I don't fully understand why the 4G needs to affect the Freeview signal as such. Manufacturers have known of the potential issue for a considerable amount of time so surely the receivers should have the filters built in by now?.
Put it this way, if I go and buy a Freeview receiver today and next month I can't use it due to 4G signals then the item is not fit for purpose as the manufactures would have known prior to manufacturing if a new item. So unless a filter is freely available at the point of sale or it's made clear prior to a sale about 4G issues I wonder what a persons rights are?.
We actually seem to be ok and can receive Freeview with just a cheap pound shop aerial and cheap signal booster despite being in a 4G area.
I am sure that current TV STB have filters in but the vast majority of viewers do not have frequency limited receivers .
The mechanisms by which a 4G signal can affect a receiver are many and complex when they occur
(it is more likely that there is no effect at all)
but when there is a problem
there a free filter from at800.tv is what will be required.
and will cure the vast majority
of what is likely to be not a very high% of viewers.
BUT it is very annoying when your TV stops working
hence the funding and speed of operation that at800 have/ should have.
I don't fully understand why the 4G needs to affect the Freeview signal as such. Manufacturers have known of the potential issue for a considerable amount of time so surely the receivers should have the filters built in by now?.
Don't blame the manufacturers, the Freeview DTT standard was set way before 4G was visualised.
UK governments have known about the potential interference issue ever since the proposal to sell off the top end of the TV UHF spectrum for 4G use.
Of course the need for money outweighed common sense (that and the baying of mobile phone fanatics who absolutely MUST have a faster internet connection on their handset, and didn't know or didn't care about the TV implications) so that the sale went ahead anyway.
Why on earth do you need anything faster than 3G?
My business e mails arrive just fine, I can easily download the data I need for whatever item I'm installing with 3G.
It's either madness or Internet on your phone is more important than TV reception, depending on your point of view.
Don't blame the manufacturers, the Freeview DTT standard was set way before 4G was visualised.
UK governments have known about the potential interference issue ever since the proposal to sell off the top end of the TV UHF spectrum for 4G use.
Of course the need for money outweighed common sense (that and the baying of mobile phone fanatics who absolutely MUST have a faster internet connection on their handset, and didn't know or didn't care about the TV implications) so that the sale went ahead anyway.
Why on earth do you need anything faster than 3G?
My business e mails arrive just fine, I can easily download the data I need for whatever item I'm installing with 3G.
It's either madness or Internet on your phone is more important than TV reception, depending on your point of view.
Advancements in one technology should not be held back by another one, especially TV distribution, where there are already more efficient systems able to do so.
IMO Freeview should be stripped back to the bare bones, in much the same way that Analogue TV was, as there are other ways of receiving TV signals.
4G is not just going to be used for Mobiles either, it will provide speeds faster than most telephonic broadband services are able too, which means people in rural areas will finally get an Internet connections capable of decent speeds.
Advancements in one technology should not be held back by another one, especially TV distribution, where there are already more efficient systems able to do so.
IMO Freeview should be stripped back to the bare bones, in much the same way that Analogue TV was, as there are other ways of receiving TV signals.
4G is not just going to be used for Mobiles either, it will provide speeds faster than most telephonic broadband services are able too, which means people in rural areas will finally get an Internet connections capable of decent speeds.
there is limited radio spectrum and 4g does not have enough capacity to replace landlines.
Don't blame the manufacturers, the Freeview DTT standard was set way before 4G was visualised.
UK governments have known about the potential interference issue ever since the proposal to sell off the top end of the TV UHF spectrum for 4G use.
Of course the need for money outweighed common sense (that and the baying of mobile phone fanatics who absolutely MUST have a faster internet connection on their handset, and didn't know or didn't care about the TV implications) so that the sale went ahead anyway.
Why on earth do you need anything faster than 3G?
My business e mails arrive just fine, I can easily download the data I need for whatever item I'm installing with 3G.
It's either madness or Internet on your phone is more important than TV reception, depending on your point of view.
Well as said, we don't seem to be affected and are in a 4G area now. I personally don't see the use for 4G, just overkill speed wise and they should simply fine tune 3G.
But even though as you say the DTT standard was set way before 4G was. What does remain is that manufactures have also known of the problem and a relative easy and cheap fix for a considerable amount of time. So I fail to see how all new Freeview receivers should be affected by this problem, or at least have the potential to be affected. More so in that manufactures are constantly modifying and updating hardware and software\firmware to account for HD channels & services, recording features, multipule tuners, catch-up services, smart TV features etc. And yet there is still no manufacturer modification in new receivers to account for signal interference due to 4G?.
At the very least the filters should be in the box and included as much as the power lead or often scart leads in case required.
All channels back to normal now, so it was just co-channel interference after all. This often happens when there's an area of high pressure giving "lift" conditions. It's moved away now and there's a storm approaching, but at least we'll have our TV to watch!
Sometimes these technological incidents occur. My box suddenly went blank and then when I turned off the mains it came on after a few minutes. A notice then came on the screen saying that your 'box had been updated.'
Comments
Put it this way, if I go and buy a Freeview receiver today and next month I can't use it due to 4G signals then the item is not fit for purpose as the manufactures would have known prior to manufacturing if a new item. So unless a filter is freely available at the point of sale or it's made clear prior to a sale about 4G issues I wonder what a persons rights are?.
We actually seem to be ok and can receive Freeview with just a cheap pound shop aerial and cheap signal booster despite being in a 4G area.
The mechanisms by which a 4G signal can affect a receiver are many and complex when they occur
(it is more likely that there is no effect at all)
but when there is a problem
there a free filter from at800.tv is what will be required.
and will cure the vast majority
of what is likely to be not a very high% of viewers.
BUT it is very annoying when your TV stops working
hence the funding and speed of operation that at800 have/ should have.
Don't blame the manufacturers, the Freeview DTT standard was set way before 4G was visualised.
UK governments have known about the potential interference issue ever since the proposal to sell off the top end of the TV UHF spectrum for 4G use.
Of course the need for money outweighed common sense (that and the baying of mobile phone fanatics who absolutely MUST have a faster internet connection on their handset, and didn't know or didn't care about the TV implications) so that the sale went ahead anyway.
Why on earth do you need anything faster than 3G?
My business e mails arrive just fine, I can easily download the data I need for whatever item I'm installing with 3G.
It's either madness or Internet on your phone is more important than TV reception, depending on your point of view.
IMO Freeview should be stripped back to the bare bones, in much the same way that Analogue TV was, as there are other ways of receiving TV signals.
4G is not just going to be used for Mobiles either, it will provide speeds faster than most telephonic broadband services are able too, which means people in rural areas will finally get an Internet connections capable of decent speeds.
ive had trouble last 2 days due to endless fiddling at transmitter. presumably due to the new bbchd channels starting.
4g interference would likely be intermittent not constant .......
there is limited radio spectrum and 4g does not have enough capacity to replace landlines.
Well as said, we don't seem to be affected and are in a 4G area now. I personally don't see the use for 4G, just overkill speed wise and they should simply fine tune 3G.
But even though as you say the DTT standard was set way before 4G was. What does remain is that manufactures have also known of the problem and a relative easy and cheap fix for a considerable amount of time. So I fail to see how all new Freeview receivers should be affected by this problem, or at least have the potential to be affected. More so in that manufactures are constantly modifying and updating hardware and software\firmware to account for HD channels & services, recording features, multipule tuners, catch-up services, smart TV features etc. And yet there is still no manufacturer modification in new receivers to account for signal interference due to 4G?.
At the very least the filters should be in the box and included as much as the power lead or often scart leads in case required.
Unfortunately, there is nothing you can do about it short of changing over to cable or satellite.
Whatever you do, do not retune.