# RE: The end of Analog TV? Canada/Mexico



## Big Bob (May 13, 2002)

Does anyone know if there are any plans in Canada and/or Mexico to force a transition to digital like the one planned for the US? Or any other NTSC country for that matter. Japan?


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Now THAT is an interesting question. 

EMR is no respecter of national borders. I can see Mexican and Canadian 1000 ft towers just across our borders cranking out gigawatts of analog programming targeting American audiences from Mount Wilson to Miami.

If the public airwaves belong to the "people", why is our own government taking the them away from us? What aren't they telling us?


----------



## Big Bob (May 13, 2002)

Isn't this how Wolfman Jack got started?


----------



## SimpleSimon (Jan 15, 2004)

Nick said:


> Now THAT is an interesting question.
> 
> EMR is no respecter of national borders. I can see Mexican and Canadian 1000 ft towers just across our borders cranking out gigawatts of analog programming targeting American audiences from Mount Wilson to Miami.
> 
> If the public airwaves belong to the "people", why is our own government taking the them away from us? What aren't they telling us?


 Nick - this is the second post of yours I've seen where you're wearing your tinfoil hat. 

It's simply that there are better uses for the RF spectrum than analog OTA, and IMO, for digital while we're at it.

As for Canada & Mexico beaming to us, there's international treaties regulating that.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

SimpleSimon said:


> Nick - this is the second post of yours I've seen where you're wearing your tinfoil hat.


You must be new around here. I've been wearing a foil hat ever since the _Nixon_ days.


> ...there are better uses for the RF spectrum than analog OTA


So, you've bought into that line of crap, too. I thought we were using it just fine - after all, it's ours to begin with.


> As for Canada & Mexico beaming to us, there's international treaties regulating that.


Well, just as nature abhors a vacuum, so do the opportunists of the world. 

I want my damn analog spectrum back! :grrr:


----------



## Larry (Aug 1, 2003)

Big Bob said:


> Isn't this how Wolfman Jack got started?


Yup, if memory serves me correctly...and it may not after all these years. I think it was XERB "the mighty 690" broadcasting from Rosarito Beach, BC.


----------



## joblo (Dec 11, 2003)

SimpleSimon said:


> As for Canada & Mexico beaming to us, there's international treaties regulating that.


Yes, and those treaties protect the rights of Canada and Mexico to keep operating analog stations even after the U.S. shutdown.

I expect U.S. stations near the border will raise a fuss about that when the time comes, possibly delaying the analog shutdown in border markets.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

Canada is way behind us in the DTV conversion. If you visit the CBC website and typein HDTV or Digital you get information on how you have to have cable or satelite to get DTV.

There are several construction permits for DTV transmitters in Southwestern Ontario that I am keeping an eye on. Once those go on the air I'm goingto try and DX them. A couple are only ~65 miles from here (across Lake Erie). Their analog statins do a good job of beaming their signals in a tight directional pattern *away* from the U.S. 

The only station in SW Ontario that does not try to stay out of U.S. airspace is CBET-9 from Windsor (it's listed as being in the Detroit DMA). That station, IIRC, is a CBC O&O. No matter who owns it, they strip out all programming that CBC carries that may also be carried on a U.S. network. It's a "sanatized" version of CBC for U.S. eyeballs. As for the "missing" programs, the Canadian viewers can get them on the Detroit stations. Years ago the duplication of programs across the border was not an issue. I received a different CBC affilliate from London, ON (it has since changed affilliations to "The New Network" {The New PL} and is also transmitted on a closer transmitter in Chatham {The New WI}). Anyway back in the 70's and 80's I noticed that the U.S. programs that were carried on CBC were aired one week later than the U.S. network carrying the same program, however when the reruns began, the Canadians aired the rerun one week ahead of the U.S. networks!?!


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

As far as "giving back" the analog spectrum for other uses, I don't see the benefit. The same frequencies are being used for DTV and analog today. Take away the analog and all you'll have is a less congested airspace for the DTV signals. Supposedly the top end of the UHF band is going away. IF so then why wers some DTV assignements placed on high UHF frequencies (WVPX-DT was assigned 59 and is not yet on the air because of that assignment being in the part of the UHF band being reallocated). Low-band VHF, although rare, also has a few DTV assignments (one right here in Cleveland WKYC-DT on ch-2).


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

Nick said:


> Now THAT is an interesting question.
> 
> EMR is no respecter of national borders. I can see Mexican and Canadian 1000 ft towers just across our borders cranking out gigawatts of analog programming targeting American audiences from Mount Wilson to Miami.
> 
> If the public airwaves belong to the "people", why is our own government taking the them away from us? What aren't they telling us?


In Windsor there is a commercial station on 88.7 FM (known as "89X"). At one time they were pushing 110,000 Watts on a 1,000'+ tower. We have a college station on 88.7 @ 750 Watts here in greater Cleveland that could not be heard over 89X just a few miles from the transmitter in the Summer when "skip" was high. I once listened to "89X" while traveling down I-71 from Cleveland to Columbus and did not loose the signal until just outside the Columbus area :eek2:

So your concerns have validity. I used to call 89X "the power pig". They must have done something to cut back, I have not heard that signal in years (the I-71 trip was in the early 90's)


----------



## KingLoop (Mar 3, 2005)

Michael P said:


> In Windsor there is a commercial station on 88.7 FM (known as "89X"). At one time they were pushing 110,000 Watts on a 1,000'+ tower...


I'm not sure how many watts 89X is running on currently, but I do know that it is still alot. I live in metro Detroit and I can pick it up over 100 miles North on I75. It's my station of choice.


----------



## GravelChan (Jan 30, 2005)

Larry said:


> Yup, if memory serves me correctly...and it may not after all these years. I think it was XERB "the mighty 690" broadcasting from Rosarito Beach, BC.


What was the one that had studios in Del Rio, TX? If I remember right they
advertized as 50,000 watts with transmitter in (don't laugh at my spelling, it's
just the way it sounded to me  Waters Chawawa, Mexico. Came booming in 
here at night, up around 1500 on the dial as I rememeber.


----------



## homeskillet (Feb 3, 2004)

That could of been XERF 1570 AM from Ciudad Acuña... originally called XERA. They were a HUGE border blaster and Wolfman Jack was there at one time. Their "hay day" came when Dr. David Brinkley and the 'Kansas Navy' were on the air. The "Goat Gland Doctor" had his preachings and sold time.

I know here in north central Kansas we can still hear XERF at night. I work for a small radio station that is on 1570 AM and at night XERF over-powers our nighttime transmitter and we're starting to wonder if XERF is turning up the juice again.

For a good read....

http://www.ominous-valve.com/xerf.html

A quack doctor.
A million watts.
Goat testicles.
Hitler.
Wolfman Jack.
Now, this is radio...


----------



## Larry (Aug 1, 2003)

That link is a good read. I was living in So. California, so I never got to hear the Wolfman until he moved to XERB. And my memory didn't serve me correctly in my above post...it was the "Mighty 1090", not 690 which was yet another border station (XEAK). It's funny how the years will do things to your memory. Thanks, homeskillet, for setting the record straight. For me it was a little trip down memory lane.

We now return to our regularly scheduled thread.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

Michael P said:


> As far as "giving back" the analog spectrum for other uses, I don't see the benefit. The same frequencies are being used for DTV and analog today. Take away the analog and all you'll have is a less congested airspace for the DTV signals. Supposedly the top end of the UHF band is going away. IF so then why wers some DTV assignements placed on high UHF frequencies (WVPX-DT was assigned 59 and is not yet on the air because of that assignment being in the part of the UHF band being reallocated). Low-band VHF, although rare, also has a few DTV assignments (one right here in Cleveland WKYC-DT on ch-2).


The "above 51" DTV assignments were made because there was no spectrum available lower - with the understanding that these assignments were temporary and the stations will be changing to another channel when the DTV changeout is complete. This is a big deal here in Raleigh because MOST of the current DTV channels are in that range (52,53,55,57 and 59 are in use).

Lowband VHF (2-6) has its problems with DTV - ask anybody in Chicago about their reception of the CBS affiliate with DTV assigned to 3.

My personal expectations is that stations will try to get upper VHF, then UHF, and if they are stuck , to use the lower VHF.

If you want to read more - do some reading on the various threads here - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=45 - this forum is for local reception issues of DTV.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

KingLoop said:


> I'm not sure how many watts 89X is running on currently, but I do know that it is still alot. I live in metro Detroit and I can pick it up over 100 miles North on I75. It's my station of choice.


FM reception at 100 miles (if it happens on a continuous basis - as if it's a "local" station) is outrageous. The only 100,000 watt stations allowed in the U.S.A. are located in sparcely populated areas (I recall there being one in Hazard, KY). Add to that the fact that they are on a part of the FM band reserved for non-commercial stations in the U.S. (which are lower power for the most part) just adds to the problem. 89X does it because they can. They don't care about international treaties. The Canadian laws were probably designed to provide coverage up north (in sparcely populated areas) but 89X is probably using a loophole to step on the U.S. airwaves. I'm surprised that the CRTC (the Canadian counterpart to the FCC) doesn't address this infringement. The FCC would never allow a Detroit station to double their power & tower height and then use the same frequency as the closest CBC Radio 1 transmitter (the Canadian counterpart to NPR).

Iguess 89X is still the "power pig"


----------



## Bob Haller (Mar 24, 2002)

I wonder how much the local digital would interfere with DX canada, when and if US analog ends?

Might be fun


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

Don't get me started on that subject! I'll just say that my local CBS affilliate DTV signal was assigned to ch 10. There is an analog ch 10 from London, Ontario that used to boom in here every summer (it was even carried on cable year-round back in the 80's). People living on the north-east side of Greater Cleveland (along the south shore of Lake Erie) have problems with the digital signal of WOIO-DT. Of all the channels available why did they assign ch 10? I have similar, but not quite as strong (as in signal strenght of a "near-by" analog station from a neighbooring market) an argument for nearly all the rest of the Cleveland DTV assignments.

Bob, if you have tried DTV OTA in Pittsburg, you may have problems with KDKA-DT being on ch 25. Ch 25 is the analog assignmnet of our local PBS. Remember Rabbi Bryan French who did the original DMA maps? He sees the interference between the two signals where he is in Wheeling!


----------



## Bob Haller (Mar 24, 2002)

My nice new 34 inch tv is analog only.

Feds messed up big time, digital tuners should of been required from the get go.

I would put up a OTA antenna just for the heck of it, my old one came down in a storm years ago

But there has to be something worth watching......


----------



## KingLoop (Mar 3, 2005)

Michael P said:


> FM reception at 100 miles (if it happens on a continuous basis - as if it's a "local" station) is outrageous. ...Iguess 89X is still the "power pig"


I agree, But I do like the station... I took a northernly trip a few weeks ago to a smaller town named Fenton... Fenton is in no way Metro Detroit. (In moderate traffic it is a 90 minute trip up 75) I didn't change the station away from 88.7. 89X does alot of Detroit advertising and the majority of their news is Detroit based (with a small amount of Canadian stuff).


----------



## Art7220 (Feb 4, 2004)

Since we were talking about this, there was an El Paso blaster I used to listen to in CAs Central Valley between 1976-80. Later on I found out it was XEROK, known as X Rock 80 on AM. Of course, the station only came in at night.

It was your basic Top 40 station, but the interesting aspect was how they played the records. They always sounded a little fast, like the turntable motors were turned up or something. I preferred that station to anything local at the time.

Then, around 1980 they switched from top 40 music to Spanish at 2am PT. I usually listened on the weekends. I believe they switched to all spanish soon after.

Does anyone else remember that? Those on the East Coast couldn't get it, because there was a Canadian Blaster on the 800 dial, which I believe was rare for them.

A few months ago, I tuned in to 800 to see if it was still on. Of course, now it's still all spanish, and nothing like it used to be. Oh well, such is life.

I believe there is still a brief write up about X Rock on www.oidar.com (Click on Chapter 7) and if you check out www.reelradio.com they have some airchecks. Neat stuff.

-A- Most remembered song from the X Rock era: Judy in Disguise.


----------

