All posts by Mr. R Baylis
Below are all of Mr. R Baylis's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
Whilst I agree that a lot of time warp TV channels show old programmes that weren't made in HD there's a huge amount of current content and movies on the main channels that benefit from HD, especially on a large screen. I'm 60 and I can assure you I always notice the difference between SD and the equivalent HD channel. The same with a DVD vs a Blu-ray. How can anyone not notice?
It's not an age related eyesight issue. Just people not caring and prepared to accept a sub standard image.
It's the same when I walk into someone's house and they have their TV set to stretch the picture to fill the screen regardless of the source. Old 4:3 shows look appalling like this; circles are ovals, people look fat, etc. Why put up with that?
| link to this comment |
StevensOnln1: Thank you for that information. With com7 and com8 simply disappearing from the diagram it wasn't clear what was going to happen to the channels carried on those mux. So am I correct in thinking that UHF 55 and 56 will appear in the list as new entries in the first column in the 700 between the existing C53 and C57? If that is the case, it might be helpful to update the diagram to include those two lines now, and show com7 and com8 in those lines on the column for March 2018 to show they have moved there.
I also notice the aerial group has changed from W back to A & K again as of this date. I've read the linked piece on aerial groups but am none the wiser, although I assume it relates to the transmitter aerial rather than the receivers? Otherwise I'd have thought there would have been a big campaign to alert us to the possible need to change our aerials again. I'm in a marginal signal area so back in 2015 I bought a Labgear LAB450T which has a 15db gain and a signal amplifier to upgrade the existing equipment. I'm assuming this will be sufficient?
| link to this comment |
Ridge Hill is my only transmitter option and is far enough away that I do suffer from channels being unavailable at time of adverse weather conditions. Yet I too am now suffering from the move of these mainstream HD channels to the weaker muxs and currently cannot get BBC News HD, BBC4 HD, etc. Which is a travesty. What muppet is responsible for this and who do we have to target with a petition to get it put back the way it was? With the prevelence of PVRs, USB connected storage options and catch up service ces, why do we need the ridiculous abundance of +1 hour channels? Kick them off to make the room. No one need lose any of the low quality channels, even though I'd personally like love to see them consigned to the dustbin to make room for more quality offerings. It's frustrating that E4 isn't offered in HD on freeview for a start.
| link to this comment |
@StevensOnin1, So what you are saying then that changes are planned without any consideration for the loss of major broadcast channels for a proportion of populace that live in more remote areas to provide for future mobile capacity that also doesn't cater for people in remote rural areas. Terrific.
It doesn't interest me in the slightest that commercial companies pay to broadcast the largely redundant +1 services. Availability of major channels in HD to everyone should be prioritised over time shift channels and minor interest channels. Surely the plethora of timewarp TV and shopping channels could be moved to the ones that we now fail to receive BBC News HD on? Those nearer the transmitters would be far more numerous and still able to get them if they desired.
But, as you say, the authorities don't give a damn about actual quality of Service and only are looking at s and EUROs Then they wonder why some people resort to illegal means of obtaining a full range of channels using IPTV!
| link to this comment |
I accept your point that we rural dwellers are disadvantaged in many ways. We've only just got fibre broadband and still don't have mobile coverage. Of course, we have many advantages of rural living too. In my case, it wasn't a matter of choice so I do feel more annoyed than those who might have made a conscious decision to locate to the country.
But my point is that our regulators are letting people down by putting money considerations over availability of channels that are from a public service broadcaster and paid for by our licence fees. True, those channels that we are now unlikely to receive due to the changes are also available in SD, but on a large screen TV look so much better in HD it isn't unreasonable for us to expect them to be part of the ring fenced service delivery.
You can spout commercial realities to me as much as you like, but I still think it is a very poor decision by the regulators and distinctly anti-consumer.
| link to this comment |
I'm not going to respond at all after this post as it's clear that there are apologists on here for the bad decisions being made by the regulators and the attitude is we have to put up with it. Which is a pretty poor attitude. Any way you cut it the principle of prioritising access to quality HD broadcasting to as many people as possible has been thrown out in favour of purely commercial considerations. Prior to these changes I could get channels 107 - 113 and now I can't. Added to the fact that 108 is Al Jazeera HD which is not broadcast in SD so that is a channel now denied to me. As I consider it's world news output vastly superior to the BBC that is a significant loss and you can't fudge that by saying I'm only losing channels that I can watch in SD. Channel 113 is RT HD that is another not broadcast elsewhere on Freeview in SD. It's a bad decision and that's it. I can't see any good reason why these channels couldn't have stayed where they were and other far less important channels could have shifted to the weaker parts of the transmission system. Like most consumers I have been sold on the idea of large screens HD capable screens and bought an expensive Freeview PVR and blu ray player, only now to see a dwindling number of HD channels due to the need to flog more capacity to mobile networks that can't even be arsed to provide proper coverage in rural areas. I was in Turkey last year and got a mobile signal wherever I went, even five miles out at sea. Yet the UK is lagging behind once again and we are told we just have to put up with it. And you wonder why I sound angry?
| link to this comment |
Sunday 14 January 2018 10:43PM
I'm confused by the diagram for Ridge Hill Frequency Changes Over Time. Everything changes massively post 31st March this year and there's no mention of support for com7 and com8. Does that mean we'll lose all the channels listed as carried on those MUX? It certainly looks as though a massive retune will be necessary.