# Local affiliates won't grant waiver.



## outwest (Sep 5, 2007)

I have searched for this many times and have not received a straight answer to my question.

I live in Bend, Oregon and have been a D*TV subscriber for a year. When my service began I requested the channel waiver due to not being able to receive local channels at my location. I have now made the request 3 times and have been denied each time. My house is in a low lying area surrounded by tall trees. I have spent hundreds of dollars on OTA antennae equipment that now stands 15 feet above my roof line. I am still unable to receive local FOX or CBS(does not have a local broadcast). 

Here is the problem. The local stations will not grant the waiver. They claim that the only way they will grant one is if D*TV has an independent firm test the signal strength from my home to verify that I cannot receive the local channels. I have called D*TV 10 times concerning this and each time I am told that they have never heard of such a thing. I have called the local station trying to get a contact number for said firm, but they tell me each time to go through D*TV. I have seen hundreds of D*TV dishes in town and I can't imagine that none of these people have had the same issue that I am having.

I am willing to pay for the test myself if I can just get a contact number for someone who does this sort of thing. Has this happened to anyone else? Can you help?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

This sounds so much like my situation. "we" are at the mercy of the broadcast station. There are people that will do a site survey, but it is expensive. You might search the forums for DNS as I do remember someone give some reference to "who" would do this.


----------



## Rockaway1836 (Sep 26, 2007)

Outwest, check your PMs. You may find the link I sent you helpful.


----------



## spidey (Sep 1, 2006)

Rockaway1836 said:


> Outwest, check your PMs. You may find the link I sent you helpful.


could ya post it here as well to help others. I just wish i could get west caost HD feeds from NBC and ABC so would help some of my recording overlaps


----------



## GP_23 (Sep 13, 2007)

I hate the waiver process! Took me 6 yrs to get ABC, then I got HD and kept getting denied! Talked to someone on the phone one day and he got me CBS and NBC HD from LA and then about 2 months later I finally got ABC HD.

Wish there was more that could be done, it is frustrating!


----------



## Rockaway1836 (Sep 26, 2007)

It's a link to another site in which someone else had the same problem. I did't know if that was allowed here.


----------



## outwest (Sep 5, 2007)

After a little reading, thanks Rockaway, I called D*TV again, referenced the letter sent out by D*TV to other customers and miraculously the first person I spoke with was able to find some information regarding this and escalated my request for the signal test. I will continue posting updates as I recieve the signal strength test request letter, and the results. There is also an address to send correspondence if you have not heard back from anyone concerning the signal strength test in 90 days of sending in the request form.


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

outwest said:


> I have searched for this many times and have not received a straight answer to my question.
> 
> I live in Bend, Oregon and have been a D*TV subscriber for a year. When my service began I requested the channel waiver due to not being able to receive local channels at my location. I have now made the request 3 times and have been denied each time. My house is in a low lying area surrounded by tall trees. I have spent hundreds of dollars on OTA antennae equipment that now stands 15 feet above my roof line. I am still unable to receive local FOX or CBS(does not have a local broadcast).
> 
> ...


Sometimes, there is just nothing you can do. I faced this issue years ago with Fox in Reno. The owner of that station is a real jerk. He had said in a couple of places that he would not issue a waiver for any reason. Nevertheless, I got waivers form all the other Reno stations within a week of asking, but Fox, said no. I badgered them until they had to shut me down with a blatant lie. They said that they sent a signal tester out to my address and got an "adequate" signal (which I think means that you can't tell the difference between Jack Bauer and Chloe). I had expensive antenna setup, but I could get nothing but white noise from Fox, 60 miles away and over several mountain ranges. So, I had to give up and buy 24 on DVD, until DirecTV got that station LiL. Only then did I find out that it ISN'T EVEN A LOCAL STATION! KRXI 11 Reno is just a feed of channel 2 from San Francisco!

The upshot is that many of these station owners can be real jerks, and they hold all the power.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

I feel for all in that position. One thing I dont follow in this situation is if you dont even had a particular affiliate(was it CBS in this case?), then what waiver is even needed if there is no local affiliate?


----------



## Brian Hanasky (Feb 22, 2008)

I'm in the same boat as most other DNS waiver people. I live in a very small town in OH right on the Ohio river 10 minutes SW of Wheeling WV. 5 years ago when I bought my house I hooked up D* and due to my zip 43947 was eligible for FOX and ABC SD E & W DNS becasue of my location. NBC and CBS were another story. NBC was decent to work with and after a few phone calls was granted a waiver. CBS took 3 years and many letters/phone calls. I basically had to harass them.

Next thing I knew we were in the HD age and once again i'm in the same mess. FOX and ABC HD were granted based on location. NBC and CBS no dice. I'm pretty sure I can get CBS OTA but NBC will be a challenge due to the terrain of my area scroll down to see maps if u choose. WTOV is the NBC while WTRF is the CBS: 
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13498471#post13498471

This whole process is stupid and no matter what the FCC or local stations say is a waste of time and resources.


----------



## outwest (Sep 5, 2007)

CCarncross said:


> I feel for all in that position. One thing I dont follow in this situation is if you dont even had a particular affiliate(was it CBS in this case?), then what waiver is even needed if there is no local affiliate?


We did have a local affiliate several months ago. I now recieve CBS HD from L.A., but that took two waiver requests.


----------



## bjlc (Aug 20, 2004)

contact Directv for a signal check. if the CSR gives you a hard time, keep pushing. Or contact a tv repair shop in your area. what you need is a true repair shop and not one that is affiliated with a best buy or sears... with a bunch of old timers working there. 

have them come out and do a signal check in your yard. You flunk the test YOU GET THE WAIVER its that simple. and I mean right now.


----------



## Brian Hanasky (Feb 22, 2008)

Called my local NBC today. Asked to talk to somebody about DNS waiver. I was transferred to a voicemail that told me that they WTOV9 have given Directv permission to carry the NBC signal but Directv won't (because DMA is so small). The message continued to say that if you want a waiver you have to go through D* and cannot talk to anybody at the station. This is nice becasue I already submitted a waiver request and it was denied. Seems that they have it set up so you get the goose chase. 

In the meantime I talked to a couple of sat install companies in the area. They all told me that due to my location in the valley I cannot get a OTA signal. I pretty much knew this after messing with antenna for the last couple of months. My next step will be to contact D* about a signal strength test. Good luck to all


----------



## outwest (Sep 5, 2007)

I finally had a someone arrive to take a signal strength reading from my house. He immediately said the I failed the test. Initially I thought this meant they would not allow me the waiver, he then stated that there was no signal present and that he would file the paperwork to grant me the request. He also gave me a number to someone locally that I could call if D*TV did not promptly provide me with the channels. It took less than a week for the channels to show up.

The kicker after a year of trying to get the other networks is that my wife and I are now moving out of the area. The good news is that the area I am relocating to has locals in HD on D*TV. I hope this situation and the previous posts help some of you with your predicaments.

Good Luck!


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Thanks for the update outwest .. Congrats on the move as you won't have to go through the process again.


----------



## GLJones (Feb 12, 2008)

Pass the info to the people that purchase your property so they don't have to do it all over again.

Jerry


----------



## srrndhound (Jul 16, 2008)

I just moved to Bend from SF Bay area where I had locals and DNS-HD (LA). Like Southwest, now I have neither via DirecTV. This week I purchased AM21 receivers for my HR21 DVRs, and voila, I have all local channels integrated into my DirecTV system. 

So as far as the local broadcasters are concerned, would they not be satisfied that I have local channels, and thus would not block my access to DNS-HD channels? I'm still waiting for my waiver requests to process, but I expect denial since I live 1 mile from the local antenna farm, and indeed receive the locals just fine as mentioned.

In other words, how are DirecTV's local feeds a sufficient prerequisite for DNS but real OTA locals, fully integrated via the DirecTV system, not sufficient? Or is this situation with AM21's just too new to have been considered as meeting the locals prerequisite?


----------



## Nomo1 (Apr 17, 2007)

After having waivers for a year and a half, I am losing my dns hd channels in August. Apparently the locals (WBRE AND WYOU in Wilkes Barre/Scranton - both owned by Nexstar) are rescinding the waivers. The stations claim they have negotiated in good faith with directv and that it is directv's fault they are not allowing the hd versions on their system. Directv blames the station, saying they are using the SHVERA quidelines to eliminate the hd versions, since I receive locals, which I do, but only sd. I have contacted both parties numerous times and been given the same bull. A big pi$$ing contest. So on August 8, I no longer have access to the hd versions of NBC and CBS.


----------



## rudeney (May 28, 2007)

Just curious, have you tried an amplified antenna to receive the HD signals? I live in a low-lying area with many mountains and trees in the 20 miles between my house and the local broadcasters. Years ago, when I first switched to D*, I tried various antennas short of erecting a real tower, but the best SD signal I could get from the highest-strength station was still unwatchable. I kept cable for locals, but eventually, D* began carrying them. Anyhow, when I got my first HDTV with an ATSC tuner a few years back, I tried one of the antennas I had from my failed SD attempts and lo and behold, I can get all of my network locals in HD! The antenna I use is a round “multi-directional” Radio Shack model with an inline powered amp. I did have to tweak its position a bit on the highest point on the roof, but it works. I don’t really need it because D* carries our local HD’s, and I don’t even have it connected to any of my D* receivers. However, when the living room HR20 is busy recording two channels and we want to watch a third program, I switch the TV over to ATCS and we get crystal clear HD locals. Anyhow, just a thought…


----------



## Tornillo (Apr 19, 2007)

After the switch to digital next year, there will be a lot of angry people who are going to call their congressman because Granny can't see her "shows". I think there will be another look at the way waivers are handed out.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

srrndhound said:


> I just moved to Bend from SF Bay area where I had locals and DNS-HD (LA). Like Southwest, now I have neither via DirecTV. This week I purchased AM21 receivers for my HR21 DVRs, and voila, I have all local channels integrated into my DirecTV system.
> 
> So as far as the local broadcasters are concerned, would they not be satisfied that I have local channels, and thus would not block my access to DNS-HD channels? I'm still waiting for my waiver requests to process, but I expect denial since I live 1 mile from the local antenna farm, and indeed receive the locals just fine as mentioned.
> 
> In other words, how are DirecTV's local feeds a sufficient prerequisite for DNS but real OTA locals, fully integrated via the DirecTV system, not sufficient? Or is this situation with AM21's just too new to have been considered as meeting the locals prerequisite?


Normally a waiver request will be denied if you can receive the local station either via Directv or OTA. Only if you *cannot* receive a local by one of these methods will you be eligible for a waiver. Some stations will routinely deny waivers in any case, hence the mechanism for a measurement, as was done in outwest's case.

The law regarding this requires the subscriber to pay for the test if it shows that a decent signal can be received OTA. If not, the station has to pay.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose (Aug 16, 2006)

If you need more proof of the POWER of the National Association of Broadcaster (NAB), just look over at the XM forum.

They rule our country!


----------



## srrndhound (Jul 16, 2008)

bobnielsen said:


> Normally a waiver request will be denied if you can receive the local station either via Directv or OTA. Only if you *cannot* receive a local by one of these methods will you be eligible for a waiver. Some stations will routinely deny waivers in any case, hence the mechanism for a measurement, as was done in outwest's case.
> 
> The law regarding this requires the subscriber to pay for the test if it shows that a decent signal can be received OTA. If not, the station has to pay.


Update: I received my postcard with waivers granted for ABC-W, CBS-W, PBS, and CW. So that was a pleasant surprise! Denied were NBC and FOX (both controlled by KTVZ).


----------



## dtrell (Dec 28, 2007)

to all of you that cant get waivers, theres always the 10 dollar mandatory carry basic cable package from your cable company that has all locals.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

dtrell said:


> to all of you that cant get waivers, theres always the 10 dollar mandatory carry basic cable package from your cable company that has all locals.


Thats works great if you live in an area that has cable. Many sat. customers do not.


----------



## tommyb (Aug 18, 2006)

I had the same problem as the OP. I just sent an e-mail to the station manager and told him that he wpold need to send somebody out and get the signal for me. The station is also responsible for providing the equipment to you if they will not grant the waiver. I had my CBS waiver within two days of sending the e-mail.


----------



## flipptyfloppity (Aug 20, 2007)

srrndhound said:


> So as far as the local broadcasters are concerned, would they not be satisfied that I have local channels, and thus would not block my access to DNS-HD channels?


Local affiliates make their money selling local insert ads. They aren't paid by NBC to air NBC programs, they make money selling ads during those programs. If you are watching a satellite feed from another city, you aren't watching their ads. That makes their ads less valuable.

It's really that simple.


----------



## DarkAudit (Sep 10, 2007)

Morgantown is in a real weird situation. It's physically closer to the Clarksburg-Weston DMA, but the lay of the land makes receiving a signal OTA nigh-impossible without massive rooftop rigs or towers that would violate FAA regs. Somehow we ended up in the Pittsburgh DMA. That means even though there is a PBS station less than 5 miles from my house, it's not technically in my market.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

dtrell said:


> to all of you that cant get waivers, theres always the 10 dollar mandatory carry basic cable package from your cable company that has all locals.


What is keeping me from doing that is that then I can not DVR shows off the locals. I will just invest in an antenna and then get locals for free.


----------



## dogs31 (Feb 27, 2006)

Filppity is right -- it's all about money


----------



## srrndhound (Jul 16, 2008)

flipptyfloppity said:


> Local affiliates make their money selling local insert ads. They aren't paid by NBC to air NBC programs, they make money selling ads during those programs. If you are watching a satellite feed from another city, you aren't watching their ads. That makes their ads less valuable.
> 
> It's really that simple.


I get that. What I don't get is why then would they be OK with me getting DNS channels once I get their local broadcast thru the DirecTV satellite? It's exactly the same program. 

On the other hand, I'd be happy to watch KTVZ's NBC-HD signal, and would have no need to get it from DNS, if only the quality were decent. The Olympics tore the picture to shreds, for example on diving when the camera pans. Without the slo-mo replay, I'd have had no idea what happened. The station engineer told me that's the best they can do with 19 Mbps encoding. Which is of course disingenuous nonsense since they steal about 5 Mbps away from 21-1 to fund two more SD channels at 21-2 and 21-3. The FCC didn't grant digital space so they could triple/quadruple their channels.

Yup, it's all about money. What KTVZ doesn't get is they drive eyeballs away from their channel by stealing the bitrate so they can "make more money." Counterproductive, methinks.


----------



## flipptyfloppity (Aug 20, 2007)

srrndhound said:


> I get that. What I don't get is why then would they be OK with me getting DNS channels once I get their local broadcast thru the DirecTV satellite? It's exactly the same program.
> 
> On the other hand, I'd be happy to watch KTVZ's NBC-HD signal, and would have no need to get it from DNS, if only the quality were decent. The Olympics tore the picture to shreds, for example on diving when the camera pans. Without the slo-mo replay, I'd have had no idea what happened. The station engineer told me that's the best they can do with 19 Mbps encoding. Which is of course disingenuous nonsense since they steal about 5 Mbps away from 21-1 to fund two more SD channels at 21-2 and 21-3. The FCC didn't grant digital space so they could triple/quadruple their channels.
> 
> Yup, it's all about money. What KTVZ doesn't get is they drive eyeballs away from their channel by stealing the bitrate so they can "make more money." Counterproductive, methinks.


The tearing on the Olympics was universal during the diving, if you paused during a dive, it was like a 64x64 grid of blocks. But it wasn't present during other events (well, not all of them). I expect it was because the encoding was done on the fly. Basically a production problem, not a problem getting the signal from your local affiliate to your TV.

Why do you think the locals are fine with you watching DNS (I assume that means distant locals) once you have LILs available? D* is supposed to pull your distant locals once you have LILs, and in fact, they pulled mine as the new MPEG-4 ESPN, et al came on line (years later than they were supposed to, but they did it nonetheless).

If you have LILs, you're not supposed to receive any distant locals over satellite. Not even with a waiver.


----------



## srrndhound (Jul 16, 2008)

flipptyfloppity said:


> The tearing on the Olympics was universal during the diving, if you paused during a dive, it was like a 64x64 grid of blocks. But it wasn't present during other events (well, not all of them). I expect it was because the encoding was done on the fly. Basically a production problem, not a problem getting the signal from your local affiliate to your TV.


I've read that theory, but I seriously doubt it. All live TV/sports is encoded "on the fly" and doesn't suffer this way.



> Why do you think the locals are fine with you watching DNS (I assume that means distant locals) once you have LILs available? D* is supposed to pull your distant locals once you have LILs, and in fact, they pulled mine as the new MPEG-4 ESPN, et al came on line (years later than they were supposed to, but they did it nonetheless). If you have LILs, you're not supposed to receive any distant locals over satellite. Not even with a waiver.


I am allowed to get DNS-HD when DirecTV offers locals only in SD.


----------



## flipptyfloppity (Aug 20, 2007)

srrndhound said:


> I've read that theory, but I seriously doubt it. All live TV/sports is encoded "on the fly" and doesn't suffer this way.


I doubt your theory too since I didn't watch the same station as you (mine has one only one additional SD alt) and I had the same problem. My picture wasn't screwed up because your local station as adding too many alts!

Rowing looked fantastic, and water is one of the most difficult things to compress well. I really do think it was a production problem. Maybe they had bad equipment there (they had to rent a lot of equipment, top notch equipment wasn't available for every venue). The specific camera that was used to take those shots had its own internal compression and did a crappy job of it. Having compression in a moving camera like this (the one showing the problems was a camera that tracked the divers down down from the platforms) is very common if it is wireless, the compression is needed to shrink the signal enough for the radio link they have.



> I am allowed to get DNS-HD when DirecTV offers locals only in SD.


Legally? Is that what you were saying, that your local station will give you a waiver for HD DNS as long as you have SD LILs?


----------



## srrndhound (Jul 16, 2008)

flipptyfloppity said:


> I doubt your theory too ...
> 
> The specific camera that was used to take those shots had its own internal compression and did a crappy job of it. Having compression in a moving camera like this (the one showing the problems was a camera that tracked the divers down down from the platforms) is very common if it is wireless, the compression is needed to shrink the signal enough for the radio link they have.


If it were the camera, then the slo-mo replay would look as bad as the realtime shot. But it didn't. It looked fine.



> Legally? Is that what you were saying, that your local station will give you a waiver for HD DNS as long as you have SD LILs?


I guess it's legal. DirecTV offered it. I used to have DNS-HD in SF with the locals, but once I moved to a town where there are no DirecTV locals, the trouble began.


----------



## thestaton (Aug 14, 2008)

tommyb said:


> I had the same problem as the OP. I just sent an e-mail to the station manager and told him that he wpold need to send somebody out and get the signal for me. The station is also responsible for providing the equipment to you if they will not grant the waiver. I had my CBS waiver within two days of sending the e-mail.


interesting. do you have any more info / tips you can share?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

srrndhound said:


> The FCC didn't grant digital space so they could triple/quadruple their channels.


Actually, in part, they did.... They made the rules so that stations could do this on purpose. It is part of the agreement the broadcasters signed with the FCC when everyone agreed on the ATSC formats and change over from analogue to digital...



flipptyfloppity said:


> Legally? Is that what you were saying, that your local station will give you a waiver for HD DNS as long as you have SD LILs?


HD rebroadcasts and Analogue rebroadcast rights from Directv are done separately in terms of waivers, etc...


----------



## flipptyfloppity (Aug 20, 2007)

srrndhound said:


> If it were the camera, then the slo-mo replay would look as bad as the realtime shot. But it didn't. It looked fine.


I'm rewatching the mens 10M finals right now. I think you're right. The slo-mos don't look awesome, but they are far better than full speed. Furthermore, there are issues when the olympics rings logos zoom by, and that's CG, not a camera at all.

Then again, I am also rewatching the end of the mens Marathon, and there's a huge pan across the stadium (at 2:06:03 into the race), and in a freeze, it's relatively fine. The logo in the corner is fine, the time in the corner is fine, I can almost make out the number on the runner (I can make out 22 and a 3 in the 4 digits he is wearing). The crowd (which is being panned by very quickly) is indistinct, but it's nothing like the diving problems blockiness, the people in the stands look more like smears (as they should) instead of blocks.

It's just that one venue. A production problem.



> I guess it's legal. DirecTV offered it. I used to have DNS-HD in SF with the locals, but once I moved to a town where there are no DirecTV locals, the trouble began.


Just because you had it before doesn't mean it was legal. D* failed to turn off my distant locals for about a year after I got HD LILs. You probably just slipped through the cracks before, it wasn't necessarily a change triggered by being in a place where there are no D* LILs.


----------



## rudeney (May 28, 2007)

flipptyfloppity said:


> I'm rewatching the mens 10M finals right now. I think you're right. The slo-mos don't look awesome, but they are far better than full speed. Furthermore, there are issues when the olympics rings logos zoom by, and that's CG, not a camera at all.
> 
> Then again, I am also rewatching the end of the mens Marathon, and there's a huge pan across the stadium (at 2:06:03 into the race), and in a freeze, it's relatively fine. The logo in the corner is fine, the time in the corner is fine, I can almost make out the number on the runner (I can make out 22 and a 3 in the 4 digits he is wearing). The crowd (which is being panned by very quickly) is indistinct, but it's nothing like the diving problems blockiness, the people in the stands look more like smears (as they should) instead of blocks.


I was watching the Women's Marathon and noticed a lot of blockiness and blurring in the motion of their legs. I switched over to OTA (directly to the TV, not through the HR20) and it was the same. In fact, it might even have been worse - more "jaggy" looking over OTA than the D* feed. My guess is this was an NBC issue and had nothing to do with the local stations or D*.


----------



## CATCRAW (Mar 27, 2008)

srrndhound said:


> Update: I received my postcard with waivers granted for ABC-W, CBS-W, PBS, and CW. So that was a pleasant surprise! Denied were NBC and FOX (both controlled by KTVZ).


I live less then a mile from the antenna farm as well in Bend. I was only able to get a waiver for CBS-HD since we do not have a CBS affiliate locally. KTVZ which controls FOX, NBC and CW all denied waivers. I can receive them via OTA with AM 21 so it's okay, except the transmition has a lot of pixilation and signal drops. It appears fairly inconsistant as to who is granted waivers and who is not.


----------



## srrndhound (Jul 16, 2008)

inkahauts said:


> Actually, in part, they did.... They made the rules so that stations could do this on purpose. It is part of the agreement the broadcasters signed with the FCC when everyone agreed on the ATSC formats and change over from analogue to digital...


Thanks for that. I stand corrected.



flipptyfloppity said:


> I'm rewatching the mens 10M finals right now. I think you're right. The slo-mos don't look awesome, but they are far better than full speed. Furthermore, there are issues when the olympics rings logos zoom by, and that's CG, not a camera at all.
> 
> Then again, I am also rewatching the end of the mens Marathon, and there's a huge pan across the stadium (at 2:06:03 into the race), and in a freeze, it's relatively fine. The logo in the corner is fine, the time in the corner is fine, I can almost make out the number on the runner (I can make out 22 and a 3 in the 4 digits he is wearing). The crowd (which is being panned by very quickly) is indistinct, but it's nothing like the diving problems blockiness, the people in the stands look more like smears (as they should) instead of blocks.
> 
> It's just that one venue. A production problem.


 In MPEG encoding, it is entirely possible for stationary images to remain clear while the rest of the screen pixellates with bit starvation. It is also possible that what appears as fast panning motion is still able to be reasonably encoded if there is blur or otherwise less detail in the image. Notice how in some cases, cameras are set so that every frame is crystal clear so that it "pops" off the screen in realtime, and also enables slo-mo to have clear stills. This is essential when shooting certain sports like diving or gymnastics where they will want to analyze the performance frame by frame. This is not done in rowing, so the camera setup may be allowed to blur more, thus making encoding easier.



> Just because you had it before doesn't mean it was legal. D* failed to turn off my distant locals for about a year after I got HD LILs. You probably just slipped through the cracks before, it wasn't necessarily a change triggered by being in a place where there are no D* LILs.


 When I moved to Bend they indeed turned all my DNS-HD off, then reactivated (some of) them. I presume they were acting legally. It may well be as inkahauts stated: >>HD rebroadcasts and Analogue rebroadcast rights from Directv are done separately in terms of waivers, etc...<<


----------



## srrndhound (Jul 16, 2008)

CATCRAW said:


> I live less then a mile from the antenna farm as well in Bend. I was only able to get a waiver for CBS-HD since we do not have a CBS affiliate locally. KTVZ which controls FOX, NBC and CW all denied waivers. I can receive them via OTA with AM 21 so it's okay, except the transmition has a lot of pixilation and signal drops. It appears fairly inconsistant as to who is granted waivers and who is not.


Are you getting FOX-HD on 39-1 on the AM-21? If not, see my post http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=1769475&postcount=18 for a tip on how to do so. It looks pretty good. I'm not experiencing dropouts--what signal strength are you seeing?


----------



## flipptyfloppity (Aug 20, 2007)

srrndhound said:


> Thanks for that. I stand corrected.
> 
> In MPEG encoding, it is entirely possible for stationary images to remain clear while the rest of the screen pixellates with bit starvation. It is also possible that what appears as fast panning motion is still able to be reasonably encoded if there is blur or otherwise less detail in the image. Notice how in some cases, cameras are set so that every frame is crystal clear so that it "pops" off the screen in realtime, and also enables slo-mo to have clear stills. This is essential when shooting certain sports like diving or gymnastics where they will want to analyze the performance frame by frame. This is not done in rowing, so the camera setup may be allowed to blur more, thus making encoding easier.


I agree this is possible. That was my point. You're saying it's your local station, I think it is a production issue. I do believe it was a choice/mistake made during production. And as to it being the camera setup, as I said, there is a lot of blocking during sweeps of the olympic rings at cuts at the Olympic venue. Those rings are CG and are unaffected by camera settings.

Also, you class diving and gymnastics together. I felt the gymnastics looked great, it didn't have the same problems with blocking as the diving.


----------



## srrndhound (Jul 16, 2008)

flipptyfloppity said:


> I agree this is possible. That was my point. You're saying it's your local station, I think it is a production issue. I do believe it was a choice/mistake made during production. And as to it being the camera setup, as I said, there is a lot of blocking during sweeps of the olympic rings at cuts at the Olympic venue. Those rings are CG and are unaffected by camera settings.
> 
> Also, you class diving and gymnastics together. I felt the gymnastics looked great, it didn't have the same problems with blocking as the diving.


Yes. diving was "clearly" the worst.

The KTVZ engineer recommended I switch to Bend Broadband, as they will soon send them the "console" output, prior to MPEG encoding, and he feels cable has more bandwidth available (or will use MPEG4 as does DirecTV) to get a superior result to their OTA signal. If the dirt was in the source, he would have passed the blame upstream. But he knows, as I do, that it is the local encode in the multiplexed environment that is responsible.


----------



## CATCRAW (Mar 27, 2008)

srrndhound said:


> Are you getting FOX-HD on 39-1 on the AM-21? If not, see my post http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=1769475&postcount=18 for a tip on how to do so. It looks pretty good. I'm not experiencing dropouts--what signal strength are you seeing?


Thanks for the info, I have not been able to get 39-1 on my AM21. I was only able to get FOX on 21-3. I'll give it a try. 39-1 seems to still have some issues I get signal loss frequently when watching it. Do you have issues with 21-1 and pixilation?


----------



## Brian Hanasky (Feb 22, 2008)

I cannot get a signal strength test for my local CBS becasue the FCC granted them a waiver blocking all signal strength tests due to their puny signal and hardship situaiton. 


DA 08-1283
Released: June 6, 2008



Ellen Mandell Edmundson
Counsel for West Virginia Media holdings, LLC
1920 N Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036

Re:	MB Docket No. 05-317

Dear Ms. Edmundson:

By letter dated April 30, 2008, West Virginia Media Holdings, LLC, licensee of WTRF-TV, Wheeling, West Virginia requested an extension of its waiver of Section 339(a)(2)(D) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, to prohibit satellite subscribers from receiving or conducting a digital signal strength test of WTRF-DT’s digital signal. The Commission granted the original digital signal testing waiver based on the fact that the station’s digital signal coverage was limited due to the necessity to use a side mounted antenna. The Commission has granted the licensee one six-month extension. In its most recent extension request, the licensee states that the circumstances justifying a waiver still exist and that it is prevented from installing a top mounted digital antenna because its analog antenna is currently installed in that position. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the request of West Virginia Media holdings IS GRANTED and the first permissible date for digital testing for WTRF-DT IS EXTENDED six months, from June 15, 2008 to December 15, 2008. If a further extension is needed, a request must be filed by October 15, 2008.

Sincerely,



Barbara A. Kreisman
Chief, Video Division
Media Bureau


----------



## srrndhound (Jul 16, 2008)

CATCRAW said:


> Thanks for the info, I have not been able to get 39-1 on my AM21. I was only able to get FOX on 21-3. I'll give it a try. 39-1 seems to still have some issues I get signal loss frequently when watching it. Do you have issues with 21-1 and pixilation?


 39-1 and 39-2 are running in low power mode. They have an amplifier out for service, I'm told. It is the weakest OTA signal in my system, but it reads 80% while all others are 100%. I've got a Winegard Square Shooter with 22 dB of amplification driving into the SWM-8.

Yes, 21-1 has pixelation when action stresses the encoder. Not bad otherwise.


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

dont they realize that many of us have dvrs and wont watch no matter what? I guess though there literally is NO upside to them granting a waiver though. If you cant see their pic you cant see anyones!


----------



## CATCRAW (Mar 27, 2008)

srrndhound said:


> 39-1 and 39-2 are running in low power mode. They have an amplifier out for service, I'm told. It is the weakest OTA signal in my system, but it reads 80% while all others are 100%. I've got a Winegard Square Shooter with 22 dB of amplification driving into the SWM-8.
> 
> Yes, 21-1 has pixelation when action stresses the encoder. Not bad otherwise.


I tried adding the seconsary zip setup as you suggested. It did pick up 39-1 and a bunch of other junk. However I still cannot play 39-1. I shows no signal error. Did I miss something?


----------



## Dirk (Sep 15, 2007)

NBC and CBS in New Orleans just don't seem to get it. They have denied my wavers about ten times. I live in Long Beach, MS which is about 70~ miles away and there is just to much crap in between us. I really need to call them. I also need to ask them for the HD waivers since that is all I really care about.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

I have a new problem with my local wavers today. It seems that they are waiting till they get word back from 2 different DMA markets in which D* is saying both have to approve my waver. Its so annoying. I emailed the VP of Customer Service. Hope I hear back from him in a few days.


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

Dirk said:


> NBC and CBS in New Orleans just don't seem to get it. They have denied my wavers about ten times. I live in Long Beach, MS which is about 70~ miles away and there is just to much crap in between us. I really need to call them. I also need to ask them for the HD waivers since that is all I really care about.


Do you need a waiver? According to DirecTV's DNS tool you are eligible for DNS, and I checked TVfool which shows the OTA signal strengths are way below grade B.
Of course, the stations may have been given an exemption from the DNS rules because of Katrina, in which case they can just say no.


----------



## Dirk (Sep 15, 2007)

Can I get the link to that? I have checked it before and it said that I had grade B signals which I don't. If I can get the link I will try calling DirecTV again and getting it fixed. I just checked it again and you are right. They still have denied my waivers though. My signal strength is grey on the tvfool thing.

Also can you tell me what to say and who to ask for when I call DirecTV. They have given me the run around so many times trying to get this its crazy. I don't even have a local CBS or NBC in my DMA.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

I called D* today to ask about my waivers. I have a few that will have been waiting approval for 30 days tomorrow. According to the SHVIA document that the FCC directed me towards it says that after 30 days D* can just turn them on. The guy on the phone is saying one of the SD waivers was denied so that denies the HD one as well and I will not be able to get them activated tomorrow. I let him know that I can see on the site right now that there are 2 local channels that have been pending since 8/19/08 and tomorrow makes 30 days. He has me on hold now checking on it.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Holy cow I had a waiver granted today already. My account says that I am being billed for Network: NBC from NYC/LA - Charge$2.99. Does anyone know what the $2.99 is for? Is is because it says that I should be getting NBC from the east and west coast? My waiver status and all CSR's I have spoke to said I only qualify for east coast feeds and my understanding was it was $1.99 per channel. I am not even home to check to see what I am getting yet.

No matter what I can not complain cause I actually live in an aread what is rated an A on signal that D* does not offer me locals. So what ever I can get granted I am happy with. I got NBC in SD granted. That will have to work. Now I am ready for the new Knight Rider, Biggerst Loser, & a new show called My own worst enemy.


----------



## CATCRAW (Mar 27, 2008)

joshjr said:


> Holy cow I had a waiver granted today already. My account says that I am being billed for Network: NBC from NYC/LA - Charge$2.99. Does anyone know what the $2.99 is for? Is is because it says that I should be getting NBC from the east and west coast? My waiver status and all CSR's I have spoke to said I only qualify for east coast feeds and my understanding was it was $1.99 per channel. I am not even home to check to see what I am getting yet.
> 
> No matter what I can not complain cause I actually live in an aread what is rated an A on signal that D* does not offer me locals. So what ever I can get granted I am happy with. I got NBC in SD granted. That will have to work. Now I am ready for the new Knight Rider, Biggerst Loser, & a new show called My own worst enemy.


In my case the $2.99 E/W feed is for SD. I received a waiver for CBS - HD West coast feed at a fee of $1.99.


----------



## kandor (Dec 29, 2007)

joshjr said:


> I let him know that I can see on the site right now that there are 2 local channels that have been pending since 8/19/08 and tomorrow makes 30 days. He has me on hold now checking on it.


Where on their website do you see that? I've got one waiver pending as well.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Here is the link. http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPageIFnorail.jsp?assetId=P4880022#h:556.492 Make sure you have your account number. Before you enter your information you need to click on check waiver history on the right side under the check status box half way down. Enter the information and hit enter. The site is slow on this section but it will pop up and show you when your waivers were submitted for HD and SD both and also if they are pending or denied. If you enter your information in the first screen and go in then you can resubmitt any waivers not currently pending for SD and HD. Make sure if you resubmitt that you mark some good reason at the bottom.


----------



## bjlc (Aug 20, 2004)

why argue when now you have a choice of when to watch things..

trust me, you will learn to love east and west coast in a New York Minute.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Yeah its going to be good having more recoding options for a netowrk.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Well 2 down 2 more to go. I have been approved for ABC (East) and NBC (East & West) SD feed. Pretty suprising considering that I am in a grade A signal area. I personally think its a Grade B at best but I am not complaining. I resubmitted tonight for CBS and for FOX from the D* website for HD and SD both. All I need is one or the other for each CBS and FOX.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

joshjr said:


> Well 2 down 2 more to go. I have been approved for ABC (East) and NBC (East & West) SD feed. Pretty suprising considering that I am in a grade A signal area. I personally think its a Grade B at best but I am not complaining. I resubmitted tonight for CBS and for FOX from the D* website for HD and SD both. All I need is one or the other for each CBS and FOX.


I just got off the phone with the president over my local CBS and FOX. He is having me do a site test. It should be interesting. One intersting thing to note, the guy was understandable but hard to persuade getting the waiver approved without a test done. He told me that the reason that I was approved for ABC and NBC was that they did not renew their subscrption to a company that takes care of tracking all this for them and everyone is being accepted now due to that.

I dont know if I agree with him as I was denied the first time and granted the 2nd time. Anyways we were talking about Sunday Ticket and that I should be getting the games they air blacked out on my Sunday Ticket and I told him that I had not had a single game blacked out at all this year. If something changes and they decide to fix that lol oh well I just lost the Chiefs and the Rams. What a huge loss.


----------



## Tower Guy (Jul 27, 2005)

joshjr said:


> He is having me do a site test. It should be interesting.


The "looser pays" stipulation applies to SD waivers. If you want an HD test, the subscriber pays in all cases.


----------



## B. Shoe (Apr 3, 2008)

All apologies if an answer to this question is elsewhere on the boards, but I’ve done a few searches and couldn’t find anything…

In our market (Quincy-Hannibal-Keokuk, DMA #171) there are two television stations – an NBC affiliate and a CBS affiliate. The NBC affiliate operates a digital HD feed of NBC, along with digital SD sub-channels of CW and FOX. The CBS affiliate broadcasts a digital HD feed of CBS, along with a digital SD sub-channel of ABC, which is actually a retransmission of an analog signal from the company’s sister station in a neighboring DMA. Needless to say, the picture quality of the ABC signal leaves a lot to be desired. 

I’ve received waivers for the HD DNS of FOX, but I’ve been denied on ABC, since they say I already receive a ‘digital’ signal for the network. I’m not an expert, but I know that you can’t operate two HD signals through the same digital stream at once and it’s not very likely (if ever) that a new company would start up a third station in our DMA to become a primary ABC affiliate. In short, it’d never be possible for us to receive an HD signal of ABC.

Now that you’ve read the story behind this, my question is this – is there any way I can get an HD DNS signal of ABC if the company is unwilling to budge on the waiver? Thanks for your time and any help or advice anyone can provide!


----------



## easy_e65 (Oct 8, 2008)

I have FOXHD and NBCHD granted and I still can't get DTV to turn them on. Any tips for getting the stations I qualified for?


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

easy_e65 said:


> I have FOXHD and NBCHD granted and I still can't get DTV to turn them on. Any tips for getting the stations I qualified for?


Did you try all the channels in the 80's as well as 380-400 to see what they turned on?


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

joshjr said:


> Did you try all the channels in the 80's as well as 380-400 to see what they turned on?


channels in the 80s are gone now.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

curt8403 said:


> channels in the 80s are gone now.


Thats odd. Just about every night I see one of them turned on in Primetime. I see channels 80,82,86, and 88 in the my lineup but they are grayed out.


----------



## curt8403 (Dec 27, 2007)

joshjr said:


> Thats odd. Just about every night I see one of them turned on in Primetime. I see channels 80,82,86, and 88 in the my lineup but they are grayed out.


they guide may not be updated but the signal has been turned off/ they are in the 390s now. they were dual illuminated for a while, but no longer.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

curt8403 said:


> they guide may not be updated but the signal has been turned off/ they are in the 390s now. they were dual illuminated for a while, but no longer.


I am telling as recently as this week channels in the 80's have been lit up. I do not get any of them but every night at least one of them has pretty much been turned on during Prime Time. I know it was this week cause Fox was one of them on this week and that was a rare thing.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

joshjr said:


> Did you try all the channels in the 80's as well as 380-400 to see what they turned on?


Have you asked for the "Distant Network HD Department" yet? The CSR's almost never know about it and there is no phone directly to it.


----------



## David MacLeod (Jan 29, 2008)

curt8403 said:


> channels in the 80s are gone now.


I watch 82 a lot.


----------



## easy_e65 (Oct 8, 2008)

BKC said:


> Have you asked for the "Distant Network HD Department" yet? The CSR's almost never know about it and there is no phone directly to it.


No, I didn't know about it either. Good more ammunition to get these turned on.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

BKC said:


> Have you asked for the "Distant Network HD Department" yet? The CSR's almost never know about it and there is no phone directly to it.


Yeah I knew about it and have spoke to them. I am not harping about HD locals. I have 4 of the 6 in SD now. So the last 2 I did submit for HD and SD but would rather just have SD and be done with it. My daughters have SD recievers and I would like to be able to get the locals in their rooms as well.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

easy_e65 said:


> No, I didn't know about it either. Good more ammunition to get these turned on.


Why would you need ammunition? Don't you think a company would love the ability to just turn on something they can charge you for? These are federally regulated. There is a process and unless D* wants to lose them like E* did they will follow the procedure.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

Shades228 said:


> Why would you need ammunition? Don't you think a company would love the ability to just turn on something they can charge you for? These are federally regulated. There is a process and unless D* wants to lose them like E* did they will follow the procedure.


Maybe you should of read up. He hass some approved already that are not activated. This is what he is trying toget done.


----------



## easy_e65 (Oct 8, 2008)

Well I called last night, got some results. Not the ones I wanted but results none the less. It turns out that Dtv's site farms out the waiver requests. That is why that part of the site is so slow. Dtv customer service has no record of me be granted the two channels yet. As they know it, all my HD waivers are still pending. Hopefully I'll get the two that their site says I will. The best explaination I got was that everything hasn't updated, maybe early in the week I'll get a more definitive result.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

easy_e65 said:


> Well I called last night, got some results. Not the ones I wanted but results none the less. It turns out that Dtv's site farms out the waiver requests. That is why that part of the site is so slow. Dtv customer service has no record of me be granted the two channels yet. As they know it, all my HD waivers are still pending. Hopefully I'll get the two that their site says I will. The best explaination I got was that everything hasn't updated, maybe early in the week I'll get a more definitive result.


Where did you see that you were approved for anything at this time?


----------



## adamson (Nov 9, 2007)

Directv RULE IS-

Even if you are approved for any station using their web page to check on eligibility and also by their determination you NOW have to have waivers approved for effected stations. HD-SD no matter.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

upmichigan said:


> Directv RULE IS-
> 
> Even if you are approved for any station using their web page to check on eligibility and also by their determination you NOW have to have waivers approved for effected stations. HD-SD no matter.


Who ever said anything different? I think we all already knew this.


----------



## easy_e65 (Oct 8, 2008)

joshjr said:


> Where did you see that you were approved for anything at this time?


I have been using the "check waiver status" page on directv.com. That is why I have been making such a fuss. Their own website told me I was granted the channels and yet they said that it wasn't approved yet.


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

easy_e65 said:


> I have been using the "check waiver status" page on directv.com. That is why I have been making such a fuss. Their own website told me I was granted the channels and yet they said that it wasn't approved yet.


Did you call that number I gave you? Also how ling has it been since you submitted the ones that say approved on their site?


----------

