or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Cleveland, OH - HDTV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cleveland, OH - HDTV - Page 108

post #3211 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

But honesty, I don't know if WJW will ever move back, or put their two repeaters in Salem into service. I don't have a problem receiving WJW on my outdoor antenna or coat hanger antenna, but I still would like them to move back.

I'm just now catching up on some long overdue reading of the Cleveland thread. Your comments about WJW prompt a couple of questions about another facility there with the VHF blues, WOIO:

1). It's hard to untangle the FCC database. Are they on the STA with 9.5 kW or still using the 3.5 kW plant per the licensed facility granted back in 1999?

2). Was there ever any consideration of swapping with sister station WUAB to get a UHF channel? That happened shortly after the transition in Wichita, KS when co-owned KWCH (CBS) traded its channel 12 facility with KSCW (CW) on RF-33.
post #3212 of 3983
9.5 kW. It was most recently extended 11/26/12. They've applied to modify their permit to specify that 9.5 kW facility, but it's still awaiting Canadian concurrence.

- Trip
post #3213 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by re_nelson View Post

I'm just now catching up on some long overdue reading of the Cleveland thread. Your comments about WJW prompt a couple of questions about another facility there with the VHF blues, WOIO:

1). It's hard to untangle the FCC database. Are they on the STA with 9.5 kW or still using the 3.5 kW plant per the licensed facility granted back in 1999?

2). Was there ever any consideration of swapping with sister station WUAB to get a UHF channel? That happened shortly after the transition in Wichita, KS when co-owned KWCH (CBS) traded its channel 12 facility with KSCW (CW) on RF-33.
Swapping WOIO's digital RF channel with WUAB would be the most practical thing to do seeing that WOIO carries CBS, one of the top 4 networks. Or, they could swap network affiliations between the two stations, which would then require rebranding (example: CBS 19 to CBS 43) and probably some confusion from viewers and cable/satellite companies. Raycom apparently thought that a repeater in Akron was good enough for WOIO.

If Raycom ever decides to swap WOIO's RF channel or network with WUAB, it would be wise for them to increase WUAB's power. 200 kW is kind of weak compared to other Cleveland UHF stations. (Excluding WVIZ)
post #3214 of 3983

OK, I searched and found this:

 

 

 

 

Is this a go-ahead for these channels, or what does it mean?

post #3215 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by CleCakYngMfd 
Is this a go-ahead for these channels, or what does it mean?

That would usually mean that the construction is authorized to proceed...

The licensee usually has three years from the grant date to complete the construction.
post #3216 of 3983
Something I don't understand...WJW was on 31 during the transition days. Was there any reported interference with WBNX then? Actual, reported interference, not a predicted result as WBNX claims?
post #3217 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael P 2341 View Post

Something I don't understand...WJW was on 31 during the transition days. Was there any reported interference with WBNX then? Actual, reported interference, not a predicted result as WBNX claims?
Actual interference to RF 30 is probably unknown. WBNX claims that at the time viewers could tune to their analog channel if they could not reliably receive their digital signal. I guess no one ever reported an improvement after the transition. WJW doesn't seem to have an issue with WCDN broadcasting next door on channel 7, though WCDN's low power signal isn't enough to disrupt RF 8, even though WCDN broadcasts on the same tower as WBNX.

Until WBNX gets some new decent programming and the equipment to syndicate in HD, I could care less if WJW's RF 31 interferes with their signal. Either the two stations work together and transmit both their signals on the same tower to overcome the interference or have one of the two scenarios: WJW forever stuck on channel 8 or WBNX crying because RF 31 is creating interference to ~2,500 households, 10-15 percent of the affected households probably watch WBNX OTA.

I also wonder if WBNX made some sort of deal with This TV in an attempt to prevent the FCC from granting approval of WJW's RF 31 and to obtain more viewers. WJW states that WBNX "offers viewers zero local news or public affairs programming. Put bluntly, it really matters if viewers throughout the Cleveland market can't reliably tune into WJW over-the-air; a few WBNX viewers' inability to watch reruns of The People's Court and Frasier is considerably less important."
post #3218 of 3983
No the old beef with WJW occupying RF31 was with WMFD RF-12, and interference approximating 'perceived' multipathing viewing trouble for fringe viewers of WMFD. The archived pages of this forum are one of the few places you can read about that, tough to dig up any other web mention today. The Wiki overviews for both calls no longer note that former dust up. WMFD was asked to allow a exemption for WJW interference rules compliance and WMFD was immeadiate and rigid in their "NO" answer. Word I have from a insider is the WBNX thing is no longer a issue in WJW moving off of RF8, a new temporary concern is some other operator moving in to the vacated RF8 slot in the present time frame before VHF-HI is gone for this use in 2014, if that actually happens. The 87.9/RF-6 FM station demonstrated to the CLE marketplace a creative use of a slot is possible. I will take down the VHF-Hi log periodic portion of my Stacker when WJW does move as the WOIO RF24 is more reliable in my location, need only the UHF Yagi-Uda. I too have wondered when on the WJW translators.

Who else noticed 'the shot heard round the world' this week in CLE marketplace TV. WJW offering a free tablet and phone app to stream their programming, I assume in real time. It's booming so fast, but maybe that is where the whole OTA/cable/sat/streaming competiton for market share thing is heading.
post #3219 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldwar View Post

No the old beef with WJW occupying RF31 was with WMFD RF-12, and interference approximating 'perceived' multipathing viewing trouble for fringe viewers of WMFD. The archived pages of this forum are one of the few places you can read about that, tough to dig up any other web mention today. The Wiki overviews for both calls no longer note that former dust up. WMFD was asked to allow a exemption for WJW interference rules compliance and WMFD was immeadiate and rigid in their "NO" answer. Word I have from a insider is the WBNX thing is no longer a issue in WJW moving off of RF8, a new temporary concern is some other operator moving in to the vacated RF8 slot in the present time frame before VHF-HI is gone for this use in 2014, if that actually happens. The 87.9/RF-6 FM station demonstrated to the CLE marketplace a creative use of a slot is possible. I will take down the VHF-Hi log periodic portion of my Stacker when WJW does move as the WOIO RF24 is more reliable in my location, need only the UHF Yagi-Uda. I too have wondered when on the WJW translators.

Who else noticed 'the shot heard round the world' this week in CLE marketplace TV. WJW offering a free tablet and phone app to stream their programming, I assume in real time. It's booming so fast, but maybe that is where the whole OTA/cable/sat/streaming competiton for market share thing is heading.
Didn't WJW move off of RF 31 due to a station in Windsor operating on the same channel? IIRC, that same station in Windsor is no longer using channel 31 after Canada pulled the plug on analog broadcasting, which then allowed WJW the opportunity to move back to RF 31. For those who can receive WMFD in its north-eastern fringes, I'm sure most of them would rather watch WJW than WMFD.

If the FCC continues to auction off channel allotments, (last I heard they wanted to get rid of channels 31 - 51), stations would have no choice but to broadcast in adjacent to one another in a cluster of the available spectrum. They would have to accept any interference that they may cause to one another. Put it this way for example…

RF 14 – WJW
RF 15 – WEWS
RF 16 – WOIO
RF 17 – WKYC
RF 18 – WQHS
RF 19 – WVPX
RF 20 – WVIZ
RF 21 – WUAB
RF 22 – WBNX

RF 23 – WFMJ
RF 24 – WYTV
RF 25 – WKBN
RF 26 – WNEO

RF 27 – WVPX
RF 28 – WDLI
RF 29 – WEAO

RF 30 – (Whatever low power station grabs it first!)
post #3220 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldwar View Post

No the old beef with WJW occupying RF31 was with WMFD RF-12, and interference approximating 'perceived' multipathing viewing trouble for fringe viewers of WMFD. The archived pages of this forum are one of the few places you can read about that, tough to dig up any other web mention today. The Wiki overviews for both calls no longer note that former dust up. WMFD was asked to allow a exemption for WJW interference rules compliance and WMFD was immeadiate and rigid in their "NO" answer. Word I have from a insider is the WBNX thing is no longer a issue in WJW moving off of RF8, a new temporary concern is some other operator moving in to the vacated RF8 slot in the present time frame before VHF-HI is gone for this use in 2014, if that actually happens. The 87.9/RF-6 FM station demonstrated to the CLE marketplace a creative use of a slot is possible. I will take down the VHF-Hi log periodic portion of my Stacker when WJW does move as the WOIO RF24 is more reliable in my location, need only the UHF Yagi-Uda. I too have wondered when on the WJW translators.

Who else noticed 'the shot heard round the world' this week in CLE marketplace TV. WJW offering a free tablet and phone app to stream their programming, I assume in real time. It's booming so fast, but maybe that is where the whole OTA/cable/sat/streaming competiton for market share thing is heading.

Scratching my head here...

How does a station with virtual channel 8 wanting to move from RF8 to RF31 affect a station that is on RF12 and virtual channel 68?

As for WBNX, they should fix their own problem - their existing antenna nulls the West to protect WGTE analog channel 30 - which no longer exists. WBNX would do a lot better (regardless of what WJW does) if they replaced their own antenna. WBNX's resistance looks to me like it is anticompetitive - maybe they just want to keep a competing station down. Perhaps they think they could get Fox affiliation if WJW's signal remains poor (fat chance!).
post #3221 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsthemultipath! View Post

Scratching my head here...

How does a station with virtual channel 8 wanting to move from RF8 to RF31 affect a station that is on RF12 and virtual channel 68?

I remember in the analog days, I would faintly receive WOIO and WBNX on unused channels. WOIO on 40 or 41 and WBNX on 50, 51 and even as interference on 65 (I could make out the WBNX CW bug drifting across the screen). I would also be able to tune WJW on channel 7. I assume that this would be the issue with RF 31 and WMFD. But what I can't figure out is that WMFD (RF 12) is on VHF and RF 31 is on UHF. I would think that RF 8 or RF 10, even WTOL 11 and WTVG 13 would be more of an issue with WMFD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsthemultipath! View Post

As for WBNX, they should fix their own problem - their existing antenna nulls the West to protect WGTE analog channel 30 - which no longer exists. WBNX would do a lot better (regardless of what WJW does) if they replaced their own antenna. WBNX's resistance looks to me like it is anticompetitive - maybe they just want to keep a competing station down. Perhaps they think they could get Fox affiliation if WJW's signal remains poor (fat chance!).

Could WBNX re-pipe their transmitter to use the old analog 55 antenna? Does it work that way? If I remember correctly, analog 55 also had a goofy coverage area with a few nulls in it. The smart thing to do (if analog WGTE was the case) was to install a non-directional antenna wait until the transition to activate it. Besides, at the time WBNX had no sub channels and the analog broadcast was so strong that you could receive a crystal-clear picture almost anywhere. The only downside would have been the lack of HD programming from the CW network (whoever watches that anyways).

Talking about nulls and stations having the same channel positions in adjacent markets, does anyone know if WTVG's pre-transition channel (RF 19) had a null towards Cleveland? I remember that analog WOIO would sometimes become very weak on my set, as if I was far from the transmitter, (Warren/Youngstown area for example). I would usually receive WTOL when this happened, and WTOL, at times, was much clearer then affected WOIO. When the tropo depleted, reception of WOIO would improve and return to normal. I came to the conclusion that pre-transition WTVG was the cause.
post #3222 of 3983
Thread Starter 
Just FYI for anyone able to receive the WTRF-DT, Wheeling, WV signal on ch. 7.....WTRF is now attempting to broadcast an HD signal on both their sub-channels as well as their main one. (CBS is on 7.1 in 1080i, Fox on 7.2 in 720p and ABC on 7.3 in 720p). Picture quality is decent but with noticeable softening on larger screens and occasional video/audio glitches that probably indicate that they are living on the edge with their compression/decoding equipment. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
post #3223 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by coldwar View Post

No the old beef with WJW occupying RF31 was with WMFD RF-12, and interference approximating 'perceived' multipathing viewing trouble for fringe viewers of WMFD. The archived pages of this forum are one of the few places you can read about that, tough to dig up any other web mention today. The Wiki overviews for both calls no longer note that former dust up. WMFD was asked to allow a exemption for WJW interference rules compliance and WMFD was immeadiate and rigid in their "NO" answer. Word I have from a insider is the WBNX thing is no longer a issue in WJW moving off of RF8, a new temporary concern is some other operator moving in to the vacated RF8 slot in the present time frame before VHF-HI is gone for this use in 2014, if that actually happens. The 87.9/RF-6 FM station demonstrated to the CLE marketplace a creative use of a slot is possible. I will take down the VHF-Hi log periodic portion of my Stacker when WJW does move as the WOIO RF24 is more reliable in my location, need only the UHF Yagi-Uda. I too have wondered when on the WJW translators.

Who else noticed 'the shot heard round the world' this week in CLE marketplace TV. WJW offering a free tablet and phone app to stream their programming, I assume in real time. It's booming so fast, but maybe that is where the whole OTA/cable/sat/streaming competiton for market share thing is heading.
Didn't WJW move off of RF 31 due to a station in Windsor operating on the same channel? IIRC, that same station in Windsor is no longer using channel 31 after Canada pulled the plug on analog broadcasting, which then allowed WJW the opportunity to move back to RF 31. For those who can receive WMFD in its north-eastern fringes, I'm sure most of them would rather watch WJW than WMFD.

If the FCC continues to auction off channel allotments, (last I heard they wanted to get rid of channels 31 - 51), stations would have no choice but to broadcast in adjacent to one another in a cluster of the available spectrum. They would have to accept any interference that they may cause to one another. Put it this way for example…

RF 14 – WJW
RF 15 – WEWS
RF 16 – WOIO
RF 17 – WKYC
RF 18 – WQHS
RF 19 – WVPX
RF 20 – WVIZ
RF 21 – WUAB
RF 22 – WBNX

RF 23 – WFMJ
RF 24 – WYTV
RF 25 – WKBN
RF 26 – WNEO

RF 27 – WVPX
RF 28 – WDLI
RF 29 – WEAO

RF 30 – (Whatever low power station grabs it first!)


This would be interesting if this would happen.




Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk
post #3224 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by rluyster View Post

Just FYI for anyone able to receive the WTRF-DT, Wheeling, WV signal on ch. 7.....WTRF is now attempting to broadcast an HD signal on both their sub-channels as well as their main one. (CBS is on 7.1 in 1080i, Fox on 7.2 in 720p and ABC on 7.3 in 720p). Picture quality is decent but with noticeable softening on larger screens and occasional video/audio glitches that probably indicate that they are living on the edge with their compression/decoding equipment. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
YIKES! eek.gif

I bet the football games look like complete crap!
post #3225 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

YIKES! eek.gif

I bet the football games look like complete crap!



When WTRF-CBS was the only channel in HD, watching football was terrible. The picture had so many pixels. I did watch the Super Bowl when ABC was at 720, CBS was at 1080 and Fox was at 480 the CBS feed of Super Bowl was much better than before.
post #3226 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

Qubo already meets WVPX's E/I requirement for 23-2/23-3/23-4.

- Trip

I always took it the E/I was per sub, not per channel allocation, as Channel 3 Wx+ also broadcasts edicuational programs on Sat & Sun AM.
post #3227 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

If the FCC continues to auction off channel allotments, (last I heard they wanted to get rid of channels 31 - 51), stations would have no choice but to broadcast in adjacent to one another in a cluster of the available spectrum. They would have to accept any interference that they may cause to one another. Put it this way for example…

RF 14 – WJW
RF 15 – WEWS
RF 16 – WOIO
RF 17 – WKYC
RF 18 – WQHS
RF 19 – WVPX
RF 20 – WVIZ
RF 21 – WUAB
RF 22 – WBNX

RF 23 – WFMJ
RF 24 – WYTV
RF 25 – WKBN
RF 26 – WNEO

RF 27 – WVPX
RF 28 – WDLI
RF 29 – WEAO

RF 30 – (Whatever low power station grabs it first!)

Where would WMFD end up then? wink.gif

No more VHF either? I hear about the lopping off of 31-51, only 17 channels left OTA of the initial 82, I guess TV isn't all that important & cell phones & blueberrys are.... Gee I think they need another area code in the area, bad enough they re-issue #'s within 60 says now, who do I complain to?

I would take it these blocks would stratigically be placed (ie: Pittsburgh would get the same allocations as Cleveland in this instance, Erie would end up with the block from Akron or so on (??))... not enough allocations already to go around.

There goes 55 once again catering to the west side, speaking of which the past few weeks 55's signal has been diminished off my attic antenna for some reason (??). I still enjoy This TV though, I'm glad it was picked up, but with the diminished band I wouldn't expect the micro networks to be around very long either. I don't have the issues with 8 as much as 19 (but they are balancing out) due to interference from CFPL.

What is next, let's sell off the FM band to the cell industry too!! There is something called Cuirrius & XM that I would have the privlidge to pay for! Hmmm now who would fall for such a scam.... Reaches in wallet... flip flip flip......
post #3228 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

Where would WMFD end up then? wink.gif

No more VHF either? I hear about the lopping off of 31-51, only 17 channels left OTA of the initial 82 [...]

The specifics of reallocation plan haven't yet been formalized but one aspect of it is reasonably certain: VHF will remain and likely be encouraged for broadcasters. As for what gets chopped off of the UHF spectrum, informal proposals include those that eliminate 31-51 but there's also been some talk of making 37-51 off limits. If the latter comes to pass, the broadcaster's spectrum will be 2-36.

Also see my comments in the Wheeling thread about what WTRF is doing with their three streams. That may portend what lies ahead elsewhere.
post #3229 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsthemultipath! View Post

Scratching my head here...

How does a station with virtual channel 8 wanting to move from RF8 to RF31 affect a station that is on RF12 and virtual channel 68?

As for WBNX, they should fix their own problem - their existing antenna nulls the West to protect WGTE analog channel 30 - which no longer exists. WBNX would do a lot better (regardless of what WJW does) if they replaced their own antenna. WBNX's resistance looks to me like it is anticompetitive - maybe they just want to keep a competing station down. Perhaps they think they could get Fox affiliation if WJW's signal remains poor (fat chance!).
You beat me to it! I believe the station with a "beef" over WJW is actually a channel 8 in Lima, not WMFD. The Lima station should be happy that WJW wants off of RF-8.

FYI: Windsor does not have a ch 31, they do have a ch 32. There was a 31 in Ann Arbor, MI as well as another one in SW Ontario (not near Windsor - it was closer to London or Paris) that was a full power translator for Toronto's CITY TV.
post #3230 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by re_nelson View Post

The specifics of reallocation plan haven't yet been formalized but one aspect of it is reasonably certain: VHF will remain and likely be encouraged for broadcasters. As for what gets chopped off of the UHF spectrum, informal proposals include those that eliminate 31-51 but there's also been some talk of making 37-51 off limits. If the latter comes to pass, the broadcaster's spectrum will be 2-36.

Also see my comments in the Wheeling thread about what WTRF is doing with their three streams. That may portend what lies ahead elsewhere.
So, back to the old VHF antenna with it's long elements that will fall off during a windstorm. I do like technology, but I don't need to be connected to the internet 24/7 though a mobile device. I can wait until I get home to use the internet. You would think that channels 52 - 69 would be enough for mobile devices. I bet that not even half of those channels are currently in use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael P 2341 View Post

You beat me to it! I believe the station with a "beef" over WJW is actually a channel 8 in Lima, not WMFD. The Lima station should be happy that WJW wants off of RF-8.

FYI: Windsor does not have a ch 31, they do have a ch 32. There was a 31 in Ann Arbor, MI as well as another one in SW Ontario (not near Windsor - it was closer to London or Paris) that was a full power translator for Toronto's CITY TV.
WLIO makes more sense, although I still don't know how RF 31 would interfere with their signal. Anyway, I believe WLIO is the reason why WJW never upped their RF 8 wattage to 30 kW. I read somewhere (probably the OMW blog) that the 30 kW upgrade would do little help for viewers south of their transmitter, but will improve coverage over the lake. And of course, when atmospheric conditions are right, viewers of WLIO located in the eastern fringe of their coverage area will either get a "no signal" or receive WJW instead.

As for RF 31 in Canada, maybe it was the one in London. All I know was that there was a station on the other side of Lake Erie that was also on RF 31. I read somewhere that WJW's move from RF 31 was probably due to interference from a station in Canada. Haven't seen CICO 32 since they discontinued analog in Canada. I remember that station use to take over WRAP. Talk about interference!
post #3231 of 3983
So is channel 49 back on the air. It was off this morning and last night.
post #3232 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassguitarman View Post

So is channel 49 back on the air. It was off this morning and last night.
Which ch 49? Virtual (as in WEAO) or RF (as in WDLI)?
post #3233 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael P 2341 View Post

Which ch 49? Virtual (as in WEAO) or RF (as in WDLI)?
I believe he means WEAO. I noticed they were off the air the other morning as my TV skipped over all their channels.

Not quite sure why WEAO ditched RF 49 after the conversion. They should have moved their digital broadcast over to 49 as WDLI is blasting out 900 kW on that channel. You would think that WEAO would take advantage of RF 49 and put out a stronger signal than the one that they currently have, even if they didn't plan on broadcasting at 900 kW. Although staying on RF 50 may have been a good thing as I never had any luck receiving analog WEAO at my house, ~20 miles away from their transmitter and always got a very snowy picture on my outdoor antenna. Null towards my house? Wish the analog coverage maps were still on TV Fool's website so I can analyze them.
post #3234 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post


I remember that analog WOIO would sometimes become very weak on my set, as if I was far from the transmitter, (Warren/Youngstown area for example). I would usually receive WTOL when this happened, and WTOL, at times, was much clearer then affected WOIO. When the tropo depleted, reception of WOIO would improve and return to normal. I came to the conclusion that pre-transition WTVG was the cause.

Actually, WOIO would not be any weaker when WTVG-DT was coming in by tropo - it just looked like a weaker WOIO signal. This was because a DTV signal interfering with an analog TV signal looked just like "snow" on an analog set!

WTVG-DT was directional, but I forgot their pattern. All pre-transition ToledoDTV signals were directional, but usually to save electricity (by nulling in the direction of Lake Erie).
post #3235 of 3983
yes it was WEAO
and they were back when I got home
post #3236 of 3983

I am seeing “No Signal” in the upper left of the screen with WRLM again.  I think this has been going on for about a year or so that I am aware of.  

 

Has anyone seen this?  Bird droppings on the satellite dish?

post #3237 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by CleCakYngMfd View Post

I am seeing “No Signal” in the upper left of the screen with WRLM again.  I think this has been going on for about a year or so that I am aware of.  

Has anyone seen this?  Bird droppings on the satellite dish?
Satellite or over the air?

I was never able to receive WRLM OTA unless I stood on my deck with my coathanger antenna, and I'm about 14 miles north of their transmitter. Then starting sometime in the 3rd quarter of 2012, I was able to receive WRLM almost anywhere inside my house, even with my coathanger antenna laying flat on my bed, still can as of now. Did that 1000 kW signal finally go into affect?
post #3238 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post


[1] Satellite or over the air?

[2] ...Did that 1000 kW signal finally go into affect?

 

[1] At first I thought it was my local cable, but checked it with my converter box and antenna...  Same thing:  Green, small font, "No Signal".  If not that, then it is video/audio breakups or blanking. 

 

[2] I guess so...  it's listed as such:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WRLM-TV   and   http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?request=print_station&facility_id=43870.   I am still trying to figure how to navigate the FCC site.   Over there, WRLM is still shown as Ch 67, at least that is what I came up with. confused.gif

 

I got my ClearStream4 in a closet pointed NNE for CLE, but WRLM is ENE of me.   However, I still get a good signal.

post #3239 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inundated View Post

WOIO and WUAB are off Cox Cable tonight...money dispute. Any of you forced to go to OTA to pick up 19 and 43?

Re: Cavs and WUAB...in the past year or two, they've been passing the direct Fox Sports Ohio HD feed (all games on 43 are now FSO simulcasts). They aren't doing that this year?

Hey, thanx in advance and don't know if you can help. Im in Lakewood with cox cable. I am trying to watch their 3d scenes on my projector (is under free zone in cox menus). They are shown in top/bottom orientation but my projector cant seem to recognize this, although it is capable of these scenes. Thanx
post #3240 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by CleCakYngMfd View Post

[1] At first I thought it was my local cable, but checked it with my converter box and antenna...  Same thing:  Green, small font, "No Signal".  If not that, then it is video/audio breakups or blanking. 

[2] I guess so...  it's listed as such:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WRLM-TV   and   http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?request=print_station&facility_id=43870.   I am still trying to figure how to navigate the FCC site.   Over there, WRLM is still shown as Ch 67, at least that is what I came up with. confused.gif

I got my ClearStream4 in a closet pointed NNE for CLE, but WRLM is ENE of me.   However, I still get a good signal.
WRLM may have been experiencing difficulties acquiring the satellite feed. I've seen the same thing happen on 8.2 when Antenna TV first launched- It would sometimes show a "no signal" message that I knew wasn’t part of my TV.

67 was the analog channel used prior to WRLM, known at the time as WOAC 67. Shortly after the switch to digital, WOAC was sold to Tri-State Christian Television, owners of WRLM. The new owners opted to use the station's digital RF channel (47) as the PSIP instead of the old analog allocation. (Probably so that they weren't at the end of the channel list and forgotten). However, it is one of the few stations I've heard of that doesn't use its old analog allocation. The FCC needs to update the virtual channel on WRLM's record.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Local HDTV Info and Reception
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Cleveland, OH - HDTV