When TV Goes All Digital

[AlphaDog]

I sure do like your new sig pic, BGnR.

[Bill in NC]

For digital OTA, plan on a rooftop antenna.

[PeterB]

There's the problem. For those of us who are apartment dwellers such as myself, the rooftop antenna thing isn't going to be feasible. The stations really need to increase power in a lot of cases in order for us to get decently clean signal. Also, and I've been looking into this a lot, the switch to digital is a REAL problem from the perspective of getting watchable TV in a portable setting-- that is, if you're camping, on the road, in a hurricane- or other disaster-type situation, etc. ... basically you get nothing, whereas with analog you would have at least gotten something, even if it was a bit snowy. A major problem is that the digital signals are just as dependent on weather conditions as analog.

[BigGuynRusty]

AlphaDog wrote:
I sure do like your new sig pic, BGnR.

"SuperPup" Says "Thank You!!"

BGnR

[BigGuynRusty]

PeterB wrote:
There's the problem. For those of us who are apartment dwellers such as myself, the rooftop antenna thing isn't going to be feasible. The stations really need to increase power in a lot of cases in order for us to get decently clean signal. Also, and I've been looking into this a lot, the switch to digital is a REAL problem from the perspective of getting watchable TV in a portable setting-- that is, if you're camping, on the road, in a hurricane- or other disaster-type situation, etc. ... basically you get nothing, whereas with analog you would have at least gotten something, even if it was a bit snowy. A major problem is that the digital signals are just as dependent on weather conditions as analog.

Apartment/TownHouse/Condo Dwellers have a right to have an Antenna/Dish installed.
Why more power?? If you live that far away, get cable.
I do DTV on a portable basis a whole bunch while beta testing, works great with just a stick antenna and a laptop.
If you are that totally freaked out about disaster/emergency info, get an AM Radio.
ALL WIRELESS SIGNALS are weather dependent!!

BGnR

[AllGold]

Harooneneutics wrote:
Some stations are still broadcasting their digital signals at low power on a temporary channel--we have two stations in my area that are that way. In Feb. 2009, they will be moving their (full-power) digital signal to the permanent frequency that their analog signal is currently on (e.g. the ABC affiliate in my area is currently broadcasting low power on channel 58 but will be moving back 24 (their current analog channel) after the transition date.)

But many channels are already broadcasting their digital signals at full strength.

So it's possible that you could still get a stronger digital signal for some channels. Or it's possible you won't. I ditched my amplified rabbit ears and put an antenna on the roof. The difference was night and day on channels I receive through the converter box.

There's also another factor that might help on some channels. Some of the stations were previously VHF but had to temporarily put their digital transmission in the UHF band (while keeping their analog signal unchanged). After the digital transition is complete, they will move back to their original VHF frequency. A VHF signal travels much farther for the same transmitter power.

[Black Landlord]

Sam* wrote:
We don't have cable tv. We've gotten the digital converter. It's awful. We won't have watchable tv after they take analog away. The problem is a week signal.

My ten-year-old son has gotten it into his head that when the tv stations stop broadcasting analog, they will have more bandwidth to send out a stronger digital signal. In other words, after they turn off analog, our digital signal will get better.

I think my son is wrong, but can't base it on anything? Anybody know what the real deal is on this?

Thanks,

Sam*

Your digital reception should be in the same general ballpark as your analogue was-- sounds like that wasn't so great before.
Definitely echo the antenna suggestion.

[Black Landlord]

incognegro wrote:
even over cable, digital TV is POOP.

lots of glitches and pauses make it just as bad as analog, IMHO.

proof positive you CAN polish a turd.

dk, must be some other factor.
My digital reception, with same old crappy antenna, is absolutely perfect.
My only issue is that my EyeTV USB won't receive one of the major channels (the CBS affiliate) but my cheapo converter box has no problem with it.

[PeterB]

Black Landlord wrote:
[quote=Sam*]
We don't have cable tv. We've gotten the digital converter. It's awful. We won't have watchable tv after they take analog away. The problem is a week signal.

My ten-year-old son has gotten it into his head that when the tv stations stop broadcasting analog, they will have more bandwidth to send out a stronger digital signal. In other words, after they turn off analog, our digital signal will get better.

I think my son is wrong, but can't base it on anything? Anybody know what the real deal is on this?

Thanks,

Sam*

Your digital reception should be in the same general ballpark as your analogue was-- sounds like that wasn't so great before.
Definitely echo the antenna suggestion.
There's part of the problem, and what certain people don't seem to understand. I currently have excellent analog signals for some stations, and for these exact same stations, I get either nothing digitally or intermittent (unwatchable) signal. It is not solely dependent on distance. Also, no, apartment dwellers do NOT have the right to an external antenna, most leases prohibit modification of the apartment without approval of the landlord. And some of us absolutely refuse, under any circumstances, to get cable.

[Black Landlord]

PeterB wrote:
[quote=Black Landlord]
[quote=Sam*]
We don't have cable tv. We've gotten the digital converter. It's awful. We won't have watchable tv after they take analog away. The problem is a week signal.

My ten-year-old son has gotten it into his head that when the tv stations stop broadcasting analog, they will have more bandwidth to send out a stronger digital signal. In other words, after they turn off analog, our digital signal will get better.

I think my son is wrong, but can't base it on anything? Anybody know what the real deal is on this?

Thanks,

Sam*

Your digital reception should be in the same general ballpark as your analogue was-- sounds like that wasn't so great before.
Definitely echo the antenna suggestion.
There's part of the problem, and what certain people don't seem to understand. I currently have excellent analog signals for some stations, and for these exact same stations, I get either nothing digitally or intermittent (unwatchable) signal. It is not solely dependent on distance. Also, no, apartment dwellers do NOT have the right to an external antenna, most leases prohibit modification of the apartment without approval of the landlord. And some of us absolutely refuse, under any circumstances, to get cable.
My statement wasn't phrased well.
I was trying to express that your overall digital reception will be similar to your overall analogue was-- if you had a few channels that came in well before, a few that didn't, one or two that are unwatchable, you will probably have some problem channels in digital too.
It is certainly not solely dependent on distance, but general distance to the source is still the greatest factor. My impression is that line of sight plays a greater role in digital.
I have almost line-of-sight to downtown Chicago; Sears tower about 4 miles away as the crow flies; analogue reception sucked for many channels (snow, ghosts) and digital is perfect, same antenna.