AVS Forum banner

15981 - 16000 of 16070 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
After rescan lost 8,19,43. I had both stations the night before. Checked antenna, made adjustment nothing. Fired up TIVO, off same antennna, and both stations there. Signal is low on TIVO, very strange. My guess ROKU updated software and now issue, the screen is white now....Did anyone ever see this issue???
k
Sounds like a bug in the Roku software. I'd contact Roku tech support via email, take pics with your smartphone if they don't believe you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
188 Posts
WOIO does have a construction permit to improve their RF10 broadcast by increasing power to 20 kW and removing the southern nulls, but I'm not sure how much of an improvement that would yield in their fringe areas.
I believe WOIO is also moving to the old WUAB tower, which is taller than their current tower. Perhaps that will also improve coverage area.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
I believe WOIO is also moving to the old WUAB tower, which is taller than their current tower. Perhaps that will also improve coverage area.
Correct, though I'm not sure when construction or the move will begin. It was mentioned here that the WUAB tower (originally built by Kaiser Broadcasting/WKBF in 1968) needs to be rebuilt due to its age and a sinking foundation, though nothing about a rebuild has been mentioned in their application, so I'm not sure if that's holding them back. The height of the tower was extended back in the 80's/early 90's to help improve reception, I guess. -The part of the tower where the top guy wires attach to (part of the original candelabra setup) was the original height.

EDIT: When you factor in the tower heights and the average heights above ground level, the WUAB tower would increase the height of WOIO's RF 10 antenna by about 55 feet. Not a drastic increase, but it would definitely help along with the 20 kW of ERP. I wonder how many feet was added to the tower back in the 80's/90's? That seemed like an attempt to match height/coverage of other broadcasters, particularly with the relaunch of 61 and their newly built tower.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
Sounds like a bug in the Roku software. I'd contact Roku tech support via email, take pics with your smartphone if they don't believe you.
I reached out to ROKU, silence.
Did a little more research and this has been ongoing problems since software 9.4.0 last year. Checked for updates and says update, but not true. I tried the factory reset nothing changed.
Heres' link for anyone else, who may have this problem.

k
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
Twist on 3.5 is about as exciting as HSN.
So far I'm not impressed. Just more cable network-produced reruns from 10+ years ago.

E.W. Scripps has two reality networks coming this July, one aimed towards women and another aimed towards men. Seeing that stations in just about every market are pretty much filled to capacity with existing diginets (the repack made it worse), I'm not sure why Scripps just didn't combine these two new networks into one. After all, I'm sure they will both be like Laff... Repetitive airings of the same 5 or so shows. What's also worse is that since some of these diginets are O&O by broadcasters that have a large presence across the country, they can kick an existing 3rd party network off of a station to make room for their own networks. I though that perhaps Twist would replace COZI on 3.3, but apparently WKYC had no issues with activating a .5 sub, though if they had two other TEGNA networks on .5 & .6 and didn't want to activate another for Twist, then perhaps replacing COZI would have happened. As major broadcasters continue to hop on the diginet bandwagon and launch more of their own networks, I can see this becoming a concerning issue, likely sending those 3rd party networks over to stations that have poor/out of core population coverage or eventually leaving that market until someone is willing to pick them up. (Example: This TV). As for those future Scripps networks, I read somewhere that they will eventually replace QVC/HSN on the formally owned ION stations. And IMO, HSN on WEWS is likely a placeholder for Bounce for when their contract ends with WUAB.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
I don't have a lot of interest in Twist, but it prompts a semi-related question: How often does Locast do a rescan of locals?
I don't know exactly how that works, but as of now, Locast does not have 3.5 on its list. It can be as simple as re-scanning or re-configuring something or installing additional equipment in order to add that channel to the list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,090 Posts
WIVX-LD 13 is once again transmitting no signal. This happens way too often. I wonder if they're retransmitting WIVM-LD 34, and another station is interfering.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
231 Posts
WIVX-LD 13 is once again transmitting no signal. This happens way too often. I wonder if they're retransmitting WIVM-LD 34, and another station is interfering.
Sounds like the encoder has stopped working. I have a local station (HC2) that the signal can be almost 100% and no decode because the encoder has gone offline, thus there is no transport stream data with the broadcast signal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
WIVX-LD 13 is once again transmitting no signal. This happens way too often. I wonder if they're retransmitting WIVM-LD 34, and another station is interfering.
That probably wouldn't surprise me, seeing that WIVM is practically a rim shot for the WIVX transmitter. Didn't you say that the WOIO repeater is setup in the same manner? I wonder how that will work out when WOHZ-CD starts repeating WOIO/WUAB? They're going have to use a microwave link or something as both RF 10 & 18 will pretty much be impossible to receive at their new transmitter location.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,090 Posts
That probably wouldn't surprise me, seeing that WIVM is practically a rim shot for the WIVX transmitter. Didn't you say that the WOIO repeater is setup in the same manner? I wonder how that will work out when WOHZ-CD starts repeating WOIO/WUAB? They're going have to use a microwave link or something as both RF 10 & 18 will pretty much be impossible to receive at their new transmitter location.
I’d bet WIVX is receiving WIVM and retransmitting it. But the slightest bit of tropo would wipe out WIVM. Now that stations are packed like sardines, I would think that the WPXI repeater in New Castle is interfering. It’s on the same channel as WIVM. It’s rare for the WOIO/WUAB Akron repeater to be wiped out. WOIO 10 is very resilient here and has only been wiped out once that I recall. Actually, there’s no need for WOIO/WUAB to have a repeater in Akron... maybe Canton, but people use inferior antennas anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,108 Posts
Andrew, would you be so kind to buy me a proper outdoor antenna and pay someone to install it on a building I do not have the authority to put something on the roof?

For that matter, can you hire a tree company?

:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
I’d bet WIVX is receiving WIVM and retransmitting it. But the slightest bit of tropo would wipe out WIVM. Now that stations are packed like sardines, I would think that the WPXI repeater in New Castle is interfering. It’s on the same channel as WIVM. It’s rare for the WOIO/WUAB Akron repeater to be wiped out. WOIO 10 is very resilient here and has only been wiped out once that I recall. Actually, there’s no need for WOIO/WUAB to have a repeater in Akron... maybe Canton, but people use inferior antennas anymore.
And I bet that most of WOIO's RF 10 issues in and around Akron will be resolved once they move over to the WUAB tower with their new pattern and higher output. If the harmonics from WONE FM are still an issue, perhaps they can continue to keep the repeater, but drastically decrease its power so that areas close to the WONE transmitter that are prone to the harmonics will still be covered. The future WOHZ-CD repeater is to help restore coverage that was lost after the repack due to significant overlap of W18ES-D in Mansfield.

As for indoor antennas, I recently bought one of those flat antennas for testing purposes. It does a decent job picking up WOIO's RF 10, but it's probably because I have a good LOS of the Parma transmitters. I'm guessing that the long cheap RG-59 coax that's hard wired to the antenna doubles as a VHF antenna since there's very little shielding in it. If I was able to attach a better cable to it, perhaps the VHF stations would be more problematic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,494 Posts
And I bet that most of WOIO's RF 10 issues in and around Akron will be resolved once they move over to the WUAB tower with their new pattern and higher output.
I admire your optimism. My rule of thumb has been and remains, "no matter how bad you think VHF is, it's actually worse." I have very, very few counter-examples.

- Trip
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,090 Posts
I admire your optimism. My rule of thumb has been and remains, "no matter how bad you think VHF is, it's actually worse." I have very, very few counter-examples.

- Trip
I am more optimistic about VHF as well. WJW and WOIO/WUAB 10 are among the strongest Cleveland signals here, outperforming the Cleveland UHFs. But I realize not everyone's situation is the same. I know interference on VHF varies a lot by location. I still think it wouldn't hurt to give VHFs more power! WJW was 325 kW if I recall on analog, and now it's only 11 kW?? UHFs are allowed a maximum of 1000 kW ERP, which is one fifth of the maximum allowed under analog. So why wouldn't VHFs also be allowed the same one fifth... 65 kW?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,494 Posts
WJW was 325 kW if I recall on analog, and now it's only 11 kW?? UHFs are allowed a maximum of 1000 kW ERP, which is one fifth of the maximum allowed under analog. So why wouldn't VHFs also be allowed the same one fifth... 65 kW?
There's nuance to this that gets lost on a lot of people because a lot of the details are so obscured by the passage of time. UHF stations are allowed 1000 kW, yes, but that power level was designed in an attempt to allow for UHF digital facilities to match VHF analogs, which had much larger coverage than UHF analogs.

Originally, the rules only allowed UHF analog stations to boost power up to 200 kW on digital, as that was considered to be roughly equivalent to analog UHF in most cases. So rather than 20%, the comparison is actually 4%. Many UHF analog stations were actually assigned digital power levels below 200 kW, with a floor of 50 kW used to allow stations to expand if they so chose. To that point, WEWS needed at least 1000 kW on 15 to match its 93.3 kW analog channel 5 signal, but WVIZ needed only 66.9 kW on channel 26 to match its 2140 kW analog on channel 25. (Source: FCC Order 98-315 - DTV Channel Allotments - Ohio )

When viewed through that lens, 4% of 236 kW (which I found to be WJW's analog power) is 9.44 kW. That's actually less than the 11 kW they use today.

If you're wondering, the rule was eventually changed when the FCC was convinced that there was no reason to artificially restrain the power of stations that were UHF on analog rather than VHF, but that just implies that the extra power for those stations led to an expansion of coverage, rather than a match to the UHF stations' existing analog coverage.

- Trip

EDIT: Decided to check WJW's analog power and found it was 236 kW. Adjusted that paragraph accordingly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nsa1062

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
I admire your optimism. My rule of thumb has been and remains, "no matter how bad you think VHF is, it's actually worse." I have very, very few counter-examples.

- Trip
Yeah, that's why I said most. If electrical interference isn't the problem, it's interference from other broadcasters. I personally never had much of an issue with WOIO, even when it was beaming out a whopping 3.5 kW of power. But then again, I've been using a proper UHF/VHF outdoor antenna, which I understand isn't an option for everyone. Very rarely have I experienced a degraded signal from co-channel interference, which is a problem for many VHF stations, no matter how close you are to the tower.

Even though it's now on the low VHF band, it appears that WGGN has been reaching distant areas very well with a proper antenna, and I've been able to catch it a few times myself with a little bit of tropo. They probably have a good transmitter that produces a good SNR. I'm sure when WOIO moves, they will be using a newer solid state transmitter, which will likely boost my SNR of them from 31 dB up to 35-36 dB. Low power VHF stations are especially the ones that are problematic, and WCDN-LD which is about 18 miles away from me, is either a semi-decode or non-existent, even though it reaches me somewhat well. There are even a lot of viewers in Detroit that have issues with WHNE-LD after they were repacked to RF 3, even in suburban areas with a proper lo VHF outdoor antenna. WOIO's RF 10 looks encouraging though, and we'll just have to wait for viewer reports once they sign-on with their improved broadcast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
Originally, the rules only allowed UHF analog stations to boost power up to 200 kW on digital, as that was considered to be roughly equivalent to analog UHF in most cases. So rather than 20%, the comparison is actually 4%. Many UHF analog stations were actually assigned digital power levels below 200 kW, with a floor of 50 kW used to allow stations to expand if they so chose. To that point, WEWS needed at least 1000 kW on 15 to match its 93.3 kW analog channel 5 signal, but WVIZ needed only 66.9 kW on channel 26 to match its 2140 kW analog on channel 25. (Source: FCC Order 98-315 - DTV Channel Allotments - Ohio )
I always thought WEWS was 1000 kW because they were on a much shorter tower. I'd thought that their ERP would be lower if their tower was about as high as everyone else.

I know that power outputs changed for many stations after they repacked to their new frequencies, I was told that the output on that new frequency made it essentially equivalent to the old frequency.
 
15981 - 16000 of 16070 Posts
Top