The DTV transition has now come and gone and the general consensus among government and industry leaders is that it went fairly smoothly, considering the impact. Most worrisome is the loss of reception for those used to getting less than optimum analog signals. In particular, many stations on Channel 7 are fielding complaints about loss of signal in larger cities, including Chicago. TV Technology will continue to monitor the aftermath of June 12 with a full report in our July 8 edition. In the meantime, if you have pictures, video or just want to share your thoughts about this history-making event for broadcasting, please e-mail them to tvtech@nbmedia.com or post them here!

It’s the antenna stupid!!

Ok, so I will admit that digital TV still has some issues to be worked out, but there are several things to remember, with the first being that this is a new technology that was not completely perfected and thoroughly researched before it was shoved in the public's face.

Reception problems were well known by the FCC and industry experts alike, and continued research and development into new antenna designs, and improved receiver electronics is still urgently needed.

Since the transition has taken place, there are now major reception issues with a lot of stations who chose to go back to their former VHF channel assignments that are just now being realized and discovered.

All digital TV channel assignments should have been assigned in the UHF TV band only as is currently being done in Japan, and the VHF spectrum should have been allocated to the potentially interference causing "White Space Devices" that are now trying to threaten DTV reception for the greed of the big telecommunications and internet giants in their never ending quest for the almighty dollar.

The grossly inadequate DTV promotion and education program that was laughable, led viewers to believe that “the magic box, along with a set of magic rabbit ears” was all you would need, and life in broadcast TV land would be all rosy again after analog was shut off, while TV broadcast engineers everywhere gritted their teeth every time a DTV answers commercial ran showing a picture of,“the magic box, along with a set of magic rabbit ears” for they knew very early in the game about the problems that existed with digital TV signal reception.

Welcome to reality antenna viewers, and that reality is that digital TV is not really a bad concept, but just because a radio signal carries digital data does not make it “MAGIC”, or change the simple laws of physics, the electrical properties of, or the reception methods of an electromagnetic radio signal.

The description of a properly installed TV reception antenna on the FCC’s own web site states that “In order to receive broadcast TV signals reliably, an antenna should be installed at least 30 feet above the ground”, and in some cases is worded to state “Above the surrounding terrain”, so where is the logic in promoting the " magic rabbit ears " as being suitable for reliable DTV reception.

"You must have a properly selected and installed antenna for your area, and the appropriate accessories such as an antenna rotor and proper cabling to receive digital TV signals reliably...period. In most cases, indoor antennas do not deliver reliable reception in a majority of locations...period".

I will repeat that I think digital TV is a good concept, and being employed as a Broadcast Television Engineer, I really think that digital TV could have a bright future, but only if the broadcast industry can repair the damage done to its reputation by the “Beltway Boys”, and their failed attempt to educate, or to purposely mislead the public about the simple laws of physics in regards to TV signal reception. I will again state that the reception issues were well known, and well documented for any politician or FCC board member who cared to read about them.

Could one of the engineers at the FCC, if there are any of them left, please explain to me how “the magic box, along with a set of magic rabbit ears” that we saw so many pictures of in the past 2 years can be expected to suddenly defy the laws of physics, and magically receive those “Elusive”, but wonderful digital TV and HDTV signals.

Remember again that the laws of electrical physics in general do not change just because the radio signal contains digital information. The signals still obey the laws of nature and physics in regards to reception, propagation, and the proper equipment needed to receive them.

In defense of the concept of digital TV broadcasting, whose issues will be worked out sometime in the future, I will state the following…"A properly selected and installed antenna for your area, and the appropriate accessories such as an antenna rotor and proper cabling to will likely receive broadcast digital TV signals reliably in 80 to 90% of locations where the signal exists to be received...period. There are now indications that facility maximization (transmitter power increases) are easing some of the reception issues that were prevalent before the transition took place".

Of course, there are many other aspects to the reception of digital TV signals, which include VHF versus UHF, new antenna designs, and several other aspects, but they are to numerous to list here.

No matter how far we advance in technology, it seems we still have to look to the past to find answers to new problems. Welcome to the new era of the outdoor TV antenna, or the beginning of the end of broadcast TV, depending on whose viewpoint you see it from.

We are literally now amongst a generation of younger people who have no concept of how television was viewed only a mere 20 years ago using outdoor antennas erected as high as physically possible. They only know about paying for TV via cable, and even more recently, via satellite TV, and they also do not seem to realize that there is free TV available using a seemingly little known and forgotten metallic device often referred to as an antenna.

My lifelong involvement in the Amateur Radio hobby, as well as employment in 2-way radio service, and currently as a Broadcast Television Engineer in a very mountainous area of the country that has numerous reception issues, would seem to make me well qualified to comment on this topic.

Your insight and observations are quite accurate.  I live in a valley that used to receive poor analog OTA reception.  Now it gets no digital channels.  But since there is only one TV antenna is my small city, no one cares.  It's 99.9% cable. And cable PBS no longer supplies XDS time either.

Thanks again for your perspective on the DTV transition.