Radio-Info.com

Radio-Info.com Discussion Boards
Login March 22, 2010, 03:33:45 AM *
Username Password Session Length
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email? Did you forget your password?
:  
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: When will a Rochester station put something worth watcing on a sub channel?  (Read 736 times)
therealjm12
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 486


« on: August 05, 2009, 06:34:05 PM »

I'd like to see the Rochester stations put something on their sub channels that is entertaining.  13 does a pretty good job with the CW but that is all I have been able to find. 10 has that weather channel (or did).  How about a retro channel? Maybe 8, 10 or 31 should pick up WBGT for My TV.
Logged

"We are just voices in the air, but we make radio alive". - Dr. Johnny Fever
Scott Fybush
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 2116


« Reply #1 on: August 06, 2009, 12:50:16 AM »

There's always 21.2 and 21.3...and depending on your make and model of DTV receiver, sometimes "16.7" as well, which is the audio feeds from 280 State Street to the WJSL and WRUR transmitters.
Logged

Page created in 82.039 seconds with 29 queries.

504 Gateway Time-out
The server didn't respond in time.
BobRoss
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 846

Hobbies: Painting


« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2009, 09:08:52 PM »

I'd like to see the Rochester stations put something on their sub channels that is entertaining.  13 does a pretty good job with the CW but that is all I have been able to find. 10 has that weather channel (or did).  How about a retro channel? Maybe 8, 10 or 31 should pick up WBGT for My TV.


Don't feel too bad... I was in NYC a couple weekends ago, and they don't have an awful lot of variety on their subchannels either. 

WNBC 4.2 was a 24/7 features and fluff channel.  Seriously, they had a 3-minute package on tips to make sure you don't oversleep in the morning -- no-brainers like putting the alarm clock on the far side of your bedroom so you have to get out of bed to turn it off.  They should rename it "Common Sense 4 New York."

WABC 7.2 was perhaps the most useful subchannel, offering a 24/7 weather channel.  It was like a combination of Weather Plus (L-bar with various localities' current conditions/forecasts) and that "Local Weather Now" channel Time Warner used to have on channel 210 in the Syracuse area, with lots of stuff fed in from AccuWeather.  But the difference is that they interspersed local forecast content provided by WABC talent.  But, after 5 minutes, there's not much to see there.  Which, in NYC, is probably the point, so I can't complain.

WCBS... I don't even remember what they had on 2.2.

WNYW and WWOR took advantage of their duopoly, putting each other on their respective #.2 channels... not a bad idea for viewers who can bring in the channel 5 signal but not channel 9, or vice versa.

One of the city's many obscure channels had a subchannel which showed random traffic cameras.  Neat idea, but they appeared to be older DOT cameras with pretty crappy picture quality (some black-and-white).  Basically another neat idea like WABC's weather channel, but the novelty wears off very quickly.

Some channels were merely running wall-to-wall infomercials on their subchannels, including one that was running infomercials dubbed over in Spanish.

WNET and another PBS affiliate seemed to have the most subchannels... I recall one of them going up to #.5.  In a major market like NYC where there are plenty of channels to begin with, you almost feel like you have cable when you scan around and see how many subchannels are also out there.  And just like cable... all those channels and barely anything worth watching.  :-)

Wouldn't be a bad idea to see a few cable networks offering themselves up for subchannel use -- could boost viewership.  But I'm sure there's tons of legalese protecting the "exclusivity" of the cable industry to provide those channels.  Aside from the fact many cable channels are already owned by cable companies... you'll never see Time Warner allowing a local station to put CNN on a subchannel.
Logged
Soby6559
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 171


« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2009, 09:38:53 PM »

The station out of Batavia (51) has 4 channels running,... all god squad and crap, though.

Anyone know if 8 or 31 will ever have sub channels? Or is Nexstar too cheap.
Logged
tripinva
RabbitEars Webmaster
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 928


« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2009, 08:32:25 AM »

You don't remember what WCBS had on 2-2 because there isn't a 2-2.  CBS O&O stations do not have subchannels.  Corporate policy to protect HD quality.

- Trip
Logged

RabbitEars.Info has launched!  Check it out!
M.J.
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 1426


« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2009, 05:28:32 PM »

Some channels were merely running wall-to-wall infomercials on their subchannels, including one that was running infomercials dubbed over in Spanish.

Quiero una Bala Mágica, por favor.

Quote
Wouldn't be a bad idea to see a few cable networks offering themselves up for subchannel use -- could boost viewership.  But I'm sure there's tons of legalese protecting the "exclusivity" of the cable industry to provide those channels.  Aside from the fact many cable channels are already owned by cable companies... you'll never see Time Warner allowing a local station to put CNN on a subchannel.

I doubt that will ever happen. OTA broadcasters in Canada have been complaining they can't make the same money on OTA stations as they can on specialty channels; once networks like CNN and ESPN are made available over-the-air, including in HD, viewers will have even less reason for cable - and these channels won't be able to make the same money as before. I assume viewers pay directly for these channels (including ones they don't watch) through their cable bills in the U.S., as is the case in Canada.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2009, 05:32:29 PM by M.J. » Logged
dmott3
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2009, 05:33:55 PM »

 WROC Wikimedia Page is Reporting 8.2 is coming in 2010, as THIS TV Network affiliate,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WROC-TV
Logged
dhett
Fastest Pun in the West
rimember

Offline Offline

Posts: 2543

Working without a teleprompter since 1964.


« Reply #7 on: November 30, 2009, 04:19:56 PM »

WROC Wikimedia Page is Reporting 8.2 is coming in 2010, as THIS TV Network affiliate,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WROC-TV

The information was unsourced, so someone removed it from the article.
Logged

Dave
facebook.com/david.hettesheimer

Attitude.  It's the difference between an ordeal and an adventure.
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP

Postings on Radio-Info.com are the opinions of the people who post them. Views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of Radio-Info.com or its parent in3 media, inc. In fact many of the views expressed here are just plain wrong. But they are opinions and this site allows us all to discuss those opinions. Any reliance on information posted is done so at the user's own risk. For a detailed look at the rules, regulations and uses of Radio-Info.com please see our TERMS OF SERVICE. 11

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 1.334 seconds with 20 queries.