On Oct 31, 4:57*pm, David Nebenzahl wrote:
Just used my gubmint'-issued $40 credit and bought the box (at a local
Circuit City). Got the only one they had, the Zenith DTT901. Now I'm
wondering whether I should have shopped around first.

My main complaint is that the picture quality ain't great. I saw another
converter box at a friend's house that looked really good on their tube;
this one isn't all that sharp or punchy, kind of grainy. Definitely not
as good as the analog picture I get from those stations with the
strongest signals. (On the plus side, not only do I get lots more
channels than I got before, but the picture quality is at least
consistent among all of them, even if it's not the greatest.) I'm
assuming this has something to do with the DAC chipset or the RF
modulator in the box.

Box was super-simple to set up. I'm not thrilled with the user
interface: there's a "favorites" function that's kind of annoying to
use. You can put the most-watched stations in a "favorites" list, then
hit the FAV button to access them. Problem is, the on-screen menu has a
very short timeout, so if you linger too long on one station, it goes
away and you can't pick from the list without hitting FAV again (plus it
bumps the selection up each time you hit FAV; definitely not the way I
would have designed that function).

The remote doesn't turn my TV on and off, but that's probably just
because the TV is so old. (There's a list of 45 manufacturers whose sets
can supposedly be used with the remote.)

Not big deals, since I don't really care that much about TV anyhow. I'd
be curious to hear similar reports on other converter boxes.

Oh, and the box was $60, so I paid $20.

--
* Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

- Paulo Freire

Can you access consumer reports online, an interesting thing is 2/3rds
are not the good ones, the rating is what you describe, poor picture.

David Nebenzahl wrote:
Just used my gubmint'-issued $40 credit and bought the box (at a local
Circuit City). Got the only one they had, the Zenith DTT901. Now I'm
wondering whether I should have shopped around first.

My main complaint is that the picture quality ain't great. I saw another
converter box at a friend's house that looked really good on their tube;
this one isn't all that sharp or punchy, kind of grainy. Definitely not
as good as the analog picture I get from those stations with the
strongest signals. (On the plus side, not only do I get lots more
channels than I got before, but the picture quality is at least
consistent among all of them, even if it's not the greatest.) I'm
assuming this has something to do with the DAC chipset or the RF
modulator in the box.
....

Well, that's better luck than I've had so far -- nuttin' is coming in
thru the RCA DTA800 I got. It was the only one on the shelves locally
and by dallying, I had waited until it was the day the gubmint credit
expired. (I've not tried yet to see if can somehow get a second thru
the online wizard). It was 40+ so tax and a little was all was out, though.

I haven't yet done the experiments w/ the antenna, cable run, etc., --
in fact I just finished a maintenance job on the hydraulic system of the
lift so I can now tomorrow get up there and futz around doing things
like direct connection off the antenna, thru the necessary cable,
orientation, etc., and see if there's any hope w/ the antenna as it is
on the present tower. Since the lift goes 40-ft, if needed I can take
it off the current tower and carry it on up higher and see if that will
help.

Do wish I had two or three other boxes to compare at the same time,
though, to be able to see if it's ****-poor box or just sol from signal
strength.

The online sites say we're _supposed_ to be in at least fringe
strong-enough signal area, but what do they know?

--

dpb wrote:
....
Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

--

Just used my gubmint'-issued $40 credit and bought the box (at a local
Circuit City). Got the only one they had, the Zenith DTT901. Now I'm
wondering whether I should have shopped around first.

My main complaint is that the picture quality ain't great. I saw another
converter box at a friend's house that looked really good on their tube;
this one isn't all that sharp or punchy, kind of grainy. Definitely not
as good as the analog picture I get from those stations with the
strongest signals. (On the plus side, not only do I get lots more
channels than I got before, but the picture quality is at least
consistent among all of them, even if it's not the greatest.) I'm
assuming this has something to do with the DAC chipset or the RF
modulator in the box.

Box was super-simple to set up. I'm not thrilled with the user
interface: there's a "favorites" function that's kind of annoying to
use. You can put the most-watched stations in a "favorites" list, then
hit the FAV button to access them. Problem is, the on-screen menu has a
very short timeout, so if you linger too long on one station, it goes
away and you can't pick from the list without hitting FAV again (plus it
bumps the selection up each time you hit FAV; definitely not the way I
would have designed that function).

The remote doesn't turn my TV on and off, but that's probably just
because the TV is so old. (There's a list of 45 manufacturers whose sets
can supposedly be used with the remote.)

Not big deals, since I don't really care that much about TV anyhow. I'd
be curious to hear similar reports on other converter boxes.

Oh, and the box was $60, so I paid $20.


--
Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

- Paulo Freire

dpb wrote:

dpb wrote:
...
Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

--

Remember that at or shortly after the cutover date, most of those
digital signals will get a lot stronger. Most of the current digital
signals are transmitting from secondary antennas at quite low power
levels.

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/31/2008 4:10 PM Pete C. spake thus:

dpb wrote:

dpb wrote:

...

Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

Remember that at or shortly after the cutover date, most of those
digital signals will get a lot stronger. Most of the current digital
signals are transmitting from secondary antennas at quite low power
levels.

I wonder about that: previously, I could get only the closest broadcast
stations, some of them not very well. With the converter box, I get a
lot more stations, including some farther away ones (like San Jose; I'm
in Oakland), and they all come in pretty clearly. And this is with the
same set of rabbit ears as before. So aren't the digital signals
actually stronger? Or are they just inherently clearer because of the
frequency band they're in?

Most of the digital signals are currently transmitting a lot lower than
their final power levels. What you're seeing is the characteristic of
digital transmissions where they can recover the data at quite low
signal levels and if they can get the data you get a clear picture. With
analog transmissions your picture gradually degrades and you get a lot
of snow when you get down to those signal levels.

"Pete C." wrote in news:490b9e58$0$21513
:


dpb wrote:

dpb wrote:
...
Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

--

Remember that at or shortly after the cutover date, most of those
digital signals will get a lot stronger. Most of the current digital
signals are transmitting from secondary antennas at quite low power
levels.

Have heard that several times. Good news for me. I get a bunch of stations
but some nights they are weak and you get that pixeling. Most of the time
they're crystal clear. This is on a DTV with no converter.

On 10/31/2008 4:10 PM Pete C. spake thus:

dpb wrote:

dpb wrote:

...

Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

Remember that at or shortly after the cutover date, most of those
digital signals will get a lot stronger. Most of the current digital
signals are transmitting from secondary antennas at quite low power
levels.

I wonder about that: previously, I could get only the closest broadcast
stations, some of them not very well. With the converter box, I get a
lot more stations, including some farther away ones (like San Jose; I'm
in Oakland), and they all come in pretty clearly. And this is with the
same set of rabbit ears as before. So aren't the digital signals
actually stronger? Or are they just inherently clearer because of the
frequency band they're in?


--
Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.

- Paulo Freire

Pete C. wrote:
dpb wrote:
dpb wrote:
...
Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

--

Remember that at or shortly after the cutover date, most of those
digital signals will get a lot stronger. Most of the current digital
signals are transmitting from secondary antennas at quite low power
levels.

I don't know that is or isn't true of these--they've not put out any
information regarding that point I'm aware of...

I've asked for info from two of the three; no response so far.

--

dpb wrote:
Pete C. wrote:
dpb wrote:
dpb wrote:
...
Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

--

Remember that at or shortly after the cutover date, most of those
digital signals will get a lot stronger. Most of the current digital
signals are transmitting from secondary antennas at quite low power
levels.

I don't know that is or isn't true of these--they've not put out any
information regarding that point I'm aware of...


It totally depends on how they decided to implement things. In the case
of my market two of the five stations are running with temporary
installations with a lower antenna and much lower ERP than they will
have after the cutoff. The other five installed permanent equipment and
what you see now is what you will see after the cutoff. I know this
because my buddy does facilities engineering. Sometimes you can get
answers if you call the station and manage to talk to someone besides
the normal staff.


I've asked for info from two of the three; no response so far.

--

George wrote:
dpb wrote:
Pete C. wrote:
dpb wrote:
dpb wrote:
...
Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

--

Remember that at or shortly after the cutover date, most of those
digital signals will get a lot stronger. Most of the current digital
signals are transmitting from secondary antennas at quite low power
levels.

I don't know that is or isn't true of these--they've not put out any
information regarding that point I'm aware of...


It totally depends on how they decided to implement things. ...

Yes...

--

dpb wrote:

Pete C. wrote:
dpb wrote:
dpb wrote:
...
Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

--

Remember that at or shortly after the cutover date, most of those
digital signals will get a lot stronger. Most of the current digital
signals are transmitting from secondary antennas at quite low power
levels.

I don't know that is or isn't true of these--they've not put out any
information regarding that point I'm aware of...

I've asked for info from two of the three; no response so far.

--

It's on the FCC.gov site.

Pete C. wrote:
....

It's on the FCC.gov site.

You have a more precise link?

I found several references to the "may be broadcasting w/ lower signal"
but all simply said "contact the broadcast station" of somesuch. Which,
of course, if I had gotten any response therefrom, I'd already know the
answer...

I _did_ get the lift back together yesterday, but by then what w/
spending some time w/ the pheasant hunters (yesterday was Opening Day)
and other required stuff the wind had gotten breezy enough I didn't much
relish the idea of trying to mess w/ the antenna so put the evaluation
task off...

--

It is not true that all stations will be increasing power in February.
Here is a response I got from a tech at channel 3 (CBS) in Burlington,
Vt.

"In fact we will decrease power slightly, need to by law."


---MIKE---
In the White Mountains of New Hampshire
(44° 15' N - Elevation 1580')

dpb wrote:

Pete C. wrote:
...

It's on the FCC.gov site.

You have a more precise link?

I found several references to the "may be broadcasting w/ lower signal"
but all simply said "contact the broadcast station" of somesuch. Which,
of course, if I had gotten any response therefrom, I'd already know the
answer...

I _did_ get the lift back together yesterday, but by then what w/
spending some time w/ the pheasant hunters (yesterday was Opening Day)
and other required stuff the wind had gotten breezy enough I didn't much
relish the idea of trying to mess w/ the antenna so put the evaluation
task off...

--

It's not the most user friendly, which is probably why it isn't linked
from the consumer DTV pages:

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html

Query on DT, STA, or other relevant fields. The ERP (Effective Radiated
Power) field will tell you their transmission power. You'll see multiple
entries for stations with different status fields like CP (construction
permit), LIC, etc. Where you see ERPs of a few to tens of KW for a main
channel (not LP or aux of some type), you can be pretty sure that value
will go higher after the cutover.

Pete C. wrote:
dpb wrote:
Pete C. wrote:
...

It's on the FCC.gov site.
You have a more precise link?
....

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html
....

Thanks; it appears all are so far at least, pretty low (highest was
roughly 80kW) so one may hope they're not planning on simply ignoring
the rest of the state (altho that's certainly a typical action of the
KC/Topeka/Wichita bunch that the other 80-90% of the state (by area)
doesn't matter).

--

dpb wrote:

Pete C. wrote:
dpb wrote:
Pete C. wrote:
...

It's on the FCC.gov site.
You have a more precise link?
...

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/video/tvq.html
...

Thanks; it appears all are so far at least, pretty low (highest was
roughly 80kW) so one may hope they're not planning on simply ignoring
the rest of the state (altho that's certainly a typical action of the
KC/Topeka/Wichita bunch that the other 80-90% of the state (by area)
doesn't matter).

--

I would certainly expect any of the mainstream stations to get to the
hundreds of KW at least and more likely to the MW level.

Pete C. wrote:
....

I would certainly expect any of the mainstream stations to get to the
hundreds of KW at least and more likely to the MW level.

These are the translators for the SW region of the state from the
Wichita base stations for the three major networks -- they're all there
is other than a bare-budget PBS that have no idea what they've got the
money to be able to do, if anything.

--

On Oct 31, 4:44*pm, dpb wrote:
dpb wrote:

...
Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

I was researching these online a while back and at the time it seemed
that the Zenith was the best coupon eligible box available in stores
BUT a repeated comment was that the included coax to go between the
box and the TV was crrrrrrap. If you're using RCA cables to get your
DTV signals into your TV that could certainly explain what you are
seeing.

nate

N8N wrote:
On Oct 31, 4:44 pm, dpb wrote:
dpb wrote:

...
Oh, one more thing...in analog pass-thru mode the signal was
significantly poorer, to the point of being virtually unwatchable.

I was researching these online a while back and at the time it seemed
that the Zenith was the best coupon eligible box available in stores
BUT a repeated comment was that the included coax to go between the
box and the TV was crrrrrrap. If you're using RCA cables to get your
DTV signals into your TV that could certainly explain what you are
seeing.

Well, actually, when I was plugging it in for the first test I
overlooked there was a cable in the box and used another instead. So,
if it's that piece of cable, it would be a pretty strong coincidence.

As noted just earlier, I did a search of the FCC site for the particular
stations and it appears that none are at the present broadcasting their
digital signal at much of a power level at all. It appears that the
links to signal "maps" at the popularized websites must be using license
application limits rather than actuals on file w/ the FCC as they all
indicated usable strengths. I've not gone back and done a detailed
comparison of the data; perhaps the other sites are simply using the
analog signal strength w/ the assumption of eventual digital matching
that knowing that the bulk of the population is so near a transmitter it
really doesn't make any difference, anyway, so why worry about the
fraction of a percent to whom the real data might be of some use?

--

Pete C. wrote:
....
I would certainly expect any of the mainstream stations to get to the
hundreds of KW at least and more likely to the MW level.

Well, I got the lift working again and had a nice day w/o too much wind
one day last week so did the 'spearmint of direct coax from the antenna
to the converter box.

Scan did manage to find one transmitter but signal so low didn't even
register on the signal strength tuning indicator. Fiddling w/ antenna
direction got one frame w/ quite a bit of drop out to
register--following that, the big nothing. Since couldn't see what was
happening from the antenna location and wife currently is hobbled w/ a
knee so can't ferry messages easily, I may try taking a small set and
the converter box up w/ me and see if can fine tune any, but seems
little point at this time. Unless there's going to be significantly
more signal strength than there is currently, it looks like OTA
broadcasts are a thing of the past for us. Which probably means we'll
be back to 50's as I'm thinking I'm not going to spend the $$$ they want
for satellite. Guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens when
it goes dark and try again then. Ain't gubmint "help" wunnerful???

--