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

Denver, CO - OTA - Page 11

post #301 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunshinedawg View Post

Anybody else notice how bad the lip sync was on Grey's Anatomy? It's was annoying the wife so bad, she switched over to analog.

They fixed it, but did you also notice the HD signal was "zoomed in", like it was 4x3?
post #302 of 8459
From the article:
"We have lost businesses in the Golden area because they couldn't stand the radiation levels on their equipment, he said. If the radiation now increases, we will drive those people away.

Funny! The FCC has never had a complaint from anyone on Lookout Mountain.
post #303 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by TotallyPreWired View Post

That is a little extreme, isn't it? With the majority of people getting their broadcasts from 3rd parties(cable & sat), they won't lose anything. And, their 1990 TV's will still work just fine. Now, if these providers were also going to require an ATSC receiver in 741 days, that would be something. But they aren't.

And, I really don't buy the idea that the low income people will be hurt that much. From what I've seen, many of these people would spend money on cable & sat and a big TV, before they would spend money on food! They have their priorities!

And, HD must not be that big of a deal, the podunk cableco up here, doesn't offer even 1 HD channel!

Let'um sue! I wouldn't be surprised to see LCG backing them!
....jc

Hey, here in our DMA (all of Utah), 25% of the homes rely on OTA, 25% on satellite, and 50% on Cable. Of those, I'd say there are plenty of people in condos, apartments, retirement homes, and low-income housing who use "bulk account" basic analog Cable. And, when Cable goes all-digital, how many of those people will be able to afford the upgrade to Digital Cable and the monthly STB rental fees. Or, if we can keep all the locals in Clear QAM mode, how many will rush out and buy new HDTV sets (remember, most smaller SDTV sets don't have the QAM option)?
post #304 of 8459
These residents and even the officials just spew crap. If you were to ask them to prove it, "OK, show me one letter from a business that decided not to locate in Golden", they couldn't do it. It's all rhetoric. If fact, there might be more letters to Golden condeming them for not moving into the 21 century by obstructing the roll-out of DTV to their big-dollar, tech-savy young engineers!

Also, I wanted so bad to get up there at the meeting and say "OK, Mr. Golden mayor, why are you condeming the consolidation tower due to your claim that the RF radiation increase is like a Nuclear bomb, but then, you're all gun-ho to install dozens or hundreds of dangerous, high-powered RF Wi-Fi transmitters all over the city of Golden... Right in their backyards?
post #305 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenglish View Post

Hey, here in our DMA (all of Utah), 25% of the homes rely on OTA, 25% on satellite, and 50% on Cable. Of those, I'd say there are plenty of people in condos, apartments, retirement homes, and low-income housing who use "bulk account" basic analog Cable. And, when Cable goes all-digital, how many of those people will be able to afford the upgrade to Digital Cable and the monthly STB rental fees. Or, if we can keep all the locals in Clear QAM mode, how many will rush out and buy new HDTV sets (remember, most smaller SDTV sets don't have the QAM option)?

I appreciate what you're saying but you know the requirement is for DIGITAL TV, not HDTV. And I have SEEN SDTV's with all 3 tuners - ATSC, NTSC and QAM - in Walmart in 27 inch and larger TVs. And these TVs were available for less than $300.

Sure going to HDTV right now is going to cost "a bit more" than these SDTV's - but it IS an option. At least they can still get TV.
Edit:
And the ATSC / QAM tuners will be moving down the size scale shortly. I'd say by next January you won't be able to buy a TV without ATSC at least, and probably QAM tuners builtin. - Or they will be "firesale" TV s to clear out the warehouses.
post #306 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Pro View Post

They fixed it, but did you also notice the HD signal was "zoomed in", like it was 4x3?

I wasn't really watching it. I came into the room and saw she was watching the analog station and she told me why.
post #307 of 8459
Hey all,

Anyone been watching Heroes OTA? I'm a Comcast subscriber and the broadcasts have been in 2.0 sound. I'm trying to pinpoint if the problem is with KUSA or Comcast. Other KUSA broadcasts are in properly in 5.1 sound (like the NHL on NBC game on now).
post #308 of 8459
I watch Heroes OTA, it is always in DD stereo. So is everything else KUSA broadcasts in primetime (except Sunday Night Football)!!

Last I heard, KUSA has problems with any time shifted, meaning recorded by them and played back at a later time for broadcast, material in 5.1. They seem to be able to do real time "Live" events just fine. To "pinpoint" the problem, call KUSA engineering and ask them why they are having this problem, and why for a very long time now, they have not been able to get their act together on this??

Phil P.
post #309 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by ppasteur View Post

I watch Heroes OTA, it is always in DD stereo. So is everything else KUSA broadcasts in primetime (except Sunday Night Football)!!

Last I heard, KUSA has problems with any time shifted, meaning recorded by them and played back at a later time for broadcast, material in 5.1. They seem to be able to do real time "Live" events just fine. To "pinpoint" the problem, call KUSA engineering and ask them why they are having this problem, and why for a very long time now, they have not been able to get their act together on this??

Phil P.

Okay, thanks. I don't watch any NBC primetime shows but Heroes, but I did notice the Sunday Night Football and the NHL games are 5.1. That explains it. I'll see what I can do about complaining, but if it's gone on this long I doubt I'll get anywhere.
post #310 of 8459
The Judge Jackson hearing is set for today. I will be travelling today, is anyone planning on going? I'll look forward to hearing the results later.

GO LCG !!!

Update:

I just called the court clerk and they do not have anything set for today. JJ is actually in a Jury trial today. So, I'm assuming JJ's decision will be a written one and not an open to the public hearing. Wabisabi, you got any inside info on this?
post #311 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by santellavision View Post

So, I'm assuming JJ's decision will be a written one and not an open to the public hearing.

Guess this makes sense. The last two were conducted this way.
post #312 of 8459
Well, is the consensus that JJ will drop the injunction and clear the way for construction to start??? Any bets?

Personally I am not sure just what he will do. The logical thing, as I see it, would be to drop all objections and simply clear the way for the LCG to start work. But, as we all know, judges do not always do what seems apparent to the rest of us.
post #313 of 8459
How and when do they release written decisions? I could not find anything on the Jeffco website or the 1st District court site.
post #314 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMartinko View Post

The logical thing, as I see it, would be to drop all objections and simply clear the way for the LCG to start work.

I agree and here is why. In May 2006 JJ remanded the issue back to the BCC for further consideration and to proceed with due speed (didn't happen). Earlier this week they voted 2 to 1 to schedule a hearing for March 12th. The no vote was Congrove.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanyonCourier View Post

While Commissioner Kevin McCasky called that plan an excellent compromise, Congrove opposed the action, saying he wanted more time to make sure the original plan does everything we would like it to do.

What has this guy been doing for the last 8 months. Give me a break.
If I was the judge I would just flat tell them you failed to get your act together therefore injunction dropped.
There is no reason what so ever why LCG should stick to their original proposal.
Let the four towers stand until they rust away. In fact maybe the mountain needs a few more towers. Now let em beg who cares.
post #315 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by santellavision View Post

The Judge Jackson hearing is set for today. I will be travelling today, is anyone planning on going? I'll look forward to hearing the results later.

GO LCG !!!

Update:

I just called the court clerk and they do not have anything set for today. JJ is actually in a Jury trial today. So, I'm assuming JJ's decision will be a written one and not an open to the public hearing. Wabisabi, you got any inside info on this?

There is no hearing today. Today is just the day that Jeffco must file their response to LCG's petition to drop the case. Then, LCG will have some time to file a response to Jeffco's response. After that, then JJ can hold a hearing, or issue a decision.

-Wabisabi
post #316 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawood View Post

Earlier this week they voted 2 to 1 to schedule a hearing for March 12th. The no vote was Congrove.

The March 12th BCC hearing date was already set. Congrove voted no to the motion to reply to LCG's offer with the language from the LCG rezoning. He did not vote no to have a hearing on the 12th.

Wabisabi
post #317 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by wabisabi View Post

The March 12th BCC hearing date was already set. Congrove voted no to the motion to reply to LCG's offer with the language from the LCG rezoning. He did not vote no to have a hearing on the 12th.

Wabisabi

Ok. Thanks. Misunderstood.
post #318 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawood View Post

See article in the CanyonCourier

I couldn't listen to that rubbish... I had to post a reply.

"I don't mean to give an unwanted civics lession, but sometimes the government has to do whats appropriate for the greater good than what is in the interest of the individual. Frankly, this debate is over. It should have been over as soon as the bill in question was signed by the President. Our Senators and Representatives, whom we elected to speak for us and do the best thing for the common good, could see that the function of givernment, i.e. the FCC, is being impeeded to the point of stagnation. Local government has no call to render the Federal government impotent. State rights are constitutionally protected, but this is not a State issue. This is a matter of Federal concern. Additionally, I just love how the Mayor of Golden is still so misinformed as to actually believe that RF levels will increase. Why can't people understand that after the digital transition, RF levels will be lower than current. If RF is such a major concern, why not go after the FM stations, who are responsible for approximately 95% of RF emissions from Lookout? Jump right on that bandwagon, everyone! TV is evil! "
post #319 of 8459
Gakon,

Could you (if you still are here) do a LOS map to RP and LOM from Erie, CO

I may be moving there soon.

(Cut and paste from another map website

40.03040763006804, -105.0715684890747

Thanks a lot!

# Matt
post #320 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by wabisabi View Post

There is no hearing today. Today is just the day that Jeffco must file their response to LCG's petition to drop the case. Then, LCG will have some time to file a response to Jeffco's response. After that, then JJ can hold a hearing, or issue a decision.

-Wabisabi

For me the interesting thing about this case is that LCG and JeffCo BCC are co-defendants in the action. As such, a defendant cannot reasonably ask that the action against them not be dismissed. That would, in essence, be arguing against their own best interests. City of Golden and (s)CARE (the plaintiffs) have already filed their motions.
post #321 of 8459
OK, I'm confused. From the recent posts, it looks like JeffCo must file a brief to JJ to respond to LCG's request to dismiss the injunction, then LCG files comments with JJ on JeffCo's response, then there might be a hearing or a written opinion issued.

As I previously understood this "issue", Golden/sCARE got their injunction. JJ sent the latest issue back (tower falling) to the BCC for prompt consideration (which didn't happen), then the Midnight Law was enacted, LCG then filed for dismissal of the injunction and Golden/sCARE filed their brief/response.

IMO, a law was passed that negated the injunction or any other action contemplated by any local authority. I don't see, as I've posted before, why anyone has to screw around with this court action any longer. JJ can issue whatever direction/order he wants, and Golden/sCARE can file as many court actions as they want. They will have no effect under the Midnight Law. If I were LCG, all I'd want to do is have the case closed (for nothing more than a "good feeling") and I wouldn't waste any more time with JJ, Golden, or sCARE.

So, unless I'm being too simplistic about this situation, could someone please explain where my thinking may be awry?
post #322 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by milehighmike View Post

.........IMO, a law was passed that negated the injunction or any other action contemplated by any local authority. I don't see, as I've posted before, why anyone has to screw around with this court action any longer. JJ can issue whatever direction/order he wants, and Golden/sCARE can file as many court actions as they want. They will have no effect under the Midnight Law. ...........

I am not sure but I suspect that is exactly what the LCG response likely said, maybe in somewhat more 'legal terms' though.
post #323 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by milehighmike View Post

IMO, a law was passed that negated the injunction or any other action contemplated by any local authority. I don't see, as I've posted before, why anyone has to screw around with this court action any longer. JJ can issue whatever direction/order he wants, and Golden/sCARE can file as many court actions as they want. They will have no effect under the Midnight Law. If I were LCG, all I'd want to do is have the case closed (for nothing more than a "good feeling") and I wouldn't waste any more time with JJ, Golden, or sCARE.

So, unless I'm being too simplistic about this situation, could someone please explain where my thinking may be awry?

The entire thing is largely a degree of legal "cleanup". Here are some key points from LCG's petition:

From the Introduction:
Given the preemptive effect of the Act, this Court no longer has subject matter jurisdiction to consider Plaintiffs' Complaint under Rule 106(a)(4). Moreover, the Act renders this case moot, which strips Plaintiffs of standing to maintain it. The Court, therefore, should dismiss this case and lift the stay entered on March 26, 2004.

From Section III:
To be clear, Lake Cedar files this motion to dismiss to put an end to litigation in which it is a named defendant, and which is no longer relevant to the underlying issue of tower construction. However, based on the terms of the stay order and the preemptive force of the federal Act, the dismissal of this suit is not a condition precedent to Lake Cedar's exercise of its federal rights. Moreover, this Court's stay can not be expanded to reach Lake Cedar's construction activities without running afoul of the jurisdictional and preemption problems identified below, and without violating Lake Cedar's rights under the Act.

From Section V-D:
As explained above, the Court's stay order operates only on the County and does not, and could not, preclude Lake Cedar from exercising its independent federal right to construct the proposed tower. As a matter of judicial administration, however, we note that a dismissal of this case also requires the Court to vacate the stay, regardless of its limited effect.
post #324 of 8459
It's really a thing of beauty, LCG's petition that is, and I encourage anyone interested to read up: http://www.c-a-r-e.org/pdfs/LCG%20Mo...iss%201-06.pdf

IANAL, but I do get cheap thrills reading legal briefs and court decisions (maybe I'm just a glutton for punishment). The LCG brief is a great read.

I find it ironic that sCARE would post such on their website -- maybe they secretly understand the genius behind it!
post #325 of 8459
I still think milehighmike described it in more understandable language......
Quote:


I don't see, as I've posted before, why anyone has to screw around with this court action any longer. JJ can issue whatever direction/order he wants, and Golden/sCARE can file as many court actions as they want. They will have no effect under the Midnight Law.

That makes sense to everyone, and takes a lot less words.
post #326 of 8459
skyburn, thanks for the cite for the LCG brief. It validates my thoughts on this.

The brief states that the construction of the tower (and all future towers, I presume) is under Federal jurisdiction, the FCC. That indicates that JeffCo has no authority to apply its tower set back rules/guidelines/requirements, etc. Taking that a step further, JeffCo may have no authority over this construction whatsoever, including applying local building code requirements, etc. Just my take on the matter.

I wonder what's going to happen to the $750 that lady contributed at the BOCC meeting last week?
post #327 of 8459
Have any of the Denver TV stations done a really in-depth story on the latest in this saga?

Maybe, show some fancy graphics of what the current antenna radiation patterns are, compared to what they will be "as soon as we get this stuff done? And, maybe tell people what the consequenses are if this doesn't get finished in two years and four more days?
post #328 of 8459
Not really. They have done some TV spots with animated graphics showing the before and after. Remember, its only a handful of people who are obstructing the tower and causing this mess. It's starting to get more widespread as 'real' people are getting HDTV's and finding out they can't get OTA DTV.
post #329 of 8459
Interesting but fluffy article on rabbit ears and HDTV:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17080800/site/newsweek/

-Glen
post #330 of 8459
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattn6 View Post

Gakon,

Could you (if you still are here) do a LOS map to RP and LOM from Erie, CO

# Matt

I'm still here. If you move, you would be close to a couple of other folks in that area for whom I've done profiles. I used abbreviations for their screen names, so I'm not sure who they are any more (without looking through a few pages of posts). Anyway, RP isn't so good (Thornton is in the way), LOM is fine (you'd be far enough away from Table Mountain).
LL
LL
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 › Denver, CO - OTA