Digital TV Conversion for the Cotlar Household and Other Musings on Digital TV

2006-08-03T11:07:00.000-07:00

Why USDTV Failed

There's been a lot of news lately about the Chapter 7 bankruptcy of USDTV. If you recall, USDTV was attempting to aggregate excess spectrum to sell consumers a miniture package of TV channels for a subscription fee. Understandably it failed. Some commentators say it failed becasue there wasn't enough spectrum. Not true.

The real problem with USDTV is that it didn’t try to replicate the free-to-air model of the widely successful Freeview in the United Kingdom, which offers over 30 free TV channels and radio channels to boot. By starting out as a subscription service, USDTV in fact emulated the ITV model (also a subscription service), which crashed and burned in Britain in part because it couldn't afford soccer rights.

I think there is still a good opportunity for somebody to offer a free multichannel video service with a suite of channels more than one gets over the air but less than the pay services. Then the organization could upsell its viewers to various subscription packages in a model that would emulate a la carte, the holy grail of TV viewing. Freeview is doing just this through its “TopUp” program and is doing well. American entrepreneurs would do well to look overseas for some inspiration. But, alas, the myth of American exceptionalism is alive and well.

2006-08-03T11:04:00.000-07:00

DTV Conversion Problems We Forgot to Think About

As the National Telecommunications and Information Administration considers new rules for implementing a federally subsidizes DTV converter box program, here are few other things to think about that haven’t yet been considered.

First, rural areas rely either partly or completely on TV reception from low power TV translators. There is no official analog shut-off date for this service, so analog transmissions in rural portions of America may actually persist beyond February 28, 2009. What happens, therefore, in a rural community that, for instance, gets 1 or 2 full power stations and a few more via translator? Analog gets terminated for the full power stations and the consumer plugs in a converter box gratis of the U.S. government, only to find that it can only receieve DIGITAL signals! He can’t receive the analog low power translators via the newly installed set-top box and will be angry no doubt. The solution? Either require analog tuners in the D to A converter box or a consumer has to install some sort of A/B switch to view some stations via the old tuner in his set and other stations via the conveter box’s digital tuner. What a mess.

Second, what about legacy VCRs? The reason you can record one channel off air while watching another channel off air is that you actually have 2 analog tuners: one in the TV set and one in the VCR. Plug in a converter box and guess what: this functionality will dissappear because there’s only one operational tuner! We need to either require 2 tuners in the converter box or have customers purchase two converter boxes, one for the VCR and one for the TV set. Another mess.

2006-02-24T10:27:00.000-08:00

DTV Off-Air Reception and DTV Adoption

Although this blog originally started as an exploration of how to convert a moderately technically adept analog TV household to digital, I recognize I've digressed a bit lately. A flurry of new postings have impelled me to address the reception issue with greater fervor.

A January 30, 2006 article by Ben Drawbaugh, called "OTA HD Demystified," provides a very detailed description of how to get over-the-air DTV. His initial suggestion is to consult the CEA-sponsored Antenna Web (www.antennaweb.org) website, which is supposed to provide you with helpful direction regarding what kind of antenna to purchase. All you do is input your zip code (after refusing to provide personal information to CEA) and voila..... an absolutely unhelpful color coded chart of stations and next to each one the moniker of UHF or VHF as well as additional assorted information of no use whatsover (e.g."compass orientation"). Yeah, I need a combined VHF and UHF antenna: of course I could figure that out. So, as readers of this blog know, I did what most consumers would be most likely to do: go to the store and see what's available for purchase. I got a Terk low profile combined UHF/VHF antenna because it was on the shelf with a handful of its siblings and ... most importantly.... because it was amplified and my wife liked the low profile. Mr Drawbaugh's otherwise excellent article is actually a really good description of how many steps it does take if you're willing to get on the roof and install an outdoor antenna, complete with leads, splitters, amplifiers, rotors and the everpresent heart-pounding fear of plummeting 2 or more stories to your doom on the brick patio below. No way. Not for me.

Now that the analog shut-off deadline is for real and has no exeptions --- doomsday being Feb 17, 2009 --- policymakers need to carefully consider consumer education programs. The recently enacted Digital Transition and Public Safety Act allocates some money to the Department of Commerce to do this but not nearly enough-- a mere $5 million. Meanwhile, the FCC is asking for $500K worth for FY 2007 to conduct its own consumer education.

Here's what the FCC says at pp. 11-12 of the budget document. Notice the attempt to draft children to disseminate DTV information to parents! Innovative but a little creepy too.....

"DTV Consumer Education and Outreach: The $.5M requested for the proposed FY 2007 Digital TV (DTV) outreach initiative covers a wide-range of projects intended to deliver informatoin to U.S. consumers about the DTV transition. The goals of this initiative are to prepare the public for the transition, insure that all consumers can continue to view their TVs after the transition is complete, and provide unabiased and technologically and competitive neutral information so consumers can knowledgeably evaluate and purchase DTV products and services that are best suited for their needs.

These projects would primary use the media, Internet, publications, and particiation in forums and events to disseminate DTV information. The core media projects include multimedia public service announcements and media tours. Internet activities include expansion of the national DTV Web portal, www.dtv.gov, to include interactive tutorials and up-to-date information and Web capabilities. DTV publications woudl be printed and distributed to consumers who learn about them through our media activities. Event participation includes exhibiting and making presentatoins at major consumer-oriented seminars and converences such as the annual AARP Life@50+ even and National Council of La Raza conference.

DTV Transition information packages would be develped and distributed to local, state and federal government agencies and community organizations for use in conducting local DTV outreach programs. An innovative "DTV Deputy" program for children would be created to help teach kids about DTV and encourage them to take transition information to their parents and caregivers. DTV outreach projects will include components for providing transition information to low-income, minority and Non-English speaking consumers."

Meanwhile, consumer interest in digital tv is ..... well, it depends on who you ask.
Kagen reports HD sets comprise the majority of total set unit sales.
The Christian Science Monitor reports that:

While nearly everyone has heard of HDTV, only 15% of American families have gought one since their introduction in the late 1990s.
Only 15% more are seriously considering buying one in the near future.
More than 1/2 of current HDTV owners aren't really watching shows in HDTV.
About 40% ofHDTV owners know they're not watching HDTV.
About 17% believe they're watching HDTV but they're not actually doing so.

Ipso/Insight Polls indicate that despite falling prices, most consumers still consider HD too expensive. Again only 15% of those polled were ready to purchase a new HD set.

And of course, this is not to mention that industry analysts are still speaking primarily in terms of HDTV without recognizing the power of multiple SD digital channels to address niche markets.

2006-01-26T07:47:00.000-08:00

Its Time to Liberate Free TV in the U.S.—We Need a FreeviewUSATM

Analog Shut-Off Should be Viewed as an Opportunity to Revitalize Broadcasting by Establishing a Free, Multichannel Wireless Broadcast Service

Broadcasters, Politicians and Consumers are rightly viewing the not-so-distant 2009 shut-off of analog TV service in the US with trepidation. But in Great Britain, digital television penetration is leaps and bounds ahead of the U.S. This is due largely to the introduction of Freeview—a freely available multichannel television and radio service that has been driving digital adoption at an incredible pace. This service, together with careful government planning and an active public education campaign, has enabled the Brits to be on the cusp of digital conversion like no other country.

In Great Britain, over-the-air DTV was initially introduced as a subscription service (ITV Digital), which subsequently failed to gain consumer acceptance due to a number of factors, including limited channels. Shortly afterwards, the government reclaimed spectrum from the failed subscription venture and reassigned it to a consortium of BBC, Sky and Crown Castle (a transmitter company), which engaged in a joint marketing effort, called Freeview, launched in October 2002. Through this service, homes with the ITV Digital boxes could receive a suite of TV and radio channels for free. Additional households could purchase inexpensive over-the-air digital set-top boxes to allow them to view digital signals on their analog sets. At present Freeview homes receive about 40 over-the-air channels, in addition to other services like music channels.

With prices for such equipment at about £50 per unit, the adoption of Freeview has been nothing short of phenomenal. One year after the introduction of Freeview, average sales of Freeview-compatible boxes were approaching 100,000 per month. In November of 2003, this increased to 100,000 units sold in a single week. By the end of the third quarter of 2005, Ofcom (the state telecommunications regulator) reports the number of Freeview households had increased to 5,775,768 -- effectively driving digital TV penetration in the UK to 65.9% of all UK households.

The UK plans on ceasing all analog television broadcasts by 2012, and Freeview has been instrumental in giving the government the level of comfort to establish this date. Led by the BBC and the national government, the planning process for analog switchover has been thorough and extensive. After numerous studies and commissions, the UK has established that it will shut off analog television broadcasts on a rolling geographic basis and has plans to conduct a large-scale switchover pilot to convert regions to digital-only broadcasting in the near future. Most recently, Ofcom has announced that it expects that the switchover process will be carried out over a period of four years between 2008 and 2012 on a region-by-region basis in six-month intervals. In fact, small scale pilots have already been conducted. On March 30, 2005, the UK government switched off analog television service in two small Welsh villages (totaling 450 homes), an initiative that has been met with apparent success. British authorities have also established an independent corporation, initially dubbed “SwitchCo” (later renamed DigitalUK) to coordinate a comprehensive publicity campaign and to manage the digital switchover process.

In this regard, the creation of a United States Freeview service --FreeviewUSATM-- could present a marketplace incentive to get over-the-air digital-to-analog converter equipment (or integrated sets with digital tuners) into the hands of consumers with a minimum of government intervention. In particular, it would better set the stage and prepare the ground for an eventual analog shut-off. Establishment of a United States Freeview service could also revitalize the over-the-air service by providing consumers with more free channels than are currently available. Moreover, if successful, it could also evolve into a competitive multichannel video service of its own, thus providing price competition to cable and satellite with the added benefit of reducing broadcasters’ reliance on cable and satellite for the distribution of their signals.

Broadcasters, consumer electronics manufacturers and others are already exploring the possibility of establishing something like this within the unique parameters of the United States market. However, most publicized efforts so far have focused on the creation of subscription-based services, rather than a free service (e.g. USDTV). This may be a mistake, as these initiatives have failed to attract significant numbers of subscribers.

Could an entirely free multichannel television service ignite consumer interest in the United States as it did in Britain? Or, alternatively, would an initial free service, later supplemented by a subscription-based tier (i.e. a hybrid free/pay service), make more sense to consumers and investors? Would consumers be willing to adopt this technology if it meant fewer channels as compared to cable but better price for a core of popular programming? While the uncertainties of introducing a new multichannel television service are numerous, the fact is that in Great Britain, Freeview has been an enormous consumer success. If something close to an equivalent can be established in the United States, those regions where United States Freeview is actively adopted – especially those regions with high broadcast reliance—may experience less of a disruptive digital switchover process than otherwise might occur.

2006-01-26T06:42:00.000-08:00

Television as a Drug

Chris Rose comments in the Achorage Daily News that there's actual psychological evidence that TV watching can become an addiction. While others have made this claim with varying degrees of success, Rose's opinion piece serves as a useful warning. Is it something about TV itself? Or does any comforting, repetitive and isolating behavior readily lend itself to addiction (e.g. Internet use, Blackberry messaging, sports)?

Here's the real lesson with broader implications: to be a healthy person you need to engage in a diversity of activities. In this regard, I recall an article from somewhere that established that elderly people who continue to learn new things and engage in a range of activities are less likely to succumb to the memory loss and confusion associated with conditions like Alzheimers. Of course, I've forgotten where I read that, so perhaps I'm actually disproving my own point....

Here's a quote from Rose's op-ed piece, which you can find here.

It's really not too far of a stretch to liken people being "on" TV with people being "on" drugs. In fact, a study by Rutgers psychologist Robert Kubey concludes that millions of Americans are so hooked on television that they fit the criteria for "substance dependence" as defined by the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Those symptoms include using TV as a sedative; indiscriminate viewing; feeling loss of control while viewing; feeling angry with oneself for watching too much; an inability to stop watching; and feeling miserable when kept from watching.

2006-01-24T10:56:00.000-08:00

Is Free TV Finished? Why Its Too Early to Predict the Demise of Free Broadcasting.

Seemingly every day I hear the chattering classes (of which I'm a member) predict the demise of free broadcasting in favor of a subscription-based on-demand model. Variously, they predict that traditional broadcasters will go the way of the dinosaurs while (fill in the blank) Google, Yahoo, Verizon, ATT, Crown Castle, satellite, or even your local cable company, etc. will provide a much improved service. They predict, with some reason, that the age of a broadcast schedule designed to hit as broad a cross-section of humanity as possible without regard to particular interests is doomed in view of the "long tail" phenomenon. They predict that mass media will be supplanted by "my media" tailored to the consumer's unique interests. And they predict that consumers would rather pay for this privilege so they can receive what they want whenever they want. However, these predictions may be a case of punditry overkill for several reasons related to economics and basic human psychology .

First, our willingness to pay for subscription-based products is limited by our ability to pay -- of course! As the range of things that are free becomes replaced with subscription-based requirements (much like the "Enclosure" movement in the Middle Ages), consumers and their households will inevitably face greater pressure on their wallets. In other words, consider a world (not so far away) in which you have to pay for gas, groceries, schooling for the kiddies, commuting costs, health care, and on top of that: cell phone service, broadband access, TV service, satellite radio, and I-pod subscription. Surely the ability to pay is not infinite. Eventually the financially stressed household (of which the U.S. has many) will have to choose which things to pay for. Would they chose TV over groceries? Probably not. Admittedly, while our household is not representative (anecdote is not data), the reason why we cling to free TV is in part because we'd rather pay for other things.

Second, the predictions of these media technorati are premised on a misunderstanding of human nature. People don't often know what they want. They only have their wants clarified and confirmed by the influence of other people. This is why John Donne famously observed that "no man is an island." In this regard, cognitive psychologists have confirmed that many of our personality and cognitive traits derive from our sociability. No "recommender software" a la Amazon will be sufficiently able to replicate the power of the water cooler. Any technology that relies on isolating people within their bubble of experience will fail to recognize this basic human fact.

Third, people like to be surprised. The delight in the new and the excitement and feeling of discovery that accompanies the encounter with our peers is an indispensable element of what it means to be human. There is a deep human need for novelty that might not be best served by algorithms, no matter how complex, that seek in essence to pander to our expectations rather than broadening our horizons. While pandering may be one element of successful consumerism, it is not the only element. Morever, there are deeper human needs that are served by the broadcast media than the pleasure we experience in being pandered to. Broadcast provides a shared collective experience for people (like fathers and sons) who do not wish to talk to one another about other things.

Lastly, there is a deep human penchant for passivity that is not served by these new technologies that require active engagement. This is not to say that there is no role for interactivity. But a world of interactivity will never effectively supplant the human need for comfort, companionship and coercion (In this regard, George Orwell was a particularly perspicacious observer of the human condition) that broadcast media is particularly apt at exploiting.

On the whole, the new always-me, my-time technology may become a fixture of some (but not all) households within a certain class. But it will not effectively eliminate the enjoyment of broadcast media any time soon for the rest of us.

2006-01-18T13:18:00.000-08:00

The End of TV? How to Avoid a Revolution when the Feds Shut off Analog TV, Lessons from Europe.

You may have heard that Congress will soon impose a hard date for the shut-off of analog TV broadcasts in the U.S. -- February 17, 2009. And you may have heard that their solution has been, well, let's say its less than satisfying if you don't want to pony up the monthy cash for a subscription service. Could Congress have done anything else? Consider the following article, written by yours truly last year. For the full text, you need to have access to LEXIS or WESTLAW (oh, how ironic!). [Or, if you're really nice to me, email me at andrew@apts.org and I'll send you a hard copy.]

Here's the abstract as published by CommLaw Conspectus and a link to their home page.

THE ROAD TO ANALOG SWITCH-OFF: HOW THE UNITED STATES CAN TURN OFF ITS ANALOG TELEVISION SERVICE WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT SERVICE DISRUPTION
Andrew Cotlar
The article argues that, based on the lessons learned from Germany and Great Britain, the cessation of analog service need not be sudden, harsh or disorienting. To accomodate consumers who rely either exclusively on over the air reception or subscribe to ditigal tv service for only one household tv, the author argues for some means to subsidize the purchase of set top converters for these types of consumers. The article argues for a gradual cessation of analog service where analog service would be shut off on a rolling geographic or market basis, coupled with a gradual decrease in power levels over time. As in many European nations, the article argues for adequate and continuing publicity about the switch from analog to digital. Finally, the article argues for the private industry to replicate an equivalent in the U.S. of Great Britain's Freeview service--a freely-available package of digital multichannel programming that has successfully been driving consumer adoption of digital television in that country.

And here's the actual, full introduction to the article with more detail.

The American media landscape is undergoing a fundamental transformation as the television broadcast service transitions to a wholly digital infrastructure. Initiated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 1987, and subsequently amended and modified by a series of FCC orders and Congressional acts, including the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, the digital television (DTV) transition promises to revolutionize television. The inherent flexibility of DTV allows for the transmission of high-definition programming or the simultaneous transmission of multiple standard definition programming as well as ancillary data delivery. This flexibility can bring a new range of wireless entertainment and educational experiences to the American public that were not possible before.

Moreover, the DTV transition will require the return of 108 MHz of analog TV spectrum in the 700 MHz band back to the federal government and a repacking of the TV band into the core of channels 2 through 51. A portion of the former TV channels at 700 MHz is slated to be assigned for public safety purposes (24 MHz at the spectrum between 764 MHz through 806 MHz), while the remaining portion will be assigned for advanced wireless purposes through existing auction procedures. As a result, a successful DTV transition has the potential to enhance public safety, encourage the deployment of innovative wireless services to the American public, provide an estimated $4-17 billion to the U.S. Treasury and contribute an even greater amount – estimated to be between $30-60 billion annually -- to the U.S. economy by spurring economic development.

To bring about a successful transition to DTV, Congress has mandated, and the FCC has implemented, a highly complex plan that involves the allocation of a second DTV channel to nearly all incumbent full power television broadcasters, the mandated build-out of digital facilities (and penalties for non-compliance), the creation of numerous service rules for digital broadcasts, limited cable carriage of DTV broadcast signals, and the eventual reclamation of channels used for analog transmission by the end of 2006 with market-by-market extensions allowed in cases where 15% or more households cannot receive the digital signals of over-the-air television stations.

Only recently, however, have lobbyists and policymakers in Washington turned their attention to how analog switch-off should be implemented without causing major disruptions in service. In other words, once the DTV transition is completed, what will the final days look like? Will there be a gradual and largely unnoticed cessation of analog service? Or will there be a sudden, harsh and disorienting process that harms consumer interests and provokes a political backlash?

This article argues that, based on the lessons learned from Germany and Great Britain, the cessation of analog service need not be sudden, harsh or disorienting. Rather, an effective analog cessation plan can be crafted to accommodate those consumers who either (a) rely exclusively on over-the-air reception or (b) subscribe to a digital multichannel television service for one television set but who possess additional television sets that are not connected. In this regard, there must be some means of subsidizing the purchase of digital-to-analog set-top converters for millions of households of this type. This article sets out what kind of subsidy could be used and how it could be implemented. In addition, consistent with proposals in Europe, this article advocates a gradual cessation of analog television service–a “fade to black” approach whereby analog service would be shut off on a rolling geographic or market basis, coupled with a gradual decrease in power levels over time as digital broadcasters increase to full power. This article also argues, as various European nations have recognized, that there must be adequate and continuing publicity through a wide range of media concerning the schedule for analog cessation and options for continuing to receive broadcast television. To accomplish this purpose, the Federal Government should create an independent quasi-governmental entity – SwitchCoUSA— that is modeled on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the National Science Foundation or the National Endowment for the Humanities. Lastly, this article proposes that it would be helpful, though not necessary, to the success of any analog cessation plan for private industry to replicate an equivalent in the U.S. of Great Britain’s Freeview service—a freely-available package of digital multichannel programming that has proven successful in driving consumer adoption of DTV in that country.

Part I of this article provides an overview of the DTV transition to date and describes the issues with which Washington policymakers are faced concerning how to manage the cessation of analog television in the United States. Part II describes the European experience with DTV, as various European Union (EU) countries begin the process of planning for a cessation of analog broadcast television. Particular focus is placed on Germany and Great Britain and the lessons to be learned from the advanced deployment of DTV in those countries. Part III identifies the consumer impact of analog cessation in the United States, providing information on the extent and nature of reliance on over-the-air broadcasting in this country. Lastly, Part IV discusses targeted solutions to ensure a smooth post-analog transition, including subsidies for the purchase of converter equipment, a gradualist approach to shutting down analog service, the institutions and public outreach necessary to prevent massive disruption, and the importance of establishing a freely available digital broadcast service.

2006-01-17T13:00:00.000-08:00

Kudos to an interesting article on DTV terrestrial reception that can be found at the Washington Post today. Here's the link. People are just beginning to understand the power of terrestrial DTV to bring multiple free steams of content. By the way, the multiple streams on local public TV stations, here in Washington, include kids programming on the weekend, which is a great hit with the youngsters in my household.

2006-01-06T07:46:00.000-08:00

Although it has been quite a while since I updated this blog, Dennis Haarsager, a technorati and intellectual light from the West Coast has posted a very cogent reminder concerning DTV off-air reception that you should read. I encourage everyone to take a look. Here's the link.

2005-08-07T16:32:00.000-07:00

Another day of free digital television

This blog entry should be pretty short, as its the weekend, the sun is shining and relatives are visiting. However, I do want to make a few observations regarding my new free, DTV experience.

As readers of this blog are aware, our household, which has one analog television that relies on over-the-air reception, now has the ability to receive off-air digital signals. The technology, while not easy to install, is quite nice in some ways-- now that we're used to it.

More kids Programs! For example, we noticed that none of the analog channels in the Washington area have quality educational children's programs on Saturday morning. This is not the end of the world, but we're surprised that the public stations did not consistently schedule this (after all, young kids don't know if its the weekend). However, now that we have access to the multicast streams of public television stations, we now have kids programs on Saturday. This is very much appreciated in our home, especially on those hot, sultry Washington summer days that makes you gasp like a fish that has been slapped onto hot pavement.

Electronic Program Guide Woes. I have another observation about the electronic program guide (EPG) that is less complementary. The Samsung receiver has an excellent EPG that tells you what is playing and what will be playing in the near future. However, to in some instances, some stations have neglected to add information in their DTV stream identifying the program. All that is left is the default: "DTV program." Hardly helpful, either to the viewer or the station. I'm embarrassed to say that the commercial stations are much better at this than some (unamed) public stations. Also, interestingly, there is a substantial delay in loading the EPG. It seems as if it is loading the information each time the EPG is called up, rather than using some sort of chaching function. As a result, in my impatience, I rarely wait for the entire EPG to load.

Audio Drop-Out. I have heard some talk about the sound preceding the video in some DTV broadcasts, because the two are transmitted separately. But I haven't yet seen evidence of this yet. However, because in digital the audio frequently cuts out when the picture pixilates, as compared to analog reception where the analog is always on (even while the picture may lose color or clarity), it is substantially easier to watch analog than digital. Our preferred means of watching TV is still therefore analog: a surprising state of affairs and one that doesn't bode well for encouraging people to convert to digital before they are forced to.

Fundamental Differences. Look at it this way. Imagine a choice between two cars. One is somewhat dumpy, a bit out of style and worn in places but always starts no matter what the weather and never breaks down. The other is a shiny new high-performance machine with all the newest gagets that is constantly breaking down and may be relied upon to strand you at the most inopportune times. Which car would you drive? Exactly. Analog TV is the Volvo of broadcast technology. If you want a Saab or BMW, try digital TV, but be prepared for what you deserve.

2005-08-05T19:18:00.000-07:00

INSTALLATION DAY #2

Today’s lesson #1: The digital transition will need technical support. Not just a webpage with frequently asked questions. And certainly not an email box. But a real live person willing to spend more than an hour with a frustrated non-technical person. This is what it will take to ensure a smooth transition.

Glory be to Samsung technical support! This second day of installation, frustrated with the enigma of unresponsive technology, I resolved to do some more research to figure out where I went wrong. I called Samsung technical support in the AM from work, and they suggested that I connect the antenna directly to the set-top box and the box to the TV, bypassing the VCR/DVD. I asked how this would ensure that I could record off-air TV or play DVDs but I didn’t get a satisfactory answer. They suggested I call back when I had the equipment in front of me, which in retrospect was an eminently reasonable suggestion.

Needless to say, I was skeptical. I did further research, going to the NAB-sponsored website, http://www.myfreehdtv.org/. Lo and behold they had an actual wiring diagram for hooking up a set-top box to an analog TV with a VCR! With barely restrained anticipation, I went home and tried the configuration they suggested and…. Even worse than the first time!

Later that day, at home, I called Samsung technical support again. The initial person couldn’t help but forwarded me to a “level two” technician, who was very eager to help and who provided a lot of accurate information on the DTV transition itself. After he patiently ensured the wires were all put in the right places (too complicated to replicate myself, I think, or to explain here in English), he guided me through the use of the channel capture process, the menu, the means of navigating and adjustments to the display. Hands down, this was the best technical support I have received from any equipment manufacturer, even though the bar is generally pretty low in this field.

Now this analog household has access to digital signals. Here’s what I found. Lesson #2: While you may get more channels and clearer pictures (even with an analog display), digital has its own kind of interference that can be even more annoying than analog. Reception was pretty good using the indoor antenna and required few adjustments. The only time the antenna needed to be rotated was to receive some of the public TV stations, which are not located on the same antenna farm as most of the commercial stations. Interference came in the form of pixilation and audio distortion (the latter sounding like what happens when a CD goes bad). You could still tell there was a channel being received and could recognize the program content, but the interference was not as easy to ignore as in analog when you get fuzzy pictures, loss of color, sparkles or bands across the screen. Ultimately, after watching one channel for a while, my wife preferred the analog consistency to the digital clarity. In particular, she noted (as did I) that the drop-out of audio, which never occurs in analog, was the key annoyance, especially if it occured at the punchline of a situation comedy (prompting one to ask, so, hey, why is the studio audience laughing?). This is a very important experiential result that should not be dismissed.

Interestingly, I believe I could loosely correlate the pixilation and audio distortion to cars and busses passing by our somewhat busy street. Busses seemed to cause a lot of distortion; cars less so.

I did note that digital brought some advantages. First, the picture was somewhat clearer until pixilation or audio artifacts occurred. Second, I appreciated the additional content from those stations that were multicasting, especially the public stations, which had additional children’s streams and travel shows. Additionally, PAX was also multicasting, providing movies and shows that I thought might otherwise be on cable (e.g. Little House on the Prairie). The other commercial stations’ multicast fare was simply an additional channel of local Doppler radar. However, this may have been so because their daytime shows were in HD and anything additional would have exceeded their off-air capacity (the 19.2 Mbs broadcast stream).

While the additional content was interesting, it should be noted that two channels could only be received in analog. The first, WHUT, the Howard University public TV station, is a unique and creatively programmed station that I like a lot. That station was sorely missed in the digital lineup, but I look forward to seeing it soon. The second channel, UPN 20, was also missing, although I rarely watch it (my wife watches it more than I do). I also noticed that the Telefutura station was received in digital while the Univision station was not.

Which leads me to lesson #3: the increase in content streams was a pleasant surprise, but I cannot say it would be sufficient to motivate me to convert to digital unless I were faced with total loss of analog service. This is an important point. A mere technology change, without a significant increase in available content, would not in itself be a sufficient reason to convert to digital. Writ large, this means that at present, the only reason for analog-to-digital conversion is the looming government mandate. Surely a government mandate in conjunction with a disengaged or disinterested citizenry will spell disaster for the digital transition.

2005-08-05T07:39:00.000-07:00

DAY OF FRUSTRATION #1

I tried connecting the Samsung SIR-T451 to my analog TV (Mitsubishi CS-2015R) and existing VCR/DVD combo (Sony SLV-D100) last night to no avail. I also purchased and attached a new Terk TV5 amplified low-profile antenna (HDTV compatible with amplified gain of 12 dB min [VHF] and 6 dB min [UHF]) with much greater success. The upshot is that the antenna works nicely for analog but I’m getting neither DTV reception nor the Samsung electronic menu. Something is dreadfully wrong here, but at least we can still get analog stations, so I won’t be thrown out of the house…. Yet.

Here’s what happened. I opened the set-top box and had no problem until I looked at the bewildering array of inputs and outputs on the back. Yes, I am the kind of person who studies the manual, so after carefully reading the manual I realized there was no mention of how to hook the box up to a system with a VCR! All, right, I said to my self: Self, you’ll just have to work by analogy and imagine that the input terminals on the VCR are like the TV inputs in the manual. So far, no problem. I didn’t have a fiber optic connection or S-Video or Dolby or computer multipin connection on the VCR, so those were easily eliminated. I also switched a very tiny switch from DTV to analog as was instructed. I saw that my only option was to connect the yellow video cable and left/right audio cables from the box to the VCR and leave the VCR-TV connections alone (which incidentally were also the same yellow [video]/red [audio]/white[audio] connections. Of course, the box came with a L/R audio cable set but no yellow video cable! It did come with the new red/green/blue cable, which wouldn’t work with my VCR/DVD.

I cursed and fumed. I invoked various gods of technology to intervene. I stared out the window. Then I recalled that I rarely throw anything away no matter how antiquated and looked in the scary closet in the study. There, among discarded computer mice, outdated software and decaying printers, I found a cord that could serve as the extra needed video cord. It was of uncertain vintage but might do the trick.

I connected everything up and powered up the set-top box, TV, VCR/DVD and antenna. Everything worked nicely except the set-top box. Its little LED display initially said “boot.” No, you’re not a boot, I said, you’re a piece of consumer electronics. (Incidentally, this reminded me of Magritte’s painting of a pipe that is titled “This is not a pipe.” Perhaps Samsung was engaging in a bit of surrealism at my expense.) Then the display changed to the mysterious but unexplained “A-02”. I pushed the required button on the remote and then on the box itself, but no on-screen guide, which is the only means to navigate the channels and understand whether there was any reception.

I suspect the problem lies with the cable connections. So I called Samsung tech support the next day from work and described the problem. Support told me to bypass the VCR/DVD and hook the box up directly to the TV. How, then, I asked, would I be able to record a program? Or for that matter, record one channel and watch another? The answer was somewhat unintelligible but I did gather I should call when I have the equipment before me.

Next step: Buy a new video cable and install, then call tech support again at home sometime before the kids go to bed. That should be interesting.

By the way, my wife thinks the new low profile antenna is pretty, although she did say the TV looks like it has sprouted wings.

2005-08-04T09:29:00.000-07:00

Well, I haven’t installed my new Samsung SIR-T451 yet, but that’s only due to my laziness, as well as my desire to have some quality time with my wife after the kids went to sleep, rather than spending the evening entangled in a Medusa of wires and outputs. I also wanted to get an upgraded indoor digital antenna for the system.

In the meantime, I’d like to report that the Circuit City experience was rather pleasant and easy. I picked up what I needed and browsed through the new flat panel displays like a kid in a candy store. The prices are still prohibitively expensive in my view. For the several thousand dollars for which these things are being sold, I’d be happier to purchase new carpeting in our house instead. Nevertheless, if the price were, say, to drop to less than $500, I might – just maybe—relent.

One thing of note. I must confess that my previous experience with HDTV was not all that positive. Of course, I’ve heard the advocates state that once you see HDTV you can’t go back and that its so much better than analog that you’ll watch potatoes rotting on your TV screen in bright, beautiful HD rather than see ANYTHING ELSE in analog. I’ve always had a bit of skepticism about that claim, although some displays are quite attractive. However, I recall on a number of occasions that some screens had a shimmer to them (probably because they are not scanned images but glowing pixels) that induced a fearful feeling of nausea in me. No, that was not the nausea associated with the Human Condition (thank you, Jean-Paul “Hell is other people” Sartre). Rather, it was the highly unusual means of watching moving pictures on 1st and 2nd generation sets (again, glowing pixels), as contrasted with the usual analog mode of watching a series of flickering still pictures. It made HDTV viewing extremely difficult for me at least. I’m happy to report, though, that none of the models I saw yesterday produced the same effect. Happily, this problem seems to have been resolved.

I also know that one of the advantages of HDTV is “CD-quality sound.” Which provokes another observation (did you expect anything less)? Did you ever wonder what’s so good about CD quality sound? I recall that when the technology was introduced, people went into paroxysms of ecstasy regarding how the sonic “highs” were so high and the “lows” were so low. Hmmm, I said to myself: “Self, that sounds like manic-depression, not a musical experience.” Nevertheless, it was nice to hear clear recordings of my favorite music without the annoying pop and hiss associated, for instance, with analog records (something, which incidentally, could be minimized through appropriate but expensive technology at the time). I admit, though, I was taken and quickly adopted to buying nothing but CDs. However, I now buy CDs because there’s no alternative. You couldn’t buy analog recordings if you wanted to. Have we lost something? I think the answer is yes. When you compare analog and digital recordings, especially of “classical” (a misnomer) music, you often find that some instruments sound tinny, processed or otherwise not quite like what they sound like in person. In fact, some connoisseurs have claimed that analog recording sometimes more accurately capture the sonic contour of the real thing than digital recordings. I tend to agree (although the distinction may disappear with the increase in digital sampling rates of modern digital recordings). The upshot, I suspect, is that this is all a matter of expectations. In the analog world, we expected a certain degree of noise, which we naturally filtered out in our listening experience when possible, but also a high degree of fidelity to the original. In the digital world, we expect clearer recordings (less noise) but accept a certain departure from the “real sound” in the concert hall in order to have that clarity. Naturally, one wonders what new set of expectations will arise with digital video and, conversely, what we may lose.

Ok, I promise the next post will be less philosophical and more technical as I really connect the technology together. I’ll be getting an upgraded indoor antenna today as well to supplement the experience.

2005-08-03T12:19:00.000-07:00

In the interests of comprehensive research, and because I cannot engage in any semi-serious activity without producing hours of mind-numbing research, laying waste forests of paper and dithering over various options, I have produced the following table that explains the result of my attempt to find digital-to-analog converters, or in the alternative a simple DTV tuner with some form of analog output. I have to say that for someone as obsessive-compulsive as me, this experience seriously stretched my very low tolerance for shopping. I realized at one point that no reasonably healthy person would be spending as much time on this as I would and so immediately curtailed my research to ensure that it could be replicated by someone with more of a life.

Here’s what I found through a combination of mostly online research and a few local telephone calls. The list came from CNet’s list of “TV/HDTV Tuners & Receivers” which they price and rate. I noted with interest that the LG models were not even mentioned, although LG/Zenith is supposed to hold the patent on ATSC technology. But I included the LG model anyway, since I knew it was out there and that Circuit City had it on their website.

	Circuit City	Best Buy	Sears	K-Mart	Target	Walmart	Costco	Good Guys
Samsung SIR-T451	$249.99	$237.49 [Not available locally]	---	---	---	---	---	Sells the Samsung TS360 for $299.99
Humax HFA100	Available only at Crutchfield for $299
Motorola HPT100	Available only through Motorola for $399, but I couldn’t find it on their website
Philips FTR9952	---	---	---	---	---	---	---	---
RCA ATSC21	---	---	---	---	---	Advertises the RCA ATSC11 for $388	---	---
NextVision HD12	Available only through Dell for $373
Directv (mystery model)	---	Local Best Buy only has Directv receivers. Without a DVD it costs $199.	---	---	---	---	---	---
LG LST3510A [with DVD]	$399
USDTV receiver	---	---	---	---	---	$198.76, but only in certain stores.	---	---

So who was the big winner? I was looking for:
· a reasonable price;
· availability at a store near my home (so I could avoid paying with that staple of American purchasing power, the credit card; our family recently decided to stop using credit unless absolutely necessary);
· a nice set of features, including a universal remote if possible;
· analog outputs;
· ease of installation; and
· recommendations from others posted online.

And the WINNER IS……the Samsung SIR-T451. I’ll be picking up my new electronic baby from the local Circuit City today after work. Interestingly, when I called, the salesperson said they had exactly TWO in stock! So I managed to deplete their stock by 50%. This says loads of course about the priorities of retailers and manufacturers.

By the way, isn’t it remarkable how silly the names are for these pieces of electronic equipment? Surely, the promotions people were out of the room at the time these were named, and so the naming process was apparently left to the engineers. Couldn’t these companies attract more sales if they named their receivers something like “the scorpion” or “the vision star” or something interesting? With some limited exceptions, car manufacturers already do this (unless they’re German or Swedish). At the risk of sounding sexist, how do they expect to get female consumers to be attracted to something that sounds like it should be attached to the bottom of your car? I don’t say this wantonly, because I remember reading an article in one of our myriad trade presses that women are now driving the purchase of flat-screen TVs. One of the factors encouraging purchase is to get that big chunky CRT out of the living room and replace it with something with a less imposing presence. Does the poor naming of this equipment further illustrate the low importance of the product among manufacturers?

So much for today’s rant. Next up, the installation.

A correction: our aging analog Mitsubishi TV is actually 20” diagonally, not the 29” I noted before. I guess this shows that size doesn’t matter. ;-)

2005-08-02T08:47:00.000-07:00

08/01/05.

Well, the time has come for me to drag our relentlessly over-the-air broadcast-dependent household kicking and screaming into the digital era. After writing about the digital television transition for over 5 years and subjecting the Washington power elite to my pontifications about digital television, its time to convert the Cotlar household and its single, analog television set. Yes, like many broadcast-dependent households, we aren’t heavy TV watchers. But we’re keenly aware of the impending switch-over from analog reception to digital reception and the need to ensure that our rapidly aging 29” Mitsubishi is not rendered a useless heap of glass and plastic.

So with the aid of a generous subsidy from my employer, the Association of Public Television Stations, and some local and technical knowledge gained from my work as a telecommunications lawyer/policy wonk in Washington, DC, I’ll start the process of converting the Cotlar household and detailing our travails in this blog for your amusement and edification.

But first a few words about our family, which is relevant to the question: Exactly who are those people who don’t even want to subscribe to cable and/or satellite? Here’s the cast of characters.

Andrew, aged 37, white male, possesses a BA and MA in philosophy and a JD, and works as a lawyer/policy analyst in Washington DC for a trade association of public TV stations. I’ve written a number of articles on broadcast television, including most recently one in CommLaw Conspectus discussing the cessation of analog television and the need for a rational, well-planned transition based on lessons learned from Europe. See Andrew D. Cotlar, “The Road to Analog Switch-Off: How the United States Can Turn Off Its Analog Television Service Without Significant Service Disruption,” 13 CommLaw Conspectus 271 (2005).
Karen, aged 38, cute white female Earth-mother type and Anglo-phile, possesses a BA and MA in history and is working much harder than her spouse as a stay-at home Mom.
Joshua, aged 3 ¾, does not yet possess any advanced degrees. He works hard at being silly.
Daniel, aged 10 months, thinks TV is a lot less interesting than watching his big brother and chasing the cats.

Our television viewing habits are also relevant to the impact that analog cessation would have on our family entertainment. Frankly, TV is not a big part of our life. If you were to look at our modest living room, you would see that about 1/3 of it is occupied by a 1950’s Baldwin baby-grand piano, on which I prefer to play Chopin rather than watch TV. When I do watch TV, not surprisingly, it is mostly one of the local public television stations. I may occasionally watch cooking shows on Saturday afternoons and then fall asleep on the couch. Sometimes I’ll watch the Packers if they’re on and fall asleep on the couch. But I’m not a rabid sports fan: I view football as a useful soporific. Karen watches public TV mainly but also watches a suite of programs on UPN or WB after 9 PM when the kids are safely tucked in bed (the majority of our TV watching occurs at this time). Josh watches roughly an hour of TV a day, which usually includes George Shrinks (PBS) or Dragon Tales (PBS). Daniel watches Josh. We have no Tivo but do possess a combination VCR/DVD player to play our vast collection of Muppet Shows and kids DVDs (as well as the occasional European “talky” cinema piece for the adults).

The reception location is also relevant. We live in a brick townhouse in the suburbs of Washington, DC (Springfield, VA) with lots of large, old trees and no over-head power lines. Analog reception is spotty to good thanks to an aging RadioShack amplified indoor antenna. The TV and antenna is located in the living room on the ground floor near a large front window, which is overshadowed by two enormous pine trees. We have no other TV sets and would look at you with a barely restrained appalled expression if you suggested placing a TV in any of the bedrooms.

Next up: the search for the perfect digital-to-analog converter!