MPTV adding subchannels to channel 10

[ArgMeMatey]

So much for full rate HD from MPTV.

http://onmilwaukee.com/movies/articles/mptvshuffle.html

[jjallou]

When the FCC is done screwing up free tv via their National Broadband Plan quality won't matter much anyway. :bang:

[Bebop]

So, they are moving some of the channels over to 10, so 36 can have more bandwidth to broadcast HD in early 2011.

10 will give up about 8mbps, so that leaves about 10mbps for HD.

Don't forget to donate next time. :)

[Xizer]

Jazz? Classical music? Who watches this crap? Why does MPTV need a subchannel just for weather? And have you seen that horrible traffic cam crap they've got on 36's subchannels? It's ugly, obnoxious, and most importantly, completely and utterly useless. What a ridiculous waste of bandwidth :bang:

I am looking forward to channel 36 getting HD though. I'm not spending money on a VHF antenna just for MPTV. :D

What they really should do though is just switch 10.1 to UHF instead of VHF and quit worrying about adding a billion subchannels that no one gives a **** about.

[Milwaukee12]

I watch the the traffic cams. I watch the weather channel. I find them very informative.

The reason MPTV has Jazz and Classical is because there are no radio stations playing them in Milwaukee. They started it when 93.3 and 106.9 first changed.

[Xizer]

I watch the the traffic cams. I watch the weather channel. I find them very informative.

The reason MPTV has Jazz and Classical is because there are no radio stations playing them in Milwaukee. They started it when 93.3 and 106.9 first changed.

You realize NBC has a waste of space that performs the exact function, right? I don't see why we need that redundancy when NBC has a perfectly fine weather subchannel on 4.2.

Who uses their TV to listen to music? It's absurd. And in the age of the Internet, MPTV continues to show its backward thinking. Doesn't make me want to contribute. I'm not interested in funneling money into a company that is looking backwards instead of forwards :rolleyes:

[WITI6fan]

What's interesting is that the weather channel is going to be "Upgraded" to an Accuweather channel, which is what WTMJ 4.2 currently is.

There is only two other markets that have two Accuweather channels. I wonder if WTMJ will change their weather subchannel once 10.4 goes live...

[LoadStar]

What's interesting is that the weather channel is going to be "Upgraded" to an Accuweather channel, which is what WTMJ 4.2 currently is.

There is only two other markets that have two Accuweather channels. I wonder if WTMJ will change their weather subchannel once 10.4 goes live...

It'd be nice. I can't stand Accuweather, particularly their graphics; they look very cheap, amateurish, and dated.

I'm kind of surprised that there wasn't a Weather Channel package available to NBC affiliates, now that Weather Channel is owned by NBC Universal. They have WeatherScan, but that's a cable channel, not broadcast, and doesn't have any on-air hosts and doesn't have any ability to integrate the local TV station forecasts/meteorologists.

[mrschimpf]

You realize NBC has a waste of space that performs the exact function, right? I don't see why we need that redundancy when NBC has a perfectly fine weather subchannel on 4.2.

Who uses their TV to listen to music? It's absurd. And in the age of the Internet, MPTV continues to show its backward thinking. Doesn't make me want to contribute. I'm not interested in funneling money into a company that is looking backwards instead of forwards :rolleyes:

The thing is that unlike WDJT's loading up Shorewest TV on their subchannel, the bit bite from the music and weather channels is virtually nil. You have two high quality audio streams, another one which barely needs to get to 32 kbps because NOAA weather audio is low-quality, and then three channels with basically still images. It takes just as much room as one regular subchannel.

I understand the need for the weather station to at least get the NOAA weather audio out there for everyone who is in a weak weather radio area, and I admit I enjoy the traffic channel for incidents and background noise since when the regular stations show the cams they just use them as decorative wallpaper unless there's an accident the DOT's focusing on (I almost never see a traffic reporter talking about what's on-screen at the moment). And the jazz and classical stations have their place in non-cable homes, but if you have digital cable or satellite you have those two services already (or if you have an HD Radio that can get WHAD-HD2), it's redundant.

Definitely though, the weather station needs the most improvement; you take away the audio and it's just random NWS maps with no context at all to speak of, and incredibly poor compared to what WBAY does with their weather subchannel in Green Bay or Twin Cities Public Television's weather subchannel in Minneapolis. I'm thinking it might just be more organized customized mapping and information presentation since there will be no way MPTV can just get away with streaming what WTMJ does now because of their non-commercial nature.

[beeper]

You realize NBC has a waste of space that performs the exact function, right? I don't see why we need that redundancy when NBC has a perfectly fine weather subchannel on 4.2.


"Perfectly fine" is a subjective observation.
The not-so-accuweather channel is terrible. The initial 4.2 weather channel format was better.

Not-so-accuweather routinely has the wrong info for the first day of the extended forecast.

[Xizer]

If you're really gonna sperg about the weather that hard when why not just use the Internet instead of some ****** TV channel? Sheesh

[WPXE ION]

If you're really gonna sperg about the weather that hard when why not just use the Internet instead of some ****** TV channel? Sheesh


Some people do not have internet and for those of us who are strictly OTA having a free weather channel is a bonus. {cheers}

[mrschimpf]

It looks like MPTV has put the new weather layout to use on 36.7 as of last night if you go by the newest imagescan of the Milwaukee channel map on SilliconDust;

http://img.lineupui.silicondust.com/snapshots/71/snapshot_20950771.jpg

I wasn't able to get it in via antenna tonight so I don't know what background audio they're using, if it's NOAA or just looping production music.

Pretty much just the same as what WTMJ has, except without the national programming, fewer ads, and information more spread out on the screen (another SD cap shows the hour-by-hour forecast filling the right space like it does on 4.2) and two extra days for the seven-day outlook. I guess it's better than they had, but it's unexceptional and plain. If anything at least the deal finally moved MPTV's warning capabilities beyond the pictures they use for warnings and to actual maps (which are even more absurdly large than the first TMJ HD warning bug).

[Bebop]

The bit rate is much lower too. It's only 600-800kbps compared to 2-4mbps for 4-2.

[AA9VI]

What's interesting is that the weather channel is going to be "Upgraded" to an Accuweather channel, which is what WTMJ 4.2 currently is.

There is only two other markets that have two Accuweather channels. I wonder if WTMJ will change their weather subchannel once 10.4 goes live...

AccuWeather is a downgrade. They're actually pretty bad forecasters for local areas.
WTMJ would be better off just keeping a radar loop and a recorded portion of the weather from the news every now and them.

If you've seen WLS, you'll get a feeling of how accuweather and their made up terminology like RealFeel (TM) stinks.

[Xizer]

lol @ people who care too much about the weather

it should take less than 10 seconds daily to check weather patterns with the internet. tv is obsolete.

[ArgMeMatey]

lol @ people who care too much about the weather

it should take less than 10 seconds daily to check weather patterns with the internet. tv is obsolete.

Depends on my reason for checking the weather. For example if I'm wondering whether I should bike or drive to the grocery store now, I will check the radar. I love the ability to do that and I do it all the time. To me, that's what the internet has added to the weather.

But sometimes I am wondering how the weather's going to be for a party tomorrow or whether to go to the beach on Saturday or Sunday. Spending a few minutes watching somebody explain what's likely on TV is more helpful to me than one paragraph on a website trying to tell me what's probably going to happen.

[AA9VI]

Well... this is sort of a give me one and take one away. I really enjoyed PBS world. Now I can't get it. I will be able to watch WMVS programming now. ( WMVS doesn't come in here for me. )

Why not just get rid of the idiotic jazz, classical, and traffic channels?

:| (shrug)

[Xizer]

Maybe they get some extra funding from the government or something for cramming as many worthless channels as they can onto their signal. Jazz doesn't exactly strike me as a big ratings draw. It's obviously there to be useless filler for some reason... maybe they think having ****** picture quality adds to the "genuine" feel of PBS and makes it seem like it's not one of the big corporate networks.

Whatever the reason is, somebody needs to be slapped for their incompetence.

[ArgMeMatey]

Maybe they get some extra funding from the government or something for cramming as many worthless channels as they can onto their signal. Jazz doesn't exactly strike me as a big ratings draw. It's obviously there to be useless filler for some reason... maybe they think having sh!!ty picture quality adds to the "genuine" feel of PBS and makes it seem like it's not one of the big corporate networks.

Whatever the reason is, somebody needs to be slapped for their incompetence.

mrschimpf already addressed bit rates on page 1. In addition, although they certainly want somebody to be watching and listening to everything, they do not face the same ratings pressure as the stations that have to sell ads. So they can fill unprofitable niches.

I wouldn't be surprised if jazz and classical are sometimes tuned in on corporate boardroom and executive suite HDTVs in the minutes before a meeting starts, after it ends, or just when watching the market has gotten to be too much.

That is exactly the kind of audience MPTV would love to reach: "Hey, I like this service. Let's put some of our community support money into MPTV and get a sponsor message on there." It costs virtually nothing to provide, and the overhead is already covered by the sponsors for paid programming, so if one sponsor mentions that they like the music, traffic, or weather subchannels, it's worth it.

Unless, of course, others follow through on their threats to drop their sponsorship and contributions unless this type of programming stops.

[ArgMeMatey]

I didn't have to re-scan at all. All the 10 & 36 OTA channels were just "there" this morning. On Time Warner Clear QAM, I didn't have to re-scan either.

Time Warner is not providing 36-2 on Clear QAM, which makes sense.

[Xizer]

So, it is September 1st. Can someone see what the video bitrate (Mbps) on 10.1 is now ? Also, does the station have DD5.1 audio? I know many PBS stations only have stereo for some reason.

[tencom]

So, it is September 1st. Can someone see what the video bitrate (Mbps) on 10.1 is now ? Also, does the station have DD5.1 audio? I know many PBS stations only have stereo for some reason.

Channel 10, digital data rate, is running in the range of about 10.5 megabits and running at 1280 x 720 a change from the 1920 x 1080 mode they were running. Channel 10 has now chose to go to SEMI-HIGH DEFINITION, Like most Milwaukee TV Stations now do. Why waste your money on a Expensive HD Television, that HD Picture Quality, is not much Improved from Standard Definition!

[Xizer]

Oh God. It's even worse than I thought. 720p? LMAO! Bitrate cut by over a third? Yeah, that's not going to vastly damage the picture... anyone know if it's stereo audio or DD5.1? I mean, that would just be vomit icing on top of a **** cake.

For all you people saying adding a couple terrible subchannels wouldn't rape the picture quality, looks like the joke's on you. It sounds like MPTV just went from having one of the highest PQs of any channel in the Milwaukee market to the worst.

Chicago's PBS "WTTW" used to be 720p. The quality was atrocious but I guess they learned from their mistake last year and switched it back to PBS native 1080i last year. WTTW's bitrate is 11 Mbps. It still looks poor but it's better quality than it was at 720p; it still looks better than any 720p channel I've seen.

It's nice to know I don't need to buy a VHF antenna anymore. I don't care about this affiliate at all now that they've decided to become one of the worst PBS affiliates in the country.

[jjallou]

I did some comparisons between 10-1 (HD) and 32-2 (widescreen SD version of 10-1) and found very little difference on a 60" set. 10-1 was only slightly better than 36-2. :bang:

Truly a turn for the worse.

[mrschimpf]

I did some comparisons between 10-1 (HD) and 32-2 (widescreen SD version of 10-1) and found very little difference on a 60" set. 10-1 was only slightly better than 36-2. :bang:

Truly a turn for the worse.

The weather channel is also incredibly disappointing. NOAA weather radio over three map loops and 10 iterations of a seven-day forecast, which most of the time don't even work and have blank images all over the place? And this 'enhanced marine product' they claim is pretty much one text screen telling you the temperature and wave height. I hate to say it, but even 4-2 is better than this.:rolleyes:

I'm kind of angry because some miscommunication between Charter and MPTV has meant that Charter thought the Create subchannel was removed completely, so they replaced it with this monotonous mess of a weather station that we're stuck with because Charter in Sheboygan only previously took the subchannels with actual content; this even though whoever was working the Charter headend knew right away Create moved to 36.3 and did just that before their supervisor made them switch the channel to Weather later in the evening.

I have reached out to Charter and MPTV via email and Twitter to beg and plead for Create back because I at least watch that channel once a week, but I have not heard any response from either of them in two weeks. I'm kind of at a loss for what to do next.

[mrschimpf]

Updating the Charter situation, I tweeted Deb O'Connor-Callahan (the station's publicist) last week asking what was up with Charter and she was checking on it (she got back to me later pretty much saying that Charter only has a contract to carry WMVS's subchannels, not those of WMVT after the switch for some inexplicable reason only known to Charter); today she responded back that Create will return to Charter systems as of September 20 (http://twitter.com/MPTVPublicist/status/23933152667).

Although I'm still annoyed by the reduced HD and some of the bugs of the weather channel (it was showing a command prompt in the video window a few times this week), I'm glad that they got back to me and I'm sure there were other complaints about the loss of Create also on Charter, so I'm glad they're working it out.

[JKO]

Over the last several days I cannot get 10-1 and any of the channel 10 subchannels. I am using a Directv HR22-100 DVR with an AM-21 OTA tuner. I get absolutely zero signal strength. I do not know exactly when this started - for sure since 9/1, so I assume it started when MPTV's channels were realigned. Previously, ever since my first digital TV in 2001, I did not have any problems getting channel 10 OTA (although with slightly lower signal strength than the other locals).

I tried the usual reset and initial setup in the OTA menu, and DVR reboots. Even after all this, the guide data for 10-1 and the subchannels populate - there is simply no signal. Instead, I get a "searching for signal on the off-air tuner (792)" message.

Also, the guide data shown on for the 36-2 simulcast of 10-1 is interesting. It shows 36-2 twice. The second one is a simulcast, but the first one states in the Directv channel banner and a message box "MPTV will return Jan/2011 in HD." A Directv CSR told me this message is scheduled to air through 9/14. I assume this refers to MPTV's plans to return 36-1 to high def later on, but wonder if the 36-2 message is somehow related to my inability to get a signal on 10-1 and the channel 10 subchannels.

I have discussed this with MPTV's engineer and the referenced Directv CSR (who seemed to be one of the more knowledgeable ones) and neither had any answers.

To those of you with Directv and an OTA tuner - have you experienced a similar complete loss of channel 10 in recent days? Or, maybe this is not even a Directv issue - has anyone else lost the ability to receive channel 10 since 9/1?

[Nels Harvey]

I know this group is interested in receiving the very best TV reception possible, and most have equipment designed to maximize the reception quality. That said, I think we are really in the minority.

I'm afraid the stations are adding sub-channels because most people aren't able to tell the difference, or don't really care. I believe many people have poor eyesight, use converters on old TV's, receive a poor signal anyhow from their cable provider, or only use TV as a audio/visual companion throughout the days.

Some stations view the added sub-channels as providing a service to smaller parts of the population. Others just want additional outlets to increase incentive in selling advertising.

I remember sitting in meetings as the digital format was being developed and hearing how television was going to offer all kinds of new things, such as tactile feedback, slow scan video of point of purchase products, and of course, the sub-channels we now have.

Some of these original ideas aren't developed yet, and may never come to pass. Sub-channels are here, however. I think we need to accept them, and move on. There is very little content that requires the highest definition anyhow, IMHO. Of course a few things like sporting events are exceptions to that rule.

Please excuse my rant, but if the local stations can't earn enough to compete with the cable stations, they can't continue to make expensive upgrades as they have been doing, just to bring us the vastly improved signals we already are receiving in spite of the presence of the sub-channels.

[ArgMeMatey]

...
Some stations view the added sub-channels as providing a service to smaller parts of the population. Others just want additional outlets to increase incentive in selling advertising.
...Sub-channels are here, however. I think we need to accept them, and move on. ...Please excuse my rant, but if the local stations can't earn enough to compete with the cable stations, they can't continue to make expensive upgrades as they have been doing, just to bring us the vastly improved signals we already are receiving in spite of the presence of the sub-channels.

Well said Nels. We'd all like to drive a Lexus or a Porsche, but when it comes to paying for it, most of us settle for Toyota or VW.

For nearly anyone, it's hard to look at how good things can be given the right resources, and then have them fall back to what's sustainable. The analogy breaks down, however, because we viewers don't pay directly for OTA. Like Cuprisin, I am constantly harping that we are the product the stations are selling to advertisers.

It's a little different for public TV, but they too have a mandate to fulfill which will always involve compromises.