Ctc ??

[Kalamazoo-DJ]

AT&T then Comcast Cable and what ever else it was here at one time used to block Indiana WSBT CBS because WWMT CBS was in Kalamazoo and the same for Ch 10 in Lansing and Wood tv8 in GR. With Direct TV you can change your zip code and get local channels in that zip code you give them. I did it once to get local better indiana channels I wanted And WWMT and WOOD tv are in the correct placements for the numbers right now on Direct at least. CW-7 came along I have NO Idea what that is, they just advertise it every 5 minutes on Wood-8.

[jr_tech]

Oh my! what a confusing situation ! It is a sub-channel (3.2) on WWMT:

http://www.cw7michigan.com/sections/faq/

WWMT according to the FCC *actually* transmits on CH 2, but has a construction permit to move to Ch 8.

[Kalamazoo-DJ]

Ah I suppose I would get yelled at for rules so anyway lol but I hope that kalamazoo station goes up north somewhere literally to the UP of Michigan with Red Green LOL they seem to be magnetized to GR and HOLLAND so they can go!! Now they are taking 8's number spot so they can move right up there physically too.

[jr_tech]

LOL! the great digital shell game.
I suspect that over time many stations that have landed on low band channels will find that low band VHF (2-6) does not work very well for digital and will apply to the FCC to move to high VHF or UHF. Also I see that many that landed on high VHF have applied for a power increase or a move to UHF to get better coverage ! The fat lady ain't sung yet!

jr

[Jeffhs]

I've said this before, but will say it again--the FCC should have left the old NTSC television system alone, as everyone knew where all the stations were in a given area with that system; there was none of this business with subdivided channels and so on as there is today, and not nearly as much confusion. Moreover, with analog NTSC, you could get a snowy picture if the signal was weak; with digital, it is all or nothing--either you see a picture or you don't. This is very likely frustrating for OTA viewers trying to watch a particular channel, and having to move the antenna around the room trying to find the spot with the strongest signal. Even cable channels run into problems like this every now and then. I have TW basic cable (no box), and every once in a while the pictures will pixelate or freeze on the screen; the sound goes when the picture acts up, of course. This was all but unheard of with analog NTSC TV, but with DTV we have to be ready for a bunch of new problems. When DTV works it works very well (I can notice the difference in picture quality even on my 10-year-old RCA CTC-185 analog set), but when it goes awry ... look out.

My goodness! Who would have thought that the digital transition would cause so many problems with OTA reception, finding the stations on your TV, etc.? Because of DTV, every local TV station in the US has had to replace transmitters, antennas, and so forth, which causes confusion for viewers because the stations often wind up on digital channels that often are quite different from the stations' RF channels.

The DTV OTA reception problems are something else TV viewers don't need, but are experiencing in some areas, especially those that have DTV stations on VHF channels. Many of these VHF stations have applied to the FCC for permission to increase transmitter power, as one station did in Philadelphia last summer, not long after the transition. Other VHF DTV stations are seeking permission to move to UHF channels. I'm not sure by any means, but since the transition I think every one of Cleveland's television stations, including our three original network ones, are now operating on UHF frequencies. However, to viewers with DTV converter boxes or using TVs connected directly to cable, the channels will appear as whole numbers on the channel displays, as I mentioned in another post.

I was surprised to read in the informational post on upper Michigan's "The CW7" station that indoor antennas absolutely cannot be used for reception of DTV stations on channel 2. The article stated that a standard, full-length antenna is required for optimum (or in some cases and in some reception areas, any) reception of stations telecasting on that channel. I can remember the old Rembrandt VHF/UHF rabbit ears TV antennas that had 102" (well, in any case, very long) dipoles, the full length of which was needed in those days for optimum reception of VHF analog channel 2.

That was then. This is now, however; we have come almost full circle in the last 60 years. I have a feeling that an updated version of those old Rembrandt set-top antennas with long dipoles and amplifiers may appear in stores before too long, for use by folks who cannot use outdoor TV antennas and/or refuse to pay for cable or satellite.

If most TV stations eventually move to UHF, however, the antennas will be much smaller, but the amplifier (if any) would be retained as many DTV stations, even those transmitting on UHF channels, are still too weak to be received well with indoor antennas in all signal areas. The best bet, if it is at all possible, however, is to use an outdoor antenna for DTV, unless you are within a stone's throw (literally) of the stations' towers. DTV signals are still too weak in most areas, or there are other problems such as reflections and/or dead spots, to be received reliably (or at all) with indoor antennas, even amplified ones.

[Kalamazoo-DJ]

I know when I had my original Zenith roundie in 1978 with a rooftop antenna with no rotor I could get 3,6,8,10, 13,41,47,MI channels ( and at night channel 50 in detroit) and 16,22,28,46 Indiana Channels. And one from Chicago IL. And it seems to be the way of the day to have ALL or NONE of about everything.