Ideas for DTV Sub-Channels in Canada? - Page 6 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums

 1Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #76 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-25, 10:22 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Craig Henry (Greenbank/Hunt Club), Nepean, ON
Posts: 3,149
Quote:
Maybe they could be left to assign frequencies, although in my area they don't seem particularly good at that.
It's not their job. Industry Canada does that.

With respect to your comments on the British TV plan, they have a centrally planned and operated scheme -- one company runs all the transmitter sites. Compared to the US, though, there are a lot more shared towers here in Canada than there are in the States.
tvlurker is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #77 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-25, 10:33 PM
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Banff Trail district, Calgary.
Posts: 451
Thank you for your answer and information. Yes, originally there were two UK companies running the TV sites (at one time the BBC and IBA), now there is just one (Arqiva). Maybe the whole system needs an overhaul here in Canada?
Billsmith is offline  
post #78 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 01:04 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Kitchener
Posts: 78
How about using multiple feeds for CBC
-1 normal
-2 news
-3 second broadcast where needed (ie put leafs on -1, Habs on -3)
gohabsgo2 is offline  
 
post #79 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 01:06 PM
OTA Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 24,879
That's a possibility, but again anytime sub-channels are used the main channel's bandwidth has to be reduced, at which point the HD picture quality noticeably degrades.

For the CBC the issue of sub-channels would be a tough call.
stampeder is offline  
post #80 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 01:22 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ottawa (Stittsville), ON, OTA (DB4e & VHF-HI folded dipole, AP-2870 pre-amp in Attic), MythTV HTPC
Posts: 6,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by gohabsgo2 View Post
How about using multiple feeds for CBC
-1 normal
-2 news
-3 second broadcast where needed (ie put leafs on -1, Habs on -3)
I have said it many times before, but I don't think we will ever see CBCNW on a sub channel since BDU subscribers pay to receive it (it is a hidden fee) so why would CBC turn around and offer it for free.

I think the best opportunity for a CBC sub channel is idea I put in post #27, but even that likely won't happen.
roger1818 is offline  
post #81 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 01:41 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scarboro
Posts: 6,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger1818 View Post
For example CBC could:
  • time-shift their news by an hour or two,
  • show Wheel of Fortune at 7:00,
  • show a secondary hockey game on Saturday nights, and
  • during the playoffs, show the regularly scheduled programming for those who aren't interested in Hockey.
Good in theory but time-shifting news would reduce the value of CBC NW, and during the playoffs there isn't any regularly scheduled programming. You could replay shows from earlier in the year but it wouldn't make sense for CBC to produce original content that would only be viewed by a tiny fraction of the normal audience.
Wayne is offline  
post #82 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 02:19 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ottawa (Stittsville), ON, OTA (DB4e & VHF-HI folded dipole, AP-2870 pre-amp in Attic), MythTV HTPC
Posts: 6,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne View Post
Good in theory but time-shifting news would reduce the value of CBC NW,
Except NW doesn't show local news. This would increase viewership of the local news (especially if the channel was available on cable).

Quote:
and during the playoffs there isn't any regularly scheduled programming. You could replay shows from earlier in the year but it wouldn't make sense for CBC to produce original content that would only be viewed by a tiny fraction of the normal audience.
My point is they could continue to show regular programming instead of stopping the season early. For The National, they do continue to show it, but it is often delayed because of a game, especially when it goes into overtime.
roger1818 is offline  
post #83 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 02:53 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scarboro
Posts: 6,327
Local news? I thought that the CEEB has seriously curtailed the local news that they produce and outside of a handful of Canadian cities there is almost no local news.

Showing the National on sub-channels makes sense, but it woudln't be worth it to produce expensive orignal content. But even showing the National would degrade the bandwidth available for the HD channel.
Wayne is offline  
post #84 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 04:09 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ottawa (Stittsville), ON, OTA (DB4e & VHF-HI folded dipole, AP-2870 pre-amp in Attic), MythTV HTPC
Posts: 6,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne View Post
Local news? I thought that the CEEB has seriously curtailed the local news that they produce and outside of a handful of Canadian cities there is almost no local news.
First of all, pardon my ignorance, but what is the CEEB?

It is true that the CBC only has local news on a handful of Canadian cities, but only a handful of Canadian cities will have DTV transmitters.

Quote:
Showing the National on sub-channels makes sense, but it woudln't be worth it to produce expensive orignal content.
How is repeating the local news any more expensive than repeating The National?
roger1818 is offline  
post #85 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 04:34 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Scarboro
Posts: 6,327
CEEB = CBC as in BEEB = BBC.

I didn't mean that repeating the news was more expensive, I meant producing original non-news content would be expensive. They would be producing the National anyhow to air after hockey (or on NW) so that is a red herring.
Wayne is offline  
post #86 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 06:25 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kincardine ON.
Posts: 4,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by stampeder View Post
That's a possibility, but again anytime sub-channels are used the main channel's bandwidth has to be reduced, at which point the HD picture quality noticeably degrades.

For the CBC the issue of sub-channels would be a tough call.
PQ loss would be minimal with only one, maybe even two SD sub-channels. Lots of US stations have a couple sub-channels each, and seem to do fine.
classicsat is offline  
post #87 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 07:36 PM
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Banff Trail district, Calgary.
Posts: 451
Quote:
PQ loss would be minimal with only one, maybe even two SD sub-channels. Lots of US stations have a couple sub-channels each, and seem to do fine.
Hang tough! - I have become accustomed to high quality pictures now since HD has been introduced in Calgary. Isn't there a way of using the subchannels when only non-HD material is being shown on the main channel or are the subchannels continuously broadcast whether needed or not. Ofcourse the number of free UHF channels generally available is far greater in Canada than "say" in the UK due to the greater distances between transmitters and lack of filler tower presence in the main coverage areas.

Also it may be necessary to eventually consider Cellphone viewers of the UHF channels as this is a new technology to be factored into the scheme of things. This is the reason (I am told) why Global Calgary has opted to put CICT-DT on UHF. I guess that HD considerations really don't matter on a cellphone where as subchannels useage would, especially for those viewers who couldn't bear to miss their game!!
Billsmith is offline  
post #88 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 09:01 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Craig Henry (Greenbank/Hunt Club), Nepean, ON
Posts: 3,149
Quote:
This is the reason (I am told) why Global Calgary has opted to put CICT-DT on UHF.
No, VHF-low band (especially 2-4, but also 5 and 6) is practially useless for ATSC because of noise issues, even for stationary receivers. VHF-high band is useable, and that's where the mobile ATSC question comes into play, and where a station that wants to broadcast to cellphones is much better off with UHF.
tvlurker is offline  
post #89 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 09:26 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Windsor, Ontario
Posts: 539
audio sub-channels only run at 0.2 Mbps (200 kbps), and ATSC has built-in support for digital SAP...and for audio-only subchannels in digital stereo, too (though those start at x.50, and i assume they can go only to x.99), using that for an entirely different feature (like a radio station) would be wasteful, especially if there's a large non-english-speaking population nearby.

The Weather Network, CBC NewsWorld or CTV News Net as sub-channels? would be great, but it'll never happen...

What needs to be done for the CBC to start saving money is to automatically merge its two networks (CBC English and CBC French/SRC) together, with x.1 being English and x.2 being French... in areas with large French populations, Quebec, and New Brunswick, it would be reversed. They could shove two HD signals in, 720p60 at 16:9 with just a bit of room to spare, and there would still be absolutely stunning picture for both (provided another sub-channel was NOT in place).

This would also apply to the OMNI stations and possibly (C)[T]\V/ with its relationship to /A\ (why not re-brand it as "Eh?" while they're at it? )

one thing i don't get is that CTV and Global are so firmly against the cable companies, yet they want to do away with over-the-air and go cable-only. not thinking things through.... or do they want to start their own cable/satellite systems?
58686 is offline  
post #90 of 176 (permalink) Old 2009-11-26, 10:36 PM
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Banff Trail district, Calgary.
Posts: 451
Response to tvlurker

Quote:
No, VHF-low band (especially 2-4, but also 5 and 6) is practially useless for ATSC because of noise issues, even for stationary receivers. VHF-high band is useable, and that's where the mobile ATSC question comes into play,
That is very interesting! In my chat with Global TV, noise issues at VHF Low band were not mentionned, only the broadcasts to cellphones and antenna sizes of cellphones being more compact at UHF. There was mention that some US companies were reverting back to their assigned temporary UHF frequencies as a result of reception problems at VHF though no details were given. Perhaps the proposed ATSC power levels at VHF are too low?? Our local CBC station in Calgary VHF High band analog power is 325 KW - the proposed VHF high band ATSC power is just 7 KW?????

In view of what you say it is interesting to note that a Winnipeg channel CIIT has a Channel 2 ATSC allocation among other Winnipeg Low band allocations.
Billsmith is offline  
Reply

Tags
canada , crtc , dtv , ota

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome