or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Cedar Rapids, IA - HDTV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cedar Rapids, IA - HDTV - Page 110

post #3271 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

And dline, no need to give up looking at antennas as you go places; I do the same thing. I'm only marginally insane.

- Trip

Oh ya, it is like a club! Kevin (adler187) and I are always looking out for towers and antenna setups, whether tv or ham....
post #3272 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgarringer View Post

I think part of the problem is, we keep hearing this. "People 70 miles away get it just fine, so you should be able to also." But, yet, a sampling of people I know proves that to be just the opposite. I have yet to find a single person in Iowa City, and only a handful in Cedar Rapids that can get your DT signal without an extreme amount of work (like putting up an entirely new antenna on their roof when one on their deck worked for everything before).

I know that KWWL can't acknowledge these coverage issues because that would open them up to a literal flood of DMA waivers for getting the national channel on sat, but it'd be nice if someone would admit that yes, we're having difficulties with people in metro areas in the south. The fact that some farmer can pick up KWWL where the tallest nearby thing is a cow a mile away doesn't really impress me much. When we're talking about a city, your signal just isn't there.

Please understand, I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just trying to explain 'the rest of the story' and why people are getting so worked up about this.

Sgarringer,

I'm not directly saying this just at you, and not saying this to anyone to be rude (though it might sound that way), but to all those having trouble.

The FCC, when it draws up signal strength maps and approves the broadcaster's power and height, assumes several things about you:

1. There's flat terrain between you and the tower
2. You have an outdoor antenna, 30' above ground level (assumed to be on the roof of a standard house plus several feet above it to attain 30')
3. You have an antenna that is "proper" for the location you are at (properly sized and designed for the distance between you and the tower)

No exceptions.

If I looked at all of the people's antenna setups, from those who were having trouble, I would say almost all would fail #2 and #3. Many of those people don't want to hear that, and/or say:

It worked for me (then), and (now) I can't get any signal!

Being blunt, UHF's high power on digital blasted through buildings, and really helped out get that signal through the wood, vinyl siding, etc. VHF can reflect very easily with multipath, and can be harder to get indoors. Read: less forgiveness/tolerance for less than optimal antennas and receivers.

As an amateur antenna installer, I hear this from people all the time: "That antenna is too big! Wifey won't like that on my roof!"). That's when I say: You're 40-60 miles from the towers. If you don't have this kind of antenna on your roof, reception will be inconsistent or not available, and you should get cable/sat. Some capitulate. Some got cable or satellite. One of them has had enough of cable after he didn't want to do a large antenna, and now he's going back to an antenna. Rule of thumb: to handle bad weather, tropo, etc...get an antenna that is designed to pick up the frequencies that local broadcasters are on, AND two sizes larger than recommended by Antennaweb, etc., outside, on the roof or on a tower 30' up.

Some people will say wahhh! I just want to plug it in, not go through all these hoops and ugly antennas, and...

Here's the deal, folks. Those "antennas" on your patios that look like pizza pans aren't cutting it. Now, that's not to say that you can't get very solid reception from them. What I am saying is this: with analog, you could get away with a lot of stuff and still get a watchable signal, even when you weren't supposed to. With digital, the margin of error on VHF is somewhat lower. You coudl also say: Broadcasters on channels 7-13 for digital aren't given enough power, and I would agree. But that's a different story. As it is, KWWL, given line of sight to the tower, should go out at least 60 miles.
If the transmitter is performing optimally, and topography isn't killing the signal on the way to your TV, then the problem is *you*.

Yeah, I'm not making friends with this post. But I've done this for 30 years, and the rules still haven't changed on how to get a great picture.
post #3273 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgarringer View Post

Not to stray too far off topic, but the thought process is that the local channels are often the most watched on a cable system and therefore they feel entitled to the largest 'cut of the pie' so to speak. The fallacy I find in that thought process is quite large:

a) We the people granted them a license to serve us and in return sell advertising to cover their expenses. Nowhere did we guarantee profit to them.

What does commercial, ie, for-profit license to use said airwaves mean to you? Yes, it does mean to serve the community. It also means they are fully entitled to make a profit from it. The FCC has explicitly stated this.
Commercial means a business, and businesses make money and profits (except now since the economy has tanked!). If you just want to break even (hopefully), get a non-commercial license, aka PBS. And since when do cable companies feel "entitled" to the largest cut of the pie? Since ESPN charges almost $5 per customer, and CBS and other networks are desiring $.50
for carrier retransmissions, how is this the " 'largest cut of the pie' "? Finally, the ratings don't lie: most of the time, still true today...the "Big 4" networks generate the largest audience.
Quote:



b) When selling to advertisers, they use the numbers gained from carriage on cable to negotiate higher rates. So, in theory, they're being paid more by being carried on cable already.

They use the Neilsen ratings numbers, which is a sum of people getting it off the air and also from pay TV services. They do break it down by demographics, and of course, cable/sat coverage is very important! But if you have a channel that can be viewed in millions of homes, and nobody is watching it...it doesn't matter. They'll go out of business quickly. They want the 18-34 aged crowd...making decent money...however that signal gets to them! If it gets to 'em via rabbit ears or a coax, they don't care.

Quote:


c) Although cable subscribers often times do watch local channels, if you asked cable subscribers what channels they were paying for with cable the local channels never get listed.

And then they would be wrong. And you know what: if it concerned them that much, then they'd switch to over-the-air, Netflix(tm), DVD's, the Internet, or something else. I only see that happening now because of the bad economy and a desire for different choices in entertainment, not because their bill paid for this or that channel (minus the "premium" channels like HBO, etc).

Quote:


In a free market, the cable networks could negotiate with nearby affiliates, the networks themselves, and other sources for the network programming. However, we've created a monopoly where only one station in a market can carry the programming and therefore the cable companies are forced to pay whatever those stations demand.

We have a free market. And you know what? The government says that satellite providers can ONLY use their customer's home DMA markets for network TV service. Cable can use up to two, if they wish. And they have likely talked with nearby affiliates, the networks themselves, and other sources. Don't like it? Yell at the FCC. Anyway, the network then says to the cableco: you MUST only carry our local station, or you will not carry it at all. Think of it like this: A network local affiliate "X" stinks because they don't have HD or more technical problems than affiliate "Y" in another market. So the cable company goes and gets station "Y". But this hurts "X" and instead of improving the situation, hey go bankrupt, and you lose out on a local source of news, information, and local programming and service. Station "Y" doesn't care two licks about you, since they get no ad revenue from your distant area, and when the next tornado or local emergency hits, well...best to you. You're on your own.

Exceptions: a few mountainous areas where cities are borderline on several DMA's in the middle of nowhere. One community in western Virginia had 4 ABC affiliates on their system; they're down to 3, IIRC. Again, exceptions to the rule.

Finally, if anyone wants station "Y" that bad, they can frequently get a big enough tower and antenna to pick it up!

Quote:


Quite frankly, I'd much rather that Dish network provide me the direct network feeds of NBC, CBS, ABC and FOX. I guarantee you there would be less issues watching those than there are the local affiliates. I have no desire to see that Waukon has a snow emergency while I'm trying to watch Heros. And I'd rather get my news semi recently, not wait until 10pm to hear what stories that local channel managed to get covered by then.

So the heck with the people who know your communities the best, letting others know about urgent weather information that could cause injuries or fatalities, I'm trying to watch my show? Absolutely NO offense to the engineers and stations on this board reading this, but in a case like that or worse (think blizzard warning/snow emergency or worse, Parkersburg tornado), are TV dramas, sitcoms, etc *that* important? Really? And how else are you going to get your news if you are shunning the station doing just that? Local stations don't "manage" to get stories covered. Been there, done that...no matter how green or veteran a reporter is, I've yet to meet one who doesn't bust their rear ends to cover stories. Are there enough reporters to get all the stories, or enough time? No...but that doesn't mean the stations aren't giving their all.

I'm sorry if this comes out harsh, but as a meteorologist and formerly on the front side of the camera, who got people mad at me for running crawls about a tornado warning two counties away from them: their lives are in danger.
This is what public service is all about. And from one who had been in broadcasting and still does freelance, I can tell you: lose your local affiliate, and the community loses a voice. Support them, while you still have the chance.
post #3274 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhf View Post

Is adaptive correction enabled? And has the RF system been swept recently to make sure there are no reflections that might be screwing things up?

We have a cleaner signal now than before on 55. Our EVM (Error Vector Magnitude) is hovering around 2.4% (was 5%). That means that we should be easier to lock onto now. When it gets above 10%, things start getting dicey as it begins to look more like noise than a 8-VSB digital signal.

Of course, the is RTAC circuitry in action to accomplish this (adaptative correction). We have virtually no reflections off the antenna (like a watt or so). Heck, we don't have much power going up the line to reflect anyhow!
I just hoping with more power, the tuners will find something to latch onto that they like!
post #3275 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

Since ESPN charges almost $5 per customer, and CBS and other networks are desiring $.50
for carrier retransmissions, how is this the " 'largest cut of the pie' "? Finally, the ratings don't lie: most of the time, still true today...the "Big 4" networks generate the largest audience.

Gee, I didn't know you were privy to the secret contracts signed between Echostar, DirecTV, Mediacom and the content providers. Either you just violated a NDA, or you're talking out your rear end... either way you're not instilling a lot of confidence in the rest of your post. But, I shall trudge on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

They use the Neilsen ratings numbers, which is a sum of people getting it off the air and also from pay TV services. They do break it down by demographics, and of course, cable/sat coverage is very important! But if you have a channel that can be viewed in millions of homes, and nobody is watching it...it doesn't matter. They'll go out of business quickly.

Thanks for proving my point. Where do most of the people 18-34 get their TV? From Cable and Sat. So, it's in the channels best interest to be carried on those. But, wait. They have a government imposed monopoly. So, they can extort money from the cable operators and sat operators at will, and still be carried!

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

And then they would be wrong. And you know what: if it concerned them that much, then they'd switch to over-the-air, Netflix(tm), DVD's, the Internet, or something else. I only see that happening now because of the bad economy and a desire for different choices in entertainment, not because their bill paid for this or that channel (minus the "premium" channels like HBO, etc).

Really? I see that happening because of the greedy local channels charging the content providers more and more. How much is BROADCAST BASIC cable up to? When I used to subscribe it was $4.95. Now its $15. Remember, this is BROADCAST BASIC, just the broadcast channels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

We have a free market. And you know what? The government says that satellite providers can ONLY use their customer's home DMA markets for network TV service.

Do you know what a free market is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

Cable can use up to two, if they wish.

Closer, but still not 'free' as in freedom to pick any carrier you want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

And they have likely talked with nearby affiliates, the networks themselves, and other sources. Don't like it? Yell at the FCC. Anyway, the network then says to the cableco: you MUST only carry our local station, or you will not carry it at all. Think of it like this: A network local affiliate "X" stinks because they don't have HD or more technical problems than affiliate "Y" in another market. So the cable company goes and gets station "Y". But this hurts "X" and instead of improving the situation, hey go bankrupt, and you lose out on a local source of news, information, and local programming and service. Station "Y" doesn't care two licks about you, since they get no ad revenue from your distant area, and when the next tornado or local emergency hits, well...best to you. You're on your own.

Incorrect blather, I'll skip this. The networks don't own any of the stations in this market, so they have no say in the matter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

Finally, if anyone wants station "Y" that bad, they can frequently get a big enough tower and antenna to pick it up!

Gee, like a 40 foot tower in the middle of Cedar Rapids? Who do I know who did that?
http://gallery.planetcr.com/gallery2...ge243.jpg.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

So the heck with the people who know your communities the best, letting others know about urgent weather information that could cause injuries or fatalities, I'm trying to watch my show?

Yeah, I don't see the local stations covering this. Sure, when CR was flooding they 'covered' that. KCRG even told you how to flush your toilet without running water. Was any of that necessary? I seriously doubt they needed to be on the air 72 hours straight reminding people how to flush with a bucket of water.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

And how else are you going to get your news if you are shunning the station doing just that? Local stations don't "manage" to get stories covered. Been there, done that...no matter how green or veteran a reporter is, I've yet to meet one who doesn't bust their rear ends to cover stories. Are there enough reporters to get all the stories, or enough time? No...but that doesn't mean the stations aren't giving their all.

Ha! If I want the 'local news' provided by the stations in Cedar Rapids, I'll just subscribe to the press releases. Investigative reporting is a thing of the past, none of the stations bother asking questions. They just report whatever is fed to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

I'm sorry if this comes out harsh, but as a meteorologist and formerly on the front side of the camera, who got people mad at me for running crawls about a tornado warning two counties away from them: their lives are in danger.

Well thanks for pointing out you have a horse in this race. There's a reason why people refer to weather breaks as the meteorologists having 'weather w00dies'. Sure, it's your life. The rest of us, quite frankly, don't care. We want to sit down and watch "The Office". The NWS cries wolf so much, that watching TV in the summer is gamble at best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebenste View Post

This is what public service is all about. And from one who had been in broadcasting and still does freelance, I can tell you: lose your local affiliate, and the community loses a voice. Support them, while you still have the chance.

The community doesn't get a voice. KCRG is 'locally owned' sure, but that doesn't mean much. KFXA and KGAN are owned by Sinclair, which might as well be the RNC for trustworthiness, and quite frankly I don't know who owns KWWL, but since I don't get their signal anymore I guess it doesn't matter.

Local! HA!

As someone who has watched the television and radio market go directly down the crapper, "local" is a huge joke. Sure, the computer playing the voice track might be in town somewhere, but that's the ONLY part that is.

I'm sorry if this came across as a personal attack, it's the furthest from possible, but I just had to speak up after hearing you go off about 'local' coverage. I wasn't going to even reply at first, but there is nothing local about TV left. There is a token glance at the community, especially when FCC renewal time comes around, but that's it. For national news I go to wikileaks and for local news I try to listen to public radio (Des Moines is the new local even there) and the paper... For now... Until the next layoff. Heck, the Iowa City Press Citizen isn't even headquartered in Iowa City anymore. They're out of Des Moines!
post #3276 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post

So, you're using the wrong tool for the job. You don't specify which UHF antenna you're using, but the graphs I've seen show some of them have huge drop-offs somewhere in the middle of the upper-VHF band.

Sure, I'll admit that a UHF antenna isn't exactly the best tool. But how was I supposed to know, ahead of time, if it would work or not? I'd say it's more like someone telling you "grab a Phillips screwdriver". I brought one size to the table, turns out it's the wrong size. But, from the original description, how would you know. It's a "Phillips screwdriver".

I spent weeks getting everything aimed, and 7 VHF analog and 9 VHF analog came in perfect. No ghosting, no issues. Unlike other markets, where the VHF stations actually tested ahead of time, we didn't do anything like that here. So it was a total shot in the dark. Would you like to climb my tower in the cold -- let alone spend the extra cash to buy a VHF antenna, VHF/UHF combiner, wasted tower space, etc.
post #3277 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4lids View Post

We have a cleaner signal now than before on 55. Our EVM (Error Vector Magnitude) is hovering around 2.4% (was 5%).

I just hoping with more power, the tuners will find something to latch onto that they like!

2.4% isn't bad. It must just be the power level. That thing isn't running a CD1A exciter is it? Just wondering, I'm not a huge fan of them, though they do seem to get the job done just fine.

I've mentioned before that my antenna at home sucks, but I can't get a lock on an antenna at several hundred feet AGL about 5 miles south of Rowley either. I'll keep my fingers crossed that things get better with the new transmitter!
post #3278 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgarringer View Post

I wasn't going to even reply at first, but there is nothing local about TV left. There is a token glance at the community, especially when FCC renewal time comes around, but that's it. For national news I go to wikileaks and for local news I try to listen to public radio (Des Moines is the new local even there) and the paper... For now... Until the next layoff. Heck, the Iowa City Press Citizen isn't even headquartered in Iowa City anymore. They're out of Des Moines!

Ummm... what?!?! Just because you are desiring nothing local doesn't mean that we aren't doing this. I get that you want the national networks and that is all, but to say there is nothing local about TV is assinine! You contradict yourself the entire time by going off on your local Iowa stations for covering the small towns you don't care about and the weather events interrupting The Office. Considering all that went on in our viewing area last year, I think it is crazy to suggest that there is nothing local.

Jeepers, do you watch the news or the local stations at all? Before you reply with a snide comment about how you can't get KWWL, please understand that I don't have much empathy for those who know they have the wrong gear and then continue to trash my station. I know things can be better... and will be. Hopefully, with our power increase in a month, we'll break through on your UHF antenna... and if not then, perhaps the FCC will grant our additional request for more power on June 12th and we'll get there then. If that still doesn't work, you'll probably lose KCRG too, although they are 12 MHz closer to your antenna's desired tuning.

Being local is about the only thing we have to hold on to as you can watch network programming now online if you choose. We aim for as much local content as we can and only hope to increase it as time goes on.

The local affiliates also do retain the rights for the networks in this area. These are negociated with the network and then the FCC aids in enforcing this as providers try to work around it. The Satellite Home Viewer Act was all about this, although it has become more of a moot point as locals become available on the providers. In effect, we are the authorized NBC dealers in this area... not really a monopoly.

Also, since you didn't know, we are owned by Quincy Newspapers Inc. (QNI) out of Quincy, IL. They own 13 TV stations around the midwest that are very focused on being bonded to their communities.
-Jarrett
post #3279 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhf View Post

That thing isn't running a CD1A exciter is it?

I've mentioned before that my antenna at home sucks, but I can't get a lock on an antenna at several hundred feet AGL about 5 miles south of Rowley either. I'll keep my fingers crossed that things get better with the new transmitter!

APEX exciter... it kicks the CD1A's butt. If you are that close, I would think there has to be something fishy going on with multipath.
post #3280 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4lids View Post

Jeepers, do you watch the news or the local stations at all? Before you reply with a snide comment about how you can't get KWWL, please understand that I don't have much empathy for those who know they have the wrong gear and then continue to trash my station. I know things can be better... and will be. Hopefully, with our power increase in a month, we'll break through on your UHF antenna... and if not then, perhaps the FCC will grant our additional request for more power on June 12th and we'll get there then. If that still doesn't work, you'll probably lose KCRG too, although they are 12 MHz closer to your antenna's desired tuning.
-Jarrett

I think that sgarringer has a CM-4221 (the older one, from the tower pictures) that antenna is decent, but without LOS to the tower, I would not count on VHF-HI reception of full power VHF-HIs more then 20-25miles out from the tower. A simple 7-13 VHF-HI yagi (that can be gotten online for less then $40) would be a simple and quick solution...
I have a client that my best friend (adler187) and I setup antennas for. The TVfool results for KTTC-DT-10 at her place where around -110dBm, and she gets pretty decent coverage at 50miles with the YA-1713 and AP-8275 amp that we installed 25-30ft AGL. KTTC-DT-10 is currently supposed to be (and I assume) at 20kW, so that is only roughly 6dB stronger then KWWL-DT-7..... And to boot, KTTC is not on nearly as high of tower as KWWL....

On a different topic, Jarrett, what happens to your old pre-transition DT antenna and feedline, now that it is offline. Will it be removed, or left until a project involves tower work in the future?
post #3281 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgarringer View Post

Sure, I'll admit that a UHF antenna isn't exactly the best tool. But how was I supposed to know, ahead of time, if it would work or not? I'd say it's more like someone telling you "grab a Phillips screwdriver". I brought one size to the table, turns out it's the wrong size. But, from the original description, how would you know. It's a "Phillips screwdriver".

Actually, it's more like you were asked for a No. 2 Phillips screwdriver (VHF antenna), but got a No. 3 (UHF antenna) because it was the same shape (not a bad assumption to make). Then you blame the screw because your screwdriver doesn't fit.

(If it turns out I actually don't know anything about tools and my sizes are wrong, just pretend I actually do know what I'm talking about. )

Quote:


I spent weeks getting everything aimed, and 7 VHF analog and 9 VHF analog came in perfect. No ghosting, no issues. Unlike other markets, where the VHF stations actually tested ahead of time, we didn't do anything like that here. So it was a total shot in the dark. Would you like to climb my tower in the cold -- let alone spend the extra cash to buy a VHF antenna, VHF/UHF combiner, wasted tower space, etc.

Yes, it was a shot in the dark, and your shot in the dark missed, as shots in the dark tend to do. It happens. If I were in your position, I'd be upset that my antenna didn't work out too, and I'd fully expect someone else to say to me the same thing I'm saying now to you.

The difference between you and me, I think, is that I don't see how this is KWWL's fault. While an overnight test would have been nice, you'd have no guarantee that atmospherics weren't helping you out. And if the test came late last year or early this year, what good would it have done you? You would find out it didn't work and still wouldn't want to climb on your tower in winter to make the necessary modifications.

The good news is that KWWL has filed to further boost power to 49 kW. Not sure the FCC will grant it, but it has been applied for. Can't fault them for not trying, since the FCC limit for their height is roughly 30 kW and KWWL clearly wants more than that.

(For gjvrieze, KTTC has also asked to boost power, as has WAOW.)

- Trip
post #3282 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4lids View Post

I know things can be better... and will be. Hopefully, with our power increase in a month, we'll break through on your UHF antenna... and if not then, perhaps the FCC will grant our additional request for more power on June 12th and we'll get there then.

Well, thanks a lot, you made me look again ... Here's the application for that boost to 49 kW:

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws....acility_id=593
post #3283 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4lids View Post

Ummm... what?!?! Just because you are desiring nothing local doesn't mean that we aren't doing this. I get that you want the national networks and that is all, but to say there is nothing local about TV is assinine! You contradict yourself the entire time by going off on your local Iowa stations for covering the small towns you don't care about and the weather events interrupting The Office. Considering all that went on in our viewing area last year, I think it is crazy to suggest that there is nothing local.

Jeepers, do you watch the news or the local stations at all? Before you reply with a snide comment about how you can't get KWWL, please understand that I don't have much empathy for those who know they have the wrong gear and then continue to trash my station. I know things can be better... and will be. Hopefully, with our power increase in a month, we'll break through on your UHF antenna... and if not then, perhaps the FCC will grant our additional request for more power on June 12th and we'll get there then. If that still doesn't work, you'll probably lose KCRG too, although they are 12 MHz closer to your antenna's desired tuning.

Being local is about the only thing we have to hold on to as you can watch network programming now online if you choose. We aim for as much local content as we can and only hope to increase it as time goes on.

The local affiliates also do retain the rights for the networks in this area. These are negociated with the network and then the FCC aids in enforcing this as providers try to work around it. The Satellite Home Viewer Act was all about this, although it has become more of a moot point as locals become available on the providers. In effect, we are the authorized NBC dealers in this area... not really a monopoly.

Also, since you didn't know, we are owned by Quincy Newspapers Inc. (QNI) out of Quincy, IL. They own 13 TV stations around the midwest that are very focused on being bonded to their communities.
-Jarrett

I will say that I never have watched a lot of KWWL news, it's focus being more on Waterloo, and it's possible that your news department may be more locally based than other outlets. My concern is over the Cedar Rapids local channels. We have one station making a career out of catching the mayor nodding off in a city council meeting. Is that news? Probably. But did it deserve the fanfare it was given? Doubtful when there was plenty of other stories to go around. The other Cedar Rapids station we have seems to want to avoid asking questions in an effort to avoid upsetting anyone in the city. A great example is the skewed reporting they gave on the "CR Tea Party" a few months ago. Although I wasn't involved in the group and disagreed with them, I was active on their board and found that the truth was a LONG ways from where KCRG reported it. They had their minds made up that a local option tax was the way to go.

Local news is expensive, and I understand that stations see it as a place to save money, with consolidation. But, when you tune in to the 'local' news and over half of it is stuff piped in nationally, and highschool sports (depending on the season) that leaves roughly 15 minutes for true local news. To top that off, if you watch at 5, 6 and 10 you're basically seeing the same thing. Wheres the investigation? I don't see it.

Once KCRG goes VHF will probably lose their signal too -- but, it will be summer and I'll have installed a VHF antenna by then. I don't blame you for the date -- that was picked by congress -- and truthfully I know that you guys (engineers at local stations) are working your butts off to bring us this programming. I just think it's important that both side be represented here. There is a (fairly) large amount of people who did prepare, only to find that their preparations were insufficient, and being that it was the middle of the winter were unable to rectify the situation right away. What's the solution? Well, I know enough to say I don't have one. Maybe a DT translator in Iowa City or something...
post #3284 of 4949
Anyone else notice how loud Kgan's commercials have gotten lately.I have to turn the sound down.
post #3285 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trip in VA View Post


The difference between you and me, I think, is that I don't see how this is KWWL's fault. While an overnight test would have been nice, you'd have no guarantee that atmospherics weren't helping you out. And if the test came late last year or early this year, what good would it have done you? You would find out it didn't work and still wouldn't want to climb on your tower in winter to make the necessary modifications.

I'm sorry if I came across as blaming KWWL -- that couldn't be further from how I feel. I know that my signal issues are no ones fault but my own. Obviously, they're transmitting, and it's my equipment, which is not perfectly suited for the job, that's not getting the signal. In my other post, I mention my mentality though. There are two sides to the issue, there's the stations which are doing the best they can, and there is the viewers who felt that they were (probably) prepared.
post #3286 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by gjvrieze View Post

On a different topic, Jarrett, what happens to your old pre-transition DT antenna and feedline, now that it is offline. Will it be removed, or left until a project involves tower work in the future?

It is staying up there for now, as there is a possibly we work something out with Qualcomm Mediaflow with our setup here. We'll see!
post #3287 of 4949
For those out there with IMON HDTV did your formatting just change?????
post #3288 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojohannah View Post

For those out there with IMON HDTV did your formatting just change?????

All of the HD channels between 801-891 look okay and the same as always off of my Scientific Atlanta 8300 HDC as of right now (9:45 PM). I haven't checked unencrypted QAM. What did you see different?
post #3289 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4lids View Post

APEX exciter... it kicks the CD1A's butt.

The APEX is awesome. The CD1A is doing almost as well, purely by luck, but what a pain to to make all the adjustments on those things.
post #3290 of 4949
im on imon with HD. Lost and dollhouse last week had a line through them and the screen was off right there. No one i talked to had that issue on mediacom.


should a db2 antenna get kwwl now? I have lost it also.
post #3291 of 4949
For what it's worth, Equity Media Holdings -- parent of KWWF, and former owner of RTN -- is putting its stations up for auction next week, according to Broadcasting & Cable. (NorthPine.com posted the information today.)

Back in December, when the transition date was still Feb. 17, the company warned the FCC that KWWF had yet to obtain financing for its digital flash-cut and may need to go silent after the ban on analog TV went into effect. Now it appears June 12 may be questionable.
post #3292 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by fireburster View Post

''''


should a db2 antenna get kwwl now? I have lost it also.

Perhaps if you're within 5 miles or so of their tower. If you're more that 10 or 15 miles, probably not.

Between that antenna not being effective at channel 7 and the KWWL's transmitter being powered by about two hair-dryer's worth of power, you prospects are not great.

You can always run a re-scan and see if you pick it up. if you haven't rescanned since they converted, your receiver doesn't have a clue where its new broadcast frequency is.
post #3293 of 4949
Some have found missing stations using these steps:

Disconnect the antenna feed.
Rescan. (This is to clear ALL channels)

Reconnect the antenna feed.
Rescan again.


FWIW: This might help.
post #3294 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post

the KWWL's transmitter being powered by about two hair-dryer's worth of power, you prospects are not great.

You dare question the mighty output power of KWWL? How dare you! You should not feel out of place needing a 250" long directional VHF antenna to pick up their signal. There is nothing wrong with their hamster-wheel-powered transmitter!
post #3295 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcourtney View Post

Some have found missing stations using these steps:

Disconnect the antenna feed.
Rescan. (This is to clear ALL channels)

Reconnect the antenna feed.
Rescan again.


FWIW: This might help.



Or do a factory reset of the converter. Instructions should be in the package.
post #3296 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by dline View Post

For what it's worth, Equity Media Holdings -- parent of KWWF, and former owner of RTN -- is putting its stations up for auction next week, according to Broadcasting & Cable. (NorthPine.com posted the information today.)

.


I'd say KWWF has at least 50/50 odds of morphing into a KWKB clone, rather, satellite. CW 20 & 22...or CW 22 & 25 if we want to stay RF correct.

Next best bet: religion.

As far as how much KWWF fetches, I couln't even begin to make an educated guess, but I'll say $500k, $750k tops.
post #3297 of 4949
Just wanted to say that I live in NE Cedar Rapids, by Noelridge, and I lost the KWWL signal after the turnover. I used just an indoor Radio Shack 20 dollar antenna to get the signal. Anyway, every once in a while I tried to do anything to get any hint of a signal. Out of the blue about a week ago I tried and got around 58-60 thru my Dish Network system. After a little tweaking, I've got it to peak around 66-70, where it stays constantly now. A little freezing for a nanonsecond every now and then, but it beats nothing, or buying a more expensive antenna. I mainly wanted it for the subchannels anyway.
post #3298 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhf View Post

The APEX is awesome. The CD1A is doing almost as well, purely by luck, but what a pain to to make all the adjustments on those things.

The APEX saved me a lot of time, especially when installing a transmitter with a sharp-tuned filter. I once spent 2 days tuning 2 CD1A exciters on a system.
post #3299 of 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by KFXAChief View Post

The APEX saved me a lot of time, especially when installing a transmitter with a sharp-tuned filter. I once spent 2 days tuning 2 CD1A exciters on a system.

I believe it. The last time Foster was around here he diddled with my CD1A, just to see if I remembered how to tune them. I thought I was going to have to beat him
post #3300 of 4949
Hi guys,

It's been interesting to sit on the sidelines here, reading the daily banter between sgarringer, 4lids, Trip in VA and others on the ongoing debate about "poor or no reception" of KWWL's VHF digital signal.
Forgive me if I am speaking out of turn, but it seems that an amateur radio operator as sgarringer would be the first one to know that an antenna which performed OK at 716-722 MHz (UHF Channel 55) would perform very poorly, if at all at 174-180 MHz (VHF Channel 7). In a prior analog world, lower gain, poorer front-to-back ratio, poorer sidelobe rejection which would result from trying to watch a high-VHF channel on a UHF antenna might produce a viewer 'acceptable' picture. With digital, with it's 'cliff-effect', the 15-db threshold makes this setup fail, for the most part. Those who do get reception should consider themselves extremely fortunate. The 542-MHz difference in the "wrong" direction (VHF 7 requires longer antenna elements than UHF 55) also means the capture area of the antenns is also insufficient to perform as required now in a digital world.
Remember, also...RF power is logarithimic...Jarrett, correct me if I am wrong here: doubling transmit power will result in only a 1/4 receive signal level increase. This may help some people who experience pixilization now, but many receivers/set-top boxes will still not be able to display a picture (cliff-effect of digital).
Again, not being argumentative here - just echoing what others smarter than I have been saying.

Ian
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 › Cedar Rapids, IA - HDTV