Why is CBS WDJT bradcasting on 1.1?

[jkane]

What's there to keep channel 18 from remapping to 1-1 also?  What would happen if they did?  Which channel would win?

Seems like these are wild west squatters rights tactic here.  I'm on the side of it not being right for 58 to use 1-1.  If they are going to be on 46, they should use 46-1.

I am also strongly for calling DiSH and telling them to come up with a different solution also.

[crumb snatcher]

I removed my copy of John's message because he was able to post by himself below..

[jgoggan]

Originally posted by borghe
SRW1000 - 58 has done nothing wrong.. as for them supposing to be mapped to "their analog channel number", you fail to mention that their analog channel number will be released once all frequencies above channel 55 are reclaimed for other uses later this decade. Channel 58 won't be an option within the decade. So they decided to move elsewhere...

...

The bottom line is that there is nothing 58 is doing that is out of compliance...   nothing that is out of compliance that they can bring back into compliance...[/B]

Hmmm...  I can't help but think that you are wrong on that.

Now, I could be wrong -- I'm certainly no expert on this -- but here is what I am going by...

At atsc.org, in their "standards" section, is "ATSC Recommended Practice A/69: Program and System Information Protocol Implementation Guidelines for Broadcasters". In that document, on page 63 (Section 1.1.1, "Channel Numbers"), it states:

"When PSIP is used for terrestrial broadcast, stations must take care in the assignment of major and minor channel numbers to avoid conflicts. For example, the PSIP standard requires that for the U.S. and its possessions, a terrestrial broadcaster with an existing NTSC license must use a major channel number for digital service that corresponds to the NTSC RF channel number in present use for the analog signal. [...] For terrestrial broadcast, the major channel number is limited to the range 2 to 99 for ATSC digital television or audio services."

That seems pretty straightforward to me. Not only does it say that they should be using their analog number -- but it clearly states that the valid range for digital channel numbers is 2 to 99. 1 is not in 2-99.

Now, I am not familiar with the statement about 58 going away -- so maybe there is more to it. But, again, the ATSC seems pretty clear on the issue.  I don't see any clause for "if your station is above 55, you can pick any other channel -- even channel #1 which we just said isn't valid."  

had Dish made a 100% ATSC compliant box, you wouldn't have a problem.

I'm still not convinced that it isn't 100% ATSC compliant since the standard says 2-99. Therefore, they should be able to do whatever they want with the non-assignable "channel 1" and still be 100% ATSC compliant.

So who is at fault? The company who is following the letter to the T

The suggestion that channel 58 is "following the letter to the T" is just absolutely ridiculous. They aren't -- at least, not from my reading of the standards at ATSC.  There may be some room for argument somewhere that I am unaware of (please point me to the ATSC information if I am missing it) -- but it clearly doesn't appear to be "following the letter to the T" -- even by a stretch...

Now, all that being said, I still hope Dish changes their hardware to work with the stubborn stations out there.  Because, even if people DO recognize that they are doing things improperly -- it will be difficult to get them to change.  

 - John...

[crumb snatcher]

John, this is the answer I was waiting to hear.  You're explanation makes perfect sense.  Where are the other facts or quotes stating that channels 55 and above are going to be unavailable later this decade?  Even if that was the case, still looks like channel 1.1 shouldn't be used and it is most certainly not between the range of 2-99.

[borghe]

No, the standard most certainly does not say 2-99... it is recommended practices for North American terrestrial broadcasts, but the ATSC standard supports 1-99 for terrestrial broadcasts. If they cannot tune in DTV channels 1-99 then they have not made a terrestrial ATSC compliant box.

As for those recommended practices, while the channel is certainly supposed to be virtually mapped to the NSTC RF channel, the question still remains as to what happens when those NSTC RF channels are shutdown and the upper range of those channels are reclaimed and auctioned off for advanced wireless services? Where does 58 go then? Do they keep that channel branding even though that is no longer where the RF channel exists?

All of that aside, 58 is compliant within the standard... I never said they were abiding by recommended practices, but they are well within the ATSC spec for channel identification within the ATSC stream. If they chose channel 1 or channel 99, they would be within the standard. They wouldn't be abiding by recommended practices, but they would be withing the ATSC broadcast standard.

And again it all becomes moot by the simple fact that every single DTV STB out there can tune in channels 1.1-1.3 except for the 811... I mean come on guys.. really.. what are you trying to accomplish here? Dish, a company WELL know for producing and distributing buggy hardware, is the only manufacturer that has managed to release a receiver that can't tune into this channel, out of dozens of other manufacturers and almost a hundred other receivers, and it is the television station's fault? C'mon... the fact that Dish is using channel 1 for something else when it is within ATSC spec to have a virtual channel mapped to it (recommended practices for North America or not) shows that Dish is once again tossing shoddy hardware out there...

but whatever... keep complaining.. it certainly won't get you anywhere with 58... if that makes snobs out of that small group known as "everyone in the US who doesn't own an 811 receiver", then so be it..

I really don't mean to come off so rude and annoyed, but it all comes down to that had Dish followed the rules like everyone else, EVERY OTHER HD BOX OUT THERE, this thread and others like it wouldn't exist... It's like saying Chevy makes lousy cars because the oil change place forgot to put the drain plug back on and your engine got ruined... had dish just made their ATSC tuner like everyone else's, there wouldn't be a problem...

[borghe]

as a followup, in this document, you know, the standards document, on page 31 it states that for terrestrial broadcasts major_channel_number shall be between 1-99.

again, whether or not CBS 58 is apparently following by recommended practices for North American ATSC terrestrial transmissions seems to be questionable, BUT, the ATSC spec is shown, and it allows for virtual channels 1-99 to be used for terrestrial broadcasts...

[gpflepsen]

Channels 1-99 is only the definition of what a Major Channel is.  You need to look at page 86, Appendix B Additional Constraints on Virtual Channel Table For the U.S., which addresses the assignment of Major Channel numbers for ATSC.  It is explicitly stated in A/65 that:

For broadcasters with existing NTSC licenses, the major_channel_number for the existing
NTSC channels, as well as the digital virtual channels, controlled by the broadcaster,
shall be set to the current NTSC RF channel number. E.g., assume a broadcaster who
has an NTSC broadcast license for RF channel 13 is assigned RF channel 39 for
digital ATSC broadcast. That broadcaster is required to use major_channel_number 13
for identification of the analog NTSC channel on RF channel 13, as well as the digital
virtual channels it is controlling on RF channel 39.

No where can it be inferred that 1 is a valid Major Channel for use.  Channel 1 exist, but it is not available for terrestrial broadcast use.

You can fault Dish for using 1.1 in the 811, but the conflict with the CBS's mapping to 1.1 is entirely CBS' fault.

[jgoggan]

Well, I still disagree with several of your points...

First, it does say 2-99 for use in North America.  Again, it states: "For terrestrial broadcast, the major channel number is limited to the range 2 to 99 for ATSC digital television or audio services."  That is clear -- and it is clear that Channel 58 is disregarding that.

Yes, maybe it is just "recommended" -- but it is obvious strongly recommended by the ATSC and the fact that it is being ignored in this case is lame. Period.

And it certainly shows that they aren't "going by the letter to a T."  The are going against strong recommendations that are there for a reason.

but whatever... keep complaining.. it certainly won't get you anywhere with 58... if that makes snobs out of that small group known as "everyone in the US who doesn't own an 811 receiver", then so be it..

Um, no, it doesn't make snobs out of "everyone in the US who doesn't own an 811."  It just makes snobs out of the handful of people that have decided that they are going to use a channel against the strong recommendations of the ATSC -- and tell anyone with problems to go stuff it.

Everyone else that happens to have a device that can get it isn't being a "snob" about it -- they simply don't care.  Well, they should.  People should care when people do things wrong even if it happens to work out for them.

I really don't mean to come off so rude and annoyed, but it all comes down to that had Dish followed the rules like everyone else

I could, of course, say the exact same thing about 58.  If they had followed the well defined rules like (almost) everyone else, this problem would exist.

It's like saying Chevy makes lousy cars because the oil change place forgot to put the drain plug back on and your engine got ruined...

No, it would be like Chevy (ATSC) saying "we recommend that you never put Type ABCBLAH oil in your car because it could cause problems" and then the oil change place (Channel58) putting it in anyway because, well, they just RECOMMENDED against it -- it isn't a requirement.  I'd still blame the oil change place quite a bit for ignoring the recommendation.

as a followup, in this document, you know, the standards document, on page 31 it states that for terrestrial broadcasts major_channel_number shall be between 1-99.

Did you even READ all of that?  That section that you mentioned is just a little summary of the protocol/format itself!  Just because you can stick a "1" into that 10-bit number slot does not mean it is acceptable to always do so.  Right in that VERY SAME SECTION it then says "For major_channel_number assignments in the U.S., refer to Annex B."  Annex B is "Additional Constraints on Virtual Channel Table For the U.S." and clearly states:

"For broadcasters with existing NTSC licenses, the major_channel_number for the existing NTSC channels, as well as digital virtual channels, controlled by the broadcaster, shall be set to the current NTSC RF channel number."

Again, quite clear.  It doesn't even say "recommended" in that one -- it says "SHALL BE SET".

And, it goes on to define other RULES:

For new broadcasters without the NTSC license, the major_channel_number for the digital channels SHALL BE SET to the FCC assigned RF channel number for ATSC digital TV broadcast.

And, this is a good one...  if the number that they currently have an NTSC license for (i.e. "58") is changed FOR ANY REASON (i.e. analog 58 gets put up for auction later), the major_channel_number used SHALL NOT CHANGE.

In other words, it appears that the argument that they might lose analog 58 later does not matter.  It seems clear that the ATSC has told them what digital channel should be used -- and the fact that they might lose the analog/NTSC one down the road does NOT mean that they can just pick some other number.

Finally, Constraint #8 restates what was said before: "The provisions listed above assign major_channel_number values 2 through 69 uniquely to broadcasters licensed to broadcast Digital ATSC channels..."

It then discusses the use of 70 through 99.

So, sorry, but you are wrong.  And Channel58 is wrong ti use Digital Channel #1.  It is against the ATSC standards.

Yes, I still think that DISH should change the 811.  But that doesn't change the fact that what channel58 is doing is a bad decision -- and goes against what was clearly outlined by the ATSC.

 - John...

[borghe]

no, it isn't inferred, it is directly stated... If you read again, 1-99 are valid major_channel_numbers. North American terrestrial digital broadcast practices call for using only channels 2-99, but the terrestrial ATSC standard supports 1-99.

There is a difference between standards and practices. CBS 58 is apparently not at all abiding by practices for ATSC broadcasts in North America, but the fact remains that they are abiding by ATSC standards of assigning a major_channel_number between 1-99.

The bottom line is that Dish chose to abide by ATSC practices and not standards... had they abided by the standards their receiver would be capable of tuning in channel 1, the same way as every other manufacturers' receiver is able to. No CBS58 isn't playing by the rules, but in this instance Dish is at fault. Had they followed the standards it would have made no difference if someone else didn't follow the practices.

edit - this was written and submitted after yours was... the guidelines you list are only for North American terrestrial ATSC broadcasts... yes that is what we are talking about here, but the ATSC standard itself supports channel 1. I have already conceded that it may have been poor judgement on 58's part to use channel 1, but it certainly does fall within the ATSC standard, even if outside the practices for North American terrestrial ATSC broadcasting. Considering the ATSC standard goes beyond just North America, and it is assumed to be possible for other territories to use channel 1, you would think CE manufacturers would be more cautious to adhering strictly to the standard.

One final thing... it isn't like these stations just started doing this either... In 58's case they have been doing this for almost 2 years? Did any of you complain then? No. Did any of you complain for the past two years? No. Only now, when a manufacturer releases a single piece of equipment that doesn't work with it do you complain. And yet all equipment coming out in the near future will still work with it.

This is what I don't get. 58 has been one of a few leaders in this market for HDTV. They were one of the few stations who actually had their signal up on May 1, 2002. They have been an active member on these boards and provided communication on happenings without any obligation to do so. They not only provide an HD signal but, to the chagrin of some, but also provide extended services in the form of two additional channels that may not be available to some otherwise. And to mention it again, there level of communication within this community has been exemplary, matched by only a few others from various stations. Heck, I firmly believed that the only reason they even turned of 58-3 during the Superbowl was solely because of this board.. Truth be told the average HD viewer probably couldn't even tell the difference with the extra 2-4Mbps gained. But now, because of a screw up at Echostar, they are being attacked in this thread because Echostar chose to deviate from the ATSC standard... well that is just a fine how do you do... what a great way to thank CBS58 for all of the tremendous work and effort they have been providing on behalf of the Milwaukee HDTV viewing community...

anyway, I am back off to watch 1.1... I am sorry you can't... but I would strongly suggest looking at who is to blame... the company renowned for releasing buggy broken hardware, or the one who has virtually bent over backwards for the last two years to work with and please a relatively niche section of their viewing community... :confused:

[jgoggan]

Oh, and just so we are very clear... That was all out of the "ATSC Standard A/65B" -- which is a STANDARDS document -- unlike the Recommended Guidelines that I was referring to before.

So, you'll have to drop the "it is only a recommendation" argument -- since the ATSC standard itself clearly defines the channels that SHALL be used.

Channel58 is in violation of the ATSC standard as I read it.

 - John...

[jgoggan]

Originally posted by borghe
no, it isn't inferred, it is directly stated... If you read again, 1-99 are valid major_channel_numbers.

Correct - valid for the PROTOCOL itself.  Not valid for use in the USA.

This is very similar to 802.11b wireless.  The system supports various frequency ranges to be used.  Some of them are only valid in the USA -- others are valid in Europe.  Using the ones that are valid in Europe in the USA is NOT allowed -- it is against the standard and violates FCC regulations for frequency usage.  Just because the 802.11b protocol happens to SUPPORT various frequencies does not mean that it is acceptable to use them in the USA.

North American terrestrial digital broadcast practices call for using only channels 2-99, but the terrestrial ATSC standard supports 1-99.

No.  The ATSC STANDARD in the USA does NOT support channel #1.  The STANDARD as defined for the USA supports channels 2-99 only.

Heck, it's a 10-bit number in the protocol!  You could probably stuff 200 in there as a channel and it would "work" -- it still wouldn't be acceptable.

There is a difference between standards and practices. CBS 58 is apparently not at all abiding by practices for ATSC broadcasts in North America, but the fact remains that they are abiding by ATSC standards of assigning a major_channel_number between 1-99.

It doesn't matter if they happen to be abiding by the protocol for identifying the major_channel_number if they are ignoring the standards.  There should NOT be a different between standards and practices here.

The bottom line is that Dish chose to abide by ATSC practices and not standards.../

Um, no, they abide by ATSC standards.  It is the STANDARD that should matter.  The fact that some rogue station is going against that standard is not acceptable.  If Channel58 decided to start broadcasting on Channel 101, that would be the same: against the standards for the USA.  It would just happen to be against the standards for the rest of the world too.

Channel 1 is not to be used in the USA -- it is obvious from the ATSC standard that is the case.

CBS58 isn't playing by the rules,

Well -- at least you are admitting that finally.  Earlier, you were absolutely sure that they weren't doing ANYTHING wrong.  I'm not sure if this is worth arguing any more -- since you obviously aren't informed about it -- and are just convinced that Channel58 can't be wrong -- until someone PROVES it to you repeatedly -- and then you just go on pretending that they aren't doing anything "wrong" -- just not "playing by the rules."

but in this instance Dish is at fault. Had they followed the standards it would have made no difference if someone else didn't follow the practices.

Um, nope.  They did follow the standards for an ATSC tuning device to be sold and used in the USA.  The standard is clear: in the USA, the valid channels are 2-99.  They built a device that tunes 2-99.  THEY followed the written standards -- Channel58 did not.

 - John...

[borghe]

see my post above for my response.. under the edit section...

[gpflepsen]

You have to read a document in its whole to get the intended effect.

The definition of Major_Channel_Number just describes the system capabilities.  Equipment must be capable of handling channels 1-99.  Appendix B gives the guidelines for assigning  Major Channel number.  ATSC Document A/69 states that channel 1 shall not be used as a Major Channel.

It's quite easy to see that any broadcaster using channel 1 in their mapping scheme is doing so in violation of the standards and practices put forth by the ATSC.

[jgoggan]

Sorry, but you just aren't getting it...

I have already conceded that it may have been poor judgement on 58's part to use channel 1, but it certainly does fall within the ATSC standard, even if outside the practices for North American terrestrial ATSC broadcasting.

It isn't just "poor judgement."  It does NOT fall within the ATSC standard for North America!

It does not work like you imply: It isn't a set STANDARD for the entire WORLD and then "recommended practices" for the USA.  That isn't how it works.  The STANDARD for the USA is well defined.

You have to look at the complete standard for the area being discussed.  In this case, there is a specific STANDARD (not just recommended practice) that defines the use of ATSC channels in the USA.  That standard defines 2-99 as valid channels for use.  And then even further defines how they are assigned to each broadcaster.

What Channel58 is doing does NOT "fall within the ATSC standard" for the USA.

But now, because of a screw up at Echostar, they are being attacked in this thread because Echostar chose to deviate from the ATSC standard...

Echostar did not deviate from the standard.  They released a device in the USA that follows the standard properly and cannot tune Channel58 because THEY deviate from the standard.

If Dish releases an 811 as it currently is into a territory whose standard does support Channel #1 -- THEN that would be Dish not following the standard for ATSC there.  But, that isn't what happened.  The standard is specific to the USA -- and Channel58 violates it.

 - John...

[borghe]

in north america... the standard can very easily handle channel 1.. it is a guideline for use in north america. the append b is solely for north america, as is 69A.

but whatever... as I said... you can blame 58 all you want, but I will go and watch 58 on my Hughes E86, as will one of my friends on his DTC-100, and another on his Sony SATHD300, and another on his Samsung SIR-T165, and another on his Mitsubishi Promise Module, and the last friend of mine who has an HD set.. a brand new RCA DLP set that tunes in 58 just fine.

58 may be out of compliance for North America, but again, it seems the 811 is the only box to have a problem with it, past, present, or future...

done.