Public often fooled by HD that isn't HD

Not only do we have HD channels that don't provide 24 hours a day of High Def programming, even new shows produced that you assume are in High Def, aren't

Take for example, TBS. They started airing a new one-hour series called "Glory Daze" about kids going to college in the mid 80's. It was supposed to be nostalgic. That's my generation. I found it stupid, unfunny, and uninteresting. But what I found most offensive was that the show was launched in 2010 on a High Def network, and the show isn't in High Def. TBS says it is, but it is not.

It is very easy to tell when a TV show is in High Def. You should NEVER have to look at the TV show and squint your eyes a bit and say to yourself, "is that in HD". If it is, there is no question.

Consumers started to really dislike television shows that were "stretched" to fit the new wide screen format. The shows were out of focus, characters looked short and fat, and heads were often cut off. But the shot filled the screen so TV execs thought they could fool the public. It only takes watching ONE show in real high definition to realize what you are missing. So TV execs siad "let's at least produce these shows in the 16:9 aspect ratio". Yeah, that will fool them.

Back to "Glory Daze". What they did to this show is the same thing I am seeing all over the place. Shows are produced in a 16:9 aspect ratio (the same length to width ratio of your wide flat screen TV" but it is still in standard definition. A brand new TV show, produced in the 21st century, and it's not in HD even though it is being broadcast on an HD network.

As it turns out there are four categories of TV:

1. Standard definition TV (that's a 4:3 aspect ratio) that has the black pillars on either side of the picture (I refuse to watch that entirely)
2. Standard definition TV that has been stretched to fit the 16:9 ratio. Disconcerting and distracting to watch
3. Standard definition TV filmed in 16:9 format (watchable - but disappointing)
4. And then real HD. Mostly the big 7 networks in Prime Time broadcast in real HD. But some, like "Extreme Makeover Home Edition" on ABC don't even try. That's because they film in the field (not in a studio). HD field cameras are very expensive.

It's easy to discern which shows are in HD. If the picture is so clear that you say "gee that picture is nice", that's your first clue. Then, on a facial close up, if you can see white light reflected back to you in the actors pupil, that's your second clue that it's HD. Standard def rarely, if ever, has this reflection. Third, HD is simply easier to watch. Your eyes don't strain, every detail is easily visible and the color is beautiful.

Some Faux-HD exists that is fairly good. HDNet had Hogan's Heroes (yes that late 60's, early 70's TV show) in high definition. You see, when the original film is of a certain film stock and quality, it can be digitally enhanced and reprocessed to be as close to real HD as possible, the results are quite good. But it's expensive to go back and reprocess these old shows. Some more current shows like "Friends" will never be in "faux HD" because it was filmed on video tape, not film.

A huge number of Americans have now spent the money on a High Def TV. Half of them don't know how to actually get HD on their HD TV. Of the ones that do, half of those don't really know if they are watching an HD show or not.

I can receive all 7 broadcast networks over the air, in HD, with an antenna, for free. It's the best quality HD because there is nothing between the signal and my TV. As for quality, as much as I despise The Today Show on NBC, that's where you will see some of the best quality HD. The CBS evening news is also excellent, as is PBS's news hour. Because all of these are in 1080i, the highest quality HD for broadcast television, they look spectacular. Fox, ABC, Fox, MyNetwork, and the CW all broadcast in 720p. Good, but not excellent quality HD.

For cable, if you have CNN in HD, you won't see a better quality HD feed.

As for the rest of cable TV high definition, so much of it is junk. That's why most cable companies no longer charge extra for HD itself. They charge you for digital TV and for the DVR, but the extra charges for the cable company to simply supply you with an HD feed have vanished. And there's a good reason for it. Even after all of this time, we still can't get many non-reality TV shows in HD. (I don't count DIY shows, and all reality shows to be real TV - when I talk about TV shows I mean the real one hour dramas and sitcoms.)

You are not getting what you think you are. It's time you started making some calls.

Southern Maine get's ready for the final "final date" of DTV transtion

Only 4 days left until June 12, 2009 - the new "drop dead" date for all Americans to be ready for Digital Television.

As a common lay person not involved directly with television broadcasting or the television industry, this has been the longest 2 years of my life. When I started writing, investigating, and talking to as many people as I could over 2 years ago, I had no idea what I was in for.

It was a long, arduous journey up to February 17, 2009 when we THOUGHT that analog signals for high powered, over-the-air Television Stations would end. Then, the FCC and the Obama Administration "extended" the drop dead date to June 12, 2009, to give those involved (since 1996) a few more months to get it right.

Even Michael Copps, Acting FCC Chairman, said that the FCC was NOT able to accomplish much and was not able to make much of a difference during the 4 month extension. Why? Well, in my opinion it was "over exposure". The American public was sick to death of hearing about the transition. Those that were going to do something about it already did and those that procrastinated continued to do so.

The FCC and the National Association of Broadcasters have already admitted that there is not much they can do now but wait and clean up the mess (reference Broadcasting & Cable Magazine, June 2009). After June 12 they will start dealing with reception problems. Do you know what that means?

For those who rely on antenna TV it means that the number of stations they received under analog TV will be reduced, in many cases significantly, to one or two if they are lucky. And there is not a single person or agency they can call who will care. I know that because people who visit this site have reported to me on numerous occasions that they have DTV reception problems with the DTV converter boxes. And in calling the TV stations involved, have received little, if any, help at all.

The local TV stations point fingers at the FCC, who point fingers back at the TV stations, who point fingers back at the Association of Broadcasters in their area, who blame the government, who blame the TV stations who blame the public. It is as vicious a circle as I have ever seen.

For those of us in Maine, a large portion (about 14%) of the population rely ONLY on over-the-air reception for television. And it just so happens that a great deal of these people seem to live on the "cusp" between where the analog signal used to reach and where the digital signal will reach.

FCC Commissioner Copps himself has admitted that his own DTV converter box worked fine over this past winter; but when spring came and the leaves came, so did the DTV signal interference. So if we're going to have problems with leaves being in the way, I don't think the State of Maine is where you're going to be most happy with over-the-air Digital TV.

To bring one more layer of confusion, some TV stations will change the channel number from which they broadcast their digital signal on June 12, 2009. I am having a tough time nailing down which channels in Maine will and which one's won't change. From what I can gather at this point here is the run down of the stations I know about in Southern Maine.

(The channel number that is displayed on your screen when you channel surf is called the PSIP; which can be different from the actual UHF broadcast channel)

WCSH (NBC) Channel 6 will remain UHF 44
WMTW (ABC) Channel 8 will change to VHF 8
WGME (CBS) Channel 13 will remain UHF 38
WPFO (Fox) Channel 23 will remain UHF 23
WPME (MYN) Channel 35 will remain UHF 35
WPXT (CW) Channel 51 will remain UHF 43
Maine PBS - depends on where you are. Check http://www.mpbn.net/About/DTV/tabid/251/Default.aspx for details.

For me, the only one of these I need to worry about is WMTW because that's the only channel in Southern Maine that I receive that is changing. So instead of doing an entire rescan (which can cause more problems that it's worth) I will simply manually change my DTV to look for channel 8 on Channel 8.1 instead of 46.1. I would suggest you do the same unless don't know how to do this in which case you better stick with the full re-scan of channels on your DTV device.

Good luck to you all. I have heard there are some things going on at the State and Federal level to help improve signal strength of digital TV but I doubt you will see the benefits of that for many months.

Metrocast Cable - no solution, but finally some answers

I received a phone call from one of Metrocast's top technicians. Without disclosing too much I'll refer to him as Mike. I've spoken with Mike before, as well as had email conversations, regarding many issues that I have had with reception on digital cable and high definition. He is well-informed, professional, and quite good at his job.

Mike apologized on behalf of Metrocast for how I was treated. To have a "supervisor" call me and leave me a message that said I wasn't receiving a particular channel because that channel was not in my channel line-up, was ridiculous. And Mike knew it. The customer service representatives have some serious training issues if they don't know what channels their customers receive in each of their companies delivery regions. And if a supervisor doesn't know, it indicates how widespread the problem is. But, I accepted Mike's apology and we agreed to move beyond all of that and look toward solutions. I also asked Mike if he could see about removing the "black mark" from my customer record at Metrocast. (I was flagged as an ornery customer and under no circumstances should I be transferred to a manger if I asked for one). Mike said that he would check on that. In my opinion, my customer record should say "This guy knows what he's talking about, so listen to him when he calls" but I highly doubt they will mark my account as such.

In the end, Mike gave me his cell phone number and email address so that if ever there are problems like the ones I had been experiencing, I could contact him directly.

As luck would have it (or is it un-luck) Channel 51, WPXT out of Portland, was experiencing some of the same pixelation issues and lack of audio through my cable connection. In checking that against my HDTV connected to an antenna, the HDTV/Antenna setup was working just fine with no degradation of signal at all. So the problem had to be at Metrocast. I contacted Mike.

The explanation, and problem, has to do with a piece of equipment at Metrocast that takes the signal from a broadcaster and "processes" it before sending it down the wire to customers. In this "processing", if the signal is lost, the equipment must be manually reset or the signal that gets sent down the line to customers is degraded (pixelation and lacking audio).

So it would seem that every time Metrocast loses a signal temporarily from a broadcaster and nobody is there at Metrocast to see it and be able to react to it, then the signal to the customer is dead in the water until a manual reset is finally done.

To me, there must be some better quality equipment out there than can "automatically" reset itself upon the loss/regaining of a broadcasters signal. I've talked to some people in the industry who have indicated that such things exist. Which leads me to the real issue which is money. Metrocast is either cheap, or broke. Neither of these options are good. I don't like subscribing to a company who is cheap, nor do I enjoy subscribing to a company who can't afford state of the art equipment.

In the end, I don't know what to do with all of this information. On one hand I don't have much choice but to give Metrocast a chance to fix the problems from a long term perspective. Satellite cable is a possibility but due to signal obstructions, and a $600 deposit for the equipment, this scenario seems prohibitive. So while I don't know where this will all end up, at least I have a Metrocast representative who is willing to work with me on these issues and not dismiss me when I call. At least one Metrocast representative respect my intelligence, experience, and understanding of the big "cable" picture.

A complaint about HDTV reception and Channel 13 - WGME

This is an email I received directly in my inbox from someone very frustrated with HDTV reception:
----------------------------------------------------
I am emailing to complain about this transition that was forced upon us viewers. For those of us who do not have cable or satellite TV, this has quickly become a nuisance. Channel 13, specifically, has most of the shows that I like to watch, yet I cannot maintain signal. I have scanned for channels several times, adjusted my antenna, and was able to improve it to the limited signal that I currently have, but while other stations have a much stronger signal and a consistently clear picture now without all of the annoying pixelation and cuts, I find it especially aggravating that this one station, that I watch the most, cannot maintain a consistent signal. I am amazed to not hear stories of sponsors pulling their ads and dropping their support! Is this ever going to be resolved? Or, are we viewers stuck with this ineffective system?
----------------------------------------------------
I am going to email this user back with my comments but I thought I woud post this here so that others can comment as well.

RSC

Update: Maine Television's Transition to Digital - what's really going on

Although President Obama signed a bill to extend the drop dead date for Analog broadcasting from February 17, 2009 to June 12, 2009, it is NOT a mandate. Broadcast television stations CAN extend their analog broadcasting, but they don't HAVE TO. So what's happening here in Maine? And what's happens beyond the conversion?

The future of Maine's broadcast television stations is in some ways written in stone and in other ways is very "up in the air" so to speak (pun intended).

There is a lot going on that we know about, but as always I am more interested in what we are not being told.

As of February 17, 2009 the following TV stations in Maine will still cease Analog operations and be Digital only. Some listed below have already shut off their analog signal.

WGME - CBS 13
*WPXT - CW - 51
*WPME - MyNetwork - 35
*MPBN - PBS Maine- Channel 10 in most areas except 9 in Orono and 45 in Biddeford
**WPFO - Fox 23
NHPTV - NH Public TV - Several channels
WVII - ABC 7 - Bangor

* Station has already dropped analog signal
** Station will do a flash cut-over from analog to digital on 2/17/09

CONGRATULATIONS, and job well done. I am glad that these stations have a backbone and continue forward on the conversion. The supposed extension to June is plain silliness. Why sign an extension bill if it is non-binding and all it does is cost different people money. It's crazy and unnecessary. The Converter Box Coupon program is not broke. The FCC handed out millions of coupons that were requested, but not really needed by the people who ordered them. And they sent out millions to people who simply let them expire without ever using them. The FCC is accounting for all of these unused and unneeded coupons as if it's money out the door and then claiming they are in the red. It's a bunch of crap. I don't know the percentages because the won't tell me but there must be a huge number of coupons out there that have never and will never be used. So I'd like to see the FCCs books to see if they moved those dollars back into the "cash available" column.

Now these are the TV in Maine stations who don't have a backbone and are using this fake extension as an excuse to hide their sub-standard technological abilities.

WMTW - ABC - 8 - Portland
WCSH - NBC - 6 Portland
WLBZ- NBC - 2 Bangor - owned by WCSH
WABI - CBS - 5 Bangor
The CW - used to be 56 Bangor, now just digital and only standard definition as a sub channel of WABI - The WABI/CW partnership is the most confusing and screwed up setup I have ever seen. I don't even think this CW entity has its own channel number anymore.

So there you have it, the winners and losers. Or is that the whole story?

The real truth is that NOT ONE MAINE TV STATONS is producing any programming in High Definition or even Standard Definition in 16:9 widescreen format. Not ONE. In Boston all three of the big three local affiliates produce their local news in High Definition. And they use Standard Def widescreen cameras for many of the field shots. WCVB even produces the only New England based non-news programming in High Definition. It's called Chronicle and they do an unbelievable job with production values.

Now in my area, WCSH, WMTW, and WGME all produce their news in digital, but standard definition. So all of us with HD televisions have to put up with two black bars on the side of the picture (called pillars). Many HDTV can't streth the picture to fit the screen easily because said black pillars are broadcast as part of the picture. The pillars exists only to fill up the screen. You would think that the people at these TV stations would be EMBARRASSED at this point. Hell, even Oprah and Ellen are in High Definition now, but Maine's crack TV technical directors can't quite figure out how to broadcast these programs in HD to Maine viewers. If Boston can do it why can't Maine? Is it about the money?

Of course it is. But they will blame in on the "economic downturn" or "reduced advertising revenue". The bottom line is that these stations are all owned by some corporate conglomerate. So until Maine's population demands High Definition local programming and refuses to watch the existing, ridiculous 1980's-style "news", then our TV stations will continue to offer sub-standard programming. If they aren't losing viewers, they have not reason to change anything.

Isn't it time we spoke up? Haven't we had to deal with enough with the digital conversion? WE WANT OUR HDTV!!!

Here's the big picture. A lot of people in Maine rely on over-the-air TV broadcasting. They have been forced to buy a new digital TV (and maybe a new antenna) or a converter box (and maybe a new antenna). When they have completed this, and hook it all up, they most likely receive fewer channels than they did before, because digital signals aren't as strong. The FCC promised that consumers would receive the same stations they did before. THIS IS NOT TRUE. The FCC had NO IDEA what they were talking about and did not know how many consumers would be affected by a reduction in the number of channels received. Now add on top of this all of the public service announcements and TV crawlers and news articles that have been going on for almost 2 years. The whole thing has been a major production and in my opinion, since the government started this whole thing, it was bound to be a mess, and it is.

So after all this don't we deserve to have high definition programming all the time, not just digital. Digital TV by itself isn't "better" than high quality analog broadcasting, not to the human eye anyway. So if you're not going to make a real difference and go HD all the way, then why bother. It's like in the old days if they had started selling color TVs and then no programming was in color, wouldn't you be a bit upset after you spent the money on a new set?

The Maine TV stations who are so behind the curve should be ashamed of themselves; I am ashamed and embarrassed by them. Thank goodness I can get the Boston channels from my house.

The analog extension is back on

As many of you already know the extension of analog TV is back on. After initially being turned down by the U.S. House of Representatives, somehow it was revisited and then voted on again; this time with enough votes to pass.

Known as the DTV Delay Act of 2009 (Bill HR 681) here is how clarification provisions of the bill read:

Declares that this Act does not prevent: (1) a station from ending analog broadcasting (and continuing to broadcast exclusively digitally) before June 13, 2009; or (2) a public safety service from beginning operations on spectrum recovered as a result of such voluntary cessation of analog or digital broadcasting.

So what does this "law" do? It allows the converter box coupon program to get additional funding and to continue beyond February 17, 2009 to June 13, 2009.

What does this law NOT do? It doesn't force any television station to continue broadcasting in analog if they don't choose to. And most WILL NOT CHOOSE TO because it is costing them a lot of money to broadcast in Analog AND digital.

So let's break it down. If you still want or need a $40 coupon to buy a digital converter box (and most people still don't know if they need one or not), then you can still apply for one and get one. The coupon will give you $40.00 off the purchase of a converter box, which averages between $50 and $60 dollars each. For those that do not have them yet, THEY ARE STILL OUT OF LUCK.

Digital is here, there is no way to stop it. The law that was passed is about funding for a program. The program in question was supposedly broke. But if they stop and count all of the coupons they issued that were never used the question becomes, were they really broke?????

Digital TV reception is bad. The FCC wanted consumer to continue to receive free over-the-air TV ever though broadcast TV stations were forced to convert digital. The FCC figured that if a consumer received X number of channels in analog, they would receive the same number of channels in digital. They figured wrong. Digital TV signals are much, much weaker than analog signals. So if you receive a digital channel, you'll get a great picture, but if you don't receive a channel very well, there won't be a fuzzy or snowy picture, there won't be any picture at all.

This law/bill does not address reception issues. However, reception issues are what everyone who is relying on a converter box for over-the-air TV is worried about. Many, or most, have realized that their antenna TVs used to get a lot more channels than they do with a digital converter box. It's not the box's fault. It's the signal from the TV station.

Some TV stations have increased their signal power, some plan to soon, and some don't plan to. So good luck. You're on your own. Nobody is addressing this issue. Not the FCC, not your State, not your local government, not the TV stations themselves, no Congressman, no Senators, NOBODY.

And therein lies the problem. This whole digital conversion thing is not about converter boxes and extensions of official dates. It is about TV reception. All the extensions and all the funding for digital converter boxes and all of the public service announcements aren't going to amount to a hill of beans because digital TV reception sucks.

The FCC overlooked it and doesn't care about it. All of the rules and regulations took placed for the most part under the Bush Administration who appointed Republican cronies to the jobs at the FCC. These were cushy jobs that had no accountability, as usual. And only now is the U.S. government realizing what has happened.

Maine Digital TV and HDTV - Update, Tools, Reception Issues, and History

We've come a long way baby.  For Google's recent 10th anniversary they brought back a 10 year old version of Google and the available index at the time.  Actually, Google has only saved archives of their index back to 2001 so while the Google interface is realistic back to 1998, the search results can only be reproduced back to 2001.  In doing a search for "HDTV in Maine" the following page was the first one referenced in the search results: 

http://www.current.org/dtv/#rush.

Take a look at how things were in the realm of digital and HDTV seven years ago.  It is quite amusing and interesting.

The second part of my update today involves digital TV reception, meaning of course HDTV reception as well, using an antenna.  Whether you have a digital converter box or a digital TV, either of which with an antenna, you have probably struggled with receiving channels over the air. There are some new tools out there to help.  I was pointed to these tools by a friend in the TV industry who has supported my site and the work we do here to keep the public informed and the TV stations honest.

The first new tool I want to share with you will plot out which channels are near to you and how far away from your location each channel is.  The results will also tell you the direction from your location that each broadcast tower is which could help you in positioning your antenna to optimize reception.  For input, use your exact address and then estimate how far your antenna is above ground level  (I live on the second floor so I estimated about 20 feet).  Now keep in mind that the tool can account for a lot of things, but specific building obstructions in your neighborhood is not one of them.     Start here to use this tool, it's pretty cool:  http://www.tvfool.com/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29.

Next, you can determine how strong the signal is for a particular channel to see if you are even in the ballpark of being able to receive it over the air.  These maps are based on real data, not projections by the TV stations or the FCC.  The results are Google Maps, with the Channel's Tower at the cente,r and different colors that denote specific signal strengths in specific locations:   To use this tool, click here:  http://www.tvfool.com/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=80

The legend for the colors is as follows:

• White is extremely strong.  Beware of signal overlap with other channels.
  
• Red-yellow-green are all quite strong. You can expect reasonable coverage with an indoor antenna.
  
• Cyan is where it's advisable to move the antenna up to the second floor or attic.
  
• Blue is where it's probably necessary to install a good antenna on the roof.
  
• Purple is quite weak and you really have to work at it for any chance of reception.

In looking at the state of digital TV back in 1998, which describes unrealistic target dates and the many changes in delivery dates as dictated by the FCC, it is quite interesting and fascinating at how far the TV industry has come.  We like to complain about the current condition of digital and HDTV but considering the extremely high costs involved and the sheer number of TV stations involved, they have come quite a long way.  And with the new tools I mentioned above, antenna users like me (and you, I hope) now have even more information at our disposal.  Who knew that in 2008, we'd be looking at coverage maps for TV Towers so that we can get HDTV and Digital TV over the air for free?  Who knew we'd be looking at ways to circumvent cable and satellite so we don'tt have to pay for Digital and HDTV?  If you think about it, you'd probably expect that by now we'd all have HDTVs and HDTV pay services.  But with the lack of HD programming out there, why spend the money when you can get the major networks in HD at no cost.  It's the one thing, so far, that the FCC got 100% right - Digital (HD) television should be free over the air just like television has been since its inception.

Thanks for stopping by.  If anyone uses the tools and has feedback, I'd love to hear it.  Take care and good luck.  Happy reception hunting!!

Sometimes, too much Digital TV signal can be the problem

In some recent back and forth email conversations I had with Suzanne Goucher of the Maine Association of Broadcasters, she provided me with some further insight about digital TV signals which is pretty important.

First, one new piece of the puzzle, at least it was new to me, is that if you have very strong digital TV signals it could actually cause a degradation of the signal. It's like the old adage "Too much of a good thing". Ms Goucher, like me, admitted to not being a technical expert on this stuff but provided an analogy that seemed to make sense: "if you think about throwing a rock into the water, you get strong ripples at the center and weaker ripples further out. Now, add in sticks and rocks and boats and other obstacles, and the ripples start bouncing back and forth and overlapping one another or smacking up against the rocks, and it becomes much less of a "straight line" proposition"

She also used WGME as an example and provide me with an FCC Analog map and an FCC Digital map of the digital signal area from the WGME Tower. Note that the two maps are almost identical: (click image to enlarge)

Analog:

Digital:

The last important piece of information that Ms. Goucher shared with me was an article written about 10 years ago regarding digital reception problems. If I didn't know it, I would have thought it was written just yesterday.

Here's the link: http://www.current.org/dtv/dtv815reception.shtml

So there's some good information here. Some of it may help those of you struggling with Digital TV reception and some of it may at least explain why you are having reception issues to begin with.

I'd like to personally thank Suzanne Goucher from the Maine Association of Broadcasters for her commitment to providing information to Maine's population about digital television.

The basic rules of receiving digital television

I recently wrote to Maine Public Television (MBPN). They are one in a long list of organizations I have contacted in an attempt to gain support and/or guidance concerning the difficulties in receiving digital TV signals in certain areas of Maine. I was surprised that they actually responded and even more surprised that J. Maurice Doyon, Audience Services Representative, gave some very useful information. It's not all good news but I thought I would post the response in full as it does give some very good advice on the best way to try and receive digital signals (they were speaking receiving MPBN specifically but many of the tips apply to all digital reception).

"Thank you for contacting the Maine Public Broadcasting Network. The following text is a comprehensive response for viewers experiencing difficulty in obtaining a digital signal. The portion in bold print addresses the fact that some, regardless of what they do, may not receive a digital signal off air. As a non-profit entity, MPBN simply does not have the financial resources to consider building more towers. The initial conversion from analog to digital will present challenges for sure. In your area of expertise, I'm sure you can foresee many of the ramifications, problems, and challenges that this change in technology will offer.

MPBN is receiving a steadily increasing number of contacts from television viewers who have purchased digital converter boxes and hooked them up to their TV sets only to find they can’t pick up MPBN. These experiences stand in contrast to the generally upbeat articles about the upcoming DTV conversion touting mainly the benefits of digital TV – of which there are indeed many, provided you can pick up the signal. Now that people are actually buying the converter boxes and hooking them up, however, they’re finding that it’s not always as easy as those public service announcements make it seem.

Here at MPBN we’ve tried out converter boxes on sets here at the station and asked some employees to try them out at their homes, with mixed success. In so doing, we’ve come up with a few things to check or consider:

• Unlike analog transmissions where the TV picture gets fuzzier as distance from the broadcast tower increases, with digital television you either get the signal or you don’t. You don’t get a snowy picture as the signal fades, it just cuts out completely.
• If you can’t get any channels at all, check your connections to make sure they are good. Especially with an outside antenna, connections can loosen or corrode and may need to be tightened or fixed.
• If you get other channels but can’t get MPBN, go to your TV’s menu and try entering the channel manually (follow the manufacturer’s instructions; most converter boxes have a signal level indicator) and adjusting the antenna.
  Keep in mind that MPBN’s digital channel number is not the same as its current analog channel number, and that the correct number depends on which of MPBN’s five TV stations in Maine you receive your signal from:
  
  o Bangor: analog channel 12, digital channel 9;
  o Portland/Augusta: analog channel 10, digital channel 17;
  o Biddeford: analog channel 26, digital channel 45;
  o Calais: analog channel 13, digital channel 10;
  o Presque Isle: analog channel 10, digital channel 20.
  
• Also keep in mind that channels 1 – 13 are VHF (regular “rabbit ear” antenna),
  but channels 14 and above are UHF, and will require a UHF “rabbit ear” loop or dish-resembling antenna for best reception.
• Try moving your rabbit ears near a window or try your converter on a TV upstairs, if you have one. If this works, a different set of rabbit ears might do the trick. In the Bangor area, MPBN shares a broadcast tower with WABI-TV Channel 5, so pointing your antenna in the same direction as you would to pick up WABI provides the best chance of receiving MPBN’s signal.
• If you still can’t find MPBN, you probably need an external VHF/UHF antenna. Among those who watch our over-the-air signal (not cable or satellite), an outside antenna with coaxial cable provides the highest probability of reception – but we still can’t guarantee that it will help.
• One last twist: in February, digital channels 17 (Augusta/Portland) and 20 (Presque Isle) will both switch to digital channel 10. All the other digital channels will stay where they are now. If you are in the coverage area of these stations, this change will most likely solve your issue, but there’s no way to be sure of that or even to test it before then.

Our Canadian friends are not facing a similar conversion to digital television in February 2009 in their country. They (and Americans along the border who can receive Canadian analog TV signals) will continue to be able to receive over-the-air analog TV emanating from Canadian TV stations. But if Canadians along the border want to continue to receive MPBN for free over the air, they will have to either purchase digital TV sets or the converter boxes, just like their American counterparts.

In addition to the materials produced by the Federal Communications Commission to explain the DTV conversion generally to a national audience, we are busily preparing similar materials specific to Maine and MPBN and what this transition will mean for you. We will announce the availability of these materials on TV and radio, on our web site and in our programming magazine as soon as they’re ready.

Finally, it does appear that it might be the case that regardless of what steps a person might take to receive MPBN for free over the air in the coming digital TV era – no matter which manufacturer’s converter box one uses, or what model digital TV one purchases, or how high one places the antenna on the roof, or which direction one contorts one’s body to receive the signal (“That’s it! Now stand just like that!”) – there will likely be a very small number of people who can pick up MPBN today who will not after February 19, 2009, converter boxes and new TVs notwithstanding. For those viewers, a cable or satellite subscription might be the only way to continue to receive public television broadcasts from MPBN. We wish it were not so, but that is reality.

Other resources include:

Maine Assoc. of Broadcasters - Conversion to Digital TV
http://www.mab.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3335

DVT for Maine - DTV News for Maine: http://www.dtvforme.com/

Businessweek writer misses the mark on Digital TV

If you want to read the article to which I am referring, click on the link above.

Here's a guy who wrote an article for Business Week. An actual reporter, or journalist, I don't know. But his "summary" of the whole digital revolution was that converter boxes were quaint, but since smaller digital TVs are ONLY $600 or so, wasting your time on a converter box wasn't worth your time and effort.

Well, let me tell you something. Six hundred dollars is a lot of money to a lot of people. And simply buying a digital TV, without subscribing to cable or satellite (more monthly bills), won't get you any better reception than a converter box.

The author, Stephen H. Wildstrom, is an elitist, a snob, and has totally missed the point of what is really going on with the conversion to digital TV. He talks about his old "rabbit ears" TV set as being one that is only used on his morning jog on his treadmill where he was "putting up with" imperfect TV reception and hadn't given it much thought. The author also knows little to nothing about digital TV itself.

There are people in rural areas who can't afford a digital TV and/or cable TV. And they don't have a treadmill either. They have one TV, with one set of rabbit ears, and that's it.

Hell, I don't live in a rural area in Maine but I can't afford it all of the equipment and services needed. But we're all supposed to lay out $600 for a new TV and pay the cable company what, $50, $60, $100 a month. If Mr. Wildstrom is willing to set up a trust fund of his own money, I'd be happy to see that those who can't afford a new TV and a new cable bill, get some assistance.

This guy must be a republican.

Please visit Mr. Wildstrom and let him know your thoughts.

I wrote to him with my concerns and asked that he spend some time writing about the other side of the digital conversion; the side that people can't afford and can't see because they don't get the signal.

UPDATE - Here is Mr. Wildstroms's reply and my response to that.

"I didn’t deal with the question of whether the digital transition is a
good idea in large part because it’s just too late. Congress mandated the
transition in 1996 and at this point it is irrevocable.. The government has
actually gone ahead and sold the analog spectrum that broadcast stations will be
surrendering next year, so there’s no going back. Rural TV has been
problematic since the birth of television. It was the problem of poor rural
reception and the need to build a really tall “community” antenna that gave
birth to cable TV in the first place."

My response:

That is an interesting way to stand by the value of your story. The
translation seems to be "it's the government's fault and I can't do anything
about it". My challenge to you was to report on the other side of the
issue. It's not too late and if there are enough squeaky wheels, maybe one
of them will get the grease. Rural TV reception is not a life or death
issue; but it is a story worthy of telling. I had composed a lengthy email
that I later decided wasn't worth sending. You obviously have different
opinions that I, and I know that I can't change another person's point of view
with one conversation. Your piece on digital converter boxes was fluff,
created only to use up space and had no real merit. It is disappointing
when people try to act like journalists but don't really want to look at more
than one side of a story. I am assuming you got paid for that
article. Good for you."

I don't know folks, you be the judge. Maybe I'm wrong about this; maybe I pushed it too far. But for those of you out there who are being forced to convert to digital TV with an antenna and can't seem to get any channels, I would think you understand where I am coming from. Nobody is reporting on this issue or doing anything about it.

Northern Maine may lose in the Digital TV revolution

The Converstion to Digital TV is Worse than Y2K

I have corresponded with several people in Northern Maine where the digital TV and HDTV landscape is quite different than in Southern Maine.

I was feeling like Southern Maine was being left behind in the the digital TV revolution. But after hearing what's going on north of Portland, we're not doing so badly after all.

In a recent conversation with someone in the Skowhegan/Norridgewock area. The have two channels, Fox 22 and the CW, that are being broadcast ONLY on a sub channel of another network TV station(like WABI). So those channels have little to no possibility of ever being in High Definition. Fox and the CW have put their digital channels out there just to satisfy the FCC rules. But as we know, digital is not the same as HDTV. You need to be in digital to move further into the realm of HDTV, but just because a station is broadcasting in digital doesn't mean it can broadcast in HD.

Then you have the issue of reception. The FCC has put out a broad public service campaign. You've all seen the commercials about the change to Digital TV and getting a Converter Box. You probably watch these commercials and wonder what the hell they are talking about. Well if you are fortunate enough to be able to afford cable TV or satellite TV then you probably don't care and don't need to. But some people still rely on their antenna. And if you don't have a brand new digital TV, you need a converter box between your antenna and your TV in order to keep in working after 2/17/09.

I thought there were FCC rules about over-the-air, broadcast TV stations that dealt with the public's right to receive free, clear signals. I mean, there is an entire Emergency Broadcast System that relies on free, over-the-air TV stations to get emergency information to the public. But if this same public can't receive the emergency information after 2/17/09 because the digital revolution left out one little detail --TV reception in remote areas -- then what's the point.

Right now digital TV is broadcast on UHF (ultra high frequency) channels. These are channels above the number 13. After the cut-off date of 2/17/09, broadcasters in the channel 2 to 13 range who are now using UHF channels to send out their digital signals will probably go back to using channels 2-13. Channels who are already above the 2 to 13 range will probably stay right where they are. These channels number are not something that you need to know about if you are a cable/satellite user. And even if you use a converter box or have a digital TV, these devices do the conversion work for you so you only have to know what channel you are looking for, not what channel it is being broadcast on.

But digital TV signals, and especially UHF channels, are weaker than VHF (2-13). Add to that the mountainous and heavily wooded areas of Maine and you have a recipe for disaster, literally.

I personally don't believe that the FCC has thought out this whole digital TV conversion to their best ability. I think that on 2/17/09 there will still be a lot of people who have no idea why their TVs don't work. And keep in mind this "conversion" has been a long term FCC project going on since 1996. Yes, that 13 years from inception to the cut-off date. But we're talking about the U.S. Government here. Different administrations, different FCC chairs, and for the past 8 years, the Bush administration has been more concerned with Janet Jackson's boob than the boobs that are running the FCC (which include Colin Powell's son, personally chosen by Bush himself).

So even under the best of circumstances, this conversion is going to be...,well, a mess. Add to that the pile of problems and issues that the FCC hasn't even considered and you've got yourself a real disaster here. Y2K was not an issue, and I never thought it would be. I am in the computer industry. On Y2K is was sipping my cocktail not worrying about a thing because I knew that all of the scare tactics didn't add up to a hill of beans. But this? This conversion to digital. Now I'm going to stock up on canned goods, cash, and gas up my car.

I discoverd that the ION TV Nework is first rate

I recently discovered a relatively small television network called ION (formerly PAX and formerly some others I think). I don't have cable or satellite because I simply can't afford it. So my goal was to get as many over-the-air (called "off air") television stations as possible, for free.

It started with my local ABC, NBC, ABC and PBS networks as you would expect. But that wasn't enough so I found MyNetwork (formerly UPN) and the CW (formerly the WB). Now I was getting somewhere.

When I had cable, one of the best channels I had was New Hampshire Public Television (NHPTV). They really leverage the digital/high definition capabilities available to all television stations who want to use it. NHPTV broadcasts their own local programming as well as the PBS High Definition Channel (as you probably know by now, all TV stations have the ability to carry more than one channel now; up to 4 if they only use standard definition).

In doing some research on Wikipedia, where you can find probably the best information on television stations, where they are, and how to receive them on your antenna, I discovered a network called the ION Network.

In playing around with the position of my antenna, I found that I could reach the ION network out of Concord, NH. They broadcast 4 separate digital channels, all in standard definition, but broadcast a wide variety of programming including cartoons, old sitcoms, religious programs, cooking shows, outdoor shows, etc.

This was going well until one day, now matter what I did, I could not receive their digital channels. When I tried to reach their old analog signal which is still operating, I could, but not their digital signal. So I knew it wasn't my reception, so to speak, and nothing wrong with the station, but something was up.

I tried to contact them. But it wasn't like calling up your local TV station and complaining. ION is run out of a national office. They have broadcast substations in several area; the one I receive, as I said, happens to be in Concord, NH. But that is just an antenna, it's not a televison station with staff. So my only option was to contact the national customer service line and leave a message. I did not think anything at all would come of it.

The very next day I received a call from the ION network. A very nice and friendly woman named Leslie spoke to me. She took all of my information down including my address, the specific issues I was having and said she would refer my complaint to the technical folks. Again, I didn't think anything would come of this.

Within an hour or so Leslie called me back. Due to my complaint, they discovered there was indeed a technical issue with their digital broadcast signal in my area, they rebooted (or whatever they do) and it was fixed. She asked me to check it. I was at work and could not do it at the time but said I would when I got home.

You know how this turns out. I got home and all of the ION digital channels were up an running fine. Because so few people use antennas anymore to receive TV signals, and because ION is a smaller network who only has their primary channel (not the subchannels) under contract with a few cable providers, I don't think many would have noticed the problem unless you were a person like me who knows a bit about digital and HDTV and would take the time to contact them since I discovered a problem.

The bottom line is that they were please dthat the issue was pointed out to them and I was pleased, not only that the problem was fixed, but that the ION network handled the situation with such professionalism and regular old human kindness.

I often call my local network affiliates with digital or High Definition issues only to be hung up on without a thank you, or treated with disbelief that I (a regular consumer with no background in television or broadcasting of any kind) know what I am talking about. It was so refreshing to be treated with respect.

Thank you to the ION network and Leslie. She handled the customer service aspect with ease, the way it should be whenever you call a big company. She even ensured that I had the correct number to call her back if the problem was not fixed or I ran into any problems in the future.

I got my channels back and figured out a few things

I thought there was a problem with my local affiliate. I was not receiving their broadcast from the digital television tower (so I thought).

One thing I forgot was that sometimes, when things go wrong, it is like a personal computer. You have to reboot it.

On a high definition TV, the way to do that is to turn it off (and actually unplug it), then plug it back in and go through the process of letting the TV find all of the available channels.

It worked. Channel 8.1 and 8.2 (my ABC affiliate in Portland, ME, WMTW) came back to life and was again available for my viewing pleasure.

Now this process is not one that most are used to when dealing with televisions. Computers, yes, but televisions, not so much.

So don't forget. When you run into trouble, sometimes you just have to start from the beginning and take a fresh approach.

I believe this same idea applies to life in general.

Using An Antenna to get High Definition is very frustrating

Well it was just yesterday that I was patting myself on the back. After months of trial and error, emphasis on error, I had finally found one spot, just one exact, specific location in my apartment, where I could place my VHF/UHF antenna and receive every possible channel available to me. That means all the High Definition channels available as well as other just plain digital channels and some much farther away from me than I ever thought I would be able to reach.

So this morning I get up and proudly turn on my HDTV. With a huge sigh, I noticed that my ABC channels (8.1 and 8.2) were not coming in. I checked the signal and it was down to zero. My CW channel was also not coming in.

The only thing that I could conceive of that would explain this? Sabotage!! No I'm just kidding. I actually believe that based on my experience, it has something to do with the time of day. I am no radio wave expert but I think that television signals can be affected by the curvature of the earth, the angle of the sun, and location of the moon, all of those celestial things that cable is not affected by simply because the receiving devices used for cable are so incredible powerful that they are not affected by such trivial matters.

So I will wait again, tonight. I will try not to fiddle around with my antenna all day thinking I must have gotten the position wrong, or maybe my antenna shifted without me realize it. But I don't want to waste my afternoon doing that. It's Sunday afternoon and there is nothing on TV anyway. I'll keep you posted (no pun intended) on whether or not the time of day makes a difference in the channels I am able to receive.

Don't be afraid to use an Antenna to get HDTV - I FINALLY DID IT! - and you can too

I must admit, without cable, it's been hell. But that's just the way things are right now. I bought a VHF/UHF antenna a long time ago and, with a little practice at the time I bought it, I was able to get all of my local network affiliates in High Definition (with the exception of FOX because they don't do HD in all parts of Maine yet).

This all started because I have always been disappointed with Maine Public Television. That's PBS in Maine known as MPBN, the Maine Public Broadcasting Network. Since I live in the Southwest corner of Maine only a few miles from the New Hampshire border, my cable system carries not just Maine stations, but New Hampshire PBS and several network stations from Boston. So I was used to more viewing options when I had cable.

New Hampshire Public Television is first rate. They have leveraged HDTV technology for quite some time now. They broadcast not only the local New Hampshire PBS feed on a digital sub-channel, but the national PBS feed on the first sub-channel. The also record and playback lots of HD programming. In Maine, not even close. MPBN has made lots of improvements in the past year but they are nowhere near where NHPTV is with technology. So one day, I started playing with my antenna, and using Wikipedia to find the exact digital UHF broadcasting numbers, moved my antenna all around the room, adding extensions to it, etc, until I finally was able to locate NHPTV with just my antenna and my HDTV. It was a lot of work, believe me. I stood on my head, tried aluminum foil, twisted it, turned it upside down, stood on one foot, you get the picture. But I did finally get NHPTV. So now, on those night where I can't sleep, I can watch PBS in High Definition all night.

Then, in my research, I realized that there was also this other network called "ION" which I never heard of because my cable system never carried it. ION is a throwback to the old PAX network and while they still do have some religious type programming, they carry things like "48 Hours", that CBS magazine show, The Drew Carry Show, Mama's Family, and all kinds of stuff that you may not care that much about, but when you don't have cable it comes in handy. ION actually broadcasts nothing in High Definition but instead carries 4 separate sub-channels in 480i.

The problem was, when I moved the antenna to get NHPTV I couldn't get ABC or the CW. Or when I could get ION, with the antenna in the right position, I couldn't get CBS. It was starting to really work my nerves. I could only work on it for an hour or so at a time, and then I just would have to stop and go back to my original configuration and antenna position founded in the early days of my HDTV/Antenna discoveries.

Today, it finally happened. I found the exact right position. I can now get NBC, NBC Weather, ABC, ABC 24 Hour News, CBS, Maine PBS, 4 separate ION stations, the CW, MyNetwork, and regular analog FOX all with just my antenna and my HDTV.

Mind you, my antenna is sitting on the back of my couch in a precarious position but I don't get a lot of company. The point is, I DID IT!!!!. Living in a valley, in an apartment, in the middle of nowhere in a little corner in Maine, that is quite a feat. I don't know what I am going to do to pass the time now. And what happens when some day I decide to get cable or satellite TV which takes no effort or ingenuity at all. Oh, well.

Setting up a new HDTV for the first time - Very Frustrating

It has been a while since I set up a new HDTV. And, I personally have only set up my own and that was a while ago.

A friend called me a few days ago to tell me she bought a new 32" HDTV and needed help setting it up because her and her boyfriend tried and got nothing; no picture or sound and were frustrated as hell.

So I stopped by for a free meal and got to work. Boy was I in for a big surprise. I could not believe, and did not remember, how difficult it was to set up a new HDTV. I also forgot how much they (meaning the people you bought it from, the "owner's manual", and the world in general) don't tell you about buying and setting up a new HDTV.

In the middle of it all I had her fire up her computer and go to this website so I could get all the info I needed in terms of locating and manually programming in the DTV stations using the UHF conversion numbers (she's in the same viewing area as me but I couldn't remember all the numbers).

The bottom line is that there is no way she would have been able to do this herself without calling the cable company and spending lots of dollars. The other thing that surprised me was how different each HDTV manufacturer is so different when it comes to the various input jacks, and setup menus.

My HDTV has a "cable in" and an "antenna in" jack separately. She only had one jack on her Westinghouse. So I could set hers up the way I set mine up.

On mine, I can easily switch from basic cable to DTV. I have my basic cable coax going into the "cable in" jack, and I have my VHF/UHF Antenna connected to my "antenna in" jack.

She only had one "IN" jack so without additional equipment like an RF switch box or something like that, she wouldn't be able to do what I do. She also is not technically savvy and wanted ON and OFF. So for her, I suggested she contact her cable company, subscribe to HD and have them come in and set it up for her. I know they can do that because I did that a year and a half ago before I dumped all that and went with antenna-only high definition.

So in conclusion, my point in the post is that I feel for you. Anyone who bought a new HDTV and is trying to figure out how to make it all work (but doesn't have the background to understand it all and do it) must be so frustrated. I even got a bit frustrated and I understand it; somewhat anyway. So that's why I write this web site. I know that I don't cover every detail and every possible product and situation out there, but I'm doing my best to help anybody I can.

HDTV or DTV Reception problems - WMTW Channel 8 - Portland, ME

I got some excellent advice from Bill Greep from WMTW Channel 8 in Portland, ME. I had always had great reception for Channel 8.1 (DTV/HDTV). In the last several days, the video and audio had become choppy and inconsistent, making it impossible to watch that channel.

I wrote to the station and asked if there were any changes in the signal output. Bill assured me there was not but had the following input:

"Unfortunately, this time of year (with vast temperature swings and antenna icing) can breed interference from a host of environmental sources, including icing, unstable air currents, or interference due to snow. One thing you may try is to power cycle your DTV off-air receiver and/or do another channel scan of off-air DTV channels. This allows the receiver to optimize digital channel filter settings for the best possible DTV signal. "

Well, I thanked Bill for the possible explanation and took his advice on the recycle of the channel scan. It actually worked and my reception is much better now.

Thanks Bill for the great advice.