ATSC 3.0 Coming to Hartford in October

Scott Greczkowski

Welcome HOME to SatelliteGuys!
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Sep 7, 2003
100,223
18,844
Newington, CT
So you will get the same "old" signal, but will it be more robust like the 3.0?
The old signal will remain the old signal for a few years... then the old signal will go away and everything will be 3.0 only.

3.0 is more robust over 1.0 especially when using it mobile and its also easier to pick up than 1.0. (or so they say)
 
  • Like
Reactions: raoul5788

NashGuy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 24, 2009
949
457
Nashville, TN USA
The old signal will remain the old signal for a few years... then the old signal will go away and everything will be 3.0 only.
Yeah, when a station begins broadcasting in 3.0, they have to keep broadcasting on 1.0 for at least five years before they can voluntarily shut down the 1.0 signal. But a couple things would need to happen before a station would consider shutting down their 1.0 signal.

First, pay TV distributors (e.g. Comcast, Charter, etc.) would need to have agreed to carry their 3.0 signal in lieu of their 1.0 signal.

Second, enough of their viewers who watch via OTA antenna would need to have shifted from watching their 1.0 signal to their 3.0 signal, which of course requires them buying a separate 3.0 tuner (currently priced at $200 and up) or, more likely, having purchased a new TV with a 3.0 tuner built-in. But without a mandate from the FCC for new TVs to include those tuners, and without any kind of government-subsidized tuner giveaways as happened with the analog-to-digital switchover several years ago, I'm skeptical of how widely ATSC 3.0 will be adopted by consumers.
 

ThisBUDs4U

SatelliteGuys Family
Jul 20, 2015
52
13
Rome, Pa
Yeah, when a station begins broadcasting in 3.0, they have to keep broadcasting on 1.0 for at least five years before they can voluntarily shut down the 1.0 signal. But a couple things would need to happen before a station would consider shutting down their 1.0 signal.

First, pay TV distributors (e.g. Comcast, Charter, etc.) would need to have agreed to carry their 3.0 signal in lieu of their 1.0 signal.

Second, enough of their viewers who watch via OTA antenna would need to have shifted from watching their 1.0 signal to their 3.0 signal, which of course requires them buying a separate 3.0 tuner (currently priced at $200 and up) or, more likely, having purchased a new TV with a 3.0 tuner built-in. But without a mandate from the FCC for new TVs to include those tuners, and without any kind of government-subsidized tuner giveaways as happened with the analog-to-digital switchover several years ago, I'm skeptical of how widely ATSC 3.0 will be adopted by consumers.
I don't like it already bc it means I have 2 replace all my gear.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: TheKrell

NashGuy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Mar 24, 2009
949
457
Nashville, TN USA
I don't like it already bc it means I have 2 replace all my gear.
Let's face it, external OTA tuners (whether in a network tuner like HD HomeRun, or an OTA DVR like Tablo or TiVo) are pretty niche. I have an HD HomeRun and it's great, it lets me watch live and recorded OTA TV through my Apple TV 4K box. But I can't ever see devices like that becoming mainstream. Just don't see many folks purchasing an external ATSC 3.0 tuner unless they were cheap and getting built directly into popular streaming devices like Roku, Fire TV, etc.

So that means that for ATSC 3.0 to really get off the ground, OTA viewers will need to buy lots of TVs in the coming years with 3.0 tuners built into them. But so far, hardly any TVs have them, just a few of the most expensive high-end models from LG, Samsung and Sony. It's kind of a chicken-and-egg thing, I think, where the TV manufacturers can't justify the added cost of the 3.0 tuner unless consumers are willing to pay a higher price for a TV that includes one. But consumer awareness of 3.0 is very low and frankly there's not much reason to watch 3.0 stations even if they happen to be available in your area. The broadcast networks aren't yet making higher-quality versions of their shows (4K or 1080p, HDR, Atmos audio, etc.) available for 3.0.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheKrell

TheKrell

A mighty and noble race originating on Altair IV.
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 4, 2007
31,956
26,768
Fairfax, VA
Nope


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
Where's the incentive for people to spend money to get something they perceive as little or no value added? I fear this will be like 3D all over again, or theater quality sound. They may remain niche products, as NashGuy said. Some think we may never have gone to HDTVs at all except that the screen was BIGGER and CHEAPER than old CRT TVs were. I have a good friend who retains 3 old 19" Sony CRT TVs and refuses to upgrade to anything better. I even handed him a small 24" HDTV as well as a FireTV STick, neither of which he has even tried out once. I think he's nuts. But he just doesn't use his TV for much at all. As long as his Sony's refuse to die, he keeps them around.
Let's face it, external OTA tuners (whether in a network tuner like HD HomeRun, or an OTA DVR like Tablo or TiVo) are pretty niche. I have an HD HomeRun and it's great, it lets me watch live and recorded OTA TV through my Apple TV 4K box. But I can't ever see devices like that becoming mainstream. Just don't see many folks purchasing an external ATSC 3.0 tuner unless they were cheap and getting built directly into popular streaming devices like Roku, Fire TV, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashGuy

raoul5788

Studebaker driver
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Supporting Founder
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 28, 2004
30,721
14,242
Cheshire CT
The biggest benefit I can see is a more robust signal allowing for better, more consistent reception. Here in CT we have a lot of hills. Not big ones but enough to knock the signal down to unreceivable in places.
 

cosmo_kramer

Master of my Domain
Pub Member / Supporter
Oct 13, 2005
23,240
19,841
41.605N, -72.879W
The biggest benefit I can see is a more robust signal allowing for better, more consistent reception. Here in CT we have a lot of hills. Not big ones but enough to knock the signal down to unreceivable in places.
Yeah, but how many will think it's beneficial to spend a couple hundred bucks on a converter box, or upgrade their otherwise well-functioning TV just for slightly better reception and slightly better picture?
 

raoul5788

Studebaker driver
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Supporting Founder
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 28, 2004
30,721
14,242
Cheshire CT
Yeah, but how many will think it's beneficial to spend a couple hundred bucks on a converter box, or upgrade their otherwise well-functioning TV just for slightly better reception and slightly better picture?
The way I read it, the signal will be more robust even if you are using a 1.0 tuner.
 
Top