I've even witnessed some of it myself... Here in South Jersey, East of Philly, we've long had problems with interference on channels 3 (CBS) and 6 (ABC). There could also be some on channels 10 (NBC) and 12 (PBS), but it was always minimal when it occurred. However, 3 and 6 could at times be only barely watchable. Folks on my street, where cable was not available until maybe eight years or so ago, never were able to establish any particular source of the interference. It could come and go seemingly at random.
Now, I knew that channel 12 had been broadcasting digitally at less than full power on channel 50 pre-transition, but they promised to boost their digital signal to full power once the transition officially arrived and they moved over to their normal frequency at actual channel 12. Indeed that's just what happened and I was quite happy about that.
However, what I didn't realize was that other stations had been similarly broadcasting digitally on different frequencies pre-transition than post-. I'll keep it simple and just stick to the traditional local VHF stations at issue...
Channel 3 was and is being broadcast digitally on UHF channel 26, no difference between pre- and post-transition. (Note that the station ID is still CBS3 and one still tunes the converter box by pressing 03 and it just magically finds the correct signal at 26.) Channels 6, 10, and 12 had been being broadcast on 64, 67, and 50 respectively prior to the switch and on 6, 34, and 12 after.
Going back slightly to give a bit of backstory it's apparently a well known fact (certainly to me) that the lower VHF channels (2-6) are by far the most prone to interference from, uh, well, I don't know what. Other electronic equipment? Atmospheric disturbances? Whatever.
This item from October, 2007, at HDTVexpert.com, by Peter Putman, specifically mentions the issue:
. . . .
Nowadays, those low-band VHF slots aren’t as popular due to impulse noise interference and sporadic enhancement of VHF signals (DX) from other parts of the country during summer months. The FCC data shows only 43 stations electing to use channels 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 at the end of the transition.
. . . .
So now that the transition has occurred, channel 6 in the Philly area is back on its traditional actual channel 6 with its digital signal. Given the susceptibility to signal disruption on VHF 6 in my area, this means there will be times then when the digital signal will not be receivable. In fact it happened for a while yesterday afternoon (black screen with "no signal" notice), but by evening it had cleared up. In analog, the interference might be hideous, but at least you could still sort of follow a program you were watching. Digital signals just drop out altogether or tantalizingly appear oh so briefly in heavily pixellated form with no sound. If the interference is relatively light, the video may appear mostly OK, but the sound may stutter in and out (in which case activating closed captioning may help one deal somewhat with that problem).
That's just the 6ABC "fiasco" as seen from my own personal perspective. Since so many others are having similar (and worse) reception issues I'm hoping that channel 6 and the FCC can work together to hammer out a solution in a timely manner. It sounds as if they will be trying to work something out at least.
When I woke up this morning, I turned on KYW NewsRadio and heard this report...
Transmitter Expert Not Surprised By DTV Transition Woes
(by John Ostapkovich):
Oded Bendov, president of the TV Transmission Antenna Group, has been in the TV transmission field for more than 40 years. He says he tried telling the FCC as early as 2001 that there were serious flaws in their plan for digital TV, but that they didn't want to hear it:
"The FCC has done very poor engineering and assigned Channel six and other channels in the VHF much lower power than they should have. For example, in the case of Channel six, they probably need as much as 15 times more power in the transmitter than they have now."
Bendov says the only solution he sees for Channel six and others in this pickle is to get reassigned a new frequency in the UHF band. The solution for viewers might be a rooftop antenna or pay TV, because he says there's no way to have a big enough VHF antenna indoors.
Here's a longer, slightly more detailed item about the local DTV situation at PhillyBurbs.com...
Some viewers lose 6ABC, WHYY in digital switch
(By Bob Fernandez for the Philadelphia Inquirer):
Thousands of over-the-air TV viewers lost 6ABC, the No. 1 local news station in the Philadelphia TV market, in Friday's national digital-TV transition. Along with Action News, 6ABC is popular because of its afternoon soaps, and Oprah.
Officials met in Washington yesterday to discuss a potential solution. Similar glitches in the transition were reported in New York and Chicago. Officials are afraid to boost the 6ABC digital-TV signal because it could lead to interference with FM radio stations in Philadelphia, or TV stations in other markets.
David Dombrowsky, an official with the Federal Communications Commission in Philadelphia, said the main issue seems to be with antennas, adding that people should experiment with different antennas.
"Keep your receipts and try different ones," he said. Some cheaper antennas work better than more expensive ones, he said.
. . . .
He's not kidding about saving the receipts. I just came across this AP article...
Reception problems linger after DTV transition
(By Peter Svensson in the USA Today):
. . . .
The problems have ensnared even the technologically sophisticated.
Wally Grotophorst in Hamilton, Va., got a "digital" antenna for his digital TV last year. But on Friday, he lost the Washington-based ABC and CBS stations, channels 7 and 9, which he could pick up digitally before the transition.
That's because those stations, like dozens of others, switched their digital signals from the UHF frequency band to the VHF band as they cut their analog signals Friday. But Grotophorst's antenna, like many others branded as "digital" and sold over the past few years, was designed only for UHF stations. Nearly all TV stations were using the UHF band for the digital broadcasts until Friday.
"This moving down to the VHF spectrum was news. The stations didn't advertise the fact," Grotophorst said.
He's now regretting that he recycled his old rooftop VHF antenna.
Officials for those stations had no immediate comment.
There are TV antennas that can receive both UHF and VHF bands. In the indoor version, these have long extendable poles — the "rabbit ears" — for VHF reception and a loop for UHF.
Brett Whitten, a technology consultant in Philadelphia, lost the ABC-affiliated Channel 6 for the same reason. He was unsuccessful in attempts to improvise a VHF antenna out of wire, helped by instructions he found online.
According to a Monday evening newscast, that station was talking to the Federal Communications Commission to see if it could increase its output power. That could help with reception, at least for those who have VHF antennas.
. . . .
Personally, I'm still using the same two virtually identical UHF/VHF indoor/outdoor antennas I've used for many, many years. They're mounted in the attic although I did reposition one a year ago when I got my first converter box and started experimenting with ways to improve reception when channel 12 turned out to be unreceivable at my distance from the temporary underpowered digital transmitter they were using via channel 50.
For the most part, now that the transition has occurred, I'm fine. It seems to be just this channel 6 interference issue which can crop up at inopportune times. I'm hoping that by the time the fall season rolls around, they'll have gotten permission to either A) boost their transmission power, or B) move to an open UHF frequency (possibly easier said than done according to this AVS forum post from March, 2007) and that one of those may help to resolve (or at least ease) the problems.
I know it'd be very frustrating if I were to be watching a particularly gripping episode of Lost (one of my favorite shows) and suddenly, uh, well... lost the signal due to a sudden spurt of local signal interference. I guess it's better (from a viewer's perspective) to encounter these issues during the dead zone of summer TV rather than last February (when the transition was originally scheduled) when there was a little bit more to watch now and then.
Feedburner
5 comments:
Yep, having trouble here in cableland, too. CBS totally dropped out last night. Not sure why, but it has always been the tough one to keep...especially since it was always on channel 2. Even in NY it was trouble. :-)
We don't know how our cable company gets the signal...so it is probably on their end...but it is still so frustrating. You just hope the cable company can troubleshoot the problem...cause our signals are even better, post transition. At least in the LA market. Yay team!
See, now they've said all along that if you had cable you wouldn't even have to be concerned about the transition. Weird. I hate when folks tell me something is changing, but don't worry, it'll all be fine and go smoothly. Way too often it seems like it just doesn't.
I keep trying 6ABC off and on just to check how it's being received at different times. Right now it's a pixellated mish-mash of unwatchableness with no sound whatsoever. Obviously there's a significant amount of local interference at the moment.
Personally, I don't care if it does it in the daytime as long as it clears up by prime time on the nights I watch anything on ABC (mainly Lost wednesday nights come 2010). But there might be a couple folks in the area who would actually want to watch their ABC soaps or Oprah at 4 PM.
Got this in my in-box at work. I don't know if it might help you.
FCC Pushing 'Double Re-scan'
Some Stations In Chicago, Philly Must Apply For Power Boosts
John Eggerton -- Multichannel News, 6/15/2009 1:12:01 PM MT
The Federal Communications Commission says some stations in Chicago and Philadelphia may have to apply for power boosts, and they are in discussions with stations there about their various technical issues,
However, the commission is currently focused on consumer-based fixes for reception problems, including promoting what it is calling the "double-rescan."
That is having consumers clear out their boxes' memories before re-scanning, a process the commission says is having success, particularly in Chicago. Are teams are beginning to put the word out on the technique, according to FCC spokesman Rick Kaplan.
Kaplan said that some consumers experiencing problems with both channel 2 and channel 7 in Chicago, for example, were having difficulties with their boxes because both those stations went from a high UHF to a low VHF channel.
"There are some converter boxes that, if you just do a normal re-scan, they won't be able to replace the old digital channel with the new one. So, you actually just have to clear the box out," he said.
The FCC spokesman said that the double re-scan has worked "very well" in Chicago with channel 2. The FCC has a person from the D.C. office now in the market, who reported that the call center has been able to resolve "about 90% of the calls that way," according to Kaplan. He said L.A. has had success with the double re-scan as well, where according to field staffers there, KTLA 80%-90% of calls about KTLA reception have been resolved..
To double re-scan, says Kaplan, viewers need to unplug the antenna, then scan so it picks up nothing, then unplug the converter or DTV set, plug it back in, then rescan.
But for viewers still having trouble, says Kaplan, the FCC is talking with stations about possible long-term solutions from their end. If stations have to officially ask for more power, the FCC will take that seriously, he said. But that will also include figuring out who the boosted power might interfere with, and what dominoes that might trigger elsewhere.
"We want to figure out how to get it right," he says. "We don't want to rush, but don't want to delay, either." But while the commission is working with stations on their end, a process that won't be immediate if it involves adjusting power levels, the FCC "wants to make sure all consumer avenues are exhausted."
Thanks Angel. I appreciate the heads up though actually I was already aware of this due to all my investigative googling yesterday. I didn't bother trying the double rescan thing as my Zenith box seems pretty good and was able to do all the chennel reassignments it needed to do upon just doing a simple rescan on the 12th.
I could also have done an "EZ Add" which would have found new channels without erasing old ones, but I knew I didn't want that. My Aunt's cheaper Magnavox box seemed to have some issues in that it found one or two new channel broadcast frequencies without eliminating the old temporary positions, but it's possible I only did the equivalent of the "EZ Add" on her box. Regardless, I was able to manually delete the old abandoned channels for her, leaving only the new locations in place. (She had two channel 10s listed, but one was the old one and therefore blank.)
At this point, I am absolutely sure (which doesn't mean I can't still be wrong!) that my channel 6 reception issues have to do with the same old local interference we've seen for years on analog channel 6. Whether the signal is analog or digital, the "6" is still in reality just a specific frequency designation or assignment, so anything that interfered with channel 6 pre-transition will still interfere with post-transition 6 even if it's encoded digitally.
The end result of the interference is that reception may come and go until they do something to alleviate it at the broadcast source. It seems to be a big enough issue that I'm hopeful a positive resolution can eventually be arrived at.
Right now (just before 4 PM) channel 6 is looking much better, though not quite perfect yet, so the interference is easing up considerably at the moment. Yesterday, when Oprah began at 4, it was still unwatchable, but gradually improved by 5 for the local news, so today's interference is slightly ahead of yesterday's pace. Of course, later tonight it could be unwatchable again. You just never know.
I just realized it's possible you were referring more to the potential power boost solution than the double rescan thing.
In which case, yeah, that could help. I can't be sure it would solve my 6ABC reception issues until it happens and I actually see it for myself, but I would think it would be likely to significantly help. I just hope they can find an agreeable way to implement it.
I just wish they'd been able to stay on broadcast 64 from the pre-transition as that was fine all along. I was just not aware they were shifting back to 6 after the changeover, so I was taken somewhat by surprise. Apparently from some of those reports I linked to, I was not the only one.
Post a Comment