The Future of TV Channels

You buy a satellite receiver from Dish or some other provider.

Hey,

I just recently heard of that same rumor. But, I thought that you would have to keep atleast a few stations on the airwaves to inform people of nation threats, evacuations, severve weather, ect. I think it would make more sense to strip channels 12+ off the air and into fiberoptic networks. I heard they were trying to cut down, not too take all the stations out of the air.

That makes sense!

From what has appeared in electronics trade journals, some of the present VHF TV spectrum will be used for HDTV, the channels for which are 6 to 8 MHz wide if I recall the article correctly. Other portions of the TV spectrum will be auctioned off for fixed or mobile services.

Somehow the auctioning of radio spectrum space seems very wrong. Maybe we will all wear breathing masks some day, connected to air totalizing meters on our backs, so we can be billed for the air we breathe.

Bernie Katz

Bernie:

The auctioning of the airwaves troubles me also because they are "free" except that the government allocates and regulates it. That means we at least "own" it, through our government. Auctioning it off for money then seems like "robbing Peter to pay Paul".

That is the troubling aspect, because the prices get bid way up, and guess who ends up paying the piper when we purchase a service that uses an expensive slice of the "ether".

In the end, in a capitalist system, what other way is there? If the government apportioned by lottery, then a bidding war would still ensue and in that case, the only winners would be the lucky lottery winners, speculators, brokers, etc ..... we would still end up paying just as much of a premium built into the service providers bills. If not a lottery, then by political act? Heaven forbid!! So, in the end, I guess the government auctions are the best way after all. At least the money will help reduce the deficit or reduce the pressure to raise our taxes.

But the idea of paying for something that is "free", is still a bit unsettling.

Regards,

Greg

This agrees with everything I've heard or read on the matter...or else HDTV would have been dead in the water. Fortunately--or unfortunately--there's no need for panic...or even mild discomfiture...because the change that was due to have already taken place (right now) has been pushed out, once again, to no earlier than 2009. My guess would be that now it's not the TV mfrs any longer; but most surely the broadcasters...who are the ones lagging and who still seem quite a ways off from perfecting HDTV broadcast transmission. As anyone who has taken the plunge into HDTV can judge, HD broadcast reliability is poor at best...probably less reliable than the early days of analog TV: Whereas back then signal interruptions (please stand by messages) happened occasionally, several picture or picture-audio malfunctions a day is normal for HDTV at this stage. (This is a good reason, and I'm thankful I did, not to purchase any HDTV without two tuners, both analog and digital. For me, the SDTV is always available (and, despite the hype, doesn't look that different from HDTV), so HD depixilation and other glitches is only a minor inconvenience; for single-tuner owners (which would be most I gather) I'm sure it can become quite aggravating.) And when, if ever, the change finally comes--I expect even later than 2009--I will only need a small investment in a HD tuner to be set with two HDTVs for practically the price of one. So in answer to OP, not to worry...as long as the power stays on....nothing's gonna keep you from getting 24/7 commercial advertising...bank on it. And if you like cable, pay for it.

I have 2 analog tv sets using an attic TV antenna. I don't have cable or a dish. I sent for 2 coupons to buy the converter boxes for the HD signal. What no one told me was they only pick up the HD signal and there is no switch to get you back to regular TV. Some channels are not broadcast on HD yet. So I had to devise a switch to change back and forth. I made it made from an old game signal splitter and some signal wire splitters to be able to go back and forth from digital to analog. The weaker HD channels I pick up are there one day and not there the next. And sometimes with a weaker HD channel, the picture will break down into pixels for a few seconds at a time every so often as you watch it. My question is, would an antenna signal booster help pull in the boarder-line channels that can't hold a signal real well? Don

Sciesis2:

It is only the present analog method of broadcasting (AM for picture, FM for sound) that is scheduled to be terminated on February 17, 2009. The same stations will still be broadcasting, but in a digital format only. It was supposed to have happened over a year ago, but was postponed due to delays in setting standards for HDTV, delays in broadcasters installing the necessary new equipment, sluggish sales of HDTV sets and other factors. It was finally signed into law in early 2006 and the February 17. 2009 date was set. It also mandates that by July 1, 2007, any TV, VCR, DVD player, or other device that may contain a tuner, must include a DTV (Digital TV) tuner.

Once that occurs (assuming it is not postponed), for older sets, VCRs etc that aren't equipped to receive digital signals a converter "box" will be required, and in some areas you might need to upgrade your antenna.

Congress has authorized the government to spend up to $1.5 billion in subsidies in the form of two $40 coupons to those who cannot afford the converters. So while I would have expected the converters to eventually sell for below $40 each in some cases, I doubt that will occur now since those coupons will act to set a floor under the price.

It will be a pain for most of us (I know it will be for me!), but the ultimate rewards are huge. The present analog transmission hogs up an enormous amount of a very useful portion of the radio spectrum. In the 6 MHz bandwidth of one analog broadcast, up to 6 standard definition digital channels or one HDTV channel can be broadcast, and even slightly more with new developments in technology (ex: 7 standard or, 1 high definition and 1 standard).

Satellite TV providers are also in the process of converting from MPEG-2 compression to MPEG-4, which will accommodate about twice as many channels. But they would take care of any needed set-top box replacements.

Cable companies will likely (depending on the specific cable provider) offer analog broadcasts well past 2009, but they will end up switching at some point also because of the fact that they are anxious to free up bandwidth for other uses, like expanded and faster broadband, interactive (2-way) features, more HDTV stations etc. A coax cable has approx a 750 MHz bandwidth capability, and presently the analog channels (1-way transmission) take up 75% of the total bandwidth.

Meanwhile, the amount of "over the air" radio frequency bandwidth that will be freed up will allow a quantum leap in wireless communications of all kinds, better frequencies for police, fire, and emergency use, frequencies for specialized wireless uses (as in remote control, traffic information/control etc).

Change is always unsettling, (especially when it cost $), but it is part of this life we live, and we will adapt and in the end benefit.

Regards,

Greg

Thanks, Greg G. That's an excellent summary.

Moose

Good Work Greeg!!

Have you not heard that in the UK they already have digital broadcasting with the old analouge system closing down in a region to region way. You will either buy a new digital tv or fit a set top box to decode. Basicily with digital tv you get satallite tv channels + many extra channels through your tv antenna.

You will definitely not get satellite broadcasts through your regular TV antenna here!

Given all the reality broadcasting of late it could be said that the future of TV is covered by the WEEE Regulations...

In 1984, Big Brother is watching you.

In 2007, you are watching Big Brother...

I agree with GregGs 1st comments, however, in the UK the government has seen that there is a lot of money to be made by selling transmission frequencies to the highest bidder (usually the cash rich phone operators). Analogue TV transmissions are gradually being turned off here requiring people to either buy a satellite dish or a set-top box to use with their existing analogue aerial. The governments latest wheeze is to propose selling off the frequencies currently used by radio microphones thus threatening the future of live music & some sporting events.

This seems to be a fairly global thing. Australia is in the process of turning off the analogue TV transmitters, I can't remember the deadline but it isn't too far away.

The cable TV network in Australia dose not have the diversity of suppliers that the US has so the changeover from analogue to digital was somewhat easier. They began switching off analogue cable channels last November and I am not sure but it may already be completely shut down. If there are any analogue channels still transmitting then they have only weeks left before they to stop broadcasting. The change over was fairly seamless, that is once the cable TV people managed to ship the correct equipment, it took three goes to get everything. After everything arrived it was just a matter of connecting the new digital box, booting it from the network and calling them up to activate the account. I must admit that the improvement in picture quality was well worth the effort and you quickly become accustomed to the improved quality. I played an old video tape the other day and initially thought something was wrong till I realized that the old analogue system was actually that bad.

Regarding the earlier comments:

Somehow the auctioning of radio spectrum space seems very wrong. Maybe we will all wear breathing masks some day, connected to air totalizing meters on our backs, so we can be billed for the air we breathe.

The auctioning of the airwaves troubles me also because they are "free" except that the government allocates and regulates it. That means we at least "own" it, through our government. Auctioning it off for money then seems like "robbing Peter to pay Paul".

The "airwaves" are not air, but broadcast spectra made available by the government for public benefit on behalf of all citizens. Think of broadcast spectra as the same as the trees in the national forest. Why should we the people allow private enterprise the ability capture market value of timber from public lands without some payment to the general public? In fact, many argue that the lease rates for timber tracts, grazing land, and broadcast spectra are so far below market value - the price a company would pay on the open market to purchase the resource and then profit by selling at market rates - that they constitute a huge subsidy to these markets. Moreover, while lumber and food may be essential commodities, the need to see World Wide Wrestling Smackdowns and the Sopranos is not. Allowing private broadcast companies to profit from pubic airwaves under the current system is a giveaway of public resources that makes oil, gas, grazing and timber leasing look like a good deal (for we the people who own these resources).

A re-reading of my post will tell you I arrived at the same place you are: A government auction is the fairest means to allocate the new bandwidth that will become available. Somebody has to allocate and regulate, and who better than our government in this and many other cases. It just "feels" funny because "we" get the money from the auction, but then pay the money in the bills we get for using it, but the logic ultimately does work.

I do not however assume any great "benevolence" on the part of the government ... they are anything but that. The particular legislation I was talking about was part of the "Deficit Reduction Act". I would very much like to see the government cut spending also, and even though it will raise their budget (but actually just a displacement of existing costs) institute a basic national healthcare plan. But that's for another time.

One other warning about purchasing HDTV's and digital tuners:

There are two different standards for digital tuners. ATSC (Advanced Television Systems Committee) is the common term for the system to be used by broadcasters, and includes the use of 8VSB, or 8 Vestigial Sideband modulation. There are other variations of VSB, including 16 VSB which was to be used for cable television, however a competing, incompatible modulation method, Quadrature Amplitude Modulation, has become the cable industry standard. A QAM tuner must be included in your HDTV if you hope to receive HDTV over cable, or even standard resolution Digital TV over cable, without using a converter box.

But wait, there's more.... It's not that simple. Modern digital cable systems have marvelous capabilities, including free as well as pay-per-view on-demand programming. However, these special features, as well as subscription services like HBO, Showtime, etc. cannot be viewed normally without the unscrambler and smart devices inside that converter box. In order to satisfy the customer who does NOT want a converter box, the industry created the so-called "Cable Card", which can be programmed by your cable company, based on your level of service, subscriptions, etc. and then inserted into your new HDTV. Unfortunately, there are reports of mixed success with the "Cable Card" and different manufacturers, with many cable companies recommending their converter box anyway. Even if successful, the "Cable Card" may be just another way for the cable companies to separate you from your money, as the cards may be sold or rented, and programming fees might be involved.

Since we had already upgraded to Digital Cable, through using a converter, when my 15 year-old 32-inch Toshiba TV started throwing hissy fits (literally, blanking the screen to snow and the audio to hiss), thinking that it was likely primarily the age and overheating of some component due to this primary TV being on 24/7, I decided to purchase a new flat screen TV to replace it. I drooled over the 42 and 46 inch LCD TV's with all three Tuners (NTSC, ATSC, and QAM), 1080p (for computer display, Blueray disc, or HD-DVD) resolution, and Cable Card capability, but decided that $2-3K+ was too much to spend on fast changing technology, I settled on a more moderately priced, $900, 37-inch LCD-TV which had no Cable Card capability (which the local cable company told me was not working yet on their systems), and no QAM, but did have HDMI component input when we upgrade our DVD or other devices, as well as NTSC and ATSC tuners, so I would still be able to get analog SDTV (480i) or digital HDTV (with its 1080i resolution) off the air if necessary. We still had our digital converter box for cable, but may not upgrade to HDTV programming and a new HDTV converter box because we are still quite happy with the quality and content of our digital channels. And now I can even see those letterboxed broadcast and DVD movies and shows in full-screen 16:9 aspect ratio using the "Zoom" feature on my new widescreen LCD-TV, with almost no appreciable loss in resolution. Conventional SDTV programs do not fill the screen, leaving vertical "black bars" on both sides of the screen, but no one seems to be complaining about that! I had heard that LCD were not as "bright" as DLP or plasma screens, but their lighter weight and smaller size (than DLP) and their purportedly higher reliability and lower heat generation (than plasma) made me choose LCD, and at least for now, the brightness and contrast is just fine, even better than the old Toshiba.

What happened to the old glass-tube monster, Toshiba? Well with much cursing and grunting, the wife and I got the behemoth upstairs where it still serves us well as a secondary TV and primary gaming screen for the kids. And it no longer throws hissy fits, since it is one only a few hours at a time at most.

STL Engineer:

And they said technology will make our lives simpler!

What you say is all true the good and the ugly, but somebody will be happy to sell me whatever I need to make it work, though it looks to me like we are entering the age of "media technicians" because even when you buy the stuff it still has to be setup, and that's getting a lot more complicated.

A new display technology was demonstrated recently: Organic LEDs, by Sony I think. The picture was reported to look spectacular, and it has vibrant colors, great contrast and handles motion flawlessly!

"but somebody will be happy to sell me whatever I need to make it work"

"Organic LEDs, by Sony I think. The picture was reported to look spectacular, and it has vibrant colors, great contrast and handles motion flawlessly!"

But at what price? Technology marches on. I wish I could afford to be an "early adopter", but the "bleeding edge" leaves my pocket book and bank account empty!

Some people trade in new cars every year or two, also. We just can't afford to take the hit on depreciation and so we leapfrog our two cars every few years, making them stretch out to 7-9 years or so, depending on mileage and condition. Last year we traded in our '97 Subaru wagon for a '06 mini-van (from a rental company, so it had about 15,000 well-cared for miles on it already).

I am quite happy with the performance of our new LCD TV. I don't know if it will have the life of our 15-year-old Toshiba tube TV (still going strong in semi-retirement), but time will tell. And since I did not pay HUGE bucks for the biggest, baddest machine money could buy, if something better comes along, or if our TV "goes south" a few years from now, out of warranty and the repair bill is unaffordable, at least we will not be out THAT much, and still get a lot of use and enjoyment in the meantime. Plus, we have more money to put towards the next "new" vehicle, or even our kids college educations!

Here is a template taken from the FCC's web site...

[NAME OF YOUR ORGANIZATION] URGES TV VIEWERS TO GEAR UP FOR THE CONVERSION TO ALL-DIGITAL TELEVISION

[Your City and State] -- After February 17, 2009 analog TV transmission will end. After that date, most TV broadcasting will be digital. Currently most TV stations are broadcasting in analog and digital and viewers with digital televisions are already enjoying DTV, digital television.

[Your spokesman] said, "February 2009 will be here sooner than we think. Now is the time for us all to get up to speed on DTV: what is it; what does it mean to me; what do I need to do? We at [your organization] encourage everyone to educate themselves on this important issue."

DTV will transform your television viewing experience. Images and sound are captured using digital technology, delivering a movie-quality experience, multicasting and interactive capabilities. That means better quality, more choices, and more control over your television.

Viewers who currently get their signals "over the air," using a rooftop antenna or rabbit ears, will have to make some adjustments. Either they will have to buy digital television sets, or they will have to obtain converter boxes to change the digital signals to analog.

Beginning in 2008, U.S. households may be able to obtain up to two coupons worth $40 each toward the purchase of converter boxes. The program will be run by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which will issue rules regarding the coupons in the future.

If you are a cable or satellite customer, you may need a set-top box to receive DTV signals and convert them into the format of your current analog television, even after the DTV transition is complete. A DTV set-top box also may receive multicast channels and high definition programming and display them in analog picture quality. Check with your cable or satellite provider to determine if and when you will need a set-top box.

Why is the country converting to digital? The obvious answer is that digital technology delivers a much improved television picture and sound. Less obvious, but just as important, is that converting to DTV will free up parts (bands) of the scarce and valuable broadcast spectrum. Analog spectrum will be returned to the government by television stations. This spectrum will go to public safety services so our police, fire and first responders can communicate more efficiently; and to companies offering advanced wireless services. The spectrum going to advanced wireless services will be auctioned, with the proceeds going to the U.S. Treasury.

There are many sources of information about the digital transition but one of the best is the government's Web site www.dtv.gov. It contains information on what DTV is, questions consumers should ask when purchasing new television sets, what programs are available in DTV, and much more.

It took a few messages before someone finally got the story somewhat correct. The thing is TV standard will change to an digital only transmission format.

Something that may not be that well known - right now, almost every TV station is transmitting on TWO different channels! FCC has assigned each station a different channel to allow the stations to setup a digital transmission while their analog transmission continues. Since about 2003-2004, over half the USA TV stations have been transmitting their "standard" channel and a DTV channel.

The FCC is saying that in 2009, all those duplicate channels will stop and only the DTV tranmission will continue. Then the government will start to sell the frequencies that are now freed up.

I have the same question in my head as Sciesis2.

do somebody knows what are going to be an alternatives?.

The backwoods viewer in Louisiginia, or Califoregada, Idakotana, Texarkana, or Mexicali, or Quebaskatuan for that matter, who has nothing more than a TV and an antenna will have to get a converter box that includes a HDTV (Digital TV) tuner with an RF modulator giving a NTSC analog output, or a composite video and separate audio outputs if his TV has the right video and audio inputs. Most TV's made since the 1980's include both the RF (75 ohm cable and/or 300 ohm screw-on terminals) input as well as composite video and mono or stereo audio input (usually RCA connectors, yellow for video and white for mono sound or red/white for Right/Left stereo). Newer TV's may even have the S-VHS video input (multi-pin round DIN plug) or better yet, component video with three separate color lines. There is also HDMI input, but if your TV has that, it likely already has an ATSC HD-broadcast digital tuner. Then again, many HD "Monitors" were sold without tuners, but it is unlikely there are any in the "backwoods" areas.

My understanding is that after analog broadcasting shuts down, TV stations will have their choice of keeping their newer DTV frequency (channel) or switching digital broadcast to their original analog frequency. Therefore, Joe Backwoods (or José) would have to have a VHF/UHF combination antenna. VHF only would not pick up the newer DTV channels very well, since they lie in the UHF band (but not exactly the same frequencies as the current UHF channels, similar to the unique cable TV channels). So-called "HDTV antennas" are nothing more than UHF-only antennas sold to people without external antennas (or with VHF-only antennas) so they can pick up the current HD broadcasts on those new DTV channels.

So if Mr. or Sr. Backwoods wants to continue to watch broadcast TV and cannot get cable or won't pay for satellite TV, he will have to buy a set-top Digital TV Tuner box and possibly a new antenna. Apparently, Uncle Sugar is even kicking in to pay for those items for those who qualify for the handout. Of course in Mexico and other countries, your mileage may vary.

Hi Sciesis2 -

We could get our digital TV by going to a web site and configuring our cable channels "ala-carte" style, selecting only those we really watch, from content-providers around the globe, and according to the amount we'd like to spend. TV would enter our house via coax, fiber, or broadcast digital signal.

Being a news/documentary fan, I'd vote to get BBC World TV, 1-2 BBC domestic channels, CBC Newsworld, CNN, HBO, Nickelodean, National Geo., and a few others, at a good price.

- april05

That's ultimately what I believe is going to happen but the bandwidth to do multiple individual view on demand programs is not quiet there yet, particularly in countries like Australia where we only have 20 million people spread out over an area the size of Europe or continental USA.

When fibre spreads to the majority of domestic residences is probably the time this will start to become practical but even then the bandwidth is probably going to limit the resolution to something considerably less than the high definition standard being rolled out now.