Antenna Viewers May Lose TV Channels With Video Codec Change

navychop

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
54,532
19,779
Northern VA
Well, I suppose this explains how the repack and lighthouse system can work.
 
Radioguy41

Radioguy41

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 7, 2008
2,439
2,036
Lehighton, PA
OK, this one I don't get. What is the point to messing with the codecs on ATSC 1 if the switch is already underway to ATSC 3? Be kinda like painting the Titanic after it's already hit the iceberg. :rolleyes:
 
navychop

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
54,532
19,779
Northern VA
Up to four times the channels in the same frequency band. Pack those suckers in without dropping subchannels for those stations sharing transmission. Makes it easier to fully implement ATSC 3 so they can get their hands deeper in our pockets more quickly.

All my TVs still get channel 14 (Arlington VA). Except one that I can’t check because it is not hooked up to OTA. 2005, I think.
 
zippyfrog

zippyfrog

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 27, 2007
1,570
914
Chicago, IL
In Chicago, channel 48.2 is MPEG4. It is Start TV. When I go to that channel on my TV, all I hear is sound, no video. However, when I watch the channel with the Dish OTA adapter I can see the channel. So it is clearly my TV, which is from 2006, cannot do MPEG4.
 
primestar31

primestar31

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Mar 15, 2005
11,030
8,329
Beta Omicron Delta III
In Chicago, channel 48.2 is MPEG4. It is Start TV. When I go to that channel on my TV, all I hear is sound, no video. However, when I watch the channel with the Dish OTA adapter I can see the channel. So it is clearly my TV, which is from 2006, cannot do MPEG4.
Buy a new one, they are practically giving them away lately, considering how cheap they are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captain Midnight
Justin Hill

Justin Hill

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 6, 2016
317
163
Green Bay
This will help improve efficiency on ATSC 1.0 broadcast TV. The more free specialty channels being multiplexed by our local TV stations without any programming hiccups, the better.

I have two flatscreen TVs, a Sanyo from 2011 and a Hisense Roku smart TV from 2019. Not sure if the Sanyo has the MPEG-4 codec, but I'm sure the Hisense in my living room does...

I could see some more slight improvements like this to improve our existing ATSC 1.0 viewing experience, making it feel almost like what the unreleased ATSC 2.0 broadcast standard could've been, if, in a decade, ATSC 3.0 becomes a commercial failure...
 
harshness

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
17,336
3,216
Salem, OR
OK, this one I don't get. What is the point to messing with the codecs on ATSC 1 if the switch is already underway to ATSC 3? Be kinda like painting the Titanic after it's already hit the iceberg. :rolleyes:
NextGen TV adoption (rather than allowance) is still a ways off and there clearly isn't room for both standards without some changes (especially in markets like L.A.). The stations want to get more HD channels on their DTV carrier and MPEG4 will allow them to do that.

Note that the AVC CODEC has been part of the DTV specification since July 2008.
 
Comptech

Comptech

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 26, 2006
3,394
2,537
Travelers Rest SC
If you run something like a HD Home run 4k to your router the codec is a whopping 99 cents from Microsoft to send it across the net. I do with no problem
 
HopperGenie

HopperGenie

SatelliteGuys Family
Jul 19, 2022
96
50
Shreveport Louisiana USA
NextGen TV adoption (rather than allowance) is still a ways off and there clearly isn't room for both standards without some changes (especially in markets like L.A.). The stations want to get more HD channels on their DTV carrier and MPEG4 will allow them to do that.

Note that the AVC CODEC has been part of the DTV specification since July 2008.
What about my Rare samsung tv from 2007?
 
HopperGenie

HopperGenie

SatelliteGuys Family
Jul 19, 2022
96
50
Shreveport Louisiana USA
If you run something like a HD Home run 4k to your router the codec is a whopping 99 cents from Microsoft to send it across the net. I do with no problem
Or a deactivated dish hopper! With a cheap hopper duo that go for less than 40$ you can get one and it would come with a Joey so free dvr capability’s and whole home with joeys and all you need to do is add the ota adapter
 
  • Like
Reactions: Comptech
harshness

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
17,336
3,216
Salem, OR
If you run something like a HD Home run 4k to your router the codec is a whopping 99 cents from Microsoft to send it across the net. I do with no problem
A $30 ($35 if you want component video) converter box would be 15% the cost and likely more convenient to use. It also wouldn't demand that it be hardwired to a LAN. We must not ignore the context here where we're talking about viewers using 14+ year old TVs.
 
N

NashGuy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 24, 2009
1,202
633
Nashville, TN USA
Note that the AVC CODEC has been part of the DTV specification since July 2008.
Interesting. Wonder what percentage of TVs currently in use with an OTA antenna right now cannot decode AVC/h.264? If all TVs sold from mid-2009 forward, i.e. for the past 13 years, can do it (plus perhaps some of the higher-end TVs sold before that date), we're probably looking at fewer than 10% of in-use antenna TVs that can't handle that codec. Probably more like 5%.


And if that's the case, I'd say it makes sense for ATSC 1.0 stations to start embracing AVC/h.264 in a major way in the next year or so. The bandwidth savings would be significant, allowing for a combination of more subchannels (i.e. more ad revenue) and improved PQ. Could free up another local tower to convert to ATSC 3.0 (although it really remains to be seen whether there's any real profits to be made from that -- jury is still out on the datacasting business model that BitPath is trying to forge).
 
Comptech

Comptech

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 26, 2006
3,394
2,537
Travelers Rest SC
A $30 ($35 if you want component video) converter box would be 15% the cost and likely more convenient to use. It also wouldn't demand that it be hardwired to a LAN. We must not ignore the context here where we're talking about viewers using 14+ year old TVs.
$35 bucks times four TV's in your house takes it to 50%, being able to watch from remote locations, is worth hundreds of bucks. Not all people think like you, I can watch in four rooms in the house with no coax runs, can watch at work 20 miles away and have old friends watching in Florida. Take your blinders off and see what can be done, some people like myself and Eardemon can think for ourselves and find a benefit to looking outside the box at times.
 
harshness

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
17,336
3,216
Salem, OR
Take your blinders off and see what can be done, some people like myself and Eardemon can think for ourselves and find a benefit to looking outside the box at times.
Give me your independent thoughts about the chances that there are four TVs involved AND are none of them are AVC capable.

If you have to outfit the TVs that aren't AVC capable with streaming devices then what's the price difference? Remember that the $35 price point was if component video was desired (in the case of a pre-2006 HDTV). Other tuner boxes are about the same price as a Fire TV stick. Then there are the really old (pre-1985?) TVs that don't have HDMI, composite or component. I'm not sure you can get a streamer that both has HDHomerun app support that serves up a component, composite or RF modulated output so you'll need an HDMI converter (perhaps comparable to the cost of a streamer or much more) to get to what ever input is available.

Independent thought needs to be thought all the way through and the assumptions made must be detailed.

My solution solves the problem at minimal expense. It will work for everyone that has pretty much any kind of TV (with maybe a $3 balun or two if their TV or antenna downlead is so old that it doesn't feature a coaxial connector). I'd put up having an affordable DVR option against out-of-home access pretty much any day.

"Because I want to" isn't independent thought -- it is a choice to do something different for the sake of being different.
 
HopperGenie

HopperGenie

SatelliteGuys Family
Jul 19, 2022
96
50
Shreveport Louisiana USA
What is rare about a 2007 Samsung? Just because it is older than you doesn't make it rare. Samsung has been building televisions for 43 years.

What may be rare is that it is still working.
It is rare because I can’t find one that like it at all and it’s still running like new except for one little unnoticeable dim spot that can’t be see. Unless your standing up super close to it and only 2 magenta lines on the left side which is the case with all old tv’s
 
harshness

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
17,336
3,216
Salem, OR
Rare implies that the TV is unique and worth chasing after. That will likely never, ever be the case with a Samsung consumer level TV as there are cheap modern TVs that are just soooo much better.
 
VictoriaFTA

VictoriaFTA

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 20, 2018
179
211
Chicago
Rare implies that the TV is unique and worth chasing after. That will likely never, ever be the case with a Samsung consumer level TV as there are cheap modern TVs that are just soooo much better.

False.

Samsung's 2015 JS9500 series is still the ultimate TV, because it has

-Stereoscopic 3D support at up to 4K resolution. I still watch 3D Blu-ray remuxes and play PC games in 4K 3D on it to this day.
-HDR support and the brightness to back it up with its FALD lighting instead of being edge-lit like most of the garbage TVs that came out in that era. It still keeps up with the brightness levels of most modern TV models except the most high-end models you don't see for sale in Walmart
-Curved screen is more immersive than flat. The curve is a fantastic feature to have in a TV when you have a proper set up with properly set up furniture that is directly centered in front of the TV.
-Handles RGB 4:4:4 4K @ 60 Hz input fine
-10-bit panel
-Game Mode that works well and delivers some of the lowest latency of any TV model produced in its era

The model is now 7 years old and I have zero desire whatsoever to upgrade to a new display that lacks 3D technology. There are far too many movies and video games out there that look absolutely amazing in 3D. I can't imagine watching something like Avatar, Gravity, or the MCU in pancake mode. These newer TVs that don't have 3D support are absolutely ridiculous. It's crazy to me that new TV models are actually downgrades over models that came out 7 years ago.
 

Similar threads

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 69) Show all

  • navychop
  • stogie5150
  • mwdxer1
  • AZ.
  • dsspredator
  • primestar31
  • llokey
  • reubenray
  • Foxbat
  • harshness
  • jamesjimcie
  • Justin Hill
  • Scott Greczkowski
  • dweber
  • VictoriaFTA
  • Mr Tony
  • detuch254
  • armadillo_115
  • DRCars
  • thomasjk
  • pamajestic
  • N5XZS
  • catamount
  • John2021
  • TazMan258
  • jwill
  • Ronnie-
  • Brct203
  • mc6809e
  • Cham
  • ggivens
  • lost_mesa
  • raoul5788
  • clucas
  • Corrado
  • Albiondon
  • mrc54
  • DanF
  • KAB
  • nyrfan1
  • Mike045
  • Darrell S
  • Cobra
  • BabaLouie
  • Peter Parker
  • zippyfrog
  • Richfunb
  • mdram
  • Conway
  • chainblu
  • osu1991
  • c-spand
  • HopperGenie
  • Comptech
  • Tower Guy
  • Art7220
  • mikekohl
  • red30
  • EarDemon
  • Captain Midnight
Top