Denver, CO - OTA - Page 514 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #15391 of 17938 Old 06-06-2006, 10:05 PM
Newbie
 
Hollin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMartinko View Post

It sounds like you either work or did work for FSRM or at least work in the business.

Its the third, I wish I had some real behind the scenes scoops, but I'm just in a position to know things when they go "kinda" public first.Everything I get is just in pre press release form. But, I do have some knowledge that will hopefully help out. Thats why I've waited to be relevant. But, I'm sick and tired of the Golden situation and only through education and gathering more supporters will this stupid thing end. I just saw another LCG commercial on 20 and I like it. Simple message explaining the big consequences of Golden and (s)CARE's tactics. I believe that is how you all abbreviate it. Hey, if my wife sees it and understands it, they're getting somewhere. She is no dummy, but not a technical person at all.

Also, I too had an HOA problem here with a HDTV antennae, but overcame it due to help from this and other forums. HOA's remind me of that David Spade commercial where they company always says no.

And I'll throw something out there, but its a gut feeling and nothing more. If I were a betting man, Comcast buys Altitude within two years. But, the good thing is that it wouldn't be a Philly situation where it would be cable only due to its current transmission. Stan is making millions here in Denver with the teams, Pepsi Center and Commerce City development. (That was one of his smartest moves.) Altitude is a drain and been way behind budget ever since starting. Stan was sold a bill of goods and Jim Martin hasn't delivered. They were even contemplating getting out of their current Hallmark digs and developing a studio in Lodo, but those plans along with a lot of staff are long gone. Only the current contract Alitiude has with the teams is a major stumbling block. Believe it or not, once those contracts left FSN, they suddenly became profitable. Nothing earth shattering, but profitable in long time none the less. With those contracts Altitude saddled themselves wit,h (try figuring that one out, they're the same company, but you don't make billions by giving one part of the company a pass over another) FSN would pass on getting them back.
Hollin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #15392 of 17938 Old 06-06-2006, 11:23 PM
Senior Member
 
BobLikesHDTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Littleton CO
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenglish View Post

We've got people in Utah that are 300-400 miles away and getting "crystal clear" reception, thanks to low-power DTV translator stations.

BTW: The lottery for DTV "companion" channels is coming up in a few days. So, maybe translators are on the horizon for many cities and towns.

You know, Ken, it wouldn't be the worse thing in the world.

The only challenge I see is getting communities throughout the front range to accept the translators. If one antenna on Lookout Mountain is a problem, I can imagine many smaller antennas being distributed all over the place as potentially moreso.

But let's cross our fingers, think good thoughts, and watch Wayne Dyer's show on the PBS beg-a-thon and ask our "Source" to provide us with the plenty of HD/Digital translators far and wide.

Now if we could only get KBDI to run a translator into Denver's western suburbs!!!

;o)

Just remember... It's Com-CRASH-tic!

Motorola 6412... Just say "NO MO MOTO!"

And don't get me started on the 3412!
BobLikesHDTV is offline  
post #15393 of 17938 Old 06-06-2006, 11:35 PM
Senior Member
 
BobLikesHDTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Littleton CO
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollin View Post

Also, FSN signed their HD carry agreement with Comcast last week. All FSNs in Comcast markets will start popping up. FSN-RM already does the games in HD in anticipation of this happening and now its here. Although, no start date has been revealed, it may take the start of a new fiscal in July for it to happen. H

If true, I'm going to have a very delighted 75 year old father.

I checked the FSN web site and although they mention many markets for FSN-HD, Denver is not mentioned.

May I ask where you saw this info, Hollin?

Here is the FSN-HD URL for their June HD schedule. Maybe Denver will show up in July? I'm hoping!

http://nmsn.foxsports.com/name/HD

Just remember... It's Com-CRASH-tic!

Motorola 6412... Just say "NO MO MOTO!"

And don't get me started on the 3412!
BobLikesHDTV is offline  
post #15394 of 17938 Old 06-06-2006, 11:50 PM
Senior Member
 
BobLikesHDTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Littleton CO
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollin View Post


And I'll throw something out there, but its a gut feeling and nothing more. If I were a betting man, Comcast buys Altitude within two years.

I'm hoping beyond hope that Gannett somehow gets control of Altitude and broadcasts its content on the soon-to-be former UPN 20.

With the UPN-WB merger, Channel 2 will survive. Channel 20 is left twisting in the wind. Now that Gannett owns in (Channel 9's parent corp), they're going to need something with which to fill the time.

So... here's hoping!

Just remember... It's Com-CRASH-tic!

Motorola 6412... Just say "NO MO MOTO!"

And don't get me started on the 3412!
BobLikesHDTV is offline  
post #15395 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 04:55 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
santellavision's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Just Below Woody's Sleeper House
Posts: 3,239
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I hate to say it, but I wouldn't be surprised to see 20 go all hispanic 24/7.
-----------

Remember, "Tower talk" on Mike Rosen KOA850 at 10am. Anybody going to record it?

Ernie

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
santellavision is offline  
post #15396 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 08:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
oxothuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by santellavision View Post

I hate to say it, but I wouldn't be surprised to see 20 go all hispanic 24/7.

We already have outlets for Univision, Telemundo, and Telefutura. Is there another network we are missing that would want to pick up 20/19?

My cable provider is Netflix
oxothuk is offline  
post #15397 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 08:36 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
santellavision's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Just Below Woody's Sleeper House
Posts: 3,239
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Maybe a new one. SP-NBC (Just my guess) I read that KMGH is planning a 24 hr Hispanic news channel for one of their sub-channels. That's a new channel, not afffiliated with any of the current spanish-speaking networks. This is the fastest growing demographic. We will no doubt see new channels in the future.

Ernie

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
santellavision is offline  
post #15398 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 09:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Symbios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bennett, CO
Posts: 1,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by santellavision View Post

[...]Anybody going to record it?

I'm on it.
Symbios is offline  
post #15399 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 10:06 AM
Newbie
 
Hollin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLikesHDTV View Post

I'm hoping beyond hope that Gannett somehow gets control of Altitude and broadcasts its content on the soon-to-be former UPN 20.

With the UPN-WB merger, Channel 2 will survive. Channel 20 is left twisting in the wind. Now that Gannett owns in (Channel 9's parent corp), they're going to need something with which to fill the time.

So... here's hoping!

Well the current thought is to not allow any OTA of Avs or Nugs products due to the contractual delivery Altitude has with cable providers. By allowing the games to go OTA they wouldn't be able to command the premium they are asking on rights fees, thus the creation of Altitude 2 on days that basketball and hockey have in common. Altitude doesn't want to pay for the airtime and then sell the inventory within the game, like the arrangement FSN has with KTVD.

But, I completely agree with you. OTA Avs and Nugs would be awesome.

Don't be too shocked to see KWGN as least shut down their newscast. With KUSA starting their 9pm newscast on 20 with Mark Koehlbich and Bazi Kanni (I'm sure I'm misspelling), the demos do not favor KWGN. Especially when they are 2 and 3 on Comcast.

KTVD always has the option to sign on to Fox's My Network TV. But, I'm not sure how appealing it is to the viewers, but it is economically favorable to them as far as reverse compensation goes.
Hollin is offline  
post #15400 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 10:12 AM
Member
 
adam1115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 75
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by A4Short View Post

If you have not shown them the FCC rules passed by congress - do so now - don't depend on them knowing where to look.

But the process is they have to fine you. At some point in time the fines get to where they can get a lean on the house through their lawyer. Clearly you can counter sue for your costs in small claims.

Thanks! I haven't done anything yet. I'm going to go the route of leans and lawsuits, it's just not worth it. They require "permission" to put up a TV Antenna, so my process I think will be to request permission in writing siting the FCC rules. We'll see what happens... I haven't seen one antenna in the subdivision, so I'm not sure if they'll allow it..

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_mal View Post

Here's the federal government's opinion on the matter: http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html

You wouldn't happen to be moving into the Platte River Ranch development, would you?


Thanks! No, Bromley Creek.
adam1115 is offline  
post #15401 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 10:38 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
JMartinko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: The Rockies
Posts: 3,187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just got out of a meeting and turned on KOA. I hear Pete and Marv are still on but no Deb Carney. Can't imagine why she isn't there to defend her position, and no one from Golden either. Gee, it's almost like they are afraid to debate the facts in public......??????? Did I miss anything earthshaking.

John M
JMartinko is offline  
post #15402 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 10:46 AM
Member
 
Karkus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
World Cup fans..... as you probably know, some games are on ABC in HD on the weekends. However, I just found out that KMGH 7 is NOT planning to broadcast all of the ABC games. For example, the 7 am game is not scheduled for this sat june 11 (neither on analog or digital OTA channels).

Please email KMGH and ask (nicely) that they broadcast all of the ABC world cup games.

Update: I got a response saying the FCC required them to broadcast a certain amount of childrens TV, and that I could get it on Comcast (but why would I pay for that when I can get OTA HDTV for FREE ?). Sounds like a lame excuse to me. I'm sure they could have shuffled the schedule around to accomodate it.
Karkus is offline  
post #15403 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 11:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Symbios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bennett, CO
Posts: 1,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The Mike Rosen Show with Pete and Marv from LCG (Episode 2)
(Hours 1 and 2 Runtime 101:38)

Broadband Version 29.1MB
(FM Radio Quality)

Dial-Up Version 7.28MB
(AM Radio Quality)

(And Ernie, if you could host these on your server, I would really appreciate it, because I am out of room on mine right now)


EDIT: These files can now be found at the Denver DTV website (http://www.denverdtv.info/).
Symbios is offline  
post #15404 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 12:35 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
santellavision's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Just Below Woody's Sleeper House
Posts: 3,239
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I would if I were in town. I am travelling the next 3 days. If you have to, save it and I can upload it when I get back on Saturday.

I bet Marv/Steve will upload too. They did the 1st show.

Ernie

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
santellavision is offline  
post #15405 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 12:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TotallyPreWired's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Woodland Park, CO
Posts: 1,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by adam1115 View Post

We'll see what happens... I haven't seen one antenna in the subdivision, so I'm not sure if they'll allow it..

I guess that's the point. In an effort to keep their little environment 'pristine'(Geez, kinda sounds like sCARE doesn't it?) they are attempting to override a Federal Law. That law being the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In one way or another you agreed to abide by the covenants of the community when you purchased a lot there. However, the particular covenant that specifies that antennas may not be erected, is trumped by federal law. So, in essence, they are attempting to restrict your freedom.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Over The Air Reception Devices Rule View Post

The rule applies to state or local laws or regulations, including zoning, land-use or building regulations, private covenants, homeowners' association rules, condominium or cooperative association restrictions, lease restrictions, or similar restrictions on property within the exclusive use or control of the antenna user where the user has an ownership or leasehold interest in the property.

And what they are trying to do is:
Quote:


A local restriction that prohibits all antennas would prevent viewers from receiving signals, and is prohibited by the Commission's rule.

So, to put that particular coventant into laymans terms: It Doesn't Mean JackShit!

They no doubt know this, and are attempting to illegally influence you. They also know, that they have no right to do this, and that they will lose any legal challenge to this particular covenant. So, it's a 'scare tactic', and when challenged, it's likely that they will allow an antenna or face a loss in court.
....jc

Woodland Park/Divide
38° 57' 49"N 105° 05' 33"W - 8,900'

Enercept SIP Provider
TotallyPreWired is offline  
post #15406 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 01:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TotallyPreWired's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Woodland Park, CO
Posts: 1,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
In listening to portions of the show, they read a letter from Ernie who lives on Lookout. The gist of the message was that the NIMBYS had not moved off the mountain, despite the so called danger, and that it was all about property values and greed. The talking heads agreed.
....jc

Woodland Park/Divide
38° 57' 49"N 105° 05' 33"W - 8,900'

Enercept SIP Provider
TotallyPreWired is offline  
post #15407 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 03:19 PM
Member
 
DouginDenver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 94
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Given the things people on this site know about, I expect to remain a newbie the rest of my life. The only useful information I can impart to others at this point is "yes, you can get HD with an antenna." My questions:

There are lots of mentions of the transmissions from RP being "low power." Then there are lots of mentions that the HD signal can be less than "full" or "HD lite." Am I correct in assuming these things are not the same?

My assumption from context is that "low power" means the distance the signal will reach, but if you recieve it, then it is just as good as full power. Or, to put it another way, it does not have to do with the amount of data in the signal, but only how far the signal reaches. Is that right?

But the other references (like HD lite) are all about the amount of data being carried, and thus the quality of the signal. True? If that is true, how does one know what channels or networks are broadcasting in a better signal (other than looking at the reception on your TV)? You guys all seem to know. How do you know?

Finally, for anyone with the patience to read this far, what is the relationship between HD lite or not lite, and broadcasting in 1080 or 720? I assume those are not synonyms either, and you can have lite in both 720 and 1080.
DouginDenver is offline  
post #15408 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 03:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TotallyPreWired's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Woodland Park, CO
Posts: 1,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DouginDenver View Post

There are lots of mentions of the transmissions from RP being "low power." Then there are lots of mentions that the HD signal can be less than "full" or "HD lite." Am I correct in assuming these things are not the same?

Yes.

Quote:


My assumption from context is that "low power" means the distance the signal will reach, but if you recieve it, then it is just as good as full power. Or, to put it another way, it does not have to do with the amount of data in the signal, but only how far the signal reaches. Is that right?

Yes.

Quote:


But the other references (like HD lite) are all about the amount of data being carried, and thus the quality of the signal. True? If that is true, how does one know what channels or networks are broadcasting in a better signal (other than looking at the reception on your TV)? You guys all seem to know. How do you know?

Either good eyes , or some people have software that can display the bit rate.

Quote:


Finally, for anyone with the patience to read this far, what is the relationship between HD lite or not lite, and broadcasting in 1080 or 720? I assume those are not synonyms either, and you can have lite in both 720 and 1080.

Yes.

Doug, I think you've got the picture(bad pun dude). Sorry.
....jc

Woodland Park/Divide
38° 57' 49"N 105° 05' 33"W - 8,900'

Enercept SIP Provider
TotallyPreWired is offline  
post #15409 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 03:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
oxothuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DouginDenver View Post

There are lots of mentions of the transmissions from RP being "low power." Then there are lots of mentions that the HD signal can be less than "full" or "HD lite." Am I correct in assuming these things are not the same?
...
Finally, for anyone with the patience to read this far, what is the relationship between HD lite or not lite, and broadcasting in 1080 or 720? I assume those are not synonyms either, and you can have lite in both 720 and 1080.

Your understanding is correct on all counts.

Low power refers to the signal strength of the station. With analog that would directly affect picture quality and you would see a steady degradatin the further you are from the station. With digital there is an all or nothing "cliff effect" - if your signal is marginal you may get pixellation and dropouts, but otherwise there is no difference between a signal that is good enough and one that is twice a strong. So the main effect of low power is how far the signal will carry and how much trouble you have to go to (fancy antennas, etc.) to get it.

HD-lite refers to whether the bitstream has been squeezed to less than the full 19.2 Mbps that the ATSC spec would allow. By comparison, a DVD is around 8 to 10 Mbps.

720p and 1080i are both HD formats which can make good use of the entire 19.2 Mbps if it is available. General consensus is that squeezing a 1080i program will show more visual degradation than the same amount of squeezing for a 720p program.

My cable provider is Netflix
oxothuk is offline  
post #15410 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 04:06 PM
Member
 
adam1115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 75
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TotallyPreWired View Post

So, to put that particular coventant into laymans terms: It Doesn't Mean JackShit!

They no doubt know this, and are attempting to illegally influence you. They also know, that they have no right to do this, and that they will lose any legal challenge to this particular covenant. So, it's a 'scare tactic', and when challenged, it's likely that they will allow an antenna or face a loss in court.
....jc

Agreed, however I'm not willing to let it go THAT far. It's definately in my best interest to attempt to get them to give me 'permission' even though I don't technically have to..

To put it anohter way, maybe they would allow the antenna vs. going to court, but I would probably start incurring fines for my bushes being to big or my tree being the wrong kind, etc.. probably not worth going down the road of pisssing them off.

Hopefully armed with the law they'll give their approval.
adam1115 is offline  
post #15411 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 05:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TotallyPreWired's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Woodland Park, CO
Posts: 1,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by adam1115 View Post

Agreed, however I'm not willing to let it go THAT far. It's definately in my best interest to attempt to get them to give me 'permission' even though I don't technically have to..

I guess that you could look at it 2 different ways: He's submissive, he won't be a problem; or We've got to watch it, we can't push him too much...

Quote:


To put it anohter way, maybe they would allow the antenna vs. going to court, but I would probably start incurring fines for my bushes being to big or my tree being the wrong kind, etc.. probably not worth going down the road of pisssing them off.

Yup, there was another thread dealing with this exact topic. The 'victim' stated that he wanted to wait until he passed his Landscape Inspection before pursuing his antenna. Landscape Inspection? I guess that I believe that there is enough external control of our lives, and going home every night to more control, wouldn't work for some of us.

Quote:


Hopefully armed with the law they'll give their approval.

What choice do they have? Oh yea, you'll be labeled a 'Bad Apple', and they will be on you like 'Stink On Sh*t'. I do understand the desire to insure that property values are 'protected', but some of these places are taking things a bit too far.

Also, check out the movie The Colony with Hal Linden. It seems like this fictional movie, is a prediction of the future.

I can also see the signs to the subdivision:

Bromley Creek, another Fine sCARE Community

Woodland Park/Divide
38° 57' 49"N 105° 05' 33"W - 8,900'

Enercept SIP Provider
TotallyPreWired is offline  
post #15412 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 08:33 PM
Newbie
 
Hollin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by oxothuk View Post

Y

HD-lite refers to whether the bitstream has been squeezed to less than the full 19.2 Mbps that the ATSC spec would allow. By comparison, a DVD is around 8 to 10 Mbps.

720p and 1080i are both HD formats which can make good use of the entire 19.2 Mbps if it is available. General consensus is that squeezing a 1080i program will show more visual degradation than the same amount of squeezing for a 720p program.

Alright, here is where I put my ignorance on full display. From what I hear, but don't understand, current Mbps put out by OTA stations will only last three years before technology catches up and the Mbps go up exponentially to take care of 1080p (well past 1080i) and beyond. (I know one OTA channel is waiting for this to happen to upgrade) So those subchannels, in the future three years out, will not affect HD quality. Is this true? And can someone explain it beyond the "technology is always improving" argument. Again, sorry for the ignorance. But, I've heard 100 Mbps per second on OTA is right around the corner. But, I have no basis to understand or believe.
Hollin is offline  
post #15413 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 11:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Symbios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bennett, CO
Posts: 1,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by santellavision View Post

I would if I were in town. I am travelling the next 3 days. If you have to, save it and I can upload it when I get back on Saturday.

I bet Marv/Steve will upload too. They did the 1st show.

Thanks Ernie. I think I can keep it online untill then.
Symbios is offline  
post #15414 of 17938 Old 06-07-2006, 11:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kucharsk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 3,930
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollin View Post

Alright, here is where I put my ignorance on full display. From what I hear, but don't understand, current Mbps put out by OTA stations will only last three years before technology catches up and the Mbps go up exponentially to take care of 1080p (well past 1080i) and beyond. (I know one OTA channel is waiting for this to happen to upgrade)

Unless there's something in the ATSC spec that allows for this that I'm not aware of, no, this can't happen. Home satellite dish services are moving from MPEG2 compression to MPEG4 compression that in theory would allow for greater bandwidth (instead they'll just cram in more useless channels), but the decoding mechanism is baked into ATSC.

Or, this can't happen without replacing all the ATSC tuners already on the market.
kucharsk is offline  
post #15415 of 17938 Old 06-08-2006, 08:20 AM
Member
 
ktmglen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Posts: 162
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kucharsk View Post

Unless there's something in the ATSC spec that allows for this that I'm not aware of, no, this can't happen. Home satellite dish services are moving from MPEG2 compression to MPEG4 compression that in theory would allow for greater bandwidth (instead they'll just cram in more useless channels), but the decoding mechanism is baked into ATSC.

Or, this can't happen without replacing all the ATSC tuners already on the market.

The modulation (VSB-8) and transport layers would have to stay the same but....

My understanding is the TV stations are only obligated to carry a single free ATSC-compliant SD signal in their multiplex after the transition date to fulfill the obligations of their license. The remaining bandwidth is theirs to use as they see fit. In theory, they could carry a 1.5 to 3 Mbps SD signal as their primary broadcast channel then fill the remaining channel capacity with whatever they want.

One example would be two H.264-encoded HD pay channels requiring an external decoder of their own design. That would allow them to comfortably fit one SD and two full-resolution HD signals in their multiplex. Of course, your HDTV would only receive the SD signal.

Another example would be to sell a fraction of the extra bandwidth to Tivo and/or MovieBeam to deliver programming to their decoders.

-Glen
ktmglen is offline  
post #15416 of 17938 Old 06-08-2006, 02:54 PM
Member
 
mattn6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Erie, CO
Posts: 96
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by adam1115 View Post

Agreed, however I'm not willing to let it go THAT far. It's definately in my best interest to attempt to get them to give me 'permission' even though I don't technically have to..

To put it anohter way, maybe they would allow the antenna vs. going to court, but I would probably start incurring fines for my bushes being to big or my tree being the wrong kind, etc.. probably not worth going down the road of pisssing them off.

Hopefully armed with the law they'll give their approval.

Just put up the antenna.

No approval needed (except from any significant other).
The HOA has NO power to allow or disallow the antenna.

They have NO right to harass you about it, and NO right to make you jump thru hoops to "request permission" for it either. It is out of their authority. The first message you get on it, reply ONLY with the aforementioned federal statute. Do NOT bow to their ILLEGAL demands.

Why waste the time?

# Matt
mattn6 is offline  
post #15417 of 17938 Old 06-08-2006, 03:03 PM
Senior Member
 
wabisabi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Golden(ish)
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for posting the audio for the Mike Rosen Show. It was interesting that last time, many opponents of the LCG called in, but this time they did not.

However, I am now confused about the next step.

At about 60:18 into to recording, a guy named Mike called in and asked if the remand made previous approvals open for ruling. Pete answered that No, the opposition (CARE) would like you to believe everything is open, but the judge has already ruled those are settled issues... The only thing on the table is multiple tower failure.

If this is true, why is CARE calling this a victory?

I have re-read the order and it says:
Quote:


There does not appear to be a need for additional evidence. The record is voluminous, and all interested parties on both sides of the debate have been given an ample opportunity to be heard. The responsibility of the Board now is to review the record and then to make a decision on the proposed rezoning.

The Court will affirm whatever decision is made, so long as it can be shown that there is competent evidence in the record that supports the decision.

Whether the Board takes further argument or evidence is for the Board to determine.

I do not see where the Judge says the only issue to be ruled on is multiple tower failure. I also do not see where the judge explicitly says that everything is open. (he did say "review the record", but not for what.)

If the BCC can only rule on multiple tower failure, then it seems very likely that LCG will win. If they can rule on everything, what will they do? Will they want to open it all up again?

-Wabisabi
wabisabi is offline  
post #15418 of 17938 Old 06-08-2006, 04:14 PM
Member
 
DouginDenver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 94
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by wabisabi View Post

Thanks for posting the audio for the Mike Rosen Show. It was interesting that last time, many opponents of the LCG called in, but this time they did not.

However, I am now confused about the next step.

At about 60:18 into to recording, a guy named Mike called in and asked if the remand made previous approvals open for ruling. Pete answered that No, the opposition (CARE) would like you to believe everything is open, but the judge has already ruled those are settled issues... The only thing on the table is multiple tower failure.

If this is true, why is CARE calling this a victory?

I have re-read the order and it says:


I do not see where the Judge says the only issue to be ruled on is multiple tower failure. I also do not see where the judge explicitly says that everything is open. (he did say "review the record", but not for what.)

If the BCC can only rule on multiple tower failure, then it seems very likely that LCG will win. If they can rule on everything, what will they do? Will they want to open it all up again?

-Wabisabi

What his ruling says had to be taken in the context of what issue is before him. In other words, what did the Bd. rule, and what was appealed to him. I have not read the order so I cannot tell from this excerpt. I presume that the order has a summary up front of some kind stating the issue before him. I assume from the use of the word "rezoning" that the Bd decision under review is broader than than tower failure, but if tower failure was the Bd's only basis to deny rezoning, then that is the only issue up for grabs. When he says the Bd. must find "competent evidence" of tower fialure, that is not a very high standard. It can't be nothing, and it can't just be lawyers speculating, but if somebody found a competent tower engineer to say it might happen, that might well be enough, no matter what some other expert says. It's not like a civil trial where you weigh both sides, and the side with the best story wins. Bd decisions are given great deference, and are upheld unless found to be essentially unsupported. He has not closed the evidence, so I presume if the Bd doesn't want this tower, all they need to do is ask any party if they have an expert they would like to put on. All of this is written without me knowing what evidence the Bd heard, but I gathered not much on that issue.
DouginDenver is offline  
post #15419 of 17938 Old 06-08-2006, 10:49 PM
Senior Member
 
BobLikesHDTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Littleton CO
Posts: 272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I found the article a the following link of marginal interest. Thought I'd pass it on.

I'm going to follow up with the writer about the HD-lite issue on satellite and how tight-lipped local cable operator, Comcast, is about increasing HD channel offerings in Denver and how they appear to be ignoring communities north of Metro Denver.

The gist of it is cable companies stand to lose tons of market share if they don't act quickly to increase HD. I know Comcast has had bad numbers in the last quarter. With the 6412 Phase III DVR, it's not a surprise.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/hidef.html

Just remember... It's Com-CRASH-tic!

Motorola 6412... Just say "NO MO MOTO!"

And don't get me started on the 3412!
BobLikesHDTV is offline  
post #15420 of 17938 Old 06-09-2006, 07:14 AM
Member
 
Dave6833's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Firestone, CO
Posts: 92
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Anybody having problems with WB2 picture quality of late? For the last few nights the 9:00 News (for me anyway) has been plagued with pixelation, freezes, and audio dropouts. Signal strength last night was 83%. I'm in NE Longmont and my DTV reception is limited to 2 and 31.

Dave P.
Dave6833 is offline  
Closed Thread Local HDTV Info and Reception

User Tag List

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