From bob.bosra@demattia.net Thu Aug 1 09:44:38 2019 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:44:38 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas. Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until now was on VHF-HI. On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce wrote: > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are > numbered. > > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF > channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done > their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to > do on that channel. > > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline > population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as > 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new > RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250 > because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to > increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic > coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see > ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because > the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN > parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). > > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the > problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air audience > slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable > to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from > gross optimism? > > Norm Pierce > > > [1] WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf > > https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 > > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" > > https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx > > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf > > From bob.bosra@demattia.net Thu Aug 1 10:03:42 2019 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 10:03:42 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who are viewing off-air with receiving equipment that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal. Maybe some of those people will switch to live streaming, but people viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt inclined to avail themselves of that option. BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option. The picture quality does not compare to off-air. -Bob On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 AM Ken VanTassell wrote: > I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are > really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called > locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5 > per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we > have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. > > -Ken > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia > wrote: > >> Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas. >> Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until >> now was >> on VHF-HI. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce > > >> wrote: >> >> > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are >> > numbered. >> > >> > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF >> > channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done >> > their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to >> > do on that channel. >> > >> > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline >> > population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as >> > 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new >> > RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250 >> > because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to >> > increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic >> > coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see >> > ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because >> > the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN >> > parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). >> > >> > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population >> > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the >> > problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air audience >> > slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable >> > to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from >> > gross optimism? >> > >> > Norm Pierce >> > >> > >> > [1] >> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf >> > >> > >> https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 >> > >> > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" >> > >> > >> https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx >> > >> > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" >> > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) >> > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf >> > >> > >> > From scott@fybush.com Thu Aug 1 09:48:14 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:48:14 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: I expect the 2.1 programming will end up being transmitted over WGBX's UHF signal, sooner or later. I also expect the VHF 5 signal will become WGBH's test bed for ATSC 3 experimentation. On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 9:38 AM Norm Pierce wrote: > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are > numbered. > > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF > channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done > their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to > do on that channel. > > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline > population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as > 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new > RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250 > because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to > increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic > coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see > ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because > the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN > parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). > > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the > problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air audience > slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable > to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from > gross optimism? > > Norm Pierce > > > [1] WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf > > https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 > > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" > > https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx > > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf > > From m_carney@yahoo.com Thu Aug 1 10:14:25 2019 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 14:14:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: <2093575558.792947.1564668865227@mail.yahoo.com> PBS viewers seem to be a high percentage of cord cutters, often for ethical/moral/political rather than financial reasons. Perhaps WFXZ takes over channel 5 and WGBH shares with WGBX. It would make more sense, especially if channel 5 will be used for 4K testing. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 10:08 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote: All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who are viewing off-air with receiving equipment that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal.? Maybe some of those people will switch to live streaming, but people viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt inclined to avail themselves of that option. BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option.? The picture quality does not compare to off-air. -Bob On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 AM Ken VanTassell wrote: > I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are > really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called > locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5 > per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we > have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. > > -Ken > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia > wrote: > >> Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas. >> Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until >> now was >> on VHF-HI. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce > > >> wrote: >> >> > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are >> > numbered. >> > >> > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF >> > channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done >> > their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to >> > do on that channel. >> > >> > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline >> > population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as >> > 7,633,586.? In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new >> > RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250 >> > because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to >> > increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic >> > coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see >> > ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because >> > the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN >> > parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). >> > >> > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population >> > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the >> > problems with DTV on VHF?? Will it really reach an over-the-air audience >> > slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable >> > to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from >> > gross optimism? >> > >> > Norm Pierce >> > >> > >> > [1] >> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf >> > >> > >> https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 >> > >> > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" >> > >> > >> https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx >> > >> > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" >> > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) >> > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf >> > >> > >> > From gary@garysicecream.com Thu Aug 1 10:24:27 2019 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 10:24:27 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: <05a901d54874$d46ce450$7d46acf0$@garysicecream.com> Can we please go back to analog tv and undo all this crap of the past 10+ years. In my estimation the picture quality and coverage area is so much worse with digital unless you are practically under the transmitting antenna. I have a very high end HDTV antenna 80 feet up on my ham tower (in addition to being 282 feet above sea level). But according to the maps Bear Hill in Waltham blocks me from the Needham antenna farm. I cannot get WSKB, WLVI, WGBX. Since my antenna is aimed right at Needham (that took hours) I get nothing from NH (WNDS, NHPTV, etc). I could get everything (Boston, Manchester, Durham NH, Providence, etc) with analog. Of course the picture quality is better with digital HDTV but the number of signals I can get is sharply reduced. Gary F. Gary?s Ice Cream ? Chelmsford Creamery, Inc. Chelmsford, MA garysicecream.com Ice Cream College ? classes in Massachusetts and Florida icecreamcollege.com -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest On Behalf Of Bob DeMattia Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2019 10:04 AM To: Boston Radio Interest Mailing List Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who are viewing off-air with receiving equipment that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal. Maybe some of those people will switch to live streaming, but people viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt inclined to avail themselves of that option. BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option. The picture quality does not compare to off-air. -Bob On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 AM Ken VanTassell wrote: > I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are > really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called > locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free > (5 per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I > think we have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. > > -Ken > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia > wrote: > >> Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas. >> Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up >> until now was on VHF-HI. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce >> > > >> wrote: >> >> > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days >> > are numbered. >> > >> > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the >> > new RF channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers >> > have done their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC >> > rules allow them to do on that channel. >> > >> > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the >> > baseline population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is >> > given as 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction >> > permit for the new RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly >> > higher number of 7,669,250 because of the change of tower, and the >> > fact that they were able to increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW >> > without exceeding the geographic coverage area of the largest >> > station within the same market (see >> > ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do >> > because the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the >> > CCRPN parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). >> > >> > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population >> > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given >> > the problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air >> > audience slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, >> > and comparable to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage >> > numbers suffer from gross optimism? >> > >> > Norm Pierce >> > >> > >> > [1] >> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf >> > >> > >> https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/2 >> 5076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 >> > >> > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" >> > >> > >> https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Pos >> t_Auction_Baseline.xlsx >> > >> > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" >> > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) >> > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf >> > >> > >> > From kenwvt@gmail.com Thu Aug 1 09:48:38 2019 From: kenwvt@gmail.com (Ken VanTassell) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 09:48:38 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5 per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. -Ken On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia wrote: > Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas. > Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until > now was > on VHF-HI. > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce > wrote: > > > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are > > numbered. > > > > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF > > channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done > > their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to > > do on that channel. > > > > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline > > population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as > > 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new > > RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250 > > because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to > > increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic > > coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see > > ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because > > the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN > > parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). > > > > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population > > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the > > problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air audience > > slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable > > to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from > > gross optimism? > > > > Norm Pierce > > > > > > [1] WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf > > > > > https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 > > > > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" > > > > > https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx > > > > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" > > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) > > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf > > > > > From dlh@donnahalper.com Thu Aug 1 13:31:58 2019 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 13:31:58 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: <3bc3bf58-e605-1e34-5693-11bdb68c34c1@donnahalper.com> On 8/1/2019 9:48 AM, Ken VanTassell wrote: > I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are really > sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called locast.org > that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5 per month > suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we have > resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. Or not. You may recall what happened to Aereo. The lawsuits against Lowcast have already begun: https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/31/20748677/locast-streaming-tv-lawsuit-abc-cbs-fox-nbc -- Donna L. Halper, PhD Associate Professor of Communication & Media Studies Lesley University, Cambridge MA From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Thu Aug 1 12:44:07 2019 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 10:44:07 -0600 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: I wouldn?t want to turn back this digital tv stuff like Gary said earlier. The picture is MUCH better then in the analog days, in my experience unlike what gary suggests And even though all I get for tv in laramie Wyoming is a Digital PBS LPTV, a digital nbc/CBS LPTV and an analog transmitter ... I wouldn?t turn things back. And I don?t have cable On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 10:37 AM Ken VanTassell wrote: > I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are really > sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called locast.org > that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5 per month > suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we have > resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. > > -Ken > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia > wrote: > > > Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas. > > Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until > > now was > > on VHF-HI. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce < > npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com> > > wrote: > > > > > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are > > > numbered. > > > > > > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF > > > channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done > > > their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them > to > > > do on that channel. > > > > > > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline > > > population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as > > > 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new > > > RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of > 7,669,250 > > > because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to > > > increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic > > > coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see > > > ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because > > > the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN > > > parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). > > > > > > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population > > > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the > > > problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air > audience > > > slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable > > > to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from > > > gross optimism? > > > > > > Norm Pierce > > > > > > > > > [1] > WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf > > > > > > > > > https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 > > > > > > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" > > > > > > > > > https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx > > > > > > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" > > > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) > > > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf > > > > > > > > > From scott@fybush.com Thu Aug 1 13:09:35 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 13:09:35 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: <6f9ff1de-720f-6d4c-76d2-0d55b546b400@fybush.com> It is - especially if some of the subchannels now on the WGBX signal get moved to RF5. We'll see how this plays out. They've been a little cagey so far. From richard@chonak.com Fri Aug 2 02:07:36 2019 From: richard@chonak.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 02:07:36 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: <4a9be3e6-f4fc-d2fe-007e-b0212d74220b@chonak.com> Is the progress of the repack reported on-line anywhere? At the moment (2 am on 8/2), from here (10 mi N of Boston), I'm seeing these stations: 2.2 World 2.3 WGBH-SD 44.2 WGBX-SD 44.3 Create 44.4 Kids -_RC From m_carney@yahoo.com Fri Aug 2 05:18:53 2019 From: m_carney@yahoo.com (Maureen Carney) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 09:18:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: <4a9be3e6-f4fc-d2fe-007e-b0212d74220b@chonak.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <4a9be3e6-f4fc-d2fe-007e-b0212d74220b@chonak.com> Message-ID: <636014592.133812.1564737533989@mail.yahoo.com> Same thing here in Holliston (25 miles SW of Boston). 2.2 and 2.3 are on RF 32 WGBX. Looks like Providence (WLNE and WJAR) and WHDH weren't part of this repack as they scanned on their previous RF channels. WNEU is coming in strong. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android From lsochrin@rcn.com Fri Aug 2 09:22:25 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 09:22:25 -0400 Subject: TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan Message-ID: <8FE19713-0E85-42E2-9C3C-D66D4722D203@rcn.com> I rescanned this morning, both a standalone TV and a TiVO connected to another TV. The stand alone TV came through just fine but my TiVO only has the signal for channel 7.1, and nothing for any other channels, although it shows the station names, logos, and program guide info but no audio or video. TiVo support isn?t open for an hour and I?m not sure what to do. Any suggestions? From LostCluster@lostcluster.me Fri Aug 2 10:47:16 2019 From: LostCluster@lostcluster.me (Ben Levy) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 10:47:16 -0400 Subject: TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan In-Reply-To: <8FE19713-0E85-42E2-9C3C-D66D4722D203@rcn.com> References: <8FE19713-0E85-42E2-9C3C-D66D4722D203@rcn.com> Message-ID: Your TiVo needs to rescan for channels because most channels changed frequencies this morning. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Larry Sochrin Sent: Friday, August 2, 2019 10:23 AM To: npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com; bob.bosra@demattia.net; scott@fybush.com Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan I rescanned this morning, both a standalone TV and a TiVO connected to another TV. The stand alone TV came through just fine but my TiVO only has the signal for channel 7.1, and nothing for any other channels, although it shows the station names, logos, and program guide info but no audio or video. TiVo support isn?t open for an hour and I?m not sure what to do. Any suggestions? From richard@chonak.com Fri Aug 2 12:18:12 2019 From: richard@chonak.com (richard@chonak.com) Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2019 12:18:12 -0400 Subject: TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan Message-ID: <7fe6m8en6st6fna7o1qbjj9p.1564762234902@email.lge.com> At present, my Plex DVR software isn't in sync with my HDHomeRun tuner either.Some DVR systems depend on program guide data from companies such as Gracenote; they use yoir zip code to generate a list of stations in your market. This can cause discrepancies between your TV tuner"s data and the channel list in the DVR software.?--RCSent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device------ Original message------From: Larry SochrinDate: Fri, Aug 2, 2019 10:23 AMTo: npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com;bob.bosra@demattia.net;scott@fybush.com;Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org;Subject:TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescanI rescanned this morning, both a standalone TV and a TiVO connected to another TV. The stand alone TV came through just fine but my TiVO only has the signal for channel 7.1, and nothing for any other channels, although it shows the station names, logos, and program guide info but no audio or video. TiVo support isn?t open for an hour and I?m not sure what to d o. Any suggestions? From lsochrin@rcn.com Fri Aug 2 13:01:25 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 13:01:25 -0400 Subject: TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan In-Reply-To: <68293e56-c2e1-1ae3-21b7-38c36ec05a9c@fybush.com> References: <7fe6m8en6st6fna7o1qbjj9p.1564762234902@email.lge.com> <68293e56-c2e1-1ae3-21b7-38c36ec05a9c@fybush.com> Message-ID: And I spent an hour on the phone with a TiVo person, we shall see. My biggest concern now is that, as was true a year or two ago, the only way I?d get NBC was on 15.1 whereas the other options they offered worked in nearby apartments (I?m in Brookline, MA) but not mine. So they added 15.1 and that worked. As of this morning, 15.1 doesn?t come in at all in my living room at all and the others don?t either, and my call to NBC10?s support for this gets me put on hold at the FCC and on one ever answers. Does anyone know the frequencies that NBC is using, since TiVO mainly seems to want to know frequencies. > On Aug 2, 2019, at 12:24 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > > I've heard of issues here in Rochester with TiVo's lists not corresponding to what's now actually on the air, too. > > I have access to a Plex/HDHR system in Newton and rescanned it this morning. It has no trouble seeing WGBH on RF5 (which has not been the case for some friends in central Mass.), and it's picking up some channels that Plex hasn't updated yet in its guide. > > Most notably, WGBH has put a 44.2 subchannel on WGBX to carry the WGBH 2.1 programming in SD. (As I expected they would do, and I still expect it will end up in HD sooner rather than later there.) > > s > > On 8/2/2019 12:18 PM, richard@chonak.com wrote: >> At present, my Plex DVR software isn't in sync with my HDHomeRun tuner either. >> Some DVR systems depend on program guide data from companies such as Gracenote; they use yoir zip code to generate a list of stations in your market. This can cause discrepancies between your TV tuner"s data and the channel list in the DVR software. >> --RC >> /Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device/ >> ------ Original message------ >> *From: *Larry Sochrin >> *Date: *Fri, Aug 2, 2019 10:23 AM >> *To: *npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com ;bob.bosra@demattia.net ;scott@fybush.com ; >> *Cc: *boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org ; >> *Subject:*TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan >> I rescanned this morning, both a standalone TV and a TiVO connected to another TV. The stand alone TV came through just fine but my TiVO only has the signal for channel 7.1, and nothing for any other channels, although it shows the station names, logos, and program guide info but no audio or video. TiVo support isn?t open for an hour and I?m not sure what to do. Any suggestions? From as@shawsheen.com Fri Aug 2 12:32:23 2019 From: as@shawsheen.com (Alexander Svirsky) Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2019 12:32:23 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 Message-ID: <20190802123223.Horde.Tl0okCxFV-5fFMi7fOj-9NB@host391.hostmonster.com> It's an interesting mess. I rescanned this morning before work to see what happened. WGBH 2-1 is gone as expected, but there is 2-2 and 2-3 WGBH-SD presumably from WGBX. 2-3 picture is SD quality. I hope this isn't the replacement for WGBH 2-1. WBZ is fine. WCVB is weaker than expected with difficult reception. WGBX/WYCN appears stronger. This was a difficult signal to receive before today and I typically watched NBC on 60-4. WFXT is gone. I can't receive it and this used to be a strong signal. WHDH and WSBK are no different, as I don't think there are any changes yet. WHDH is fine while WSBK is still difficult to receive as usual. I'm 26 miles from Needham, 31 miles from Uncanoonuc, and 35 miles from Saddleback. I receive Boston and NH stations almost equally. WENH, WNEU, and WPXG are easy signals and WMUR reception isn't uncommon even when my antenna is aimed at Needham. My channel re-scan shows "40" stored channels now instead of my usual "56." I'm missing at least WGBH, WFXT, & WSBK now with no new signals coming in. From marklaurence@mac.com Fri Aug 2 14:07:07 2019 From: marklaurence@mac.com (Mark Laurence) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 14:07:07 -0400 Subject: TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan In-Reply-To: <7fe6m8en6st6fna7o1qbjj9p.1564762234902@email.lge.com> References: <7fe6m8en6st6fna7o1qbjj9p.1564762234902@email.lge.com> Message-ID: I have a TiVo Roamio with OTA capability, and rescanned my TiVo a short time ago: "Settings/Channel settings/Antenna channel scan/Scan for new antenna channels." Then go to ?My Channels? and you will probably see a lot of duplicates, for the channels that have moved. Check the ones with an asterisk next to them, and uncheck the duplicates. For me, these are channels 2, 4, 5, 15, 24, 27, 44, and 60, along with their subchannels. I?m not sure about channel 68 which I wasn?t receiving before with my antenna angle. Channels 7, 38, 50-1, 56, and 68 are unchanged. For me, channel 8 has disappeared, but 15-1 is the replacement for NBC Boston. The program information on the new frequencies is not there yet, so you may not succeed at automatic recordings, and the logos have disappeared as well. I tried reconnecting Network Settings but so far that hasn?t helped to bring in program information. Hopefully it?ll be updated soon, but at least my TiVo is pulling in all the channels I got before. > On Aug 2, 2019, at 12:18 PM, richard@chonak.com wrote: > > At present, my Plex DVR software isn't in sync with my HDHomeRun tuner either.Some DVR systems depend on program guide data from companies such as Gracenote; they use yoir zip code to generate a list of stations in your market. This can cause discrepancies between your TV tuner"s data and the channel list in the DVR software. --RCSent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device------ Original message------From: Larry SochrinDate: Fri, Aug 2, 2019 10:23 AMTo: npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com;bob.bosra@demattia.net;scott@fybush.com;Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org;Subject:TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescanI rescanned this morning, both a standalone TV and a TiVO connected to another TV. The stand alone TV came through just fine but my TiVO only has the signal for channel 7.1, and nothing for any other channels, although it shows the station names, logos, and program guide info but no audio or video. TiVo support isn?t open for an hour and I?m not sure ! > what to d > o. Any suggestions? From scott@fybush.com Fri Aug 2 12:24:58 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 12:24:58 -0400 Subject: TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan In-Reply-To: <7fe6m8en6st6fna7o1qbjj9p.1564762234902@email.lge.com> References: <7fe6m8en6st6fna7o1qbjj9p.1564762234902@email.lge.com> Message-ID: <68293e56-c2e1-1ae3-21b7-38c36ec05a9c@fybush.com> I've heard of issues here in Rochester with TiVo's lists not corresponding to what's now actually on the air, too. I have access to a Plex/HDHR system in Newton and rescanned it this morning. It has no trouble seeing WGBH on RF5 (which has not been the case for some friends in central Mass.), and it's picking up some channels that Plex hasn't updated yet in its guide. Most notably, WGBH has put a 44.2 subchannel on WGBX to carry the WGBH 2.1 programming in SD. (As I expected they would do, and I still expect it will end up in HD sooner rather than later there.) s On 8/2/2019 12:18 PM, richard@chonak.com wrote: > At present, my Plex DVR software isn't in sync with my HDHomeRun tuner > either. > > Some DVR systems depend on program guide data from companies such as > Gracenote; they use yoir zip code to generate a list of stations in your > market. This can cause discrepancies between your TV tuner"s data and > the channel list in the DVR software. > > --RC > > > /Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device/ > > ------ Original message------ > *From: *Larry Sochrin > *Date: *Fri, Aug 2, 2019 10:23 AM > *To: *npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com > ;bob.bosra@demattia.net > ;scott@fybush.com > ; > *Cc: *boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > ; > *Subject:*TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan > > I rescanned this morning, both a standalone TV and a TiVO connected to another TV. The stand alone TV came through just fine but my TiVO only has the signal for channel 7.1, and nothing for any other channels, although it shows the station names, logos, and program guide info but no audio or video. TiVo support isn?t open for an hour and I?m not sure what to do. Any suggestions? > From scott@fybush.com Fri Aug 2 14:00:03 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 14:00:03 -0400 Subject: TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan In-Reply-To: References: <7fe6m8en6st6fna7o1qbjj9p.1564762234902@email.lge.com> <68293e56-c2e1-1ae3-21b7-38c36ec05a9c@fybush.com> Message-ID: NBC's primary signal is now WYCN-CD, virtual 15.1, channel share (now on RF 32) with WGBX. I can confirm the RF 32/virtual 15.1 signal is on the air - I'm watching it right now from the tuner in Newton to which I have remote access. WBTS-LD, virtual 8.1, RF 46 is still on the air but will be going away soon. WNEU has completed its move to Needham and is no longer carrying NBC on 60.2, as best I can tell. 60.2 is now TeleXitos. The TiVo people REALLY ought to have known this was happening and shouldn't be taken by surprise... s On 8/2/2019 1:01 PM, Larry Sochrin wrote: > And I spent an hour on the phone with a TiVo person, we shall see. > > My biggest concern now is that, as was true a year or two ago, the only way I?d get NBC was on 15.1 whereas the other options they offered worked in nearby apartments (I?m in Brookline, MA) but not mine. So they added 15.1 and that worked. As of this morning, 15.1 doesn?t come in at all in my living room at all and the others don?t either, and my call to NBC10?s support for this gets me put on hold at the FCC and on one ever answers. > > Does anyone know the frequencies that NBC is using, since TiVO mainly seems to want to know frequencies. > > > >> On Aug 2, 2019, at 12:24 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: >> >> I've heard of issues here in Rochester with TiVo's lists not corresponding to what's now actually on the air, too. >> >> I have access to a Plex/HDHR system in Newton and rescanned it this morning. It has no trouble seeing WGBH on RF5 (which has not been the case for some friends in central Mass.), and it's picking up some channels that Plex hasn't updated yet in its guide. >> >> Most notably, WGBH has put a 44.2 subchannel on WGBX to carry the WGBH 2.1 programming in SD. (As I expected they would do, and I still expect it will end up in HD sooner rather than later there.) >> >> s >> >> On 8/2/2019 12:18 PM, richard@chonak.com wrote: >>> At present, my Plex DVR software isn't in sync with my HDHomeRun tuner either. >>> Some DVR systems depend on program guide data from companies such as Gracenote; they use yoir zip code to generate a list of stations in your market. This can cause discrepancies between your TV tuner"s data and the channel list in the DVR software. >>> --RC >>> /Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device/ >>> ------ Original message------ >>> *From: *Larry Sochrin >>> *Date: *Fri, Aug 2, 2019 10:23 AM >>> *To: *npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com ;bob.bosra@demattia.net ;scott@fybush.com ; >>> *Cc: *boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org ; >>> *Subject:*TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan >>> I rescanned this morning, both a standalone TV and a TiVO connected to another TV. The stand alone TV came through just fine but my TiVO only has the signal for channel 7.1, and nothing for any other channels, although it shows the station names, logos, and program guide info but no audio or video. TiVo support isn?t open for an hour and I?m not sure what to do. Any suggestions? > From lsochrin@rcn.com Fri Aug 2 17:21:50 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 17:21:50 -0400 Subject: Still an NBC issue In-Reply-To: References: <7fe6m8en6st6fna7o1qbjj9p.1564762234902@email.lge.com> <68293e56-c2e1-1ae3-21b7-38c36ec05a9c@fybush.com> Message-ID: <038A6750-34D5-44DD-A68E-927147F8A900@rcn.com> Thanks. When NBC local station started operating, I couldn?t get it on any channel although others right near me in Brookline, MA could. According to the newspapers then, after lots of complaints to the state?s Senators, they added 15.1 and it worked fine. But now, after the rescan, 15.1 works fine for NBC for others near me in Brookline but gets me nothing. Nor do any of the other alternatives NBC claims to work (60, 8). I?ve been on never?ending hold with the number the NBC Boston station says to call which is the FCC Rescan Info help line. > On Aug 2, 2019, at 2:00 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > > NBC's primary signal is now WYCN-CD, virtual 15.1, channel share (now on RF 32) with WGBX. I can confirm the RF 32/virtual 15.1 signal is on the air - I'm watching it right now from the tuner in Newton to which I have remote access. > > WBTS-LD, virtual 8.1, RF 46 is still on the air but will be going away soon. > > WNEU has completed its move to Needham and is no longer carrying NBC on 60.2, as best I can tell. 60.2 is now TeleXitos. > > The TiVo people REALLY ought to have known this was happening and shouldn't be taken by surprise... > > s > > On 8/2/2019 1:01 PM, Larry Sochrin wrote: >> And I spent an hour on the phone with a TiVo person, we shall see. >> My biggest concern now is that, as was true a year or two ago, the only way I?d get NBC was on 15.1 whereas the other options they offered worked in nearby apartments (I?m in Brookline, MA) but not mine. So they added 15.1 and that worked. As of this morning, 15.1 doesn?t come in at all in my living room at all and the others don?t either, and my call to NBC10?s support for this gets me put on hold at the FCC and on one ever answers. >> Does anyone know the frequencies that NBC is using, since TiVO mainly seems to want to know frequencies. >>> On Aug 2, 2019, at 12:24 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: >>> >>> I've heard of issues here in Rochester with TiVo's lists not corresponding to what's now actually on the air, too. >>> >>> I have access to a Plex/HDHR system in Newton and rescanned it this morning. It has no trouble seeing WGBH on RF5 (which has not been the case for some friends in central Mass.), and it's picking up some channels that Plex hasn't updated yet in its guide. >>> >>> Most notably, WGBH has put a 44.2 subchannel on WGBX to carry the WGBH 2.1 programming in SD. (As I expected they would do, and I still expect it will end up in HD sooner rather than later there.) >>> >>> s >>> >>> On 8/2/2019 12:18 PM, richard@chonak.com wrote: >>>> At present, my Plex DVR software isn't in sync with my HDHomeRun tuner either. >>>> Some DVR systems depend on program guide data from companies such as Gracenote; they use yoir zip code to generate a list of stations in your market. This can cause discrepancies between your TV tuner"s data and the channel list in the DVR software. >>>> --RC >>>> /Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device/ >>>> ------ Original message------ >>>> *From: *Larry Sochrin >>>> *Date: *Fri, Aug 2, 2019 10:23 AM >>>> *To: *npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com ;bob.bosra@demattia.net ;scott@fybush.com ; >>>> *Cc: *boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org ; >>>> *Subject:*TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan >>>> I rescanned this morning, both a standalone TV and a TiVO connected to another TV. The stand alone TV came through just fine but my TiVO only has the signal for channel 7.1, and nothing for any other channels, although it shows the station names, logos, and program guide info but no audio or video. TiVo support isn?t open for an hour and I?m not sure what to do. Any suggestions? From scott@fybush.com Fri Aug 2 17:24:06 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 17:24:06 -0400 Subject: Still an NBC issue In-Reply-To: <038A6750-34D5-44DD-A68E-927147F8A900@rcn.com> References: <7fe6m8en6st6fna7o1qbjj9p.1564762234902@email.lge.com> <68293e56-c2e1-1ae3-21b7-38c36ec05a9c@fybush.com> <038A6750-34D5-44DD-A68E-927147F8A900@rcn.com> Message-ID: I'm pretty sure the issue here is with TiVo not updating the information it's pushing to your box. (And again, they should have been ready for this.) It sounds like the box can only tune to the channels the mothership says it should be receiving, and if they're not updating for WGBX's new RF channel of 32, you're out of luck until they do. Can you get WGBX 44.1 over TiVo? Or 44.3? On 8/2/2019 5:21 PM, Larry Sochrin wrote: > Thanks. When NBC local station started operating, I couldn?t get it on any channel although others right near me in Brookline, MA could. According to the newspapers then, after lots of complaints to the state?s Senators, they added 15.1 and it worked fine. > > But now, after the rescan, 15.1 works fine for NBC for others near me in Brookline but gets me nothing. Nor do any of the other alternatives NBC claims to work (60, 8). I?ve been on never?ending hold with the number the NBC Boston station says to call which is the FCC Rescan Info help line. > >> On Aug 2, 2019, at 2:00 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: >> >> NBC's primary signal is now WYCN-CD, virtual 15.1, channel share (now on RF 32) with WGBX. I can confirm the RF 32/virtual 15.1 signal is on the air - I'm watching it right now from the tuner in Newton to which I have remote access. >> >> WBTS-LD, virtual 8.1, RF 46 is still on the air but will be going away soon. >> >> WNEU has completed its move to Needham and is no longer carrying NBC on 60.2, as best I can tell. 60.2 is now TeleXitos. >> >> The TiVo people REALLY ought to have known this was happening and shouldn't be taken by surprise... >> >> s >> >> On 8/2/2019 1:01 PM, Larry Sochrin wrote: >>> And I spent an hour on the phone with a TiVo person, we shall see. >>> My biggest concern now is that, as was true a year or two ago, the only way I?d get NBC was on 15.1 whereas the other options they offered worked in nearby apartments (I?m in Brookline, MA) but not mine. So they added 15.1 and that worked. As of this morning, 15.1 doesn?t come in at all in my living room at all and the others don?t either, and my call to NBC10?s support for this gets me put on hold at the FCC and on one ever answers. >>> Does anyone know the frequencies that NBC is using, since TiVO mainly seems to want to know frequencies. >>>> On Aug 2, 2019, at 12:24 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: >>>> >>>> I've heard of issues here in Rochester with TiVo's lists not corresponding to what's now actually on the air, too. >>>> >>>> I have access to a Plex/HDHR system in Newton and rescanned it this morning. It has no trouble seeing WGBH on RF5 (which has not been the case for some friends in central Mass.), and it's picking up some channels that Plex hasn't updated yet in its guide. >>>> >>>> Most notably, WGBH has put a 44.2 subchannel on WGBX to carry the WGBH 2.1 programming in SD. (As I expected they would do, and I still expect it will end up in HD sooner rather than later there.) >>>> >>>> s >>>> >>>> On 8/2/2019 12:18 PM, richard@chonak.com wrote: >>>>> At present, my Plex DVR software isn't in sync with my HDHomeRun tuner either. >>>>> Some DVR systems depend on program guide data from companies such as Gracenote; they use yoir zip code to generate a list of stations in your market. This can cause discrepancies between your TV tuner"s data and the channel list in the DVR software. >>>>> --RC >>>>> /Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE device/ >>>>> ------ Original message------ >>>>> *From: *Larry Sochrin >>>>> *Date: *Fri, Aug 2, 2019 10:23 AM >>>>> *To: *npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com ;bob.bosra@demattia.net ;scott@fybush.com ; >>>>> *Cc: *boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org ; >>>>> *Subject:*TiVo lost signal for all but one channel after rescan >>>>> I rescanned this morning, both a standalone TV and a TiVO connected to another TV. The stand alone TV came through just fine but my TiVO only has the signal for channel 7.1, and nothing for any other channels, although it shows the station names, logos, and program guide info but no audio or video. TiVo support isn?t open for an hour and I?m not sure what to do. Any suggestions? > From Kaimbridge@Gmail.com Fri Aug 2 23:17:05 2019 From: Kaimbridge@Gmail.com (Kaimbridge M. GoldChild) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 03:17:05 +0000 Subject: [B-R-I] Boston Repack Results (Was: WGBH-TV coverage...) Message-ID: <201b9655-24b7-4478-e1d1-10cc549fb901@Gmail.com> Here is the Boston Repack results, noted up here on the North Shore. (Old?New RF Ch.) [Last Month? WBPX:68- 32?22 (new xmtr on WUNI?s Hudson twr)] ?[ Ch.Share: WDPX:58 ]? 1-1:15am? WGBH:02- 19?5 ?[ Ch.Share: WFXZ:24 ]? WBZ:04- 30?20 WCVB:05- 20?33 WFXT:25- 31?34 WGBX:44- 43?32 (44.1-HD = RF-5 {WGBH}) ?[ Ch.Share: WYCN-CD:15 ]? WNEU:60- 34?29 (new xmtr on Cedar St Newton twr) 2:15am? WUTF:27- 29?19 ({inherited WGBH?s old?} xmtr on Cedar St Newton twr) WSBK:38 doesn?t move until January, and WHDH:07/WLVI:56 til March. ~ ?????????? ~ -- -- -- Wiki?Sites Contribution History Pages: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge math.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge rosettacode.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** From bob.bosra@demattia.net Fri Aug 2 23:55:26 2019 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 23:55:26 -0400 Subject: [B-R-I] Boston Repack Results (Was: WGBH-TV coverage...) In-Reply-To: <201b9655-24b7-4478-e1d1-10cc549fb901@Gmail.com> References: <201b9655-24b7-4478-e1d1-10cc549fb901@Gmail.com> Message-ID: Is WBZ just using WCVB's old transmitter? On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 11:51 PM Kaimbridge M. GoldChild < Kaimbridge@gmail.com> wrote: > Here is the Boston Repack results, noted up here on the North Shore. > > (Old?New RF Ch.) > [Last Month? WBPX:68- 32?22 (new xmtr on WUNI?s Hudson twr)] > ?[ Ch.Share: WDPX:58 ]? > > 1-1:15am? WGBH:02- 19?5 > ?[ Ch.Share: WFXZ:24 ]? > WBZ:04- 30?20 > WCVB:05- 20?33 > WFXT:25- 31?34 > WGBX:44- 43?32 (44.1-HD = RF-5 {WGBH}) > ?[ Ch.Share: WYCN-CD:15 ]? > WNEU:60- 34?29 (new xmtr on Cedar St Newton twr) > > 2:15am? WUTF:27- 29?19 ({inherited WGBH?s old?} xmtr > on Cedar St Newton twr) > > WSBK:38 doesn?t move until January, and WHDH:07/WLVI:56 til March. > > ~ ?????????? ~ > > -- -- -- > Wiki?Sites Contribution History Pages: > > en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge > math.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge > wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge > rosettacode.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge > > ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** > > From joe@attorneyross.com Sat Aug 3 02:02:53 2019 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 02:02:53 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> Message-ID: <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band entirely and put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. On 8/1/2019 10:03 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who > are viewing off-air with receiving equipment > that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal. Maybe some of those people will > switch to live streaming, but people > viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt inclined > to avail themselves of that option. > > BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option. The > picture quality does not compare to off-air. > > -Bob > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 AM Ken VanTassell wrote: > >> I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are >> really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called >> locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5 >> per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we >> have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. >> >> -Ken >> >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia >> wrote: >> >>> Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas. >>> Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until >>> now was >>> on VHF-HI. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce >> wrote: >>> >>>> After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are >>>> numbered. >>>> >>>> Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF >>>> channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done >>>> their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to >>>> do on that channel. >>>> >>>> According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline >>>> population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as >>>> 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new >>>> RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250 >>>> because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to >>>> increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic >>>> coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see >>>> ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because >>>> the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN >>>> parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). >>>> >>>> But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population >>>> served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the >>>> problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air audience >>>> slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable >>>> to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from >>>> gross optimism? >>>> >>>> Norm Pierce >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] >>> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf >>>> >>> https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 >>>> [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" >>>> >>>> >>> https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx >>>> "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" >>>> (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) >>>> https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf >>>> >>>> -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From bob.bosra@demattia.net Sat Aug 3 08:06:35 2019 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 08:06:35 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: Because the wireless carriers want the UHF spectrum. This latest exercise is all about freeing up UHF spectrum. -Bob > > From LostCluster@lostcluster.me Sat Aug 3 11:05:41 2019 From: LostCluster@lostcluster.me (Ben Levy) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 11:05:41 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: They needed VHF in order to fit all of the analog and digital stations at first. Then the former stations were reserved for new stations, but no new owner showed up so now the unused space is reserved for 5G cell phones. This ?repack? is annoy OTA viewers everywhere? but there are some hidden gems out there like the new CourtTV channel which is 27.5. BTW, anybody see a Univision logo on 27 and a UniMas logo on 66? those two swapped everything over two years ago.. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: A Joseph Ross Sent: Saturday, August 3, 2019 2:34 AM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band entirely and put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. On 8/1/2019 10:03 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who > are viewing off-air with receiving equipment > that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal. Maybe some of those people will > switch to live streaming, but people > viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt inclined > to avail themselves of that option. > > BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option. The > picture quality does not compare to off-air. > > -Bob > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 AM Ken VanTassell wrote: > >> I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are >> really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called >> locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5 >> per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we >> have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. >> >> -Ken >> >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia >> wrote: >> >>> Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas. >>> Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until >>> now was >>> on VHF-HI. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce >> wrote: >>> >>>> After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are >>>> numbered. >>>> >>>> Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF >>>> channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done >>>> their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to >>>> do on that channel. >>>> >>>> According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline >>>> population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as >>>> 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new >>>> RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250 >>>> because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to >>>> increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic >>>> coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see >>>> ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because >>>> the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN >>>> parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). >>>> >>>> But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population >>>> served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the >>>> problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air audience >>>> slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable >>>> to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from >>>> gross optimism? >>>> >>>> Norm Pierce >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] >>> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf >>>> >>> https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 >>>> [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" >>>> >>>> >>> https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx >>>> "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" >>>> (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) >>>> https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf >>>> >>>> -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From LostCluster@lostcluster.me Sat Aug 3 13:49:49 2019 From: LostCluster@lostcluster.me (Ben Levy) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 13:49:49 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: Where are the Quality of Service Listeners when we need them? Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Kevin Vahey Sent: Saturday, August 3, 2019 1:08 PM To: Ben Levy Cc: A Joseph Ross; boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 A friend in Warwick RI? says 2.1 4.1 7.1 and 15.1 now coming in - 5.1 has vanished? On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 11:10 AM Ben Levy wrote: They needed VHF in order to fit all of the analog and digital stations at first. Then the former stations were reserved for new stations, but no new owner showed up so now the unused space is reserved for 5G cell phones. This ?repack? is annoy OTA viewers everywhere? but there are some hidden gems out there like the new CourtTV channel which is 27.5. BTW, anybody see a Univision logo on 27 and a UniMas logo on 66? those two swapped everything over two years ago.. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: A Joseph Ross Sent: Saturday, August 3, 2019 2:34 AM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band entirely and put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. On 8/1/2019 10:03 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who > are viewing off-air with receiving equipment > that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal.? ?Maybe some of those people will > switch to live streaming, but people > viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt inclined > to avail themselves of that option. > > BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option.? The > picture quality does not compare to off-air. > > -Bob > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 AM Ken VanTassell wrote: > >> I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are >> really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called >> locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free (5 >> per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I think we >> have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. >> >> -Ken >> >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia >> wrote: >> >>> Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only antennas. >>> Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up until >>> now was >>> on VHF-HI. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce >> wrote: >>> >>>> After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are >>>> numbered. >>>> >>>> Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF >>>> channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done >>>> their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to >>>> do on that channel. >>>> >>>> According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline >>>> population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as >>>> 7,633,586.? In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new >>>> RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250 >>>> because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to >>>> increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic >>>> coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see >>>> ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because >>>> the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN >>>> parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). >>>> >>>> But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population >>>> served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the >>>> problems with DTV on VHF?? Will it really reach an over-the-air audience >>>> slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable >>>> to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from >>>> gross optimism? >>>> >>>> Norm Pierce >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] >>> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf >>>> >>> https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 >>>> [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" >>>> >>>> >>> https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx >>>> "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" >>>> (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) >>>> https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf >>>> >>>> -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From kvahey@gmail.com Sat Aug 3 13:08:39 2019 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 13:08:39 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: A friend in Warwick RI says 2.1 4.1 7.1 and 15.1 now coming in - 5.1 has vanished On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 11:10 AM Ben Levy wrote: > They needed VHF in order to fit all of the analog and digital stations at > first. Then the former stations were reserved for new stations, but no new > owner showed up so now the unused space is reserved for 5G cell phones. > > This ?repack? is annoy OTA viewers everywhere? but there are some hidden > gems out there like the new CourtTV channel which is 27.5. > > BTW, anybody see a Univision logo on 27 and a UniMas logo on 66? those two > swapped everything over two years ago.. > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: A Joseph Ross > Sent: Saturday, August 3, 2019 2:34 AM > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 > > I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band > entirely and put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. > > On 8/1/2019 10:03 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > > All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who > > are viewing off-air with receiving equipment > > that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal. Maybe some of those people will > > switch to live streaming, but people > > viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt > inclined > > to avail themselves of that option. > > > > BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option. The > > picture quality does not compare to off-air. > > > > -Bob > > > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 AM Ken VanTassell wrote: > > > >> I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are > >> really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called > >> locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free > (5 > >> per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I > think we > >> have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. > >> > >> -Ken > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only > antennas. > >>> Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up > until > >>> now was > >>> on VHF-HI. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce < > npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days > are > >>>> numbered. > >>>> > >>>> Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new > RF > >>>> channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done > >>>> their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them > to > >>>> do on that channel. > >>>> > >>>> According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline > >>>> population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as > >>>> 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the > new > >>>> RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of > 7,669,250 > >>>> because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to > >>>> increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the > geographic > >>>> coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see > >>>> ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because > >>>> the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN > >>>> parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). > >>>> > >>>> But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population > >>>> served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the > >>>> problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air > audience > >>>> slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and > comparable > >>>> to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from > >>>> gross optimism? > >>>> > >>>> Norm Pierce > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> [1] > >>> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf > >>>> > >>> > https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 > >>>> [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx > >>>> "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" > >>>> (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) > >>>> https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf > >>>> > >>>> > > -- > A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 > 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com > > From scott@fybush.com Sat Aug 3 15:07:45 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 15:07:45 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: There was never any intent to use the freed-up former analog spectrum for new licensees. So it's not correct to say "none showed up." No new allocations were created and no auction/application window was held after the 2009 digital transition. On Sat, Aug 3, 2019, 11:09 AM Ben Levy wrote: > They needed VHF in order to fit all of the analog and digital stations at > first. Then the former stations were reserved for new stations, but no new > owner showed up so now the unused space is reserved for 5G cell phones. > > This ?repack? is annoy OTA viewers everywhere? but there are some hidden > gems out there like the new CourtTV channel which is 27.5. > > BTW, anybody see a Univision logo on 27 and a UniMas logo on 66? those two > swapped everything over two years ago.. > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: A Joseph Ross > Sent: Saturday, August 3, 2019 2:34 AM > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 > > I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band > entirely and put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. > > On 8/1/2019 10:03 AM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > > All of that may be true, but what they will definitely lose is people who > > are viewing off-air with receiving equipment > > that cannot pick up the VHF-LO signal. Maybe some of those people will > > switch to live streaming, but people > > viewing off-air already have that option and thus far haven't felt > inclined > > to avail themselves of that option. > > > > BTW, I'm live streaming now in NH where off-air is not an option. The > > picture quality does not compare to off-air. > > > > -Bob > > > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:48 AM Ken VanTassell wrote: > > > >> I am going to disagree. Cord cutting is becoming rampant, people are > >> really sick of paying huge cable bills. There is a non-profit called > >> locast.org that has a roku app with the local Boston stations for free > (5 > >> per month suggested donation). I know several people using this. I > think we > >> have resurgent times for OTA TV ahead. > >> > >> -Ken > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:46 AM Bob DeMattia > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Not to mention many off-air viewers are probably using UHF-only > antennas. > >>> Even if they have VHF antennas, the only DTV in this area on VHF up > until > >>> now was > >>> on VHF-HI. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:39 AM Norm Pierce < > npierce.aq3h@dappermapper.com > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days > are > >>>> numbered. > >>>> > >>>> Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new > RF > >>>> channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done > >>>> their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them > to > >>>> do on that channel. > >>>> > >>>> According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline > >>>> population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as > >>>> 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the > new > >>>> RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of > 7,669,250 > >>>> because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to > >>>> increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the > geographic > >>>> coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see > >>>> ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because > >>>> the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN > >>>> parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). > >>>> > >>>> But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population > >>>> served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the > >>>> problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air > audience > >>>> slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and > comparable > >>>> to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from > >>>> gross optimism? > >>>> > >>>> Norm Pierce > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> [1] > >>> WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf > >>>> > >>> > https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 > >>>> [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx > >>>> "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" > >>>> (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) > >>>> https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf > >>>> > >>>> > > -- > A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 > 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com > > From marklaurence@mac.com Sat Aug 3 16:51:42 2019 From: marklaurence@mac.com (Laurence Kranich) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 16:51:42 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <012DB961-C5E2-46F9-8EEE-F8FDD0FBAF88@mac.com> Today I had to redo nearly everything I did yesterday on my TiVo. Nearly all of the channels that had shown up as duplicates, without logos or program information, gave me no signal today. The exception is WGBH, where 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4 still have the non-program guide and no logo situation. I went back in my channel list on the TiVo, unchecked the new duplicate channels, and rechecked the original channels. Now, nearly all the channels are matched up with program information, which probably means they?ll record again. The big winner in this appears to be channel 27, at least from my reception in Boston. Sent from my iPad From jjlehmann@comcast.net Sat Aug 3 18:13:38 2019 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 18:13:38 -0400 Subject: [B-R-I] Boston Repack Results (Was: WGBH-TV coverage...) In-Reply-To: References: <201b9655-24b7-4478-e1d1-10cc549fb901@Gmail.com> Message-ID: No, they have a new transmitter. Also, I?m pretty sure that WBZ, WCVB, WFXT, and WGBX are now running from the ?Candelabra? tower antenna below the WGBH low band channel bel 5 antenna, which will become a backup once the antennas are replaced on the ?WBZ? tower. It?s possible that the backup isn?t quite as good as what the final configuration on the other tower will be, but I don?t know the exact specs of power levels, antenna height, etc. Jeff Lehmann > On Aug 2, 2019, at 11:55 PM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > > Is WBZ just using WCVB's old transmitter? > > On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 11:51 PM Kaimbridge M. GoldChild < > Kaimbridge@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Here is the Boston Repack results, noted up here on the North Shore. >> >> (Old?New RF Ch.) >> [Last Month? WBPX:68- 32?22 (new xmtr on WUNI?s Hudson twr)] >> ?[ Ch.Share: WDPX:58 ]? >> >> 1-1:15am? WGBH:02- 19?5 >> ?[ Ch.Share: WFXZ:24 ]? >> WBZ:04- 30?20 >> WCVB:05- 20?33 >> WFXT:25- 31?34 >> WGBX:44- 43?32 (44.1-HD = RF-5 {WGBH}) >> ?[ Ch.Share: WYCN-CD:15 ]? >> WNEU:60- 34?29 (new xmtr on Cedar St Newton twr) >> >> 2:15am? WUTF:27- 29?19 ({inherited WGBH?s old?} xmtr >> on Cedar St Newton twr) >> >> WSBK:38 doesn?t move until January, and WHDH:07/WLVI:56 til March. >> >> ~ ?????????? ~ >> >> -- -- -- >> Wiki?Sites Contribution History Pages: >> >> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge >> math.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge >> wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge >> rosettacode.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kaimbridge >> >> ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** >> >> From michaeldmalone@hotmail.com Thu Aug 1 11:56:37 2019 From: michaeldmalone@hotmail.com (Michael Malone) Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 15:56:37 +0000 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com>, Message-ID: Is it technically possible for WGBX to add an HD signal from WGBH and still maintain the HD signal that WGBX allots to NBCBoston 15? ________________________________ From: Boston-Radio-Interest on behalf of Scott Fybush Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2019 9:48 AM To: Norm Pierce Cc: Boston Radio Group Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 I expect the 2.1 programming will end up being transmitted over WGBX's UHF signal, sooner or later. I also expect the VHF 5 signal will become WGBH's test bed for ATSC 3 experimentation. On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 9:38 AM Norm Pierce wrote: > After a lifetime of watching Channel 2, I'm wondering if those days are > numbered. > > Looking at the application for their construction permit for the new RF > channel 5 assignment [1], it appears that the WGBH engineers have done > their best to give the strongest signal that the FCC rules allow them to > do on that channel. > > According to the "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet [2], the baseline > population served by WGBH-TV, as limited by terrain, is given as > 7,633,586. In WGBH's application for a construction permit for the new > RF channel 5 assignment, they give a slightly higher number of 7,669,250 > because of the change of tower, and the fact that they were able to > increase the ERP from 5.3 kW to 6.7 kW without exceeding the geographic > coverage area of the largest station within the same market (see > ?73.622(f)(5)) -- something they are apparently allowed to do because > the proposed coverage contour may extend beyond that of the CCRPN > parameters for a station that changes bands (see ?73.3700(b)(1)(iii)). > > But even with the higher ERP, does anyone think that the population > served won't actually be much smaller than it currently is, given the > problems with DTV on VHF? Will it really reach an over-the-air audience > slightly larger than it currently does on RF channel 19, and comparable > to channels 4, 5, and 7, or do the above coverage numbers suffer from > gross optimism? > > Norm Pierce > > > [1] WGBH-TV_reassignment_initial_minor_mod_application_ENG_06-18-2017.pdf > > https://enterpriseefiling.fcc.gov/dataentry/api/download/attachment/25076f915c78b6bf015cbcb83aa224c3 > > [2] "Post Auction Baseline" spreadsheet" > > https://data.fcc.gov/download/incentive-auctions/Transition_Files/Post_Auction_Baseline.xlsx > > "Incentive Auction Closing and Channel Reassignment Public Notice" > (CCRPN) (DA 17-314) > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-17-314A1.pdf > > From wollman@bimajority.org Sat Aug 3 20:22:48 2019 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 20:22:48 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <23878.9560.492031.739837@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band > entirely and put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. Because UHF is worth more in spectrum auctions whereas VHF is practically worthless *except* for broadcast TV. -GAWollman From lsochrin@rcn.com Sat Aug 3 22:35:14 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 22:35:14 -0400 Subject: TV antenna reception update as of now in Brookline, MA Message-ID: <0D268998-6A43-4E4C-A8E2-D3E5F7E25F44@rcn.com> Here?s an update as of tonight in Brookline, MA, showing only those channels and frequencies that actually are giving me both video and audio. The information comes from my TiVo?s ?channel signal strength meter - antenna.? It shows that it picks up other signals, but not actually giving me audio/video. Hope someone finds this helpful. 2-2 World - 32 2-3 WGBH-SD - 32 4-1 WBZ-DT - 20 4-2 WBZ-DT2 - 20 5-1 WCVBDT - 33 5-2 WCVBDT2 - 33 7-1 WHDHDT - 42 7-2 WHDHDT2 - 42 15-1 WYCN-CD - 32 15-2 COZI - 32 25-1 WFXTDT - 34 25-2 WXTDT2 - 34 25-3 WFXTDT3 - 34 26-1 WCEA Spanish - 45 26-2 TELESUM Spanish - 45 26-3 VOA - Voice of America - Spanish - 45 26-4 Dom Republic Spanish - 45 26-5 Colombia Spanish - 45 26-6 Dom Republic Spanish - 45 26-7 TEST - 45 38-1 WSBKDT - 39 38-2 WSBKDT2 - 39 38-2 WSBKDT3 - 39 38-4 WSBKDT4 - 39 44-2 WGBX-SD - 32 44-3 Create - 32 44-4 Kids - 32 50-1 WWJEDT - 27 56-1 WLVIDT - 42 56-2 WLVIDT2 - 42 58-4 WCEA-LD4 - 45 (weak) 60-1 WNEU TV Spanish - 29 60-2 WNEUDT2 Spanish - 29 66-1 WUNIDT Spanish - 27 66-2 WUNIDT2 Spanish - 27 66-3 WUNIDT3 - Spanish - 27 66-4 WUNIDT4 - Spanish - 27 From dave@skywaves.net Sat Aug 3 23:10:15 2019 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2019 23:10:15 -0400 Subject: TV antenna reception update as of now in Brookline, MA In-Reply-To: <0D268998-6A43-4E4C-A8E2-D3E5F7E25F44@rcn.com> References: <0D268998-6A43-4E4C-A8E2-D3E5F7E25F44@rcn.com> Message-ID: <000c01d54a72$23328be0$6997a3a0$@skywaves.net> I'm in Worcester, so I don?t get quite as many as you do. I noticed the missing WBGH 2.1 HD here also. WBZ, WCVB, and WHDH are all good here. WFXT is marginal - lots of video blockiness and audio dropouts. -d -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Larry Sochrin Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2019 10:35 PM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: TV antenna reception update as of now in Brookline, MA Here?s an update as of tonight in Brookline, MA, showing only those channels and frequencies that actually are giving me both video and audio. The information comes from my TiVo?s ?channel signal strength meter - antenna.? It shows that it picks up other signals, but not actually giving me audio/video. Hope someone finds this helpful. 2-2 World - 32 2-3 WGBH-SD - 32 4-1 WBZ-DT - 20 4-2 WBZ-DT2 - 20 5-1 WCVBDT - 33 5-2 WCVBDT2 - 33 7-1 WHDHDT - 42 7-2 WHDHDT2 - 42 15-1 WYCN-CD - 32 15-2 COZI - 32 25-1 WFXTDT - 34 25-2 WXTDT2 - 34 25-3 WFXTDT3 - 34 26-1 WCEA Spanish - 45 26-2 TELESUM Spanish - 45 26-3 VOA - Voice of America - Spanish - 45 26-4 Dom Republic Spanish - 45 26-5 Colombia Spanish - 45 26-6 Dom Republic Spanish - 45 26-7 TEST - 45 38-1 WSBKDT - 39 38-2 WSBKDT2 - 39 38-2 WSBKDT3 - 39 38-4 WSBKDT4 - 39 44-2 WGBX-SD - 32 44-3 Create - 32 44-4 Kids - 32 50-1 WWJEDT - 27 56-1 WLVIDT - 42 56-2 WLVIDT2 - 42 58-4 WCEA-LD4 - 45 (weak) 60-1 WNEU TV Spanish - 29 60-2 WNEUDT2 Spanish - 29 66-1 WUNIDT Spanish - 27 66-2 WUNIDT2 Spanish - 27 66-3 WUNIDT3 - Spanish - 27 66-4 WUNIDT4 - Spanish - 27 From richard@chonak.com Sun Aug 4 00:08:26 2019 From: richard@chonak.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 00:08:26 -0400 Subject: indoor antennas In-Reply-To: <23878.9560.492031.739837@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> <23878.9560.492031.739837@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <026606a7-3526-37fb-ed27-078f76ab3e4f@chonak.com> It looks as though I may need to shop for an indoor antenna that (unlike most) is capable of receiving low-VHF signals.? There are lots of models; does anyone know of any sources that test them? --RC From scott@fybush.com Sun Aug 4 00:33:16 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 00:33:16 -0400 Subject: indoor antennas In-Reply-To: <026606a7-3526-37fb-ed27-078f76ab3e4f@chonak.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> <23878.9560.492031.739837@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <026606a7-3526-37fb-ed27-078f76ab3e4f@chonak.com> Message-ID: <0b199a0f-a714-9910-72ca-35fbca45368e@fybush.com> Where are you located? For indoor use in areas with fairly strong VHF signals, my go-to is the Terk HDTVa. It ought to be decent for WGBH in most areas within 128. Beyond that, you'd need something more. On 8/4/2019 12:08 AM, Richard Chonak wrote: > It looks as though I may need to shop for an indoor antenna that (unlike > most) is capable of receiving low-VHF signals.? There are lots of > models; does anyone know of any sources that test them? > > --RC > > From kvahey@gmail.com Sun Aug 4 00:53:43 2019 From: kvahey@gmail.com (Kevin Vahey) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 00:53:43 -0400 Subject: RIP Howard Lapides Message-ID: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/howard-lapides-dead-talent-manager-celebrity-rehab-producer-was-68-1228942 Howard spent 4 years in Boston from 1968-1972 when he attended Emerson. He produced Steve Fredericks at WMEX for several years and also worked weekends at WEIM in Fitchburg. From bob.bosra@demattia.net Sun Aug 4 10:42:07 2019 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 10:42:07 -0400 Subject: TV antenna reception update as of now in Brookline, MA In-Reply-To: <000c01d54a72$23328be0$6997a3a0$@skywaves.net> References: <0D268998-6A43-4E4C-A8E2-D3E5F7E25F44@rcn.com> <000c01d54a72$23328be0$6997a3a0$@skywaves.net> Message-ID: On locast, 2.1 is broken up/unwatchable. 66.1 and 68.1 are not there at all. On Sun, Aug 4, 2019 at 12:05 AM Dave Doherty wrote: > I'm in Worcester, so I don?t get quite as many as you do. > > I noticed the missing WBGH 2.1 HD here also. WBZ, WCVB, and WHDH are all > good here. WFXT is marginal - lots of video blockiness and audio dropouts. > > -d > > -----Original Message----- > From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto: > boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Larry > Sochrin > Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2019 10:35 PM > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > Subject: TV antenna reception update as of now in Brookline, MA > > Here?s an update as of tonight in Brookline, MA, showing only those > channels and frequencies that actually are giving me both video and > audio. The information comes from my TiVo?s ?channel signal strength meter > - antenna.? It shows that it picks up other signals, but not actually > giving me audio/video. Hope someone finds this helpful. > > > 2-2 World - 32 > 2-3 WGBH-SD - 32 > 4-1 WBZ-DT - 20 > 4-2 WBZ-DT2 - 20 > 5-1 WCVBDT - 33 > 5-2 WCVBDT2 - 33 > 7-1 WHDHDT - 42 > 7-2 WHDHDT2 - 42 > 15-1 WYCN-CD - 32 > 15-2 COZI - 32 > 25-1 WFXTDT - 34 > 25-2 WXTDT2 - 34 > 25-3 WFXTDT3 - 34 > 26-1 WCEA Spanish - 45 > 26-2 TELESUM Spanish - 45 > 26-3 VOA - Voice of America - Spanish - 45 > 26-4 Dom Republic Spanish - 45 > 26-5 Colombia Spanish - 45 > 26-6 Dom Republic Spanish - 45 > 26-7 TEST - 45 > 38-1 WSBKDT - 39 > 38-2 WSBKDT2 - 39 > 38-2 WSBKDT3 - 39 > 38-4 WSBKDT4 - 39 > 44-2 WGBX-SD - 32 > 44-3 Create - 32 > 44-4 Kids - 32 > 50-1 WWJEDT - 27 > 56-1 WLVIDT - 42 > 56-2 WLVIDT2 - 42 > 58-4 WCEA-LD4 - 45 (weak) > 60-1 WNEU TV Spanish - 29 > 60-2 WNEUDT2 Spanish - 29 > 66-1 WUNIDT Spanish - 27 > 66-2 WUNIDT2 Spanish - 27 > 66-3 WUNIDT3 - Spanish - 27 > 66-4 WUNIDT4 - Spanish - 27 > > > > > > From ecps92@earthlink.net Sun Aug 4 10:24:05 2019 From: ecps92@earthlink.net (~Bill) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 10:24:05 -0400 Subject: TV antenna reception update as of now in So.Weymouth In-Reply-To: <0D268998-6A43-4E4C-A8E2-D3E5F7E25F44@rcn.com> References: <0D268998-6A43-4E4C-A8E2-D3E5F7E25F44@rcn.com> Message-ID: <035a01d54ad0$45cc7d60$d1657820$@net> Scan from South Weymouth with a RS #15-0246 in the 2nd floor window [10am Scan] might see what the evening brings https://www.radioshack.com/collections/indoor-hdtv-antennas/products/radioshack-indoor-hdtv-antenna?variant=20332545669 Note Scan vs watchable are two different scenarios 2-1 WGBH-HD Too Weak a Signal 2-2 World - AOK 2-3 WGBH-SD - AOK 2-4 WGBH-KD Too Weak a Signal 4-1 WBZ-DT - AOK 4-2 WBZ-DT2 - AOK 5-1 WCVB HD - AOK 5-2 ME TV - AOK 6-1 WLNE-HD Too Weak a Signal 6-2 WLNE2 Too Weak a Signal 6-3 Escape Too Weak a Signal 6-4 WLNE4 Too Weak a Signal 7-1 WHDH-HD AOK 7-2 This TV AOK 8-1 WBTS Too Weak a Signal 8-2 WBTS Too Weak a Signal 8-3 WBTS Too Weak a Signal 8-4 WBTS Too Weak a Signal 9-1 WMUR Too Weak a Signal 9-2 ME TV Too Weak a Signal 10-1 WJAR HD Too Weak a Signal 10-2 ME TV Too Weak a Signal 10-3 Comet Too Weak a Signal 10-4 TBD Too Weak a Signal 11-1 NHPT VPRM Too Weak a Signal 11-2 NHPT Expl Too Weak a Signal 11-3 NHPT W Too Weak a Signal 11-4 NHPT C Too Weak a Signal 11-5 NHPT K Too Weak a Signal 12-1 WPRI HD Too Weak a Signal 12-2 MYRI TV Too Weak a Signal 12-3 WPRI Too Weak a Signal 12-4 WPRI Too Weak a Signal 13-1 WYCN Too Weak a Signal 13-2 COZI Too weak a Signal 15-1 WYCN AOK 15-2 COZI AOK 21-1 ION Too Weak a Signal 21-2 QUBO Too Weak a Signal 21-3 SHOP Too Weak a Signal 21-5 QVC Too Weak a Signal 21-6 HSN Too Weak a Signal 24-1 WFXZ Too Weak a Signal 25-1 WFXT HD AOK 25-2 WFXT DT2 AOK 25-3 LAFF AOK 27-1 WUTF HD AOK 27-2 LATV AOK 27-3 TBD AOK 27-4 Stadium AOK 27-5 Court TV AOK 28-1 WLWC HD Too Weak a Signal 36-1 WSBE HD Too Weak a Signal 36-2 WSBEL Too Weak a Signal 36-3 VME Too Weak a Signal 38-1 myTV38 Too Weak a Signal 38-2 H&I Too Weak a Signal 38-2 Comet Too Weak a Signal 38-4 WSBK HD4 Too Weak a Signal 40-1 W40BO Too Weak a Signal 44-1 WGBX HD Too Weak a Signal 44-2 WGBX-SD AOK 44-3 Create AOK 44-4 WGBX K AOK 46-1 WWDP Too Weak a Signal 46-2 WWDP2 Too Weak a Signal 48-1 DayStar Too Weak a Signal 50-1 WWJE HD Too Weak a Signal 50-2 GET TV Too Weak a Signal 50-3 GRIT TV Too Weak a Signal 51-1 WRIW Too Weak a Signal 54-1 ION HD Too Weak a Signal 54-2 qubo Too Weak a Signal 54-3 ION Plus Too Weak a Signal 54-4 Shop Too Weak a Signal 54-5 QVC Too Weak a Signal 54-6 HSN Too Weak a Signal 56-1 WLVI HD AOK 56-2 BUZZR AOK 58-1 ION Plus Too Weak a Signal 58-2 WCEA2 Too Weak a Signal 58-3 WCEA3 Too Weak a Signal 58-4 WCEA4 Too Weak a Signal 58-5 WCEA5 Too Weak a Signal 58-6 WCEA6 Too Weak a Signal 60-1 WNEU HD AOK 60-2 WNEU AOK 60-3 WNEUC Too Weak a Signal 60-4 WNEUC Too Weak a Signal 60-5 WMFP Too Weak a Signal 62-1 WMFP HD Too Weak a Signal 62-3 Charge Too Weak a Signal 62-4 WMFD4 Too Weak a Signal 64-1 WNAC HD Weak but can adjust the Antenna 64-2 WNAC Weak but can adjust the Antenna 64-3 LAFF Weak but can adjust the Antenna 66-1 WUNI DT Too Weak a Signal 66-2 Bounce Too Weak a Signal 66-3 Get TV Too Weak a Signal 66-4 Grit TV Too Weak a Signal 68-1 ION HD Too Weak a Signal 68-2 qubo Too Weak a Signal 68-3 Shop Too Weak a Signal 68-5 QVC Too Weak a Signal 68-6 HSN Too Weak a Signal Bill - N1KUG Boston, Mass Cruise Ship Frequencies http://scanmaritime.com/ -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Larry Sochrin Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2019 10:35 PM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: TV antenna reception update as of now in Brookline, MA Here?s an update as of tonight in Brookline, MA, showing only those channels and frequencies that actually are giving me both video and audio. The information comes from my TiVo?s ?channel signal strength meter - antenna.? It shows that it picks up other signals, but not actually giving me audio/video. Hope someone finds this helpful. 2-2 World - 32 2-3 WGBH-SD - 32 4-1 WBZ-DT - 20 4-2 WBZ-DT2 - 20 5-1 WCVBDT - 33 5-2 WCVBDT2 - 33 7-1 WHDHDT - 42 7-2 WHDHDT2 - 42 15-1 WYCN-CD - 32 15-2 COZI - 32 25-1 WFXTDT - 34 25-2 WXTDT2 - 34 25-3 WFXTDT3 - 34 26-1 WCEA Spanish - 45 26-2 TELESUM Spanish - 45 26-3 VOA - Voice of America - Spanish - 45 26-4 Dom Republic Spanish - 45 26-5 Colombia Spanish - 45 26-6 Dom Republic Spanish - 45 26-7 TEST - 45 38-1 WSBKDT - 39 38-2 WSBKDT2 - 39 38-2 WSBKDT3 - 39 38-4 WSBKDT4 - 39 44-2 WGBX-SD - 32 44-3 Create - 32 44-4 Kids - 32 50-1 WWJEDT - 27 56-1 WLVIDT - 42 56-2 WLVIDT2 - 42 58-4 WCEA-LD4 - 45 (weak) 60-1 WNEU TV Spanish - 29 60-2 WNEUDT2 Spanish - 29 66-1 WUNIDT Spanish - 27 66-2 WUNIDT2 Spanish - 27 66-3 WUNIDT3 - Spanish - 27 66-4 WUNIDT4 - Spanish - 27 From 011010001@interpring.com Sun Aug 4 15:50:55 2019 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 15:50:55 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [B-R-I] Boston Repack Results (Was: WGBH-TV coverage...) In-Reply-To: <201b9655-24b7-4478-e1d1-10cc549fb901@Gmail.com> References: <201b9655-24b7-4478-e1d1-10cc549fb901@Gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 3 Aug 2019, Kaimbridge M. GoldChild wrote: > WNEU:60- 34?29 (new xmtr on Cedar St Newton twr) The tower at 350 Cedar Street is in Needham not Newton. Rob From 011010001@interpring.com Sun Aug 4 15:53:07 2019 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 15:53:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 3 Aug 2019, A Joseph Ross wrote: > I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band entirely and > put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. VHF isn't useful for mobile broadband, but UHF is. So it's UHF spectrum being removed from broadcast use, not VHF. Rob From LostCluster@lostcluster.me Sun Aug 4 21:49:38 2019 From: LostCluster@lostcluster.me (Ben Levy) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 21:49:38 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: VHF 2-6 was removed from TV during the analog shutdown. All of the classic analog numbers were released then? leaving plenty of room for new players, but none other than NBC Boston showed up, so they could now compact the bandwidth/ Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Rob Landry Sent: Sunday, August 4, 2019 4:29 PM To: A Joseph Ross Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 On Sat, 3 Aug 2019, A Joseph Ross wrote: > I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band entirely and > put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. VHF isn't useful for mobile broadband, but UHF is. So it's UHF spectrum being removed from broadcast use, not VHF. Rob From scott@fybush.com Sun Aug 4 22:34:51 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 22:34:51 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: Not sure where you got that impression, but it's... less than accurate. Some low-band VHF stations (6 in Philadelphia, 6 in Schenectady) stayed on low V. There were four new low Vs created by a very specific FCC action in NJ and DE. But otherwise, there was no provision for any new licenses on low V or elsewhere, and the repack is now filling low V with more existing stations again. It's not just WGBH... WSBE in RI and WQED in Pittsburgh took auction dollars to go to low V as well, among others. On Sun, Aug 4, 2019, 9:51 PM Ben Levy wrote: > VHF 2-6 was removed from TV during the analog shutdown. All of the classic > analog numbers were released then? leaving plenty of room for new players, > but none other than NBC Boston showed up, so they could now compact the > bandwidth/ > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Rob Landry > Sent: Sunday, August 4, 2019 4:29 PM > To: A Joseph Ross > Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 > > > > On Sat, 3 Aug 2019, A Joseph Ross wrote: > > > I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band > entirely and > > put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. > > VHF isn't useful for mobile broadband, but UHF is. So it's UHF spectrum > being removed from broadcast use, not VHF. > > > Rob > > From scott@fybush.com Sun Aug 4 22:36:18 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 22:36:18 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: Also, NBC Boston signed on using existing licenses - full power WNEU in NH, which Comcast already owned through Telemundo, and two existing LPTV stations NBC bought, which became WBTS and WYCN. On Sun, Aug 4, 2019, 10:34 PM Scott Fybush wrote: > Not sure where you got that impression, but it's... less than accurate. > Some low-band VHF stations (6 in Philadelphia, 6 in Schenectady) stayed on > low V. There were four new low Vs created by a very specific FCC action in > NJ and DE. But otherwise, there was no provision for any new licenses on > low V or elsewhere, and the repack is now filling low V with more existing > stations again. It's not just WGBH... WSBE in RI and WQED in Pittsburgh > took auction dollars to go to low V as well, among others. > > On Sun, Aug 4, 2019, 9:51 PM Ben Levy wrote: > >> VHF 2-6 was removed from TV during the analog shutdown. All of the >> classic analog numbers were released then? leaving plenty of room for new >> players, but none other than NBC Boston showed up, so they could now >> compact the bandwidth/ >> >> Sent from Mail for Windows 10 >> >> From: Rob Landry >> Sent: Sunday, August 4, 2019 4:29 PM >> To: A Joseph Ross >> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org >> Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 >> >> >> >> On Sat, 3 Aug 2019, A Joseph Ross wrote: >> >> > I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band >> entirely and >> > put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. >> >> VHF isn't useful for mobile broadband, but UHF is. So it's UHF spectrum >> being removed from broadcast use, not VHF. >> >> >> Rob >> >> From bob.bosra@demattia.net Sun Aug 4 23:14:06 2019 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2019 23:14:06 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: In Bangor, WLBZ - 2 stayed on its VHF-Lo channel when it transitioned, as did VHF-HI WVII (7). WABI moved from 5 to VHF-HI 13. WMUR (9) and WENH (11) also stayed on VHF-HI. WPRI (12) in Providence moved to 13, and WNAC (64) in Providence moved to 12. So there were plenty of VHF transmitters running after the switchover, just not in Boston. As Scott mention, WHDH originally planned to stay on 7, but there were so many reception problems on VHF 7 that they asked and were granted permission to stay on their transitional channel 42 assignment. -Bob On Sun, Aug 4, 2019 at 10:59 PM Scott Fybush wrote: > Also, NBC Boston signed on using existing licenses - full power WNEU in NH, > which Comcast already owned through Telemundo, and two existing LPTV > stations NBC bought, which became WBTS and WYCN. > > On Sun, Aug 4, 2019, 10:34 PM Scott Fybush wrote: > > > Not sure where you got that impression, but it's... less than accurate. > > Some low-band VHF stations (6 in Philadelphia, 6 in Schenectady) stayed > on > > low V. There were four new low Vs created by a very specific FCC action > in > > NJ and DE. But otherwise, there was no provision for any new licenses on > > low V or elsewhere, and the repack is now filling low V with more > existing > > stations again. It's not just WGBH... WSBE in RI and WQED in Pittsburgh > > took auction dollars to go to low V as well, among others. > > > > On Sun, Aug 4, 2019, 9:51 PM Ben Levy > wrote: > > > >> VHF 2-6 was removed from TV during the analog shutdown. All of the > >> classic analog numbers were released then? leaving plenty of room for > new > >> players, but none other than NBC Boston showed up, so they could now > >> compact the bandwidth/ > >> > >> Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > >> > >> From: Rob Landry > >> Sent: Sunday, August 4, 2019 4:29 PM > >> To: A Joseph Ross > >> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > >> Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sat, 3 Aug 2019, A Joseph Ross wrote: > >> > >> > I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band > >> entirely and > >> > put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. > >> > >> VHF isn't useful for mobile broadband, but UHF is. So it's UHF spectrum > >> being removed from broadcast use, not VHF. > >> > >> > >> Rob > >> > >> > From joe@attorneyross.com Mon Aug 5 00:00:20 2019 From: joe@attorneyross.com (A Joseph Ross) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:00:20 -0400 Subject: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> Message-ID: <1f4f2727-a9d8-85ec-fd4c-2c35af044d98@attorneyross.com> Back in the day, I thought that VHF low had better reception, in general, than VHF high.? When we lived in the Albany area, the only VHF station, high or low, was 6 in Schenectady, and when we moved from there to Bedford in May 1957, we only got Channel 4, with sound on 2.? Channel 2 had a low power signal at that time, and 5 wasn't on the air yet.? For some reason our TV didn't get channels 7 or 9. At some point, after we got a new TV, I wanted to fix up the old one, and my father let me test one tube at a time at the local drug store tube tester.? When I finally figured out that I should be checking the tuner tubes, I found one that was weak, bought a replacement, and the VHF high stations finally came in.? And I could get a picture on 2. On 8/4/2019 11:14 PM, Bob DeMattia wrote: > In Bangor, WLBZ - 2 stayed on its VHF-Lo channel when it transitioned, as > did VHF-HI WVII (7). WABI moved from 5 to VHF-HI 13. > WMUR (9) and WENH (11) also stayed on VHF-HI. > > WPRI (12) in Providence moved to 13, and WNAC (64) in Providence moved to > 12. > > So there were plenty of VHF transmitters running after the switchover, just > not in Boston. > > As Scott mention, WHDH originally planned to stay on 7, but there were so > many reception problems on VHF 7 that they asked > and were granted permission to stay on their transitional channel 42 > assignment. > > > -Bob > > > On Sun, Aug 4, 2019 at 10:59 PM Scott Fybush wrote: > >> Also, NBC Boston signed on using existing licenses - full power WNEU in NH, >> which Comcast already owned through Telemundo, and two existing LPTV >> stations NBC bought, which became WBTS and WYCN. >> >> On Sun, Aug 4, 2019, 10:34 PM Scott Fybush wrote: >> >>> Not sure where you got that impression, but it's... less than accurate. >>> Some low-band VHF stations (6 in Philadelphia, 6 in Schenectady) stayed >> on >>> low V. There were four new low Vs created by a very specific FCC action >> in >>> NJ and DE. But otherwise, there was no provision for any new licenses on >>> low V or elsewhere, and the repack is now filling low V with more >> existing >>> stations again. It's not just WGBH... WSBE in RI and WQED in Pittsburgh >>> took auction dollars to go to low V as well, among others. >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 4, 2019, 9:51 PM Ben Levy >> wrote: >>>> VHF 2-6 was removed from TV during the analog shutdown. All of the >>>> classic analog numbers were released then? leaving plenty of room for >> new >>>> players, but none other than NBC Boston showed up, so they could now >>>> compact the bandwidth/ >>>> >>>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10 >>>> >>>> From: Rob Landry >>>> Sent: Sunday, August 4, 2019 4:29 PM >>>> To: A Joseph Ross >>>> Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org >>>> Subject: Re: WGBH-TV coverage after August 2 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, 3 Aug 2019, A Joseph Ross wrote: >>>> >>>>> I don't understand why the FCC didn't simply delete the VHF band >>>> entirely and >>>>> put all off-air TV on UHF with the conversion to digital TV. >>>> VHF isn't useful for mobile broadband, but UHF is. So it's UHF spectrum >>>> being removed from broadcast use, not VHF. >>>> >>>> >>>> Rob >>>> >>>> -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. ? 1340 Centre Street, Suite 103 ? Newton, MA 02459 617.367.0468 ? Fax:617.507.7856 ? http://www.attorneyross.com From 011010001@interpring.com Mon Aug 5 08:51:41 2019 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 08:51:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Tower light problems in Newton/Needham Message-ID: The top beacon on the 1165 Chestnut Street tower has been inoperative for several weeks now. This morning I noticed that the side lights on the level next down from the top beacon are out as well. The top beacon on the 350 Cedar Street tower may be out, too, although it may simply be that I was too close to the tower to see it. Rob From richard@chonak.com Mon Aug 5 20:42:38 2019 From: richard@chonak.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 00:42:38 +0000 Subject: indoor antennas In-Reply-To: <0b199a0f-a714-9910-72ca-35fbca45368e@fybush.com> References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> <23878.9560.492031.739837@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <026606a7-3526-37fb-ed27-078f76ab3e4f@chonak.com> <0b199a0f-a714-9910-72ca-35fbca45368e@fybush.com> Message-ID: I'm almost outside 128, in Stoneham, 15 mi NE of Needham, and am trying out a Clearstream 2MAX antenna outdoors on my deck, pointed in various directions.? At best it brings in 40 channels with or without an amplifier, and sometimes 44 channels when WCSH 6 and its subs appear, but 2.1 isn't on the list. Channel scans linger tantalizingly on RF 5, but never lock in. But maybe that will change: a note came from WGBH Audience Services today saying that they are preparing a petition to the FCC for a "maximization of power". --Richard On 8/4/2019 4:33 AM, Scott Fybush wrote: > Where are you located? For indoor use in areas with fairly strong VHF > signals, my go-to is the Terk HDTVa. It ought to be decent for WGBH in > most areas within 128. Beyond that, you'd need something more. > From richard@chonak.com Mon Aug 5 21:00:09 2019 From: richard@chonak.com (Richard Chonak) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 01:00:09 +0000 Subject: indoor antennas In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> <23878.9560.492031.739837@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <026606a7-3526-37fb-ed27-078f76ab3e4f@chonak.com> <0b199a0f-a714-9910-72ca-35fbca45368e@fybush.com> Message-ID: <9a46211f-6307-fd87-8b90-de44d786e08b@chonak.com> On 8/6/2019 12:46 AM, Paul B. Walker, Jr. wrote: > I?d love 40 channels. > > I get 3 or 4 here in Laramie, WY > That reminds me of a old school friend who grew up in the Upper Connecticut Valley.? When I met him, he was able to receive one (1) television station at the time, channel 3 from Burlington, VT.? It shocked me, a Brooklyn-born kid, that he had never heard of the Marx Brothers. --RC From walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com Mon Aug 5 20:46:27 2019 From: walkerbroadcasting@gmail.com (Paul B. Walker, Jr.) Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 18:46:27 -0600 Subject: indoor antennas In-Reply-To: References: <5D41E45C.9040202@dappermapper.com> <9d0b3c93-993a-671d-d3b9-daf92380b454@attorneyross.com> <23878.9560.492031.739837@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> <026606a7-3526-37fb-ed27-078f76ab3e4f@chonak.com> <0b199a0f-a714-9910-72ca-35fbca45368e@fybush.com> Message-ID: I?d love 40 channels. I get 3 or 4 here in Laramie, WY On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 6:43 PM Richard Chonak wrote: > I'm almost outside 128, in Stoneham, 15 mi NE of Needham, and am trying > out a Clearstream 2MAX antenna outdoors on my deck, pointed in various > directions. At best it brings in 40 channels with or without an > amplifier, and sometimes 44 channels when WCSH 6 and its subs appear, > but 2.1 isn't on the list. Channel scans linger tantalizingly on RF 5, > but never lock in. > > But maybe that will change: a note came from WGBH Audience Services > today saying that they are preparing a petition to the FCC for a > "maximization of power". > > --Richard > > > On 8/4/2019 4:33 AM, Scott Fybush wrote: > > Where are you located? For indoor use in areas with fairly strong VHF > > signals, my go-to is the Terk HDTVa. It ought to be decent for WGBH in > > most areas within 128. Beyond that, you'd need something more. > > > From elipolo881@gmail.com Tue Aug 6 00:02:14 2019 From: elipolo881@gmail.com (Eli Polonsky) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 00:02:14 -0400 Subject: TV antenna reception update (as of now in Somerville) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here's what I get now over the air in Somerville, MA. I use one of these Terk amplified indoor antennas that has two old-school "rabbit ear" telescoping arms that pull in the now-RF VHF channels virtual 2-1 and 44-1 just fine. The center element gets the RF UHF channels, but is directional requiring repositioning for certain channels. https://www.crutchfield.com/S-7w2aqhKUOAi/p_209HDTVA/Terk-HDTVa.html Virtual channels and info display: 2-1 WGBH-HD 2-2 World 2-3 WGBH-SD 3-1 WHDT (LD) 4-1 WBZ-DT 4-1 WBZ 4.2 5-1 WCVB 5-2 MeTV 7-1 WHDH 7-2 THIS-TV 8-1 WBTS-LD 8-2 Tele 8-3 Cozi 8-4 TeleXo 10-1 NBC 10-2 MeTV 10-3 Comet 10-4 TBD 15-1 WYCN-CD 15-2 Cozi 24-1 WFXZ 25-1 WFXT 25-2 ESCAPE 25-3 LAFF 26-1 WCEA (LD) 26-2 TELESUR 26-3 VoA 26-4 DomREP 26-5 Colomb. 26-6 DOMREP 26-7 Test 27-1 WUTF-DT 27-2 LATV 27-3 TBD 27-4 Stadium 27-5 CourtTV 38-1 WSBK-TV 38-2 WSBK.2 38-3 WSBK.3 38-4 WSBK.4 44-1 WGBX-HD 44-2 WGBX-SD 44-3 Create 44-4 Kids 50-1 WWJE-DT 56-1 WLVI 56-2 BUZZR 58-1 IonPLUS 60-1 WNEU-DT 60-2 Xitos 66-1 WUNI-DT 66-2 Bounce 66-3 GetTV 66-4 Grit 68-1 ION 68-2 qubo 66-3 Shop 68-5 QVC 68-6 HSN EP From mamros@mit.edu Tue Aug 6 12:23:43 2019 From: mamros@mit.edu (Shawn Mamros) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 16:23:43 +0000 Subject: TV antenna reception update (as of now in Somerville) In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1565108624649.25382@mit.edu> Here in northwestern Waltham (just off of Totten Pond Road, with only the western slope of Prospect Hill blocking line of sight to the Needham/Newton towers), using an unpowered Mohu Leaf antenna, we get 47 of the 59 channels that Eli is getting. Only channels 3, 8, and 26 and their respective subchannels are missing here. (I actually was getting channel 26 on the morning of August 2nd when I did the initial rescan, but it was MIA yesterday and when I did a re-rescan it no longer appeared on the list - a few other channels showed up that weren't there before, though.) -Shawn ________________________________________ From: Boston-Radio-Interest on behalf of Eli Polonsky Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2019 12:02 AM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org Subject: Re: TV antenna reception update (as of now in Somerville) Here's what I get now over the air in Somerville, MA. I use one of these Terk amplified indoor antennas that has two old-school "rabbit ear" telescoping arms that pull in the now-RF VHF channels virtual 2-1 and 44-1 just fine. The center element gets the RF UHF channels, but is directional requiring repositioning for certain channels. https://www.crutchfield.com/S-7w2aqhKUOAi/p_209HDTVA/Terk-HDTVa.html Virtual channels and info display: 2-1 WGBH-HD 2-2 World 2-3 WGBH-SD 3-1 WHDT (LD) 4-1 WBZ-DT 4-1 WBZ 4.2 5-1 WCVB 5-2 MeTV 7-1 WHDH 7-2 THIS-TV 8-1 WBTS-LD 8-2 Tele 8-3 Cozi 8-4 TeleXo 10-1 NBC 10-2 MeTV 10-3 Comet 10-4 TBD 15-1 WYCN-CD 15-2 Cozi 24-1 WFXZ 25-1 WFXT 25-2 ESCAPE 25-3 LAFF 26-1 WCEA (LD) 26-2 TELESUR 26-3 VoA 26-4 DomREP 26-5 Colomb. 26-6 DOMREP 26-7 Test 27-1 WUTF-DT 27-2 LATV 27-3 TBD 27-4 Stadium 27-5 CourtTV 38-1 WSBK-TV 38-2 WSBK.2 38-3 WSBK.3 38-4 WSBK.4 44-1 WGBX-HD 44-2 WGBX-SD 44-3 Create 44-4 Kids 50-1 WWJE-DT 56-1 WLVI 56-2 BUZZR 58-1 IonPLUS 60-1 WNEU-DT 60-2 Xitos 66-1 WUNI-DT 66-2 Bounce 66-3 GetTV 66-4 Grit 68-1 ION 68-2 qubo 66-3 Shop 68-5 QVC 68-6 HSN EP From lsochrin@rcn.com Tue Aug 6 13:57:55 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 13:57:55 -0400 Subject: TV antenna reception update (versus that of Eli Plonsky) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Re Eli?s list below, I?m still not getting anything (in Brookline, MA) for 2-1, 44-1, or 68-1 through 68-6. I also never got and still don?t get 8-1 through 8-4, 10-1 through 10-4, or 27-1 through 27-5, I use an amplified MOHU Curve antenna on one TV (the one connected to my TiVo) and a very old Radio Shack $8 antenna (missing half of it) connected through an old TIVAX analog to digital converter on an ancient TV. > > From: Eli Polonsky > > Subject: Re: TV antenna reception update (as of now in Somerville) > Date: August 6, 2019 at 12:02:14 AM EDT > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > > > Here's what I get now over the air in Somerville, MA. I use one of these > Terk amplified indoor antennas that has two old-school "rabbit ear" > telescoping arms that pull in the now-RF VHF channels virtual 2-1 and 44-1 > just fine. The center element gets the RF UHF channels, but is directional > requiring repositioning for certain channels. > > https://www.crutchfield.com/S-7w2aqhKUOAi/p_209HDTVA/Terk-HDTVa.html > > Virtual channels and info display: > 2-1 WGBH-HD > 2-2 World > 2-3 WGBH-SD > 3-1 WHDT (LD) > 4-1 WBZ-DT > 4-1 WBZ 4.2 > 5-1 WCVB > 5-2 MeTV > 7-1 WHDH > 7-2 THIS-TV > 8-1 WBTS-LD > 8-2 Tele > 8-3 Cozi > 8-4 TeleXo > 10-1 NBC > 10-2 MeTV > 10-3 Comet > 10-4 TBD > 15-1 WYCN-CD > 15-2 Cozi > 24-1 WFXZ > 25-1 WFXT > 25-2 ESCAPE > 25-3 LAFF > 26-1 WCEA (LD) > 26-2 TELESUR > 26-3 VoA > 26-4 DomREP > 26-5 Colomb. > 26-6 DOMREP > 26-7 Test > 27-1 WUTF-DT > 27-2 LATV > 27-3 TBD > 27-4 Stadium > 27-5 CourtTV > 38-1 WSBK-TV > 38-2 WSBK.2 > 38-3 WSBK.3 > 38-4 WSBK.4 > 44-1 WGBX-HD > 44-2 WGBX-SD > 44-3 Create > 44-4 Kids > 50-1 WWJE-DT > 56-1 WLVI > 56-2 BUZZR > 58-1 IonPLUS > 60-1 WNEU-DT > 60-2 Xitos > 66-1 WUNI-DT > 66-2 Bounce > 66-3 GetTV > 66-4 Grit > 68-1 ION > 68-2 qubo > 66-3 Shop > 68-5 QVC > 68-6 HSN > > EP From lsochrin@rcn.com Wed Aug 7 13:22:26 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:22:26 -0400 Subject: TV Reception Message-ID: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com> Hi. Are you both saying that you each currently get channels 2-1 WGBH-HD and 44-1 WGBX-HD fine (audio and video) via Antenna, and if yes, do you know what the frequencies are that are working for you right now? I do a scan and nether of those show up at all. Thanks. From elipolo881@gmail.com Wed Aug 7 15:14:17 2019 From: elipolo881@gmail.com (Eli Polonsky) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 15:14:17 -0400 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com> References: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 1:22 PM Larry Sochrin wrote: > Hi. Are you both saying that you each currently get channels 2-1 WGBH-HD > and 44-1 WGBX-HD fine (audio and video) via Antenna, and if yes, do you > know what the frequencies are that are working for you right now? I do a > scan and nether of those show up at all. Thanks. Yes, 2.1 WGBH-HD and 44.1 WGBX-HD are now on RF Ch. 5 in the VHF band. I get them both fine in Somerville with my Terk amplified indoor antenna that has two telescoping "rabbit ear" arms for VHF, as well as the center element for UHF. You can see it here: https://www.crutchfield.com/S-7w2aqhKUOAi/p_209HDTVA/Terk-HDTVa.html I extend the telescoping arms to receive 2-1 and 44-1 because they are on VHF (RF 5). All other channels in the Boston area are on UHF RF channels, and they are received through the center element. The issue that many people seem to be having with 2-1 and 44-1 is that their antennas are not designed to pick up VHF frequencies, only UHF (or the manufacturers may claim that they pick up VHF and UHF on only one universal element, but that may not actually work well for VHF). Except for a very brief period when WHDH Ch. 7 (RF Ch. 42) tried broadcasting their digital signal on RF Ch. 7 when TV went all-digital in 2009 (with poor results), I don't believe there have been any other TV stations in Boston proper broadcasting their RF signal on a VHF frequency until WGBH and WGBX as of last week. That's why over-the-air viewers in this area could get by for the past ten years with modern indoor (so-called) "HDTV antennas" that are designed for reception of UHF RF channels only, or that claim VHF reception through the primarily designed UHF element, but with poor results. There weren't any TV stations on the VHF band in Boston since 2009. Unfortunately the Terk antenna I have seems to no longer be manufactured (I bought it on a physical walk-in at You-Do-It Electronics in Needham in 2009), but it may be found on online resellers, or you may need to find another antenna that receives VHF. EP From rbello@belloassoc.com Wed Aug 7 17:50:00 2019 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 17:50:00 -0400 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: References: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com> Message-ID: Crutchfield claims there is a newer model: https://www.crutchfield.com/p_209LOGTVAZ/Terk-LOGTVAZ.html It appears to have the same configuration of antenna elements --------------------------------------------------- On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 4:57 PM Eli Polonsky wrote: > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 1:22 PM Larry Sochrin wrote: > > > Hi. Are you both saying that you each currently get channels 2-1 WGBH-HD > > and 44-1 WGBX-HD fine (audio and video) via Antenna, and if yes, do you > > know what the frequencies are that are working for you right now? I do > a > > scan and nether of those show up at all. Thanks. > > > Yes, 2.1 WGBH-HD and 44.1 WGBX-HD are now on RF Ch. 5 in the VHF band. I > get them both fine in Somerville with my Terk amplified indoor antenna that > has two telescoping "rabbit ear" arms for VHF, as well as the center > element for UHF. You can see it here: > > https://www.crutchfield.com/S-7w2aqhKUOAi/p_209HDTVA/Terk-HDTVa.html > > I extend the telescoping arms to receive 2-1 and 44-1 because they are on > VHF (RF 5). All other channels in the Boston area are on UHF RF channels, > and they are received through the center element. > > The issue that many people seem to be having with 2-1 and 44-1 is that > their antennas are not designed to pick up VHF frequencies, only UHF (or > the manufacturers may claim that they pick up VHF and UHF on only one > universal element, but that may not actually work well for VHF). > > Except for a very brief period when WHDH Ch. 7 (RF Ch. 42) tried > broadcasting their digital signal on RF Ch. 7 when TV went all-digital in > 2009 (with poor results), I don't believe there have been any other TV > stations in Boston proper broadcasting their RF signal on a VHF frequency > until WGBH and WGBX as of last week. That's why over-the-air viewers in > this area could get by for the past ten years with modern indoor > (so-called) "HDTV antennas" that are designed for reception of UHF RF > channels only, or that claim VHF reception through the primarily designed > UHF element, but with poor results. There weren't any TV stations on the > VHF band in Boston since 2009. > > Unfortunately the Terk antenna I have seems to no longer be manufactured (I > bought it on a physical walk-in at You-Do-It Electronics in Needham in > 2009), but it may be found on online resellers, or you may need to find > another antenna that receives VHF. > > EP > From elipolo881@gmail.com Wed Aug 7 18:28:15 2019 From: elipolo881@gmail.com (Eli Polonsky) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 18:28:15 -0400 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: References: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com> Message-ID: Looks similar to my discontinued one, I wonder what's the difference, or what was changed? At first it looked to me like that one didn't have the telescoping VHF arms on the sides until I checked the side view photos. EP On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 5:50 PM Ron Bello wrote: > Crutchfield claims there is a newer model: > https://www.crutchfield.com/p_209LOGTVAZ/Terk-LOGTVAZ.html > > It appears to have the same configuration of antenna elements > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 4:57 PM Eli Polonsky wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 1:22 PM Larry Sochrin wrote: >> >> > Hi. Are you both saying that you each currently get channels 2-1 >> WGBH-HD >> > and 44-1 WGBX-HD fine (audio and video) via Antenna, and if yes, do you >> > know what the frequencies are that are working for you right now? I >> do a >> > scan and nether of those show up at all. Thanks. >> >> >> Yes, 2.1 WGBH-HD and 44.1 WGBX-HD are now on RF Ch. 5 in the VHF band. I >> get them both fine in Somerville with my Terk amplified indoor antenna >> that >> has two telescoping "rabbit ear" arms for VHF, as well as the center >> element for UHF. You can see it here: >> >> https://www.crutchfield.com/S-7w2aqhKUOAi/p_209HDTVA/Terk-HDTVa.html >> >> I extend the telescoping arms to receive 2-1 and 44-1 because they are on >> VHF (RF 5). All other channels in the Boston area are on UHF RF channels, >> and they are received through the center element. >> >> The issue that many people seem to be having with 2-1 and 44-1 is that >> their antennas are not designed to pick up VHF frequencies, only UHF (or >> the manufacturers may claim that they pick up VHF and UHF on only one >> universal element, but that may not actually work well for VHF). >> >> Except for a very brief period when WHDH Ch. 7 (RF Ch. 42) tried >> broadcasting their digital signal on RF Ch. 7 when TV went all-digital in >> 2009 (with poor results), I don't believe there have been any other TV >> stations in Boston proper broadcasting their RF signal on a VHF frequency >> until WGBH and WGBX as of last week. That's why over-the-air viewers in >> this area could get by for the past ten years with modern indoor >> (so-called) "HDTV antennas" that are designed for reception of UHF RF >> channels only, or that claim VHF reception through the primarily designed >> UHF element, but with poor results. There weren't any TV stations on the >> VHF band in Boston since 2009. >> >> Unfortunately the Terk antenna I have seems to no longer be manufactured >> (I >> bought it on a physical walk-in at You-Do-It Electronics in Needham in >> 2009), but it may be found on online resellers, or you may need to find >> another antenna that receives VHF. >> >> EP >> > From scott@fybush.com Wed Aug 7 15:05:57 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 15:05:57 -0400 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com> References: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com> Message-ID: 2.1 and 44.1 are both being transmitted over WGBH's RF 5 (76-82 MHz) transmitter. People with decent VHF antennas within 128 seem to be getting it pretty robustly, but (as expected) it's not working on those little flat panel/leaf thingys. On 8/7/2019 1:22 PM, Larry Sochrin wrote: > Hi. Are you both saying that you each currently get channels 2-1 WGBH-HD and 44-1 WGBX-HD fine (audio and video) via Antenna, and if yes, do you know what the frequencies are that are working for you right now? I do a scan and nether of those show up at all. Thanks. > From wollman@bimajority.org Wed Aug 7 22:04:53 2019 From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:04:53 -0400 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: References: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com> Message-ID: <23883.33605.220675.703809@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Except for a very brief period when WHDH Ch. 7 (RF Ch. 42) tried > broadcasting their digital signal on RF Ch. 7 when TV went all-digital in > 2009 (with poor results), I don't believe there have been any other TV > stations in Boston proper broadcasting their RF signal on a VHF frequency > until WGBH and WGBX as of last week. WWDP (channel 46), very low power on RF channel 10, which nobody watches even on cable. -GAWollman From rbello@belloassoc.com Wed Aug 7 22:32:59 2019 From: rbello@belloassoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:32:59 -0400 Subject: Tower light problems in Newton/Needham In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The WWDP tower in West Bridgewater rarely has all lights flashing --------------------------------------------------- On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 8:52 AM Rob Landry <011010001@interpring.com> wrote: > > The top beacon on the 1165 Chestnut Street tower has been inoperative for > several weeks now. This morning I noticed that the side lights on the > level next down from the top beacon are out as well. > > The top beacon on the 350 Cedar Street tower may be out, too, although it > may simply be that I was too close to the tower to see it. > > > Rob > From elipolo881@gmail.com Thu Aug 8 02:36:56 2019 From: elipolo881@gmail.com (Eli Polonsky) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 02:36:56 -0400 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: <23883.33605.220675.703809@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> References: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com> <23883.33605.220675.703809@hergotha.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: Though WWDP is technically "in the Boston market" I don't consider it to be a station serving Boston proper. It can't be viewed on-air in Boston proper or the immediate metro suburbs unless perhaps with an excellent roof antenna and/or from a high elevation with an open vista to the south. It won't come in for the average indoor antenna viewer until well south of Boston, south of Route 128/93/1. I have only very rarely seen it here in Somerville only in certain "ducting" conditions, and I get RI's WJAR (virtual 10), farther south, as a regular, and other RI stations weather-dependent before WWDP comes in. EP On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 10:05 PM Garrett Wollman wrote: > < > said: > > > Except for a very brief period when WHDH Ch. 7 (RF Ch. 42) tried > > broadcasting their digital signal on RF Ch. 7 when TV went all-digital in > > 2009 (with poor results), I don't believe there have been any other TV > > stations in Boston proper broadcasting their RF signal on a VHF frequency > > until WGBH and WGBX as of last week. > > WWDP (channel 46), very low power on RF channel 10, which nobody > watches even on cable. > > -GAWollman > > From mamros@mit.edu Thu Aug 8 08:39:36 2019 From: mamros@mit.edu (Shawn Mamros) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 12:39:36 +0000 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: References: <3F8FB4A5-BDA9-438F-BFDF-B737915EAB5E@rcn.com>, Message-ID: <1565267978611.94332@mit.edu> >2.1 and 44.1 are both being transmitted over WGBH's RF 5 (76-82 MHz) >transmitter. People with decent VHF antennas within 128 seem to be >getting it pretty robustly, but (as expected) it's not working on those >little flat panel/leaf thingys. It works fine with my flat panel, non-amplified Mohu Leaf, but as I said before, I only have one or two terrain obstacles between me and the Cabot Street tower, which is less than eight miles away by air. -Shawn From lsochrin@rcn.com Fri Aug 16 12:58:09 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 12:58:09 -0400 Subject: TV Reception Message-ID: <2743E0CB-40D0-442D-8D24-FC0DF6587ADE@rcn.com> I noticed this morning that I was getting better versions of 15-1 and 15-2 on 15-3 and 15-4. Then, I found the following posting on the NBC Boston website - "If you watch NBC10 Boston over the air with your TV antenna, you may have been experiencing issues receiving our channel. A transmission issue is impacting a number of stations in Boston right now, which is affecting NBC10 Boston's over-the-air signal of 15.1. The tower company is working to correct the issue, but there is no estimated time of restoration at this time. Until the problem is resolved, if you're not receiving NBC10 Boston on 15.1, you'll need to grab your remote and rescan for our temporary reduced-power channel of 15.3. Here's how: ? Go to the menu button on your TV remote and choose antenna; ? then hit rescan or auto tune to get all of your favorite NBC shows with a great signal; ? let your antenna find your channels This transmission issue only affects viewers who use antennas to receive their signals, not anyone receiving NBC10 Boston on cable, satellite or streaming services.? I hope that this will cure most of the other Boston area signal issues many of us have been experiencing occasionally. From mamros@mit.edu Sat Aug 17 08:55:34 2019 From: mamros@mit.edu (Shawn Mamros) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 12:55:34 +0000 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: <2743E0CB-40D0-442D-8D24-FC0DF6587ADE@rcn.com> References: <2743E0CB-40D0-442D-8D24-FC0DF6587ADE@rcn.com> Message-ID: <1566046536530.30984@mit.edu> There was definitely something odd going on about a week ago. There was one day when I was getting channels 2.1 and 44.1, but all of the other 2.* and 44.* subchannels had no signal (and I'm pretty sure that's what both of our TVs said, "No signal"), and we also had no signal on all of the 4.* channels as well, and I think other channels were out as well. 5.* and 7.* were still on, though, if I'm recalling correctly. Is there a single point of failure that would explain all of the above? Or just a whole bunch of failures, and if so would there be any relation between them? -Shawn ________________________________________ From: Boston-Radio-Interest on behalf of Larry Sochrin Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 12:58 PM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: TV Reception I noticed this morning that I was getting better versions of 15-1 and 15-2 on 15-3 and 15-4. Then, I found the following posting on the NBC Boston website - "If you watch NBC10 Boston over the air with your TV antenna, you may have been experiencing issues receiving our channel. A transmission issue is impacting a number of stations in Boston right now, which is affecting NBC10 Boston's over-the-air signal of 15.1. The tower company is working to correct the issue, but there is no estimated time of restoration at this time. Until the problem is resolved, if you're not receiving NBC10 Boston on 15.1, you'll need to grab your remote and rescan for our temporary reduced-power channel of 15.3. Here's how: ? Go to the menu button on your TV remote and choose antenna; ? then hit rescan or auto tune to get all of your favorite NBC shows with a great signal; ? let your antenna find your channels This transmission issue only affects viewers who use antennas to receive their signals, not anyone receiving NBC10 Boston on cable, satellite or streaming services.? I hope that this will cure most of the other Boston area signal issues many of us have been experiencing occasionally. From as@shawsheen.com Sat Aug 17 14:06:26 2019 From: as@shawsheen.com (Alexander Svirsky) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 14:06:26 -0400 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190817140626.Horde.35Te-bI6oNDekdFiTcZqOEf@host391.hostmonster.com> I'm glad someone else has confirmed these reception problems and it's not just me. For the last week reception of anything I think is still on the former Westinghouse tower has been weak. WBZ reception is rare. WCVB, WSBK (usually weak anyway), and WGBX/WGBH/WBTS come and go. Spotty reception and sometimes disappearing completely at night. Are there feedline or master antenna problems? WBZ was very strong immediately after the repack but lately no good. Also *very* interesting that it explains why I suddenly have extra 15.3 and 15.4 NBC/Cozi channels. I didn't know these were coming from someplace else. Any idea where these signals are coming from if not WBTS? My assumption that the problem is on the Westinghouse tower and not my antenna comes from receiving WHDH just fine. WFXT still seems OK too, though I'm no longer sure where it transmits from. Reception of WBZ, WCVB, WSBK, and WGBH/WGBX/WBTS seems OK today on Saturday. Good for me that WMUR and WENH still have strong VHF-hi signals. I am annoyed at losing 1080i reception of WGBH due some stupid idea of putting it on VHF low band. WUTF is simply GONE since the repack. Not that I watched it much but it used to be one of my strongest received signals, and now there's not a trace of it. From lsochrin@rcn.com Sat Aug 17 16:19:23 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 16:19:23 -0400 Subject: TV Reception once again Message-ID: WGBH?s website says the following: "I've rescanned but the quality isn't as good as it used to be! As the FCC changes our channel frequencies, there may be signal strength variations. Please be assured that WGBH is working hard to improve the signal strength for WGBH and the HD signals it carries. Your email will be used to demonstrate that viewers are having difficulty receiving our signal. We will be petitioning the FCC for a "Maximization of Power" and this will help you receive our HD channels, but we need viewers like you to help in that effort. The application process for a signal strength boost may take up to 8-10 weeks. In the meantime, if you can only view our standard definition channels (2.3 and 44.2) but not the HD channels (2.1 and 44.1), we recommend that you may want to replace your existing antenna with one that can better receive WGBH and WGBX HD signals. ?You-Do-It? Electronics Center has stocked appropriate (low-band VHF) off-air antennas and is eager to assist viewers with reception issues that persist after rescanning. They are located in located in Needham, MA and you can call them at 781-449-1005. You can also get in touch with them online at their website here. They can discuss general reception issues with viewers who have rescanned their sets but still need further assistance. WGBH is working to receive permission from the FCC to increase power as soon as possible. We expect increased power will help with most reception issues.? From scott@fybush.com Sat Aug 17 16:03:41 2019 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 16:03:41 -0400 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: <20190817140626.Horde.35Te-bI6oNDekdFiTcZqOEf@host391.hostmonster.com> References: <20190817140626.Horde.35Te-bI6oNDekdFiTcZqOEf@host391.hostmonster.com> Message-ID: The Cedar Street tower isn't yet fully configured for the repack, so everyone is operating from what will eventually be their aux facility (except for WFXT and WGBH) at Cabot. My understanding is that there is indeed a problem at Cabot that has not yet been resolved, and so there's a lot of low-power operation for now. On Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 2:43 PM Alexander Svirsky wrote: > I'm glad someone else has confirmed these reception problems and it's > not just me. > > For the last week reception of anything I think is still on the former > Westinghouse tower has been weak. WBZ reception is rare. WCVB, WSBK > (usually weak anyway), and WGBX/WGBH/WBTS come and go. Spotty > reception and sometimes disappearing completely at night. Are there > feedline or master antenna problems? WBZ was very strong immediately > after the repack but lately no good. > > Also *very* interesting that it explains why I suddenly have extra > 15.3 and 15.4 NBC/Cozi channels. I didn't know these were coming from > someplace else. Any idea where these signals are coming from if not > WBTS? > > My assumption that the problem is on the Westinghouse tower and not my > antenna comes from receiving WHDH just fine. WFXT still seems OK too, > though I'm no longer sure where it transmits from. > > Reception of WBZ, WCVB, WSBK, and WGBH/WGBX/WBTS seems OK today on > Saturday. > > Good for me that WMUR and WENH still have strong VHF-hi signals. I am > annoyed at losing 1080i reception of WGBH due some stupid idea of > putting it on VHF low band. > > WUTF is simply GONE since the repack. Not that I watched it much but > it used to be one of my strongest received signals, and now there's > not a trace of it. > > From lsochrin@rcn.com Sun Aug 18 00:09:36 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 00:09:36 -0400 Subject: Why TV Reception Problems Continue After FCC Repack Phase - YouTube Message-ID: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqbydW8L-O4&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1RmCkEYYMdCYIfgy5yIlE1agIAE8tUWg8gfVVOZbC-Wec0JAysSHQwd_I From 011010001@interpring.com Sun Aug 18 16:08:00 2019 From: 011010001@interpring.com (Rob Landry) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 16:08:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: TV Reception once again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 17 Aug 2019, Larry Sochrin wrote: > ?You-Do-It? Electronics Center has stocked appropriate (low-band VHF) > off-air antennas and is eager to assist viewers with reception issues > that persist after rescanning. They are located in located in Needham, > MA and you can call them at 781-449-1005. Ah yes, "You Blew It", as we affectionately call it. They are one of the last stores of their kind in existence, at least in this part of the country. Rob From dave@skywaves.net Sun Aug 18 18:42:14 2019 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 15:42:14 -0700 Subject: TV Reception once again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000801d55616$2f330640$8d9912c0$@skywaves.net> For folks in some parts of the country (not New England), there's Fry's Electronics. The nearest one is in Indiana. Frys.com. -d -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Rob Landry Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2019 1:08 PM To: Larry Sochrin Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: TV Reception once again On Sat, 17 Aug 2019, Larry Sochrin wrote: > ?You-Do-It? Electronics Center has stocked appropriate (low-band VHF) > off-air antennas and is eager to assist viewers with reception issues > that persist after rescanning. They are located in located in Needham, > MA and you can call them at 781-449-1005. Ah yes, "You Blew It", as we affectionately call it. They are one of the last stores of their kind in existence, at least in this part of the country. Rob From rfgenerator@gmail.com Fri Aug 16 18:17:24 2019 From: rfgenerator@gmail.com (Michael D. Malone) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 18:17:24 -0400 Subject: TV Reception In-Reply-To: <2743E0CB-40D0-442D-8D24-FC0DF6587ADE@rcn.com> References: <2743E0CB-40D0-442D-8D24-FC0DF6587ADE@rcn.com> Message-ID: Out here in Spencer, MA I've been having problems with WBZ 4, as well as all the WGBX transmitted signals including NBC Boston on 15.1 and 15.2. It was fine right after the repack, but after the last several days it's been really hit or miss if I have a watchable signal. Didn't know if it was the humidity/wx conditions. MIke On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 3:14 PM Larry Sochrin wrote: > > > I noticed this morning that I was getting better versions of 15-1 and 15-2 > on 15-3 and 15-4. Then, I found the following posting on the NBC Boston > website - > > "If you watch NBC10 Boston over the air with your TV antenna, you may have > been experiencing issues receiving our channel. > A transmission issue is impacting a number of stations in Boston right > now, which is affecting NBC10 Boston's over-the-air signal of 15.1. The > tower company is working to correct the issue, but there is no estimated > time of restoration at this time. > Until the problem is resolved, if you're not receiving NBC10 Boston on > 15.1, you'll need to grab your remote and rescan for our temporary > reduced-power channel of 15.3. > Here's how: > > ? Go to the menu button on your TV remote and choose antenna; > ? then hit rescan or auto tune to get all of your favorite NBC > shows with a great signal; > ? let your antenna find your channels > > This transmission issue only affects viewers who use antennas to receive > their signals, not anyone receiving NBC10 Boston on cable, satellite or > streaming services.? > > > I hope that this will cure most of the other Boston area signal issues > many of us have been experiencing occasionally. > From dave@skywaves.net Wed Aug 21 23:27:30 2019 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 20:27:30 -0700 Subject: Retro WABC Message-ID: <001101d55899$881c3c10$9854b430$@skywaves.net> If you can stand the background noise, or maybe listen on their stream, Cumulus is bringing back the old "77 WABC" rock and roll on Labor Day from 5AM to 3PM. -d From Supersport@Maine.RR.Com Thu Aug 22 12:08:56 2019 From: Supersport@Maine.RR.Com (supersport@maine.rr.com) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 12:08:56 -0400 Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 23, Issue 90 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16cba168dc0.27f4.ac4e18591c77d00685fa6fd032d485ec@Maine.RR.Com> Wasn't 77 WABC sold? John --- Original message --- From: boston-radio-interest-request@lists.BostonRadio.org Sent: August 22, 2019 12:00:02 PM To: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 23, Issue 90 > > Send Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list submissions to > > boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://lists.BostonRadio.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-radio-interest > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > boston-radio-interest-request@lists.BostonRadio.org > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > boston-radio-interest-owner@lists.BostonRadio.org > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of Boston-Radio-Interest digest..." > > > > > > > > ---------- > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Retro WABC (Dave Doherty) > > > > > > > > ---------- > > Retro WABC > > From: Dave Doherty dave@skywaves.net > > Date: Aug 21, 11:27 PM > > To: boston-radio-interest@lists.bostonradio.org > > > > If you can stand the background noise, or maybe listen on their stream, > Cumulus is bringing back the old "77 WABC" rock and roll on Labor Day from > 5AM to 3PM. > > > > -d > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- > > _______________________________________________ > > Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list > > Boston-Radio-Interest@lists.BostonRadio.org > > https://lists.BostonRadio.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-radio-interest From sids1045@aol.com Thu Aug 22 18:57:25 2019 From: sids1045@aol.com (Sidney Schweiger) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 18:57:25 -0400 Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 23, Issue 90 In-Reply-To: <16cba168dc0.27f4.ac4e18591c77d00685fa6fd032d485ec@Maine.RR.Com> References: <16cba168dc0.27f4.ac4e18591c77d00685fa6fd032d485ec@Maine.RR.Com> Message-ID: ?Wasn't 77 WABC sold?? Yes, to John Catsimitidis, who IIRC has roots in Boston and is the owner of the NYC-area Gristedes grocery chain. However, I believe I read somewhere that the deal won?t close (pending FCC approval) until October. I don?t know if there?s an LMA in place. Supposedly John C was a huge fan of Musicradio WABC, so it wouldn?t surprise me a bit if he was behind getting Rewound back on the air. From bob.bosra@demattia.net Fri Aug 23 13:19:04 2019 From: bob.bosra@demattia.net (Bob DeMattia) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 13:19:04 -0400 Subject: Northeast HamXposition - help needed Message-ID: My apologies for this being off-topic, but it seems the best way for me to reach a few audio-savvy individuals, all my other avenues are exhausted, and time is getting short. As many of you may know the ham convention formerly known as "Boxboro!", and now known as "Northeast HamXposition" is coming to the Boxboro Regency in Boxborough on Sept 6,7, and 8. The convention is a non-profit organization staffed 100% by volunteers. The proceeds of the convention provide funding for academic scholarships through the ARRL Foundation. Our regular crew that sets up the audio systems (microphones, cabling, mixers, amps, speakers) in each of the six forum rooms is not available this year. I'm hoping to find one or two individuals that might be willing to volunteer a couple hours of their time to help with this effort. This is pretty simple stuff - we have all the equipment - but with so many other things getting set up at the same time a few knowledgeable individuals to ensure this gets done would be really appreciated. Setup can be done anytime on Thursday September 5th (morning, afternoon, or evening), or even Friday morning as long as the two conference rooms needed for Friday are ready by 10AM (the others are not needed until Saturday). If you are interested in helping, please let me know by reply email to k1iw@hamxposition.org Thanks in advance, Bob - K1IW From lsochrin@rcn.com Fri Aug 23 12:50:25 2019 From: lsochrin@rcn.com (Larry Sochrin) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 12:50:25 -0400 Subject: Wasn't 77 WABC Sold? Message-ID: Yes, 77 WABC was sold - see https://nypost.com/2019/06/27/john-catsimatidis-acquires-77-wabc-radio-for-12-5-million/ > > Wasn't 77 WABC sold? > > John From dave@skywaves.net Mon Aug 26 19:53:29 2019 From: dave@skywaves.net (Dave Doherty) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:53:29 -0400 Subject: Wasn't 77 WABC Sold? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001801d55c69$75ce3f30$616abd90$@skywaves.net> The FCC approved the transfer, but it looks like it hasn't closed. -d -----Original Message----- From: Boston-Radio-Interest [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@lists.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Larry Sochrin Sent: Friday, August 23, 2019 12:50 PM To: supersport@maine.rr.com Cc: boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: Wasn't 77 WABC Sold? Yes, 77 WABC was sold - see https://nypost.com/2019/06/27/john-catsimatidis-acquires-77-wabc-radio-for-1 2-5-million/ > > Wasn't 77 WABC sold? > > John From dav2149@comcast.net Sat Aug 31 09:13:19 2019 From: dav2149@comcast.net (dav2149@comcast.net) Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2019 09:13:19 -0400 Subject: WDRC-1360 Top 40 weekends 6-10a.m. Message-ID: Saturdays (Sundays, too?) between 6-10am WDRC (Hartford CT) is broadcasting top 40 1950?s-60?s with "Rockin? Rob, the Music Professor?.The station plays lots of the original ?Big D? jingles which are wonderful to hear again. According to Ed Brouder?s website there were postings indicating the weekend oldies show has existed over the past few years. It?s only been in recent weeks that I have been hearing frequent promos for the weekend morning format when listening to the Michael Savage and Mike Gallagher shows on weekdays.