sowny.net | The Southern Ontario/WNY Radio-TV Forum


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

SOWNY » Why Is CHML’s 50,000 Watt Signal So Poor In Toronto? » May 19, 2020 8:20 pm

fybush
Replies: 12

Go to post

Saul wrote:

fybush wrote:

 Some of those other nulls to the northeast protected other now-defunct 900 and 910 signals - there was CKTS 900 in Sherbrooke, CKLY 910 in Lindsay and CFBR/CHYC on 900 in North Bay.  

Were CFBR-CHYC not in Sudbury? Regardless, they're not in my log, and I struggled to remember the station(s). That is because they were never heard here despite the close proximity.

Whoops - yes, Sudbury is correct. Originally CHNO was on 900 and CFBR on 550, and they swapped in the late 1960s. Both were DAs from south of Sudbury aiming north. I'm not surprised you never heard them. I never did, either. 

 

SOWNY » Why Is CHML’s 50,000 Watt Signal So Poor In Toronto? » May 18, 2020 7:51 pm

fybush
Replies: 12

Go to post

Ida Spencer wrote:

It may have to do with protecting CKLY Lindsay when it was broadcasting at 910 kHz. Of course they're now at 91.9 but it probably wasn't worth redesigning the antenna array to remove that eastern null.

The old CHML Vinemount site was still standing well into the 1990s, even though it hadn't been transmitting since 1978.

I remember finding the Vinemount site still standing on a trip I took around 1998 or 1999 - not the towers, but the building was still there, anyway. 

So why does the current signal look the way it does? The main protection on 900 is actually to XEW in Mexico City, since 900 is a Mexican clear channel. That's why the deep null to the southwest is there. There's another pretty deep null more or less due west that protects WFDF on 910 in Michigan (and may also provide some first-adjacent night protection to WLS in Chicago.)

The array was designed to put a huge maximum lobe right into Hamilton itself, and then out over Niagara. You can drive that pretty narrow lobe across western New York if you plot it out - it remains a killer signal as far away as Hornell, for instance, while it's audible but not very strong here in Rochester, 70 miles north.

Most of the rest of why that signal looks the way it does is just symmetry beyond that. The huge lobe to the east-southeast is accompanied by another strong lobe to the west-northwest that covers K-W very nicely. Some of those other nulls to the northeast protected other now-defunct 900 and 910 signals - there was CKTS 900 in Sherbrooke, CKLY 910 in Lindsay and CFBR/CHYC on 900 in North Bay. 
 

SOWNY » 1220 » March 1, 2020 10:48 pm

fybush
Replies: 81

Go to post

I was in Buffalo last week, and even with WECK right next door on 1230, I could hear CFAJ decently on my car radio over by Transit and Broadway in Lancaster/Cheektowaga during the day. 

I expect that will actually become a harder trick to pull off when/if CFAJ gets the full 9-tower DA back up and running. 

SOWNY » WECK Buffalo Partners With Two Canadian FMs » March 1, 2020 10:46 pm

fybush
Replies: 7

Go to post

The WECK FM translator signals are all carefully designed to protect the Canadian border - that's what the rules require. Even the 100.5, which is on the WNED tower on Grand Island - where you can literally SEE Canada - still has a directional antenna that's so tight that it doesn't put any meaningful signal over the border. (For that matter, you can spit into Canada from where the 102.9 antenna is, too, on the former HSBC tower in downtown Buffalo.)

The 100.1 will be more distant from the border, on the tower at the quarry just north of the Thruway east of Transit Road. It's designed mostly to serve the eastern suburbs. 

SOWNY » Exactly One Month To Go Before Final Buffalo OTA Stations Repack » February 24, 2020 8:17 am

fybush
Replies: 29

Go to post

Fitz wrote:

Not sure why WGRZ put up a video for ABC 10 but it was meant for Northern California.

Welcome to corporate content management systems! Whatever system TEGNA (the owner of WGRZ) is using for its websites allows you to put in *any* domain name for any of their stations to any URL, and it will serve up that same page with the local station logo for that domain name.

So: 

https://www.wfaa.com/video/news/how-to-rescan-your-tv-to-get-abc10/103-8285154

is the same page, but with the WFAA Dallas logo on it. Or you can take a WGRZ news article and change the domain to, say, ABC10 from Sacramento:

https://www.abc10.com/article/life/why-wait-polish-community-celebrates-paczki-day-a-little-early/71-00ec9b06-f5ed-4e1a-a498-047053b7ca45

This also works for iHeart radio stations, among other things. 
 

SOWNY » Exactly One Month To Go Before Final Buffalo OTA Stations Repack » February 14, 2020 7:13 pm

fybush
Replies: 29

Go to post

Agreed that the proper antenna is needed for receiving stations that are transmitting on (real, not virtual) VHF channels. In general, those little flat "leaf" type antennas don't do the trick very well. Rabbit ears, the old-fashioned kind, work quite well. 

I was in the GTA a month or so ago, staying with friends in deepest Etobicoke (Kipling/Rathburne), and had no trouble getting clean CFTO reception with my usual travel antenna, a Terk HDTVa. This was at more or less ground level - the CN Tower signals all came in decently, but no Buffalo or even Hamilton was coming in there. 

SOWNY » The Evanovs’ Latest Plan: Switch Pride FM To 103.5 & CIDC To 103.7 » January 31, 2020 12:05 pm

fybush
Replies: 89

Go to post

Reading all the way to the bottom, on the specific matter of HD Radio, the CRTC explicitly says it has no formal application process yet for HD Radio. So it's hard to see how Evanov could have "bother(ed) to file an application," in that case. 

SOWNY » Guy Goes Overboard With Radio Bumper Stickers On His Car » December 4, 2019 9:19 am

fybush
Replies: 7

Go to post

I have some pictures of Dave's old van, may it rust in peace. 

And yes, I made sure Gabe got some WXXI and WRUR stickers in the mail to add to his ride...

SOWNY » This One’s For You, Mom » November 21, 2019 9:27 am

fybush
Replies: 23

Go to post

Beautifully written, RA. I'm so sorry for your loss. 

SOWNY » More Toronto HD Radio » November 18, 2019 9:44 pm

fybush
Replies: 12

Go to post

Gumshoe wrote:

fybush wrote:

When did that light up? I heard it three weeks ago when I was up in the Hamilton area.
 

I caught it about two weeks ago with Z103 on HD2, and silence except the AM530 text on HD3.  The HD3 audio was fixed the next day.

It was gone last week, but has re-appeared when I checked today.

There was audio on both HD2 and HD3 when I heard it in the car. This would have been Oct. 27, I think, 
 

SOWNY » More Toronto HD Radio » November 18, 2019 6:01 pm

fybush
Replies: 12

Go to post

Gumshoe wrote:

Evanov has also lite up their HD subcarrier in Brantford on 92.1, with Z103 and AM530 on HD2 and HD3 respectively.

When did that light up? I heard it three weeks ago when I was up in the Hamilton area.
 

SOWNY » U.S. Toys With HD Radio - On AM » October 31, 2019 9:31 am

fybush
Replies: 6

Go to post

You can hear an extensive discussion of the WWFD experiment on this podcast episode from March, It's important to understand that (a) there's a huge difference between the "MA-1" hybrid system, where the digital rides on fragile carriers at the outer edges of the analog spectrum, and the "MA-3" system under discussion, where analog goes away and its bandwidth is occupied by a full digital signal, (b) that about 30% of all cars on the road in the US right now can receive MA-3 broadcasts without needing to buy anything new, and (c) that nobody's treating this as the salvation of anything, just an opportunity to try something different with existing infrastructure that is otherwise effectively dead these days. 


https://www.fybush.com/podcast-035/


 

SOWNY » Radio’s Morning & Evening “Pattern Change” Has Certainly Changed » October 24, 2019 2:23 pm

fybush
Replies: 18

Go to post

Across the lake here at WXXI 1370, we did our pattern changes manually until just a few years ago. I didn't get to have that fun myself in the studio - the "operator on duty" was the master control person downstairs in WXXI-TV master control, where the remote control panel for the AM transmitter resides. 

Now it's done automatically on a timer, and what's more, they changed the studio-transmitter link so that there's just a smidge too much delay for me to use the AM air signal as my headphone monitor in the studio. So I've lost the fun of listening to myself in the cans as I'm doing the top-hour ID and hearing the carrier drop and come back up again. 

SOWNY » Is A Detroit FM Station Causing Odd Car Troubles Near Windsor? » October 11, 2019 9:26 am

fybush
Replies: 3

Go to post

I've heard of car receivers getting desensed in the very immediate vicinity of high-power FM and TV facilities. Happened to me on my old Jetta at the TV towers here in Rochester more than once.

But that's in massive (> 110 dBu) RF fields. The inverse-square law applies here. There's no way a Detroit signal 25 km away has enough RF field over Amherstburg to cause this, and if it somehow DID, it would be wiping out every car in metro Detroit along the way.
 

SOWNY » Why doesn't Toronto media do a better job of covering "the media" » September 15, 2019 9:05 pm

fybush
Replies: 20

Go to post

It's not just Toronto. As newspapers everywhere have contracted, they've stopped having media beats. When I was in Boston in the early 90s starting what's now NorthEast Radio Watch, both the Globe and the Herald had reporters assigned, if not full time than at least frequently, to cover local radio and TV. I think the Globe even had separate beats for general radio/TV and sports radio/TV (Boston being the sports market it was!)

As the web started up, it was possible for a while to read media coverage from many other papers, too - several of the NYC tabloids and the Record in NJ all covered the NY scene, Robert Feder was THE man for Chicago in the Sun-Times, and the list went on and on even into much smaller markets. 

Those beats started to go away in the late 90s and faded away all but completely by the late 00s. A few of the reporters managed to keep their coverage going as blogs (Feder is still at it in Chicago, for instance), but I can't think of any newspaper in the US that's still maintaining a regular beat reporter. 

Canada at least has Steve Faguy at the Montreal Gazette, who seems to do some media reporting for the paper and a lot more for Cartt.ca and his own Fagstein site. 

SOWNY » Are These The Only 5-Call Letter Stations In Canada Or The U.S.? » September 12, 2019 9:05 pm

fybush
Replies: 8

Go to post

Callsign policy is sort of a mess on both sides of the border. 

The FCC treats the suffix (-FM, -TV) as part of a unique callsign, so "WNEDFM" and "WNEDTV" are considered separate calls, and the full call includes all six letters in both cases. But in the US, you can have an FM or TV station without a suffix, so long as the base call isn't duplicated on another service. For the entire time (1962-2005) that Rochester's channel 13 was WOKR, that was its entire callsign. It was never WOKR-TV - but it had to become WHAM-TV and not just "WHAM," because "WHAM" is the callsign on the once-sister AM station. Channel 21 in Rochester started as simply WXXI, then added the -TV in 1984 when it bought an AM station and put the WXXI calls there. (WXXI-FM began in 1974 as WXXI-FM and has remained ever thus.)

Not that it matters, since they're never heard on the air any longer, at least in English, but the CBC's callsign policy has been weirdly inconsistent as well. When many of the Radio One stations migrated from AM to FM, it was with no rhyme or reason as to how calls would move. In Ottawa, CBO 920 became CBO-FM 91.5, with the former CBO-FM (CBC Stereo/Radio Two) on 103.3 becoming CBOQ. Most everywhere else, the Radio Two station kept the CB_-FM call and the Radio One station changed calls upon moving to FM - CBM 940 to CBME 88.5, CBL 740 to CBLA 99.1, CBE 1550 to CBEW 97.5. Radio-Canada liked to keep the three-letter call on the premiere chaine service, so CBF 690 became CBF 95.1 in Montreal (while CBF-FM 100.7 became CBFX), CBV 980 Montreal became CBV 106.3, etc.

There was little rhyme or reason, ever, to how satellite stations got assigned calls if they weren't production centers. CBF's relays in Quebec seemed to mostly get numbers, as have the more recent relays of CBLA across southern Ontario. Earlier relays got separate calls - CBCP Peterborough, CBCL London (now an independent station), CBCK Kingston. Some TV relays ended up with five letters, like CBLAT Geraldton, wh

SOWNY » Sept. 6, 1952: The Day TV Came To Canada - And It Wasn't Toronto » September 6, 2019 7:33 pm

fybush
Replies: 11

Go to post

Also 53 years to the day (I triple-checked my math!) since WXXI-TV signed on in Rochester, bringing educational TV to the market on a full-time signal. 

(Rochester Area Educational TV Association, or RAETA, had been kicking around since 1958, producing programming that was shown on commercial stations and then applying for channel 13 when it opened up in 1962. RAETA became one of more than a dozen competing applicants who partnered up to form an interim operating company to put channel 13 on as WOKR, then dropped out of the partnership to build WXXI in 1966.)

SOWNY » Sept. 6, 1952: The Day TV Came To Canada - And It Wasn't Toronto » September 6, 2019 6:21 pm

fybush
Replies: 11

Go to post

Also 53 years to the day (I triple-checked my math!) since WXXI-TV signed on in Rochester, bringing educational TV to the market on a full-time signal. 

(Rochester Area Educational TV Association, or RAETA, had been kicking around since 1958, producing programming that was shown on commercial stations and then applying for channel 13 when it opened up in 1962. RAETA became one of more than a dozen competing applicants who partnered up to form an interim operating company to put channel 13 on as WOKR, then dropped out of the partnership to build WXXI in 1966.)

SOWNY » Instant Replay: Your “Guide” To Saturday Morning TV » August 5, 2019 10:19 am

fybush
Replies: 20

Go to post

RadioActive wrote:

I never understood that shared time insanity. Back then, there were so few stations, you might think they could each get assigned one, even though there were only so many designated to each market. I'm not sure if the audience cared or understood anything about it in any event. And as the ad below shows, I don't know if the owners understood it all, either.

Was "Sea Hunt" on WHEC or WVET? Who knows?

It's... complicated.

The short version is that there were five applicants for channel 10 when it became available - basically, every radio station in town that wasn't WHAM. The comparative hearing process the FCC used back then could easily have held up a grant of a license for years, unless one applicant could get an edge on the others. Applying for share time jumped WHEC and WVET ahead of the other three applicants for a quick license grant. Two of the other three ended up with UHF construction permits they never built, and the fifth, Gordon Brown's WSAY, spent decades filing lawsuits to try to hold everyone else up.

The ambiguous "channel 10, WHEC and WVET" branding was deliberate. While WHEC and WVET each had its own studio and sales and programming staff, the stations worked closely together to put out a consistent face to the public. It went fairly well right up until 1961, when WVET's owners sold their half of channel 10 to WHEC and then bought WROC-TV.

There's a much longer and more detailed explanation here: http://www.uhftelevision.com/articles/rochester.html
 

SOWNY » Bell To Shut Down 28 OTA Analog Transmitters Across Canada - 5 In Ont. » August 2, 2019 8:23 am

fybush
Replies: 10

Go to post

The FCC started to allow "same base call, same owner, different city" around 1983. I think the first examples were KCBS(AM) in San Francisco, KCBS-TV Los Angeles (you get zero credit for guessing who owned them!), and then Gannett (which owned USA Today) using KUSA-TV in Denver, WUSA-TV in Minneapolis (and later DC), WUSA-FM in Tampa and KUSA(AM) in St. Louis. 

"Same base call, different owner, different city" came later in the 80s, or maybe early 90s. 

It's important to note three things: first, the FCC treats "KCBS" and "KCBSTV" as separate call signs. You still can't use "KCBS" on two different AM stations, or "KCBSTV" on two different TV stations. Second, the suffix is an integral (but optional) part of FM and TV callsigns, and there is never a suffix on AM callsigns. Our TV station in Rochester started as simply "WXXI" in 1966, added "WXXIFM" in 1974 - and then, when we bought an AM station in 1984, the AM station became "WXXI" and the TV station had to become "WXXITV" as a result, since you can't be simply "WXXI" on both AM and TV. And third, the callsign is NOT the primary way the FCC identifies stations internally these days. Every station has a unique facility ID number that never changes. "WXXI" (the AM station) is always "74220" to the FCC, no matter how often the calls might change. 

SOWNY » WIVB/WNLO/WUTV/YesTV Confirm OTA Frequency Shift » July 24, 2019 3:40 pm

fybush
Replies: 91

Go to post

Oh, and there's an even more interesting group of these on VHF-hi, where there are several groups of stations that have agreed to accept mutual interference in exchange for being allowed to run higher power. One such group includes a bunch of stations now on RF 7, and in order to preserve the existing contours between those stations, most of those 7s (including WBNG in Binghamton, WWNY in Watertown and WXXA in Albany) go to 8, while several stations with somewhat smaller signal contours (WICZ 8 in Binghamton, WNYA 13 in Albany) go to 7. And yes, that means 7 and 8 in Binghamton swap channels - but it has to be that way to preserve WBNG's larger signal coverage. It also leads to a daisy chain of additional moves in New England - WVNY Burlington goes from 13 to 7 in tandem with WNYA, 13 opens up for WGBY in Springfield to make an auction-based move off UHF, and that in turn sends WPRI in Providence from 13 to 7. Fun fun fun!!!
 

SOWNY » WIVB/WNLO/WUTV/YesTV Confirm OTA Frequency Shift » July 24, 2019 3:30 pm

fybush
Replies: 91

Go to post

RadioActive wrote:

So unless this has something to do with adjacent channels in other markets, what's the point? 

It has everything to do with adjacent channels in other markets, and it's mind-rendingly complex. Just one example: WIVB/WNLO can use 36 at the old WIVB Colden site because 36 goes away from Elmira when WENY repacks from 36 to 35. WIVB/WNLO couldn't use 32 at the Colden site because 32 is first-adjacent to 31, WNED's new channel...and while you can use a first-adjacent if the two sites are very close to each other, you can't use a first-adjacent at a more distant site in the same market. CITS goes from 36 to 14 because you can use 14 as a co-located first-adjacent to CHCH on 15. 

And because WUTV gets off 14, you can use 14 in Syracuse for WSYT, replacing 19 there. WSYT on 14 can then be co-located with WNYS on 15 (which had to move off 44 because that channel is now out of core.) 

Why not leave WSYT on 19, which will be the new channel for WSTM in Syracuse? Because the WSYT/WNYS site is a good ten miles away from the rest of the signals in the market. If WSYT stayed on 19, it would have adjacent-channel issues with WTVH (vacating out-of-core 47 for 18) and WCNY (moving from 25 to 20 to make room for a move in Albany.) And if you moved WSTM to 14 instead of 19, it would have adjacent-channel issues with WNYS.

Oh, but wait - it gets even more complex: to get WTVH to 18, Elmira's WETM needs to move from 18 to 23, a move that can only happen because WPXJ moves from 23 to 24. 

Now multiply this across the entire crowded eastern seaboard, and you end up with, in one case, 84 interlinked channel moves in just one "dependency" group. 

Head exploding yet?
 

SOWNY » WIVB/WNLO/WUTV/YesTV Confirm OTA Frequency Shift » July 23, 2019 10:12 am

fybush
Replies: 91

Go to post

RadioActive wrote:

I'm not sure about WNYO, channel 49, which is also a Sinclair outlet, Channel 29's owner. They're scheduled to head from 39 to 16 at some point, although whether they'll also go on Monday isn't clear. 
 

Well, 16 is free for them now. We turned off WXXI-TV's channel 16 signal here in Rochester at 12:30 AM and are now up and running on channel 22 this morning. 

I guess we just coexist with CHEX-TV-22 in Durham for now. 
 

SOWNY » Why You Can't Get CBC Radio Over The Air In Peterborough » July 22, 2019 6:11 pm

fybush
Replies: 19

Go to post

I remember my first e-skip event - summer of 1985, tuning a little black and white TV with rabbit ears in a cottage in the New York Finger Lakes. Baseball game showed up on channel 4. Channel 4? This was a long way from WIVB-land and there was no other 4 until you got to NYC and Boston. Kept watching for a little bit and it turned out to be the Royals on WDAF-TV from Kansas City. 

At the time, I too thought it was a once-in-a-lifetime thing. A few years later, when I got more involved with the TV-FM DX community, I learned that it's actually quite common in the summer months (and occasionally in December, too). The advent of the internet meant that news of an opening could be spread almost instantly, and so what was once a very random happenstance became almost predictable. 

In the last few years of analog TV, I was largely working from home near Rochester, and starting in June I'd typically spend the mornings with my office TV tuned to channel 2 and the antenna pointed southwest. WGRZ, of course, came in pretty decently - but not so strongly that it couldn't be overtaken once an e-skip event started rolling. And once it did, it usually started with WPBT or WESH on 2 and WEDU on 3 from Florida. It often moved clockwise at about an 1100-mile distance, through WBRZ 2 and sometimes WWL 4 in New Orleans, sometimes east Texas, usually into Oklahoma (KJRH 2, KOET 3, KFOR 4), and often up through Kansas, Nebraska and the Dakotas and into Canada. 

Sometimes the cloud would go northeast, too, and with no low-band VHF 1100 miles due north in deepest northern Ontario and Quebec to receive, the next signals around would be from Newfoundland. 

On very rare occasions, e-skip went above 3 and 4 to 5 and occasionally 6 (though nearby FM signals usually prevented that). There's too much FM near me to have been able to do much FM DX from home. 

On extraordinarily rare occasions, the skip went so high that some DXers caught high-VHF signals via skip. There was one very memor

SOWNY » Why You Can't Get CBC Radio Over The Air In Peterborough » July 20, 2019 10:58 pm

fybush
Replies: 19

Go to post

mace wrote:

With the CBC signal on 103.9 not at full strength, those of you in Pickering, Ajax, Whitby might have a shot at 800 watt WDKX in Rochester.

And if you do, please let me know - they're one of my engineering clients now. A pretty amazing little station, actually... locally family-owned since day one, 45 years ago, and now in the second generation. A very potent 800 watts from the top of the tallest building in downtown Rochester, too. And *so* deeply enmeshed in Rochester's urban community. 
 

SOWNY » Instant Replay: The First TV Station In T.O. Was From Buffalo » July 9, 2019 1:56 am

fybush
Replies: 20

Go to post

The "Las Vegas Show" is a fascinating story. It wasn't a CBS show. It was the lone offering from an upstart would-be fourth network that started as the Overmyer Network (for founder D.H. Overmyer) and was then known as the United Network. Bill Dana hosted the show, which was a rather high-budget affair, and which pretty much wiped out the United Network before it could really get its feet under it. Wikipedia has a pretty comprehensive entry on the whole matter, and there's an even better one here:

http://www.uhftelevision.com/articles/overmyer.html
 

SOWNY » Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost » June 18, 2019 6:10 pm

fybush
Replies: 13

Go to post

Tim Brown 2016 wrote:

andysradio wrote:

My thinking was being on a first adjacent from Buffalo might work better than co-channel with Rochester

Years ago, a few of my amateur radio friends (RF Engineers) and I built an FM repeater system that gave us the opportunity to study the effects of co-channel verses adjacent channel effects. The base stations ranged from 30 to 100 km apart.

I don't recall the ISEDC standards off the top of my head (since it's not where I do my work), but whether it's ISEDC or the FCC, there are specific rules about how co- and adjacent-channel FMs may interact. On this side of the lake, they're defined in section 73.207 of the FCC rulebook, generally by mileage spacings (which depend on the class of each station) - but you can also use another section of the rules, 73.215, to move a little closer based entirely on contour non-overlap. 

It gets even more complex when the border is involved. There's a section of 73.207 that specifically addresses US stations protecting Canadian allotments, but of course both sides play games with how those allotments are written in. There are a lot of unbuilt allotments that still have to be protected - when I moved an 89.7 in the Finger Lakes to 89.5, we had to show protection to an 89.5 in Deseronto, and of course no such signal has ever been on the air there. And there are specific allotment restrictions written in on both sides - I engineer a 103.9 here in Rochester now, and our class A allocation has a specific provision limiting us to no more than 3 kW equivalent along a specific azimuth toward Peterborough (CBBP). 

For lower-powered signals, like translators and LPFM, there's an unwritten convention that allows us to show that our 34 dBu signal (a very, very far fringe) won't hit Canadian soil at all; Canadian regulators apparently tell the FCC that they won't object to anything that weak. 

SOWNY » Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost » June 17, 2019 8:26 pm

fybush
Replies: 13

Go to post

andysradio wrote:

It was always a poor choice in frequency. Wouldn’t 92.7 have been be a better choice?
They would have to address Trent Radio in Peterborough.

And the big CJBX signal from London, too. And 92.9 in Buffalo - anything co-channel or first-adjacent to the big Buffalo signals (CFMZ on 96.3 vs. WMSX on 96.1, CKFG on 98.7 vs. WKSE on 98.5, CIRR on 103.9 vs. WHTT on 104.1) has to be relatively limited in power. I'm not sure how 96.3 managed its relatively high power level, which is still significantly less than the big CN Tower FMs.

As others have noticed, even if you could rebuild the combiner at CN to handle more signals and more power, the CN Tower FM antenna is omnidirectional and therefore usable only by nondirectional FMs, which pretty much eliminates CKIS.

 

SOWNY » Antenna Alert: WUTV Buffalo Supposed To Be Switching Channels Soon » May 28, 2019 12:33 pm

fybush
Replies: 25

Go to post

RadioActive wrote:

fybush wrote:

Don't get encouraged. WIVB/WNLO isn't returning to Grand Island. They serve about 500,000 more (monetizable) US viewers from the Colden site than they would from Grand Island. And they own the Colden tower instead of having to pay hefty rent to WNED on Grand Island. Their move to Colden is a win-win for everyone except Canadian viewers. 

And that's what I was afraid of. I finally got a reliable signal from WIVB when they switched and the difference has been palpable. I hate to go back to those ugly days where it was hit and miss. Plus WNLO is probably one of the most reliable signals into Toronto. Are they going to diminish here, too?

WNLO and WIVB are just different sets of bits on the same digital signal these days. While they're still technically separate licenses (which means they each get separate must-carry rights on cable and satellite, for instance), they are channel-sharing on what had been the WNLO facility. It's literally just that several of the program IDs on the stream of data coming out of that transmitter are labeled as 4.1 and 4.2. 

It was well worth it to Nexstar, which collected tens of millions of dollars for giving up its separate chunk of spectrum that WIVB used. And, yes, it means that when WIVB moves, it will do so in tandem with WNLO and both signals will diminish for you.

Scott, I wonder - I know the WKBW channel swap isn't until 2020, but I have frequent dropout problems with them, as well. Do you know if their move will make things better, worse or keep them about the same for those of us in the GTA?  

In general, if a station isn't moving transmitter sites, the aim of the repack is to keep signals as close to identical to the current ones as possible. So if WKBW is iffy for you now, it will be in 2020, too. 

But wait - there's yet another curveball coming: when over-the-air TV starts transitioning to the new ATSC 3.0 system, it will use a different modulation scheme

SOWNY » Antenna Alert: WUTV Buffalo Supposed To Be Switching Channels Soon » May 28, 2019 10:47 am

fybush
Replies: 25

Go to post

Tim Brown 2016 wrote:

I know this is confusing but didn't Scott say WUTV is moving to channel 32? As I understand it, OTA viewers in the GTA will receive WUTV roughly as well as we currently receive WIVB/WLNO.

You'll receive WUTV roughly as well as you currently receive WUTV. Whether it goes to 36 (as originally proposed) or to 32 (as the channel-swap petition requested), WUTV will be at the same Grand Island facility it's been at, at the same height, with a power level calculated to replicate its current coverage on RF 14.

And CTS gets no reprieve - it has to move off 36 to free that channel for use in the US by *someone,* whether it's WUTV or WNLO/WIVB. And it can't go to 14 without WUTV moving, whether that ends up being to 36 or to 32. 

Also, first I've heard of WIVB/WLNO having long term plans to return to Grand Island at some point. That is encouraging for us here in the GTA.

Don't get encouraged. WIVB/WNLO isn't returning to Grand Island. They serve about 500,000 more (monetizable) US viewers from the Colden site than they would from Grand Island. And they own the Colden tower instead of having to pay hefty rent to WNED on Grand Island. Their move to Colden is a win-win for everyone except Canadian viewers. 

Board footera