Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

Ideas for DTV Sub-Channels in Canada?

52K views 177 replies 59 participants last post by  bigoranget 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
I noticed that the CBC stations do not have any sub stations. It would be great if CBC can put Newsworld in SD format as a sub channel. Does anyone know if this has ever been discussed?

Thanks, Dave
 
#36 ·
The CRTC would come up with some reason not to allow it.
I read somewhere in the forums that the CRTC has basically said they will not be allowing sub-channels unless is it for some novel use that will not compete with existing channels. Even feeding the doppler radar would likely get objections from the Weather Network.

NBC out of Buffalo used to do the doppler radar thing on 2-2 until they switched over to their sports channel. It was handy because they would show 5 day forecasts for various cities on the bottom, including Toronto.
 
#37 ·
I read somewhere in the forums that the CRTC has basically said they will not be allowing sub-channels unless is it for some novel use that will not compete with existing channels. Even feeding the doppler radar would likely get objections from the Weather Network.
That is true. Doppler RADAR is kind of iffy as it could be considered competing with the Weather Network (though as a filler program it might be OK, especially if they don't actually give a forcast). Time-shifting popular programs and replacing pre-empted programs might be considered novel though. Alternate programming might also be OK as long as it is Canadian. During rush hour they could also show traffic cams.

So here is a proposed schedule for CBC.2 on a typical weekday:

6:00-9:30 - Traffic Cam
9:30-10:30 - CBC News: Morning (time-shift)
10:30-1:00 - Kids CBC (time-shift)
1:00-2:00 - CBC News: Today (time-shift)
2:00-3:30 - Kids CBC (time-shift)
3:30-6:00 - Traffic Cam
6:00-7:00 - ???
7:00-7:30 - Wheel of Fortune (time-shift)
7:30-8:30 - CBC News: at Six (time-shift)
8:30-11:00 - ???
11:00-12:00 - The National (time-shift)​

There are a few holes that I don't know what to fill with, but I am sure something could be found.
 
#42 ·
Great idea! CBC has a vault of classic shows that don't need more than low bandwidth SD. I'd like to see Zed again. Wait! Wait! Wayne and Schuster! They could call it DejaView. That works in both official languages
 
#41 ·
Great for OTA users but not so great for CP24. They get lots of money from cable and satellite customers (it is a hidden fee). To go OTA they would lose all that money and not get much in return (they likely wouldn't get a better channel number and simsub wouldn't be of much value to them).
 
#43 ·
I had another idea about subchannels.

I saw a cable system in Mexico that carries a digital music service, similar to Galaxie. However, they use only one channel, using a ton of subchannels for different music channels. I think there were over 20 subchannels. There was no picture transmission, unlike Galaxie (at least on Rogers).

I wonder if digital broadcasters on the TV band could do this to complement existing services? Let's say CTV had a transmitter in Ottawa broadcasting CJOH in HD on the main channel, CHRO in SD on the .2 subchannel, and then all their local radio stations on audio-only subchannels plus additional audio subchannels if there was space remaining? I think CTV has three radio stations in Ottawa - CFRA, BOB, and Majic 100.
 
#44 ·
I think the main channel in HD running at 1080i or 720p would be fine as long as only one sub-channel is run. Preferable a 480p wide (DVD quality) at about 5mbps. That would allow the HD channel a little over 14mbps.

480i is good, but for that little extra 480p wide can improve things and offer 16:9 on the subchannel as well.
 
#45 ·
480i is good, but for that little extra 480p wide can improve things and offer 16:9 on the subchannel as well.
480 60p is not necessary to support 16:9. ATSC also supports 16:9 480 60i. The choice between 480 60i and 480 60p (along with the choice of 4:3 or 16:9) should be based on the source material. If most of it is SD, 480 60p would be a waste of bandwidth.
 
#46 ·
I saw a cable system in Mexico that carries a digital music service, similar to Galaxie. However, they use only one channel, using a ton of subchannels for different music channels. I think there were over 20 subchannels. There was no picture transmission, unlike Galaxie (at least on Rogers).
Omni TV from Toronto on 64-1 is already doing something similar. If you switch to the french audio channel you get AM680 news radio station. It's not a subchannel, but it would probably get more notice if they did move it to a proper subchannel. I agree it would a be very good use of the subchannels and just adds more value content for next to no cost (assuming the TV station and radio stations are owned by the same company)
 
#47 ·
It would certainly be an interesting interim option while Canada sorts out its long term digital radio solution after the apparent failure of DAB. It would be cool if PSIP data was used to transmit the name of the current song/program.

The question is, would the cable cos then be required to include the audio channel in their digital music package, though I believe some have already started including local FM radio stations as a replacement for cable FM.
 
#48 ·
Omni TV from Toronto on 64-1 is already doing something similar. If you switch to the french audio channel you get AM680 news radio station. It's not a subchannel, but it would probably get more notice if they did move it to a proper subchannel.
That's not just on digital either, they carry that on their analog service (including on their London repeater) with 680 News on the SAP audio channel.
 
#49 ·
IIRC, Galaxie is run by CBC.

I would imagine however that Galaxie is only licenced for distribution by BDU services. It would not be a logical choice for the TV band because of it's business model - no advertising. As well, there would be justifiable opposition from conventional radio broadcasters, which would prevent it.

With regards to carrying out-of-market radio stations as a DTV subchannel, that would encounter the same resistance.
 
#52 ·
Since ATSC allows multiple audio channels, on say Spanish, put a descriptive video feed and on another language put VoicePrint (a reading service for the Blind/Print handicapped. VoicePrint is a national service.

As for OTA radio broadcasts, a separate subchannel with the "locals" on it would be a great addition. Apartments are brutal for getting proper OTA radio signals.

Cameron
 
#58 ·
It is kind of like the way the Leafs and Sabers don't want a team in Hamilton as it would affect their profitability (especially for the Sabers). If a team in Hamilton causes the Sabres to go bankrupt does the new team benefit the league as a whole?

Now if the new team can appease the Leafs and Sabres and the market is big enough to support a third team then the league benefits by having a new team and the people of Hamilton benefit most of all.

Now I don't want to turn this into a should there be a team in Hamilton debate (that is off topic), I am just trying to paint a picture of why the CRTC does what it does. As consumers we want variety and feel competition is always a good thing yet when our favorite business go bankrupt we wonder why. While some competition is good, too much competition can be bad and can end up being just a shell game.
 
#59 · (Edited)
Is the CBC News Channel a future OTA possibility?

I was chatting with my neighbour one evening as we were exercising and commented on my HD OTA reception having recently added a new antenna (he had previously visited to view my TV picture while displaying an HD broadcast). He responded that he would consider HD OTA reception if the CBC broadcast their news Channel OTA! (He is presently a cable BDU subscriber). I wonder how many other folks may consider this if given that possibilty? The BBC in the UK include their BBC News 24 Channel on the UK digital OTA UHF multiplexes nationally! I guess the equivalent in Canada would be to use a CBC subchannel e.g. A future Channel 9.2 as referred to in the case of CBRT in Calgary.

Anyone think that this would fly? Probably seems extremely optimistic right now! :)
 
#64 ·
He responded that he would consider HD OTA reception if the CBC broadcast their news Channel OTA! (He is presently a cable BDU subscriber). I wonder how many other folks may consider this if given that possibilty? The BBC in the UK include their BBC News 24 Channel on the UK digital OTA UHF multiplexes nationally! I guess the equivalent in Canada would be to use a CBC subchannel e.g. A future Channel 9.2 as referred to in the case of CBRT in Calgary.

Anyone think that this would fly? Probably seems extremely optimistic right now! :)
While this is good in theory the reason it won't happen is who is going to pay for it? The local channels are screaming that they need more money as ads are not enough to pay for their expenses and they want to charge a tax on BDU subscribers. So why would they (the OTA channels and networks) want to make it more attractive for Canadians to move away from BDUs? I think we are far more likely to go in the other direction and see some OTA channels go away and become BDU only, especially if they lose this current fight.

The CBC has stayed out of this fray so far, but I sure don't think they would like giving up the subscriber revenue that they currently get from Newsworld - such as your neighbour.
 
#60 ·
I think that there would need to be an amendment to their Newsworld licence, if they were going to boadcast OTA. I would surely accept Newsworld on a CBC HD subchannel.

On another note, you gotta love the cable and satellite companies, that never included an OTA tuner in their boxes, like the U.S.companies, to keep competition out. Maybe this could be a compromise to the T.V. tax, if the CRTC does not give the OTA stations money from the sat/cable companies. The CRTC could allow OTA stations to add subchannels like Newsworld or Regional Sports feeds to augment their incomes and allow direct competition to the Cable/Satellite companies. This is a better option than a T.V. tax.
 
#62 · (Edited)
Are the CRTC a little confused??

Thank you Stampeder.

On another note, you gotta love the cable and satellite companies, that never included an OTA tuner in their boxes, like the U.S.companies, to keep competition out. Maybe this could be a compromise to the T.V. tax, if the CRTC does not give the OTA stations money from the sat/cable companies. The CRTC could allow OTA stations to add subchannels like Newsworld or Regional Sports feeds to augment their incomes and allow direct competition to the Cable/Satellite companies. This is a better option than a T.V. tax.
It seems to me that the CRTC is a little confused in that they appear to think that the broadcast industry in Canada are the BDUs (i.e. the Satelite and Cable companies). Why don't they consider more carefully the real program producers representing the heart of the Canadian culture and local information like local news? Placing more local OTA subchannels with local news (including CBC Newsworld) and other local program content certainly makes complete sense to me! But then I am very used to UK TV system where this is already done. Satelite and cable in the UK are certainly options but usually only when folks already have their OTA channels but are still not completely satisfied! :rolleyes:

Anyhow my mum always taught me that the best things in life are free! (Ofcourse UK TV requires a OTA
recieve licence but not yet here in the "New World")
 
#65 · (Edited)
Subchannels for local and non-local Canadian programming.

While this is good in theory the reason it won't happen is who is going to pay for it? The local channels are screaming that they need more money as ads are not enough to pay for their expenses and they want to charge a tax on BDU subscribers. So why would they (the OTA channels and networks) want to make it more attractive for Canadians to move away from BDUs? I think we are far more likely to go in the other direction and see some OTA channels go away and become BDU only, especially if they lose this current fight.
Wayne. Thank you for your response! I believe that Canadian culture and content is more important than the existance and use of BDU's. Ofcourse it is to be hoped that the broadcasters win the current fight simply to protect the Canadian broadcast industry. I see that BDUs really are for program distribution and so do not represent the bare bones broadcasting industry here at home. I would hope that additional financing could come from the OTA local channel advertising and also partly from an additional FFC paid by the BDUs. My thinking is that subchannels will provide for transmission of extra local material and produce additional revenue in order to pay for their expenses. The BDU output is largely US programming which is simply a controlled way of Canadians buying US programming and supporting the American broadcast and production industry at the expense of our own. Something which Canadian individuals are not allowed to do personally. I remember when we were no longer allowed to purchase Direct TV for example. This rule was made (if I remember correctly) to protect the Canadian broadcast Industry but it hasn't resulted in any more Canadian programming local or otherwise. Subchannels can provide an ideal vehicle for local and non-local programming distribution possibly at reduced cost.
 
#66 ·
It seems to me that the CRTC is a little confused in that they appear to think that the broadcast industry in Canada are the BDUs
Read the bio's of the CRTC leadership and you'll see why. BDUs also have lobbyists. The only way there can be OTA lobbyists is to intervene in the hearings. Stampeder usually informs us when they occur and how to get involved. :cool:
 
#68 ·
Just a thought for a sub-channel...Since Christmas (or should I be more politically correct and say Holiday season) is around the corner, something ideal would be the "fireplace" video. It wouldn't cost too much to any of the broadcasters to videotape a fire roaring in a fireplace, then loop the video over and over again. Even have some music playing in the background....maybe.

Just a thought for the holiday season.

Cheers all
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top