Jump to content

Community Tv


Recommended Posts

Should we be surprised by preparationH being wrong so often... no I'm not.. he's consistently wrong so it's not surprising... Anyone who has spent more than a few minutes perusing this forum will see that... the issue is our concern for newbies being misinformed.

As for the topic at hand

From the myswitch website today for the main Melbourne transmitters , proposed date of retune 10/3/2014 which happens to be 4 months after the switchoff.

Service information

Service Pre-Retune Post-Retune

Channel Freq(MHz) Channel Freq(MHz)

ABC 12 226.5 12 226.5

SBS 29 536.625 7 184.5

Seven Network 6 177.5 6 177.5

Nine Network 8 191.625 8 191.625

Network Ten 11 219.5 11 219.5

Community Television 32 557.625 32 557.625

(apologies for the cut and paste table but I wanted to put it in the post rather than a link)

C31 Melbourne has no plans to move the main transmitter at switch off or post that at the restack... as I have previously stated I have confirmed this with them directly.

Edited by beeblebrox
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What is really important is that if there is to be any transmission and or LCN changes they must happen at analog switch off time on the main sites. This is because MATV systems with channel amplifiers will have to be retuned, along with SBS. Also all viewers will need to rescan their receivers for SBS anyway. This is unlikely to be repeated by large MATV systems such as hotels, hospitals etc along with those who cannot retune their receivers themselves. The result is that some of the potential community TV audience will miss out on their programs through cost/landlord or ignorance.

Alanh

Again... real world...

Unless the customer has modern channel processors then in most cases single channel amplifiers will actually need to be replaced for SBS as the existing will be UHF units. In many cases where a head end has been running for many years I would not be attempting to retune a single channel amp anyway I would be replacing it with a new unit... the cost of an amp (or even the whole headend) v's the risk associated with trying to stuff around with something that may have been running to 10-20 years IMHO is too great to warrant bothering with them.

Most modern channel processor headends (not tighta.ss old fashioned single channel amps) can be reconfigured in seconds via a laptop, or even remotely and any professional in the business will be designing and costing the restack factor into any job they do.

As for most hotels and hospitals, most that I know of don't carry ctv on their matv now and are unlikely to in the future even when given the option as they're more focus on VOD and Pay channels that give them incremental revenue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Timj

NITV is now part and funded as part of the SBS budget. After all it is the Special Broadcasting Service, no mention of nationality.

SBS has a simulcast of SBS HD and SBS1. Considering that the capability of nearly all receivers is to be able to display HD then SBS1 could be dropped and replace by community TV, inserted at the transmitter site. The big advantage of this approach is that community TV will have exactly the same coverage area as all other broadcasters in that city, considering that SBS is moving to channel 7. The translators will automatically carrry the Community TV signal without modification and no extra transmitter will be required.

SBS is currently only transmitting 19 Mbit/s and this can increase to 23 Mbit/s when they move to channel 7 allowing them to not loose any of their current capability. I suppose that SBS doesn't want to share!

Beeblebrox, considering that tuned MATV systems will have to modified or retuned to continue SBS reception, and if SBS was including the CTV signal no modifications for CTV will be required and if this occured prior to receiver retuned, then every TV will get the CTV signal. I agree that a alot of body corporates will not wish to pay to get CTV which is why they don thav it yet.

In addition if CTV is not provided now, just a band 3 antenna will be needed to feed the amplifiers as well. Remember that Adelaide switches SBS to channel 7 in 12 days and Perth in 26 days and there is only a month to modify the MATV systems in those cities.

Alanh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SBS has a simulcast of SBS HD and SBS1. Considering that the capability of nearly all receivers is to be able to display HD then SBS1 could be dropped and replace by community TV, inserted at the transmitter site.

As noted previously, SBS intend to commence breaking their HD simulcast to instead show content from both SBS One and SBS2 that is available in HD.

The big advantage of this approach is that community TV will have exactly the same coverage area as all other broadcasters in that city, considering that SBS is moving to channel 7. The translators will automatically carrry the Community TV signal without modification and no extra transmitter will be required.

And the big disadvantage is an inability to utilise their full multiplex in areas that they don't have community television, with SBS' goal first and foremost to provide for SBS services. That's why NITV was merged with SBS rather than SBS carrying a distinct NITV service as an external channel - it means SBS are in full control of their channels.

SBS is currently only transmitting 19 Mbit/s and this can increase to 23 Mbit/s when they move to channel 7 allowing them to not loose any of their current capability. I suppose that SBS doesn't want to share!

Or they want to put it towards easing the addition of future services or to increase bitrates.

Beeblebrox, considering that tuned MATV systems will have to modified or retuned to continue SBS reception, and if SBS was including the CTV signal no modifications for CTV will be required and if this occured prior to receiver retuned, then every TV will get the CTV signal. I agree that a alot of body corporates will not wish to pay to get CTV which is why they don thav it yet.

So then a retune from the SBS UHF channel amplifier to the UHF Community TV frequency would be the most efficient process, reusing part of the existing equipment not needing to buy another channel amplifier.

In addition if CTV is not provided now, just a band 3 antenna will be needed to feed the amplifiers as well. Remember that Adelaide switches SBS to channel 7 in 12 days and Perth in 26 days and there is only a month to modify the MATV systems in those cities.

Even if it was a certainty for them to move to VHF (they've just confirmed the permanant assignment of a portion of the 6th channel spectrum, there's no confirmation on a band move), it certainly could not be organised within a month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



It's official. Alan has lost the plot. Months of anger has built up to this point, now he's making a "name" for himself. Utterly disgraceful conduct here in the 'What's Happening' section. This needs to be stopped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Malich

When you've got mods that just go "Wow" and lock the thread, what can you do?

Luckily, Alan seems to have put me on his ignore list. I don't know why he'd think that makes a difference to me, and in fact I see only upsides - I get to correct Alan's ridiculous statements and lies, he continues on in his usual ignorance, nobody gets into a pointless slanging match with the fool, and everybody has a chance to learn the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's official. Alan has lost the plot. Months of anger has built up to this point, now he's making a "name" for himself. Utterly disgraceful conduct here in the 'What's Happening' section. This needs to be stopped.

Which was my hope with the infamous thread,only to see it hijacked by those wankers whom never frequent this part of the forum (mello,happy-pants,and several others I've never seen before.I note Chops has come investigate these parts now,and copped some of hughsey's wisdom for his efforts) who were intent on slagging me.They should be proud of themselves.

When you've got mods that just go "Wow" and lock the thread, what can you do?

Luckily, Alan seems to have put me on his ignore list. I don't know why he'd think that makes a difference to me, and in fact I see only upsides - I get to correct Alan's ridiculous statements and lies, he continues on in his usual ignorance, nobody gets into a pointless slanging match with the fool, and everybody has a chance to learn the truth.

He's had me on ignore for months,so I was surprised when he started retorting to my posts.He really cannot help himself,and unless he's shut down I will stand by my claim that the site owner/s actively want him here to boost page views by those correcting him.

The fact that I've received no communique from the mods/admins despite several posters actively reporting my posts indicates nothing will change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which was my hope with the infamous thread,only to see it hijacked by those wankers whom never frequent this part of the forum (mello,happy-pants,and several others I've never seen before.I note Chops has come investigate these parts now,and copped some of hughsey's wisdom for his efforts) who were intent on slagging me.They should be proud of themselves.

I just had a read of that thread. Those members who jumped you have never been subjected to Alan's crap. They're just looking at it from a "aww, don't bash DTV Forum, there's nothing wrong with it" perspective, rather than actually verifying your (our) concerns.

The time has come to do something about Alan. We now have 3 reputable members of the greater media forum community (DTV, Media Spy, Austech, Whirlpool) resign from this forum over Alan and his uncontrollable urge to be a forum dictator.

It wouldn't be such a bad situation if Alan responded to criticism and participated like a normal person. But he doesn't. He is a broken record of continuous mistakes and errors and just ignores every critique, every shred of feedback. He refuses to debate. It's his word or you just don't matter. He has some sort of DTV Forum "right" to just be wrong all the time. Anyone else probably has the same "right", but most of us here are normal people seeking information, discussion and input on media topics and are happy to be corrected and learn along the way. Alan thinks he doesn't need to be taught any more.

He's had me on ignore for months,so I was surprised when he started retorting to my posts.He really cannot help himself,and unless he's shut down I will stand by my claim that the site owner/s actively want him here to boost page views by those correcting him.

I doubt he would have ignored you by using the Ignore function of the forum. More like he just refuses your input because you disagreed with one of his mistakes. Again, he's a man of dictation, not discussion.

The fact that I've received no communique from the mods/admins despite several posters actively reporting my posts indicates nothing will change.

The moderators know full well what's going on here. I have been lucky enough to get a reply from them, and they believe he is doing nothing wrong, and that healthy debate is the best way to solve the issue. All good and well, except when healthy debate is impossible when only one side wants to participate in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you've got mods that just go "Wow" and lock the thread, what can you do?

That blew me away. One chance to respond to a genuine concern, and "wow" is all they can come up with.

I get to correct Alan's ridiculous statements and lies, he continues on in his usual ignorance, nobody gets into a pointless slanging match with the fool, and everybody has a chance to learn the truth.

A good bandaid solution, but it should never need to be like that in the first place. The truth should be evident through discussion and research within the threads. Not by someone saying "this is how it is" and refusing to allow anyone to say otherwise. It's not fair that members have to defend themselves and resort to new lows to try and steer threads in the right direction and stamp out misinformation, all for the good of keeping DTV Forum going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Guest Malich
That blew me away. One chance to respond to a genuine concern, and "wow" is all they can come up with.

Want to be blown even further away? Go look for that thread again.

Yes, that's right, it's been disappeared. Seem that Alan Hughes actually is such a protected species here that even a locked thread criticising him mustn't be allowed to stand...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Want to be blown even further away? Go look for that thread again.

Yes, that's right, it's been disappeared. Seem that Alan Hughes actually is such a protected species here that even a locked thread criticising him mustn't be allowed to stand...

Crap! Thanks for letting us know.

Well I think it's 100% officially confirmed (as if we didn't already know) - Alanh is either the sock puppet of one of the admins,or the admin is the sock puppet of alanh!

PS:I might be persuaded to post up a transcript on my blog (if I can work it out) if there's any interest?

Edited by dbrmuz
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Guest Malich

While running around memory-holing his old posts, he's also taking the opportunity to big-note himself e.g. "The table's function has been replaced by the maps I suggested to the DBCDE" as can be seen here, here, here, here, here, here, here, etc.

It's hardly an honest way to behave...

(I'm not actually stalking analh - I just noticed the change above was dated minutes before I saw it, then I followed to find the others. There are no doubt more I haven't found...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd never seen it before, but always heard that Alan edits really old posts using his DTV Forum Arse Kisser priviledges. Thanks for the proof, Malich. If you don't mind, I've created an image of that. Quick way of showing how unfair and one-sided this forum is.

alanh rewiriting history.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Malich

I believe "senior members" can edit posts beyond the 24hrs us mere mortals have. If you can find any left that haven't been chased away by Alan's behaviour and the forum's indulgence of it, you could ask them.

At one stage it appeared that Alan had the ability to do that without the "Edited by ..." note being added - in effect, his edits were invisible unless the original had been quoted or he chose to reveal it; after many complaints over several months that privilege was removed / error was corrected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Want to be blown even further away? Go look for that thread again.

Yes, that's right, it's been disappeared. Seem that Alan Hughes actually is such a protected species here that even a locked thread criticising him mustn't be allowed to stand...

Is anything really deleted forever in cyberspace though? :pirate:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Malich

Glad someone found it - it'd already disappeared out of my cache by the time I thought to look.

When I caught posts being deleted yesterday I started to hang on to the originals - but then my laptop crashed :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Glad someone found it - it'd already disappeared out of my cache by the time I thought to look.

When I caught posts being deleted yesterday I started to hang on to the originals - but then my laptop crashed :(

Poor laptop - probably attempting suicide from all the Trolling F-wit's moronic BS it had to display.I hope it survives and prospers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top