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

Lexington, KY - HDTV - Page 162

post #4831 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

That's funny, I've been watching 18, and they've ran crawls (more snow coming!) under their school closings. I even watched on a 4x3 set, and the very bottom of the crawl was at the very bottom of the screen. That's because the 4x3 sets all over scan. You've got to allow for that (as I tried to explain in the post just above yours).

Are we really going to get into this argument again?

I've only seen the crawl when the big blue monster wasn't there. I assume it's "on top" of the monster when you're seeing it together. My point was that there's nothing that the box that makes the monster will put in that area. I could be wrong, but I'm assuming the crawl is from another place, independent.

What argument? I'm just pointing out that the size of the graphic is larger than many I've seen from neighboring cities, and that fits into the idea of them not caring about basic PQ. There's no reason for all the dead space.

I didn't, and still don't, get the 4:3 reference. It makes sense for the silly logo placement you often see, but I can't wrap my brain around how it could affect all that blank space.

I hadn't noticed any reference to KET losing 5.1, so I brought it up as well.
post #4832 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjames View Post

What argument? I'm just pointing out that the size of the graphic is larger than many I've seen from neighboring cities, and that fits into the idea of them not caring about basic PQ. There's no reason for all the dead space.

I didn't, and still don't, get the 4:3 reference. It makes sense for the silly logo placement you often see, but I can't wrap my brain around how it could affect all that blank space.

I had to drop my car off for some service this morning and in the "waiting area" was an old fashioned 4:3 TV. They happened to have 18 on at the time. What I'm trying to explain is the "older" TVs "overscanned". What that means is on 4:3 sets, the distance between the bottom line of the graphic (where schools had 'Closed Wednesday') and the bottom of the screen was not that big. In fact, when the crawl came up it seemed to fit the space just right. I'll grant you watching on an HDTV, it looks like there's a lot of room. But not everyone is watching on a big screen, and broadcasters still have to allow for those watching 4:3.

The argument I was hoping we wouldn't get into again was PQ. We're all in agreement having subchannels takes away from the 'network' PQ. But how many viewers would complain if Wazoo, MyTV, and (heaven forbid) CW were taken off? FWIW, those "weather stations" on KYT & TVQ take up VERY little bandwidth. The reason the stations run the 2nd channel is $$.

Also for what it's worth, I agree 100% closings shouldn't be up 24/7. Say from 5a-9a, then again during the evening news (5p-7p), and maybe overnight (midnight+).
post #4833 of 5238
I second lets not go there.. If you want the reasons why KET is configured as it is please search my posts in the archive since 1999 and you will find your answers.

Now as to why we dropped 5.1 for now..

Prior to October 1, 2009, the KET HD service was a stand alone system with its own server, satellite receivers, and graphics system. In October we integrated the HD service into the new Master Control system including the same servers that have been driving KET2,KET KY, and KET ED.

This resulted in 12,000+ files that were transfered from the old SD servers (which had run the 4 SD channels for years) being mixed in with the 400 HD files in the inventory.

Those 12,000 files have stereo audio on the main channels but can have different audio on the second and third audio pairs since they originated from analog tapes.

We have to process all the files to clear the second and third audio pairs before we can switch back to 5.1 operation otherwise we can get mixed audio on the air ( such as tone and barney audio mixed into the Brit coms).

We are still debugging the new system and its on the list but with the massive budget cut and staff reductions we took last year its a case of resource allocation.


So the quick solution was to switch all services back to stereo only and make sure that all the new files captured have the correct audio on the correct tracks.

The long term goal is to have all programs captured with 5.1 audio or upmixed stereo and downmix the audio during playback for the SD services while keeping 5.1 on the HD.

William
post #4834 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

I had to drop my car off for some service this morning and in the "waiting area" was an old fashioned 4:3 TV. They happened to have 18 on at the time. What I'm trying to explain is the "older" TVs "overscanned". What that means is on 4:3 sets, the distance between the bottom line of the graphic (where schools had 'Closed Wednesday') and the bottom of the screen was not that big. In fact, when the crawl came up it seemed to fit the space just right. I'll grant you watching on an HDTV, it looks like there's a lot of room. But not everyone is watching on a big screen, and broadcasters still have to allow for those watching 4:3.

The argument I was hoping we wouldn't get into again was PQ. We're all in agreement having subchannels takes away from the 'network' PQ. But how many viewers would complain if Wazoo, MyTV, and (heaven forbid) CW were taken off? FWIW, those "weather stations" on KYT & TVQ take up VERY little bandwidth. The reason the stations run the 2nd channel is $$.

Also for what it's worth, I agree 100% closings shouldn't be up 24/7. Say from 5a-9a, then again during the evening news (5p-7p), and maybe overnight (midnight+).

I understand what you're saying as far as overscanning, and making it worse if you're bit-mapped, but not that this is the reason some stations use such large graphics. I set my display to overscan (they define this as 95%) and KYT (the smallest graphic by far) still had plenty of room at the bottom. TVQ had more and LEX had tons. I think it's just a form of station advertising like a lot of other stuff they do in the guise of "public service." Basically I'm saying whatever the individual rationale for the size of the graphics, it's not a technical decision, it's "something else."

My comment about local PQ was intentionally general. PBS/KET has its own issues and needs to be considered separately. My gripe isn't with the subs, it's with KYT, it's 30 year history of hacking me off, and my view that they had a chance to start over and do it right and they went out of their way (downconverting) to screw it up again. I'm reasonably confident that other CBS affiliates manage to maintain a 1080i network signal while still providing CW. I'm sure someone will correct me if that's wrong. There's an old saying in the stock market - nobody ever got fired for buying IBM. Turn that around and it means if you buy something for your company, you're going to use it, otherwise you'd have to justify a useless purchase, and that's not going to happen.

They fell in love with the technology (as witnessed by the email someone posted here ages ago,) made a dumb decision (probably helped along by a friendly and knowledgeable salesman,) and now they're stuck with it. I haven't seen a word about the new channel and whether they'll take advantage of that to go to native resolution or not. Be pretty funny if they didn't.
post #4835 of 5238
William,

Thanks for the reply. So you're basically saying the audio issue is a back room file crunching problem, you're short staffed, but you're working on it. Good deal
post #4836 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

... But how many viewers would complain if Wazoo, MyTV, and (heaven forbid) CW were taken off?

I could live without Wazoo or MyTV, I suspect that the majority of households in the DMA aren't even aware that those two "channels" exist.

The only reason I'd watch CWKYT is because WBKI is currently having HD feed issues and/or CWKYT is more convenient for DVR setup.
post #4837 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjames View Post

I understand what you're saying as far as overscanning, and making it worse if you're bit-mapped, but not that this is the reason some stations use such large graphics. I set my display to overscan (they define this as 95%) and KYT (the smallest graphic by far) still had plenty of room at the bottom. TVQ had more and LEX had tons. I think it's just a form of station advertising like a lot of other stuff they do in the guise of "public service." Basically I'm saying whatever the individual rationale for the size of the graphics, it's not a technical decision, it's "something else."

All I can say is what I saw. Hook up an old TV set and look at the graphic. Do you still have all the room you thought you did. I actually went around to a couple older TVs at work yesterday to see how much space there was. Again, it's not as much as you'd think. Personally I've always been of the opinion that a font you can read on a 20" TV from across the room is big enough. If you have to be within 5' to read it, make it bigger.

Quote:


My comment about local PQ was intentionally general. PBS/KET has its own issues and needs to be considered separately. My gripe isn't with the subs, it's with KYT, it's 30 year history of hacking me off, and my view that they had a chance to start over and do it right and they went out of their way (downconverting) to screw it up again. I'm reasonably confident that other CBS affiliates manage to maintain a 1080i network signal while still providing CW. I'm sure someone will correct me if that's wrong. There's an old saying in the stock market - nobody ever got fired for buying IBM. Turn that around and it means if you buy something for your company, you're going to use it, otherwise you'd have to justify a useless purchase, and that's not going to happen.

The problem is your analogy doesn't hold up. Stations buy a character generator to put on graphics. The character generator doesn't care whether the graphic takes up 10%, 20%, or even 100% of the screen. So the "box" is going to get used regardless of the graphic.

Quote:


They fell in love with the technology (as witnessed by the email someone posted here ages ago,) made a dumb decision (probably helped along by a friendly and knowledgeable salesman,) and now they're stuck with it. I haven't seen a word about the new channel and whether they'll take advantage of that to go to native resolution or not. Be pretty funny if they didn't.

Folks smarter than me have discussed on here the options KYT will have with the new channel. The first question would be whether the FCC allows them to continue operating on 13 after they cut over to 36. If that answer is "no", then it's a moot point.

If you don't like something a broadcaster is doing, contact them. Everyone has a contact page on their website. Use it.
post #4838 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDTVChallenged View Post

I could live without Wazoo or MyTV, I suspect that the majority of households in the DMA aren't even aware that those two "channels" exist.

Agreed. Just didn't want to show any favoritism.
Quote:


The only reason I'd watch CWKYT is because WBKI is currently having HD feed issues and/or CWKYT is more convenient for DVR setup.

But you've got to admit there's been plenty of discussion on this board about picture quality on CWKYT. How would those people feel if it wasn't there at all?
post #4839 of 5238
Has anyone else been having problems with KET, all 3 channels, breaking up and sound dropping out when watching on Insight? When I switch to OTA the problems disappear.
post #4840 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

If you don't like something a broadcaster is doing, contact them. Everyone has a contact page on their website. Use it.

The gripe about KYT downconverting to 720p is legitimate IMO. Same thing for KET. Same thing goes for cable and sat services that downconvert. If bandwidth is insufficient, then find a way to do it without altering PQ--- and don't use the argument that it's already altered at multiple points before it gets to the station. That's still not justification for further altering it.

This thread is also a perfectly legitimate place to voice these concerns IMO. Now, if someone wants to voice them directly to the broadcaster that's OK too. Hopefully, someone will listen. At least William is for one.
post #4841 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpcat View Post

The gripe about KYT downconverting to 720p is legitimate IMO. Same thing for KET. Same thing goes for cable and sat services that downconvert. If bandwidth is insufficient, then find a way to do it without altering PQ--- and don't use the argument that it's already altered at multiple points before it gets to the station. That's still not justification for further altering it.

Any gripe is valid... to the person making the gripe. Regarding insufficient bandwidth... picture a big pipe. Let's say for the sake of argument you can fit up to 100 "taras". Now you can use 1 signal that takes up all 100 taras. Or you can put 2 signals in that each use 50 taras. Or 10 signals @ 10 taras, 100 signals at 1 tara, or any combination. That pipe is a fixed size. You can't put more "taras" into the pipe. So what broadcasters (cable, sat, and yes, OTA) have do is try to balance the quality of the signal with quantity of the signal. If you give more bandwidth to increase the quality of one signal, you decrease the quality of another. Go to a message board for cable & satellite subscribers. Want to make a bet those complaining about poor picture quality are the same ones who want more HD channels? The easy solution is to drop the quantity. However, then you lose viewers to those channels. And sometimes the people who own the "little" channels also own the "big" channels. So if ABC told DirecTV "sure, you don't have to carry ABC Family, but if you don't, you don't get ESPN." What do you think DirecTV is going to do? They're going to give up the bandwidth to air ABC Family.

Quote:


This thread is also a perfectly legitimate place to voice these concerns IMO. Now, if someone wants to voice them directly to the broadcaster that's OK too. Hopefully, someone will listen. At least William is for one.

I agree. This is a place to voice concerns. However, if you want something to change, posting here will do VERY little. That's my point. You think if viewers started flooding email & voice mail boxes of station decision makers about the size of graphics, something might get done? Or do you really hope one of the "lurkers" here will read a post (or many posts) and go to the boss and say "we need to shrink the graphics"?
post #4842 of 5238
Quote:


One out of five in 1080i

Like it would be better if WTVQ and WDKY were 1080i? I'm so confused! Somewhere I thought read that progressive is better than interlaced, and less processed is better than more processed (like it's bad to turn a 720p network feed into 1080i and versa-vice). FWIW, Fox looks dang good on my 52" set. Now as to why WKYT is compressing their signal, well they might need to make room for the second money making channel. Somebody needs to pay for their new "Super Duper Doppler." (I still don't know why they didn't let me name it.) Broadcasters were all hit pretty hard by the economic downturn that occurred in the middle of the DTV transition. Just plan bad timing on that one!

Wouldn't it be better to note which stations pass along their network unconverted instead of touting "1080i" like it's the only true HD standard?

Coming soon to a TV near you, TheCoolTV..... Sinclair signed a deal with them, so I suspect that WDKY will carry it on 56.2 shortly. (please don't shoot the messenger)
post #4843 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDTV4usinky View Post

Like it would be better if WTVQ and WDKY were 1080i?

I thought LEX & DKY were the only 1080i.
Quote:


Somewhere I thought read that progressive is better than interlaced,

I think that would be the case as long as your comparing the same resolution (ie: 1080p is better than 1080i, 720p is better than 720i. 1080i vs. 720p... about the same)

Quote:


and less processed is better than more processed (like it's bad to turn a 720p network feed into 1080i and versa-vice).

That is true. The more you can keep native, the better off you are.

Quote:


Now as to why WKYT is compressing their signal, well they might need to make room for the second money making channel. Somebody needs to pay for their new "Super Duper Doppler." (I still don't know why they didn't let me name it.)

Ding, ding, ding. You hit it on the nose. In order to put the subchannels out (and they bring in $$), you've got to rob bandwidth from the primary.

Quote:


Broadcasters were all hit pretty hard by the economic downturn that occurred in the middle of the DTV transition. Just plan bad timing on that one!

Keep in mind the stations had been broadcasting DTV for years before the final transition. I'd say the downturn hit at the end of DTV. As far as upgrading facilities to originate HD... I think most of Lexington was already done before the hard stuff hit. KYT and LEX converted in 07. If they would have waited a year or two, I don't know if they would have done it.

Quote:


Wouldn't it be better to note which stations pass along their network unconverted instead of touting "1080i" like it's the only true HD standard?

I believe LEX, DKY (both 1080i) and TVQ (720) are all passing along network "as is". Only KYT is converting (from CBS' 1080 to 720).

Quote:


Coming soon to a TV near you, TheCoolTV..... Sinclair signed a deal with them, so I suspect that WDKY will carry it on 56.2 shortly. (please don't shoot the messenger)

And then there were none... (full bandwidth network feeds)
post #4844 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

And then there were none... (full bandwidth network feeds)

WDKY will still have one. Thank the Fox splicer.

- Trip
post #4845 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

WDKY will still have one. Thank the Fox splicer.

- Trip



Can you explain please?
post #4846 of 5238
Fox delivers a pre-compressed 720P feed via satellite that leave enough room for the station to add a local SD service.
post #4847 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post



Can you explain please?

William Smith has the correct answer. Fox provides its affiliates with a stream already prepared to accept a subchannel. Even now, with WDKY airing only its HD feed, the network HD feed never gets above 16.5 Mbps, and as it's variable bitrate, is often lower. As such, any Fox station adding an SD subchannel is doing no damage to the HD feed.

The splicer shapes any additional SD services to fit the remaining bandwidth.

- Trip
post #4848 of 5238
Oh. For some reason I thought DKY was 1080. Does that mean LEX is the only station doing 1080?
post #4849 of 5238
Quote:


Keep in mind the stations had been broadcasting DTV for years before the final transition. I'd say the downturn hit at the end of DTV. As far as upgrading facilities to originate HD... I think most of Lexington was already done before the hard stuff hit. KYT and LEX converted in 07. If they would have waited a year or two, I don't know if they would have done it.

While this is true, many station groups have had to renegotiate their bank loans that were used to purchase the digital equipment. This left more than one group on the verge of (or in) bankruptcy. It's like buying the big house a few years before you loose your job. You buy the house, the lawn mower, and new furniture. You pile up debt knowing it will take a five or ten difficult years of overtime to pay for it, then wham! you are out of work (and your variable interest rate increased). So you take two or three low paying part time jobs to pay the bills so you can keep the house. It's not how you planned to pay for the house, but you are doing everything you can. Many stations are just trying to survive, and they are working on a new business model. The old broadcast model is twenty years out of date thanks to satellite and the internet. ESPN charges $5 a sub, and we wonder why the broadcast networks can't outbid them for sports rights. Things are changing!
post #4850 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

Oh. For some reason I thought DKY was 1080. Does that mean LEX is the only station doing 1080?

In Lexington, yes.

OTOH, I still can't understand Belo's(WHAS) insistence on using 1080i on an ABC affiliate ... then piling two 480i sub-channels on top of it.
post #4851 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDTVChallenged View Post

In Lexington, yes.

OTOH, I still can't understand Belo's(WHAS) insistence on using 1080i on an ABC affiliate ... then piling two 480i sub-channels on top of it.

You're right. That doesn't make sense.
post #4852 of 5238
There's no certainty for CWKYT to go back to HD for the OTA viewers (currently pending HD for ONLY Insight in Lex, no one else.. a kind of unfairness, but whatever.. it is convenient and do-able for them I guess).

Anyhow media delivery services are indeed changing. Just today I read the 2nd most popular video distribution channel online (hulu.com) is prepared to work with Apple to be able to sell TV shows for use on the iPad. I think hulu.com is preparing to switch to some kind of pricing model as well. I actually know several households that completely dumped cable\\satellite and rely on OTA and hulu to enjoy TV. Every one of them has told me there aren't going back to cable or satellite cause they are saving so much money. If hulu starts charging a service fee to share the TV shows they are hosting if the price beats cable and satellite and the signal is high-def format I am willing to bet more and more cash-strapped families would choose that over cable\\satellite TV service. On the flip side broadband Internet services keep creeping up in cost, but there is still savings to realize (even though TWC costs me almost $60/month for just broadband Internet) because the viewer can be very selective about what they want to watch and are not paying for ESPN for example if they never watch any sports. Times are changing
post #4853 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDTV4usinky View Post

Like it would be better if WTVQ and WDKY were 1080i? I'm so confused! Somewhere I thought read that progressive is better than interlaced, and less processed is better than more processed (like it's bad to turn a 720p network feed into 1080i and versa-vice). FWIW, Fox looks dang good on my 52" set. Now as to why WKYT is compressing their signal, well they might need to make room for the second money making channel. Somebody needs to pay for their new "Super Duper Doppler." (I still don't know why they didn't let me name it.) Broadcasters were all hit pretty hard by the economic downturn that occurred in the middle of the DTV transition. Just plan bad timing on that one!

Wouldn't it be better to note which stations pass along their network unconverted instead of touting "1080i" like it's the only true HD standard?

Coming soon to a TV near you, TheCoolTV..... Sinclair signed a deal with them, so I suspect that WDKY will carry it on 56.2 shortly. (please don't shoot the messenger)

LOL, that's the argument I thought sam was referring to above. The 720p v. 1080i one. I'm going back probably 15 years or more here, but I remember reading an in depth interview with Joe Kane where he was strongly promoting 720p as the standard for broadcast HD. Now, go to one of these city forums with a pro football team and they seem to hate 720p. Whatever, I couldn't care less, and I wasn't in any way intending to say that 1080i was better. My feeling is that there are so many variables, the end user can't make rational decision just based on what he sees at home.

I'm strictly OTA and for me here in the Lexington area, DKY has the best PQ for scripted dramas. SNL can be startling sometimes, HD live over a good antenna is pretty impressive when everything is working. I've always heard that upconverting is a lot easier than down-converting btw.
post #4854 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDTV4usinky View Post

Like it would be better if WTVQ and WDKY were 1080i? I'm so confused! Somewhere I thought read that progressive is better than interlaced, and less processed is better than more processed (like it's bad to turn a 720p network feed into 1080i and versa-vice). FWIW, Fox looks dang good on my 52" set. Now as to why WKYT is compressing their signal, well they might need to make room for the second money making channel. Somebody needs to pay for their new "Super Duper Doppler." (I still don't know why they didn't let me name it.) Broadcasters were all hit pretty hard by the economic downturn that occurred in the middle of the DTV transition. Just plan bad timing on that one!

Wouldn't it be better to note which stations pass along their network unconverted instead of touting "1080i" like it's the only true HD standard?

Coming soon to a TV near you, TheCoolTV..... Sinclair signed a deal with them, so I suspect that WDKY will carry it on 56.2 shortly. (please don't shoot the messenger)

You have it right. Digital TV has given local broadcasters too much temptation to try to "improve the bottom line" and cram more channels into their broadcast. AFAIK, they did OK for years with one channel each under NTSC Now, instead of improving the overall quality delivered to consumers, what happens is the quality is just "OK" as the broadcasters succumb to the temptation for quantity over quality. The problem is that if no one decides to watch those extra channels then nobody wins: The broadcasters are no better off and neither do we get the best PQ that ATSC has to offer.

At this point, it's been what 15 years of this and my impression is that, other than for weather, the penetration subchannels have had into the market is minimal.
post #4855 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpcat View Post

The problem is that if no one decides to watch those extra channels then nobody wins: The broadcasters are no better off and neither do we get the best PQ that ATSC has to offer.

Do the broadcasters get any $$ for carrying the extra channels? If they do, then they ARE better off... they're making more $$ without a lot of expenditure.
post #4856 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

Do the broadcasters get any $$ for carrying the extra channels? If they do, then they ARE better off... they're making more $$ without a lot of expenditure.

Yeah, that's what Ford said about the Pinto. If they're network affiliates, they should be obligated to air network programming, at the very least all prime time programming, not just what they happen to feel like airing. And to air it with the best quality signal they can.

People have a funny ability to only see one side of the equation. Affiliates have been whining about the networks for years. Simple solution - go independent ... find your own content. But not a lot of them seem to be doing that. They want the benefits of network affiliation, but not the responsibility. And the viewing public pays the price. Same old, same old, but now they have more tools to screw us.
post #4857 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

Do the broadcasters get any $$ for carrying the extra channels? If they do, then they ARE better off... they're making more $$ without a lot of expenditure.

Only if the viewership is there. If no one is watching, the revenues won't be there and what happens is the subchannel just feeds off the revenue from the main channel. In effect, you get two lesser quality channels for the cost/revenue of one while other non-OTA, non-network sources for programming continue to erode the overall market share. As other sources for broadcast TV i.e. streaming video continue to improve, broadcasters may ultimately find their viewership dropping unless they take full advantage of the better PQ ATSC can provide. The answer is NOT to more tightly regulate streaming video, etc. IMO but rather allow competition to have the effect it should.
post #4858 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjames View Post

Yeah, that's what Ford said about the Pinto. If they're network affiliates, they should be obligated to air network programming, at the very least all prime time programming, not just what they happen to feel like airing.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but have we had a problem in Lexington with the affils pre-empting network programming? I know KYT occasionally preempts to show SEC basketball, but they show the non-UK games as part of the contract so they can show the UK games.
Quote:
And to air it with the best quality signal they can.

Something tells me the affil's agreement with network doesn't have that statement in there. With DTV, quality is a subjective measurement (until you get to extremes).

Quote:
People have a funny ability to only see one side of the equation. Affiliates have been whining about the networks for years. Simple solution - go independent ... find your own content. But not a lot of them seem to be doing that. They want the benefits of network affiliation, but not the responsibility. And the viewing public pays the price. Same old, same old, but now they have more tools to screw us.

Yes, it's a conspiracy. All the broadcasters sit around and think "how can we screw our viewers." If that was the case, no one would be airing HD. They'd downconvert the network feed to SD, and put in a couple more subchannels. THAT'S the argument I didn't want to get into earlier.
post #4859 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpcat View Post

Only if the viewership is there. If no one is watching, the revenues won't be there and what happens is the subchannel just feeds off the revenue from the main channel.

Do the subchannel networks (Wazoo, CW, & MyTV) not pay the Lexington broadcasters in order to be carried? I can't imagine the broadcasters rely solely on the ad revenue from those stations.
Quote:
As other sources for broadcast TV i.e. streaming video continue to improve, broadcasters may ultimately find their viewership dropping unless they take full advantage of the better PQ ATSC can provide. The answer is NOT to more tightly regulate streaming video, etc. IMO but rather allow competition to have the effect it should.

Has anyone here stopped watching the local affils? I realize there are some people across the country who have given up broadcast and just relied on broadband/rental, but I hazard a guess those are a handful of people (and I'd say most of those gave up cable/sat, not OTA). I also think it's a minority of viewers who can even detect the stations aren't using the full picture quality they can.
post #4860 of 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

Do the subchannel networks (Wazoo, CW, & MyTV) not pay the Lexington broadcasters in order to be carried? I can't imagine the broadcasters rely solely on the ad revenue from those stations.

It really doesn't matter whether they do or not. Revenue will always ultimately be tied to viewership. The subchannel networks aren't likely to be giving out any free money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sam_gordon View Post

Has anyone here stopped watching the local affils? I realize there are some people across the country who have given up broadcast and just relied on broadband/rental, but I hazard a guess those are a handful of people (and I'd say most of those gave up cable/sat, not OTA). I also think it's a minority of viewers who can even detect the stations aren't using the full picture quality they can.

That's what broadcasters are counting on.

25 years ago, I don't remember radio broadcasters predicting their own demise either.
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 › Lexington, KY - HDTV