Sinclair Broadcast Group - General Discussion

[padrechuck 25]

What does Sinclair own in Youngstown?

[padrechuck 25]

And Youngstown

[padrechuck 25]

Sorry. I miss-read your post. I meant that Sinclair is just about all over Ohio: North: Toledo, South: Cincinnati, East: Steubenville, West: Dayton and Central: Columbus.

[tyrannical bastard 3442]

...my bad, forgot about Steubenville. I guess they would cheer on the Buckeyes, but due to their proximity to Pittsburgh (and getting some TV from there until recently), it's Steelers country.

[MichiganNewsGraphicsJunkie 740]

Hey I'm new to this forum... But a question.. Are the new graphics packages rolling out to all the Sinclair owned stations?? Just curious.. WWMT 3 here in Kalamazoo is WAY overdue for a makeover... Thanks

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

...my bad, forgot about Steubenville. I guess they would cheer on the Buckeyes, but due to their proximity to Pittsburgh (and getting some TV from there until recently), it's Steelers country.

 

It is Steelers country but pretty much everyone on the Ohio side of the market is on the Ohio State bandwagon.

[rkolsen 1675]

The reporter and photographer behind the WBFF news story in which video from a protest over police brutality was edited and taken out of context have been let go by the station.

 

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvspy/reporter-and-photog-behind-wbff-kill-a-cop-report-out-at-baltimore-station_b137037

Someone commented that the news director wanted the reporter to do a story on that edited YouTube clip making it sound like she was told to do the story (which I guess is the ND's job to dole out assignments). I wonder if she was told to do the story using that specific clip and spin it a certain way by focusing in on "kill a cops" instead of "killer cops". As an anonymous insider told FTVLive "It was found by him [News Director], assigned by him and ultimately proofed by him."

 

If not I would think it would be evident to me to go to the source, in that case C-SPAN (whose live content is TVEverywhere but archives are free) and find the original video just to do my due diligence. If the reporter couldn't find the clip in question on C-SPAN, I'm sure there are other sources she could went to like Fox News Edge, CNN Newsource, APTN and their own affiliate WJLA all of which would have some coverage of the event.

 

Either way it sounds like the reporter and photographer were being scapegoated on an assignment that was handed to her by the news director who got a slap on the wrist with a one day suspension. In addition the producer to sent the news director the link of the video was suspended for two days.

[T.L. Hughes 746]

I noticed when KOKH began carrying Grit on New Year's Eve, that the station converted the 25.2 subchannel to 16:9 from 4:3 (the aspect ratio it used as a ZUUS Country affiliate). Now, 25.1 is transmitted in Fox's preferred 720p resolution and the WeatherNation subchannel they launched on 25.3 in early December is transmitted in 480i (as the Grit subchannel is) and in 16:9. How much bitrate is needed to carry a station's main channel and two subchannels in 16:9, and (I only ask this since I use a digital tuner on an SDTV, so I wouldn't know this) can it be done with little impairment of the main signal? I've only heard of stations carrying two 16:9 channels and one or two 4:3 channels on a single digital signal.

[rkolsen 1675]

I noticed when KOKH began carrying Grit on New Year's Eve, that the station converted the 25.2 subchannel to 16:9 from 4:3 (the aspect ratio it used as a ZUUS Country affiliate). Now, 25.1 is transmitted in Fox's preferred 720p resolution and the WeatherNation subchannel they launched on 25.3 in early December is transmitted in 480i (as the Grit subchannel is) and in 16:9. How much bitrate is needed to carry a station's main channel and two subchannels in 16:9, and (I only ask this since I use a digital tuner on an SDTV, so I wouldn't know this) can it be done with little impairment of the main signal? I've only heard of stations carrying two 16:9 channels and one or two 4:3 channels on a single digital signal.

I noticed when KOKH began carrying Grit on New Year's Eve, that the station converted the 25.2 subchannel to 16:9 from 4:3 (the aspect ratio it used as a ZUUS Country affiliate). Now, 25.1 is transmitted in Fox's preferred 720p resolution and the WeatherNation subchannel they launched on 25.3 in early December is transmitted in 480i (as the Grit subchannel is) and in 16:9. How much bitrate is needed to carry a station's main channel and two subchannels in 16:9, and (I only ask this since I use a digital tuner on an SDTV, so I wouldn't know this) can it be done with little impairment of the main signal? I've only heard of stations carrying two 16:9 channels and one or two 4:3 channels on a single digital signal.

Television stations in the US have a maximum capacity of 19.3Mbps in their transport stream. Most stations use variable bitrates meaning that if the main HD channel needs more bandwidth (like in during sports) they can fluctuate the streams bitrate there by making the sub channel use less. KOKH appears to use between12-15.8Mbps for their HD channel, which appears to be average. According to RabbitEars the average bit rate for a 1280x720p broadcast is 12.18Mbps. SD sub channels, regardless of aspect ratio generally average around 4Mbps.

 

From what I've seen 720p looks great around 9-10Mbps, add in in two SD sub channels at 4Mbps a piece then your at your limit. But if Fox were to broadcast at 1080i anything below 13Mbps looks like crap.

 

Generally networks write in specified parameters regarding bitrates in their affiliation agreements. Currently finding the parameters. Will post back later.

 

NBC - Minimum 6Mbps / Nominal 9.1Mbps

Cozi TV - Minimum 500Kbps / Nominal 3 Mbps

CBS - Doesn't appear to have a minimum but they expect the maximum to be the full transport stream at 19.39Mbps

[mvcg66b3r 97]

RabbitEars has just updated WTWC and WTLH's entries:

WTWC 40.2 (FOX) is now in 720p HD. 40.1 (NBC) is 720p as well (was 1080i; may still be 1080i on cable).

WTLH 49.1 is now blank, 49.2 CW (480i SD), 49.3 MeTV (480i SD).

http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?request=station_search&callsign=66908#station

http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?request=station_search&callsign=23486#station

[rkolsen 1675]

RabbitEars has just updated WTWC and WTLH's entries:WTWC 40.2 (FOX) is now in 720p HD. 40.1 (NBC) is 720p as well (was 1080i; may still be 1080i on cable).WTLH 49.1 is now blank' date=' 49.2 CW (480i SD), 49.3 MeTV (480i SD).http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?request=station_search&callsign=66908#stationhttp://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?request=station_search&callsign=23486#station

Yes, the networks are often times willing to allow their picture quality / desired resolution slide over the air but has the option for them to transmit the 1080i image to cable & satellite if capable. For example Sinclair's KTVO, licensed to the Honeylands region of NE Missouri and SE Iowa is primarily affiliated to ABC and secondarily to CBS both of which broadcast over the air at 720p. Their affiliation agreement requires a minimum resolution of 704x480 (16:9) but has a clause stating that KTVO has the option to transmit the 1080i signal at bitrates up to 19.3 Mbps to cable companies. However rarely see the satellite companies take a direct fiber connection to the station rather they choose to pick up the signal over the air. I've seen this option with CBS & Telemundo sub channel stations.

[Thundershock MN 169]

I'm still having trouble with the "quote" function. First, Trip's site (rabbitears.info) is fantastic and has a plethora of information. But, WRT bitrates, etc. I'd like to point out that encoders have greatly improved (and continue to improve) since the introduction of ATSC. Newer "state of the art" encoders are more efficient allowing for lower bit rates (and, variable bit rates) to be used without degradation. This frees up space to run dual HD and/or more subchannels. JVC did a nice blog write up on this back in 2011. It's slightly dated but, the basics remain the same and if anything things have improved further.

 

I personally think too much is made of focusing solely on bitrates. It only tells you part of the story. If a station has the proper equipment they can do things like run dual HD or more subchannels now with little to no impact on the "primary stream." I can speak to this first hand. To the best of my knowledge when KMSP/WFTC made their changes last summer they upgraded their equipment prior to the changes so, there were no noticeable changes in PQ. However, on the other end of the spectrum you have KSTP/KSTC that pushes the bitrate limits on (to the best of my knowledge) "older" equipment that clearly isn't designed to that resulting in degraded PQ. With all that said I expect those "average bitrates" on Trip's site to continue to fall as stations upgrade their equipment and make more efficient use of their bandwidth.

[Samantha 2876]

 

I'm still having trouble with the "quote" function. First, Trip's site (rabbitears.info) is fantastic and has a plethora of information. But, WRT bitrates, etc. I'd like to point out that encoders have greatly improved (and continue to improve) since the introduction of ATSC. Newer "state of the art" encoders are more efficient allowing for lower bit rates (and, variable bit rates) to be used without degradation. This frees up space to run dual HD and/or more subchannels. JVC did a nice blog write up on this back in 2011. It's slightly dated but, the basics remain the same and if anything things have improved further.

 

I personally think too much is made of focusing solely on bitrates. It only tells you part of the story. If a station has the proper equipment they can do things like run dual HD or more subchannels now with little to no impact on the "primary stream." I can speak to this first hand. To the best of my knowledge when KMSP/WFTC made their changes last summer they upgraded their equipment prior to the changes so, there were no noticeable changes in PQ. However, on the other end of the spectrum you have KSTP/KSTC that pushes the bitrate limits on (to the best of my knowledge) "older" equipment that clearly isn't designed to that resulting in degraded PQ. With all that said I expect those "average bitrates" on Trip's site to continue to fall as stations upgrade their equipment and make more efficient use of their bandwidth.

 

In addition I expect to see some use of MPEG-4 on ATSC, especially in a next generation standard.

 

In Mexico TV Azteca ran a service called HiTV using its three Mexico City stations — the channels of said service were broadcast over the air (in Mexico City Azteca has a continuous swath of 18 MHz of spectrum, 24-25-26). On channel 26 (40.x) they ran 7 subchannels, one of which was in HD MPEG-2 (while Mexican stations can use MPEG-4 their primary subchannel must be in MPEG-2 for compatibility reasons) and the others in SD MPEG-4.

 

HiTV ran into some legal trouble. Originally Azteca sold special decoder equipment for it (as most digital equipment from the US could not handle MPEG-4) and charged a subscription but in 2010 they were forced to open the service after the SCT told them they really couldn't charge for pay TV on a broadcast concession. It's likely that the disappearance of HiTV over the last few months (I believe it also ran on their Guadalajara transmitters) is related to the massive legal changes in Mexican telecom law and also the fact that digital subchannels under new policy (currently being drafted) will be regulated much more tightly than an American observer is used to.

[mvcg66b3r 97]

Newer "state of the art" encoders are more efficient allowing for lower bit rates (and, variable bit rates) to be used without degradation. This frees up space to run dual HD and/or more subchannels.

RabbitEars has a list of stations with dual HD subchannels. A few stations even have three HD subchannels!

http://www.rabbitears.info/oddsandends.php?request=dualhd

[rkolsen 1675]

In addition I expect to see some use of MPEG-4 on ATSC, especially in a next generation standard.

I wish during the digital switch over the manufacturers included MPEG 4 capability / the ability to run software upgrades so when we finally switch over to ATSC 3.0 there won't be another rush of people buying new adapters. Unfortunately the FCC wasn't thinking that far ahead and the manufacturers will want the influx of people buying new hardware to improve their bottom line.

[Samantha 2876]

 

I wish during the digital switch over the manufacturers included MPEG 4 capability / the ability to run software upgrades so when we finally switch over to ATSC 3.0 there won't be another rush of people buying new adapters. Unfortunately the FCC wasn't thinking that far ahead and the manufacturers will want the influx of people buying new hardware to improve their bottom line.

 

There is an ATSC norm A/72 for MPEG-4 but I think the US just came too early to be able to implement it.

 

While the use of MPEG-2 for a 90s standard is understandable, I think the bigger miss was using 8VSB instead of OFDM modulation. ATSC can't support single frequency networks, mobile reception, etc. Having done much research into Mexican television, a British-style DTT system would have been far more suitable if only economic imperatives and geopolitical realities didn't dictate their use of ATSC.

[rkolsen 1675]

There is an ATSC norm A/72 for MPEG-4 but I think the US just came too early to be able to implement it.

 

While the use of MPEG-2 for a 90s standard is understandable, I think the bigger miss was using 8VSB instead of OFDM modulation. ATSC can't support single frequency networks, mobile reception, etc. Having done much research into Mexican television, a British-style DTT system would have been far more suitable if only economic imperatives and geopolitical realities didn't dictate their use of ATSC.

Either last year or in 2013 Sinclair did overnight tests of DVB-T2 the standard in the UK. How ever one thing that makes me worried about the British style TV system is they only have six eight multiplex channels where different stations share the same multiplex. I wonder if that is by choice of Ofcom or limited availability. I do wonder if it was implemented here in the US would each station continue to have their own multiplex and avoid channel sharing?

 

Could you imagine the picture quality if TV stations could use the full 40Mbps bit rate that some of the muxes have in the UK? If some station decided to only air one HD channel at 40Mbps that would be awfully close to the bitrates of BluRay (50Mbps)

[Samantha 2876]

 

Either last year or in 2013 Sinclair did overnight tests of DVB-T2 the standard in the UK. How ever one thing that makes me worried about the British style TV system is they only have six eight multiplex channels where different stations share the same multiplex. I wonder if that is by choice of Ofcom or limited availability. I do wonder if it was implemented here in the US would each station continue to have their own multiplex and avoid channel sharing?

 

Could you imagine the picture quality if TV stations could use the full 40Mbps bit rate that some of the muxes have in the UK? If some station decided to only air one HD channel at 40Mbps that would be awfully close to the bitrates of BluRay (50Mbps)

 

WNUV did test DVB-T2 in 2013.

 

First off I think there'd need to be more multiplex channels (say, 9 or 10) solely due to channel width (8 MHz versus 6). Secondly, it'd be a nightmare ensuring that all the networks had just one channel number (put CBS on 2 and anger viewers in Midland, Fort Myers and St. Louis, for instance). You need to have a more nationalized media landscape to make those types of channel allocations. From the business side, many "basic cable" channels are now found on the commercial side of these multiplexes (this would never happen). And technically most countries that do this have ONE transmitter operator, usually a private concern in and of itself (e.g. Arqiva in the UK).

 

The only country in the Americas going DVB-T(2) is Colombia, which has the nationalized media landscape and technical infrastructure to make it work. They're also implementing a very tight frequency allocation program with 6 MHz-wide muxes rigidly assigned nationwide and all in MPEG4 compression:

 

14: Caracol

15: RCN

16: RTVC (public)

17: Reserved for a third national private network

18: Regional public channels

 

After transition that will be it. No more VHF, no higher UHF channels, and what seems to be four muxes for broadcast.

[Thundershock MN 169]

There is an ATSC norm A/72 for MPEG-4 but I think the US just came too early to be able to implement it.

 

While the use of MPEG-2 for a 90s standard is understandable, I think the bigger miss was using 8VSB instead of OFDM modulation. ATSC can't support single frequency networks, mobile reception, etc. Having done much research into Mexican television, a British-style DTT system would have been far more suitable if only economic imperatives and geopolitical realities didn't dictate their use of ATSC.

ATSC does support single frequency networks (ATSC a/111), WTVE in Reading currently operates a SFN (or Distributed Transmission System.) It also supports mobile (ATSC a/153.) Although, like the MPEG-4 support they are all "addendums" that came later on.

 

The DVB-T2 test was kind of a test for ASTC 3.0. Although, everything has yet to be finalized part of Sinclair's test was to try out other standards, like DVB-T2 that could be adapted to fit the new ASTC 3.0 standard under development.

 

Personally, I think ASTC 3.0 faces an uphill battle. I want to see it happen and achieve full adoption. But, like the MPEG-4 extension I think it faces a "chicken or the egg" conundrum. Do broadcasters go "all in" and invest in new equipment and hope consumers upgrade with new tuners? Or, do they wait for enough new tuners to enter the marketplace before making the switch? The only way I see ASTC 3.0 being a success is if it's implemention is timed to take place as part of the repack and/or they find a way to make it backwords compatible. Otherwise, I fear it will end up like "HD Radio", etc.

[rkolsen 1675]

ATSC does support single frequency networks (ATSC a/111) and mobile (ATSC a/153.) Although, like the MPEG-4 support they are all "addendums" that came later on.

The DVB-T2 test was kind of a test for ASTC 3.0. Although, everything has yet to be finalized part of Sinclair's test was to try out other standards, like DVB-T2 that could be adapted to fit the new ASTC 3.0 standard under development.

Personally, I think ASTC 3.0 faces an uphill battle. I want to see it happen and achieve full adoption. But, like the MPEG-4 extension I think it faces a "chicken or the egg" conundrum. Do broadcasters go "all in" and invest in new equipment and hope consumers upgrade with new tuners? Or, do they wait for enough new tuners to enter the marketplace before making the switch? The only way I see ASTC 3.0 being a success is if it's implemention is timed to take place as part of the repack and/or they find a way to make it backwords compatible. Otherwise, I fear it will end up like "HD Radio", etc.

If broadcasters go all in and invest in new equipment prior to widespread adoption is that they would be cutting off most of their over the air viewership. I don't know how they could maintain backwards compatibility with ATSC 1.0 when the stations would be broadcasting an ATSC 3.0 transport stream. Somehow the ATSC 1.0 receivers would have to figure out how to decode the 3.0 stream. The only way it could them maintain backwards compatibility would be is if the FCC allowed a companion channel similar the analog/digital simulcast but I can't see the FCC allocating additional spectrum. In addition I doubt that Congress would run another Converter coupon program so soon (but if they did I hope they would make it where boxes could take software updates for future standards.)

WNUV did test DVB-T2 in 2013.

 

First off I think there'd need to be more multiplex channels (say, 9 or 10) solely due to channel width (8 MHz versus 6). Secondly, it'd be a nightmare ensuring that all the networks had just one channel number (put CBS on 2 and anger viewers in Midland, Fort Myers and St. Louis, for instance). You need to have a more nationalized media landscape to make those types of channel allocations. From the business side, many "basic cable" channels are now found on the commercial side of these multiplexes (this would never happen). And technically most countries that do this have ONE transmitter operator, usually a private concern in and of itself (e.g. Arqiva in the UK).

 

The only country in the Americas going DVB-T(2) is Colombia, which has the nationalized media landscape and technical infrastructure to make it work. They're also implementing a very tight frequency allocation program with 6 MHz-wide muxes rigidly assigned nationwide and all in MPEG4 compression:

 

14: Caracol

15: RCN

16: RTVC (public)

17: Reserved for a third national private network

18: Regional public channels

 

After transition that will be it. No more VHF, no higher UHF channels, and what seems to be four muxes for broadcast.

Your right the way the UK muxes are setup is that every transmitter broadcasts the same channel number nation wide. If we were to launch DVB-T2 kind of system I think it would be similar to our channel structure today where each station would have sub channels like for WJZ all of their channels would be 13.2, 13.3 etc.

You mentioned that channels carried UK's Freeview (how they brand their OTA) are bit of a basic cable type of channels. I however don't see any basic cable channels ever being launched terrestrials here in the U.S. First of all I doubt the cable networks would want to give out their content for free, given the fact they command a per subscriber fee from the cable companies. Second I believe the cable companies would protest the cable networks giving their signal for free there by enabling cord cutters. The only way I see cable channels being carried over the air would be if they are encrypted requiring a subscription to decode the channels (in the 1980s there were services that broadcast movies overnight that required a special receiver to receive the channel.)

 

You know there should be a thread discussing all things technical and discussions about nitrates bit rates (iPad keeps auto correcting.)

[compubit 670]

The US could implement ATSC 3.0 as the UK has done with DVB-T2: If you want HD, you have to upgrade to a newer Freeview box (that supports MPEG-4), but digital TV (SD widescreen) is available for backwards compatibility.

 

I wish, though, that station transmitters would all be co-located within a market - with SFN-types of repeaters to fill in coverage, plus markets would be "banded" together frequency-wise. For example, if a market had 5 channels, then at a co-located transmission site, that market would have say channels 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18 (maybe with 19 & 20 as "spares"). OTA users could then have one place to point to, as well as a frequency-matched antenna.

 

Of course, it could end up like Italy, where nearly every channel is in use country-wide - but for national channels, the muxes are on the same frequency: MediaSet Mux 2 is always on Ch. 36 and TIM Mux 1 is always on ch. 47. But where there isn't a national channel, there probably is a local or regional channel offering even more programming.

 

Side note:

Digital TV in Italy has intrigued me - where we stayed near Cortona, my computer tuner identified over 250 streams over the air. Some were radio, some were encrypted, but most were regional or national channels. There were some duplicates - sometimes a local channel will carry a channel from a different state (in exchange for carriage in the other locale), so you can pick up a stream twice if you're in the right location. Being interested in local news, my biggest issue was trying to figure out when local newscasts aired (teletext was the only semi-reliable solution - no printed local/regional guide, and websites were lacking with program guides or just program info for just 1 stream).

[Mrtraveler01 737]

David Zurawik from the Baltimore Sun had another article about the fallout from WBFF's selectively editing video for their news packages.

 

http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/tv/z-on-tv-blog/bs-ae-zontv-fox45-20150109-story.html#page=1

[bhratbrat 423]

Took a look at KDNLs website and apparently the Allman Report (their news programming) is on at 6:30 AM this morning. NMSA already has them listed using Sinclair News Package as well.

[Mrtraveler01 737]

 

Took a look at KDNLs website and apparently the Allman Report (their news programming) is on at 6:30 AM this morning. NMSA already has them listed using Sinclair News Package as well.

 

Apparently it started last week. It also looks like KDNL has a new logo as well. You can see clips of the program on their Facebook page. For some reason the KDNL website doesn't even have anything about this program. But based on the clips I've seen on Facebook, it's a TV version of his radio show. Which I guess you have to give Sinclair credit for trying something different (in the cheapest and laziest manner possible) but outside of the folks who would listen to his radio show, I don't see how this is going to attract viewers.

 

https://www.facebook.com/kdnl30

 

I live in St. Louis and I've seen no promotion for this program at all minus the one story I saw in the Post-Dispatch (newspaper) announcing this program.

[rkolsen 1675]

Apparently it started last week. It also looks like KDNL has a new logo as well. You can see clips of the program on their Facebook page. For some reason the KDNL website doesn't even have anything about this program. But based on the clips I've seen on Facebook, it's a TV version of his radio show. Which I guess you have to give Sinclair credit for trying something different (in the cheapest and laziest manner possible) but outside of the folks who would listen to his radio show, I don't see how this is going to attract viewers.

 

https://www.facebook.com/kdnl30

 

I live in St. Louis and I've seen no promotion for this program at all minus the one story I saw in the Post-Dispatch (newspaper) announcing this program.

 

Their studio looks good.

 

Edit: I see they are renting studio space from a company called Pelopidas.