TV Fool  

Go Back   TV Fool > Over The Air Services > Help With Reception

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-Dec-2013, 9:29 PM   #1
ota_user
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1
CHCH's move to RF15 is Blocking WUTV Fox 29 signal into Hamilton

The Hamilton/Burlington area has completely lost reception for WUTV because CHCH is now broadcasting on RF15 as of Dec. 2, 2013. CHCH's adjacent signal is effectively acting as a jammer for Fox 14 and Zuus 14.2. Where Fox used to be a consistent signal, Hamilton Mountain (South) is now getting no signal bars for WUTV. I used a notch filter and a quarter stub notch to block out CHCH (476-482 Mhz) but to no success. This is a serious blunder on CHCH and the CRTC. Buffalo which has a population of 250,000 is right next door to Hamilton/Burlington where the population exceeds 700,000. The signals should not be interfering with one another as per the Letter of Understanding between the FCC and Industry Canada published January 2001.

Canadians living in the Toronto-Niagara Falls column are unique in that they are linked culturally, historically and geographically to New York state. There is one common media market in this area and my proof of this is the following example from the WNED website.

"About WNED - For more than 50 years, viewers have turned to member-supported WNED as a powerful and trusted resource. Today, WNED is a leading bi-national public broadcasting organization operating two television stations and two radio stations, all locally programmed. Programs and outreach explore and address interests relevant to the Buffalo and Toronto area."

WUTV is just as important as WNED to our common bi-national community. If WNED content is "relevant" to the Buffalo-Toronto area then so too is WUTV and Zuus content. Locally, receiving the WUTV signal must garner the same importance and attention as the CHCH signal and any other signal within receiving range of this bi-national area.

ota_user is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-Dec-2013, 4:57 AM   #2
teleview
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
+=>
-------
Yes I remember reading about the then coming reception problem , that is here now.

I suspect the channel allotments and resulting interference is/are not a blunder.

It is all about / market share / money / and games.

I suspect that a channel allotment change will happen , the reception complaints are likely to be many.

But then what do I know.

---------------------------------

I am aware of a area in eastern Canada that has no Digital Broadcast TV , it is still Analog the last time I was helping some one with Tv reception in the area.
The Canada Tv stations/owners have not put any Digital Broadcast Tv transmitters in the area , to make a statement/point , to those persons in Industry Canada that are living in the area.

Many Tv stations/owners are up set with having to change to Digital and getting little to nothing of the Big B Billions of Dollars of the sale of Tv channels to the cell phone and wireless owners.

None of the Billions of dollars went to a converter box program from the sale of the Tv channels and No converter box program happened in Canada as it did in the USA.

And the Canada Tv stations/owners are up set about that.

http://www.tvtechnology.com/feature-...f-track/206775

Last edited by teleview; 11-Dec-2013 at 3:07 PM. Reason: Clarify information and typos.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-Dec-2013, 3:49 PM   #3
teleview
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
+=>
------
While waiting for the situation to be resolved , can check these out.

------

Some Tv stations are internet streaming programing.

------

http://www.sligbox.com

Can put a Sling Box and a Tuner at a location to receive PBS and stream station to your computer/tv.

-------

http://www.aereo.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 20-Dec-2013, 3:29 PM   #4
murwald
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1
Smile Chch

First time post - we live in Grimsby and until CHCH made the switch to a stronger signal we would receive a weak signal but did get the channel. Now we don't get any signal at all, however we are receiving 29.1 WUTV. Is CHCH getting blocked? I did a new channel scan and am wondering if we can do anything else to pick up CHCH again - nice to have your local channel! Thanks for any suggestions.
murwald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-Dec-2013, 6:47 PM   #5
teleview
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
+=>
------

Did you do a Double Rescan??

Digital Broadcast Tv Tuners can develop - Digital Glitches - that are not cleared out with simple channel scans.

Do a Double Rescan.

http://www.wchstv.com/DoubleReScanAlert.pdf.

Also please make and post a tvfool report for your location.

Use the Exact address to make the tvfool report and make the antenna height in the report 25 feet above ground.

If the Exact address does not work , then go to the tvfool home page and click on >>Start MAPS<<.

Select a location close to your location and then move the pointer to your exact location.

Make a tvfool report with the antenna height at 25 feet above ground and post the tvfool report.

Is this a , house , town home , condo , apartment , mobile home , motor home , or etc.??

How many floors??

What is the top floor??

What directions do , windows , patios/balconies face??

-------

What is the make and model number of the antenna??

Is a amplifier being used??

Last edited by teleview; 20-Dec-2013 at 7:42 PM. Reason: Clarify information and typos.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29-Nov-2015, 2:09 PM   #6
mikecandu
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 31
Hey,

Thanks for confirming why I can't get WUTV FOX 29! I'm on East Mountain and for the life of me I can't get WUTV but I get WNED (real 43) perfectly even though they are broadcasting from very similar locations. THE CHCH tower in Stoney Creek is (15 real) is right in the middle of the signal from WUTV (14 real). I was suspecting interference from CTV in Kitchener (13 real) but it's probably CHCH that's the culprit.

Ironic my friend that lives down the mountain (~4km north of me) and should have the escarpment blocking his signal gets WUTV all the time.

I know this is an old thread but has anyone on Hamilton Mountain found a solution to this?

Here's my TVfool results:

http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...b97d44a98538bc
mikecandu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-Nov-2015, 7:18 PM   #7
rabbit73
Retired A/V Tech
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 2,550
Welcome, mikecandu:

Receiving WUTV Fox 14 seems to be a common problem in your area. Have you asked your question on the Canadian forum?
ON - Hamilton, Stoney Creek, Brantford, Haldimand
http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/129-...haldimand.html
Quote:
but it's probably CHCH that's the culprit.
Yes, it is CHCH on adjacent channel 15, which is 54.3 dB stronger causing interference. Max allowed is 33 dB stronger.

ATSC Recommended Practice:
Receiver Performance Guidelines

Document A/74:2010, 7 April 2010

RECEIVER PERFORMANCE GUIDELINES

5.4.2 Adjacent Channel Rejection

The receiver should meet or exceed the thresholds given in Table 5.2 for rejection of first adjacent-channel interference at the desired signal levels shown above the columns therein.


Quote:
I was suspecting interference from CTV in Kitchener (13 real)
No, not 13, it is a VHF-High channel, not UHF.

Since your antenna is facing CHCH when it is aimed at WUTV, you have a serious problem that might be impossible to fix, but I will try to give you a few ideas.

You can't use a preamp to make Fox stronger because it will be overloaded by your first 3 strong signals.

One possible solution might be to have a separate antenna for WUTV with a custom filter for WUTV from Tin Lee that would make CHCH weaker. I'm not even sure that they could design a custom single channel bandpass filter for WUTV. If they could, it would be expensive. You could talk to their engineer and email him your tvfool report.
http://www.tinlee.com/index.php
Quote:
I can't get WUTV but I get WNED (real 43) perfectly even though they are broadcasting from very similar locations.
WNED sends 156 kW of power your way:
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...ALLTV%26n%3d13

but WUTV only sends about 17 kW of power your way because of its antenna directional pattern:
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...ALLTV%26n%3d17



Another possibility would be making an antenna so directional that it would reject some of the CHCH signal when it is aimed at WUTV, because they are 10 degrees apart.



Another possibility that might work is the "Two Antenna Trick, Outdoor Version" as described on the hdtvprimer.com site. It is possible to connect two antennas so that WUTV would be at a main lobe peak and CHCH would be at a null:

Example 3: Cupertino, California 95015



Quote:
The towers for Sacramento and San Jose are only 15 degrees apart, but the San Jose towers are visible on the horizon. Pointing an amplified high-gain antenna in this direction will cause both preamp overload and adjacent channel interference. Putting San Jose in a null will permit the reception of Sacramento. Set the masts 40 inches apart. Reversing the polarity of one antenna will cause the null direction to not change with frequency, and all the San Jose stations can sit in the null.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg mikecanduTVFcovWUTV.JPG (124.2 KB, 1868 views)
File Type: jpg Example 3 TATOut (2)_1.jpg (44.4 KB, 1676 views)
__________________
If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
http://www.megalithia.com/elect/aeri...ttpoorman.html

Last edited by rabbit73; 29-Nov-2015 at 8:55 PM.
rabbit73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1-Dec-2015, 12:13 AM   #8
mikecandu
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 31
Hi,

Thanks for all the great information. Right now my setup is an 8 bay DB8E from Antenna's Direct mounted on a J pole on my chimney with a rotor for directional control. I have a Kitz Technology KT-200 pre-amp and a Homerun HD digital tuner.

My original plan was to face half the DB8E towards Toronto and the other half towards Buffalo. The Toronto portion worked great but there wasn't enough gain for the weaker Buffalo stations (plus Buffalo stations transmit from multiple locations) so I ended up using the DB8E as a conventional 8 bay with a rotor for directional control. One of the online techs from Antennas Direct recommended the 91XG when I was first planning my setup but it was a bit too big for mounting on a chimney and I wanted to avoid the complexity of a rotor. In hindsight that might have been a better choice for my situation.

Regarding FOX 29 in Buffalo ..well I might just throw in the towel on that one. I can get most of Fox's programming on the Canadian feeds and the stuff I can't get like NASCAR doesn't really interest me that much anyways.

I will try to e-mail the tinlee.com site to see if they have a single channel notch filter (I've also seen them called single channel UHF trap) but I'm skeptical that I'll be able to find something in the price range I'd be willing to pay.

Thanks for the advice and information.

Mike
mikecandu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1-Dec-2015, 12:54 AM   #9
rabbit73
Retired A/V Tech
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 2,550
You would need notch (bandstop) filters to attenuate at least your 3 strongest channels if you wanted to use the same antenna for everything.

You would need a single channel bandpass filter for WUTV Fox, real channel 14, virtual channel 29.1 using a separate antenna.

Careful, filters are designed using the real RF channel, not the virtual channel number.

You might also be able to use their AC7 filter to insert a signal from a Fox antenna into the main antenna system.

Different filters are needed for different solutions to the problem, which is why you need to talk to their filter engineer if you decide to try that.
Quote:
but I'm skeptical that I'll be able to find something in the price range I'd be willing to pay
Yes, they are expensive. Forum member mulliganman had good results with their AC7 filter, but his problem wasn't as difficult as yours. He wanted Fox on real channel 49 with a 91XG.

http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...d24362e8886d03

question regarding overamplification
http://forum.tvfool.com/showthread.php?t=15025
__________________
If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
http://www.megalithia.com/elect/aeri...ttpoorman.html

Last edited by rabbit73; 1-Dec-2015 at 1:16 AM.
rabbit73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1-Dec-2015, 1:33 AM   #10
mikecandu
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 31
From original post in thread..

"I used a notch filter and a quarter stub notch to block out CHCH (476-482 Mhz) but to no success. "

It looks like someone in Hamilton already tried the Notch filter idea without success.

Tinlee.com is located just north of Hamilton in Toronto so they are probably familiar with this exact problem. If they have a reasonable solution I'll try it, otherwise I'll just have to live without FOX.

Mike
mikecandu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2-Dec-2015, 2:30 PM   #11
Tower Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Delmar, NY
Posts: 1,164
Note that WUTV is running elliptical polarization.
One way to decrease the signal strength of channel 15 is to twist the receive antenna to vertical polarization. This will drop channel 15 by as much as 20 db while reducing WUTV by only 3 db. This drops the interference by as much as 17 db.
Tower Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-Apr-2017, 10:41 PM   #12
mikecandu
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 31
All,

This morning I received a $15 dollar voucher from Ebay so I think I'm going to try buying a 1 channel stop filter on E-bay from Jan_jenca.

The price is right. Hopefully it will work.

I tried to copy a link to the filter, but I'm not sure if it will work.

Mike


http://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/e11030...EF%3AUS%3A1123
mikecandu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-Apr-2017, 2:48 AM   #13
JoeAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 380
Lots of interesting posts which do not really address the underlying
problem. Why is it that so many in Southern Ontario WANT to receive
television from Buffalo, NY??? The answer is simple, Canadian television
is lousy at best. Not only is there a lack of Canadian content but the
CTRC prevents stations from using subchannels to deliver more choice
to Canadian viewers.
JoeAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-Apr-2017, 3:27 PM   #14
mikecandu
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 31
Joe,

At this point OTA is more of a hobby for me then a way of accessing TV channels.

My original plan was to "cut the cord" but still keep all the cable TV features, like pausing live TV , having a channel guide, DVR recorder etc.

I managed to do that using Homerunhd (Two tuner HDTV to IP converter) and Windows Media player. This system still wasn't simple enough for my wife so now we have OTA and conventional bell satellite TV.

It's handy because now we can get OTA tv on our smartphones and laptops so the two system do somewhat compliment each other.

Mike
mikecandu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-Apr-2017, 4:50 PM   #15
ADTech
Antennas Direct Tech Supp
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,932
Mike,

If you're considering ordering a band stop filter to attenuate an undesired channel that is immediately adjacent a desired channel, I'd suggest keeping your voucher for something doable. Such a filter would have to have so many poles to provide the cutoff frequencies that tight and the slopes that sharp that it would be somewhere extraordinarily expensive or impossible. You only have a couple hundred kHz to work in and you'd need the filter's attenuation deep enough to allow the weakened signal to be within 30-35 dB of the strong local signal.


I do have good news and bad news.

The good news is that WUTV is moving form channel 14 (CITS gets 14 in Phase 4) to channel 36 in Phase 4 of the repack.

The bad news is that CHCJ is right next door to you on channel 35 and they're staying put. You'd be swapping one adjacent channel problem for another.
__________________
Antennas Direct Tech Support

For support and recommendations regarding our products, please contact us directly at https://www.antennasdirect.com/customer-service.html

Sorry, I'm not a mod and cannot assist with your site registration.
ADTech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-Apr-2017, 6:53 PM   #16
mikecandu
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADTech View Post
Such a filter would have to have so many poles to provide the cutoff frequencies that tight and the slopes that sharp that it would be somewhere extraordinarily expensive or impossible. You only have a couple hundred kHz to work in and you'd need the filter's attenuation deep enough to allow the weakened signal to be within 30-35 dB of the strong local signal..
I was wondering that myself. The sample graph he (Jan_Jenca) has on ebay shows a deep notch with very little spill over to the adjacent channels. Last year I downloaded some software and thought about designing my own notch filter but the tolerances on the capacitors and the inductors were impossibly tight to meet. Maybe they have magical components in Slovakia

Quote:
Originally Posted by ADTech View Post

I do have good news and bad news.

The good news is that WUTV is moving form channel 14 (CITS gets 14 in Phase 4) to channel 36 in Phase 4 of the repack.

The bad news is that CHCJ is right next door to you on channel 35 and they're staying put. You'd be swapping one adjacent channel problem for another

..
This is more good news then bad. The big problem with CHCH is it is almost in the same angular direction as WUTV. I do have a rotor so I could compensate somewhat, and occasionally my tuner would lock in to WUTV.

CHCJ is west of me while WUTV is east south east of me. From the specs it looks like the DB8e is mostly directional so I think I'll be okay, or at least the situation isn't quite so hopeless. Also the antenna has better gain around 35 then at 14.

Mike
mikecandu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-Apr-2017, 11:09 PM   #17
mikecandu
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 31
The good news is that WUTV is moving form channel 14 (CITS gets 14 in Phase 4) to channel 36 in Phase 4 of the repack.

The bad news is that CHCJ is right next door to you on channel 35 and they're staying put. You'd be swapping one adjacent channel problem for another.


Do you have any dates when this is suppose to happen? Curiously, there's nothing on the WUTV website or the FCC link but rabbitears.info already lists WUTV on channel 36. I also found this list on a southern Ontario forum.

These channels will have new homes:
7 CKNY Huntsville
8 CFTO Toronto
9 CKVR Barrie
9 WHAM Rochester
11 Global Bancroft
11 Global Muskoka
13 CKWS Kingston
14 CITS Burlington
16 WNYO Buffalo
16 CITY-2 Woodstock
17 Global Toronto
18 OMNI1 Toronto
21 WROC Rochester
22 TVO Belleville
22 WXXI Rochester
23 Global Paris
24 WPXJ Batavia
26 OMNI2 Toronto
28 CHCH Muskoka
29 Global Durham [CHEX2] Oshawa
29 CKVP Fonthill
30 CITY Toronto
31 WNED Buffalo
34 WKBW Buffalo
36 WUTV Buffalo

That's a whole lot of changes!

Mike
mikecandu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-Apr-2017, 12:59 PM   #18
Tower Guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Delmar, NY
Posts: 1,164
The switch is currently scheduled for August 2, 2019. It may be delayed if the construction of about 100 stations in the Northeast are not ready to go by then.
Tower Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-Oct-2019, 11:00 PM   #19
mikecandu
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 31
WUTV 29 Buffalo comes in great since the repack!

Hi,

This thread has a happy ending. Since the repack Fox moved from 14 to 32 (real). WUTV went from one of my weakest stations, to one of my strongest.

Unfortunately some other stations are now weaker such as CBS WIVB channel 4. Hopefully this is because they are still getting their transmitters sorted out and eventually the signal strength will return.

Mike
mikecandu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Go Back   TV Fool > Over The Air Services > Help With Reception


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © TV Fool, LLC