Analog and digital TV channels on cable -- why?

[Jeffhs]

While rescanning my flat-screen TV today, I noticed that the TV will scan first for analog channels, then for digital ones; in my area the set will find 66 analog and 44 digital channels on the cable (Time Warner). I'm more than a bit confused. Why are there still analog TV stations in the US, when analog television was done away with on June 12, 2009? Do cable systems operate under different rules than do broadcast stations? That is, are cable operators still permitted to carry analog NTSC signals and digital ATSC ones on the same cable? This doesn't seem right to me. My understanding was that on June 12, 2009 all analog television, including on cable, would be discontinued and everything, with no exceptions whatsoever, would be digital. How do the cable companies get away with carrying analog NTSC signals in this day and age? Will there ever be a day when there will be no more NTSC analog signals on any cable system? Most if not all flat-screen TVs have tuners capable of receiving NTSC, ATSC and clear QAM signals, so there should be no problem with any modern TV's ability to receive the new digital channels. I am just curious as to when or if analog NTSC signals will disappear from U. S. and Canadian cable TV systems.

[Kamakiri]

The whole ruling and change in broadcast standard over to a mandatory digital signal left a really bad taste in my mouth when it was announced. Other than a blatant attempt by the government to spur electronics sales in a depressed economy, can anyone provide sound reasoning as to why this law took effect in the first place? Has anyone DONE anything with the old TV frequencies? Not that I've heard of.

Apologies in advance if I'm derailing the thread by asking, but I felt that the fundamental question linked up with Jeff's post.

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by Kamakiri

The whole ruling and change in broadcast standard over to a mandatory digital signal left a really bad taste in my mouth when it was announced. Other than a blatant attempt by the government to spur electronics sales in a depressed economy, can anyone provide sound reasoning as to why this law took effect in the first place? Has anyone DONE anything with the old TV frequencies? Not that I've heard of.

Apologies in advance if I'm derailing the thread by asking, but I felt that the fundamental question linked up with Jeff's post.

I feel the same way regarding the reasoning (or lack of it) behind the DTV transition. It was almost certainly, as you mentioned, an attempt by the FCC to kickstart sales of new technology, in this case flat-panel TV. I have a feeling, however, that our government is trying its darnedest to align the US with the rest of the world, which for the most part adopted digital TV years ago.

The original NTSC analog video standard served us well for over five decades, and in many ways was superior to DTV. While I agree that DTV can and does produce better pictures (more pixels of resolution versus NTSC's 525-line interlaced standard) -- I like the picture on my own 19" FP much better than what I had grown used to watching on my old CRTs -- the digital broadcast standards have created real problems for viewers, such as reflections and dead spots when trying to view DTV using rabbit ears or even outdoor antennas. DTV's all-or-nothing nature means that you will either see a picture or a blank screen; there is no in-between as there was with NTSC analog. This has forced many people to subscribe to cable, satellite, or AT&T U-Verse (the last is probably available only in the Great Lakes region of the US), and it is no secret that a lot of folks don't like having to pay for the privilege of watching TV programs they previously (read for years or decades) received over the air, with an antenna, and without having to pay anything except the cost of the TV and antenna.

Some folks do receive watchable signals on antennas, but they are in the minority because of DTV's line-of-sight and all-or-nothing nature. It wouldn't surprise me if many folks in the US, and in Canada as well since that country switched to DTV late last year, have given up on watching TV altogether since the transition. Their mindset may well be that if they have to pay to get their TV reception, the heck with it -- they will do without. I personally am not crazy about having to pay for cable, but I have no choice since I live in an apartment building with a strict ruling against outdoor TV antennas. Satellite dishes are allowed (one of my upstairs neighbors has one and there is a dish mounted atop the building), but not antennas. Go figure.

However, DTV is here to stay, so we might as well get used to it -- faults and all. Wishing that analog NTSC will somehow magically return in the US some day is absolutely pointless, because it won't happen -- no thanks to our greedy FCC and government in general. The closest thing we still have to analog NTSC, at least for now, are the analog channels still being carried on cable. I say "at least for now" because analog cable is in the process of being phased out, meaning that eventually, as I have mentioned before, all analog broadcasting, even over cable systems, will disappear. I can see a day coming in the not too distant future when I will rescan my flat-screen TV and the tuner will find only digital channels -- no more analog. The situation may even force me to rent a cable box, although since my TV has an NTSC-ATSC-clear QAM tuner, I would be very surprised if that were the case. Today's flat TVs are designed to receive most if not all OTA (over the air) and cable signals (the digital channel display on my FP has five digits [!] -- are there any cable systems in this country with anywhere near that many channels?), so unless someone wants special features such as movie channels, they will have no need for a cable box ahead of any modern TV.

As well, as time goes on, old analog NTSC TVs will be junked in favor of FPs when the former finally develop serious repair problems. Again, I can see a day coming, and it may not be too terribly far off (in fact, it may have already arrived), when every U. S. home will have at least one flat TV, and no analog sets. As I see it, analog NTSC and b&w TVs are useless nowadays to anyone other than collectors; those folks who still own older TVs will keep them as long as they work, but as soon as they go bad, out they go, to be replaced by FPs. This is really the only recourse anyone has nowadays if they want a new TV, since analog sets are no longer available except on the used market -- and they wind up there, for the most part, because their owners have upgraded to flat panels. The only uses I can see for analog NTSC TVs these days are as video monitors for games, DVD players and VCRs.

[Kamakiri]

You've brought up another interesting point.

Antique radio restoration is still a popular hobby, because you can still use a restored radio. Sure, if AM were phased out too, you could still buy one of those AM-100 transmitters, but that would have a profound impact on the hobby.

One wonders if eventually restoring vintage televisions will be akin to going into a museum, unbolting the 14th century Viking ship from the suspended cables on the ceiling rafters, and trying to put it in the water.

[Electronic M]

Well there have been folks that have built exacting replicas of viking ships and sailed them....Just say'n.

[ChrisW6ATV]

Jeff-

All politics and other-type comments aside, the quick answer to your original basic question is that broadcast TV uses the public airwaves and therefore is regulated by our government, but cable TV is a private industry that pays for all of its infrastructure and therefore can put any type of signals on there they please (more or less).

The same distinction is why broadcast TV has strict limits on language and other content but cable/satellite/fiber lacks such limits.

[mstaton]

Cable companies will eventually switch over to all Digital but it will take some time. I believe some already have but you will still need a converter box for movie channels or for people with older analog TV's. Here where I live is still mostly analog(cable TV) unless you have the Digital Box for HD channels. Seems we get everything late in the game here in Idaho even though this is where TV was invented and one of the last states to get it. Anything "Over the air" is always more heavily regulated than pay service broadcasts. In fact, cable companies don't really have to ever stray away from NTSC unless they are forced to.

[Penthode]

You have to remember that DTV is also all about efficiency of spectrum usage. The FCC is currently trying to squeeze back the TV spectrum further.

The DTV transition in 2009 reduced the TV broadcast spectrum from 68 to 50 channels. The current of round of discussion in Congress is about reducing that further to 30. This means that terrestrial free to air TV is under threat and DTV with the ability to squeeze multiple streams into a single 6MHz terrestrial channel is seen by many legislators as a panacea.

Most cable companies have severely curtailed analog or discontinued it already. All new TVs have cable ready tuners.

Consider this: terrestrial DTV broadcast via 8VSB modulation over a 6MHz channel with an audio/video payload of aboout 18.5Mb/s, can carry five SD (better than NTSC) streams or up to two HD streams in one terrestrial channel.

Digital cable distributed over the same 6MHz bandwidth uses 256QAM modulation with a net video/audio payload of about 37Mb/s. It can carry up to 12 SD (better than one NTSC) streams or up to 4 HD streams over the same 6MHz channel which would carry an NTSC analog signal! (Cable DTV is via a more benign distribution environment of a wire as opposed to terrestrial over the air, which accounts for the extra program streams in one six MHz channel),

[6GH8cowboy]

The wireless bandwidth for all the new toys we are encouraged to buy has to come from somewhere. Here's something to consider. All digital information is "addressable", or can be and someone can determine at will who will get what, when and where in a time of crissis, spoon fed to the masses, if you will. I prefer to get what I feel is the best info on my own and goven myself accordinly. If AM radio goes away we could be screw'd. I rememder the media saying dammage after Andrew wasn't too bad.... untill the sun came up, Remember Katrina? More recently the Costa ship with "it's just an electrical problem".. untill it listed and sank.
I,ve met people, that are astounded that there is free tv in the air that dosn't need a data plan, dish, or cable bill to get, it's the culture of our time. I don't want to seen like an alarmist, but we are becoming a society of information haves and have nots and its becoming clear that more and more control is being placed on all aspects of broadcasting and our access to information.

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by 6GH8cowboy

I,ve met people, that are astounded that there is free tv in the air that dosn't need a data plan, dish, or cable bill to get, it's the culture of our time. I don't want to seen like an alarmist, but we are becoming a society of information haves and have nots and its becoming clear that more and more control is being placed on all aspects of broadcasting and our access to information.

Many people cannot receive free TV signals any longer since television went digital almost three years ago, which is why there are so many cable and satellite subscribers today. In many areas over-the-air DTV is problematic as all get out (and in many cases impossible to receive over an antenna) because of reflections, dead spots and areas the signals just plain do not reach. Television signals have always been line of sight, but DTV is even worse because of the high frequencies at which most stations operate
(most TV stations today, with few exceptions, are now on UHF channels).

Your observation that many people are amazed at the fact that there is still such a thing as free television has merit, but you have to remember that most people saying this are far too young to remember over-the-air NTSC television. Kids, especially teenagers, are growing up with DTV, satellite and cable and do not realize that there ever was any such thing as free television transmitted over the airwaves.

DTV has created another generation gap because of this; tell a 17-year-old, for example, that you used to watch TV on a set with a picture tube in a huge cabinet, and you are likely to get a blank stare or a response such as "Huh? People actually watched TV on those things?!" I am reminded of a cartoon I saw in an electronics magazine years ago, in which a couple of TV technicians were looking at a set that was just brought in for repair. One technician took the back off, saw the tubes in their sockets and, bewildered, asked the other tech, "What the hell is a vacuum tube?!" Obviously, that technician must have been too young to remember when all televisions had vacuum tubes.

Teenagers, and for that matter anyone under about 35 years old, are growing up/have grown up with cable, satellite and DTV. They do not know any other kind of television and probably believe that TVs with picture tubes and in space-hogging wood cabinets are from at least the Stone Age. Today's teenagers do not, either, remember tube-operated radios or life before iPods, iPads, tablet computers or the Internet, so again we have an entire generation who have grown up knowing only digital everything (or so it seems).

Don't fault them for this. It is not their fault they were born in the digital age. It would not surprise me if, a generation or two from now, kids of that era will be amazed at the Internet we knew 20 years earlier, which certainly will have evolved greatly from what it was then. Technology is changing these days at almost literally breakneck speed, so the Internet we know today bears little resemblance to the one we knew in the mid-'90s, when Bill Gates came up with the idea for what is now known as the World-Wide Web.

Tomorrow's Internet will be poles different from the Internet we now know (and have known for 20 years or more), but don't expect kids of that era to remember any earlier versions of it, any more than they would remember vacuum tubes or life before any of the modern technology existed that we use and enjoy today. It is impossible for anyone to remember anything that existed before they were born, which is why all U. S. schools teach American history and why there are historical archives of and Internet web sites devoted to the history of most devices, technology, etc. that existed years or decades before the present time. This is the only way today's generation (and every generation to follow) can learn about the predecessors to the Internet, iPods, iPads, tablet computers, et al.

[tvtimeisfun]

Hello this is just another way for the government to get in our pockets for this is not a very good way to do it5 but soon they will charge us for the air that we breathe we all knew that this was coming to a head when thay started talking about this stupid change over for our opinions do not count towards their ideas on this matter like it or not we are stuck with the new junk..

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by tvtimeisfun

like it or not we are stuck with the new junk..

I am slow to adopt changes in anything, and waited awhile (about a year or so) after the DTV transition to get a flat-panel digital TV, but I must say, now that I have one, I think DTV produces a much better picture than NTSC analog ever did, because of the much higher resolution (up to 1080p) of the former. I will not go back to NTSC analog, although I still have both of my analog sets in storage.

DTV is here to stay -- the US is not about to revert to NTSC analog television standards. The latter was the standard for U. S. and Canadian TV for over five decades, but times have changed. Most of the rest of the world switched to DTV long before North America did; if I remember correctly something I read awhile back about DTV penetration in the world, there are only a small handful of countries left (if that many) which still use analog TV broadcast standards and technology.

"The new junk", as you put it, is indeed what we must deal with today. New DTVs may not last longer than two years or until the warranty expires (whichever comes first), but unfortunately, that's the way of it nowadays. Time was when anyone could and did expect a new TV to last at least ten to fifteen years (my grandmother had a GE console TV she bought new in 1951, and the set was still working 20 years later when she finally got a color set, which lasted 30 years); however, such is not the case today. I bought a cheap 12" tube-type portable TV in 1975 that lasted all of three years before burning up. In sharp contrast, the Zenith 12" b&w portable I bought to replace it lasted 22 years, and was still going strong when I eventually gave it up in 2000. When I moved here in late 1999, I bought an RCA CTC185 19" table model TV that still works well today, 12 years later, and my 1995 Zenith Sentry 2 was (and I have every reason to believe still is) still working as well as always.

Imported "junk", be it televisions or anything else, is the norm these days. We live in a throwaway society in which things are discarded rather than repaired and kept any length of time.

I should talk (!), however, as I did just that myself with my first DVD player, when it finally bit the dust three years after I got it as a Christmas present. My current DVD, a Memorex DVD2042 full-size model, has a known issue with a capacitor that supposedly swells and splits open after the first nine months following the original purchase; well, mine is almost three years old and still works, although I have to admit I don't use it as much as some folks use their DVD players. I watch a movie occasionally (I have a Netflix subscription and a small but growing collection of my own DVDs), so my player doesn't get nearly the use as would a machine owned by a family of avid TV/DVD watchers. I would expect a heavily-used DVD player to fail within a year or so, given the cheap parts with which these machines are built, but again, that's the way of it these days.

I have yet to hear of or see a DVD player or a flat-screen TV that has lasted more than five years; most don't make it past two, again because of the cheap, slap-dash way in which they are manufactured on Korean or other offshore assembly lines. I was looking at a consumer-watchdog website the other day on which people were complaining -- bitterly -- about the problems they were having with a certain model of Zenith (actually manufactured by Lucky Goldstar or LG) flat-screen plasma television. Almost all the complainants reported hearing a loud "pop" sound accompanied by a burning smell, followed by no picture (as well as other problems, such as multicolored blobs right in the center of the screen -- making the set nearly unusable), after the TV had been on only a short length of time. In many cases, repeated attempts to have the set repaired resulted in the TV operating properly for anywhere from one day to three years before developing the same problem again.

Many of these people vowed, not surprisingly, that they would never again buy anything made by LG -- and I don't blame them. My own flat-screen TV is manufactured by an offshore electronics firm no one ever heard of (their name begins, IIRC, with an X), and contains many LG parts. I don't know how long my set will last. I've had it almost six months now and it still works well, but as to its future longevity, I don't know. I watch it several hours a day and like it, but I don't relish the thought of possibly having to replace it in two years or even less (!!!) with yet another disposable TV.

Sheeeesh.

[radiodayz]

Maybe I'm being paranoid, but I think...the DTV transition was just the beginning. I see a future coming where over-the-air TV and radio are gone, replaced by streaming programming on the Internet. Reason given will be that it's cheaper and more efficient than maintaining those big ol' transmitters and towers, but the real reason will be because it's easier for "them" to monitor our viewing and listening habits, and censor or spin what "they" want us to see. We have to speak up NOW if we don't want this to happen, and also to maintain a free, uncensored Internet.

[Kamakiri]

Originally Posted by Jeffhs

"The new junk", as you put it, is indeed what we must deal with today. New DTVs may not last longer than two years or until the warranty expires (whichever comes first), but unfortunately, that's the way of it nowadays. Time was when anyone could and did expect a new TV to last at least ten to fifteen years (my grandmother had a GE console TV she bought new in 1951, and the set was still working 20 years later when she finally got a color set, which lasted 30 years); however, such is not the case today. I bought a cheap 12" tube-type portable TV in 1975 that lasted all of three years before burning up. In sharp contrast, the Zenith 12" b&w portable I bought to replace it lasted 22 years, and was still going strong when I eventually gave it up in 2000. When I moved here in late 1999, I bought an RCA CTC185 19" table model TV that still works well today, 12 years later, and my 1995 Zenith Sentry 2 was (and I have every reason to believe still is) still working as well as always.

First off, Jeff, I have to say that I always enjoy reading your well thought out, articulate posts

Cheap is as cheap does, but let's look for a moment at costs of technology in relative terms and present value of past-era dollars.

The 1963 Zenith 17" black and white portable that I still use in my office on occasion (and working perfectly, as most Zeniths of the era still do), was according to an ad found on the internet, priced at $149.95 new. Translate that into today's dollars, that works out to $1,070. An RCA roundie color set ad that I came across from 1965 shows sets in living COLOR, priced from 399.95, meaning that's the low end of the scale. In today's dollars, that's $2,760.00.

That said, it's not much of a stretch to see why the sets lasted longer, and were much more well cared for. When you have to pay more for something considered durable goods, you certainly expect it to last. And television has become more of a disposable luxury than it ever was, not only because the technology has been available for far longer, but because there are a lot more entertainment options out there.

Sure, the quality isn't there, but just as in today's cars, the value of the technology is much more important to the consumer than a well-constructed unit, because as Jeff said, it's going to be obsolete shortly anyways.

[Penthode]

Jeff, I too liked your well thought out post. I do however take exception to your statement of Bill Gates and his contribution to the world wide web. If I recall, Microsoft was late in the game and I remember the frantic catch up in the late '90's.

After all, Bill Gate's did even earlier exclaim that 640k RAM should be enough for anybody!