or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Hartford, CT - OTA
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hartford, CT - OTA - Page 221

post #6601 of 7074
Oh yeah, and they should stop wasting bandwidth with this subchannel junk! It would be nice to have the entire 6mhz for HD! WVIT is down to about 12mbps, from the full-channel 19, not sure about the others. The additional compression makes OTA sort of pointless, since you're going to get just as good of a picture on cable/satellite.
post #6602 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by raoul5788 View Post

Maybe a new Channel Master 4228 would help? JUST KIDDING!!!
It's WTNH, they aren't sending the DD signal.

Hi Chip. Yep, I still miss that antenna. Hopefully you're getting some good usage from it.......
post #6603 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light-O-Matic View Post

We are in a similar situation. I am in the hills south of Waterbury. I have the advantage of height and can get NYC stations sometimes. You have the advantage of no obstructions as you aim across Long Island Sound. But you are awfully far from NYC. Without a roof mounted high gain antenna, I think NYC would be tough for you. Even then, you may find your NYC reception to be very weather dependent. Now that the weather is warming up, I can get the NY stations more frequently, but over the winter it was rare.

I'm suprised that you get anything at all with rabbit ears considering how far you are from any broadcast antenna. Right off the bat, the higher you can get your antenna, the better off you will be.

I use an attic mounted 4228 with the 7777 amp. Additionally, I use a rotor to spin the antenna toward NYC or Hartford as needed. There isn't any one good postion where I get all of the channels, so I usually opt for Hartford and pick up New Haven off the backside of the antenna. Someone on the board here might be able to describe some creative multi-antenna solutions where one antenna could aim toward NYC and the other toward Hartford so you wouldn't need a rotor, but I have never tried this arrangement.

I found that www.tvfool.com was a useful source of information to determine what channels you could hope to get at your address. Best of luck.

A couple of years ago, I had a roof mounted 4228 with the 7777 in Westerly, RI. That's another story for another day. Here in Grand Rapids, MI our transmitters are in 3 diff directions. I use a roof mounted with rotor. Point is they make a Grand Rapids antenna. Three antennas mounted on 1 pole in the 3 diff directions. I am sure it can be done for Hartford and NYC. There should be someone on the list here who would know how far apart to keep the antennas and how to wire properly.
post #6604 of 7074
FYI,

By yesturday afternoon, Tuesday May 11, 2010, WEDW 49 Bridgeport (Trumbull) digital had increased ERP from 91 kW to 170 kW.
post #6605 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by raoul5788 View Post

Maybe a new Channel Master 4228 would help? JUST KIDDING!!!
It's WTNH, they aren't sending the DD signal.

How long has this been the case? Just recently got a surround system and noticed it - also while watching Lost. Seems inconceivable that a network affiliate would be broadcasting stereo audio with an HD feed. Anybody know why, or if they plan to, you know, get with it?
post #6606 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvwtwo View Post

How long has this been the case? Just recently got a surround system and noticed it - also while watching Lost. Seems inconceivable that a network affiliate would be broadcasting stereo audio with an HD feed. Anybody know why, or if they plan to, you know, get with it?

WTNH is owned by LIN, a notoriously cheap company. I wouldn't expect anything to change anytime soon. Why not email them and ask what their plans are?
post #6607 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by raoul5788 View Post

WTNH is owned by LIN, a notoriously cheap company. I wouldn't expect anything to change anytime soon. Why not email them and ask what their plans are?

Well, I did ask. The reply:

"Yes, that is correct. We only transmit our audio in stereo. We are in
the process of upgrading equipment and I believe the audio issue will be
addressed in this upgrade."

So... it's anybody's guess. Meh.
post #6608 of 7074
I am having a hard time getting WABC 7 in Seymour. I get my VHF off of a combo antenna (cm3018).
I have made the decision to try an antenncraft Y10-7-13.
I want to try buying this locally.
Does anyone remember the name of the TV equipment supplier in the Hartford area?
I know there was someone selling antennas in West or East Hartford.
Right now, my option is to drive to Stark in Worcester, but that is a haul from Southern CT.
post #6609 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSfromCT View Post

I am having a hard time getting WABC 7 in Seymour. I get my VHF off of a combo antenna (cm3018).
I have made the decision to try an antenncraft Y10-7-13.
I want to try buying this locally.
Does anyone remember the name of the TV equipment supplier in the Hartford area?
I know there was someone selling antennas in West or East Hartford.
Right now, my option is to drive to Stark in Worcester, but that is a haul from Southern CT.

I think you are thinking of Signal Electronics in West Hartford. They used to be on New Park Ave. I don't know where they are now.
post #6610 of 7074
You might be thinking of Hatry Electronics. They were located on Ledyard St. in Hartford. Unfortunately, Signal Electronics is also closed now. There's Cumberland Electronics in West Hartford, but they seem to be more into parts.
There's Cables and Connectors on the Berlin Turnpike in Newington, but it doesn't look like they have much for outdoor antennas (antennae?).

Al Bundy used to just have his kids hang on to the antenna and get in to their Fox viewing position.
post #6611 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldow View Post


Al Bundy used to just have his kids hang on to the antenna and get in to their Fox viewing position.

post #6612 of 7074
LOL. Unfortunately Al's kids can help me. FOX is coming in great. :-)
I was thinking of Signal Electronics. I knew it was like Solid Signal.
Too bad they are gone. I guess Stark Electronics in Worcester is our local shop. Two hours away from my house. I'll get a shipping quote from them too. Thank you all who replied for jogging my memory.
post #6613 of 7074
I'm at an elevation of 500 feet in northern NJ and can receive off air ABC from New Haven, Philadelphia and NYC. The picture quality on WTNH for the NBA Finals was awful. It looked like a bad upconversion. You could also easily see the softness in the graphics. Philadelphia and NYC have 2 subchannels that take away much of their bandwidth yet pictures were much sharper than New Haven. I kept switching back and forth and was amazed at the difference.

I don't know what the problem with WTNH is but if I lived in Conn. with New Haven as my only source for ABC I would be very upset. It was NBA finals in SD not HD. I would also think the network should be concerned that a important event was so poorly broadcasted in a major market.
post #6614 of 7074
new to this forum.

Finally got sick of my $130 per month comcast and canceled.

I bought a $22 outdoor antenna at monoprice that had excellent reviews.

A long time ago i tested ota reception with some rabbit ears on my new samsung hdtv. i was frustrated I couldnt get ABC from new haven. When i installed this monoprice antenna i was curious to see what i got. I'm in W. htfd

I've been able to tune in 3.1 to 3.4, 18.1-18.4, 20.1, 20.2, 24.1, 24.2, 30.1, 30.2, 38, 48, 50, 61.1.

I was upset i didn't get abc. I decided to put antenna on back of house and point it southeast. I was hoping to get new haven abc. instead i got:

40.1(ABC), 40.2 (FOX) from springfield

One thing that was cool was getting ch. 48. It's still analog, but it's called RTV (retro television). I almost fell out of my chair when the Rockford Files came on. I love that show.
post #6615 of 7074
Are you getting WCTX-DT (MY) channel 39 ("59-1") at all?
post #6616 of 7074
I don't get channel 39 or 59-1 at all
post #6617 of 7074
WTNH really needs a repeater in Hartford. Their signal has become terrible in this area since the transition. WCTX too.
post #6618 of 7074
Either that or work on the picture quality of their HD, which looks like crap.
post #6619 of 7074
I contacted ch. 8 like 2 years ago about this. Their answer was for me to buy a better antenna. They are not going to spend money so the antenna crowd can get them. It is too small a crowd to justify it. Their answer is to buy comcast basic service, but i'm not even interested in that.

Apple is supposedly going to come out with a new version of their appletv. I would rather spend money on that and watch internet content
post #6620 of 7074
It can't be their Madmere Mountain location in Hamden, because I nearly always got WCTX-DT (MY) channel 39 ("59-1") just fine, back when I had my converter box hooked to my TV.
post #6621 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucasland View Post

I contacted ch. 8 like 2 years ago about this. Their answer was for me to buy a better antenna. They are not going to spend money so the antenna crowd can get them. It is too small a crowd to justify it.

That's would be a good conspiracy theory if it was true, but it's not.
WTNH is on a VHF-Hi Band channel, and they are transmitting at the maximum allowed for their allocation.
(20kW @ ~ 350 meters, if my memory serves me.).
(And thanks to being wedged in between New York, and Boston, they don't have any room to move to, without losing coverage area).

There is a two fold problem with VHF DTV signals (outside of the obvious flaws of 8VSB). One, they are much more prone to multi-path problems., and two many of the set top antenna manufacturers made antennas with great UHF sections but really lousy VHF ones. As an engineer for another station, who has a high band assignment (actually two), I can tell you, 75% of the calls we got were from people with poor receiving equipment. (Bad antennas, poorly designed antennas, poor nosiy pre-amps, etc.). It's amazing what happens when people call after they get a better antenna system, how much better the reception is. There aren't any issues with WTNH's transmitting antenna system. I could pick them up in Springfield with a simple, and small, VHF Yagi (without amplification) when I lived there. Without knowing any details of your setup and or location (antenna type, set model), its tough to tell if youre just in a bad spot for the reception of WTNH or if in fact you do have antenna issues.
post #6622 of 7074
here is a youtube video of the antenna i bought

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNjFv...layer_embedded
post #6623 of 7074
The antenna is probably too small to work well on channel 10 and most of the better UHF antennas look like antennas. The frequency coverage mentioned in the video was probably developed by the marketing department, since it included the lower VHF channels as well as high. Something like this http://www.buy.com/prod/winegard-hd7...208503805.html or this http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...LAID=378670231 is more likely to work well on channel 10 and UHF channels as well. If you post TVFool results we can get a better idea of what you need.
John
post #6624 of 7074
After connecting my antenna, i discovered an analog channel 48 called retro tv. Someone had told me i was lucky to get it at all, since it is low powered. How does a station likes this make money? What is the point of it, if it is so low powered, analog, and only available to OTA viewers? It would seem to me the amount of people actually watching are few and far between.
post #6625 of 7074
It really is amazing how poor the WTNH product is, currently. Their laughable widescreen response to both WVIT and WTIC going HD for news is a joke. No DD on anything for months. Sad. Thank goodness I can flip to bit-starved WABC, it actually looks better!

Quote:
Originally Posted by dvwtwo View Post

Well, I did ask. The reply:

"Yes, that is correct. We only transmit our audio in stereo. We are in
the process of upgrading equipment and I believe the audio issue will be
addressed in this upgrade."

So... it's anybody's guess. Meh.
post #6626 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucasland View Post

How does a station like [Channel 48/Retro TV] make money? What is the point of it, if it is so low powered, analog, and only available to OTA viewers? It would seem to me the amount of people actually watching are few and far between.

I've wondered about this too, especially considering the monthly electric bill to transmit the signal. Some people operate low power stations as a hobby, out of a genuine interest in broadcasting. In a barter arrangement between a network and a station, no money changes hands. The station airs all the network's commercials and infomercials in exchange for the network providing the entertainment programming. Maybe something like this exists between RTV and WRNT/48.

Originally most of Connecticut's low power stations were geared to the Greek, Italian, and Portuguese communities, showing soccer matches and cultural programming that was a connection to the native homeland. Maybe to gain a broader reach, WRNT picked up the Retro TV Network. In other markets, Retro TV is on a subchannel of a full power station, and/or on cable.

Article about Retro TV here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retro_TV_Network

It is broadcasting from the WCCC Radio tower on Albany Avenue in West Hartford.

The Retro program schedule for Hartford:
http://www.myretrotv.com/prog_schedu...V-National.pdf

All the shows on the network:
http://www.myretrotv.com/shows.html

Retro TV homepage:
http://www.myretrotv.com/

WRNT has a deadline of April 18th of next year to turn off analog channel 48 and immediately turn on digital channel 48. This is called a "flash cut". But it may not happen then. Their sister station in Springfield had a deadline of this past May 14th to flash cut, but the FCC is now giving them until May 27, 2013. Both of these stations are owned by a husband and wife, with headquarters in Wethersfield, CT.
post #6627 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glados View Post

WTNH really needs a repeater in Hartford. Their signal has become terrible in this area since the transition. WCTX too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by W1KNE View Post

That's would be a good conspiracy theory if it was true, but it's not.
WTNH is on a VHF-Hi Band channel, and they are transmitting at the maximum allowed for their allocation.
(20kW @ ~ 350 meters, if my memory serves me.).
(And thanks to being wedged in between New York, and Boston, they don't have any room to move to, without losing coverage area).

There is a two fold problem with VHF DTV signals (outside of the obvious flaws of 8VSB). One, they are much more prone to multi-path problems., and two many of the set top antenna manufacturers made antennas with great UHF sections but really lousy VHF ones. As an engineer for another station, who has a high band assignment (actually two), I can tell you, 75% of the calls we got were from people with poor receiving equipment. (Bad antennas, poorly designed antennas, poor nosiy pre-amps, etc.). It's amazing what happens when people call after they get a better antenna system, how much better the reception is. There aren't any issues with WTNH's transmitting antenna system. I could pick them up in Springfield with a simple, and small, VHF Yagi (without amplification) when I lived there. Without knowing any details of your setup and or location (antenna type, set model), its tough to tell if youre just in a bad spot for the reception of WTNH or if in fact you do have antenna issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lucasland View Post

I contacted ch. 8 like 2 years ago about this. Their answer was for me to buy a better antenna. They are not going to spend money so the antenna crowd can get them. It is too small a crowd to justify it. Their answer is to buy comcast basic service, but i'm not even interested in that.

Apple is supposedly going to come out with a new version of their appletv. I would rather spend money on that and watch internet content

From reading in this thread and by word of mouth, WTNH's signal strength exhibits problems starting in West Hartford and its cut-off is about in Manchester/Vernon. Up here in the northeast corner, Ch. 8 was always one of the stronger signals at a campground where I did a few installs. It's in a nice, high spot and has a clear LOS... BUT now there's nothing for WTNH. This is using the gamut for equipment, from re-using older antenna setups, to a new DB-8 with a CM7777.

Adding a repeater in the Hartford environs would help dramatically. But, bear in mind that last I read, repeater towers can only broadcast in 480, so it wouldn't be HD. Repeater towers cost quite a bit, so I wouldn't be surprised with that kind of response. East of the River is probably a satisfactory red-line for them. Heaven knows it's an acceptable red-line for CT state gov't (well, besides the U).
post #6628 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesCT View Post

But, bear in mind that last I read, repeater towers can only broadcast in 480, so it wouldn't be HD.

Repeaters - or more accurately, translators and low power stations, broadcast in the same ATSC digital format as regular high power DTV stations do. The only thing different is they are lower power. There are a number of low power stations still on the air transmitting in the old NTSC analog format - which would be the equiv of 480i resolution. Maybe that is what you are referencing?


Quote:


Repeater towers cost quite a bit

The cost in any transmission facility is quite expensive - both the initial capital as well as on-going expenses, including the power bill, site lease, etc. Further - there are a limited number of frequencies available for additional stations, translators - they are assigned based on not causing any interference to other existing users of a channel or nearby channels.
post #6629 of 7074
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcodey View Post

I'm at an elevation of 500 feet in northern NJ and can receive off air ABC from New Haven, Philadelphia and NYC. The picture quality on WTNH for the NBA Finals was awful. It looked like a bad upconversion. You could also easily see the softness in the graphics. Philadelphia and NYC have 2 subchannels that take away much of their bandwidth yet pictures were much sharper than New Haven. I kept switching back and forth and was amazed at the difference.

I don't know what the problem with WTNH is but if I lived in Conn. with New Haven as my only source for ABC I would be very upset. It was NBA finals in SD not HD. I would also think the network should be concerned that a important event was so poorly broadcasted in a major market.

WTNH is pretty mushy on cable, too, so it's not just their OTA signal. Easily the worst PQ of the networks available on Charter's system. For the record, Charter's picture is generally pretty good, and living in VA for a few years I know that the mushymushy HD isn't ABC's fault, as WJLA in Arlington looked terrific. Between the picture quality and the lack of DD audio (really, people?) WTNH is doing fairly lousy work.
post #6630 of 7074
Hi I am new to this forum, but have been reading thru 1000's of interesting posts over the last 3 days try to play catch up.

One question I have that relates to something that really annoys me is New Haven CT. WCTX's station identification of MYTV-9.

For one, WCTX formally on UHF Channel 59 has never been located on the VHF-Hi channel 9 frequency.

Only WWOR Secaucus N.J. and WMUR Manchester N.H. and recently WEDN UHF channel 53 Norwich have occupied channel 9.

WCTX is NOW located on DTV RF CH. 39. So where are they getting this MYTV-9 Station Ident. from?

I think it is the most misleading information I have ever heard.
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 › Hartford, CT - OTA