Freeview re-tuning

[JBR]

Yet again, I find I am having to re-tune Freeview channels on my two BD/DVD recorders.
The recent event was necessitated by my sudden loss of Sky News signal (Channel 233), so I did a complete re-tune on both units and found several channels had had their numbers changed. Sky News had completely disappeared!

My question: why is it necessary to re-tune Freeview channels every few months?

Surely, it should be possible to leave all unaffected channels as they are, on their assigned channel numbers. I realise that new channels keep appearing and, at the same time, some old channels are discontinued (these are almost invariably the 'rubbish' channels that very few people watch anyway).

Would it not be more sensible, and less disruptive, to leave the 'more permanent' (Sky News, for example) and most popular channels where they are and either add new channels to newly created channel numbers or, alternatively, add new channels to those channel numbers vacated by discontinued services?

Perhaps there is a reason for these wholesale changes, but I cannot think what it might be.

 

[Lucid]

If Winter Hill was the only transmitter in the country then the answer would be Yes. But it's not.

The folk that run the transmitters have to juggle the frequencies of hundreds of transmitters to make sure that no two (or more) transmitters within range of each others distribution footprint cause interference with each other.

At my location - CW10 0EN - my local transmitter is Winter Hill. But I can also pick up Emley Moor (Yorkshire TV region) on a simple unamplified Log Periodic aerial. Logs have the lowest gain of most aerial groups, and yet when I re-tuned on the 7th I could still get loads of Yorkshire transmissions despite Emley Moor being on the other side of the whacking great lumps of rock and earth called The Pennines.

Winter Hill is at bearing 355 degrees and 31 miles away. Wolfsbane predicts a field strength of 46dBuV for this location and recommends an extra-high gain aerial with an amplifier. That's pretty much the entire opposite of what I am using.
Emley Moor is at bearing 47 degrees and 36 miles away. The predicted field strength is 27dBuV, yet I can still pick up the signals on a low gain aerial.

From where I am, and if I rotated and changed the polarisation of my aerial, I could potentially pick up from The Wrekin, Congleton, Haslingden, Fenton, Moel-y-Parc, Saddleworth and Sutton Coldfield as well as Winter Hill and Emley Moor. Some of those are smaller relay transmitters which are vertically polarised, so I wouldn't expect them to cause too many issues with horizontal reception. But still, Sutton Coldfield, Moel-y-Parc and The Wrekin are all main transmitters and some much more powerful than Winter Hill.

Cut Arqiva some slack. They're charged with managing the transmitter network and ensuring all these transmitters intermesh without significant interference problems. It was a hard-enough job when the channel band went from C21 to C68. Now it's C21-C60 and it's going to get smaller again when the next lump of frequencies are sold off for 4G mobile phone and data use.

For the last few years Winter Hill has run from C31 to C59. This year it will run from C29-C37. If you're using a wideband high-gain aerial and in a marginal area then get ready to spend some cash on a new aerial or suffer very poor reception.

 

[JBR]

Yes, I do appreciate that frequencies nationally have to be ordered very carefully in order to avoid interference, etc.

However, my point is that once a working system of frequencies is in place, and I assume that this has been sorted out quite some time ago, there should be no need to keep changing the frequencies.

I don't claim to understand all the ins and outs of the matter, but my logic is that once you have over a hundred working channels in each region there should be no need to change them all. Yes, new channels appear from time to time, but I have seen other channels disappear too. Why not accommodate the new channels within the frequencies vacated by others?

Quite apart from that, and this is only my personal opinion of course, but there are far too many channels anyway and I am sure that the majority have a very small following. Do we really need so many shopping and (dare I say it?) sex channels?

Incidentally, I re-tuned completely earlier today and found that Sky News had miraculously re-appeared, presumably because my earlier attempt was done late at night which, I understand, is not the best time to do such things for some reason. I then had the pleasure of going through the very many channels available and unchecking those of no interest to me. The resulting channels numbered only 22, and five of those were the first five which duplicated the five corresponding HD channels, but which I retained anyway 'just in case'.

 

[Lucid]

I agree with you that there are a lot of marginal interest channels. However, someone is paying the bill to keep them on air so for as long as there is demand then I suppose these channel will exist.

The politics of the channel moves must be a huge headache. On the one hand you have successive Government's who see the TV spectrum as a piggy bank they can raid to sell off space to 4G telecoms. On the other side you have all the viewers who have been watching TV on group aerials tuned to the upper end of the spectrum who now face the prospect of losing some or all of their reception as the channel move out of band. Even those with so-called Wideband High-Gain aerials face potential disruption as the channels shuffle down to a place where these aerials are definitely not High-Gain at all.

What would you prefer, suddenly one day to disenfranchise huge segments of the viewing public just so it doesn't inconvenience you that had to press the tuning button more than once, or is it better to have a more gradual shift which allows people time to adjust and if necessary then have their aerial changed to something more suitable?

I am hacked off about the retunes too, but not because of the personal inconvenience. My issue with it is the Government selling off an asset and casually ignoring the cost implications passed on to the general public.

 

[JBR]

What would you prefer, suddenly one day to disenfranchise huge segments of the viewing public just so it doesn't inconvenience you that had to press the tuning button more than once, or is it better to have a more gradual shift which allows people time to adjust and if necessary then have their aerial changed to something more suitable?

To be honest, what I would prefer is for them to just leave things alone.
If they want to introduce new channels, use those frequencies vacated by discontinued channels.
I still can't see why that can't be done. Yes, I know they want to auction off frequencies to make money, but once they've sold all they can, surely they could just leave well alone.

 

[Lucid]

Any new channels are contained within the existing muxes. The channel numbers (1 = BBC1, 2 = BBC2 etc) are simply convenient tags for ordering the channels in to some kind of familiar ranking. So you saying "use those frequencies vacated by existing channels " suggests that you haven't got a good grasp of how digital TV differs from the old analogue system where one frequency = one channel.

The muxes are what's actually broadcast on a frequency. A mux or multiplex to give it its full name is a package of channels. Winter Hill broadcasts 11 muxes. Some are high power and omnidirectional. There are a few that are low power and directional.

Incidentally, the process of vacating the 700MHz channel ready for being auctioned off is happening right now. That's why the retunes. It hasn't finished. It's ongoing as we speak. This is part of that process.

If you still can't understand what a mammoth task it is to organise a whole country's digital transmissions with respect to the moving goal posts that are the Government's requirements to sell off the family silver, and at the same time to balance that with the general population's receiving equipment's capabilities, then there's really no point in continuing the conversation. You'll never understand it because you don't want to understand it. It sounds like you just want to moan like some petulant Kevin teenager "Oh it's so unfair".

Yeah. Sometimes life is. Grown-ups deal with it.

 

[JBR]

If you still can't understand what a mammoth task it is to organise a whole country's digital transmissions with respect to the moving goal posts that are the Government's requirements to sell off the family silver, and at the same time to balance that with the general population's receiving equipment's capabilities, then there's really no point in continuing the conversation. You'll never understand it because you don't want to understand it. It sounds like you just want to moan like some petulant Kevin teenager "Oh it's so unfair".

Yeah. Sometimes life is. Grown-ups deal with it.

You're right. What a silly little boy I am, coming on here asking questions and trying to conduct an adult discussion. I should go back to my play pen, shouldn't I?

You should spend some time on the GD threads. Responses such as yours are what persuaded me to leave that section of the forum.

 

[Lucid]

Hey, wind your neck in. I've already tried to do the adult conversation thing with you.

I've told you what's happening and why, and given you the bigger picture than your little world with its minor inconvenience. I've done so patiently and with respect twice in this thread and yet you were still moaning "Oh it's not fair". You're not happy because the world doesn't work the way you think it should, and you seem to believe that whining and moaning here is going to change that. Now you're moaning again because I'm calling a spade a spade.

If you want to stay deluded then that's your business. Just don't expect others to put up with your crap because you can't deal with how the real world works.

Do let us know when you're ready to put on the big boy pants again

 

[JBR]

Yet more childish insults, and you're accusing me of being childish!

Clearly, you are not worth talking to.

You carry on trying to make yourself sound important. I'm out of here.

 

[Lucid]

Yet more delusion. You don't like the mirror being held up to you, do you?

Let's see.... you bailed on GD, and now you're bailing on AV too. Hmmm.... repeating pattern much? What's up; did folk got fed up there too when you persisted with unrealistic or ignorant positions despite being provided with logical evidence to the contrary?

Really, what were you expecting in this thread? Did you think the guys from Arqiva would tip in and shout up "Eh up lads, we'd better knock off this national retuning lark. Some guy on a forum can't fathom it. Tell Theresa that she better do her sums again 'cos t'4G sale is off "? Anything else you'd like to change while you're at it. Perhaps you'd like the sun to rise in the West, for example?

So now you're going flounce off and take your ball home because you don't like the rules of the game. Well, sorry to burst your bubble but it's no skin off our noses.

How quickly FMs forget the help they received. About two weeks ago I took great pains to help you with your PVR problem. Do you recall? No, clearly not. This is a link to that thread https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/panasonic-dmr-bwt850-bd-dvd-recorder-problem.498387/#post-4099167 By all means then, cut off your nose to spite your face.

Oh, and your closing insult is water off a duck's back to me. I know my place. But it's ironic, isn't it? You accuse me and yet you're the one with the condescending signature disparaging the good people of Lancashire. I'm happy to say you're not typical of the great folk from Yorkshire I've met and still know from my eight years living in Cleckheckmondsedge.

Off you pop then. Ta-Ta