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

Cincinnati, OH - HDTV - Page 463

post #13861 of 14333
From John Kiesewetter, TV Channels Bounce Around On Jan. 1.

In short,
  • Bounce comes to 19.2.
  • This TV moves from 19.2 to 25.2
  • NBC Universal Sports leaves 25.2 for good.
post #13862 of 14333
I was hoping This TV would be on 25.1 since that is the only channel Insight Cable carries but I'm happy they found a new home.
post #13863 of 14333
I hope THIS will help Channel 25 (WKRP) be more viable...
post #13864 of 14333
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThoraX695 View Post

From John Kiesewetter, TV Channels Bounce Around On Jan. 1.

In short,
  • Bounce comes to 19.2.
  • This TV moves from 19.2 to 25.2
  • NBC Universal Sports leaves 25.2 for good.

Good that This TV is not leaving OTA
post #13865 of 14333
Of all the channels involved in the switch, the only one we watched was NBC Universal Sports. My wife is an "Olympics junkie" and records everything related to swimming, snowboarding, gymnastics, and figure skating. She's gonna be bummed... and considering that NBCU probably would have been one of the alternate carriers of programming during the upcoming London games this year, I hate that we're losing that.
post #13866 of 14333
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjpjpjpj View Post

Of all the channels involved in the switch, the only one we watched was NBC Universal Sports. My wife is an "Olympics junkie" and records everything related to swimming, snowboarding, gymnastics, and figure skating. She's gonna be bummed... and considering that NBCU probably would have been one of the alternate carriers of programming during the upcoming London games this year, I hate that we're losing that.

I like Universal Sports as well. Moving from OTA to cable/satellite does have one major upside -- the broadcasts will be made available in HD. The OTA SD picture quality just wasn't up to par.
post #13867 of 14333
Quote:
Originally Posted by skylab View Post

I like Universal Sports as well. Moving from OTA to cable/satellite does have one major upside -- the broadcasts will be made available in HD. The OTA SD picture quality just wasn't up to par.

The upside is that it will be HD. The downside is that we (those on this forum because we're OTA-only) won't get it.

I agree that the SD was poor quality but my wife didn't care....
post #13868 of 14333
I think (but am not 100% sure) that Universal Sports isn't going to be "new" channel on cable, but rather that Versus is going to be re-branded as NBC Sports Network, and they're going to have the content rights that Universal Sports had. Indeed it's a shame though. As bad as the picture quality was, it was a very nice channel to have.
post #13869 of 14333
No, there will be NBC Sports and Universal Sports on cable. From what I understand, at least.

- Trip
post #13870 of 14333
Anybody else having reception issues with ch.7. Since ch.7 installed their new digital antenna last year (my parents) have been having a hard time receiving ch. 7. Here in sharonville ch.7 comes in at (80% signal at my house) vs. (30% signal strength at my parents house - 3 blocks away). Every other dayton station comes in perfectly. Both houses have antennacraft u4000 antennas with amplifiers that I installed 3 years ago. I don't want to relocate the outside antenna at the parents house. Could water in their antenna transformer be causing these problems or is something else like ch.7 metal tower causing the signal problem in their direction.
post #13871 of 14333
Looks like WBQC 25-2 changed to This-TV at midnight whereas Fox 19-2 kept it on until 8:00 before "Bounce"-ing. I've always liked This-TV and this weekend they have been showing the Marx Brothers, WC Fields and Hope & Crosby movies which I like. Glad WBQC picked it up even if it was at the expense of Universal Sports.
post #13872 of 14333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balloonfanatic View Post

Anybody else having reception issues with ch.7. Since ch.7 installed their new digital antenna last year (my parents) have been having a hard time receiving ch. 7. Here in sharonville ch.7 comes in at (80% signal at my house) vs. (30% signal strength at my parents house - 3 blocks away). Every other dayton station comes in perfectly. Both houses have antennacraft u4000 antennas with amplifiers that I installed 3 years ago. I don't want to relocate the outside antenna at the parents house. Could water in their antenna transformer be causing these problems or is something else like ch.7 metal tower causing the signal problem in their direction.

I replied to your post in the Dayton thread as well, but yeah double check all connections and even the aiming. Even though the other channels are coming in, weird things can happen... You said you don't want to relocate it, but could you raise or lower it at all? Sometimes that helps too.
post #13873 of 14333
I think the reason my parents are experiencing ch. 7 reception problems is I275 and US 42 exit is approx. 1 mile north of my parents location and 3 office buildings (5-7 stories tall) are probably blocking the signal (dayton broadcast towers are almost due north). But i will change out the transformer and adjust the antenna height and try adjusting the direction once it warms up a little.
post #13874 of 14333
Hi:

New here, technologically challenged user. Going on the theory that the only stupid question is one that isn't asked, I'm coming here with a query. Here goes:

I have a Sony Bravia HDTV and Time Warner HD cable. Also a Samsung DVD/VHS combo unit. The Time Warner cable guy installed these as follows: (1) HDMI cable from DVD/VHS combo directly to the TV; (2) component cables from cable box to DVD/VHS combo unit and then from combo unit to the TV. The way it was working during that time was that only DVDs would play, tapes would not play. But all television channels – HD or SD – appeared full screen. And I swear there was no distortion of the image on the SD channels.

Then the other day one of my kids wanted to watch an old tape we had laying around. So I reconnected as follows: (1) HDMI cable from DVD/VHS combo; (2) HDMI cable directly from cable box to television; (3) composite cables from DVD/VHS combo unit to the TV. Now the combo unit will play tapes as well as DVDs. But when we watch television, the SD channels are now showing with black bars on the sides.

I can use the Stretch function so that the SD channels fill the screen, but the pictures are distorted. Same with the Zoom function.

Is anyone familiar with this and know how to get the setting back the way it was? I’ve had a Time Warner guy out to look things over, but he simply set the Stretch function and said that was the only way to get full-screen SD channels.

Perhaps I’m simply not remembering right, but I don’t remember the full-screen SD channels looking distorted under the old set up. Of course, I could just be hallucinating again. Can someone advise me? Thanks very much.
post #13875 of 14333
Quote:
Originally Posted by tntnb View Post

Hi:

New here, technologically challenged user. Going on the theory that the only stupid question is one that isn't asked, I'm coming here with a query. Here goes:

I have a Sony Bravia HDTV and Time Warner HD cable. Also a Samsung DVD/VHS combo unit. The Time Warner cable guy installed these as follows: (1) HDMI cable from DVD/VHS combo directly to the TV; (2) component cables from cable box to DVD/VHS combo unit and then from combo unit to the TV. The way it was working during that time was that only DVDs would play, tapes would not play. But all television channels - HD or SD - appeared full screen. And I swear there was no distortion of the image on the SD channels.

Then the other day one of my kids wanted to watch an old tape we had laying around. So I reconnected as follows: (1) HDMI cable from DVD/VHS combo; (2) HDMI cable directly from cable box to television; (3) composite cables from DVD/VHS combo unit to the TV. Now the combo unit will play tapes as well as DVDs. But when we watch television, the SD channels are now showing with black bars on the sides.

I can use the Stretch function so that the SD channels fill the screen, but the pictures are distorted. Same with the Zoom function.

Is anyone familiar with this and know how to get the setting back the way it was? I've had a Time Warner guy out to look things over, but he simply set the Stretch function and said that was the only way to get full-screen SD channels.

Perhaps I'm simply not remembering right, but I don't remember the full-screen SD channels looking distorted under the old set up. Of course, I could just be hallucinating again. Can someone advise me? Thanks very much.

4:3 SD channels will never be "full screen" on your 16:9 HDTV unless stretched horizontally. It's impossible to turn the almost square 4:3 picture into a 16:9 rectangle without stretching. It just can't be done.

SD content *should* be displayed with "black bars" (actually called pillar-box) on the sides. This is the correct way to display. Stretching should NEVER be done.
post #13876 of 14333
Yes...4:3 will look distorted and is normal. But there are different levels of distorted, you just need to find the acceptable one to you. Hell, just keep it in 4:3.
post #13877 of 14333
Some channels broadcast widescreen content letterboxed (black bars on top and bottom) on their SD channels, and you can set some widescreen TV's to "zoom" so that the letterboxed image fills the 16x9 screen without distortion... though the picture will be considerably more fuzzy than a digital broadcast.
post #13878 of 14333
tntnb:

Just thought I'd add a bit more to hopefully explain what happened a bit better (?). So first of all, welcome (forgot that last time!).

Second, the component cables are an analog connection and so the display processing would have been handled by the cable box. With the HDMI cable (digital connection to TV), it's the TV doing it. That might explain a difference in how they appear to you, but in either case, I would maintain that the proper and preferred way to display 4:3 SD is in 4:3 as it was designed, pillarboxed (black bars on both sides) unless you want people to look fat, squares turn into rectangles, and circles turn into ovals!
post #13879 of 14333
Thank you, folks, for the explanations (and the welcome also!). That really helped me understand things much better.
post #13880 of 14333
I suspect that the original hookup was doing "anamorphic" stretch where it gradually stretches the picture more and more, the farther from the center of the screen you get. That typically hides the stretch much better. Then when things got switched, and you manually did the stretch, it was just standard "equal" stretch, where the entire picture was stretched equally, which looks noticeably more stretched.

But, as above, the SD content was surely being stretched.
post #13881 of 14333
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjpjpjpj View Post

I suspect that the original hookup was doing "anamorphic" stretch where it gradually stretches the picture more and more, the farther from the center of the screen you get. That typically hides the stretch much better. Then when things got switched, and you manually did the stretch, it was just standard "equal" stretch, where the entire picture was stretched equally, which looks noticeably more stretched.

But, as above, the SD content was surely being stretched.

Anamorphic actually refers to the process of squishing widescreen content horizontally to fit in a 4:3 format (people are tall and skinny), and then the display device stretches it horizontally back to widescreen, where it displays properly.

But, your point is taken. That sort of non-linear stretching you are describing makes things in the middle of the picture appear closer to correct proportions, but then things on the side are way out of proportion. When the camera pans in say basketball or football games, it looks like a wave. Yuck!
post #13882 of 14333
wow, eddie fingers coming back to wlw to his old time slot starting monday. http://cincinnati.com/blogs/tv/2012/...ack-on-wlw-am/
post #13883 of 14333
Why did 'Doc' get canned??? Kinda cold to do it to him while he was on his honeymoon...
post #13884 of 14333
From John Kiesewetter: Bill Cunningham's TV show going national.

The bad news is that it's moving from local syndication to the CW. And we don't have a dedicated CW station here in Cincinnati. Willie would be stuck in 4x3, 480i on 12.2. I know there's a slim chance, but wouldn't it be nice if one of Elliott Block's stations would become a low-power, yet full HD CW affiliate? Likely it would be the station on virtual channel 38 that's implemented on physical channel 20.

(What?! You say there's nothing there? The FCC records don't lie! )
post #13885 of 14333
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThoraX695 View Post

From John Kiesewetter: Bill Cunningham's TV show going national.

The bad news is that it's moving from local syndication to the CW. And we don't have a dedicated CW station here in Cincinnati. Willie would be stuck in 4x3, 480i on 12.2. I know there's a slim chance, but wouldn't it be nice if one of Elliott Block's stations would become a low-power, yet full HD CW affiliate? Likely it would be the station on virtual channel 38 that's implemented on physical channel 20.

(What?! You say there's nothing there? The FCC records don't lie! )

Fortunately, should I ever decide to watch, I get The CW out of Dayton.
post #13886 of 14333
Does anyone really need to see Willie in HD. There is a reason he's been on radio for 30 years you know .
post #13887 of 14333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splicer010 View Post

Fortunately, should I ever decide to watch, I get The CW out of Dayton.

Some of us can't get it due to significant terrain issues. My TV Fool plot says WBDT has a -12.0 dB noise margin where I'm located. Nothing can cure bad VHF/UHF reception behind a large hill!
post #13888 of 14333
I don't expect ch.38 to ever go full power. Last week i talked to elliot (ch.38 owner) they were moving out of their current offices. He expects more of the tv spectrum is going to be taken away for the wireless companies. BTW the reason This-Tv program guide isn't working is this tv engineers are not sending him the proper program guide format (thats why 25-2 says no information). After hearing this info I just deleted 25-2 (this tv) since i never know what on their channel. I also learned Daystar is in bankruptcy so don't expect (low power ch.36) to be on the air in cincinnati anytime soon.
post #13889 of 14333
The one hope will be if WKRC would provide a HD feed of 12.2 directly to the cable companies in the area. With Insight becomming Time Warner cable in a few months, it might be easier to do.
post #13890 of 14333
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbob View Post

The one hope will be if WKRC would provide a HD feed of 12.2 directly to the cable companies in the area. With Insight becomming Time Warner cable in a few months, it might be easier to do.

That would be nice but 12-2 looks awful now (very pixilated with motion) I don't expect them to do anything. All of ch.25 subchannels look better than ch.12 so the technology is there except ch.12 doesn't seem to care.
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 › Cincinnati, OH - HDTV