Could VHF 2 through 6 become analog-only?

[IM42A]

This isn't as crazy as it may sound. Stay with me on this.

I was reading about CHBX-TV in Sault Ste Marie, Ontario, which according to its Wikipedia article remains analog and on VHF channel 2. I don't know if they have moved to digital (VHF 13) and the article just hasn't been updated, but assuming they remain analog, might it be a feasible plan to dedicate VHF channels 2 through 6 in the US and Canada to analog-only, possibly for independent and other broadcasters who aren't affiliated with a major network, and migrate what few low-VHF digital broadcasters there are (including CHBX) onto high-VHF or UHF channels?

Low-VHF is supposedly plagued with problems that makes it an undesirable medium for DTV, while at the same time being perfectly suited for analog, and easier reception at greater distances at that. Moreover --- someone correct me if I'm wrong --- these frequencies would be useless for commercial telecommunications purposes such as smartphones, data, and so on. So they are of little use to anyone except TV broadcasters who wouldn't mind offering an analog signal. Most DTV receivers are also capable of receiving analog as channel x.0.

And, of course, it would make for great DX, though I realize that is of no interest to anyone except hobbyists.

Thoughts from the forum?

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

I know channel 6 it's inside the FM band as 87.7 FM. But not likely to make Channels 2-6 analog anymore given where we are today with current technology.

The 3 Best FM Transmitters

Well you can use analog Channel 6 for personal FM Transmitters at 87.7 FM and that's it.

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/scosche-btfreq-bluetooth-fm-transmitter-hands-free-car-kit-w-dual-usb-ports-v5-0-black/6410246.p?skuId=6410246

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/scosche-btfreq-bluetooth-fm-transmitter-hands-free-car-kit-w-dual-usb-ports-black/6345474.p?skuId=6345474

 

[radiofan2023]

Stop believing everything you read on Wikipedia and contact the station to ask them

 

[tripinva]

"Could VHF 2 through 6 become analog-only?"

No.

- Trip

 

[kevtronics]

All such grand ideas have failed:

"DTV will be on UHF only" -- Nope.
"Okay, but at least only on VHF-High, not VHF-Low" -- Nope.
"Turn VHF-Low into a new digital radio band" -- Nope.
"Okay, at least add channels 5 to 6 to FM" -- Nope.
"Can we even get channel 6 for FM, since it's so close?" -- Nope.

 

[Michi]

VHF low band is the most undesirable for digital TV. In fact, every nation outside of the North American region has dropped VHF low band and in many cases, high band in favor of UHF. So far, Japan and Brazil have reclaimed former TV spectrum for use for FM broadcasting. CITEL, which is an international association of Western Hemisphere nations has already made official recommendations for member nations to be able to use the 76~88 MHz band for sound broadcasting. REC has developed a way to implement this spectrum with an emphasis on expanding noncommercial educational services at Home | WIDE-FM: Radio's Long Overdue Expansion.

Over the past few years, we have seen an exodus of stations out of the low band going to high band or UHF. Those who are still behind on Channel 5 or 6 are either
(1) Don't really care about over the air viewers, they just want the must-carry.
(2) Are legacy analog TV 5/6 stations in more rural areas with established over the air viewerships using outdoor VHF low antennas and are not willing or able to make the change to UHF (such as funding for PBS stations, etc.)
(3) Were LPTV stations that moved to channel 6 with a hope that they would be one day permitted FM6 (Franken FM) operation before the FCC set their fate with the decision in MB Docket 03-185 to limit such operation to 14 stations.
(4) Can't move off the channel even if they wanted to because of crowding (WPVI, Philadelphia).

Most consumer grade TV antennas (indoor and outdoor) are simply not designed to handle low VHF that well.

Making the spectrum "analog TV only" would be pointless and would only serve a small number of hobbyists in the long run. There have been delays in launching DTV both because of transmission equipment delays or delays of consumer conversion in very deep rural parts of Alaska and possibly northern Canada. We saw the delays originally requested by the State of Alaska on the LPTV analog shutdown for that reason.

Honestly, I would love to see 54~60 MHz (TV Channel 2) be allocated to the amateur radio service on a secondary basis and to allow up to a 6 MHz bandwidth and image privileges.

 

[Kelly A]

Honestly, I would love to see 54~60 MHz (TV Channel 2) be allocated to the amateur radio service on a secondary basis and to allow up to a 6 MHz bandwidth and image privileges.

Ham's don't need any more spectrum. They barely use what they have now.

 

[valvashon]

And from a broadcasters perspective, the infrastructure for analog broadcasting has largely been dismantled and sent off to the electronics recyclers. Any analog broadcasts would likely be downconverted HD or SD with most plants being 100% digital at this point. Many engineers would have to re-learn the details of analog broadcasting. The ROI on re-introducing analog transmtters would probably not be there. So no.

 

[JeeperOne]

This isn't as crazy as it may sound. Stay with me on this.

I was reading about CHBX-TV in Sault Ste Marie, Ontario, which according to its Wikipedia article remains analog and on VHF channel 2. I don't know if they have moved to digital (VHF 13) and the article just hasn't been updated, but assuming they remain analog, might it be a feasible plan to dedicate VHF channels 2 through 6 in the US and Canada to analog-only, possibly for independent and other broadcasters who aren't affiliated with a major network, and migrate what few low-VHF digital broadcasters there are (including CHBX) onto high-VHF or UHF channels?

In a word - No

Why??

1). NextGen TV will render the need for Analog TV moot (And regular HDTV had already pretty much done that already)

2). Smart TVs manufactured today aren't designed with Analog in mind (Besides, who would want to watch some Analog TV station broadcasting in 16:9 Widescreen in ANY resolution (That would be somewhere around 480p (??) @ 25 fps)?? Not me. Twitch streamers stream at higher quality than that)

3). A myriad of other services from Ham Radio (Of which I am very familiar with ) to FM Radio broadcasters & Part 15 Microcasters are all hoping & vying to get a piece of this precious spectrum. Plus remember the audio portion IS NOT the only portion up for grabs. The video portion is as well (And some of that was shared with broadcast TV by these same other services now vying to keep what they've had to themselves since 2009 TO themselves)

That;s why

 

[KeithE4]

Well you can use analog Channel 6 for personal FM Transmitters at 87.7 FM and that's it.

No, you can't. The FCC is absolutely clear on the subject.

47 CFR 15.239 -- Operation in the band 88-108 MHz
(a) Emissions from the intentional radiator shall be confined within a band 200 kHz wide centered on the operating frequency. The 200 kHz band shall lie wholly within the frequency range of 88–108 MHz. (Emphasis is mine.)

(b) The field strength of any emissions within the permitted 200 kHz band shall not exceed 250 microvolts/meter at 3 meters. The emission limit in this paragraph is based on measurement instrumentation employing an average detector. The provisions in § 15.35 for limiting peak emissions apply.

(c) The field strength of any emissions radiated on any frequency outside of the specified 200 kHz band shall not exceed the general radiated emission limits in § 15.209.

In addition, 15.209 prohibits any operation in the TV bands, with some exceptions that do not include Part 15 FM broadcast transmitters.

 

[anotherguyTN]

It might have made sense to keep 2 through 6 analog if it had been done in 2009 but it's too late to turn back now.

 

[IM42A]

Stop believing everything you read on Wikipedia and contact the station to ask them

I'm assuming that nobody ever updated the Wikipedia article. There's usually somebody out there, somewhere, who cares enough about any given subject, to go in and update articles every time something material happens that changes the narrative. Maybe that never happened here.

 

[Kelly A]

It might have made sense to keep 2 through 6 analog if it had been done in 2009 but it's too late to turn back now.

The Commission was very clear from the beginning back in the 90s that they intended to make all TV digital. Since that the process was completed years ago, it seems silly why anyone would consider going backward.
Was setting up a new TV in my home gym the other day, having it run through and program local channels. It doesn't even have an analog TV search as an option. Just digital cable and antenna DTV. Facts are; that nobody is doing analog which means even if it were allowed, the station owner would be on an island of their own with no viewership. Not exactly a model for a successful business.

 

[Kelly A]

I'm assuming that nobody ever updated the Wikipedia article. There's usually somebody out there, somewhere, who cares enough about any given subject, to go in and update articles every time something material happens that changes the narrative. Maybe that never happened here.

Or as we've seen admitted on this very site, some know zero about the subject, yet will 'edit' content for Wikipedia anyway.

 

[IM42A]

Perhaps, then, if there's no turning back and making VHF 2-6 an ancillary analog service for broadcasters who aren't concerned with all the bells and whistles of digital --- hyper-local community broadcasters and so on (who, to be fair, could use digital LPTV, assuming they could get a frequency) --- then the question is "what, then, would be the highest and best use of that spectrum?".

I tend to think an expanded FM band would be that "highest and best use", but then you have to manufacture a whole new set of radios to pick it up. Not many people have those "TV band radios" that were on the market back in the 1970s and 1980s (I had a few of those myself) and that only picked up VHF 2-13.

 

[Kelly A]

Perhaps, then, if there's no turning back and making VHF 2-6 an ancillary analog service for broadcasters who aren't concerned with all the bells and whistles of digital --- hyper-local community broadcasters and so on (who, to be fair, could use digital LPTV, assuming they could get a frequency) --- then the question is "what, then, would be the highest and best use of that spectrum?".

You're not thinking in reality. Public or private broadcasters can't survive if nobody is watching. Advertisers won't advertise if nobody is there watching, or if they don't know you exist. Donors won't donate if nobody knows or cares whether a station exists. LPTV isn't the same as LPFM. It's lower power than most full-class TV stations, but some can operate as high as 20kW ERP. Many LD stations are also commercial, unlike LPFM.

I tend to think an expanded FM band would be that "highest and best use", but then you have to manufacture a whole new set of radios to pick it up. Not many people have those "TV band radios" that were on the market back in the 1970s and 1980s (I had a few of those myself) and that only picked up VHF 2-13.

Consumers don't purchase new radios anymore. That's been the case for decades. 'If you build it, someone will find you', is a complete fallacy.

 

[JeeperOne]

Honestly, I would love to see 54~60 MHz (TV Channel 2) be allocated to the amateur radio service on a secondary basis and to allow up to a 6 MHz bandwidth and image privileges.

Ham's don't need any more spectrum. They barely use what they have now.

The Digital Voice modes (DMR, D-Srar. C4FM, etc) & Hotspots used for them will change that

Plus, there's the ISS which has a Ham station on board (Callsign W5ISS) & there are various Ham Satellites orbiting the Earth using spectrum in ways you don't even realize on the ground unless you're a Ham

 

[Mr Tony]

I'm assuming that nobody ever updated the Wikipedia article. There's usually somebody out there, somewhere, who cares enough about any given subject, to go in and update articles every time something material happens that changes the narrative. Maybe that never happened here.

Because they haven’t upgraded to digital yet. There are a fair amount of stations in Canada that are in smaller areas that weren’t required to upgrade at a specific point. A fair amount of them are CTV affiliates. Some are privately owned (not by the network). So you see CTV in some areas that aren’t digital yet.

 

[JeeperOne]

I know channel 6 it's inside the FM band as 87.7 FM.

Just because radios can tune down there doesn't mean there's anything there anymore. Don't believe me?? Take a look at any one of these videos & see for yourself

No, you can't. The FCC is absolutely clear on the subject.

47 CFR 15.239 -- Operation in the band 88-108 MHz

Snip....

In addition, 15.209 prohibits any operation in the TV bands, with some exceptions that do not include Part 15 FM broadcast transmitters.

That means if you hope to find something on 87.7 Mhz., you better be lucky enough to live next to someone running a Part 15 station. Good luck with that (Should you by some miraculous chance get that lucky, GET AN AIRCHECK of it as we'd like to hear it )

 

[Kelly A]

The Digital Voice modes (DMR, D-Srar. C4FM, etc) & Hotspots used for them will change that

It's been almost twenty-five years since D-Star, close to that for DMR. At least ten for C4FM. None of that has increased the use of ham bands. If anything, there's less activity.

Plus, there's the ISS which has a Ham station on board (Callsign W5ISS) & there are various Ham Satellites orbiting the Earth using spectrum in ways you don't even realize on the ground unless you're a Ham

That's great. They don't need more spectrum to make one contact in orbit.