Digital transmistion

[louisiii]

Comcast add says that analog broadcasting to stop and digit to start. I think I know the answer to my question. If I buy a Zenith radio, TV, and changer console from the 1930's will I still be able to use it. I think I can because I remember comcast telling me that all cable is digital and the cable box converts it to analog for analog TVs. Is my assumption correct. Of course the other reason I want to get a 1930's radio and TV is so I can tune in radio and TV programs from the 30's and 40's.

[radiotvnut]

Yes, your cable company should be able to supply you with a digital cable box for use with your analog TV.

The last day for over the air analog TV broadcast will be 2/17/09. After that date, you will need a converter box to convert the digital off air signal to an analog signal that your set can use.

The cable companies are not bound by law to go all digital. For now, they can use whatever method (analog or digital) for delivery that they choose for as long as they want.

Keep in mind that digital off air signals and digital cable signals are different and the converter boxes for each signal type are not interchangeable.

All you would need to do is connect the converter box to the TV and set the channel selector to channel 3. The converter box will be your tuner and will add remote control channel change to your set.

I currently receive analog cable from C***ast and will continue to do so until I have no other choice.

[radiotvnut]

BTW, the TV combinations that you are talking about were not around in the '30's. Those didn't appear until the late '40's and they were black & white and had small screens. The larger screen B&W models came out in the '50's and were popular through the early to mid '60's. Stereo models will almost always be from the '60's.

The early color TV / stereo combinations became popular in the early '60's and most had 21" round CRT's. The color combinations with rectangular tubes came out in the mid '60's and were made up until at least the late '70's.

[peverett]

One thing to remember is that, in spite of misconceptions, broadcast analog radio is not changing(only TV). This is in spite of the push for "HD radio".

With the very limited number of sets for sale available to receive "HD radio", I am not to sure that it is going to fly. I saw one very ugly Sony at Circuit City and one very cheaply made set at Radio Shack. I could not find the one that Fry's was supposed to have. (One of the sales people told me that HD Radio was some companies that could not afford satellites answer to Cirrus, etc. Could be true.)

[electroking]

I read in Gramophone (classical recordings reviews) that an European
country (I believe it is Sweden, but I would have to check) was backing
off completely on a projected changeover to digital radio, stating that
it was not economically sound. The funny thing is that the economic
motives that work against the transition to digital radio are actually
even stronger in the case of digital television. It will not make the
number of channels considerably greater (yes you can use adjacent
channels, but so what), it will not save electrical power in practice, and
it will send tons of perfectly good transmitting and receiving equipment to
the dumpster. ARRRRRGH!...

[Celt]

Our cable provider announced that they will continue to send analog signals to their regular cable customers and the HD customers will use boxes, which I assume are the same ones they currently use (DVR and digital tuner combo).

[Chad Hauris]

I think some cable companies are cutting back to analog for just channels 2-13 only...in order to get the higher channels they are requiring you to get a digital cable box.

[radiotvnut]

I think some cable companies are cutting back to analog for just channels 2-13 only...in order to get the higher channels they are requiring you to get a digital cable box.

That would explain why they are moving some "semi decent" channels from the VHF band to the higher channels. They took the Hallmark channel and one other channel off of analog and moved it to digital. Now, if you want those channels, you have to rent a box. I know some older people that went that route. Channel 2 was TBS, now it's the TV guide channel. 4 was HBO, now it's the Home shopping network (like I care about that), 8 was CNN, now it's the CW network. 11 is QVC, but has interference from OTA channel 11. I'm sure that will change when OTA goes digital. If I had a digital OTA tuner, I could receive everything of interest, except WGN, that is available on the VHF cable channels. The C***ast CSR that I talked to when I got cable tried to talk me into taking a digital package because she claimed they were going "digital" sometime in '08. I guess we'll see what happens...

[bgadow]

I sure don't know much about digital cable; the other night I helped set up a new tv/new digital cable box for some friends. I was not impressed. The local channels looked terrible (except for the commercials, which looked great somehow!) What I thought was odd was how the stations showed up in 2 places-in the old "standard" place (2-13) and then up in the hundreds as well, but in that case the picture did not fill the screen and none of us could figure a way to make it stretch. Oh, and then there was the pixelation...

Long live analog!

[radiotvnut]

ABC is on channel 6 in regular SD. It's also on some high channel up in the 400's on HD. I have not personally seen it; but, they advertise it on cable here all the time. In order to get the HD channel, you must have an HD box and subscribe to digital cable.

[ChrisW6ATV]

ABC is on channel 6 in regular SD. It's also on some high channel up in the 400's on HD. I have not personally seen it; but, they advertise it on cable here all the time. In order to get the HD channel, you must have an HD box and subscribe to digital cable.
If you get a "digital cable ready" TV set, you will be able to receive those local digital and/or HD channels without a box. By law, they have to let you receive them (digital but unscrambled) even if you only subscribe to the lowest-level cable package, without any box, from the cable company.

[rods]

I find it interesting that Direct TV is enticing people to sign up for service that costs "at little as $29.95." Well, the fine print says it's really $39.95 because you have to pay extra for digital. When will that go away?
Who remembers when Internet providers charged by the hour? You could sign up for different daily time increments - 2 hours, 10 hours, etc., and be charged accordingly. Well, of course that went away pretty fast.

[Thyratron]

Oh, and then there was the pixelation...

. . . something which many of these super-size flat screen fanatics seem not to mind too much in the "bigger is better" competition. Do we really care what color gum the guy is chewing?

[Brach]

Being the dudum I apparently am I must ask yet another likely dumdum question.

I have had digital cable for a few years and have been completely disappointed with it's softer focus look compared to a picture from an antenna. The delay between channels is upsetting me when flipping channels because I constantly miss words as compared to the instant sound that happens when changing channels from an antenna signal. Every time it rains the picture/sound go out and I have to use an indoor antenna. I know these things go along with the digital tansmission but is this not a system that will at sometime have many people unable to get emergency information when we can no longer use an antenna?


The thought of having to get a box for every set along with the loss of the free broadcast signal only to be given a system that will surely leave me hanging in the dark during some emergency is most certainly going to take me away from this hobby.

Stop screaming with joy.

[ChrisW6ATV]

Brach, I think you are mixing up a few different problems and causes.

-Soft focus on digital cable is because the cable company decided to provide a lousy signal, not because a digital signal is inherently poor.

-Yes, you will get a delay when switching digital channels, whether from an antenna, cable, or satellite. This cannot be completely fixed.

-Loss of signal when it rains is from lousy equipment and practices, if it is a cable system. A good, solid outdoor antenna with a strong signal should not have this problem with over-the-air digital signals, especially after February 2009 when many stations will boost their power.

-We can all still use antennas to watch free broadcast TV, and that will not change at all with digital TV. (I have watched nothing but free digital TV over-the-air for the last two years, and plenty of all-digital OTA TV for five more years before that. Cable companies would like people to think they cannot watch free TV with antennas anymore, or that they will not be able to when broadcast TV goes all-digital, but it is not true.

[Brach]

I keep thinking I should know the answers to most questions I ask.

I thought we would not get through-the-air signals after 2009.

I've been thinking that if I can tell my mind is not working right it could mean I am not going crazy but the more I try to communicate with others the more it seems I must be really loosing it.

I just don't think like anybody else and I have been trying to change but it seems unlikely that can happen based on results thus far.

I sincerely apologize to all I have rubbed the wrong way. No response is necessary.
Thank you,
John

[peverett]

I also have been watching over air digital signals for the last 6 months or so. My reception has not been that good(not as good as analog on some stations), especially in windy conditions(my antenna is indoors, so that is not it). Part or all of the problem may be the power levels, but I am not sure.

What I can say is that analog recovers much quicker than digital when reception is lost. I can be watching a snowy analog picture with sound on the same station(using a similar antennas) while the digital version is frozen(or pixellated) with no sound. This is why I am not that enthusiastic about over the air digital. So far it has not been near as good as advertized here.

One final note-in spite rumors to the contrary, analog radio is not going away.

[peverett]

I also have been watching over air digital signals for the last 6 months or so. My reception has not been that good(not as good as analog on some stations), especially in windy conditions(my antenna is indoors, so that is not it). Part or all of the problem may be the power levels, but I am not sure.

What I can say is that analog recovers much quicker than digital when reception is lost. I can be watching a snowy analog picture with sound on the same station(using a similar antennas) while the digital version is frozen(or pixellated) with no sound. This is why I am not that enthusiastic about over the air digital. So far it has not been near as good as advertized here.

One final note-in spite rumors to the contrary, analog radio is not going away.