James Martin post_id=12223 time=1620848628 user_id=872 Wrote:- and, again, how did Channel manage to cover up Meridian's numbers?

Inspector Sands post_id=12285 time=1620885303 user_id=1003 Wrote:

James Martin post_id=12223 time=1620848628 user_id=872 Wrote:- and, again, how did Channel manage to cover up Meridian's numbers?

In the case of the Telethon surely they'd just have put a solid caption with their number(s) on it over the one from TVS. It's not as if it moved, looking one of the clips above TVS's phone number graphic was in a blue background anyway

Steve in Pudsey post_id=12291 time=1620889682 user_id=942 Wrote:Wouldn't Channel have genlocked to TVS routinely to get clean cuts in and out of "network"? Much like say Yorkshire genlocking to Granada to get a clean transition into Coronation Street.

RDJ post_id=12226 time=1620849326 user_id=831 Wrote:Just to answer this question and not to take the topic too off course. The numbers are the same across the country. BT was just able to provide the statistics of how many callers there were in each particular region. Easy when there’s one landline telephone exchange for ITV to get call statistics from. Much harder with the advent of mobile phones and many major networks to obtain regionalised stats from, which the networks themselves would likely struggle to get straight away.

Brekkie post_id=12230 time=1620850375 user_id=976 Wrote:I guess they were done Sunday evening till Monday evening to have both London franchises involved.

Colm post_id=12278 time=1620880156 user_id=975 Wrote:I'm certain I read, or heard, somewhere down the years, that ITV Telethon '92 was pushed back from the last weekend in May, as it was anticipated it'd fall during a General Election campaign (assuming Parliament ran for a complete five-year term since the 1987 election) - a pre-emptive move which backfired when the General Election happened in April instead.

Not sure if the above is a reliably-sourced fact, a conclusion which had been jumped too, or a figment of my imagination.

Steve in Pudsey post_id=12291 time=1620889682 user_id=942 Wrote:I think this clears up the question of how Channel's network contributions were done:

RDJ post_id=12226 time=1620849326 user_id=831 Wrote:

James Martin post_id=12223 time=1620848628 user_id=872 Wrote:Very nearly off topic but if you remember ITV Record Of The Year from the late 90s and early 00s, the results would be compiled by going around the regions where a spokesperson from each region would come on, thank LWT for a wonderful show tonight and then reveal how many points each song had recieved by tapping aimlessly at an Apple Mac of the era. (Wonder where they got that idea from.) I assume different numbers were displayed in different regions in order for this to work, again not unlike said show the idea came from - and, again, how did Channel manage to cover up Meridian's numbers?

Just to answer this question and not to take the topic too off course. The numbers are the same across the country. BT was just able to provide the statistics of how many callers there were in each particular region. Easy when there’s one landline telephone exchange for ITV to get call statistics from. Much harder with the advent of mobile phones and many major networks to obtain regionalised stats from, which the networks themselves would likely struggle to get straight away.

https://youtu.be/DtuMerEqhtE
https://youtu.be/DewfzaIXt34

A small fact that all the regional presenters presented the results all together in London in two makeshift sets that each presenter swapped between.

Markymark post_id=12293 time=1620890453 user_id=1078 Wrote:

Steve in Pudsey post_id=12291 time=1620889682 user_id=942 Wrote:Wouldn't Channel have genlocked to TVS routinely to get clean cuts in and out of "network"? Much like say Yorkshire genlocking to Granada to get a clean transition into Coronation Street.

Before frame syncs, the local company would 'slip'; their SPG (normally by adding or subtracting a line) until it was in phase with the incoming feed. (That's why VTRs etc couldn't be used while that was happening, because their servos would go bananas)

That required staff, and an SPG that had that ability. I'm not sure Channel would have had either ? Even then, for overlaying you need to keep your local SPG in exact sync with the incoming continuously. You could lock yourself to the incoming, but the quality of an off air feed (even a 'clean' one that's derived from a strong and stable signal) it's all over the place. There's no way you'd lock your SPG to that. (I'm not even sure you'd do it on a clean stable BT line feed, Mr Bluecortina would know more about that I'm sure)

Markymark post_id=12293 time=1620890453 user_id=1078 Wrote:Before frame syncs, the local company would 'slip'; their SPG

Steve in Pudsey post_id=12323 time=1620908238 user_id=942 Wrote:

Markymark post_id=12293 time=1620890453 user_id=1078 Wrote:Before frame syncs, the local company would 'slip'; their SPG

Would it be too fanciful to think that Channel might have had a frame synchroniser by 1988?

James Martin post_id=12439 time=1620947814 user_id=872 Wrote:Although if there was a sat truck sent for the purpose of sending material to LWT I guess it's not unrealistic to suggest there might have been a return path by which the feed from LWT came back to Jersey, so that they didn't have to work with the TVS version?

RDJ post_id=12226 time=1620849326 user_id=831 Wrote:A small fact that all the regional presenters presented the results all together in London in two makeshift sets that each presenter swapped between.

GMc post_id=12581 time=1621027944 user_id=1131 Wrote:Looking at those videos, this seems so obvious. But I can't believe they went to that length. Surely all regions would've had some sort of green screen set-up or could've knocked up a simple backdrop to actually present from their own studios.

Steve Williams post_id=12295 time=1620893208 user_id=1326 Wrote:Yes, I remember on A Song For Europe twenty years ago, when on a couple of occasions they revealed the votes by area, and then mobile and online voting was all put together in one lump. I used to enjoy Record of the Year, but then I would enjoy anything that involved extensive mention of the ITV regions. The fact that each region had the same number of points to allocate meant that the likes of Border and Channel would become Britain's top rock powerbrokers, because there were far fewer voters, and I always wondered if record companies shipped a load of people off to Carlisle or St Helier that night to constantly phone in and try and massage the results.