On 28-Jun-2008, "Agamemnon" <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:

> The ********* responsible for the BBC regional news have just cut into
> the
> extended Tennis on BBC1 and inserted a 14:9 broadcast of London News
> which
> is also being simulcast on BBC despite the fact that I an getting my
> TV from
> Sandy Heath.

The reason for the London News being broadcast everywhere is that those
cash struck people at the BBC do not have the equipment to transmit
digital regional programs on BBC2.

Every year they do this silly scheduling where the tennis is broadcast
on BBC1 until early evening news time, then they transfer it to BBC2. 
But of course if it is in the middle of the match the news is moved or
late.

Why they do not put the tennis continually on BBC2, and all the other
programs on BBC1 I do not know.  I do not think anybody at the BBC will
know either, they have done it for so long that the person who no doubt
initially did it for good reason will have long since moved to different
pastures.

Now at the news start time of 17:55 this evening we had three tennis
matches being transmitted simultaneously.  One on BBC1, one on BBC2, and
one on BBCi.  Please tell me how a tennis enthusiast can watch three
matches at the same time.

I have made a formal complaint about this to the BBC.  Please do the
same, if enough people complain a miracle might happen and an
intelligent BBC official may read it.

Malcolm

On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 21:37:45 GMT, memyself@not-this.com wrote:

>
>On 28-Jun-2008, "Agamemnon" <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>
>> The ********* responsible for the BBC regional news have just cut into
>> the
>> extended Tennis on BBC1 and inserted a 14:9 broadcast of London News
>> which
>> is also being simulcast on BBC despite the fact that I an getting my
>> TV from
>> Sandy Heath.
>
>The reason for the London News being broadcast everywhere is that those
>cash struck people at the BBC do not have the equipment to transmit
>digital regional programs on BBC2.

How does BBC2 Scotland manage then?

"Scott"  wrote in message
news:vfdd64919dr266phgf98oq25is1ukpnu3c@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 21:37:45 GMT, memyself@not-this.com wrote:
>
> >
> >On 28-Jun-2008, "Agamemnon" <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> >
> >> The ********* responsible for the BBC regional news have just cut into
> >> the
> >> extended Tennis on BBC1 and inserted a 14:9 broadcast of London News
> >> which
> >> is also being simulcast on BBC despite the fact that I an getting my
> >> TV from
> >> Sandy Heath.
> >
> >The reason for the London News being broadcast everywhere is that those
> >cash struck people at the BBC do not have the equipment to transmit
> >digital regional programs on BBC2.
>
> How does BBC2 Scotland manage then?

BBC 2 Scotland is a "Nation" not  a "Region".

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 00:24:21 +0100, "Zorst" 
wrote:

>"Scott"  wrote in message
>news:vfdd64919dr266phgf98oq25is1ukpnu3c@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 21:37:45 GMT, memyself@not-this.com wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >On 28-Jun-2008, "Agamemnon" <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>> >
>> >> The ********* responsible for the BBC regional news have just cut into
>> >> the
>> >> extended Tennis on BBC1 and inserted a 14:9 broadcast of London News
>> >> which
>> >> is also being simulcast on BBC despite the fact that I an getting my
>> >> TV from
>> >> Sandy Heath.
>> >
>> >The reason for the London News being broadcast everywhere is that those
>> >cash struck people at the BBC do not have the equipment to transmit
>> >digital regional programs on BBC2.
>>
>> How does BBC2 Scotland manage then?
>
>BBC 2 Scotland is a "Nation" not  a "Region".
>
In that case I will rephrase my question.  If it is possible to
transmit a separate programme via the transmitters located in
Scotland, why can the same not be done for transmitters located in
other geographic areas of the UK?

Scott wrote:

>> BBC 2 Scotland is a "Nation" not  a "Region".
>>
> In that case I will rephrase my question.  If it is possible to
> transmit a separate programme via the transmitters located in
> Scotland, why can the same not be done for transmitters located in
> other geographic areas of the UK?

Simple answer is the the BBC nations have much larger operating budgets, and 
therefore provide many more opt outs daily on both BBC 1 and 2. BBC English 
regions are much smaller outfits, and for them to be able to opt out on BBC 2 
on the digital platforms would require more kit. The cost of providing this is 
not deemed worthwhile for the rare occasions that regional news ends up on BBC 2.

In fact for the same reasons no regional opting is possible on analogue BBC 2 
in the Oxford, Hull, and (Mr Armageddon's area) Cambridge regions.


-- 
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:6covhlF3hhgo9U1@mid.individual.net...
> Scott wrote:
>
>>> BBC 2 Scotland is a "Nation" not  a "Region".
>>>
>> In that case I will rephrase my question.  If it is possible to
>> transmit a separate programme via the transmitters located in
>> Scotland, why can the same not be done for transmitters located in
>> other geographic areas of the UK?
>
> Simple answer is the the BBC nations have much larger operating budgets, 
> and therefore provide many more opt outs daily on both BBC 1 and 2. BBC 
> English regions are much smaller outfits, and for them to be able to opt 
> out on BBC 2 on the digital platforms would require more kit. The cost of 
> providing this is not deemed worthwhile for the rare occasions that 
> regional news ends up on BBC 2.
>
> In fact for the same reasons no regional opting is possible on analogue 
> BBC 2 in the [] Hull region.

Good job too. It's bad enough on BBC1 with half of South Yorkshire being 
subjected to endless news about the price of cod and the number of drunks 
that have fallen into the Grimsby docks that week.

Bill

On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 21:37:45 GMT, memyself@not-this.com wrote:


>
>Why they do not put the tennis continually on BBC2, and all the other
>programs on BBC1 I do not know.  I do not think anybody at the BBC will
>know either, they have done it for so long that the person who no doubt
>initially did it for good reason will have long since moved to different
>pastures.
>
>Now at the news start time of 17:55 this evening we had three tennis
>matches being transmitted simultaneously.  One on BBC1, one on BBC2, and
>one on BBCi.  Please tell me how a tennis enthusiast can watch three
>matches at the same time.
>
>I have made a formal complaint about this to the BBC.  Please do the
>same, if enough people complain a miracle might happen and an
>intelligent BBC official may read it.
>
>Malcolm

At last!  A thread I feel I can make a contribution to. (I've been
lurking for some considerable time.)

I have been complaining to the BBC about this for years, and I have
come to conclusion that "intelligent BBC official" is an oxymoron.  A
similar problem occurred during Tim Hen Man's days, when his matches
were kept on BBC1, and scheduled BBC1 progammes were moved to BBC2 -
where tennis was scheduled.  I suspect that the reason it's done is
that they think BBC1 gets a larger audience than BBC2, and they think
that the average tennis fan won't have the wit to change channels.

To be fair, they might very well be right!

John Armstrong
Dundee

On 29/06/2008 16:56, John J Armstrong wrote:

> where tennis was scheduled.  I suspect that the reason it's done is
> that they think BBC1 gets a larger audience than BBC2, and they think
> that the average tennis fan won't have the wit to change channels.

Well Wimbledon is one of the BBC's flagship events, perhaps they want to 
ensure they show it on the channel which has the highest picture quality 
on Freeview, BBC1 is noticibly better than BBC2 (due to stat muxing with 
lower average bandwidth on everything except BBC1).

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:20:31 +0100, Andy Burns
 wrote:

>On 29/06/2008 16:56, John J Armstrong wrote:
>
>> where tennis was scheduled.  I suspect that the reason it's done is
>> that they think BBC1 gets a larger audience than BBC2, and they think
>> that the average tennis fan won't have the wit to change channels.
>
>Well Wimbledon is one of the BBC's flagship events, perhaps they want to 
>ensure they show it on the channel which has the highest picture quality 
>on Freeview, BBC1 is noticibly better than BBC2 (due to stat muxing with 
>lower average bandwidth on everything except BBC1).

Does this apply in Scotland where there is a separate BBC2 Scotland?

Scott wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:20:31 +0100, Andy Burns

>> Well Wimbledon is one of the BBC's flagship events, perhaps they want to 
>> ensure they show it on the channel which has the highest picture quality 
>> on Freeview, BBC1 is noticibly better than BBC2 (due to stat muxing with 
>> lower average bandwidth on everything except BBC1).
> 
> Does this apply in Scotland where there is a separate BBC2 Scotland?

I think BBC 1 on DTT is only fixed bit rate in England (and I don't think that 
even includes the London region). It's stat-muxed in the nations with BBC2, 
News 24, and BBC3/CBBC.

It's only fixed bit rate in England, because of the method used to insert the 
local BBC 1 into the regional Mux 1 stream at the regional studios. The 
process has been described in here, and uk.tech.broadcast, several times over 
the years.

-- 
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:39:57 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Scott wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:20:31 +0100, Andy Burns
>
>>> Well Wimbledon is one of the BBC's flagship events, perhaps they want to 
>>> ensure they show it on the channel which has the highest picture quality 
>>> on Freeview, BBC1 is noticibly better than BBC2 (due to stat muxing with 
>>> lower average bandwidth on everything except BBC1).
>> 
>> Does this apply in Scotland where there is a separate BBC2 Scotland?
>
>I think BBC 1 on DTT is only fixed bit rate in England (and I don't think that 
>even includes the London region). It's stat-muxed in the nations with BBC2, 
>News 24, and BBC3/CBBC.
>
>It's only fixed bit rate in England, because of the method used to insert the 
>local BBC 1 into the regional Mux 1 stream at the regional studios. The 
>process has been described in here, and uk.tech.broadcast, several times over 
>the years.

So to address the previous point, does this mean that the picture
quality of BBC1 in Scotland should NOT be 'noticeably better than
BBC2'?  Indeed, will they be the same?

Scott wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:39:57 +0100, Mark Carver

>> It's only fixed bit rate in England, because of the method used to insert the 
>> local BBC 1 into the regional Mux 1 stream at the regional studios. The 
>> process has been described in here, and uk.tech.broadcast, several times over 
>> the years.
> 
> So to address the previous point, does this mean that the picture
> quality of BBC1 in Scotland should NOT be 'noticeably better than
> BBC2'?  Indeed, will they be the same?

Depends where the max and min bit rate points have been set on the encoders, 
but I suspect all four services on Mux 1 get equal treatment. I've never seen 
DTT in the nations, perhaps someone can tell us how the BBC looks on DTT in 
those areas ?

-- 
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:58:41 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Scott wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:39:57 +0100, Mark Carver
>
>>> It's only fixed bit rate in England, because of the method used to insert the 
>>> local BBC 1 into the regional Mux 1 stream at the regional studios. The 
>>> process has been described in here, and uk.tech.broadcast, several times over 
>>> the years.
>> 
>> So to address the previous point, does this mean that the picture
>> quality of BBC1 in Scotland should NOT be 'noticeably better than
>> BBC2'?  Indeed, will they be the same?
>
>Depends where the max and min bit rate points have been set on the encoders, 
>but I suspect all four services on Mux 1 get equal treatment. I've never seen 
>DTT in the nations, perhaps someone can tell us how the BBC looks on DTT in 
>those areas ?

I have not noticed any difference between BBC channels (in Scotland)
but maybe I am not observant enough or don't know what to look for.

On 29/06/2008 17:58, Mark Carver wrote:

> I've never seen DTT in the nations, perhaps someone can tell us how the 
> BBC looks on DTT in those areas ?

I can't say what the quality looks like, but this site claims that the 
nations versions of mux1 simply have BBC1 at a lower fixed bitrate, to 
accomodate the additional 192kbps for radio stations, whether it's 
accuratr or not I don't know.

http://uk.geocities.com/talk2me2u/mux.html

On 28 Jun,  
     memyself@not-this.com wrote:

> 
> Why they do not put the tennis continually on BBC2, and all the other
> programs on BBC1 I do not know.  I do not think anybody at the BBC will
> know either, they have done it for so long that the person who no doubt
> initially did it for good reason will have long since moved to different
> pastures.

Probably because BBC1 had better coverage being on BandI/III VHF in addition
to UHF. This will have ceased to be a valid reason by the early 80s.
Programme people don't understand technical things, so they just plod on as
before.

-- 
  BD
  Change lycos to yahoo to reply

wrote in message news:4FB73F2F54%brian13434@lycos.co.uk...
> On 28 Jun,
>     memyself@not-this.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Why they do not put the tennis continually on BBC2, and all the other
>> programs on BBC1 I do not know.  I do not think anybody at the BBC will
>> know either, they have done it for so long that the person who no doubt
>> initially did it for good reason will have long since moved to different
>> pastures.
>
> Probably because BBC1 had better coverage being on BandI/III VHF in 
> addition
> to UHF. This will have ceased to be a valid reason by the early 80s.
> Programme people don't understand technical things, so they just plod on 
> as
> before.

I should think the media types at the Beeb have no idea whatsoever of the 
historical details of the coverage of the different channels. Don't forget, 
most of them weren't even born in the VHF days.

Bill

wrote in message news:4FB73F2F54%brian13434@lycos.co.uk...
> On 28 Jun,
>     memyself@not-this.com wrote:
>>
> Probably because BBC1 had better coverage being on BandI/III VHF in 
> addition
> to UHF. This will have ceased to be a valid reason by the early 80s.
> Programme people don't understand technical things, so they just plod on 
> as
> before.
>
> -- 
>  BD
>  Change lycos to yahoo to reply

So come DSO will there be no means for regional BBC2 ? (as at Whitehaven now 
? I assume they had BBC London news on Saturday)

Perhaps we are taking a step back towards 405 days !

cmwb

On 29 Jun, 17:58, Mark Carver <mark.car...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Scott wrote:
> > On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:39:57 +0100, Mark Carver
> >> It's only fixed bit rate in England, because of the method used to insert the
> >> local BBC 1 into the regional Mux 1 stream at the regional studios. The
> >> process has been described in here, and uk.tech.broadcast, several times over
> >> the years.
>
> > So to address the previous point, does this mean that the picture
> > quality of BBC1 in Scotland should NOT be 'noticeably better than
> > BBC2'?  Indeed, will they be the same?
>
> Depends where the max and min bit rate points have been set on the encoders,
> but I suspect all four services on Mux 1 get equal treatment. I've never seen
> DTT in the nations, perhaps someone can tell us how the BBC looks on DTT in
> those areas ?
>
> --
> Mark
> Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

No difference. Comparing Wenvoe and Mendip BBC1 subjectively, I'd say
that Mendip looks a little better, if anything.

dave@dsymons.plus.com wrote:
> On 29 Jun, 17:58, Mark Carver <mark.car...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>> Depends where the max and min bit rate points have been set on the encoders,
>> but I suspect all four services on Mux 1 get equal treatment. I've never seen
>> DTT in the nations, perhaps someone can tell us how the BBC looks on DTT in
>> those areas ?

> No difference. Comparing Wenvoe and Mendip BBC1 subjectively, I'd say
> that Mendip looks a little better, if anything.

Which perhaps confirms the other posting that the nations are running on a 
slightly lower bit rate than the English regions, though they might still be 
stat-muxed.

-- 
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.