In article m,
David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 1/8/2009 7:23 AM Don Bruder spake thus:
In article ,
Robert Neville wrote:
Don Bruder wrote:
Sorry, Rob, but that's *TOTALLY* incorrect. One of the primary purposes
of the switch is to open up the VHF bands for other uses. *ALL* digital
transmissions are on UHF now (on channels 14 through 51, between 470 and
698MHz, to be exact) and will remain there after the switch.
Sorry Don. I'm afraid you are very confused. The frequencies associated
UHF
Channels 52 to 69 are being auctioned off - not the VHF frequencies.
Stations
have the option of moving their digital channels back to VHF after the
transition if they want, or they can stay on their temporariy UHF channel
if
it
is below 52. Since low VHF has better propagation than VHF and is cheaper
to
run
a transmitter on, those stations current on 2-7 for analog will likely
stay
there for digital.
Notice that it's *52-69* being auctioned? Notice that 14-51 are where
DTV broadcasting is happening?
But don't take my word for it - Do your own research, same as I did, and
find out that everything I've said is dead-on accurate, regardless of
what some self-proclaimed "HDTV expert" blog has to say about it. Also
note that "HDTV" has exactly *NOTHING* to do with "DTV" beyond the fact
that they share some letters.
Since what you say is in direct contradiction to what that blog said,
can you supply any authoritative cites to back up your assertions? Not
challenging them, as I'm truly confused at this point. Any links to
verifiable info would be appreciated (like maybe something from the FCC???).
I *WISH* I could find something in the disaster that claims to be the
FCC site! Finding anything useful on *ANY* topic there seems to be
designed to be as difficult as possible. Which, in a way, is suspicious
in and of itself.
Part of the problem is "information overload" - Do a search that
includes "Digital TV", "DTV", or variations on that theme, and the
number of results is so huge that trying to find something that actually
applies is an exercise in frustration.
That said, so far, I can't find *ANYTHING* that supports *EITHER*
position from anyone that resembles any kind of "official". There's
about 17 metric buttloads of stuff from various bloggers, pundits, and
self-proclaimed experts of various flavors, most of which seems to
contradict "what the other side says", but not a bloomin' word I can
find from anything that would be called "official" to settle it once and
for all.
The closest thing I came across was a page I hit a few weeks ago (Sorry,
didn't bother to bookmark it, as I wasn't expecting to need to trot out
(c/s)ites when I was searching for information on homebrewing an antenna
for DTV reception) put up by the NAB that showed that the VHF-LO band
would essentially cease to exist, so far as TV is concerned - If I
didn't miss any when scrolling the list of 1600-ish channels and
counting numbers between 2 and 7 as they went by, there were only 6-8
stations that *WANTED* those channels, and around 15-20 that *WANTED*
channels in the 8-13 range. *EVERYTHING* else was showing as being
expected to land in the 14-51 range.
Whether that's anything like what they'll *GET* (as opposed to what they
*WANT*) seems to be up in the air, since the list was tagged as being
"tenative".
(And since it's an NAB site, not an FCC site, I'd call it, at best,
"Reasonably authoritative, but not official")
--
Don Bruder -
- If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist,
or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow"
somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my
ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd for more info