Is Digital Television Switch a good idea?
- 6
- Add a Comment
As you know in less than a year (February 17, 2009) TV signal will change from analog to digital. It says that it will produce better sound, better picture, and more channels. The thing that grinds my gears is that you will not get dropped signal or no signal if you live 35+ miles from the broadcasting tower. I had tested one of these DTV converter box. It is a RCA DTA 900. CNet and Consumer Reports says it is the best one right now because the video and audio does not glitch up or distort with small small boxes, and loose sound as badly as Magnavox, Insignia or the Zenith DTV Box for a mid price DTV box. When I tested the Box with a Phillips 50db amplified antenna, I got
- Up to 3 main TV stations (up to 5 different channels)
- Low signal strength (usually have boxes, bad sound, or freezes for a while)
With regular analog signal, I get:
- Up to about 12 channels
- Not as good signal, but viewable (fuzzy static sound in a couple of channels, and static on TV screen)
Overall, DTV is not a good idea. Even though you can get more channels, through sub-channel, it can’t get a signal. People who live 35+ miles from the broadcasting tower will have to get a outdoor antenna and set it up on the roof (attic is possible for some antenna, but it will gain less signal than putting on the roof) or ultimately switching to a cable or satellite company. The Insignia and the Zenith DTV converter box are the same. Fortunately I have a satellite for my TV. I test it in-case if I have to live with over the air TV for a while.
6 Comments
the oracle
June 6th, 2008
at 10:57am
If you’ve read any of my articles, you know that DTV is merely a cash grab by the government. They wanted to take back the spectrum, and resell it to the stations, so that the ‘government’ made money, and many in Congress got to line their pockets. For anyone who doubts this, do a little investigating - digital television was part of the ‘Debt Reduction Act of 2005′ - a money grab was its first reason to be.
Digital can be better, but as you show, it is not cut and dried - besides, there needed to be no channel changes, or shrinking of the available frequency spectrum for digital television to come about.
Also, something that many don’t know - there will be many stations not forced to go digital - it depends on the areas they serve, and the power output of the station.
Is Digital Television Switch a good idea? | Technology Blog
June 6th, 2008
at 12:22pm
[...] Continued here: Is Digital Television Switch a good idea? [...]
kevoc2008
June 6th, 2008
at 4:11pm
I know that some stations are going to change on the day they change, but those stations are not that major (like ABC, NBC, CBS, CW, FOX, MY, And PBS). I checked using antennaweb.org. It shows that the distance from my house and the broadcasting antenna is about 40.5 miles away, so I think it is the problem of me not getting a good signal is the distance from the broadcasting antenna.
Chris Pirillo
June 6th, 2008
at 5:06pm
FrenzyTech is a spam site.
Is Digital Television Switch a good idea?
June 7th, 2008
at 4:22pm
[...] NDmomma wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptAs you know in less than a year (February 17, 2009) TV signal will change from analog to digital. It says that it will produce better sound, better picture, and more channels. The thing that grinds my gears is that you will not get … [...]
Laren H.
June 17th, 2008
at 8:39am
This switch is a very good idea for three reasons.
1: EMS as well as Police and Firefighters use analog radio signals. With this switch, they would have more open airwaves which is equal to faster response time because less traffic on the airwaves.
2: Better Picture quality: Even if you receive over the air tv, when you buy a converter box, you will get a much clearer and sharper picture quality. Same with people who have HDTV.
3: More free channels: This is due to multi-casting.
For more info go to http://www.DTVAnswers.com