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

Raleigh, NC - HDTV - Page 492

post #14731 of 15283
I haven't been able to watch ANY Triangle stations lately. I seem to favor distant reception from South Carolina these days. Also after I decided to ground the rotor bracket that holds the antenna mast to the bracket that mounts to the main pole, some channels dropped in strength while others went up. I'm glad I did it though for lightning reasons... I don't think it had any way to drain the static the way it was built without a ground wire.
post #14732 of 15283
What effect do rapid changes in atmospheric temperature have on OTA reception? And does rainfall actually reduce the signal strength, or is that more of a multi-path issue?
post #14733 of 15283
I have noticed, on my antenna, that rain causes the UHF channels issues but WTVD is perfect in the rain. In fact, during heavy rain is the only time I can get blips on WSET from VA anymore. (I used to get WSET perfectly at night and sometimes during the day nearly until the WTVD antenna work last year. Not sure how related the antenna work was, but it haven't seen it without heavy rain since!) After big storms, if the storms are still between me and the towers OR even near the towers, usually signals are gone for me, regardless of where the signals are located. WGPX is my closest, strongest signal (the proverbial "able to be tuned with a paperclip") and even that station after rain, is very pixelated. Post-rain interference is usually quick to clear up, within a couple of hours tops. I am sure this interference varies significantly by set up.
post #14734 of 15283
My experiance at my location is that the biggest issue with wind / rain is the effect they have on leaves and THAT is what causes multipath / signal breakup on ATSC broadcasts . Then again, I live in the middle of a forest, about 23 miles at 020 from the Garner antenna farm.

PBS is difficult at best for me, but everything else is fine. Draw a line between the antenna for WUNC and the one for WUNP in Roanake Rapids, and go about halfway in between, then go about 3-5 miles perpendicular (SE) to that line. Puts me at about 40 miles to either one, dealing with the trees.
post #14735 of 15283
Anyone having audio issues with WTVD 11-1? We get audio on commercials and local news updates audio, but not on the network feed audio. Appears to be digital sound, not analog. It happened during Good morning america, analog sound appeared to be fine. Kelly Rippa was fine??
post #14736 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbehrman View Post

Anyone having audio issues with WTVD 11-1? We get audio on commercials and local news updates audio, but not on the network feed audio. Appears to be digital sound, not analog. It happened during Good morning america, analog sound appeared to be fine. Kelly Rippa was fine??

Check your TV, Dish / Direct receiver or cable box for the SAP setting. I think you have it turned on. Turn it to normal stereo audio.
post #14737 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by jspENC View Post

Check your TV, Dish / Direct receiver or cable box for the SAP setting. I think you have it turned on. Turn it to normal stereo audio.

Thanks for responding.

TV does not allow MTS on digital reciever. MTS is listed as Stereo however.
DVR is set to Dolby Digital/PCM with no option for SAP/MTS

What is weird is that sound can be heard when TV set to external speaker (note TV and DVR are connected to AV receiver via optical connections). I think it is a problem with network/broadcaster sending digital audio on 11-1. All the other stations including 11-2 and 11-3 are not an issue.
post #14738 of 15283
Since WRAL had not come back yet, I decided to move my antenna, replace the coax, and put the amplifier where it should be (closer to the antenna.) Amazing what doing things right will do. WRAL is back and at the highest level I've ever seen it (70-80% on the AM21 OTA Directv tuner). WTVD and WLFL seem to have lost a little bit of strength, though. Oh well, fine tuning will likely fix that.
post #14739 of 15283
I am hearing audio distortion on WNCN on Dish for the last 3 day. Anyone else?
post #14740 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhawley View Post

I am hearing audio distortion on WNCN on Dish for the last 3 day. Anyone else?

I was hearing it on Directv, but I have since switched to TWC, and I have not experienced it there. Maybe there is a problem in the mpeg2 to mpeg4 transcoding on that channel. Make sure you notify Dish.
post #14741 of 15283
Does anyone know what Time Warner Cable's current QAM number for WUNC on the Raleigh cable system is? The UNC PBS channels (UNC-HD,UNC-KD, and UNC-EX) no longer show up when I do an auto scan.

Also, doesn't it seem that there is neither rhyme nor reason to the QAM mappings? WRAL maps to 85, WNCN maps to 84, and WTVD maps to 99. Where is the sense in that? Why not group all of the locals together at adjacent QAM numberings?

Do congress and the FCC need to have a talk with TWC?
post #14742 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

Do congress and the FCC need to have a talk with TWC?

What about?

They are supposed to provide the OTA channels in the clear (i.e. not encrypted) but that's only true to subscribers.

If you are not a subscriber, then you aren't entitled.

If you are a subscriber, you have a set-top box or a cable card.

There is no entitlement to hook up cable to a TV and get free clear-QAM channels even if sometimes you can get such channels without subscribing to TWC services.
post #14743 of 15283
And being an Internet only subscriber is NOT the same as taking basic cable, even though you can view a number of the local broadcast channels.
post #14744 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

What about?

They are supposed to provide the OTA channels in the clear (i.e. not encrypted) but that's only true to subscribers.

If you are not a subscriber, then you aren't entitled.

If you are a subscriber, you have a set-top box or a cable card.

There is no entitlement to hook up cable to a TV and get free clear-QAM channels even if sometimes you can get such channels without subscribing to TWC services.

I think you're forgetting that there is such a thing as a very basic cable TV subscription and that the cable companies are required by law to offer that very basic service. Also, the local channels that are offered under that service are supposed to have picture quality comparable to what can be received OTA. It is logical then that the cable company should also be required to tell customers what the QAM channel numbers are so that they do not have to rent or buy a set-top box.

Instead of complying with the intent of the FCC regulations that predated DTV, cable companies are now trying to get permission to encrypt every channel, including the local channels, so that they can eliminate clear QAM entirely and charge everyone for a box.
post #14745 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

What about?

They are supposed to provide the OTA channels in the clear (i.e. not encrypted) but that's only true to subscribers.

If you are not a subscriber, then you aren't entitled.

If you are a subscriber, you have a set-top box or a cable card.

?

You are badly confused. Currently, the law states all cable providers must provide local HD in clear QAM, if they carry it on their system. Yes, one has to be a paying subscriber to have access to these channels, but nowhere does the OP say he isn't.

Having a cable box or CableCARD device is not a requirement for viewing local channels in HD.

As noted, the FCC is currently considering a proposal to allow any cable system that is all digital to encrypt all channels, including local HD. If this is approved, and it appears it will be, expect to see most all cable system go all digital and all encrypted, legally.
post #14746 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

?

You are badly confused. Currently, the law states all cable providers must provide local HD in clear QAM, if they carry it on their system. Yes, one has to be a paying subscriber to have access to these channels, but nowhere does the OP say he isn't.

Having a cable box or CableCARD device is not a requirement for viewing local channels in HD.

As noted, the FCC is currently considering a proposal to allow any cable system that is all digital to encrypt all channels, including local HD. If this is approved, and it appears it will be, expect to see most all cable system go all digital and all encrypted, legally.

No, I am not confused. I know that cable companies will try to get away with whatever they can get away with. My real complaint is that congress and the FCC have not been zealous enough about looking out for the interests of the public. The FCC has been too concerned with corporate profits for cable companies.

In the days of analog broadcasting, many people who had the lowest tier of cable TV service could simply connect their TV sets directly to the wall jack without any set-top boxes or other equipment, and that would allow them to receive all of the local channels through the cable system with a picture quality as good or better than OTA.

Now there is this wonderful world of digital broadcasting, but if a cable TV customer wants to get those local channels through the cable service rather than OTA, many cable companies may require the customer to accept (or even pay for) a cumbersome set-top box that the customer does not want.

The FCC should require that all of the local channels on the very basic service tier be made available in both digital and analog format so that all consumers can receive (with the least cumbersome equipment possible) through the cable system the same type and highest quality of signal that their TV set will support.

Put the consumer and the pubic interest first, FCC. Tell the cable companies that they have had it too easy for too long.
post #14747 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

Does anyone know what Time Warner Cable's current QAM number for WUNC on the Raleigh cable system is? The UNC PBS channels (UNC-HD,UNC-KD, and UNC-EX) no longer show up when I do an auto scan.

Did you look in all possible QAM locations? Sometimes they get moved to completely different locations. If you are sure they are missing, you'll most likely have to call and try to find someone that knows what QAM is. In all cases I'm aware of, when this happens it's a just a mistake. None of these companies would intentionally violate a known FCC regulation, especially the second largest cableco in the US. It may take more than one call to find the right person to help. Good luck.

Quote:


Also, doesn't it seem that there is neither rhyme nor reason to the QAM mappings? WRAL maps to 85, WNCN maps to 84, and WTVD maps to 99. Where is the sense in that? Why not group all of the locals together at adjacent QAM numberings?

Usually the reason is system requirements. Remember they have digital cable, analog cable, VOIP, and Internet to deal with.

Quote:


Do congress and the FCC need to have a talk with TWC?

Probably not worth the effort.
post #14748 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

No, I am not confused.

I wasn't replying to you with that comment.
post #14749 of 15283
Sorry, Ken H. I thought that your reply was to my post, but I now see that you were replying to someone who had replied to one of my posts.
post #14750 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

Sorry, Ken H. I thought that your reply was to my post, but I now see that you were replying to someone who had replied to one of my posts.

Not a problem, thx.
post #14751 of 15283
Is there any way (other than just an auto scan) of knowing which QAM channels a cable system uses for local stations? I know that I have seen conversion tables for those TV tuner boxes (such as HDHomerun) that allow computers to tune QAM-modulated signals, but what about the QAM tuners that are built directly into TV sets?
post #14752 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

Is there any way (other than just an auto scan) of knowing which QAM channels a cable system uses for local stations?

Not really, unless someone else can provide them.

Even the cableco themselves can't tell you, with a few exceptions like WOW, as they have so few clear QAM customers they don't get that many problems like yours.
post #14753 of 15283
There is no requirement that the channels be on any particular QAM channel, though.

IF you have a set-top box or cablecard, then those decoders handle the channel placement for you.

Who has access (legally) to cable without paying for cable? If you subscribe to internet-only, then you aren't entitled to the unencrypted QAM channels, right?

If you subscribe to even the most basic package of digital cable, they give you a converter box don't they?

So who does that leave to be connecting a cable to their TV without a converter box to try and decode the clear QAM channels?

I'm not even saying anyone is stealing anything... I'm just saying that the intended way is via converter box or cable card... and the QAM channels move around for various reasons (some technical, some just because they can)... so there's no guarantee nor legal requirement that the OTA clear QAM channels be on any particular channel OR remain on any particular channel for any period of time.

If someone can find it in the FCC requirement that says the clear QAM channels must be on specific channels or that they can't change without notice... then you have legs to stand on. If not, then I'm just saying what TWC is going to say if you complain about them moving the channels around.
post #14754 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

....

If you subscribe to even the most basic package of digital cable, they give you a converter box don't they?

....

TWC charges an additional fee for set top boxes - these come with and without a DVR but are not required to receive basic cable services. So if you have this basic service the TV tuner must find the channels when TWC moves them around. It can be problematic at times.
post #14755 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankpc001 View Post

TWC charges an additional fee for set top boxes - these come with and without a DVR but are not required to receive basic cable services. So if you have this basic service the TV tuner must find the channels when TWC moves them around. It can be problematic at times.

Warner doesn't give you anything in HD from the cable line-up without a convertor box. The only things they give you in digital cable that I know of from the tv tuner are WGN, C-Span, and some shopping channels.
post #14756 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

Who has access (legally) to cable without paying for cable? If you subscribe to internet-only, then you aren't entitled to the unencrypted QAM channels, right?

Correct. But, the FCC requires all cablecos to offer a basic, least expensive tier with local broadcast channels, gov/edu/public service, and whatever else the cableco wants to include which is usually shopping channels and maybe WGN and/or TBS. This is what is being referred to.

Quote:
If you subscribe to even the most basic package of digital cable, they give you a converter box don't they?

In most cases yes, but it's an SD box. The whole point of using a QAM tuner for HD locals is to avoid paying an additional monthly rental fee for an HD box, which costs between $5 and $10 per month.

Quote:
I'm just saying that the intended way is via converter box or cable card...

?

Again, you are confused. There is no 'intended' way to receive QAM channels.
post #14757 of 15283
I may be slightly confused... but if there was a legal obligation for TWC to provide clear-QAM of the local channels AND to keep those channels on specific numbers so that you didn't have to re-scan constantly... then I'm sure that battle would have been fought and won already, wouldn't it?

I'm not saying anyone is trying to steal anything... I'm just saying they appear to be expecting a level of service for which they aren't paying and aren't entitled to.. so I can guarantee if you call TWC and complain about the QAM channels moving around, I bet you don't get much in the way of help.
post #14758 of 15283
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDMe2 View Post

I may be slightly confused... but if there was a legal obligation for TWC to provide clear-QAM of the local channels AND to keep those channels on specific numbers so that you didn't have to re-scan constantly... then I'm sure that battle would have been fought and won already, wouldn't it?

You're missing the point, and talking about two totally different things.

Providing the channels is one thing, keeping them on the same QAM location or passing PSIP (which some cableco's do) to maintain the same channel number is completely different. The OP didn't say the channels were required to be on specific numbers, he made a comment that he didn't understand the locations they had been placed on.

The OP simply was asking for confirmation locals in HD were still available. Due to legitimate system maintenance QAM channel locations get moved. Assuming they are still available, it's TWC's responsibility to help him find them. If they aren't available, it's TWC's responsibility to make them available.

For the last time, the problem is too few subscribers use clear QAM and as such the average cableco CSR doesn't know what they are, let alone where or how to find them.
post #14759 of 15283
I'm glad that Ken H. understands what I'm talking about. Believe it or not, there are lots of people who have digital sets but choose to subscribe to an analog cable package rather than a digital package. Typically those analog packages also include clear QAM digital signals for the local channels.

Why would someone with a digital set choose to subscribe to a lowly analog package? Well, it makes a nice backup for when an antenna is not doing a god job of bringing in OTA signals. Also, some people are just not willing to pay the high prices that cable companies charge for digital packages.

Or maybe they dislike set-top boxes and find cable cards annoying or have a set that cannot use a cable card. Maybe they simply think that all sets should be "cable ready", that the cable companies should have worked with manufacturers years ago to make sure that cable cards were user friendly and set-top boxes were never required. Maybe they think that the cable companies should not want to be in the equipment rental business.

Now, I believe that the FCC regulation says that when a cable company carries a local channel, it must do so without material degradation of the signal. What does that mean in the era of digital broadcasting? Some people interpret it to mean that the local channel must be offered in digital format, including hgh def for the programs that are in high def.

Now, did the FCC ever say that it had to be easy to find the channel? No, but in the analog days when the regulations were originally written, nobody ever dreamed of a cable company supplying a signal but not wanting to tell the customer what the channel number was.
post #14760 of 15283
I'm going back to the beginning here since there seems to be some confusion... Below is the original message to which I replied...

Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

Does anyone know what Time Warner Cable's current QAM number for WUNC on the Raleigh cable system is? The UNC PBS channels (UNC-HD,UNC-KD, and UNC-EX) no longer show up when I do an auto scan.

Also, doesn't it seem that there is neither rhyme nor reason to the QAM mappings? WRAL maps to 85, WNCN maps to 84, and WTVD maps to 99. Where is the sense in that? Why not group all of the locals together at adjacent QAM numberings?

Do congress and the FCC need to have a talk with TWC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

I'm glad that Ken H. understands what I'm talking about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

Providing the channels is one thing, keeping them on the same QAM location or passing PSIP (which some cableco's do) to maintain the same channel number is completely different. The OP didn't say the channels were required to be on specific numbers, he made a comment that he didn't understand the locations they had been placed on.

The OP simply was asking for confirmation locals in HD were still available.

Ok... so looking at the bold portion which seems to be asking why the QAM channels aren't grouped together and then asking if the FCC needs to get involved... I originally replied to ask "what about" and I said that the only requirement was clear-QAM and not that they be on any specific channel.

IF the original question wasn't about asking if there was (or should be) a requirement for the channels to be grouped a certain way or on specific non-changing channels... then I don't know what the question about involving the FCC was meant to be.

I'm sure I'm confused... but I know there was more to the question than just asking if the channels were available and where they might be found.
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 › Raleigh, NC - HDTV