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

Cleveland, OH - HDTV - Page 119

post #3541 of 3983
Canada hasn't given ANY date to require the smaller market TV stations to switch to digital. I suppose they can just continue analog broadcast forever if nothing is forcing them. My family owns property between Ottawa and Kingston Ontario, and we need a TV that's capable of both receiving analog and digital. CKWS from Kingston is still using analog channel 11, CIII from Bancroft is still on analog channel 2, and CJOH from Deseronto is on analog channel 6. All Ottawa channels, like CJOH on channel 13, are using digital. There's no consistency.
post #3542 of 3983
CKWS converted to digital on July 5.

- Trip
post #3543 of 3983
Quote:
My family owns property between Ottawa and Kingston Ontario, and we need a TV that's capable of both receiving analog and digital.

That would be any new TV set sold in US (and probably Canada, also). The rule requires that both capabilities be present.
post #3544 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

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?
I had interference on RF ch 7 Saturday. The Daystar channel had fragments of video from another station (with commercials so I know it was not from then). I wonder if that was the Steubenville ch 7? My TV ID'd the signal as WCDN. I live just one mile south of the antenna towers, so I never have had any issues with the full power stations. I did lose WLFM ch 6. Did they turn off their video signal?

My antenna was aimed at Windsor, I was trying to get CBC on ch 9 (I sure miss analog ch 40 from London).
post #3545 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael P 2341 View Post

I had interference on RF ch 7 Saturday. The Daystar channel had fragments of video from another station (with commercials so I know it was not from then). I wonder if that was the Steubenville ch 7? My TV ID'd the signal as WCDN. I live just one mile south of the antenna towers, so I never have had any issues with the full power stations. I did lose WLFM ch 6. Did they turn off their video signal?

My antenna was aimed at Windsor, I was trying to get CBC on ch 9 (I sure miss analog ch 40 from London).
You were probably picking up WJBK from Detroit (RF 7). Since my antenna is somewhat aimed towards Toledo/Detroit, I assume that WJBK knocks WCDN off when the tropo is up. My TV never actually decodes WJBK during the this time, just causes "weak signal" interference with WCDN.

Another possibility, I wonder if WJW was causing interference with WCDN seeing that you are that close to the towers. You may have had your antenna turned just right. I remember receiving a faint image of WJW on CH 7 on my old analog set after installing my Radio Shack VU-190XR antenna back in 2006.

WLFM apparently turned off their video a month or so ago. I guess they are strictly a radio broadcast now.
post #3546 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

WLFM apparently turned off their video a month or so ago. I guess they are strictly a radio broadcast now.

Isn't that against FCC rules? Aren't they required to broadcast video being that they're technically a TV station and not a radio station?
post #3547 of 3983
Without a video signal my HDTV does not detect anything on ch 6. The old analog CRT does get the audio only signal but it acts confused.
post #3548 of 3983
Looks like WOIO wants to expand the coverage area of their full power transmitter.
https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101556810&formid=911&fac_num=39746

I still think that WOIO should flip RF channels with WUAB. Wouldn't that be easier? Who really watches My Network TV or 43.1's syndicated programming?
Edited by snowdog 88 - 7/19/13 at 7:43am
post #3549 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew K View Post

Isn't that against FCC rules? Aren't they required to broadcast video being that they're technically a TV station and not a radio station?
Thought that was the whole idea behind that..... but we know that would be coming to an end in 2015 too, so what is the point of the investment in this project that was doomed from the start?
post #3550 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

Looks like WOIO wants to expand the coverage area of their full power transmitter.
https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101556810&formid=911&fac_num=39746

I still think that WOIO should flip RF channels with WUAB. Wouldn't that be easier? Who really watches My Network TV or 43's syndicated programming?

No mention of CFPL? they needed to go back to 19, though think that's a bit late. Snowdog, I still enjoy Bounce on 43.2, though since the band is opening I don't get 19 around Sunrise (at least)

Had WVIZ activated it's repeater on 38 in Thompson? I am getting strong blips on there but have not been able to lock any out of town stations during this past week... even Toledo which is usually present at times this time of year.
post #3551 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

Looks like WOIO wants to expand the coverage area of their full power transmitter.
https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101556810&formid=911&fac_num=39746

Read that carefully. It's not a new permit, it's an extension to the existing STA. They've been at 9.5 kW since shortly after the transition, but under STA due to lack of Canadian concurrence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

No mention of CFPL? they needed to go back to 19, though think that's a bit late.

Can't happen. WFMJ is on 20 and is too close.
Quote:
Had WVIZ activated it's repeater on 38 in Thompson? I am getting strong blips on there but have not been able to lock any out of town stations during this past week... even Toledo which is usually present at times this time of year.

WVIZ has a 38 signal, but not a 39. The 39 license was canceled.

- Trip

EDIT: Typoed WVIZ as WIVM... go figure. And flipped the channel numbers. I should not post that early in the morning.
Edited by Trip in VA - 7/19/13 at 8:19am
post #3552 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

No mention of CFPL? they needed to go back to 19, though think that's a bit late. Snowdog, I still enjoy Bounce on 43.2, though since the band is opening I don't get 19 around Sunrise (at least)

Had WVIZ activated it's repeater on 38 in Thompson? I am getting strong blips on there but have not been able to lock any out of town stations during this past week... even Toledo which is usually present at times this time of year.
Yes, they should have went back to RF 19 after the switch before WYFX got a hold of it. They probably couldn't do that due to interference concerns with WFMJ. They could also flip the CBS/MyNet affiliations between the two stations, but that would probably result in confusion and create a giant mess with the cable/satellite companies. They would also have to re-brand the stations as My Network 19 and CBS 43.biggrin.gif

I also thought the same about CFPL. Isn't CFPL the reason WOIO is broadcasting at a pathetic wattage with nulls towards the north?

Talking about Bounce, does anyone know that WYTV recently picked up the network at the beginning of the month? It replaced their weather on 33.3.

And for WVIZ, I recently read that the FCC doesn't want to renew their license for repeaters W64AK and W39DU-D. Ideastream has asked the FCC to reconsider.
https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101556806&formid=303&fac_num=18753
post #3553 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

Can't happen. WFMJ is on 20 and is too close.

Why I said a bit too late for that.... I never see anything on 35 though .. possible?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post


WVIZ has a 38 signal, but not a 39. The 39 license was canceled.

- Trip

Yes, that south of Akron LP station (WIVM ??) snatched that 39 allocation up, really should had been full power.

I think that's when WVIZ was issued permits for 38 (Thompson), & 44 (Conneaut), though I could be wrong.

So is 38 operational, I'm getting steady low signal consistantly on 38 most of the time, though I would think being this close to Thompson I would be locking it occasionally.

I DON'T think this is WOSU.
post #3554 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

And for WVIZ, I recently read that the FCC doesn't want to renew their license for repeaters W64AK and W39DU-D. Ideastream has asked the FCC to reconsider.
https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/forms/prod/cdbsmenu.hts?context=25&appn=101556806&formid=303&fac_num=18753

Yeah, I guess we don't need any repeaters up here in the lowlands.

25 is not as problamatic as 19 though.

Thompsons WVIZ repeater used to be on 67, then 63 before going dark shortly after the switchover.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

I also thought the same about CFPL. Isn't CFPL the reason WOIO is broadcasting at a pathetic wattage with nulls towards the north?

Exactly, reason at times I get neither, I wonder if WOIO interferes with CFPL?
Edited by Bismarck440 - 7/19/13 at 7:08pm
post #3555 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

Why I said a bit too late for that.... I never see anything on 35 though .. possible?

Same problem, but with WYTV instead.
Quote:
Yes, that south of Akron LP station (WIVM ??) snatched that 39 allocation up, really should had been full power.

WIVM and WVIZ's translator could have co-existed.
Quote:
I think that's when WVIZ was issued permits for 38 (Thompson), & 44 (Conneaut), though I could be wrong.

Canada objected to 44, and they specified 39 instead.
Quote:
So is 38 operational, I'm getting steady low signal consistantly on 38 most of the time, though I would think being this close to Thompson I would be locking it occasionally.

I DON'T think this is WOSU.

You could be seeing it all the time but only able to lock it during atmospheric events, during which you may get enough interference to keep it from decoding. Go figure.

The license for 39 was canceled due to not operating for more than a year. Unless they can demonstrate that it operated on channel 39 before 12/31/12, the FCC won't be reinstating it.

- Trip
post #3556 of 3983
WKYC finally changed the music on 3.2! No more 45 second loop, more selections now! The loop has been playing non-stop since January 1, 2009 when NBC Weather Plus was discontinued. Apparently WKYC intends to keep their weather channel for a little bit longer. Would be nice to see more radar screens, a live weather camera and the return of the "L" bar with the current temperatures and the 5 day forcast.
post #3557 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

WIVM and WVIZ's translator could have co-existed.
Canada objected to 44, and they specified 39 instead.
You could be seeing it all the time but only able to lock it during atmospheric events, during which you may get enough interference to keep it from decoding. Go figure.

The license for 39 was canceled due to not operating for more than a year. Unless they can demonstrate that it operated on channel 39 before 12/31/12, the FCC won't be reinstating it.

- Trip

Unless Conneaut ended up with the 38 repeater, & the Thompson repeater was nixed.


Never had been able to Lock anything on RF 38 except for WOSU. (which is also PBS)
post #3558 of 3983
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

Any thoughts on Duplexing? Was thinking of setting up the Gray-Hoverman on the other side of the attic pointing it toward a second market (not sure if It will actually work), such as Toledo or Erie in my case (although Toledo has 11 & 13). Or would these antennas be nulling each other out?

Was WOIO off Monday AM? No Signal....Probably the intereference from CFPL again, I'm thinking.
post #3559 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

Unless Conneaut ended up with the 38 repeater, & the Thompson repeater was nixed.


Never had been able to Lock anything on RF 38 except for WOSU. (which is also PBS)

Thompson is where 38 is located.

- Trip
post #3560 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

Any thoughts on Duplexing? Was thinking of setting up the Gray-Hoverman on the other side of the attic pointing it toward a second market (not sure if It will actually work), such as Toledo or Erie in my case (although Toledo has 11 & 13). Or would these antennas be nulling each other out?
IIRC, the two antennas have to be spaced at least 8.5 feet apart to avoid signal loss.
post #3561 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

Thompson is where 38 is located.

- Trip

Yes, I looked this up, located on Ohio 528 south of the square (if they are using the same tower).

I really question if this repeater is operational, & if it is it is using the full 10k... I'm about 15 miles from Thompson as the crow flies (if that) with no obstructions & well within the coverage map.
post #3562 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

Yes, I looked this up, located on Ohio 528 south of the square (if they are using the same tower).

I really question if this repeater is operational, & if it is it is using the full 10k... I'm about 15 miles from Thompson as the crow flies (if that) with no obstructions & well within the coverage map.
You could be within the coverage map but terrain could block the signal. How high is the repeater? IIRC you are in the Mentor area? If so the ridge to the south is probably at fault (remember Thompson is inland, not like Perry). You would have better luck with the Toledo stations as there is nothing but water between their transmitters and the Lake County coastline.
post #3563 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael P 2341 View Post

You could be within the coverage map but terrain could block the signal. How high is the repeater? IIRC you are in the Mentor area? If so the ridge to the south is probably at fault (remember Thompson is inland, not like Perry). You would have better luck with the Toledo stations as there is nothing but water between their transmitters and the Lake County coastline.

If it is in the same location, it is hust below the crest in Thompson, over all the low lying areas, this repeater was designed for the area so there should be no issues.. unlike WRLM which I'm in the coverage area but is blocked by the ridge... along with all the other Cleveland LP WAX, WCDN Ect.
post #3564 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bismarck440 View Post

unlike WRLM which I'm in the coverage area but is blocked by the ridge...
The problem with WRLM is that their tower isn't nearly as high compared to the Cleveland/Akron stations, even though they are blasting out 1000 kW of power. The higher the tower, the more terrain the signal can overcome. I could not receive WRLM for a long time unless I stood on my deck with a UHF antenna pointed directly at their transmitter, and I'm only 10 miles away from it. TVfool.com said that I was in the green (very good) area and there were no major terrain obstructions in my way according to the coloring of the map. Then about a year ago I was able to receive WRLM almost anywhere inside my house, so I don't know if they removed a null or if that 1000 kW signal finally went into effect. I'm thinking that the digital transition in Canada had something to do with it. I believe they were under a STA for a long time.
post #3565 of 3983
I finally got back into the attic to find out what happened with my woio and wjw reception. It was not before doing a lot of reading here and other places. Thank you all for your suggestions. Sorry for not posting sooner, but I just did this tonight. It's been a busy summer.
Turns out it was the pre-amp. I didn't check it when I checked the amplifier because I was confused about what it was. The amp/preamp combo was a Radio Shack 15-259. It lasted just over a year. What a bummer.

My antenna is a VU 190RX, also from Radio Shack. It's in the attic. It's way too big for my attic and I have trouble positioning it. The attic trusses run between the elements, which I'm sure is not ideal. The back elements I can't even extend completely. It's really laughable actually and probably dumb luck I get it to work. The only way it fits at all is pointing a few degrees north of Parma. But, the wife doesn't want it on the roof and being completely a newbie to antenna's I just bought the biggest thing I could find, knowing that the attic was going to take a big bite out of reception.

For the Parma stations I don't need the amp. I wanted to pick up 23 and 49 and so my wife got me the amp for my B-day last year. With the amp I could pick up Detroit with good weather, but only sometimes 23 and never 49.

Even now that I have 8 and 19 back, after reading some I think I may try a different antenna that I can position better. The CM-4228HD looks like it would fit in the attic much better. The range advertised is not as good as with my current antenna, but maybe it won't be an issue with better positioning and fit? I'd like to point it midway between Parma and Akron. I may also look into getting a better amp/preamp. If anyone wants to make a suggestion I'll check it out. I know the roof is the best place, but please don't suggest that, I've already lost that battle and 23 and 49 are for me, so my wife has no stake in improving things.

BTW... I asked the guys at WOIO about my issue and got a very long, detailed answer with the past and present struggles explained. Very helpful and I get the sense they are just as frustrated with their broadcast situation as we are. It doesn't sound like it's getting better any time soon for them unfortunately.
post #3566 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1ectr1chead View Post

I finally got back into the attic to find out what happened with my woio and wjw reception. It was not before doing a lot of reading here and other places. Thank you all for your suggestions. Sorry for not posting sooner, but I just did this tonight. It's been a busy summer.
Turns out it was the pre-amp. I didn't check it when I checked the amplifier because I was confused about what it was. The amp/preamp combo was a Radio Shack 15-259. It lasted just over a year. What a bummer.

My antenna is a VU 190RX, also from Radio Shack. It's in the attic. It's way too big for my attic and I have trouble positioning it. The attic trusses run between the elements, which I'm sure is not ideal. The back elements I can't even extend completely. It's really laughable actually and probably dumb luck I get it to work. The only way it fits at all is pointing a few degrees north of Parma. But, the wife doesn't want it on the roof and being completely a newbie to antenna's I just bought the biggest thing I could find, knowing that the attic was going to take a big bite out of reception.

For the Parma stations I don't need the amp. I wanted to pick up 23 and 49 and so my wife got me the amp for my B-day last year. With the amp I could pick up Detroit with good weather, but only sometimes 23 and never 49.

Even now that I have 8 and 19 back, after reading some I think I may try a different antenna that I can position better. The CM-4228HD looks like it would fit in the attic much better. The range advertised is not as good as with my current antenna, but maybe it won't be an issue with better positioning and fit? I'd like to point it midway between Parma and Akron. I may also look into getting a better amp/preamp. If anyone wants to make a suggestion I'll check it out. I know the roof is the best place, but please don't suggest that, I've already lost that battle and 23 and 49 are for me, so my wife has no stake in improving things.

BTW... I asked the guys at WOIO about my issue and got a very long, detailed answer with the past and present struggles explained. Very helpful and I get the sense they are just as frustrated with their broadcast situation as we are. It doesn't sound like it's getting better any time soon for them unfortunately.
Typical overpriced Rat Shack junk. Glad that WJW and WOIO are coming back in for you.

As for the antenna, the VU-190XR is assembled in two sections. One section has the long (low-VHF) elements and the other section has the shorter (hi-VHF) elements and the UHF bowtie/reflectors. Try removing the section with the long VHF elements, they are generally used for channels 2-6, but no one broadcasts digitally on those channels due to interference issues. Removing that section should not degrade the reception of WJW/WOIO and will give you more clearance in your attic to move the antenna. You can even go the extra mile and remove the majority of the VHF elements so that you have 2-3 pairs of elements along with the UHF bowtie/reflector. (We've been talking about these modifications on page 118).

I'm curious about the reply that you got from WOIO. Do you mind sharing it with us?
post #3567 of 3983
You would be better off with a preamp from Winegard or Channel Master rather than the RadioShack version.
post #3568 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

Typical overpriced Rat Shack junk. Glad that WJW and WOIO are coming back in for you.

I may be going back some time...

I miss the days of RS being the affordable alternative, was able to go in & get components... not being halwked a new cell phone every time I walk in. They had some great products (ie: scanners).. that were outsourced to better manufactures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post


Try removing the section with the long VHF elements, they are generally used for channels 2-6, but no one broadcasts digitally on those channels due to interference issues. .

Would this compromise FM, as it is right on the edge? I think 2-6 VHF is used more in the wide open spaces out west now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post


I'm curious about the reply that you got from WOIO. Do you mind sharing it with us?

Me too.... but they kinda made their own bed by insisting staying on rf 10.
post #3569 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post

The problem with WRLM is that their tower isn't nearly as high compared to the Cleveland/Akron stations, even though they are blasting out 1000 kW of power. The higher the tower, the more terrain the signal can overcome. I could not receive WRLM for a long time unless I stood on my deck with a UHF antenna pointed directly at their transmitter, and I'm only 10 miles away from it. TVfool.com said that I was in the green (very good) area and there were no major terrain obstructions in my way according to the coloring of the map. Then about a year ago I was able to receive WRLM almost anywhere inside my house, so I don't know if they removed a null or if that 1000 kW signal finally went into effect. I'm thinking that the digital transition in Canada had something to do with it. I believe they were under a STA for a long time.

As I think about this, I don't think I was able to get WRLM on my friends set down in Chesterland when I was evaluating her antenna. (strange)

I was only able to lock 47 once one early morning in last fall I think.... usually no blips on 47 either.
post #3570 of 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowdog 88 View Post


I'm curious about the reply that you got from WOIO. Do you mind sharing it with us?

Here is an excerpt. The rest offered some advice about likely causes and fixing my failed reception. It just sounds like a bad situation all around that they've tried to get out of but can't.

...

We share your frustration with this new digital broadcast system. As the saying goes, “This is not your father’s Oldsmobile”. This is a completely different broadcast system with different(much lower) power & different channel assignments and antenna types all outlined by the FCC. We have been doing everything within the legal limits of our license to overcome all the problems caused by the move to digital VHF Ch. 10 at extremely low power (compared to our analog signal) coupled with 2 sources of on-channel interference! THIS is what makes reception of our signal different from every other station in Cleveland. You are kind of ‘sandwiched’ between both of these. It is very likely that your problem stems from atmospheric conditions allowing one or both of these to mix with our signal.


After a 10 year long battle with the FCC to solve this, we have come up empty handed as our complaints did not warrant the FCC to act in our favor. Their claim that only 2% of the viewing public is using an antenna to watch TV these days is a statistic that pretty much made the decision for them to not act. We are well aware of the ‘holes’ in our coverage. Our new signal doesn’t travel as far as people have been accustomed to in the analog world where we pumped out more than 3 Million watts!



WJW Ch.8 has been plagued with problems but somehow managed to get the FCC to allow them to increase their power from 11KW(greater than our current increase) to 30KW back in 2009. This seems to have helped them considerably, but they have re-applied to move back to their initial DTV channel assignment of UHF Ch. 30. We actually increased our WOIO signal back in Oct. 2009 from our original licensed power of 3.5KW to 9.3KW. This was done to try and overcome the interference we are getting all throughout our viewing area from Analog Ch. 10 from London, Ontario (now digital at 45kW which is still more than 4 times that of ours!) We have been dealing with the FCC about their oversight in assigning us a channel that was obviously not clear in our own market since day one. And to make matters worse, WONE 97.5, an FM radio station in Akron is also interfering with Ch. 10! Instead of giving us another channel assignment, the FCC would only allow us to increase our power to our main VHF Ch. 10 transmitter to try to help with the interference from London and they recently gave us a low power UHF Ch.24 license in Akron to solve that issue. Viewers in and around the Akron area will find WOIO on Ch.24 once they rescan. The Ch.24 transmitter was activated August 12th 2010. As of August 2010, Canada has switched over to the digital broadcast system. The London station has gone digital, but unfortunately has remained on Ch.10, but at significantly lower power from their analog version. We had hoped that even though they are still on Ch.10, their reduced power will back off much of the interference they have induced into our viewing area. This has not been the case and they continue to be our worst interfering signal.
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