Oh we just love the echo chamber that is the internet these days -- some genius reads about something as harmless as a integrated security waver for cheap digital SD set-top-boxes and automatically predicts the end of clear QAM as we know it. Now we hate all the feet dragging by cable operators in the US as much as the next, and wish the FCC would enforce the Telecommunications Act of 1996 already, but that doesn't mean that everything big cable does is evil, or that the FCC is useless.

The bottom line is that local broadcast channels are available in HD to any cable subscriber with a clear QAM tuner, whether you have a set-top-box or not. The recent news changes nothing, except maybe a very select few who were lucky enough to receive more than locals via clear QAM. We dropped the FCC a line to make sure we had our facts straight -- wouldn't want to call people out without checking our own first -- and the very prompt answer we received was that this statutory requirement goes all the way back to the to the Communications Act of 1934 (Section 614(b)(4)(B).

More recently, the FCC addressed the issue when laying down the digital transition rules which "states that broadcast signals that are subject to mandatory carriage must be "viewable via cable on all television receivers of a subscriber which are connected to a cable system by a cable operator or for which a cable operator provides a connection." Now obviously we're not lawyers, but it seems pretty clear that local cable operators are not allowed to encrypt any locally broadcast HD stations. Now we've heard reports that some cable companies do indeed encrypt these signals, but while you might be willing to complain on some forum about it, have you taken the time to file a proper complaint with the FCC? If not, then you really don't have anything to complain about.

Read (doc) - The 2007 Report to set the transition rules (paragraph 15)

**UPDATE** As you can see from the comments, with anything legal it isn't exactly cut and dry. In fact the only thing we've managed to accomplish is to be confused. So while some level of broadcast TV has to be free, we're not sure if it's free as in beer or what. Stay tuned for a follow up just as soon as we figure it out.

We were pretty excited to see analog TVs disappear from store shelves; delays in the analog shutoff aside, it was a big move in the right direction. But wouldn't you know it, there's a niche market that still legitimately needs to move video around to analog-only endpoints -- security cameras, commercial distribution systems and MDU (multiple dwelling units) setups, for example. Users of such systems who haven't stocked up on analog sets will be glad to know Motorola's got them covered with the QUE100 QAM MicroEncoder. The svelte rack-mountable units will soak up 2, 4, 8 or 12 (depending on model) standard definition MPEG-2 analog video feeds along with their audio and put them all into a single MPEG-2 QAM output that can be tuned on those newfangled digital tuners.

We haven't talked about QAM cramming much recently, but we have a feeling its ugly, pixelated head will soon be raised once more, now that Harmonic is launching the DiviCom Electra 8000 encoder, capable of stuffing four MPEG-2 HD streams in one QAM channel. It might be an interesting bit of hardware if you're a head end tech, capable of delivering 1080p60, MPEG-4 and MPEG-2 video capable of three encoding passes, but all we can see at the end is too many channels slotted into too little frequency and the potential for compression artifacts. Anyone stopping by Cable Show '09 this week should be able to get a demo, with the first units shipping in June, we'll be keeping a close eye on both our channel lineup and picture quality.

[Thanks, Larry]

We still haven't been able to shake the ViewSonic dragon from our memory, but we're attempting to move on with our lives by directing our attention (however briefly) to the N2201w. This so-called "3-in-1" LCD TV packs a 22-inch 1,680 x 1,050 resolution panel, a 5-millisecond response time, 1,000:1 contrast ratio and a built-in NTSC / ATSC / QAM TV tuner. You'll also find an integrated DVD player and an HDMI port, and just to prove it really is multifaceted, there's a PC input to boot. No telling if the picture quality is anything to write home about, but the $429 price tag sure is palatable.

[Via CEPro]

There aren't many things we love more than when a new gadget comes along that is nothing like anything we've ever seen, so when we first heard about a box that streams HD around the house on the existing coax that is in just about every abode in America, we got pretty excited. Lucky for us, we were able to pull a ZeeVee ZvBox in for review, and after a few setbacks during setup, we were left playing with something pretty unique. The problem of course is that unique isn't really a compliment, but it can be if it just happens to be the solution you're looking for. So if you've been scouting a way to get web content on your HDTV without running any wires and without being forced to deal with a STB or the headaches that come with a wireless device, click on through to see what all the fuss is about.

With scads of cable providers slowly but surely converting markets and delivering channels via switched digital video, we reckoned now was an excellent time to dust off the terminology dictionary and dig in deeper. Fittingly, Jarad agreed:

"I've seen that lots of markets are being switched over to SDV lately, and I've noticed CableCARD users are generally upset whenever this happens. Why is that? I thought SDV was supposed to free up space so that more high-definition channels could be distributed on the current network?"

If you've suddenly found yourself wondering the same, head on past the break for the low-down.

Just about the pull the trigger on that warmly received AVerTV Bravo Hybrid, are you? Hold your horses just a moment. Hauppauge's WinTV-HVR-2250 recently hit the test bench over at PC Magazine, and we'll just get right down to the dirt: it was called "the gold standard of home theater PC TV tuners." That's right folks, the gold standard. Said card boasts twin hybrid tuners, dual hardware MPEG encoders and integrated QAM support, and apparently, using it was a real joy. Setup and installation was "a snap," and image quality was "crisp and clear." Really, the only dig reviewers had was that the QAM plug-in was still a bit unstable, but given that it is still in beta, that really shouldn't come as a surprise. Of note, this card will run you a touch more than the aforementioned AVerTV at $129, but it just might be worth it based on this glowing review.

Folks possessing a Hauppauge HVR-1250, HVR-1600, HVR-1800 or HVR-2250 -- have we got an interesting tidbit for you. A fresh new beta plug-in has surfaced, which promises to give the aforementioned cards ClearQAM support within 32- and 64-bit Vista Media Center environments. Initial reports are somewhat disappointing, but encouraging nonetheless. Those with nerves of steel can hit the read link and proceed to download the beta -- but only if you promise to tell us how it goes in comments below.

[Via Chris Lanier's Blog, thanks Will]

Comcast is stepping up its busy HD rollout (and channel squeezing) schedule, with several new channels spotted today in the Detroit and Chicago areas. Science HD, Disney HD and ABC Family HD are probably in your local channel guide -- Discovery HD is now listed DSCHD, while Disney is DISHD, confused yet? -- and word is they should hit many other areas Wednesday. Posters at AVSForum indicate more of the 3 channels-on-one-QAM compression tactics are afoot, take a look and let us know if having High School Musical 2 in HD still satisfies.

[Thanks, Nathaniel]

Read - Detroit, MI HDTV
Read - Chicago, IL Comcast

If you've noticed, quite a few Comcast users have been grumbling over the quality of their HD programming recently, and they're attributing the artifacts / compression to the squeezing of three high-def channels onto a single QAM. Granted, delving into technical aspects typically isn't our bag, but given the constant talk of HD Lite, we figured it prudent to pass along a rough 'n dirty explanation that details why cramming more than two HD channels onto one QAM is a bad idea (in the consumer's eye). Quadrature amplitude modulation, as it's formally known, equals 6MHz of bandwidth, which equals 38.8Mbps of broadband data, which equals thousands of voice conversation, which equals "enough" space for two to three HD nets. Granted, just because three will fit doesn't mean things will look as good as if only two were allocated to one QAM. Quite frankly, we're just scratching the surface in this space, but hit up the read link if you're itching to know more.

It's been a while since we checked in on the MythTV project, just updated to version 0.21, most notably adding QAM recording for HDHomeRun owners. If merely recording unencrypted HDTV via cable isn't enough, upgraded users may notice lowered memory consumption, the ability to record main and/or secondary audio channels, a couple new official plugins and a bunch of other tweaks. Check the wiki for the full list and get your Linux DVR going.

[Via TV Squad]

AVerMedia's latest PCI-E tuner isn't chock full of extras, but it's definitely packing quite a punch for $79.99. The unit plays nice with ATSC, NTSC and Clear QAM signals along with FM radio, and aside from letting folks tune into HD programs over-the-air, it can also record directly in H.264 format to save space on your hard drive and provide easy exporting to iPods / PMPs. Just what the doctor ordered? Fantastic -- it's available right now.

In the linked interview, Bresnan Communications' VP of strategic engineering, Pragash Pillai, doubles the company's earlier HD channel plans for 2008, moving the mark up to 50. He also indicates that figure does not include the couple hundred hours of HD VOD (video on demand) that's also planned for the year. The tech plans detailed by Pillai are interesting: Besnan has about 96-percent of its systems at 750 MHz and above, and will be moving to 256 QAM (quadrature amplitude modulation) to get the most out of its bandwidth. In the end, he expects 2.5 HD channels per 6 MHz QAM channel. Looking to 2009, he also expects to see rollout of MPEG4 to homes as necessary. This kind of long-term planning is encouraging to see, especially from a smaller player -- infrastructure improvements are costly, and only companies that see the HD future will be prepared to keep growing their offerings and feeding our appetite.

Part of the job of the FCC is to protect the interests of us, (the common HDTV enthusiast) but there are a few ways in which they leave us in the cold and the one itching at the moment is the lack of clear QAM. For as long as cable TV has existed we've been able to simply plug in our TVs and enjoy a pretty decent selection of programming, and as we move into the world of digital we are losing this ability. The problem is that almost all cable co's encrypt all their digital channels and in most areas the only digital signals not encrypted, are the ones that are also available OTA, and this only because the FCC forbids it. Sure, CableCARDs allow us to unencrypted these signals, but big cable has proven they don't want to support 'em and as a result most HDTV manufacturers have abandoned them. But, what is still included, is a clear QAM tuner and if the FCC would force big cable to send any channel in the basic tier, in the clear, then most TVs sold today could subscribe to basic digital cable without a STB or CableCARD -- and to us that'd be, real nice. The other piece of the puzzle is programming information, the broadcast industry is forced to use what is called PSIP for this and more often than not, cable co's strip this information out when they pass the signal on to the customer. The FCC should not only require cable co's to pass on PSIP info, they should force them to include -- valid and usable -- PSIP information for all clear QAM channels. This would allow TV manufactures to display the clear QAM channels -- just like analog ones have for years -- at the correct channel location and with current program information and retain the same "basic cable" experience that we've had for years. As for DRM, we don't see any reason that the FCC couldn't enforce a broadcast flag on QAM tuners, and since we're not talking about free OTA TV here, we'd bet the mandate would stick this time.