Comments

JohnnyRoy wrote on 2/10/2005, 11:46 AM
I’m confused about the “more free programming” argument. Can you receive digital TV from an antenna? (i.e., rabbits ears, roof-top, or otherwise?) If not, what’s free about it if you need cable or dish to receive it? Cable and dish aren’t free.

Also what does it mean that “Congress has told broadcasters to complete the digital shift by December 2006”. Will analog TV’s stop working next December? My cable company charges extra for digital programming. I don’t need more channels with nothing to watch so I don’t subscribe to it. Will we all need to pay for digital cable in the future or will basic cable just become digital too?

This is very confusing for the consumer (and me). ;-)

~jr
Coursedesign wrote on 2/10/2005, 12:11 PM
I'm receiving lots of free DTV via a set-top antenna (Gemini, the only one of many I tried that works well, Amazon has it for $20).

I live in West L.A. and receive something like 9 HDTV stations and more than a dozen SD DTV stations.

The quality is very very good, outright astonishing with good source material and PBS is a standout for that (I get 3 PBS stations in 2 counties in HD).

Certainly better quality than cable or satellite, because there is no extra compression (although in some rare cases a station splits its channel among 2, 3 and even 4 simultaneous broadcasts with varying amounts of compression to do so).

I use an all-digital DVI connection to my front projector, this DOES give a noticeably better picture on my 120" screen than even pro component cables.

Of course Dolby Digital sound doesn't hurt the experience either.

I use a recent Samsung tuner (SIR-T451), $249 list, that can output 1080i, 720p, 480p and 480i. This means it can also output NTSC to an analog TV set, which I also have hooked up for direct view. So old sets will not be "obsolete" and the picture is awesome with digital reception.

Notable is also that I pick up some channels perfectly in digital, even though I can't get them in analog. This in spite of the transmitter antennas probably being co-located (on Mt. Wilson) and the analog transmitters usually get a lot more power.

JohnnyRoy, I couldn't agree more on the crappy programming. If I want to see a movie, I rent a DVD and watch it when I want, with HD scaling. It is true that there are HD channels that show movies in HD, some even with modest compression, but I still don't want to be ruled by broadcast schedules, especially since it is early days for recording HD at home.
JJKizak wrote on 2/10/2005, 12:16 PM
Yes, you must have an aftermarket tuner, usually about 3 to 500 bucks.
The tuner will pick up analog and digital stations and will label them as let's say, channel 3.0 being analog, 3.1 being HD 16 x 9, 3.2 being digital 480i 4 x 3 etc. The tuner will automatically take the digital channel being used which in this case might be channel 32 then relabel it to the 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, etc. and still keep the analog channel as 3.0. As long as the signal is OK it's just dandy, but if its weak it will usually fade in and out and the tuner will constantly loose sync and drive you nuts. I use an MDR-200 tuner . Also a Samsung T165 which distorts the analog 4 x 3 stations too much so I gave it to my guru buddy. I also use the MY-HD 120 video card tuner with fantastic results.

JJK
JohnnyRoy wrote on 2/10/2005, 12:27 PM
Wow, I didn’t realize that digital was transmitted over the airways and could be picked up via antenna. I guess I would need a digital tuner to view it. Well, that’s something to look for in the next purchase.

~jr
Coursedesign wrote on 2/10/2005, 12:57 PM
I recommend the digital tuner I got after some research, the Samsung SIR-T451. It's $249 list.

It's important not to buy anything but the very latest generation in digital TV tuners. The older models are very slow in changing channels, and have all kinds of other ATSC problems that have since been fixed.

There are some models from other manufacturers for closer to $500, these have some extra features, but I don't believe they offer a better picture or higher sensitivity.

The antenna is super important. Don't buy anything from Terk, Radio Shack, etc. available in stores. I can tell you from experience, verified with many others, they stink. Some of these cost $120 and up.

The Gemini ZHDTV1 is the least expensive at $20 and the highest performance.

I just noted Amazon is temporarily sold out and they have raised the price to $29.44. OMG! Time to look elsewhere for this antenna.

Of course, if you live too far away, you may need to get a rooftop antenna. There's a website that will tell you that and directions to the transmitter etc., forgot it, perhaps BJ_M or sb else can chip in with this.
JJKizak wrote on 2/10/2005, 4:32 PM
Keep in mind also that all (99.0 %) digital channels are in the UHF(not VHF) band when purchasing an antenna.

JJK
richard-courtney wrote on 2/10/2005, 7:47 PM
I can agree on the T451. Sears had them on sale over Christmas.

A good antenna is made by Blonder Tongue model BTY-UHF-BB #4875.
It uses 75 ohm coax and is made from aluminum rods, not rolled strips.

We unfortunately can not get the PBS HD at this time, but hope in the future.
Steve Mann wrote on 2/10/2005, 11:30 PM
If you have a set-top box for your cable, then it's probably digital already.

Oh, you can say goodbye to "free" TV in about ten years. Digital transmissions can contain six standard-def programs or one high-def program. Because it's digital, the broadcaster can encode any or all of the channels so that only paid subscribers can receive them.

Steve Mann
farss wrote on 2/11/2005, 1:33 AM
Having been watching SD DVB for over a year now I can tell you it was the best purchase I've made for a long time. I can finally see what broadcast quality images look like. Maybe that's not such a good thing, my own work now looks pretty crappy by comparison but hey much of the stuff down here is now originated from HDCAM. Just as an aside a few days ago they ran IMAX Home Cinema, now even downconverted to SD it looks better than the HDCAM footage treated the same way, interesting.
Bob.
riredale wrote on 2/11/2005, 12:58 PM
If I might swerve back to the original topic for a moment, this is big news.

For decades, the over-the-air broadcasters have wielded trememdous power, because they were first and they have (or had) a powerful lobbying force in Washington DC called the NAB. When the cable upstarts came along in the 1970's and 80's and began wiring houses to their feeds, they were required to carry the local programming from the broadcast people even though the cable guys could just get their feeds from satellite (like the broadcast guys also did, for much of their programming). Still, for many years the cable guys had to carry the local broadcaster's stuff. The issue has been called "Must-Carry."

When HDTV came along, the broadcast gang cried crocodile tears in order to get that second broadcast channel, ostensibly to carry the same content as their first channel, but in high def. Once they got their second channel, they suddenly did an about-face and casually mentioned that maybe, just maybe, they ought to be carrying other programming on that second channel, and, by the way, must-carry dictates that the cable guys have to carry that programming too. The reason must-carry has been so important for broadcasters is because they make their living on commercials, and the wider the viewer base the more they can charge for commercial airtime. But the problem has been that more people have been hooking up to cable (or even satellite) over the years, leaving broadcasters out on a rather narrow limb.

The FCC just handed the cable guys a saw.
JohnnyRoy wrote on 2/11/2005, 2:06 PM
WOW! Having that information was essential to understanding what the article was about (at least for me). I went back and read it again and now, at least, I understand the issue. I had no idea cable was forced to carry local stations. I know lots of people who won’t get DirectTV because it cannot show local stations. Go figure. Thanks,

~jr