Analog Hole Legislation Formally Introduced

[hudsonf]

In order to fit all TV broadcasting into the UHF bands, a compression scheme was needed. Continuation of analog transmission would have resulted in unacceptable interference between the closely spaced stations. So it was decided to abandon analog broadcasting altogether for digital technology that would multiply potential channels by 5x* with even more compression possible in the future. This decision obsoleted the analog UHF tuner in current TV sets.

With all the channels available on the UHF band they couldn't find room for up to 12 tv stations? I will always believe the only reason they want to go digital is so they can have more control over what we can or can not do with the programming we receive.

[GullyFoyle]

In order to fit all TV broadcasting into the UHF bands, a compression scheme was needed. Continuation of analog transmission would have resulted in unacceptable interference between the closely spaced stations. So it was decided to abandon analog broadcasting altogether for digital technology that would multiply potential channels by 5x* with even more compression possible in the future. This decision obsoleted the analog UHF tuner in current TV sets.

With all the channels available on the UHF band they couldn't find room for up to 12 tv stations? I will always believe the only reason they want to go digital is so they can have more control over what we can or can not do with the programming we receive.

Word.
Same with the push for Sat radio.

[mbellot]

mbellot, I see two separate issues here:

The first is the 7-11 year plan to move TV broadcasting to higher frequencies thus obsoleting analog TV tuners.

The second is the introduction of encryption schemes that restrict reception of TV broadcasts to certain types of approved equipment.

[snip] Good history info [/snip]

Your position seems to be that the government should force all TV sets to include ~$100 DTV tuners now. This would double the price of small sets and add ~30% to the mainstream 27" analog TV. As it stands now, sets larger than 27" will have to carry this burden for a feature that will not be needed until 2009 and then by only 12% of users.

External set top DTV tuners are expected to be priced ~ $20-50 in 2009 when they will be needed.

I'll address encryption in a separate post later.

* Some of this additional channel bandwidth can be combined to provide HDTV service. HDTV is irrelevant to this discussion of analog sets.

Excellent info, but you misunderstand my position slightly. The only reason I see to "force" the inclusion of the ATSC tuner is because of the short date to analog cut off (which BTW I don't actually believe will occur on time).

In reality, I think the date needs to be pushed out to give time for the cost to come down to reasonable consumer levels (with gratitude to the early adopters who pay for the R & D). That way the cost of 100% inclusion would be minimal, certainly less than the $20 from your set top box since most of the components are redundant (case, power supply, I/O connectors, even the pcb and retail packaging costs get cut out).

The need for the bandwidth is not so dire that the transition can't wait another 5 - 10 years, its being done for better utilization and grouping - similar to the reason Nextel/Sprint will be giving up its 800MHz iDEN band for public safety groups like police and fire.

Imagine the uproar if/when they try to consolidate out the FM radio band.

The thought process behind forcing inclusion in large (> 27") TVs is sensible from a cost perspective, but totally backwards from a real world end use standpoint. The reality of it is that its the small TV that will need the internal tuner because its going to end up in the bedroom, basement or garage.

The $20 - $50 price for a set top converter is (at best) an educated guess on your part. Nobody can predict the actual costs until the silicon is done and you are running production volumes. And with typical setbacks associated with such a complicated ASIC its likely that it won't even be ready (in its final form) in time for the proposed cut off.

As far as encryption is concerned, there is no doubt its actual purpose is to incorporate DRM (of some form or other) into every broadcast signal. Digital encryption simplifies the process greatly, but as long as there is an analog output somewhere the system will never be 100% secure.

[edDV]

In order to fit all TV broadcasting into the UHF bands, a compression scheme was needed. Continuation of analog transmission would have resulted in unacceptable interference between the closely spaced stations. So it was decided to abandon analog broadcasting altogether for digital technology that would multiply potential channels by 5x* with even more compression possible in the future. This decision obsoleted the analog UHF tuner in current TV sets.

With all the channels available on the UHF band they couldn't find room for up to 12 tv stations? I will always believe the only reason they want to go digital is so they can have more control over what we can or can not do with the programming we receive.

Sorry back from a power outage.

This site covers most of the issues from the viewpoint of an antenna seller but is a bit weak on ATSC DTV. Where they say HDTV, substitute DTV. HDTV is only an augmentation to digital broadcasting. I'll add more links.

http://www.tvantenna.com/support/tutorials/uhf.html

another perspective (scroll down to "Why Digital Television?")
http://www.bsss.org/digital_tv.htm

[edDV]

edit

[mbellot]

This site covers most of the issues from the viewpoint of an antenna seller but is a bit weak on ATSC DTV. Where they say HDTV, substitute DTV. HDTV is only an augmentation to digital broadcasting. I'll add more links.

http://www.tvantenna.com/support/tutorials/uhf.html

another perspective (scroll down to "Why Digital Television?")
http://www.bsss.org/digital_tv.htm

Two rather interesting quotes from the second link.

The FCC's original drop-dead date for the cessation of all regular analog television broadcasting in the US was to be May 1, 2006 (less than five years away). Since that ruling, a loophole was added saying that analog television can't be shut down until 85% of viewers in a market can receive digital signals. How long will that take? If history is a guide, from the time color television was introduced in 1953, it took until 1978 for 50% of viewers to have color TV sets in their homes. That was 25 years. So you won't need to buy a DTV set today.

Emphasis added by me.

And even more to my original point:

But to those of us who work in the broadcasting industry, it is a frustrating time of transition -- -a government-mandated transition that most TV viewers are unaware of!

The majority of the population know nothing about it.

Granted it won't affect a geat deal of those people, but I'd be willing to bet that the people who it will affect the most are precisely the people who are most in the dark about it.

[edDV]

I think we passed 85% long ago. This year even the smallest markets have parallel DTV service. Many are operating at low power until the analog shutoff. All it takes is a gov't mandated power boost and the number will be surpassed. If you are using that as your arguement then analog could be shut off in 2006.

http://www.nab.org/Newsroom/issues/digitaltv/DTVStations.asp
North Platte, Nebraska (the 209th market, pop 23,944) has 3 DTV stations.

I don't see your other point. Many don't know it's against the law to have your windshield wipers on and not your headlights. Hundreds are being ticketed every day. Should those cases be thrown out of court because the violator was ignorant of the new law?

The broadcasters are still going through lotteries to determine their final channel numbers after analog shutoff.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=591927

[gadgetguy]

Just because the signal is being broadcast does not mean that 85% of the market can receive it. But I have to question how they will determine when 85% will have the capability to receive the digital transmission.

[edDV]

Just because the signal is being broadcast does not mean that 85% of the market can receive it. But I have to question how they will determine when 85% will have the capability to receive the digital transmission.

That is simple. 85% has nothing to do with it. Analog will be shut off when Congress decides to throw the switch. Billions in license revenue is there for the taking.

To find your local analog and digital TV stations plug your address into http://www.antennaweb.org/

Digital station power will be raised before the shutoff so everyone can have their ducks in line and antennas pointed.

Note that some markets will continue to have digital stations in the upper VHF (ch 7-13) in the first phase. FM Radio sits just above Ch 6. That frees all TV frequencies below 85 MHz. Analog TV (ch 2-6) currently occupies 35% of the bandwidth below 85 MHz.

[gadgetguy]

Since that ruling, a loophole was added saying that analog television can't be shut down until 85% of viewers in a market can receive digital signals.

For the record, I agree with you EdDV, but this is the first time I've heard of this loophole and if that wording is correct then IMO they would not be able to shut it down until the 85% had capability to receive.
Of course, the actual text of the loophole may be different and may mean that the signal must be available to 85% of the market before disconnecting. Does anyone have a link to that actual text?

[edDV]

Since that ruling, a loophole was added saying that analog television can't be shut down until 85% of viewers in a market can receive digital signals.

For the record, I agree with you EdDV, but this is the first time I've heard of this loophole and if that wording is correct then IMO they would not be able to shut it down until the 85% had capability to receive.
Of course, the actual text of the loophole may be different and may mean that the signal must be available to 85% of the market before disconnecting. Does anyone have a link to that actual text?

But that "rule" was put in place by Congress and Congress can amend it any way they please. It has no real impact. Both parties support the transition.

[edDV]

This chart shows current frequency allocations in the USA for the radio spectrum. Note how much space is being taken currently by broadcasters (blue). It is a logarithmic base so the blue in the upper frequencies represents even more that it looks. Other nations have similar allocations.

Ch-2-6 will be made available for lease in all markets plus portions of the upper VHF Ch 7-13. Meanwhile the UHF TV band has/is being reduced in half from 70 to less than 35 channels total. Digital technology makes this possible.

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf