FCC To Repack Channels
 

All channels above 36 will be required to shift down. While the transmitters are frequency agile to some extent, the antennas are not. Many stations may simply not be able to afford the shift. Is this part of the government's conspiracy to drive OTA broadcasters out of business?

What is the article or reference regarding this?

Old thread here with some info:

http://www.videokarma.org/showthread.php?t=266888

jr

Heard it on the Glenn Hauser World of Radio broadcast on WBCQ (shortwave) yesterday afternoon.

FCC Commish speaks after the reverse auctions that started the spectrum repack:

STATEMENT OF FCC CHAIRMAN AJIT PAI ON FOSTERING AN ORDERLY POST-AUCTION TRANSITION
WASHINGTON, February 6, 2017 – Today, we are taking an important step to facilitate a rapid and orderly repack of television broadcast stations following the close of the incentive
auction. Specifically, the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau is waiving the rules prohibiting communication between parties of any incentive auction applicant’s reverse auction bids or bidding strategies. Broadcasters have asked for this waiver in order to make it easier for television stations to engage in planning and coordination for the post-auction transition. I look forward to working with broadcasters and wireless carriers going forward on further steps to ensure a smooth post-auction transition.

The folks above channel 37 sold their spectrum, and now will find their home at/below channel 36.

Repacking
What is repacking and why is it so important to the outcome of the auction?

Repacking is one of three major components of the incentive auction, along with the reverse and forward auctions. It refers to the process of reassigning broadcast TV channels in order to free up spectrum for other uses. Repacking plays a role in the reverse auction. It will help us identify which bids we should accept in order to free up the most spectrum, consistent with interference and other constraints.

Only winners are the Telecoms. Here comes gigabit cell service....

WARNING: Prolonged use of this device will cause rapid loss of brain cells.

Surely this is a cash grab for the bureau as well. Can't imagine why they would have done it otherwise.

Given that TV resolution has been consistently doubling since NTSC became depreciated, I find this spectrum reduction and repack to be a dangerous and short sighted move. the TV bands may end up becoming jammed, full of same channel interference between markets, etc, plus aren't they trying to implement ATSC 3.0?...They don't want 1 and 3 sharing channels so new/empty channels are needed to keep a station from being stuck on one or the other, or the networks crowding sub-channels off the air on remaining 1.0 transmitters. smashing a already densely packed TV band into having perhaps 0 empty channels in some areas seems EXTREMELY foolish presently....Maybe after the 1 to 3 transition it would be called for, but why now?...Greed/buying market share through paying the fed to legislate away your competition sure seems like the answer (that or blatant relative devaluing of TV relative to cellular as a public service in the eyes of the fed).

I just saw an AP article in the paper saying in effect: More homes getting TV reception OTA, increased from 9 to 15 percent in a year or two. The cord-cutting trends have helped this along with availability of antennas from such ubiquitous outlets as Wal-Mart.

Just wait for the next ATSC standard (after 3.0) a few years later - gigabit downstream internet OTA (upstream will be via cell or cable) and TV (not streaming video...) that is tuneable/viewable on a cell phone, independent of a cell tower. There would be one channel (actual) per metro area, and 36-72 subchannels in the metro area. This is probably a dozen years off, but the testing is starting....

The E-waste that ATSC 3.0 is gonna create may get some pushback....

There are broadband UHF antennas out there.

WBGU in Bowling Green, OH, has one.

They used it to transmit channel 27 analog and RF channel 56 digital at the same time.

For analog shutoff, they disconnected the analog 27 transmitter from the antenna and retuned the digital transmitter to channel 27.

I question why FM is still using the same technology developed in the '50's. Why not go full digital with 5.1 using frequencies in the 900 Mhz to 1 Ghz range? Why not convert standard AM to DRM (digital radio mondial) reducing channel allocations and providing high fidelity stereo sound? Once you've heard DRM you'd wonder why it isn't in wide use. I'd also increase transmitter power.

Perhaps it has something to do with what David Sarnoff's infamous greed did to Edwin Armstrong.

Have you heard IBOC digital on the FM band? I think that it is capable of 5.1, but most stations use the digital signal to broadcast multiple programs, just like the TV sub-channels.

jr

Change is scary.

DRM is used by some SW broadcasters in Europe. VOA found it was easier to jam than analog.

I hope this never happens, my collection of working antique radios will become doorstops if it does. I prefer analog audio wherever possible...My ear can average away analog noise, but digital breakup/dropout can not be averaged away so easily...
Audio quality has a lot to do with RX design. There is analog AM HiFi stereo, and it's audio quality can approach that of a decent FM RX. Most newer AM radios don't bother to design for good audio quality since they assume AM is talk only and need only sound as good as an 80's POTs phone line... Many modern FM tuners are rather halfassed too...If you listen to a high end tube or early SS rig from the years when top 40 AM was king, and classic music audiophiles were the FM market, and demanded that FM sound perfect you will never want digital.

Couple of repacking updates:

"UHF Channels 38 thru 50 will soon belong to Cell Carriers. The FCC will be putting out a list soon of the upcoming changes."

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/new...stage-4/162589

http://repackready.com/spectrum-repack-news/

jr

What will happen to TV stations below channel 36 after the channel repack? Will the repack render streaming video players such as the Roku boxes obsolete? I watch almost all my TV via streaming video instead of OTA, and use a Roku 2 with the Spectrum (formerly Time Warner Cable) app to receive local stations. I still have cable, but I don't use it; the only reason I have cable at all (the cable is connected to my VCR) is so the Spectrum app will receive my area's local TV stations (chalk that up to a crazy quirk in TWC's billing system, which has been there since long before their merger with Spectrum). My favorite channels are the DTV subchannels of channels 5, 8 and 19 from Cleveland (COZI TV, Antenna TV and MeTV, respectively); will these channels be affected at all by the repack? Since these channels are well below channel 36, I don't think it will have any effect at all; the repack only seems to be affecting channels from 36 to 51 (except channel 37, of course), if I understand correctly what I have been reading about it. The VHF stations and channels 51 and up won't be affected at all, so existing VHF channels and their subchannels will almost certainly be exempt from this action.

And often unnecessary.

I'm sorry, but I just half a year ago, built a software defined radio on my own, that picks up anywhere between 40MHz and 1.7GHz. It only has about 3MHz bandwidth (2MHz without any skipped "frames"), and I really don't want to have to redesign it to pick up some silly digital signal it probably can't decode anyway. I like FM as it is, and all of my radios in the house already support it.

I honestly don't think radio's gonna change much anytime soon. Tv, on the other hand... well, we'll always have converter boxes and adapters and stuff.

Is there presently available software for SDRs that will decode the digital signals already in use in the FM band? I suspect that you have noticed the IBOC "sidebands" attached to many analog FM signals, and *perhaps* are already decoding them.
Or perhaps not?

jr

They keep getting rid of more OTA channels and yes ITS SCARY! (I guess it doesnt matter because they arent analog anyway)

Next it will be all channels above 13!!

They want to sell that spectrum. Basically they're getting something for nothing. Spectrum is just a natural resource. They don't have to maintain it. The really scary part is they could sell us the air that we breathe.

Just like from the song "Taxman" by The Beatles.

Feel sorry for the pros in the biz that will get let go when some stations close up shop or merge with other stations.

Check this broadcasting forum out.I've been a member for years there and its very informative with info on these topics with the current DTV outlook.

http://www.radiodiscussions.com/show...Auction-thread

http://www.radiodiscussions.com/foru...-Policy-Debate

Central, thanks for those links....quite a bit of interesting reading I'll be doing over there!

No problem Bryan. Enjoy.

Looks as if we should have info on station moves in April.

http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/1...nners-in-april

Blog on Rabbit Ears has some early info.

http://www.rabbitears.info/blog/

Stay tuned!
jr

As someone who operates VERY low power analog transmitters to feed signal to the tube sets in my collection I worry about more stations crowding into the VHF band...Most of my modulators (several are fixed channel, and all my TX antennas are fixed) are running on VHF...If VHF fills up it will be hard to wirelessly send signal to all my pre-1964 VHF only sets. I don't use channels that are occupied by DTV stations in the area since I don't want to interfere with reception, and also since DTV carriers can interfere with my system.

More on repacking:

http://www.tvtechnology.com/resource...-abound/280362

jr

Thanks Jr_Tech .Nice read. If I was one of those struggling stations with ratings in the toilet and wondering if I can pay next months electric bill and other bills.I will take the buyout option and close up shop for good.

Since I don't bother with OTA television signals anymore (I watch all my TV via streaming video, DVDs and VHS, having cable on my account only so my Roku's TWC TV app will bring in local channels), the repack does not now and will not, ever, concern me in the least.

BTW, I've been wondering about channel 37. If this channel was never intended to (and in fact is forbidden to) be used as a TV broadcast frequency in this country, why do TVs still tune it? There should have been a way to block that channel somehow, whether by mechanically blocking the tuner at 37 (meaning the tuner would go from 14-36 and then 38-83, with a blank spot on the tuning dial on the front of the set where channel 37 would have been) or any other method so that the tuner would skip that channel. I guess the only reason those continuous UHF tuners even tuned channel 37 at all is due to the nature of continuous tuning; now that I think of it, it would be almost impossible to design any continuous TV tuner such that it would skip any channel. Even the old Zenith varactor tuning systems in their early 1980s TVs could tune to channel 37, and in fact there was a tab for that channel which could be inserted in one of the blank UHF channel positions (U1-U6).

The only other thing I can come up with is that broadcast use of channel 37 in Canada was in fact permitted, with stations on the air on that channel in some cities. I never saw one when I was still watching TV using an antenna, but of course that doesn't mean there might have been at least one channel 37 station north of the border.

I am only guessing at this, of course, since I don't know how Canada's TV broadcasting rules are set up. It could be, however, that use of channel 37 for TV in Canada in some areas near the US border would in fact be forbidden, if the authorities (Canada's "FCC") thought a Canadian station on that channel might interfere with U. S. radio astronomy operations.

I just get an antenna design optimized with 4NEC2, physically constructed and mounted at my grandparents' place for 14-52, and they pull this garbage.... ugh, oh well, back to the digital drawing board.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_37

Besides the somewhat spotty ban, receiver makers probably found it easier to include the capability rather than explain to buyers that they didn't need it.

Incomplete information now, but a searchable database from National association of Broadcasters:

http://www.nab.org/repacking/clearinghouse.asp

Check out your area, if listed.

jr

I checked my area, I live in the Steubenville/Wheeling area so no changes there, I jut get VHF channels 7 and 9, "that's it, Fort Pitt." ;) If I was on a hill, I might get some of the stations from ym old home, the Pittsburgh area but I live on a valley so I only get two channels, but at least one GOOD thing about the digital transition is we get Fox, ABC and MeTV on the subchannels along with CBS and NBC on the main. However, I did look at the Pittsburgh area changes as well as Youngstown and Johnstown area nearby and noticed some of the channels are on the same channel or adjacent to each other. I know Youngstown stations come into Pittsburgh quite a bit, us kids used to watch the "Money Movie" on WKBN 27 Youngstown when we were kids and teenagers during the summer when we were not outside. Given that, I had a thought at what "weisenheimer" thought of that idea to reband channels where you can have co-channel interference or adjacent channel problems. That's about s wise as the FRC (then Federal Radio Commission) putting all commercial stations on 360 meters and farm station on 485 meters in 1921.

I am 30 miles outside Cleveland, and some 35-40 miles from the city's TV towers.

I saw the FCC repack database as well; however, I found no listing whatsoever for Cleveland's CBS station on channel 19. I looked under all three options, but no luck. I was hoping I'd see it, with perhaps a move to a channel above 10, so that I could get the station using an antenna. As it stands, I do not get channel 19 on an antenna, almost certainly because of its DTV channel being channel 10. I am not certain by a long shot whether the repack will result in the station's DTV channel being moved to a channel above 10, or whether it will be moved to another VHF channel; only time will tell.

Oh well. I guess I shouldn't be concerned about the issue; after all, since I watch TV via streaming video (Roku, with the Spectrum TV app) and not OTA, it almost certainly will not matter to me where channel 19's DTV signal winds up after the repack. However, I will continue to follow the progress of the overall repack, just out of curiosity as to where the remaining TV stations not listed in this database will be moved in the RF spectrum. My best guess is most stations now on VHF DTV channels will be moved to UHF stations, in order to clear the VHF television spectrum entirely.

This rearrangement of channels will affect some areas more. A few I can think of is Baltimore with two UHF at 40 and 46, and Wilkes-Barre Scranton with three of thiers at 41, 45 and 50.

I would be OK with expanding to more subchannels on the remaining allocated VHF and UHF-low freqs, but to shift frequencies to a crowded band should not be left to the FCC.

FCC already has worsened co-channel issues (Between NYC and Baltimore) when VHF DTV channels 11 and 13 were ALSO assigned to the other two Wilkes-Barre/Scranton stations that were on UHF pre-digital. Between Baltimore and W-B-S, I can select which pair of these I get with a rotator and a deep-fringe (big) antenna with amp.

Having one strong local and three other medium-strength VHF channels is hard enough to work around with in-home broadcast equipment.