# NT/OT is the DTV conversion a BUST for you?



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

OK this is part question part rant, but has the DTV conversion is a BUST for you? 

Let me explain, we dont have cable, or satalite, I dont want to pay up to $150 a month in my area for cable so we get over the air TV like alot of folks do. Now we DO have a big screen, hooked up to a classic 2-wire TV antenna on the roof, when TV channels started broadcasting in DTV I rescanned the channels like they told us to and WOW, where did all these extra chanels come from? Picture great, sounds is still a little iffy between channels, (some loud some too soft) over all pretty good despite the older antenna, so whats my rant about?.....the OTHER 3 TVs in the house that CANNOT be hooked up to the outdoor antenna. It has a 2-wire leed with a coax converter going into the DVD/TV setup, and as such cannot just simply add coax splitters, even if I could I dont want to run coax cables all over the outside (or inside) of the house!

OK so now for 50 years the old rabbit ears did a fine job of pulling in reception on TVs around the nation, particularly people who couldnt mount rooftop atennas. So for months now we were told DTV was coming and that ALL WE NEEDED TO DO was buy a converter box, so back before the last "end of analog" day I bought my 1st converter box, hooked it up like they said, and got nothing but scrabbled eggs on my screen, so I go the BestBuy and ask "what the hey", and the technogeek there explains I need to replace my antenna, and that I might need not just a DTV compatable antenna, but maybe a POWERED antenna??? and that even THAT may not work and that I may need to add yet another roof top antenna!!!! Apparently DTV signals are very very sensitive to "line of sight" issues and those little things like walls, roof, furniture, can BLOCK the signals(this is an improvement?)...so unless you have a rooftop antenna, you may get nothing. So now maybe a powered antenna(?) may work better, but I've already got pluggd into the duplex outlet in the wall 1) TV 2) DVD 3)convertor and now I have to add 4) antenna???? 4 plugs 2 outlets? (again this is an improvement?)

Now let me explain this, I am less than 10 miles from the broadcasting center of southern california, Mt Wilson, I can literally step out my door, look up and SEE the antennas!!! IF I CANNOT GET A GOOD INDOOR SIGNAL WHO THE **** CAN???? 

So now here I am, I've diligently added converter boxes to my other TV, even bought another flatscreen, but despite all the promises, I still cannot get good reception, have lost channels and it appears that unless I add yet another rooftop antenna, they are going to be big paperweights. and I'm not the only one, up to and now after the BIG DAY I've spoken to lots of people who still cannot get many stations, this is a rather ludicrus situation.

I am convinced this is all a conspiracy to A) suppliment TV producers by inticing us to buy new (not cheap) flatscreens, and B) to force alot of folks onto cable, which in most areas is a monoploy with no competition, Yeah theres satallite, but for alot of folks in newer developments thats a no go as their HOAs will not even allow them to have rooftop antennas! One of my co-workers says he has to have cable as the HOA in his tract has this policy so he's chucking out $100 a month.

DTV concept? GREAT

DTV implementation? FAIL

So I want to hear from you other non-cable non-satallite guys, how has the conversion been in your area? any tips, suggestions, rants, raves?


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

Vic,

I am right up against the Verdugo Mountains in Burbank. 14 miles from Mt. Wilson. When I bought the house in 1974, I had to immediately get cable to have ANY reception at all. I figured I needed an antenna about 600 feet tall! If I lived about two blocks further SW, I wouldn't need cable. Luck of the draw so I spend 150 bucks plus a month for cable HBO, Cinemax and high-speed internet. It's all part of living.


----------



## Schlosser (Jan 2, 2008)

Vic, I'm probably 10 miles from the broadcasting antennas. Can't see them, though, hilly country. One TV has no HI-DEF tuner, the other does. 

The 5 local stations didn't start broadcasting the HD signals at the same time nor did they stop broadcasting the old signals at the same time. As far as I have been able to tell, those converter boxes will not tune to the lo def stations. If you started using the box before any stations had switched over, you wouldn't pick up anything. 

My HD TV with the HD tuner can pick up the new signal without anything but a dangling wire; no antenna in the attic, nothing on the roof. One wall with a glass door between the set and the great beyond. Your converter box should be able to do that, too, if you're near the broadcast antenna. But a weak station may not get picked up without a good receiving antenna, a good one meaning not corroded, missing parts, etc. I have read that people have been conned into buying a HIGH DEFINITION antenna; ain't no such thing. Antennas are frequency sensitive, not data sensitive! 

If an antenna will pick up UHF channels, those higher than the 2-13 VHF channels, it should pick up the HD channels, none of which are higher than old channel 50. 

On a different plane, I think it's a rip off. The definition is not on an order of 10 times better. You have break-throughs when the improvement is on the order of 10. I doubt seriously that this is even 5 times more definition. The horizontal lines are just barely doubled!! 
The new is 1080; old NTSC was 525 lines with only about 505 used as picture, the rest were spent getting the beam from the bottom right corner up to the top right corner. You have a wider picture by one third; it's now 16 units wide, 9 high, compared to the old 12 wide by 9 high (4x3 like old movies). For all the hasseling, it should end have ended up at least 10 times as good. 

I got trained on TV back in 1950, but got into computers, rather than TV. 

Art


----------



## Schlosser (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Schlosser on 06/17/2009 10:29 AM
Vic, I'm probably 10 miles from the broadcasting antennas. Can't see them, though, hilly country. One TV has no HI-DEF tuner, the other does. 

The 5 local stations didn't start broadcasting the HD signals at the same time nor did they stop broadcasting the old signals at the same time. As far as I have been able to tell, those converter boxes will not tune to the lo def stations. If you started using the box before any stations had switched over, you wouldn't pick up anything. 

My HD TV with the HD tuner can pick up the new signal without anything but a dangling wire; no antenna in the attic, nothing on the roof. One wall with a glass door between the set and the great beyond. Your converter box should be able to do that, too, if you're near the broadcast antenna. But a weak station may not get picked up without a good receiving antenna, a good one meaning not corroded, missing parts, etc. I have read that people have been conned into buying a HIGH DEFINITION antenna; ain't no such thing. Antennas are frequency sensitive, not data sensitive! 

If an antenna will pick up UHF channels, those higher than the 2-13 VHF channels, it should pick up the HD channels, none of which are higher than old channel 50. 

On a different plane, I think it's a rip off. The definition is not on an order of 10 times better. You have break-throughs when the improvement is on the order of 10. I doubt seriously that this is even 5 times more definition. The horizontal lines are just barely doubled!! 
The new is 1080; old NTSC was 525 lines with only about 505 used as picture, the rest were spent getting the beam from the bottom right corner up to the top left corner. You have a wider picture by one third; it's now 16 units wide, 9 high, compared to the old 12 wide by 9 high (4x3 like old movies). For all the hasseling, it should end have ended up at least 10 times as good. 

I got trained on TV back in 1950, but got into computers, rather than TV. 

Art


----------



## Robbie Hanson (Jan 4, 2008)

20 miles from the antennae, we're on and ridge and so are they. 

Reception varies from fantastic to glitchy as heck for no reason--rain, shine, cloudy, clear. It's driving me insane. Thankfully i really don't care much about television--I have trains to run  

That's with either a Panasonic 20" with converter or the new 32" Panasonic LCD.


----------



## JEFF RUNGE (Jan 2, 2008)

Remember the federal gov. has your best interest in mind when they make these changes ???? NOT


----------



## jguettler (Apr 17, 2009)

I live in the flight corridor for the airport about 2-3 miles from the runway. Every time a plane comes into land my DTV reception is disrupted and I lose otherwise good reception. A good example of multi-path reception fouling up the signal.

ARRRGGHH!


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

If you're having issues with reception, call your local TV stations. Their engineering departments are still tweaking the signals and looking for dead spots that need to be addressed. They also have hotline numbers to refer you to if you've got other questions,such as what to do if one TV in your house has a great signal while the other does not. The thing to remember is that the transmitters are mostly transmitting in different frequency ranges, so the reception patterns can be vastly different. Areas that used to have rock solid reception may now sit in a "shadow," while other areas that could never receive the signals in the past now have the clearest of pictures. You're not going to hear those folks complaining about the switchover. (At least, we haven't at our station.) 

I don't know that I've ever heard "10 times better" picture, unless it was just metaphorically. You've got a bit over 4 times the number of pixels, combined with the fact that the pixels have much less black space between them than on an old CRT display, which creates a clearer, sharper picture. The difference is decidedly night and day, but it's not 10 times by any stretch of the imagination, nor has it to my knoweldge ever been purported as such--at least not by the industry. Your local big-box retailer wants to sell TVs, and might play fast and loose with the metaphors. 

Later, 

K


----------



## ralphbrades (Jan 3, 2008)

Vic, 

To be honest with you -the last analogue TV signal that I must have seen would be about 1998. The succession of cable companies that my TVs have been plugged into have all worked well for me. 625 line TV, 16:9, and now 1080 line HD -no problems here.... 

regards 

ralph


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

I am convinced this is all a conspiracy 


Well, it's a plan that wasn't designed to help you and me, except peripherally. The Gov got to sell those airwaves for $20B, the pols got lots of campaign contributions from 4G phone companies who wanted the spectrum, and we got a horror-show. 

Vic, 

I can't do more than commiserate about your antenna problems, but let me tell you about my cable service... 

Firstly, I'm on 'basic cable' in a condo where the service is free (part of the condo fee.) To get the official Hi-Def (HD) channels I'm supposed to order Digital Cable service, which means $29.99/mo for the first 12 mo ($56+/mo) plus $10/mo per TV for a set-top box. 

However, there's another closely guarded secret that you have to ferret out. The cable companies are carrying digital versions of the 'basic' channels on the basic cable. No channel guide, no info on their web site, but they are there. I know this because one of my sets has a digital tuner and it found all sorts of digital channels. Many are in HD already, and several are in addition to the analogue channels. 

The gotcha (of course) is that an older HD TV without a digital tuner can't pick up those channels - and you can't buy an ATSC/QAM tuner with an HDMI output. [Yes, I know a 'converter box' is an ATSC tuner, but it outputs NTSC and doesn't know QAM, which the cable uses.] 

I thought - I wonder if I can persuade my new 'entertainment' laptop to work, with a plug-in tuner, feeding out the picture on its HDMI port. Yes, but only at the resolution of the laptop screen - not at the TVs resolution. Another gotcha. 

Whatever I do next is going to cost me lotsa $$. What a pain in the ***.


----------



## Mik (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By JEFF RUNGE on 06/17/2009 10:57 AM
Remember the federal gov. has your best interest in mind when they make these changes ???? NOT

They had their soft money supplying lobbyists' wallets in mind 

We used to get 5 channels, now we sorta get 3 -- the pictures pixellate about every 15 seconds 


Can't get dish because the building owners don't want them cluttering up their roof, and Comcast? When they promise $99/month for everything, then bill you for 3 months at $125/mo, and try to tell you that's what you ordered, they get told to stuff their service....


----------



## altterrain (Jan 2, 2008)

Yes, it has been hit and miss. Most TVs are on DirecTV but a couple are off the grid. I got everything set up and working well for those sets and then *BOOM!*. Last Friday when the final switch was thrown, the local DC CBS and ABC (ch.9 and 7) affiliates switched over from the strong UHF digital signal to a weak VHF digital signal. A true case of WTF?. Thousands of angry folks out there with the last minute switch! Since then the ABC station has boosted its signal to an okay level but the CBS has done nothing and only begrudgingly admitted there is even an issue. I still can't pick them up. I am thinking about adding a new UHF/VHF antenna but not sure about that. What were they thinking of 2 years of transmitting on UHF then switching to this pitiful VHF signal at the last minute. I have heard of similar stories like this in markets like Chicago. 

-Brian


----------



## altterrain (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By jguettler on 06/17/2009 11:00 AM
I live in the flight corridor for the airport about 2-3 miles from the runway. Every time a plane comes into land my DTV reception is disrupted and I lose otherwise good reception. A go1od example of multi-path reception fouling up the signal.

ARRRGGHH! 






Oh yeah, that too! Though I'm 15 miles from BWI things get very busy over head during primetime!


-Brian


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Yes sir another govt screw up. For months all I heard was you need to by this converter box if your going to use an out side ant. So I have a camper no satellite tv just plan old ant and worked fine got just enough channels while camping to keep the mrs happy. So I purchase two black magic boxes for $20 buck each after using coupon. Now I figure I'm good to go. Ya right. One, I find out if your tv is dvd ready no box needed. Oh great. Two I hook up the black box to analog tv. Ha nothing. come to find out these signals are higher up in the air and any obstuctions such as trees buildings cut reception. Bottom line no Tv use for camper mrs going to be P O ed and I spent $40 for two black boxes that I did not need. Thanks Mr Govt for nothing. Later RJD


----------



## Jerry Barnes (Jan 2, 2008)

I am on Direct tv Satl., but we have a antenna also, we've always had to use an amplified splitter with it, still get the channels good on the tv's. We got the amplifier at Radio Shack years ago, without it we get nothing. Might try that.


----------



## toddalin (Jan 4, 2008)

Sorry I can't empathize with you as we are in the shadow of a hill and have _never been able to get any_ signal over the airwaves. We've always had to use cable and satalite so the conversion to digital has no impact on us.


----------



## Schlosser (Jan 2, 2008)

The 10 times factor I mentioned before is just a measuring stick that I use to see if something is indeed improved or is it just hoopla. I have never seen it in advertisements.

When the first personal computers came along the “floppy”, slightly larger than 5 inches, was the standard. Then it became half that size and held a heck of a lot more. Now even they are obsolete (my laptop has no place to insert a floppy), and instead of a floppy, we have a little thing that goes into a USB port with 4 GB being rather standard. All this in about 25 years.

The NTSC type of TV started out in the 40's; the war stalled it for awhile, and CBS threatened it with their 405 line color scheme. But the 525 line standard held up for over 60 years. Now if you're going to upgrade a standard that lasted that long, shouldn't it be REALLY better than “Boy that's a lot brighter!” I would have liked to have seen something that changed as much as the floppy did. The French even had 1000 line TV back in the 70's!

LCD and plasma screens are much brighter than the CRT (cathode ray tube) used in older sets. My projection LCD is brighter than our flat panel LCD, and both provide a much better and brighter picture when viewing non HD programs than our old CRT TV.

VHS (Channels 2-13) was always the channel of choice, if you had it. But you sure don't have a choice anymore. UHF has been mandated. And although I could be satisfied with a sub-standard snowy picture, a frozen pixilated HD picture is not satisfactory at all! Analogue Snow has been traded for Frozen Pixels.

Fortunately, I have good reception at the moment, but I sure feel sorry for people in fringe areas.

Art


----------



## altterrain (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Schlosser on 06/17/2009 3:43 PM
... UHF has been mandated. 
Art 





I wish that was the case. As stated above, we had 2 stations do a last minute switch from strong digital UHF signals to weak VHF ones. We are not sure why this was done but it sucks.

Don't forget about those high capacity 8 inch floppies







.




-Brian


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

My X says she likes the digital tv. She gets more stations than she used to and they're so clear. Stations she used to get very snowy are sharp and clear. My motel had Direct TV, so I haven't noticed.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

I HATE BROADCAST DIGITAL TV! PERIOD!










I started with a converter box and had to get a larger outdoor type antenna to get any "digital" signal at all. Put the antenna in the attic with RG-58 coax down the stairwell to the TV. (The coax was already in the house for cable TV that the previous owners had.)

Utterly poor reception anyway, even though the converter box was indicating plenty of signal... random picture scrambling, pixelation, drop out, missing syllables in spoken dialog. Just plain horrible! There were times in newscasts that I could not tell whether some politician was for or against some issue... did they say "not" or was there just a pause between "I am" and "for" some issue?

The converter box put out an analog signal that was slightly off frequency in the Vertical refresh rate and that tried to drive my TV at that frequency and eventually BROKE the TV (extreme "fold over" at the top of the screen that just got progressively worse). 

I had to buy a new TV... of course it is Digital ready. It is a 16:9 screen that usually shows a picture that may be the same ratio but seldom fills the actual screen, resulting in a very small visible image. No selections in the setup will change it. 

No change in the picture or sound problems noted with the converter box and the old TV.

I was told I would need an RF amplifier on the antenna. Another $60.00 for a 30dB amp (variable amplification with a switchable FM trap) NO IMPROVEMENT in the picture or sound problems.

I have tried it with and without the FM trap switched in and at the extremes and in the middle of the amplification range... NO CHANGE.

I was told that RG-58 is no good for this, I need RG-6... another $50.00 for Quad Shielded RG-6 coax with gold plated connectors... ABSOLUTELY NO IMPROVEMENT in the picture or sound problems.

I have noticed that the picture and sound problems are worse when it is windy. Since MY antenna is in the attic and shielded from the wind I must assume it is the transmitting antenna that is shaking in the wind and causing the reception problems on my end.

The idiots that promoted this farce had better never go down a dark alley with me!

RANT RANT RANT... but it does me no good. I'd better go stick my head in the oven to cool off!


----------



## Spule 4 (Jan 2, 2008)

Should not need to replace the antenna, but check your connections. 

But I fear the timing of this will be ill for the broadcast TV industry as a whole. From several local to national comments, the speculation is that local Tv will start falling with the newspapers. Viewership is down and a loss of advertising, both national and local, much of it automotive..... 

We watch the news, occasionally Letterman/Ferguson, SNL, and watched some Law and Order, but NBC will be axing it for the unfunny former Citroen mechanic. So maybe a total of 9 or so hours a week....


----------



## Tom Leaton (Apr 26, 2008)

We bought an HDTV television, hoping for great things. 
Our expert hooked it up to an "HD" TV antenna. It was an electrically powered device, made by P******s, with a gray flat panel flanked by two telescoping antennas. 
It pulled in one station. You could get another station if you picked it up and rotated it, but you would lose the signal you had. I was be walking around the room, seeking a digital signal as if I had a dowsing rod and was trying to divine the location of an underground well. 
Thanks a lot, senators.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Tom: got the same ant and same results. One Mex channel yikes all I got. Yep Uncle sam has put it to us again. Later RJD


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

Yes sir, I'm quite certain that this new digital communication system is going to prove of great benefit in improved communications with the citizenry, during the coming natural disasters. For some reason I don't remember all these problems with the old system. Yes you could have a really lousy picture, but usually not so bad that you couldn't understand it and the sound most always made it through.

Direct from our friendly government caretakers at DTV.gov:
_"Your DTV reception can be affected by nearby moving vehicles, such as cars, trucks, trains and airplanes. In some instances, shadowing or reflections from these vehicles may cause your digital picture to temporarily break-up or even disappear completely. If this occurs, you should try moving or reorienting your antenna to find a position that provides the most reliable reception. If you are using an indoor antenna, switching to an outdoor antenna system which may include a directional antenna or rotor could improve reception. In severe cases it may not be possible to completely eliminate the effect of nearby traffic. If reception remains unsatisfactory due to these disruptions, viewers may wish to consider alternatives such as cable or satellite service. _ 

_Your DTV reception can also be affected by severe weather conditions such as storms and high winds. These reception issues can result from fluctuations in the broadcast signal that can be caused, for example, by moving leaves and branches on trees. You can minimize the effects of high winds or storms by re-orienting your antenna to obtain the strongest available signal. If this does not work, a better indoor antenna or an outdoor antenna may help. In addition, make sure that outdoor antenna mounts are secure to minimize any movement caused by the wind. If you lose reception of a particular channel during severe weather conditions try tuning to other channels that remain available for weather advisory information or alerts. In cases where no TV stations can be received, you should tune to a local AM or FM station or any other available media for weather alerts."_


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Is ABC still broadcasting? Bonus I'm getting 6 spanish stations! Don't speak Spanish tho.....


----------



## Chucks_Trains (Jan 2, 2008)

I quit watching over the air analog signals way back in 1982? when HBO cranked up on a C-Band 10' satellite dish. Used to have lots of fun with those big dishes tuning and improving them, free movies, buying new black market descramblers. I'm still a Driectv satellite user. From what I gather over the air stations have been broadcasting in HD for a couple of years now and the switch was announced what, 4 years ago?? And folks are waiting untl now to get hoked up??


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

...From what I gather over the air stations have been broadcasting in HD for a couple of years now and the switch was announced what, 4 years ago??...

Depends on the station. We've been broadcasting HD for a few years, but not on our regular transmitter. (It--literally--took an act of Congress to get our DTV tower built.) Our HD reception was not very good because the signal was fairly weak on the temporary antenna. So, yes, there's been over-the-air HD for quite a few years, but you really didn't know if you got it until the transmitters went full strength over the past few months. 

Later, 

K


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

You might find some of this interesting.

*http://www.antennasdirect.com/blog/*


----------



## ThinkerT (Jan 2, 2008)

Hmmm... 

Still Analog here in my corner of the now thawed out north...for possibly quite a while longer. The actual TV stations are in Anchorage - something on the order of 80-90 miles from here. *Those* went digital last week. (Was supposed to happen earlier, but got an extension). However, the signals are relayed through a series of 'translators' - big tower thingies in the smaller towns. The stations were too cheap to change the equipment in those translators over to digital, so as I understand it: digital signal comes in analog signal comes out. If/when they ever do change it over...I guess I could try hooking up the box thingie...or maybe looking into the el-cheapo cable package...maybe one with internet...


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Vic,

I've had Dish for the last dozen years, because our cable company had no concept of the term 'customer satisfaction'.

Last month, I cut my mid-level package back to basic.

All the History, Dicovery, Science channels were swapping and re-running the same old, old garbage. The movie channels, ditto, on a quarterly basis.

I've learned it does no good to complain about anything. Just keeping one's money in one's pocket is the best course, but it's not going to change much of anything. I watch the news/weather once or twice a day. My 90 yr-old mother in law (a real sweetie) watches the news and all the 'Gospel Hour' stuff, which you get with the basic package. Everyone's just as happy and I'm saving ~ $25?/mo, not counting the electricity to run the tv.

Digital?

Yeah, when my present set shoots craps, I'll go digital, because that's all that is out there now. Or, I might just elect to do w/o. I remember when we got our first TV, before that, we listened to the radio.

I have a computer. I can have nearly everything I want for the price of DSL. I'm thinking of getting the setup where one can play DVD movies on one's computer, and a larger monitor.

In the meantime, I just do without.

And FWIW, you have my sympathies.

Les


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Well I LOVE that there is no old analog signals floating around me anymore!! The old crappy 8" tv my wife parked on top of the fridge no longer gets a signal so I get to remove that POS and put it out at the yardsale next summer!!!!!! 

We switched from cable to satellite about 15 months ago and haven't looked back. I find the satellite signal is much better than the old crappy comcast and we haven't had nearly as many problems recording shows as we did with Comcast. Sure we pay for it, but for the amount of TV we watch, it is 100% worth it. 

The other thing is that this switch has been coming a long time. My neighbors went out and bought a new antenna last summer and have been getting digital channels for free since then. Vic- I'll see what they do about their 'other' tv's.


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By Les on 06/18/2009 8:46 AM
Vic,

I've had Dish for the last dozen years, because our cable company had no concept of the term 'customer satisfaction'.

Last month, I cut my mid-level package back to basic.

All the History, Dicovery, Science channels were swapping and re-running the same old, old garbage. The movie channels, ditto, on a quarterly basis.

I've learned it does no good to complain about anything. Just keeping one's money in one's pocket is the best course, but it's not going to change much of anything. I watch the news/weather once or twice a day. My 90 yr-old mother in law (a real sweetie) watches the news and all the 'Gospel Hour' stuff, which you get with the basic package. Everyone's just as happy and I'm saving ~ $25?/mo, not counting the electricity to run the tv.

Digital?

Yeah, when my present set shoots craps, I'll go digital, because that's all that is out there now. Or, I might just elect to do w/o. I remember when we got our first TV, before that, we listened to the radio.

I have a computer. I can have nearly everything I want for the price of DSL. I'm thinking of getting the setup where one can play DVD movies on one's computer, and a larger monitor.

In the meantime, I just do without.

And FWIW, you have my sympathies.

Les



That is probably the best we can hope for!


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Semp wrote: "That (sympathy) is probably the best we can hope for!







"

Yep. And we know where 'sympathy' is found in the dictionary.....

I do sympathize with folks who have numbers of good reasons for hanging onto TV. My 90 yr-old M.I.L. uses it for her only contact with the larger world. She's a sports nut, as well as a follower of the Gospel Hour programs. For me, I'd give the whole thing up, it's not worth the price, for the junk offered. But that won't change a thing in the broadcasting world.

I've been carrying on a boycott of the St. Louis Post Dispatch, or Pravda on the Mississippi, as it's sometimes called. After more than 35 years, it's still around, though thinner and with smaller type. I must be winning.









Computers have remade communication, except for 'word of mouth'. That'll never change.


----------



## Great Western (Jan 2, 2008)

I have seen, quite a few times mainly on this Forum, the letters OT/NT as part of a tread title.

What does it mean?









I asked a friend in Wisconsin this morning if he knew what it meant - assuming it be something well known to Americans. He, like me, didn't know and also, like me, could only think of the reference Old Testament?new Testament.


----------



## Totalwrecker (Feb 26, 2009)

Great Western. 

Off Topic/ no topic 

Regarding a Garden Railroad forum; Digital TV is way off topic....


----------



## SteveC (Jan 2, 2008)

OT=Off Topic / NT=Not Train Related


----------



## wchasr (Jan 2, 2008)

Mark,
Regarding all those old Analog TV's if they do not ahve ANY hook ups as most do not then they are landfill fodder and I've got to wonder if the gov't. thought about the costs of that when forcing this change?

Les, 
Word of mouth has also gone Global as I correspond regularly now with a Brother From Down under. My mother has a very dear friend that lives on the other side of the pond now too that she "winters" with.

A necessary change? Not for us. Up until last year all that was run on our TV was Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network and the Weatehr Channel in our bedroom. Now that my mother ahs moved in we get to watch some more TV but I tend to not watch. Like Les I find I've got other things to do.

Chas


----------



## Great Western (Jan 2, 2008)

Many thanks for prompt replies TW and Steve C.

I will be speaking to my chum in Milwaukee this evening as he drives home from work. I will tell him the explanation. He is also a train buff, but HO scale and 1:1's.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well i wished I could convince the better half to go satellite as I had it years go and really liked it. If I had it it would not cost me much for to use the system while camping. Good thing I'm not a TV buff I'll just take my Sirius radio with now and listen to the old time programs while out camping. Wife will just have to do without tv. Maybe with time the new system will improve. for now I'll save some money. Later RJD


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

The "system" cannot "improve" for two reasons:

1) The stations are limited on power output at the transmitter... (most stations were even required to lower their effective radiated power output from the antenna). You may have noticed on some stations that the Weather maps they show have shrunk a county or two in diameter. Their signal just cannot reach as far as it used to, so they don't attempt to tell the weather at what used to be the fringes of their broadcast area. 

The problem around here is that the three largest metropolitian areas WERE all at the "near fringe" of the centralized broadcast antennas the various stations put up... thus ALL of the metropolitian areas are now at the "extreme fringe" of their signals and the majority of the viewers are not getting good reception from any of the stations!

2) Worse yet, the digital system does not include a redundancy encoding. So if you lose some bits from the signal due to a temporary condition you cannot recover them from some other or later part of the signal; the bits are just gone. To implement a redundancy method would require ALL TV receivers to be upgraded to handle the redundant data. Fat chance that happening! 

Maybe the Gubbermint will issue some $40.00 credit cards to some folk to buy a $10.00 converter for $60.00.



I am also upset that my old "RELIABLE" VCR cannot tune to the desired station to record something while I am not at home to tune the Converter box for it. Sure, if I just want to record ONE station one or more times it will work, but I had it set up to record several 1/2- to 1- hour programs on an 4- to 6-hour tape from different stations throughout the week so I could watch them on the weekend at my leisure (fast forwarding through the advertisements and station breaks can make that 5-hour tape viewable in about 3 hours or less!!!!) 




Of course watching the 2 or 3 hour "morning yakaty-yak" shows can be done in less than 10 minutes if you fast forward over all the "what you will see on today's show" garbage they fill the show with... 

"Today we have previews of all the latest electronic gadgets..." 
"Everybody here is really excited by the new electronic gadgets that we have on display here today. I can't hardly wait until we can get to them..."
"Just wait till we show the new electronic gadgets..." 
"Coming up, the new electronic gadgets..." 
'I got a preview of these new electonic gadgets on display here today. Wow are they neat..."
"Later in today's show... the latest in new electonic gadgets..."
"Wow! We really have some really neat new electronic gadgets to show on the next segment"... 
"Later in this segment we will show all the latest in the new electronic gadgets"... 
"Right after this break we will get to the latest electronic gadgets"... 
"The latest electronic gadgets are here, right after this word from our sponsor"... 
"WOW, look-it that hundreds of neat electronic gadgets we have on these tables here in front of us. We will get to them right after this..." 
"Coming up, Billy-bob will explain aaaallll these new electronic gadgets, right after the local stations identify themselves..." 
"Well, here is Billy-Bob to explain all these wonderful new electronic gadgets, so tell us Billy-Bob, uh I can call you Billy-Bob can't I? No?! Your name is 'Robert Bieley'? Oh sorry, I am always getting names mixed up, maybe I'm dyslexic or thingsome... say will any of these wonderful new electronic gadgets help me with my lysdexia?" 

Laughter all around.)

"Tell us about this one"... 

"Uh, well, that one is, uh, well... ya know, that was the dislay stand that, ya know, the new 'j-poke phone' was supposed to be on, but the 'j-poke' uh, ya know, uh, it seems to be, ya know, uh, missing!"... 

"Well, we only have about 10 seconds left, what one do you think is the best value for our dollar?" 

"Unh, well, that, uh... ya know, depends, ya know, on, well, ya know, these are all, well, ya know, kinda on the expensive side, ya know...". 

"Thank you Billy, err... Bob, err... Robert, but we are totally out of time for today. But tune in tomorrow for the latest in new gadgets from the electronics industry when Mary-Beth from the anti-gadget coalition will be here to debunk the myths that electronic gadgets do not cause latent sylable reversal in adults as well as renchild. Maybe daysome we can have Bobby-baby here back to rebutt Beth Mary's coalition... Oh oh, we are out of time for today... have a good day and we will see you all tomor"

Oh wait, that was totally off topic wasn't it... sorry.


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

RJD wrote "... for now I'll save some money."

Yep. Complaints get you nowhere.

But at least you'll be 'nowhere' with a pocketful of money.


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Posted By Semper Vaporo on 06/19/2009 12:42 PM
The "system" cannot "improve" for two reasons:

1) The stations are limited on power output at the transmitter... (most stations were even required to lower their effective radiated power output from the antenna). You may have noticed on some stations that the Weather maps they show have shrunk a county or two in diameter. Their signal just cannot reach as far as it used to, so they don't attempt to tell the weather at what used to be the fringes of their broadcast area. 

The problem around here is that the three largest metropolitian areas WERE all at the "near fringe" of the centralized broadcast antennas the various stations put up... thus ALL of the metropolitian areas are now at the "extreme fringe" of their signals and the majority of the viewers are not getting good reception from any of the stations!

2) Worse yet, the digital system does not include a redundancy encoding. So if you lose some bits from the signal due to a temporary condition you cannot recover them from some other or later part of the signal; the bits are just gone. To implement a redundancy method would require ALL TV receivers to be upgraded to handle the redundant data. Fat chance that happening! 

Maybe the Gubbermint will issue some $40.00 credit cards to some folk to buy a $10.00 converter for $60.00.



I am also upset that my old "RELIABLE" VCR cannot tune to the desired station to record something while I am not at home to tune the Converter box for it. Sure, if I just want to record ONE station one or more times it will work, but I had it set up to record several 1/2- to 1- hour programs on an 4- to 6-hour tape from different stations throughout the week so I could watch them on the weekend at my leisure (fast forwarding through the advertisements and station breaks can make that 5-hour tape viewable in about 3 hours or less!!!!) 




Of course watching the 2 or 3 hour "morning yakaty-yak" shows can be done in less than 10 minutes if you fast forward over all the "what you will see on today's show" garbage they fill the show with... 

"Today we have previews of all the latest electronic gadgets..." 
"Everybody here is really excited by the new electronic gadgets that we have on display here today. I can't hardly wait until we can get to them..."
"Just wait till we show the new electronic gadgets..." 
"Coming up, the new electronic gadgets..." 
'I got a preview of these new electonic gadgets on display here today. Wow are they neat..."
"Later in today's show... the latest in new electonic gadgets..."
"Wow! We really have some really neat new electronic gadgets to show on the next segment"... 
"Later in this segment we will show all the latest in the new electronic gadgets"... 
"Right after this break we will get to the latest electronic gadgets"... 
"The latest electronic gadgets are here, right after this word from our sponsor"... 
"WOW, look-it that hundreds of neat electronic gadgets we have on these tables here in front of us. We will get to them right after this..." 
"Coming up, Billy-bob will explain aaaallll these new electronic gadgets, right after the local stations identify themselves..." 
"Well, here is Billy-Bob to explain all these wonderful new electronic gadgets, so tell us Billy-Bob, uh I can call you Billy-Bob can't I? No?! Your name is 'Robert Bieley'? Oh sorry, I am always getting names mixed up, maybe I'm dyslexic or thingsome... say will any of these wonderful new electronic gadgets help me with my lysdexia?" 

Laughter all around.)

"Tell us about this one"... 

"Uh, well, that one is, uh, well... ya know, that was the dislay stand that, ya know, the new 'j-poke phone' was supposed to be on, but the 'j-poke' uh, ya know, uh, it seems to be, ya know, uh, missing!"... 

"Well, we only have about 10 seconds left, what one do you think is the best value for our dollar?" 

"Unh, well, that, uh... ya know, depends, ya know, on, well, ya know, these are all, well, ya know, kinda on the expensive side, ya know...". 

"Thank you Billy, err... Bob, err... Robert, but we are totally out of time for today. But tune in tomorrow for the latest in new gadgets from the electronics industry when Mary-Beth from the anti-gadget coalition will be here to debunk the myths that electronic gadgets do not cause latent sylable reversal in adults as well as renchild. Maybe daysome we can have Bobby-baby here back to rebutt Beth Mary's coalition... Oh oh, we are out of time for today... have a good day and we will see you all tomor"

Oh wait, that was totally off topic wasn't it... sorry.




















You did that on posepur, didn't you?









Les


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

I don't know how typical we are but we have no TV at all in our house--no analog, no digital, no cable. We get stuff that used to be on TV over the internet--my wife watches stuff on "hulu.com," my son has a collection of teenager offbeat sites he watche sold reruns on, I mostly just surf the web and sometimes watch movies.I suspect more and more people are going this way. It's easy for us because we have fiber optic internet service


For about a year we had digital cable but about three years ago we dumped it--the signal to noise ratio was just WAY to high. It's expensive, and it seems like the more channels they added, the more crap they added. All that idiotic vulgarity, and I'm paying for it? Those nasty "reality" shows? No thanks. And I don't know if it's age or what, but I can't stand the commercials any more--the volume, the constant braying interruptions. 


I'm not claiming any superior virtue--I waste lots of time. But I don't waste it watching TV. if I had to bet on the future of braodcast TV, I'd bet it'll be gone in ten years, maybe less


----------



## George Schreyer (Jan 16, 2009)

DTV is great for most folks, a disaster for others. 

The difference is that the digital signal doesn't degrade at all until the signal is weak or distorted enough and then it just craps. There is a small window of signal strength that will produce "blocks" in the picture and dropouts in the sound. If the signal gets a little weaker or more distorted, nada. 

Analog signals degrade "gracefully." If you are in a marginal coverage area, your analog signal may have had noise, ghosts, sync tearing and other symptoms of a degraded signal. The picture and sound may have been degraded but it was often still watchable. Those "barely watchable" signals become a blue screen in the DTV world. 

My home in Torrance is line of site to Mt. Wilson, a simple outdoor antenna and RF distribution in the house was sufficient for the converter box at the end of the line to still work fine. I have not yet tested my reception at my mountain cabin where I am not line of sight to anywhere but I had "watchable" signals on a few VHF channels. My expectation is that, even with a multi-element VHF only log periodic antenna and a 30 dB gain pre-amp at the antenna and an antenna rotor I will lose my TV reception entirely. This is because the best I could do with all that stuff was a pretty poor picture. The converter box will generate too many bit errors and declare "no signal." We'll see when I get back up there.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Amen Lownote. My feelings also. Don't need it. Later RJD


----------



## Les (Feb 11, 2008)

Low wrote:

" I don't know how typical we are but we have no TV at all in our house--no analog, no digital, no cable."




Well, at present, I'm paying ~$50/mo for Dish, which fades out during T-storms. I just reduced to the basic package and don't miss it at all.

If I could get some more info, I'd chuck the whole works after my M.I.L passes on, get a bigger monitor, and sign up for some company to watch movies on my computer. A sort of 'pay per view' online.

Low wrote: " All that idiotic vulgarity, and I'm paying for it? Those nasty "reality" shows? No thanks. And I don't know if it's age or what, but I can't stand the commercials any more--the volume, the constant braying interruptions."

That's what I think, also. The vulgarity I can do without. I use the 'muter' a whole lot, for the hour or so every day I'm watching.

I think public broadcast will be with us forever, due to political influence from both sides. Half the programming has either a political bias or an unwanted philosophical one that's being pushed--or both.


----------



## East Broad Top (Dec 29, 2007)

...I had to bet on the future of braodcast TV, I'd bet it'll be gone in ten years, 


Sure...*sniff* Render me obsolete. 

Actually, I sort-of agree. I see TV and the internet melding as households become more connected. We're already seeing that to an extent with the melding of cable, internet, and phone technologies. Household networks are getting to the point where any PC can be a TV and vice versa, so it's a natural progression. I'd imagine that in 5 years, you'll be able to watch a TV program in your living room, and when they say "head to our web site," you'll be able to click the link and visit right there, with your DVR recording the program while you surf. 

Later, 

K


----------



## Allan W. Miller (Jan 2, 2008)

I have lived without cable (or satellite) TV for some eight years now. I don't miss not having 250+ channels much at all, aside from just a couple of them, and the money I save each month goes into the train-buying piggy bank. 

I did by a new Samsung flat screen HDTV set in December, along with a fairly good indoor antenna, and receive about 10 local channels--several of which are not worth watching at all (spin-off "new" channels added by local affiliates). The HDTV set, which I leave on all day while I'm at work for the dog to enjoy, did reduce my monthly electric bill--an added benefit--and picture quality is markedly improved. However, the signal is very fragile in bad weather, and I really dislike how it just drops out entirely whenever there is interference of some sort or a signal strength disruption. 

I primarily use my TV for watching DVDs, and have long felt that commercial and cable TV is truly the "vast wasteland" that it has long been reported to be. Some of the most uninspired, mindless, and gawdawful waste of the airwaves I could possibly imagine, and getting worse with each passing year.


----------



## Ralph Berg (Jun 2, 2009)

We used to pull about a dozen or so stations "over the air".Only one station came in "clean". The rest had a bit of "snow". 
But they were watchable. 
Now, we get ZERO channels. 
Ralph


----------

