Is that you Kenneth?You did notice the word "frequency" in my post, right?
Is that you Kenneth?You did notice the word "frequency" in my post, right?
Star Trek predicted the digital cliff in 1986Again, the issue is the digital cliff. The SIGNAL should go just as far (everything being equal). But, an analog signal degrades as the received signal declines. A digital signal will be good, be good, be good, be good, some pixelization, gone.
Wiki has a good image:
Basically where the two lines cross, you're probably still seeing an image with an analog broadcast. With a digital one, you get "no signal". The same signal strength is at the receiver.
You can't really say "picture quality aside" and then say the picture quality is what determines "reception".Picture quality aside, viewable VHF analog TV over open range carries much farther that digital because at the digital cliff (there is no picture and no sound) whereas at that same signal level (analog and digital signals on the same frequency carry exactly the same) analog TV still has a somewhat snowy picture and the sound may be a bit fuzzy, but it was watchable.
Actually the digital signal in reality has shorter distance...obstacles degrade a digital signal more than analogYou can't really say "picture quality aside" and then say the picture quality is what determines "reception".
With all things being the same, frequency is the same, power is the same, terrain is the same, etc, a digital signal will go just as far as an analog signal. You'll get the exact same signal strength at the receive point. At issue is how much signal strength is needed for a viewable picture. As the received signal strength degrades, the analog picture quality will deteriorate. However, until a certain point with digital, you'll still have perfect quality. But, you will reach a point as the strength continues to decline where digital "falls off the cliff" and you no longer have ANY picture. Analog you will still have an image.
What about "all things being equal" do you not understand? An analog signal will travel as far as a digital signal broadcast at the same power, the same height, from the same antenna, at the same location. You will get the same reception strength.Actually the digital signal in reality has shorter distance...obstacles degrade a digital signal more than analog
You can only lose so many 1s and 0s before the tv cant reproduce the picture
In other words
Its about line of sight between your antenna and the transmitter
A digital signal with equal frequency and power will travel much further in north dakota than the mountains of west virginia
They are trying to use old uhf tv frequencies to broadcast 5g cellular from telephone pole to houses
The uhf signal doesn't pass through buildings and houses as well as 4g and 3g
They can either mount antennas outside of houses or cut 3g and cband frequencies over to 5g
They dont want to mount antennas
I guess you didn't see the fcc requests for more transmitting power after the digital conversionWhat about "all things being equal" do you not understand? An analog signal will travel as far as a digital signal broadcast at the same power, the same height, from the same antenna, at the same location. You will get the same reception strength.
Yes, an analog signal AT A LOWER RECEPTION STRENGTH will probably get you a viewable (not clean) picture where a digital signal AT THE SAME RECEPTION STRENGTH won't. HOWEVER, while the image starts to degrade on analog, the digital image will still be pure.
My point is the reception strength doesn't change whether it's analog or digital. Whether you have ENOUGH strength to produce a digital picture is the variable. If you do, the picture is PERFECT. If you don't, it's not that you don't have a perfect picture (like in analog), you don't have a picture.
Physics isn't going to change on your whim.I guess you didn't see the fcc requests for more transmitting power after the digital conversion
My OTA does not work what do I do....My new OTA comes today...
I guess all those old analog channels in the VHF range really didn't have to relocate to UHFSam Gordon is correct. The frequency determines the signal strength at a given location. It doesn’t matter whether it is analog or digital since the carrier is what determines the strength of the signal.
However, there are two other points to consider. At the start of the digital transition many broadcasters changed their frequency from VHF to UHF. VHF frequencies travel farther than UHF frequencies. That is why some broadcasters requested an increase in power. The second point that was previously mentioned is the digital cliff. At lower signal strengths analog signals will show up with a snowy picture while digital signals will not show up at all.
Again, the actual signal strength does not depend on whether the broadcast is analog or digital but it does make a difference on whether your receiver can display it. Also different compression schemes such as ATSC 3.0 broadcasts can make a difference since error correction can improve a weak signal.
You wanted to know why TV stations have changed their frequencies. For the latest repack which reduced the UHF spectrum TV broadcasters had to make a decision whether they wanted to sell their old frequency. The earlier repack was mandated by the FCC.I guess all those old analog channels in the VHF range really didn't have to relocate to UHF
They should have just been happy with digital range that was 1/2 the size of the analog range
The FCC had no business switching everybody from the lower VHF to UHF
It really made no difference
A signal is just a signal
Look back earlier to the digital transitionYou wanted to know why TV stations have changed their frequencies. For the latest repack which reduced the UHF spectrum TV broadcasters had to make a decision whether they wanted to sell their old frequency. The earlier repack was mandated by the FCC.
The latest Spectrum Repack occurred where the FCC held 2 auctions. Yes, 2 auctions so that they could get the spectrum back from the television broadcasters. You see, one auction was to regain the spectrum from the broadcaster and the other was to unload the spectrum to the carriers. All of this in the 600MHz band.
Back to the broadcasters. Now they must move to the new spectrum which involves much work. They need to take down what they have and build a new transmitter. They have to replace their antenna and line. It is a lot of work. They need to do all of this before the deadline hits.
- The broadcasters were in a reverse auction where they could request money from the FCC and get paid based on their market for their spectrum. They would also get new spectrum. So, they get paid to unload their spectrum.
- Then another auction for the carriers to buy the spectrum in the 600MHz band. This gives them the opportunity to gain more spectrum and grow for a few billion dollars. The big winner in this auction was T-Mobile, who intends to fill their holes across the US. They spent quite a bit. However, AT&T bought very little, and Verizon showed little interest. T-Mobile did very well. Comcast snatched up some spectrum too, among many others.
Provide more details than it "does not work". Is the receiver seeing anything? What signals strengths are you getting. Indoor/Outdoor?My OTA does not work what do I do....
Provide more details than it "does not work". Is the receiver seeing anything? What signals strengths are you getting. Indoor/Outd The receiver does see anything.