I can't receive Bangor area over-the-air digital TV stations (Dixmont: house, live)

[chopper1340]

humm im in maine and yah it tuff getting many signals at first.im in midcoast area neer rockland and tv fool has me in a fringe area.i highly recamend doing a serch for the gary hoverman tv antenna.i built mine and its a single bay with reflector screen.there are some doble bat with narods that work better and give a stronger signal,but im able to get boston 187 miles away.im not using any amp of any sort.i dont get it all the time but on most days i get over 12 channals and on good days i get 26 diffrent ones . thanks for the threads theyved help me. best luck to all chopper

[beltrams]

It's funny how the FCC let (or forced) TV stations to keep their advertised channel numbers without any regard to what TV RF channel/frequency they're actually transmitting on now. There are guides on the Internet to report what actual broadcast channel/frequency a particular TV station is on, but the stations can also change. It makes antenna selection and orientation an even bigger challenge than it used to be.

Everything in this country and world is being tilted towards favoring the urban areas as world population moves towards the urban areas. This will continue until the end of fossil fuels makes large scale, distant agriculture impossibly expensive. Then the country side will start to repopulate because people tend to like to eat.

[cebdark]

Originally Posted by beltrams

It's funny how the FCC let (or forced) TV stations to keep their advertised channel numbers without any regard to what TV RF channel/frequency they're actually transmitting on now. There are guides on the Internet to report what actual broadcast channel/frequency a particular TV station is on, but the stations can also change. It makes antenna selection and orientation an even bigger challenge than it used to be.

Everything in this country and world is being tilted towards favoring the urban areas as world population moves towards the urban areas. This will continue until the end of fossil fuels makes large scale, distant agriculture impossibly expensive. Then the country side will start to repopulate because people tend to like to eat.

I tend to believe it's more along the lines of "bigger, better, faster, more." We're running out of clever ways to make lots of money by doing essentially nothing for it.

Well, that and the fact that the airwaves are quite literally clogged with ClearChannel communication radio stations - some of which broadcast the exact same "mass-produced" broadcasts. Thank heavens for Stephen King and K100, or I'd have to jump off a cliff.

Maybe I just need a tin hat.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by beltrams

... Everything in this country and world is being tilted towards favoring the urban areas as world population moves towards the urban areas. This will continue until the end of fossil fuels makes large scale, distant agriculture impossibly expensive. Then the country side will start to repopulate because people tend to like to eat.

It was required by the UN's agenda-21

[retiredtinbender]

And here I thought it was because NYC ran out of frequencies to use untangled diring 9/11. I heard the FCC and Fed wanted to stop that from becoming a problem again and possibly on a larger scale. Must be reading the wrong journals and talking to the wrong people.

[cebdark]

Originally Posted by retiredtinbender

And here I thought it was because NYC ran out of frequencies to use untangled diring 9/11. I heard the FCC and Fed wanted to stop that from becoming a problem again and possibly on a larger scale. Must be reading the wrong journals and talking to the wrong people.

Given how many times the station I'm listening to cuts in and out with another one from god only knows where, I can see why.

Still, it's pretty frustrating not to be able to get local channels unless you pay mucho buckos a month for it.

I suppose in the end it'll be a moot point since it seems a whole lot of people watch via the internet now.

[maine4.us]

You can look for the cable companies to start charging you for bandwidth. That will strangle internet TV, which even now is only fledgling. In Canada, the reaction to Netflix and streaming was to charge a fee for "excessive bandwidth." Depending on how much you stream, it can add significant charges to your monthly bill. If you go with your local TELCO, you aren't in much better shape. I always had issues with streaming with Verizon/Fairpoint. The reason is that they really don't have the bandwidth to stream HD. I have a Roku and a 6mb internet connection, and I still occasionally have a glitch, hiccup, or have to reload the movie. American's are grossly overcharged for the internet. In many countries $3.95 is a fair price, especially for the telco's which have had the technology for a long time.

[imjustthere]

In Brewer all I get is 5.1, 5.2, 7.1, and 7.2. There's a local NBC station right down the street, but my antenna doesn't pick it up for some reason. Are other people with digital antennas picking up more? Last year, when I lived outside of Maine i got a good 25 channels with that antenna, now all I get is a measley 4. What's the deal?

[cebdark]

Originally Posted by imjustthere

In Brewer all I get is 5.1, 5.2, 7.1, and 7.2. There's a local NBC station right down the street, but my antenna doesn't pick it up for some reason. Are other people with digital antennas picking up more? Last year, when I lived outside of Maine i got a good 25 channels with that antenna, now all I get is a measley 4. What's the deal?

I have a coworker in Brewer who ordered cable because she couldn't get any of them with an antenna, so I'm not sure what's up with that other than to say that in Maine, we have a lot hills and valleys.

In the Bangor area, we could only get channel 5 on one side of the room and it was iffy at best. We didn't have an outside antenna however, but the inside one wasn't a cheap first-generation one. We eventually just ran the cable to that tv.

I know people who for a long time couldn't get satellite reception because of natural interference where they live. As technology improves, more are able to access it, but I still know others who live in outlying areas who don't have reception at all.

[maine4.us]

It's the ridiculous low power that all digital stations operate at now that is the issue. Channel 2, WLBZ, used to run with 50kilowatts of power, now, it's a measley 3 kilowatts. Not even as much as a small FM station. Channel 5, WABI, went from 363 kilowatts to 12 kilowatts. Channel 7 went from 150 kilowatts to 14 kilowatts. The FCC in their infinite wisdom decreed that a digital signal would travel just as far as an analog, but on much less power. So, the issue isn't limited to topography, it's limited to how much power the stations are running. I would be surprised if WLBZ can be received outside the Bangor city limits. Channel 5 and 7 probably fare much better. This reduction in transmitting power saves the stations a ton of cash every month on their power bill.

By the way, everyone who receives the signal on antenna is pretty much in the same boat as people in Maine. Where I used to live, the terrain was flat, and I still had iffy reception of many channels only 11 miles from their tower.