I have the strong feeling--and I'm not kidding--that every time I rescan I'll lose a few more stations. I'll do it anyway, of course. Deprivation builds character.

Alisande - they do broadcast them differently before and after the switch. This is straight from an engineer at my CBS affiliate - this was sent to me last August - and that was when the official switchover date was still February -but it does have some interesting info. I was asking if the signal would get better after the switch over.....

It's actually not an issue with signal strength, but rather many stations are using *different* channels at this time for broadcasting digital, than they will be after 2/17/09.

For instance, we are presently broadcasting our digital signal on UHF channel 31, because our VHF channel 8 is still tied up being an analog transmitter until next February.

A digital receiver will already call our digital channels by their "virtual" names of "8-1" and "8-2", once the receiver initially discovers the signal on channel 31.
But, our signal won't be on "real" channel 8 until next February.

Channels 5, 11, and 13 in Des Moines are doing similarly with temporary UHF channels, and plans to move their digital signals down onto their traditional VHF channels next February. Other stations are going to stay on their present digital UHF channels, and are effectively already done with the digital transistion, except they still haven't shut off their analog transmitters.

But even though our UHF channel is temporary, we are still broadcasting it at full strength. It's legally maxed-out at a level that is intended to replicate the coverage area of analog channel 8. BUT, receiving our digital signal just as well as analog depends on having home UHF reception that's just as good as VHF reception. Admittedly, for many homes, this is not the case. Some people have VHF-only TV antennas. Sometimes, the little "UHF loop" on their indoor rabbit ears don't pick up as well as the longer VHF aerials.

In my opinion, the best kind of antenna is still the good-old-fashioned rooftop-style VHF/UHF antenna. But, even if you have one of those, old antenna wire or old signal splitters may be preventing the higher-frequency UHF channels from carrying down to the TV set as well as the VHF signals do. And, finally, UHF sometimes doesn't do as good of a job of holding up over long distances and penetrating natural or man-made obstructions as VHF signals do.

Therefore, even though we are transmitting digital at "full power", there are a number of reasons that some viewers may not receive the digital as well as analog, most of them related to poor UHF reception. Some people may experience improved digital reception after 2/17/09, if they haven't already taken steps to improve UHF reception by that time.

Thanks, Iowagirl. That was interesting. I'm using one of those "good-old-fashioned rooftop-style VHF/UHF antennas" he talks about, so maybe I'll notice an improvement after the wide-scale switchover. We'll see....

Yea....we'll see!

I am far enough from Des Moines that it isn't always that great.

I have found that a new digital TV beats the converter boxes hands down. That stinks - in my personal opinion, but that is what I have found.

Everyone who lives closer to the signal tower raves about how many more channels they can get - but if you are not near a metro area - it isn't great.

When stormy weather approaches and you really need to get a signal - that is when it is nearly impossible. The first thing to go is the sound, then the picture starts to drop... Isn't that dandy! We do have satellite TV - that drops also when the weather is bad..... Technology at its best, I guess!!