No Freeview HD in Wellington apartments?

Forums › Freeview (DVB-T/DVB-S) › No Freeview HD in Wellington apartments?

pedrogarcia

245 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 66

Trusted

Topic # 85171 15-Jun-2011 10:17

I recently moved from an apartment building in Wellington which wasn't wired for Freeview HD into another one, and have been informed by the building managers that it is also only wired for Sky. There's a UHF aerial on the roof, but it is not connected and will not be connected, apparently.

Just wondering with the govt now announcing firm timelines for switch over, how many other apartment dwellers are like me and compelled to pay monthly subscriptions just to watch TV in HD?

1 | 2

1992 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 331

Trusted

Reply # 481353 15-Jun-2011 10:30

If you have a connection to a satellite for sky, then you can plug in a freeview satellite receiver to receive non-HD freeview channels. If you are really keen on HD then you might be able to use a small panel antenna that sticks on your window, depending on which direction your apartment faces.

Personally I think digital SD is more than satisfactory, and paying for HD is entirely reasonable.

It will be interesting at the switchover, Im sure there will be plenty of older apartment buildings with just VHF, which will be useless after switchover.

cyril7

6298 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 288

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 481355 15-Jun-2011 10:36

Hi, just to add, in NZ FreeView is available on both UHF and Satellite, the satellite for Sky is the same as for FreeView so a FreeView satellite STB will recieve this service.

It will be interesting at the switchover, Im sure there will be plenty of older apartment buildings with just VHF, which will be useless after switchover.

Or more commonly have UHF abiltiy also but due to the configuration of the headend will only pass services that currently may not pass the FreeView UHF muxs, which to complicate issues are due to change in frequency.

Cyril

Jaxson

6683 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 573

Trusted

Reply # 481356 15-Jun-2011 10:37

The basic Sky packages are not in HD, so just getting Sky doesn't mean you'll get anything in HD.

It's a common problem that apartment aerial distribution networks have filters applied to block signals from non TV channel frequencies. With the freeview HD UHF broadcasts being on new frequencies, often the signal is being blocked and the whole system needs a revisit to correct this.

If your TV has freeview built in then a flat panel aerial / rabbit ears etc might be the way to go. I hooked my brother up with a short UHF aerial inside, on top of his fridge, but that's not acceptable to most!

If not then you could use a freeview satellite box on the sky cable and that would probably work. Or get sky or go without.

Se7ensyns

125 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 481368 15-Jun-2011 10:56

I had the same problem in my apartment building in Wellington however just found out that capital city aerials? jsut came in and did some work so all apartments now get freeview HD. Yay now my Tivo unit I bought prior to moving in can actually start working.

Not sure what they did as I still use the same jack in the wall as I did when I used to have sky, and they never came into the apartments.

pedrogarcia

245 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 66

Trusted

Reply # 481372 15-Jun-2011 11:01

Hey - yes i'm aware I can get Freeview SD through the existing dish, but if you're like me - well within in the HD coverage area with an expensive new HD television its annoying not to at least have the option of not paying a monthly subscription to watch broadcasts in HD.

I can't get any kind of signal from an indoor UHF aerial, and was just interested to know if there were many other people in my situation.

cyril7

6298 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 288

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 481374 15-Jun-2011 11:03

Not sure what they did as I still use the same jack in the wall as I did when I used to have sky, and they never came into the apartments.

As mentioned above the headend in apartment buildings typically has programable filters that control what channels enter the system. Most systems will only pass operational channels, which at the time of install may not have included the FreeView|HD channels.

In the past couple of years many UHF channels have gone (Sky UHF, Triangle etc) and new ones arrived (FreeView|HD) but until someone comes and reprogram the filters the may or may not pass into the system.

Cyril

pedrogarcia

245 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 66

Trusted

Reply # 481387 15-Jun-2011 11:11

Thanks - that all makes good sense.

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks there may be something going on between the company that manages my building and Sky TV - they share the same offices on the Terrace and just happen to not want to connect the UHF aerial to allow us to receive a Freeview HD signal.

cyril7

6298 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 288

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 481391 15-Jun-2011 11:19

No, I do not think you are correct there, probably one of the largest installers of MDU systems is Sky commerical (or its contracted installers) and the majority of those installs include UHF support, however it is up to the building owners if they want to pay the extra to include FTA support, not Sky.

Cyril

xarqi

727 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 7

Reply # 481424 15-Jun-2011 12:34

pedrogarcia: Thanks - that all makes good sense.

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks there may be something going on between the company that manages my building and Sky TV - they share the same offices on the Terrace and just happen to not want to connect the UHF aerial to allow us to receive a Freeview HD signal.

Isn't the conspiracy between the government and Sky?
Hypothetical scenario:
"Here SKY - take all of the Freeview content you like and broadcast it in HD. What's that? No, no need to broadcast it unencrypted. Why would you even think that? What? Umm, c'mon Sky - do the maths - if you encrypt it anyone who wants HD but can't get it for free because of the patchy UHF transmission cover will have to give you money instead. Scam? Hey - nobody will notice, and if they do, all they will be able to do is bleat about it in online forums. We're golden!"

sbiddle

26920 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6355

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 481481 15-Jun-2011 14:15

xarqi:
pedrogarcia: Thanks - that all makes good sense.

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks there may be something going on between the company that manages my building and Sky TV - they share the same offices on the Terrace and just happen to not want to connect the UHF aerial to allow us to receive a Freeview HD signal.

Isn't the conspiracy between the government and Sky?
Hypothetical scenario:
"Here SKY - take all of the Freeview content you like and broadcast it in HD. What's that? No, no need to broadcast it unencrypted. Why would you even think that? What? Umm, c'mon Sky - do the maths - if you encrypt it anyone who wants HD but can't get it for free because of the patchy UHF transmission cover will have to give you money instead. Scam? Hey - nobody will notice, and if they do, all they will be able to do is bleat about it in online forums. We're golden!"

The only flaw in this is that Freeview|HD currently covers 75% of the population and will cover 87% of the population with the expansion come the end of July. That hardly makes UHF coverage "patchy".

xarqi

727 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 7

Reply # 481511 15-Jun-2011 14:47

That's a difference of degree, not of kind, and does not invalidate the argument. If a single person feels required to pay Sky to receive HD content that others can receive for free, simply because of inadequate UHF cover, that is one too many.

It costs Sky no more to transmit the signal to everyone than it does to a single person, and it is being transmitted now. It hits my dish, but I can't receive it.

Nor are those unfortunate 13% denied UHF cover all going to be in the remote hinterland where the decision to live in the wilderness could be expected to entail additional costs for the delivery of services. I suspect a great many of these disenfranchised will be in our metropolitan areas, as I am.

B1GGLZ

1928 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 128

Reply # 481728 16-Jun-2011 09:20

pedrogarcia:
I can't get any kind of signal from an indoor UHF aerial, and was just interested to know if there were many other people in my situation.

I think there's going to be a tremendous amount of people in your situation when analogue is switched off in 2013.
I see no solution other than Satellite Reception (assuming apartments are already wired for satellite) unless a lot of Bodies Corporate fork out a lot of money installing UHF Freeview capability in Apartments. Satellite only reception means paying monthly for any reception at all, even more for HD, and no HD on Freeview. One of the downsides of Apartment Dwelling I guess.
I forsee the brown stuff hitting the fan around 31 Dec 2013 when thousands of people find they have no TV reception at all and blissfully unaware it was going to happen.

pedrogarcia

245 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 66

Trusted

Reply # 481773 16-Jun-2011 10:55

And the reality is that urban apartment dwellers like me tend to be younger, tech savvy and unprepared to settle for standard definition broadcasts.

My body corporate won't install Freeview HD so we just go on forking out for Sky. At least I can watch '16 and Pregnant'.

richms

21380 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4333

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 481787 16-Jun-2011 11:26

IMO its unacceptable for any body corp to prevent the reception of broadcast services.

Is there any legal protection in NZ for installing your own antenna like the US enjoys? I expect that a few giant antennas on balconys would soon have people complaining and make the body corp move on reticulating it properly.

Richard rich.ms

Jaxson

6683 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 573

Trusted

Reply # 481806 16-Jun-2011 12:18

Couldn't sat and terrestrial be mixed on the same cable, with the appropriate use of faceplates / splitters at the users end?

1 | 2