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

Cleveland, OH - HDTV - Page 118

post #3511 of 3985
I still don't fully understand this mobile TV. I don't hear much about it or know anyone that uses it. Why can't mobile TV's use the regular OTA channels that are out there right now? Is the mobile TV's picture transmitted at a resolution of 240? Can it be received on a smart phone? Do we really need to be connected to some sort of media everywhere we go? 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

Where is this Dish 56 broadcasting from? I don't get any indication that it exists at my house. And since regular TV's will not decode the mobile TV signal, will rescanning pick this channel up with a no signal message or will it ignore it?
post #3512 of 3985
I'm planning to produce coverage maps for the channel 56 transmitters soon.

- Trip
post #3513 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

I still don't fully understand this mobile TV. I don't hear much about it or know anyone that uses it.

Pretty good overview here:
http://broadcastengineering.com/news/atsc-mh-basics

No indication of 56 down here either. I thought WKYC was transmitting some mDTV?

Ed
post #3514 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

I still don't fully understand this mobile TV. I don't hear much about it or know anyone that uses it. Why can't mobile TV's use the regular OTA channels that are out there right now?

...because they wouldn't be able to bill you for it, people DO actually WANT to pay for television. See it's kinda like a status symbol...I think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

Do we really need to be connected to some sort of media everywhere we go? 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

I think so... that's the whole idea, (& it's not mine wink.gif ) to program everyone to thinking they need to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post


Where is this Dish 56 broadcasting from? I don't get any indication that it exists at my house. And since regular TV's will not decode the mobile TV signal, will rescanning pick this channel up with a no signal message or will it ignore it?

My last query somewhere on West 3rd St Downtown, though I'm not sure. 56 has been off the air for about a week now, i'm kinda sorry I allowed my TV to commit it to memory, no way to get rid of it aside of a complete wipe, but I still want to retain my occasionals. .. thus I never programmed WLFM into my main set... it's video is off the air too.
post #3515 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

All I did was cut the leads with wire cutters after the first pair of VHF elements. They need to be cut as close to the supporting rivet as possible to avoid signal loss. Then I took a hacksaw and sawed off the rest of the antenna right before the second pair of elements. In between the first pair of elements and where the second pair of elements were, I drilled a pair of holes for the u-bolt. A u-bolt clamp assembly (thing that goes around the neck of the antenna) makes a good template for straight, perfectly spaced holes. Don't forget to transfer the end cap from the discarded section. Depending on the weight of the antenna, you might need to utilize a portion of the support bar in order to keep it in a straightforward position.

Is your antenna rated 120 miles for UHF analog? If so, then it's slightly longer then the one that I have. I think the model number of that antenna is VU-210. See this link, jump to page 156.

TY that's how I visualized modifing it. That's the basic design of what I have, too big to orient it in the attic because of the trusses, I have it suspended with ropes... wanted to do what you say, my long elements at the front end are broken & hanging. God knows how I got it up there via the opening, I will have to work on it while it's in the attic as it's never coming back down. Was told altering this design would adversly affect the antennas overall performance, true/false? All I thought I would be doing is limiting reception on Low VHF.

Actuallly the 120 mile model is the VU-120... the miles ratings are over optimistic BS, oriented towards Erie I'm about 60-70 miles from the transmitters with no obstructions, so one would think Erie would be easy & very clear with a rotor, though I found that was very seldom the case.

Neat link, too bad not in pdf frown.gif
post #3516 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

I still don't fully understand this mobile TV. I don't hear much about it or know anyone that uses it. Why can't mobile TV's use the regular OTA channels that are out there right now? Is the mobile TV's picture transmitted at a resolution of 240? Can it be received on a smart phone? Do we really need to be connected to some sort of media everywhere we go? 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

Where is this Dish 56 broadcasting from? I don't get any indication that it exists at my house. And since regular TV's will not decode the mobile TV signal, will rescanning pick this channel up with a no signal message or will it ignore it?

Long winded post, lets see if I can cover this completely:

Reason why you don't hear much about mobile TV is because between of the pay TV providers, phone makers, and cellcos, they don't want you to have access to free TV on your phone. Money and lobbying speaks and no mobile TV in your phones. At best there's a few largely unheard of devices and dongles in the market to manage it. It's annoying really. I'd love to have the OPTION to use it if I choose. Not that I'd use it 24/7 but I'd pay a premium to have a phone with the hardware in it for that occasional use. Sadly... frown.gif

Why can't they just view existing OTA? The existing signal is horrendous for mobile viewing. In a stationary position like your house it is fine but on the move the multipath issues are crazy. The M/H standard adds in extra error correction to overcome this. Not to mention for existing OTA feeds you'd need hardware in each device that could decode and downconvert (for existing lowres screens) high bitrate 720/1080 MPEG2 signsls and do so with minimal battery usage. Rather it is much easier to take a small chunk of the 18mbit bandwidth alotted and transmit a widescreen 240 or 480p h264 video stream with AAC audio that just about every mobile device these days can do without breaking a sweat. So you just need the tuner hardware and feed the bits to the phone to work with.

It should be noted if you don't know this already but all mobile streams are on the same existing transmitters so barring antenna efficiency in your device, it is the same signal being received by your household antenna. Your TV won't see the M/H stream since it is a completely different format but it is in those bits being sent to it.

You can check out Trip's site and the station details include the data on Mobile TV broadcasts. For example, WCMH here has a Mobile TV signal. Actual video stream is 340kbps and audio is 48kbps for a total of 388kbps barring overhead. The full 'payload' is 1.35mbps taken out of the 18mbps stream. That extra bandwidth difference is for the error correction mentioned. And actual bandwidth taken from the primary OTA broadcast is minimal.
post #3517 of 3985
post #3518 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vchat20 View Post

Long winded post, lets see if I can cover this completely:

Reason why you don't hear much about mobile TV is because between of the pay TV providers, phone makers, and cellcos, they don't want you to have access to free TV on your phone. Money and lobbying speaks and no mobile TV in your phones. At best there's a few largely unheard of devices and dongles in the market to manage it. It's annoying really. I'd love to have the OPTION to use it if I choose. Not that I'd use it 24/7 but I'd pay a premium to have a phone with the hardware in it for that occasional use. Sadly... frown.gif

Why can't they just view existing OTA? The existing signal is horrendous for mobile viewing. In a stationary position like your house it is fine but on the move the multipath issues are crazy. The M/H standard adds in extra error correction to overcome this. Not to mention for existing OTA feeds you'd need hardware in each device that could decode and downconvert (for existing lowres screens) high bitrate 720/1080 MPEG2 signsls and do so with minimal battery usage. Rather it is much easier to take a small chunk of the 18mbit bandwidth alotted and transmit a widescreen 240 or 480p h264 video stream with AAC audio that just about every mobile device these days can do without breaking a sweat. So you just need the tuner hardware and feed the bits to the phone to work with.

It should be noted if you don't know this already but all mobile streams are on the same existing transmitters so barring antenna efficiency in your device, it is the same signal being received by your household antenna. Your TV won't see the M/H stream since it is a completely different format but it is in those bits being sent to it.

You can check out Trip's site and the station details include the data on Mobile TV broadcasts. For example, WCMH here has a Mobile TV signal. Actual video stream is 340kbps and audio is 48kbps for a total of 388kbps barring overhead. The full 'payload' is 1.35mbps taken out of the 18mbps stream. That extra bandwidth difference is for the error correction mentioned. And actual bandwidth taken from the primary OTA broadcast is minimal.
Pretty soon they will be charging you to breathe air. Everything that is a convenience to you has to come with a price/monthly fee. That's why I stay away from this smart phone garbage.

I figured that the regular OTA signals would have a reception issue considering the tiny antennas inside cell phones. VHF would be impossible to receive unless you're 50 feet away from the transmitter. So lower bitrates and higher error correction.
post #3519 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

TY that's how I visualized modifing it. That's the basic design of what I have, too big to orient it in the attic because of the trusses, I have it suspended with ropes... wanted to do what you say, my long elements at the front end are broken & hanging. God knows how I got it up there via the opening, I will have to work on it while it's in the attic as it's never coming back down. Was told altering this design would adversly affect the antennas overall performance, true/false? All I thought I would be doing is limiting reception on Low VHF.

Actuallly the 120 mile model is the VU-120... the miles ratings are over optimistic BS, oriented towards Erie I'm about 60-70 miles from the transmitters with no obstructions, so one would think Erie would be easy & very clear with a rotor, though I found that was very seldom the case.

Neat link, too bad not in pdf frown.gif
Yes, you will lose/diminish low-VHF & FM reception by removing the longer elements. I suppose (if you have the room) you could keep three pairs of the shorter VHF elements as they may help minimize interference. As for UHF, the modifications should not alter it's performance.

Post a picture of the antenna when you decide to modify it! smile.gif
post #3520 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

Pretty soon they will be charging you to breathe air. Everything that is a convenience to you has to come with a price/monthly fee. That's why I stay away from this smart phone garbage.
.

I agree & they will, but then again if they build it they will come.

Why I resisted the cell phone for so long.
post #3521 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

Yes, you will lose/diminish low-VHF & FM reception by removing the longer elements. I suppose (if you have the room) you could keep three pairs of the shorter VHF elements as they may help minimize interference. As for UHF, the modifications should not alter it's performance.

Post a picture of the antenna when you decide to modify it! smile.gif

On the VU 120, leave only 3 pairs of elements? I'm not sure of the total count.
post #3522 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

On the VU 120, leave only 3 pairs of elements? I'm not sure of the total count.
3 pairs of VHF elements, 6 all together - like this antenna. Keeping three pairs of elements was just a suggestion, but I would consider going that route if you are far from the Cleveland transmitters or have problems receiving WJW and/or WOIO.
post #3523 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

3 pairs of VHF elements, 6 all together - like this antenna. Keeping three pairs of elements was just a suggestion, but I would consider going that route if you are far from the Cleveland transmitters or have problems receiving WJW and/or WOIO.

WOIO & WJW... of course I have problems with them!

Per the RS picture in catalog, appears to have 7 sets of elements, was going to take off the area where the front elements are damaged... any drawback to leaving 4 pairs? Would also like to have FM performance on it too.

Seems to have a double boom, that may be a structural issue when I cut it. frown.gif
post #3524 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

Coverage map: http://www.rabbitears.info/contour.php?appid=556&map=Y

- Trip
Thanks Trip! I wonder how Dish chose the transmitter location? Had they been in the Parma antenna farm they would not be dumping so much signal over Lake Erie (unless they think mobile will be a big hit on boats).
post #3525 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

WOIO & WJW... of course I have problems with them!

Per the RS picture in catalog, appears to have 7 sets of elements, was going to take off the area where the front elements are damaged... any drawback to leaving 4 pairs? Would also like to have FM performance on it too.

Seems to have a double boom, that may be a structural issue when I cut it. frown.gif
I don't see why not. The more the better.

As for FM, as long as you have a pair of elements that are 32 inches long (length of my car's antenna) you should be fine.

Yes, those antenna's have a double boom for added support. Older RS antennas have the blue clips that hold the two together. Later ones are held on by metal brackets and will require drilling new holes for the screws/nuts.
post #3526 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

I don't see why not. The more the better.

As for FM, as long as you have a pair of elements that are 32 inches long (length of my car's antenna) you should be fine.

Yes, those antenna's have a double boom for added support. Older RS antennas have the blue clips that hold the two together. Later ones are held on by metal brackets and will require drilling new holes for the screws/nuts.

I'm thinking there were black plastic connectors. This antenna in my attic is 1981 Vintage from dad's house, the front end took a hit by a few tree branches (thus stored & later ended up up in my attic) & was replaced buy the one with the blue connectors.. that one was destroyed by a roofing crew that didn't understand that some people actually still use an antenna & don't subscribe to cable... they replaced it with an unknown brand antenna of similar quality that was once again hit with tree branches. I replaced this a few years back with the HBU-55 (mistake, should have went with the 33 ... the issues he has is with the terain & height, not the antenna itself).

I haven't looked at the antenna recently, with the black roof, it gets to 152F on a sunny day in that attic. Really want to get the Grey Hoverman, I spoke about about 50 pages back to test each one side by side....

What I don't want to do is make the current RS in the attic unusable by hacking it up.... but if smaller I could make adjustments easier.
post #3527 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

I'm thinking there were black plastic connectors. This antenna in my attic is 1981 Vintage from dad's house, the front end took a hit by a few tree branches (thus stored & later ended up up in my attic) & was replaced buy the one with the blue connectors.. that one was destroyed by a roofing crew that didn't understand that some people actually still use an antenna & don't subscribe to cable... they replaced it with an unknown brand antenna of similar quality that was once again hit with tree branches. I replaced this a few years back with the HBU-55 (mistake, should have went with the 33 ... the issues he has is with the terain & height, not the antenna itself).

I haven't looked at the antenna recently, with the black roof, it gets to 152F on a sunny day in that attic. Really want to get the Grey Hoverman, I spoke about about 50 pages back to test each one side by side....

What I don't want to do is make the current RS in the attic unusable by hacking it up.... but if smaller I could make adjustments easier.
The larger RS antennas are sold in two pieces, meaning that you have to join the two VHF sections together during assembly. You can temporarily disconnect the cross leads where the two sections meet. (They should both be held on by wing nuts.) If possible, remove the bolts on the joining bracket and remove the entire VHF only section and set it aside. That way you can take note of any reception changes without ruining the antenna.

If you are planning on saving 3 or 4 pairs of VHF elements, you might as well remove the other half of antenna from the bracket rather than hacking it off.
post #3528 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

my long elements at the front end are broken & hanging:(

I hope you realize that those long elements are usually thought of as being on the back. That is the rods for the lowest VHF channels are always the furthest away from the transmitters. The antenna in Snowdog's avatar is pointing to the right.
I have cut down antennas several times over the years. After RS discontinued carrying any VHF only antennas, I bought one of their largest combination units and took off the UHF section. Testing before and after the modification showed no loss of performance. A friend needed a UHF only antenna and I used that section for her with equally good results. Of course minor structural modifications are needed.
Best of luck, it sounds as though you have given it plenty of thought.
post #3529 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister B View Post

I hope you realize that those long elements are usually thought of as being on the back. That is the rods for the lowest VHF channels are always the furthest away from the transmitters. The antenna in Snowdog's avatar is pointing to the right.
I have cut down antennas several times over the years. After RS discontinued carrying any VHF only antennas, I bought one of their largest combination units and took off the UHF section. Testing before and after the modification showed no loss of performance. A friend needed a UHF only antenna and I used that section for her with equally good results. Of course minor structural modifications are needed.
Best of luck, it sounds as though you have given it plenty of thought.

I think that answers my question, several years back I planned on doing this & posted (here or elsewhere) & was told I'd be severly affecting the antenna design.

It would make sense that it would work within the limits I give it... I still unfortunately need Channels 8 & 10.

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

The larger RS antennas are sold in two pieces, meaning that you have to join the two VHF sections together during assembly. You can temporarily disconnect the cross leads where the two sections meet. (They should both be held on by wing nuts.) If possible, remove the bolts on the joining bracket and remove the entire VHF only section and set it aside. That way you can take note of any reception changes without ruining the antenna.

If you are planning on saving 3 or 4 pairs of VHF elements, you might as well remove the other half of antenna from the bracket rather than hacking it off.

Sounds like a plan, the assembly is coming back to me, I probably hadn't assembled an RS antenna in 20 years. So you say remove it at the overlapping boom, meaning the end result will have the UHF & Hi VHF on a single boom?

Now only if it were easy to get to & I had the ability to work in that attic smile.gif
post #3530 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister B View Post

I hope you realize that those long elements are usually thought of as being on the back. That is the rods for the lowest VHF channels are always the furthest away from the transmitters. The antenna in Snowdog's avatar is pointing to the right.
I have cut down antennas several times over the years. After RS discontinued carrying any VHF only antennas, I bought one of their largest combination units and took off the UHF section. Testing before and after the modification showed no loss of performance. A friend needed a UHF only antenna and I used that section for her with equally good results. Of course minor structural modifications are needed.
Best of luck, it sounds as though you have given it plenty of thought.
Thanks for backing Bismarck up. I tried searching the internet for sites where people may have done this kind of modification. As I stated before, I took an old Archer/RS antenna, hacked off the UHF end along with a pair of (hi) VHF elements and give it to my uncle. He lives on the fringes of WKBN and can pull it most of the time. Even though he has the antenna facing away from the Cleveland towers, all the local stations come in fine for him. Now that I think about it, I believe that antenna was a VU-120 that I modified. It must have been an old one as it doesn't have the UHF bowtie found on later models.

Yeah, I guess where the low VHF elements are located would be considered the the back. I always think the UHF end as being the rear as it points towards the transmitting tower(s). It looks even worse after today's storms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

So you say remove it at the overlapping boom, meaning the end result will have the UHF & Hi VHF on a single boom?
Yes.
post #3531 of 3985
Did anything happen recently with WOIO and/or WJW?
I live in Brunswick and lost OTA on WOIO and WJW a week or so ago. I know these two are trouble stations for a lot of people but I don't understand how I could just completely loose them both at the same time. My signal on both of these is literally 0% and weeks ago I could watch them with no interruption.

My setup: only about 4 years old. Antenna in attic that runs into my amplifier (was in basement, but moved into the attic tonight to see if it fixed anything. It improved all my channels, but not wjw or woio. Actually added 23 which I couldn't get before which was nice). Amplifier has two outputs, one feeds directly into master bedroom, the other runs to the basement that splits to feed the rest of the house.

I've done some troubleshooting. I had a couple iffy cable ends that I replaced (done before I had the right tools). Other than that I don't see anything that looks bad. I've also tried completely taking the amp out of the loop (in case it was damaged or failed) to see if that was blocking any signals, but it did not improve anything.

Most my other channels are at or near 100%. Is it possible lightning or some other damage has occurred with my antenna? Can that happen where it only knocks out select channels?

Thanks for any help/suggestions.
post #3532 of 3985
Double-check all your coax connections - I once had a failure that caused the loss of VHF stations (WJW gone and WOIO very weak) while UHF was mostly unaffected. Turned out to be the center conductor was still connected but the shield was disconnected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1ectr1chead View Post

Did anything happen recently with WOIO and/or WJW?
I live in Brunswick and lost OTA on WOIO and WJW a week or so ago. I know these two are trouble stations for a lot of people but I don't understand how I could just completely loose them both at the same time. My signal on both of these is literally 0% and weeks ago I could watch them with no interruption.

My setup: only about 4 years old. Antenna in attic that runs into my amplifier (was in basement, but moved into the attic tonight to see if it fixed anything. It improved all my channels, but not wjw or woio. Actually added 23 which I couldn't get before which was nice). Amplifier has two outputs, one feeds directly into master bedroom, the other runs to the basement that splits to feed the rest of the house.

I've done some troubleshooting. I had a couple iffy cable ends that I replaced (done before I had the right tools). Other than that I don't see anything that looks bad. I've also tried completely taking the amp out of the loop (in case it was damaged or failed) to see if that was blocking any signals, but it did not improve anything.

Most my other channels are at or near 100%. Is it possible lightning or some other damage has occurred with my antenna? Can that happen where it only knocks out select channels?

Thanks for any help/suggestions.
post #3533 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1ectr1chead View Post

Did anything happen recently with WOIO and/or WJW?
I live in Brunswick and lost OTA on WOIO and WJW a week or so ago. I know these two are trouble stations for a lot of people but I don't understand how I could just completely loose them both at the same time. My signal on both of these is literally 0% and weeks ago I could watch them with no interruption.

My setup: only about 4 years old. Antenna in attic that runs into my amplifier (was in basement, but moved into the attic tonight to see if it fixed anything. It improved all my channels, but not wjw or woio. Actually added 23 which I couldn't get before which was nice). Amplifier has two outputs, one feeds directly into master bedroom, the other runs to the basement that splits to feed the rest of the house.

I've done some troubleshooting. I had a couple iffy cable ends that I replaced (done before I had the right tools). Other than that I don't see anything that looks bad. I've also tried completely taking the amp out of the loop (in case it was damaged or failed) to see if that was blocking any signals, but it did not improve anything.

Most my other channels are at or near 100%. Is it possible lightning or some other damage has occurred with my antenna? Can that happen where it only knocks out select channels?

Thanks for any help/suggestions.
Try replacing the transformer on the antenna. (The thing that converts the cable from twin lead to coaxial). Sometimes they go bad and will diminish reception.

EDIT: Brunswick is only 10 miles away from WJW's transmitter and 12 miles away from WOIO. I don't see the need for an amplifier as the other Cleveland stations are located in between the two. Using an amplifier that close can cause overloading, which will reduce signal strength. But if it has worked fine for you in the past, then I would just leave it in your setup. Have you tried bypassing the amp in troubleshooting WJW & WOIO?
Edited by snowdog 88 - 7/12/13 at 7:51am
post #3534 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1ectr1chead View Post

Did anything happen recently with WOIO and/or WJW?

Both coming in fine for me in Strongsville (just north of Brunswick).
post #3535 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1ectr1chead View Post

Did anything happen recently with WOIO and/or WJW?
I live in Brunswick and lost OTA on WOIO and WJW a week or so ago. I know these two are trouble stations for a lot of people but I don't understand how I could just completely loose them both at the same time. My signal on both of these is literally 0% and weeks ago I could watch them with no interruption.

My setup: only about 4 years old. Antenna in attic that runs into my amplifier (was in basement, but moved into the attic tonight to see if it fixed anything. It improved all my channels, but not wjw or woio. Actually added 23 which I couldn't get before which was nice). Amplifier has two outputs, one feeds directly into master bedroom, the other runs to the basement that splits to feed the rest of the house.

I've done some troubleshooting. I had a couple iffy cable ends that I replaced (done before I had the right tools). Other than that I don't see anything that looks bad. I've also tried completely taking the amp out of the loop (in case it was damaged or failed) to see if that was blocking any signals, but it did not improve anything.

Most my other channels are at or near 100%. Is it possible lightning or some other damage has occurred with my antenna? Can that happen where it only knocks out select channels?

Thanks for any help/suggestions.


One more possibility (by no means necessarily correct) is a new transmitter nearby causing overload in an amplifier or the tuner of your set. Did an FM broadcast transmitter recently set up shop nearby? (FM overload is often a problem as channels 7-13 are the second harmonic of the FM broadcast band).

Another yet, some new electronic gadget you or a neighbor just bought home (with a switching power supply or microprocessor causing the jamming), though I would not think it should be strong enough to jam the Parma VHFs on an outdoor antenna in Brunswick).
post #3536 of 3985
I thought that the Canadian TV stations all switched to digital by now. On Saturday night I was running an autoscan trying to get CBC digital ch 9 when my TV found CTV in analog on ch 42. What's up with that?
post #3537 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael P 2341 View Post

I thought that the Canadian TV stations all switched to digital by now. On Saturday night I was running an autoscan trying to get CBC digital ch 9 when my TV found CTV in analog on ch 42. What's up with that?

It wasn't an across-the-board transition. Generally, only larger cities and provincial capitals were required to transition. Plenty of analog left elsewhere including CKCO.
post #3538 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

I'm planning to produce coverage maps for the channel 56 transmitters soon.

- Trip

I wonder how that might might compare to the old MediaFLO sites? I'll bet those would be easy to convert....
Edited by ADTech - 7/16/13 at 11:31am
post #3539 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADTech View Post

I wonder how that might might compare to the old MediaFLO sites?

Too many of those to do, given that they're all gone, never to return.

I did produce maps for the Echostar sites, though they're not posted publicly at the moment. If you want them, let me know.

- Trip
post #3540 of 3985
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1ectr1chead View Post

Did anything happen recently with WOIO and/or WJW?

I suspect the usual summer tropo interference from CFPL, been knocking my 10 off, ... with the addition of WOIO's new Akron repeater, I can no longer get WJET this time of the year, seem to null each other out. The repeater actually mapped itself into my box a few times already (easy fix), I don't want it in my main set (difficult fix).

Perhaps 8 in Lima is nulling WJW out?
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