WHY did you lose your stations?

bicker · 06-28-2009, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loves2Watch

... no end.

Especially that.

The reality is that we live in a pluralistic society, where a balancing of conflicting priorities prevails over any one set of priorities. Folks who have a hard time accepting that will continually face bitter disappointment with just about every aspect of their public life.

NonMcTubber · 06-28-2009, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bicker

Especially that.

The reality is that we live in a pluralistic society, where a balancing of conflicting priorities prevails over any one set of priorities. Folks who have a hard time accepting that will continually face bitter disappointment with just about every aspect of their public life.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have to almost 100% agree with bicker here.

And at the end of the day, when it comes to OTA television, there are two broad class of individuals. (1) Those that have taken no steps to self educate themselves on the issues. And that set of people may have the emotional ability to feel robbed when changes in technology do not benefit them. But no intellectual ability to feel the emotion. (2) Then there are the set of individuals who have gotten up to speed on the technology of the digital transition, and its this set of people that various web sites and this forum exist to serve and further educate. And I can safely say the majority of us on this forum had a pretty clear idea of what would happen on 6/12/09 and took the needed steps to be prepared long before 6/12/09. In the immediate short term aftermath of 6/12/09 I have lost 2 of 14 channels, after they get back to full power I will have a small gain because one channel will be much stronger and much closer, even though it will take better than 2 months to get back to even. But I have to admit that I feel both respect for and sympathy for some of our class#2 folks that are indeed losers in the final 6/12/09 transitions. And they clearly have the intellectual ability to feel robbed.

The one set of class #2 folks I cannot respect or feel sympathy for are the people who refused to do the antenna upgrades clearly needed to do much better than they do now post 6/12, not because of money issues, but for simple stubborn refusal to change. And as far as I am concern, that set of folks have no emotional or intellectual right to feel robbed post 6/12/09.

Ray in Florida · 06-28-2009, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB Antennaman

If you read my posts - as to how the signal is transmitted and how the signal works, you would know that it is not the FCC's fault.

What you propose would make some stations into super stations.

They would be so powerful that you would not be able to receive other stations because the stations closest to you would over power the other stations.

You have to have some compassion for the poor fool that lives near a television transmitter. He has no choice in what he can receive - because either he built his house in the wrong place or the television station chose his place to build their antenna.

The FCC does make small allowances if it is necessary to give the stations additional power, if it is justified.

What you are asking - would cost the television station millions of dollars a year when you figure a energy consumption of about $18,000 a day for the transmitter at their present power level of some stations. Thats $6,570,000 a year in electricity for their transmitter now, vs. $9,855,000 for your idea.

Television stations are run on revenue, the revenue comes from used car dealers and burger joints and furniture stores. There is only so many ways to slice the pie before you get to the point of where there is nothing left.

You can only ask so many dollars per a commercial from a advertiser - before the price of the advertisements gets to high and the advertiser has to leave and go elsewhere.

A car dealer in Pittsburgh is not going to want to pay to transmit to Punxsutawney Pennsylvania - just because you like to watch their news reports. He is out to sell cars and he knows that you will not drive 80 miles to come to his show room to buy a used car or a new car and so he doesn't care if you can get their signals because it is of no benefit to him.

Where as I do drive to Pittsburgh and the dealers all knows me by name due to the fact that I was in the used car business for a number of years and I bought new and used cars off those dealers and they know that I am going to come back and they know that I am going to refer all my friends to do business with them in the future.

But people refuse to spend their money wisely and don't always listen to what I have to say and they will go to car lot X and pay $1000 more for the same vehicle - because they want it today and they don't have the cash to pay it in full and they don't care how much it costs, just how much is the monthly payment.

If you are in the market area of the stations you are having problems with, I would be more than willing to suggest a pre amplifier that would help your cause and a more sensitive antenna, and rotor that would help to position your antenna properly.

But if your goal is to watch The Wheel of Fortune from a station 100 miles away in the middle of a mountain range in Colorado, it's not going to happen.

Thank You JB Antennaman for a great explanation of some of the problems that TV stations and the advertisers are faced with. A few points that I have never thought of.

Electrictroy are you still whining? Good television is not one of your rights in the United States. Man up and get a good antenna, or at least man up and quit whining. There is a lot of good informed information here on the HighDef Forums....give it a read.

teds12 · 06-28-2009, 09:08 PM

You wrote:
<Just because you were asleep at the wheel does not mean that others here were as well. Methinks you protest far too much.>

Wow, I'm glad you got that out of your system; good for you!

NO: I wasn't "asleep at the wheel", in fact I originally bought a CM-3021 for it UHF and Hi-VHF advertised capabilities, but found "shaky" Hi-VHF reception, particularly for WABC channel 7 (174 MHz) here in NJ.

Over the past few months, I've experimented with building DIY 4 bays with particularly long V's geared towards the Hi-VHF and have even added Radio Shack FM antenna wires tuned to 1/4-wavelength for channel 7 as adjustable dipoles (sophisticated rabbit ears) in parallel across the UHF 300-75 ohm balun transformer on my DIY's and on the CM-3021. My only finding was improvement in Hi-VHF (at the tuned or "near-tuned" frequency), but a huge UHF signal loss in all cases.

I tried to be ready, but my worse fears WERE realized.

Still resisting the purchase of a monster combo antenna, or moving from the attic to the roof AS I ALWAYS HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL!

Ted

Loves2Watch · 06-28-2009, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teds12

You wrote:
<Just because you were asleep at the wheel does not mean that others here were as well. Methinks you protest far too much.>

Wow, I'm glad you got that out of your system; good for you!

NO: I wasn't "asleep at the wheel", in fact I originally bought a CM-3021 for it UHF and Hi-VHF advertised capabilities, but found "shaky" Hi-VHF reception, particularly for WABC channel 7 (174 MHz) here in NJ.

Over the past few months, I've experimented with building DIY 4 bays with particularly long V's geared towards the Hi-VHF and have even added Radio Shack FM antenna wires tuned to 1/4-wavelength for channel 7 as adjustable dipoles (sophisticated rabbit ears) in parallel across the UHF 300-75 ohm balun transformer on my DIY's and on the CM-3021. My only finding was improvement in Hi-VHF (at the tuned or "near-tuned" frequency), but a huge UHF signal loss in all cases.

I tried to be ready, but my worse fears WERE realized.

Still resisting the purchase of a monster combo antenna, or moving from the attic to the roof AS I ALWAYS HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL!

Ted

You are loosing about 50% of your signal by having the antenna in the attic. Get it up on the roof and all will be much, much better.

NonMcTubber · 06-28-2009, 09:47 PM

Ted12 says, "Still resisting the purchase of a monster combo antenna, or moving from the attic to the roof AS I ALWAYS HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL!"

To some extent the monster combo antenna has no reason for continual existance, because channels 2-5 are basically gone, but its still hard to ignore the huge advantages of getting an antenna outside which elimates the losses inherihant in building materials.

Sadly many renters have landlords that will veto an outdoor antenna, which leaves them more challanged on marginal OTA channel reception.

Its a dilemma with no easy answer.

electrictroy · 06-29-2009, 05:40 PM

There is an easy answer. They can increase power levels to 50% of former analog levels, instead of a crazy 5 kilowatt. As the WPVI engineer observed, "I'm not operating a transmitter; I'm running a hair dryer."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loves2Watch

Quote:

Originally Posted by teds12

It's a shame that so many here that had done the 4-bay and 8-bay thing over the past couple of years got shafted so badly by this Hi-VHF 6-12-09 shift disaster!

.... You got it and let me add that electrictroy was one of the members who discussed this many times and was informed of the proper methods/antenna selections to make. It was his decision to not heed the advice given, because then, as now he just wanted to argue his faulty point to no end.

(1) It isn't necessary to insult me.

(2) I have a VHF/UHF combo antenna. Got that? Let me repeat it: I have a VHF/UHF combo antenna, and it's on my roof. I am prepared to receive channels 8,10,11,12,13, et cetera if they ever decide to increase their power to match that of a major television station, instead of a "hair dryer".

In the meantime I've lost a lot of stations and as long as you (and others) keep acting as if DTV is flawless, then I'm going to keep reminding you that is is not. I don't mind losing one or two, but losing 10 stations is ridiculous and indicative of a government doing a lousy job.

I hope they do better with Uncle Sam Healthcare.

Thanks,
Troy :-)

electrictroy · 06-29-2009, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB Antennaman

Note - I said hometown for the transmitter - not the station address. Clearfield Pa is about 40 miles from State College.

That used to be a requirement, but not anymore. WGAL calls Lancaster its "home" and WPMT calls York its "home" with their studios located in these respective cities, but both have their transmitters located 20 miles away next to the Susquehanna River.

Why? Because that's the center of their Nielsen DMA. It lets them cover all four cities (Harrisburg, Lebanon, York, Lancaster) instead of just their home. Presumably WPSU made a similar decision where they felt locating the transmitter in Clearfield covered more towns than locating it in State College (which is surrounded my mountains that would block the signal).

BTW the State College/Clearfield DMA also includes Johnstown/Altoona stations.

dewster1977 · 06-29-2009, 07:53 PM

I found an interesting statement in an application for WCTI in N. Carolina they want a boost to 38.7kW for their VHF channel. it references subsection 73.622(f) would deprive a significant number of viewers of free over the air television service that they use to receive.

I'm sure there is much more to this section and its subsections, but I haven't been able to find the complete section 73 yet.

jim5506 · 06-30-2009, 09:28 AM

The fact that many analog VHF stations were returning to VHF after a flirtation with UHF in digital was well advertized buy each station and by the FCC for nearly a year.

If you bought an antenna without regard to your future needs, suck it up and do it right this time.

Your complaints are falling on deaf ears because plenty of warning was given.

Every time advice has been given, here and on all the other sites I monitor, the caveat of where the digital channel was then and where it would be after the digital transition was almost always sounded, if not by one , then by another.

spokybob · 06-30-2009, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim5506

The fact that many analog VHF stations were returning to VHF after a flirtation with UHF in digital was well advertized buy each station and by the FCC for nearly a year.

If you bought an antenna without regard to your future needs, suck it up and do it right this time.

Your complaints are falling on deaf ears because plenty of warning was given.

Every time advice has been given, here and on all the other sites I monitor, the caveat of where the digital channel was then and where it would be after the digital transition was almost always sounded, if not by one , then by another.

Jim. I disagree with your statements. As you may know, WHBF returned to VHF-LO on June 12. They NEVER once mentioned on the air or in the newspaper that people in outlying areas would need a VHF antenna until May 28. On May 28 they posted that info on their website and later mentioned it in their newscast. In February 2007, I installed a UHF antenna on my roof to receive WHBF on RF58. At that time, I did not know that the antenna would be useless only 2 1/2 years later. Where is the plenty of warning? Even the DISH installer did not know about a proper OTA antenna. Why didn't the TV store mention it to me?
I agree that some people are stubborn. I know of many in my county in fact. But they are not the ones complaining. They accept the fact that they lost one station. They are very happy with their CECBs and indoor 4 bay antenna.
..A final note. Just before June 12, a station in Peoria,IL broadcast a PSA that OTA viewer may need a VHF/UHF antenna for digital. That is soo false for that area. The engineer said the FCC mandated that message. Go figure.

electrictroy · 07-01-2009, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spokybob

Jim. I disagree with your statements.

I also disagree with his (a) rudeness towards people needing help and (b) his assumption that they don't have VHF antennas. I can't speak for the whole nation but I know many people in the DC/Baltimore/Philly region have said they have VHF-capable antennas but still don't see channels 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, or 13. The power is simply too low.

Yes616 · 07-05-2009, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim5506

The fact that many analog VHF stations were returning to VHF after a flirtation with UHF in digital was well advertized buy each station and by the FCC for nearly a year.

This may or may not be true. This is what I saw..

Stations in New York City were big (as everywhere else) in letting people know that they needed a converter box to receive the OTA signals after the transition. Nowhere did I ever see or hear them mention a new antenna would be mentioned. I know the reason also. Cablevision seemed to do alot of advertising over the last year aimed at the OTA viewer that told them they would take care of you. Here Cablevision did not want you to know that you could be prepared for OTA after the transition simply by having the correct antenna. It seemed to me the stations did not want alienate Cablevision by telling people about this. NYC people know that Cablevision has to be one of thier biggest adverters. The stations wants the $$ from Cablevision and Cablevision wants the $$ from you!

It didn't even seem to be a requirement by the FCC that stations tell people about the channel shifting. It did seem to be very much a requirement that people needed digital tuners after the shift. But really, nothing more.

I get the NYC stations through Dish Network and I just purchased a $40 indoor amplifed antenna and get a couple of stations from Scranton now. WBRE almost always works and WYOU sometimes. It is funny how WBRE (formerly 28 and now 11) has dropped all mention of what channel they are. You don't hear or see anything about 28 or 11. Just the call letters. NYC on the other hand has not changed a thing in this respect. They just keep on mentioning their pre transition channel numbers. Whether they changed or not. All stations in NYC just leaves it to you to figure out that 2 is really on 33, etc.

PS.. So now that I see that little indoor antenna works for a couple of the PA channels, I am about to take the plunge to a good outdoor antenna system.

dieselgeek · 07-06-2009, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB Antennaman

If you read my posts - as to how the signal is transmitted and how the signal works, you would know that it is not the FCC's fault.

What you propose would make some stations into super stations.

They would be so powerful that you would not be able to receive other stations because the stations closest to you would over power the other stations.

You have to have some compassion for the poor fool that lives near a television transmitter. He has no choice in what he can receive - because either he built his house in the wrong place or the television station chose his place to build their antenna.

The FCC does make small allowances if it is necessary to give the stations additional power, if it is justified.

What you are asking - would cost the television station millions of dollars a year when you figure a energy consumption of about $18,000 a day for the transmitter at their present power level of some stations. Thats $6,570,000 a year in electricity for their transmitter now, vs. $9,855,000 for your idea.

Television stations are run on revenue, the revenue comes from used car dealers and burger joints and furniture stores. There is only so many ways to slice the pie before you get to the point of where there is nothing left.

You can only ask so many dollars per a commercial from a advertiser - before the price of the advertisements gets to high and the advertiser has to leave and go elsewhere.

A car dealer in Pittsburgh is not going to want to pay to transmit to Punxsutawney Pennsylvania - just because you like to watch their news reports. He is out to sell cars and he knows that you will not drive 80 miles to come to his show room to buy a used car or a new car and so he doesn't care if you can get their signals because it is of no benefit to him.

Where as I do drive to Pittsburgh and the dealers all knows me by name due to the fact that I was in the used car business for a number of years and I bought new and used cars off those dealers and they know that I am going to come back and they know that I am going to refer all my friends to do business with them in the future.

But people refuse to spend their money wisely and don't always listen to what I have to say and they will go to car lot X and pay $1000 more for the same vehicle - because they want it today and they don't have the cash to pay it in full and they don't care how much it costs, just how much is the monthly payment.

If you are in the market area of the stations you are having problems with, I would be more than willing to suggest a pre amplifier that would help your cause and a more sensitive antenna, and rotor that would help to position your antenna properly.

But if your goal is to watch The Wheel of Fortune from a station 100 miles away in the middle of a mountain range in Colorado, it's not going to happen.

I'm 16 miles from the ANT. Am I to close? I'm 70 feet off the ground and can see them from my window. I've noticed that I'm losing a lot of channels now since the switch. I only use OTA so this is really limiting what I can watch.

Thank you

Ryan

06-28-2009, 09:08 PM	#19
teds12 High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 74	Brian You wrote: <Just because you were asleep at the wheel does not mean that others here were as well. Methinks you protest far too much.> Wow, I'm glad you got that out of your system; good for you! NO: I wasn't "asleep at the wheel", in fact I originally bought a CM-3021 for it UHF and Hi-VHF advertised capabilities, but found "shaky" Hi-VHF reception, particularly for WABC channel 7 (174 MHz) here in NJ. Over the past few months, I've experimented with building DIY 4 bays with particularly long V's geared towards the Hi-VHF and have even added Radio Shack FM antenna wires tuned to 1/4-wavelength for channel 7 as adjustable dipoles (sophisticated rabbit ears) in parallel across the UHF 300-75 ohm balun transformer on my DIY's and on the CM-3021. My only finding was improvement in Hi-VHF (at the tuned or "near-tuned" frequency), but a huge UHF signal loss in all cases. I tried to be ready, but my worse fears WERE realized. Still resisting the purchase of a monster combo antenna, or moving from the attic to the roof AS I ALWAYS HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL! Ted

06-28-2009, 09:47 PM	#21
NonMcTubber High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 812	Ted12 says, "Still resisting the purchase of a monster combo antenna, or moving from the attic to the roof AS I ALWAYS HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL!" To some extent the monster combo antenna has no reason for continual existance, because channels 2-5 are basically gone, but its still hard to ignore the huge advantages of getting an antenna outside which elimates the losses inherihant in building materials. Sadly many renters have landlords that will veto an outdoor antenna, which leaves them more challanged on marginal OTA channel reception. Its a dilemma with no easy answer. __________________ High definition is not the definition of my life. But knowledge is power and HD does have some potential to increase content variety and choices.

06-30-2009, 09:28 AM	#25
jim5506 Yellow Submarine Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Lubbock, Texas Posts: 2,418	The fact that many analog VHF stations were returning to VHF after a flirtation with UHF in digital was well advertized buy each station and by the FCC for nearly a year. If you bought an antenna without regard to your future needs, suck it up and do it right this time. Your complaints are falling on deaf ears because plenty of warning was given. Every time advice has been given, here and on all the other sites I monitor, the caveat of where the digital channel was then and where it would be after the digital transition was almost always sounded, if not by one , then by another. __________________ Programming: Dish HD Absolute with 0.01 Cinemax Displays: Sony VPH-D50Q - 7 ft on the wall; Hitachi 57R59 Receivers: DishNetwork ViP722k; DishNetwork ViP211K; DishNetwork ViP211; DishNetwork 301; 2 - TiVo Series 2's; Accurian 6000; Samsung SIR-T351; Panasonic ShowStopper 2000; ATI HDTV Wonder Dish 1000 on 110,119,129; Dish 500 on 61.5; DPP44 Sony 80GB PS3; Toshiba HD-DVD

Similar Threads to WHY did you lose your stations?
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sony KD-34XBR970 Screen Popping Issue	mwschultz	DirecTV Forum	2	03-12-2008 10:42 PM
Upconverting DVR/DVD Player	pclark24	SD DVD Players and Discs	2	02-25-2005 07:01 AM

06-29-2009, 07:53 PM	#24
dewster1977 How can anyone watch standard def? Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 25	I found an interesting statement in an application for WCTI in N. Carolina they want a boost to 38.7kW for their VHF channel. it references subsection 73.622(f) would deprive a significant number of viewers of free over the air television service that they use to receive. I'm sure there is much more to this section and its subsections, but I haven't been able to find the complete section 73 yet.