local reasoning....I think that there were a few "board meetings" with other stations for the attempt to "poach" the prime real estate at the bottom of the dial.

WNET and ABC 7 had the right ideas...stay put.
Congress and the FCC see the bigger money right now is vested with the cellular providers. They view television broadcasters as squatters on land that they perceive has a much higher monetary value. They want the current occupants off that land. To effectuate this, they are proposing to buy-out the occupants at fair market value and then auction the land to the cellular providers. Essentially, this is electromagnetic eminent domain.

Some of the occupants (whether by strategic ploy or sheer ignorance) are being bedazzled at promises of hundreds of millions of dollars for certain parcels they presently occupy.

From a financial perspective, the OTA viewer deserves the least consideration from the perspectives of broadcasters, the Congress, or the FCC. No individual or group of individuals will likely come to the table with an offer of $300 million to preserve their access to free television. But to placate those lowly grumblers, Congress and the FCC will likely mandate that every cable company provide one free year of cable converter rental, after which the rent will be $7.00 or more per month, plus taxes.

Ultimately, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think I am close to accurate when I suggest that FOX has their marks and dollars set on RF 3 which may explain why PMCM TV seems to be withdrawing from their virtual channel number fight.

ION Media (WPXN-TV) certainly had no standing to object to PMCM TV as the FCC deals with broadcast issues and not cable television matters. I think they were ultimately recruited by Meredith (WFSB), who also recruited CBS (KYW-TV) because Meredith wanted WJLP off 3-10. Again, not one instance of interference to viewers has been proven.

As to channel 2, that is low-power WKOB-LD which broadcasts at 300 watts, not 3,000 watts. That station has a CP to relocate to UHF channel 42 in West Orange, NJ.
Giacomo Siffredi is offline  
post #17992 of 17995 Old Yesterday, 04:34 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Trip in VA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Alexandria, VA, US | Age: 26
Posts: 14,618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 170 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Send a message via AIM to Trip in VA Send a message via Yahoo to Trip in VA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giacomo Siffredi View Post
The law mandating at least one VHF television station to each state is definitely part of a tax law, look it up.
Um, no, it's section 331 of the Communications Act of 1934.

http://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/1934new.pdf

I suppose you can argue there are taxes in the Communications Act, but I doubt most people would call it a "tax law."

- Trip

N4MJC

Comments are my own and not that of the FCC (my employer) or anyone else.

RabbitEars

"Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand..." - Rush "Witch Hunt"

Trip in VA is online now  
post #17993 of 17995 Old Yesterday, 06:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 1,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 333 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Trip and Giacomo may both be right.
The provision regarding each state having at least one VHF allocation is now part of the Communications Act of 1934.
But it became part of the act as a result of congressional action in 1982, and that provision, giving preferential treatment to a reallocation that would remedy the situation if a state lacked a VHF station, was part of a great big piece of tax legislation in 1982.

That's how you get things done in Congress. You put your provisions into a giant bill that has to pass.
And if the main purpose of the bill is to deal with taxation, that gives your little unrelated provisions an even better chance of surviving.

When the federal court ruled in favor of KVNV's "move" to New Jersey, the court ruling reviewed the history of the provision.

What is interesting, though, is that the ruling focused on the question of true interference between TV signals.
It did not mention the idea of "virtual interference" at all.

The FCC should have brought up the virtual interference issue back when the case was being argued. If it had done so, the court might have agreed that the proposed move was not "technically feasible" and might have prevented the move.

I think it's a bit amusing that the reason that the provision was passed into law back in 1982 had something to do with some sort of trouble that WOR Channel 9 had gotten into, and the provision was a way for New Jersey to be able to quickly get a VHF station by giving WOR a kind of getaway car. I'm not sure what the whole story was, but I read that WOR would never have moved if it hadn't been due to some special circumstances.

http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/9C75C436CD25514E85257AD40055B6CD/$file/11-1330-1410082.pdf
Giacomo Siffredi likes this.

Last edited by veedon; Yesterday at 06:59 PM.
veedon is online now  
post #17994 of 17995 Unread Today, 03:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dstoffa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 1,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post
Trip and Giacomo may both be right.
The provision regarding each state having at least one VHF allocation is now part of the Communications Act of 1934.
But it became part of the act as a result of congressional action in 1982, and that provision, giving preferential treatment to a reallocation that would remedy the situation if a state lacked a VHF station, was part of a great big piece of tax legislation in 1982.

I think it's a bit amusing that the reason that the provision was passed into law back in 1982 had something to do with some sort of trouble that WOR Channel 9 had gotten into, and the provision was a way for New Jersey to be able to quickly get a VHF station by giving WOR a kind of getaway car. I'm not sure what the whole story was, but I read that WOR would never have moved if it hadn't been due to some special circumstances.
RKO General was the owner of WOR-TV, and were ready to be forced out, but Senator Bill Bradley gave them a reprieve by passing a law which stated that the license of any VHF television station would automatically be renewed if it moved to a state which didn't have one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RKO_General
dstoffa is offline  
post #17995 of 17995 Unread Today, 05:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 1,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 333 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by dstoffa View Post
RKO General was the owner of WOR-TV, and were ready to be forced out, but Senator Bill Bradley gave them a reprieve by passing a law which stated that the license of any VHF television station would automatically be renewed if it moved to a state which didn't have one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RKO_General
Bill Bradley! He was on the Knicks back when they were a good team.
This year's Knicks aren't even worthy of a subchannel slot on an LPTV station, much less a cable TV deal.
veedon is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Local HDTV Info and Reception

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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