AVS Forum banner

Traverse City, MI - HDTV

Tags
ant-751
238K views 2K replies 113 participants last post by  dek8ss 
#1 ·
Anyone know any info about WCMU or it's satellite stations' digital plans? Searching around, I've found that they plan to use WGTU's tower near Kalkaska, but no date through Antennnaweb on when it will be operational. Local stations are pretty bleak here, but should be better when WGTU signs on in March.
 
#1,402 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA /forum/post/17060159


Don't know if anyone saw, but WWTV is asking for a fill-in translator on channel 40 in Traverse City. 15 kW ND.


- Trip

Cool. Musical transmitters. For the locals, that tower is on Cedar Run Road just past Harris at the curve. It's one of Terry Martin's. I've always liked his company name... Northern Tower Erection Co.
 
#1,403 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mesickstan /forum/post/17060299


Cool. Musical transmitters. For the locals, that tower is on Cedar Run Road just past Harris at the curve. It's one of Terry Martin's. I've always liked his company name... Northern Tower Erection Co.

Idiots (WWTV). That's what you get for putting a main transmitter so far south in the market. Yeah, they can serve Midland with the VHF 9 but can't crack Charlevoix. Where's the population center? Cadillac/TVC/Gaylord/Houghton Lake right? Why not put the transmitter to have maximum coverage over those towns? WWUP should increase power to reach Petoskey better.


BTW, what's the point of WPBN on UHF 50 @ 15 kW ERP? Why don't they just put a 300 kW (or greater) station there at Harietta and quit playing games? That's what's going to happen at some point anyhow.
 
#1,404 ·
It doesn't seem very fair to call WWTV idiots. These transmitters (WWTV & WPBN) were placed in 1954, long before there was any thought of color TV, much less digital TV. Both served their markets just fine until the digital switch. Both stations seem to be working hard to fill in the unforseen digital VHF gaps at great expense to their companies.
 
#1,406 ·
New applications for LD in the past 3 days:

These are max 15kw

Ch.

38 Heritage Bcst For Traverse City

39 Cadillac Telecasting For Traverse City

40 Heritage Bcst For Traverse City

40 Roy E.Henderson For Cadillac

42 Cadillac Telecasting For Traverse City

43 Heritage Bcst For Traverse City

43 Roy E.Henderson For Traverse City

43 West Cent.Mich.Media Ministries For Cadillac


Some of these appllications are dated within 2 days, with Roy Henderson

(NEW ULM Broadcasting) Ulm,Texas,having the edge.

This seems to by Roy's new adventure into television, he's been mostly

AM/FM radio ownership. WBNZ,WOUF,WCUZ,WLDR in Michigan, 7 others in Texas.


The race is on !


Also a DN for a ch 23 allocation NE of E.Jordan in Antrim county.

DN is a new allocation and it was "granted". Have to find out what

that's all about.


Lots to ponder over here.


PS A tv station can have only "one" main full power transmitter

in it's DMA. All others (translators) have to be LD 15kw max.

Last I read there is no limit on number of LD's they can have.


This should be a blast!


Jack in Wellston
 
#1,407 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonyLCD /forum/post/17066166


It doesn't seem very fair to call WWTV idiots. These transmitters (WWTV & WPBN) were placed in 1954, long before there was any thought of color TV, much less digital TV. Both served their markets just fine until the digital switch. Both stations seem to be working hard to fill in the unforseen digital VHF gaps at great expense to their companies.

Well, how smart is it to place a transmitter in an area that only covers 2/3 of your market 1/3 of 2 another markets? I don't see how any of those gaps were unforeseen. The early coverage maps show they do cover Midland but not Charlevoix. "Northern Michigan's News Leader" should cover Northern Michigan... at least I'd think so...
 
#1,408 ·
WWTV only covers 2/3rd of the market? Oh please. Missing a portion of Charlevoix and Emmet counties and the "hilly areas along the Lake Michigan coast" as the perpetually moody Falcon 7 says, hardly constitutes missing a third of the market. I doubt they would have been the prohibitive #1 sign on to sign off station book after book if they missed a third of the market. Beyond all that, now WWTV is also on full power 45 out of Vanderbilt which EASILY covers Charlevoix and Emmet counties. For this market size, all of the stations up here have done a pretty good job of rolling with the very expensive punches that the digital transition has provided.
 
#1,409 ·
Today 8-28-09 the FCC DA-09-1963

Has OK'd the change from ch 7 to 47, BUT there first must be

a comment period which is 25 days in length, after the notice has been

published in the Federal Register.


ch 47 500kw ERP at 393meters.


But it's going to be another 25day wait after it's published in the register.

Providing there is no other party interested in ch 47. If there is, the FCC

will assign a different channel. (so sayeth the document).


So, things are moving along on it.


Jack in Wellston
 
#1,410 ·
Excerpts From FCC yesterday 8-28-09



NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING DA-09-1963


Adopted: August 27, 2009 Released: August 28, 2009


Comment Date: [15 days after date of publication in the Federal Register]

Reply Comment Date: [25 days after date of publication in the Federal Register]


We believe that Barrington’s proposal warrants consideration. DTV channel 47 can be substituted for DTV channel 7 at Traverse City, Michigan, as proposed, in compliance with the principal community coverage requirements of Section 73.625(a) of the Commission’s rules, at coordinates 44-44-53 N. and 85-04-08 W. In addition, we find that this channel change meets the technical requirements set forth in Sections 73.616 and 73.623 of the Commission’s rules. We propose to substitute DTV channel 47 for DTV channel 7 for station WPBN-TV at Traverse City with the following specifications:

City and State DTV Channel DTV Power (kW) Antenna HAAT (m)

Traverse City, Michigan 47 500 393

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


Things are moving right along.


Jack

Wellston
 
#1,411 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mewdi /forum/post/17083764


Today 8-28-09 the FCC DA-09-1963

Has OK'd the change from ch 7 to 47, BUT there first must be

a comment period which is 25 days in length, after the notice has been

published in the Federal Register.


ch 47 500kw ERP at 393meters.


But it's going to be another 25day wait after it's published in the register.

Providing there is no other party interested in ch 47. If there is, the FCC

will assign a different channel. (so sayeth the document).


So, things are moving along on it.


Jack in Wellston

Now THIS is a SMART move. The transmitter is centrally located, on UHF and at least 300 kW. Good job WPBN! There really shouldn't be any need for RF 7 or RF 50 after this. I hope the next stage is to increase that Fisher Price transmitter in Cheboygan to at least 300 kW. it would probably be smart to have a pattern mostly beamed north since WPBN will cover the northwest lower pretty well. As it is, once the new WPBN on RF47 signs on, WTOM will be fairly useless (except for far northern Emmet Co.) with the overlapping coverage.
 
#1,412 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonyLCD /forum/post/17079751


WWTV only covers 2/3rd of the market? Oh please. Missing a portion of Charlevoix and Emmet counties and the "hilly areas along the Lake Michigan coast" as the perpetually moody Falcon 7 says, hardly constitutes missing a third of the market. I doubt they would have been the prohibitive #1 sign on to sign off station book after book if they missed a third of the market. Beyond all that, now WWTV is also on full power 45 out of Vanderbilt which EASILY covers Charlevoix and Emmet counties. For this market size, all of the stations up here have done a pretty good job of rolling with the very expensive punches that the digital transition has provided.

Well, let me put it another way... WWTV is proposing 3 transmitters in lower michigan (Tuston, Vandy, fill in TC) to cover what once was done with 1. Now, doesn't that get expensive? Could that have been mitigated by more centrally locating a transmitter? Maybe idiots was a rough term, but inefficient would definitely work in this case. I just don't understand why Kalkaska or between Cadillac-TC with 1MW on UHF (or 40 kW for VHF) for WWTV wouldn't be necessarily a better overall tradeoff between coverage and expense of building new transmitter sites.
 
#1,413 ·
They are not really using a transmitter in Vanderbilt, just a subchannel on the transmitter built for WGKU/WFUP.


The TC translator will be using a channel (40) that held an analog translator for WGKI (later WFQX) in the past (I wonder if they plan to use the antenna and transmission line of that former translator?). Both are inexpensive ways to "perfect" WWTV's OTA coverage.


Though I never lived in TC, I'm pretty sure that WWTV's analog channel 9 signal right in TC (i.e., places not significantly higher than the bay) was "watchable" but left something to be desired. On Platte Lake, I know it was snowy with rabbit ears. An outdoor antenna would clear it up somewhat, but then WAOW in Wausau would often cause interference (made worse because they were on the same zero offset - stations this close together were usually on different offsets). In contrast, analog WPBN-7 was snowfree and solid.


WPBN still wants a transmitter at Harrietta because their market extends somewhat South of TC. The current app is for a translator with 15kW because any more would be another full-service station and there is a freeze on new full-service stations.

I would not be the least bit surprised if they apply for a full service station on 50 (about 200kW, Licensed to Baldwin, Ludington, or some other town in that direction) through the same antenna after the freeze is lifted.


Anyone who is wondering how the "new" WPBN on 47 will come in - just remember how well/poorly WFQX came in on 47 two months ago. It is essentially a reactivation of the old WFQX with the WPBN call and virtual channel 7. As a DXer, when I see WPBN on 47, it will not count as a new station, just noted as "ex-WFQX".
 
#1,414 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by itsthemultipath! /forum/post/17086069


I would not be the least bit surprised if they apply for a full service station on 50 (about 200kW, Licensed to Baldwin, Ludington, or some other town in that direction) through the same antenna after the freeze is lifted.

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

NOTE: From the rules:

Local TV Multiple Ownership. The rule allows an entity to own two TV stations in the same DMA if either (1) the service areas – known as “Grade B contours” – of the stations do not overlap; or (2) at least one of the stations is not ranked among the top four stations in the DMA (based on market share), and at least eight independently owned TV stations

would remain in the market after the proposed combination.

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

Q: What freeze are you referring to? The freeze was lifted in May 2008.


Barrington already owns two stations in the DMA. WPBN-LD will not count.

Increasing power at Harietta i.e. going to a class A or full-service would be a violation of the rules.

LD class, 15kw there is no limit on number, as long as they are in the original

service contour of the original analog station.

Another LD may be needed farther south, as the DMA includes the counties

of Mecosta,Lake,Osceola,abd Clare.

I'm almost certain WOOD will establish a LD station in their north DMA as

they are having coverage problems there.

Here in Manistee county the west side of county is terrible except for Wisconsin stations.

Plus that area will not experience a increase in reception after ch 50 goes to Harietta, those high number channels are bad propagators, even in analog days. 15kw isn't going to make it better than 500w on ch 7. Though the Grade B contour shows it will, those contours are yet another long story. The ch 7 500w B 36dbu contour shows it extending beyond Ludington. The chl 50 15kw 51dbu contour doesn't even include Ludington. Those contours are based on an antenna 30' above ground.


sorry this is so long, I just had to get my 2cents worth in today. Hi Hi

Jack


Wellston
 
#1,415 ·
I need antenna advice. I am on the south side of TC near chums corners. I can currently get abc and nbc both in hd and sd clear as day. Right now I have rabbit ears at ground level. I would like to get fox and cbs. My wife isn't keen on the idea of a big antenna on the roof. How are those wingard metrostar omnidirectional's? I can put it on the rooftop about 20f off of ground level.
 
#1,420 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mesickstan /forum/post/17098189


TivoHD says there are three sound tracks on the current show, but only the first one actually has sound on 27-1. Doublecheck your sound output on your TV/tuner.

I get no sound on 27-1 from my TV tuner as well as my dish tuner from my antenna. The dish feed, 27-2 and 27-3 have sound as do all my other locals on both tuners using either tuner. ??!!
 
#1,421 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by CVX_GEEK /forum/post/17098397


I get no sound on 27-1 from my TV tuner as well as my dish tuner from my antenna. The dish feed, 27-2 and 27-3 have sound as do all my other locals on both tuners using either tuner. ??!!


Shoot this guy a message. Let us know what he says.


Rick Schudiske

Director Of Television

CMU Public Broadcasting
schud1ra@cmich.edu
 
#1,422 ·
Just checked the Channel Master converter and guess what? No sound on 27-1. My AVR is decoding audio from Great Performances off the Tivo as Dolby Digital and this is working fine. Sounds like (sorry, poor pun) it's not down mixing to two channel, which a DTV converter would need. Are you using an AVR or sound from your TV speakers?
 
#1,426 ·
Here's Darel Vanderhoof's response for the current audio problems on CMU's x.1 channels:

At the moment we are experimenting with an SD to HD line upconverter on the X-1 channels. In earlier tests about a week ago which were from an HD source, there was a 448Khz Dolby Digital 5.1 on audio-1; a 96K mono DVI Descriptive audio service on Audio-2; and another 96K mono audio targeted for SAP foreign language on audio-3.


In this current test, there is a 5.1 surround on audio-1 which mostly has material on the L, R, Center, and low frequency channels, but there is no audio on audio-2 and audio-3.


There is a problem where all three audio signals may show up labeled as "English", this might be a problem with older receivers, maybe its a possibility. Also, there were some FCC changes made to audio descriptors in the PSIP tables about a year ago and we are not in compliance. We have ordered the software updates to correct these signal problems recently, but I do not know if its related to your problem. I will let you know when we have upgraded, please keep me apprised. We are basically just testing at this point, so the x-1 might not be on all the time.


Thanks,


Darel Vanderhoof


Maintenance Supervisor


CMU Public Broadcasting

vande1dd@cmich.edu
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top