John Willkie wrote:
Go back and read what I wrote. The sets are from 1946 to 1956, NOT THE VIDEO!!!!!So, your "interest" in digital is solely to get 1946 to 1956 studio-quality video into analog sets?
That's pretty much what I think your interest is, but I wouldn't have used the word "solely."I can guarantee you that studio quality video has improved significantly in the past 60 years, and that not a word in any of the various laws, regulations and FCC proceedings would favor your interest.
As I said above....
Your situation is a bit different than most; you are a television engineer, not merely someone who plays one on the Internet. I also suspect that you moved to your present location with marginal analog reception after DTV was initiated by an act of Congress.
1999.
I lost 2 Philly DTV stations but picked up up 3 more from Baltimore. Sometimes.And, I know that there was debate back then whether or how well digital would replicate analog reception. Isn't this a bet that you lost?
I could get it from Baltimore, 52 miles distant, but thats not where I live. The weather from Baltimore only has meaning here once in a while.What you really could and should have said was that your bad bet meant that you couldn't get the weather tonight on digital, so you had to step down to analog.
I have several weather radios, but the NWS station nearest me is very weak. The only other one is from the Maryland shore. Not my weather either. I look at radar loops from NOAA in Mt. Holly,N.J. and Sterling Va. Good but do not provide theHowever, I suspect that there are several ways of getting the weather, even in bad weather, and several of them are more efficient than waiting for someone to dispense a bit of weather information to you when they do it, on a regular schedule.
forecast that the computerized TV weather programs have.
It sounds to me like you need to subscribe to cable to get the same type of television reception that others consider to be baseline useable.
If I subscribe to anything it will be to a satellite service.
I moved here because the house has a huge backyard with a Southwestern look and no trees. I get great, FREE C-Band reception.You're right about the FCC, of course. The FCC of 1953 is not the FCC we have today. Of course, the FCC didn't mandate 8-vSB; Congress did, and Bill "BJ" Clinton signed it into law. Nor does this FCC mandate agricultural reports for urban areas, or news, or public affairs programming. There are no limits on commercial content, nor are station proposals evaluated on whether they propose to pay for an Associated Press newswire. Nor are the industries regulated by the FCC (save mobile telephones and another here and there) in an expansion mode. Nor is broadcasting the only way to get reliable news and information between the various editions of newspapers that are delivered to homes.Others, without your knowledge and experience, have bigger violins to play over the next 40 or so days. But, me, I'm old-fashioned. I always pay attention to broadcast, satellite, cable and telephone reception/connectivity issues when I consider moving.
I even try to anticipate how the situation might change based on weather, topography, climate, and new construction. I learned this the hard way, by moving, in 1976, to a location where I soon discovered, there was no possibility of TV, AM or FM (aside from snowy audio from one station) reception. Fortunately, Adobe Falls did have cable television hookups, and it was livable, until/unless the Lake Murray dam broke.By the way, nothing I say should be construed to assert that 8-VSB works perfectly or anything more than "almost adequate." But, I can receive HDTV signals that travel more than 120 miles to my home.John Willkie
Sometimes I can too. The key word here is 'sometimes'.