BREAKING NEWS: FCC Approves Next-Gen TV for OTA Broadcasting

harshness said:

You have the very terrible affliction of assuming that what can be done will materilize immediately, in abundance and in the most favorable way imaginable. As someone who works with DIRECTV, you know very well that UHD still hasn't materialized they way that they hyped it. Where DIRECTV promised many UHD channels by now, they now offer perhaps less than what they started with (you should well remember the parallels I drew to DIRECTV's much-ballyhooed 3D programming). Bandwidth demands of running multiple standards dictate that UHD simply isn't sustainable in most of the larger markets until after DTV has been officially retired. New does not necessarily mean better and what is provided for is no guarantee that it will come to pass on a fast track schedule (consider DIRECTV's Reverse Band hype).

Click to expand...

Where did DirecTV ever promise such? I would like to see that press release. DirecTV's UHD channel count has been the same in fact they have aired more UHD content than any other provider. Period. Again your showing your rear end here. UHD is not the same as 3D programming. Look at NASA TV for example. They were the first to launch an HD channel when HD came about. They are now the first to launch a UHD channel. They never launched a 3D channel. 3D died, UHD is just starting to take off. Your comments on reverse band are laughable as you have no clue on timelines at DirecTV. DirecTV wouldn’t of invested the type of capital into reverse band only to not use it. It takes time to fully build out facilities to support the type of initiative that is taking place. It just doesn’t magically appear overnight. In the case of ATSC 3.0 there is a strong broadcaster push to get ATSC 3.0 up. Because of this it will go quickly. You will see more at NAB.

Many outliers lost significantly in the DTV transition and the utility of DXing was severely curtailed. Physics is a cruel mistress and there are almost always compromises when you seek to wring more out of the same bandwidth.Again, you make the possibly fatal assumption that permission equates to full support and/or a guarantee of unconditional success. There have been many permitted uses that just never caught on and were later denied for any number of reasons.A model must have very strong similarities. South Korea isn't even similar to most of our individual states, much less North America. I'd be willing to wager that the "independent bloggers" that you cite aren't all that independent. Many are probably aligned with the ATSC committee, the broadcasters or the manufacturers in some not-so-indirect way.We both know that isn't going to happen. If you look, there may already be plans forming for the next auction of OTA bandwidth.It isn't a matter of having blinders. It is a matter of not buying into the propaganda of the TV stations and TV manufacturers that have very much to gain from a transition. Hype and what happens aren't very much connected and if you study the entire context of what is going on in the next five years (along with some of the dissenting analyses of when various milestones are likely to be met), you'll begin to see the smoke and mirrors.

Click to expand...

Irrelevant. This standard is about bringing quality programming to the viewers, addressing the shortcomings of the ATSC 1.0 system and adding in an ability for programmers to interact with viewers in a way that would change the way OTA broadcasts are perceived. I know of engineers who are changing the polarization of their antennas to circular so they can support mobile devices over ATSC 3.0. They want to interact with those devices. You use DirecTV's reverse band as an argument without knowing anything about what's really going on and how unrelated that is. Also, broadcasters can give two hoots about DXing. They want you to receive their local content, not content from 1200 miles away. Their purpose is to serve the viewers of their city.

Finally, what you have here is a chicken and an egg scenario. The broadcasters are not going to put out content until they see enough UHD TV's into the wild. Were about at that point and I do believe black Friday sales of UHD TV’s will be the strongest ever pushing over that point where we will see an acceleration of channel launches in the next two years.

As someone who follows the industry closely, there is a reason why you have Mobile TV Group, NEP and other production companies rapidly retrofitting their trucks to UHD. It's because UHD is far from dead and about to really kick off. ESPN has even said they want to do an UHD channel, FOX, CBS, and NBC does UHD productions now. These broadcasters would not be doing what they are doing if UHD was as dead as you say it is.

Korea is a proof of concept that the technology works and works well, demographics of Korea vs the USA has nothing to do with proof of concept.

What the broadcasters and manufacturers want and how the public votes with their wallets have never been (and are likely never to be) in much agreement. If the proponents try to force their hand, the public may just walk away out of frustration.

Click to expand...

Looks like the public wants UHD. Look at Xbox One X sales. They have pushed out 600,000 units in two months blowing away everyone’s expectations. Xbox One S and the Xbox One X does the same thing with only one difference. That difference is the X pushes out content in Native 4K resolutions whereas the S is limited.

The fact they have pushed out 600,000 units sense launch shows the fact that the public wants UHD and is adapting it. It’s far from dead. The public won’t walk away because of the fact they know that this is the pathway to modernizing our already two decade’s old standard to meet the demands of today’s changing technology. People said the same thing during the HD transition and now HD is the standard in video with UHD becoming what HD was during the SD To HD transition.

In 10 years from now UHD will be the standard and 8K / 16k will become the new UHD. So If I had to guess what the public is doing with there wallets, Xbox One X sales clearly show what they are doing and Black Friday sales will also indicate that UHD is far from the graveyard as you make it out to be.

Voyager6 said:

And what TV station will be sending out a single UHD broadcast when it can send out 4 1080P (maybe w/HDR) and a multitude of SD channels in the same bandwidth? Which configuration is going to make the station the most money?

Click to expand...

When it's all said and done, what your going to see is a single UHD station with a bunch of IP content that can get pushed making the station the most money. The IP content will be VOD and other content that users would get pushed to their devices. Also, you will see a trending of those sub channels disappearing on the OTA signal in favor for internet streaming. Meaning the channels will still be available to you over an internet connection via a Video over IP multicast stream. Think outside of the linear box. Broadcasters won’t be limited to the bandwidth of the OTA transmitter. Read the standard.

Rather than a bunch of us spitballin’ about what we think will happen, I would like to hear what our resident authorities Trip and Scott Greczkowski think will happen. How do you guys think this will go down? What kind of timeline are we looking at?

Here is a good read on what's coming next. Phoenix will be done by April. I suspect that once Phoenix is done we would start to see additonal buildouts in the fall of 18 / spring of 19. Broadcasters Praise 3.0 Authorization, Get to Work on Deployment

K9SAT said:

Here is a good read on what's coming next. Phoenix will be done by April. I suspect that once Phoenix is done we would start to see additonal buildouts in the fall of 18 / spring of 19. Broadcasters Praise 3.0 Authorization, Get to Work on Deployment

Click to expand...

This sure sounds like what I speculated would happen.

The purpose of the SFN deployment is to bring together the vendor community, integration, SFN propagation planning and RF components to develop “a methodology to be able to execute on a national scale over the next two and half to three years a full nationwide buildout,” said Aitken. The initial phase of the buildout will focus on having a multi-site, multi-frequency, multi-tenant SFN infrastructure that can accommodate up to six channels.

Click to expand...

K9SAT said:

When it's all said and done, what your going to see is a single UHD station with a bunch of IP content that can get pushed making the station the most money. The IP content will be VOD and other content that users would get pushed to their devices. Also, you will see a trending of those sub channels disappearing on the OTA signal in favor for internet streaming. Meaning the channels will still be available to you over an internet connection via a Video over IP multicast stream. Think outside of the linear box. Broadcasters won’t be limited to the bandwidth of the OTA transmitter. Read the standard.

Click to expand...

I already have Pay-TV. If I want to stream TV I can do that now. What content could the local stations put on their new pay IP channels that anyone would want to watch that they cannot already get? You are also assuming that everyone has access to high-speed broadband. Many of the areas served by OTA TV do not have that access.

It still remains to be determined how ATSC 3 will work with cable and satellite. Will the IP features be supported? How will “Main Channel” be determined, in a more flexible environment?

Trip said:

You've simply made a statement with zero evidence and, upon being called on it, attempted to wriggle out of it.

Click to expand...

Speculatory statements don't require a lot of backup. Motifvation is required, but certainly not irrefutable proof of active procedings.

As it stands right now, there are no plans for any kind of follow-up, for multiple reasons.

Click to expand...

I'd be very surprised if someone wasn't dreaming about what the next steps might be after a transition to Next Gen TV.

You've incorrectly characterized my statement as a statement of fact and having to do with the current repack. It obviously wasn't about the current repack but rather what happens if and when ATSC 3.0 (the topic of this thread) becomes the broadcast standard of the day. The compression and modulation technologies behind Next Gen TV should make significant additional room in the band once DTV goes dark.

As I pointed out previously, the DTV transition was followed up by such a repack and perhaps the reason that you don't see evidence of that is that the plan isn't the gubmint's this time -- it is the brainchild of the broadcasters who are being given considerable leash to implement Senator Kerry's original motion for more efficient OTA bandwidth use.

At the same time, we find that fiber providers like Google and others are slowing their deployment roll and waiting for some sort of RF technology to ease the financial burden of the last mile connections. Someone is always going to have designs on resources that they think could be better utilized and to deny that is to try to wiggle out of reality.

comfortably_numb said:

Rather than a bunch of us spitballin’ about what we think will happen, I would like to hear what our resident authorities Trip and Scott Greczkowski think will happen. How do you guys think this will go down? What kind of timeline are we looking at?

Click to expand...

If only it where that easy.

The recent FCC ruling is "permissive" rather than "prescriptive" so the broadcasters are pretty much free to do what they want within a few notable bounds.

The DTV transition was largely prescriptive with the stages and timeline being set (and extended) by the FCC as well as a mandate regarding tuner inclusion in televisions (the Next-gen permission doesn't demand that TVs include ATSC 3.0 capable tuners).

harshness said:

If only it where that easy.

The recent FCC ruling is "permissive" rather than "prescriptive" so the broadcasters are pretty much free to do what they want within a few notable bounds.

The DTV transition was largely prescriptive with the stages and timeline being set (and extended) by the FCC as well as a mandate regarding tuner inclusion in televisions (the Next-gen permission doesn't demand that TVs include ATSC 3.0 capable tuners).

Click to expand...

Its called letting the free market work. Amazing concept!

Voyager6 said:

I already have Pay-TV. If I want to stream TV I can do that now. What content could the local stations put on their new pay IP channels that anyone would want to watch that they cannot already get? You are also assuming that everyone has access to high-speed broadband. Many of the areas served by OTA TV do not have that access.

Click to expand...

Look at CBS All Access. Star Trek is one. ABC is pulling all of their Disney stuff from Netfilx, so yes there is content that can be put on the local stations new IP channels that people would pay for. Also, only 6 percent of the population doesn't have access to high-speed broadband (19 million). That's a drop in the bucket for the reach broadcasters have. Also, with Gigabit 5G deployments happening that number will significantly drop in the next 5 years.

Voyager6 said:

This sure sounds like what I speculated would happen.

Click to expand...

You still missed the part where it said, "a methodology to be able to execute on a national scale over the next two and half to three years a full nationwide buildout,”

That puts it right where I said, unlike others who still think it's light years away. Yes, It would be multi-frequency, Multisite would depend on the market, and multi-tower is possible. Maybe I was getting confused by the fact that the lighthouse would only be one tower, but it's possible that if they wanted to do multi towers they could. Here is an example of what I am talking about.

K9SAT said:

Look at CBS All Access. Star Trek is one. ABC is pulling all of their Disney stuff from Netfilx, so yes there is content that can be put on the local stations new IP channels that people would pay for. Also, only 6 percent of the population doesn't have access to high-speed broadband (19 million). That's a drop in the bucket for the reach broadcasters have. Also, with Gigabit 5G deployments happening that number will significantly drop in the next 5 years.

Click to expand...

The FCC says more like 10% of the US population with rural areas reaching 39%.
Rural and urban America divided by broadband access

According to the FCC’s 2016 Broadband Progress Report

Click to expand...

, 10 percent of Americans lack access to broadband by this definition. This number, however, fails to illustrate the stark contrast between rural and urban access to broadband. Rural areas have significantly slower internet access, with 39 percent lacking access to broadband of 25/4 Mbps, compared to only 4 percent for urban areas. This rural/urban “digital divide” in access severely limits rural populations from taking advantage of a critical component of modern life.

Click to expand...

K9SAT said:

Its called letting the free market work.

Click to expand...

I hear this battle cry from Chairman Pai on multiple important topics. Perhaps you could cite some modern examples of where free market workings are making notable progress for consumers?

The gubmint didn't leave much to chance with the DTV transition. What has changed that the powers that be think a voluntary transition will succeed now?

Voyager6 said:

The FCC says more like 10% of the US population with rural areas reaching 39%.

Click to expand...

There's a set of numbers to support just about any claim. I comes down to reading the conditions regarding who isn't included (or is expressly excluded) from the sampling.

There used to be a test that was conducted occasionally where the sample was given a router that reported statistics directly to the survey organization. My cousin with his 100Mb broadband always seemed to be able to participate while I was turned down every time. If you control your sample carefully, you can get the numbers your client wants.

K9SAT said:

Here is an example of what I am talking about.

Click to expand...

You example offers up a scenario where the number of channels per station are reduced to no more than two and they're trying to pack three HD stations on a single DTV channel. Is that realistic?

I'm in a medium size market and we have an average of more than three channels per frequency. My PBS has two 1080p, one 480i and three stereo audio feeds so I don't imagine they can buddy up with that lineup.

harshness said:

I hear this battle cry from Chairman Pai on multiple important topics. Perhaps you could cite some modern examples of where free market workings are making notable progress for consumers?

The gubmint didn't leave much to chance with the DTV transition. What has changed that the powers that be think a voluntary transition will succeed now?

Click to expand...

Telsa on multiple fronts


The fact this is a broadcaster initiated where as the last one was fcc initiated. Basically the broadcasters have decided to clean up the mess from the last transition and want to utilize h.265 to put up additional content for mobile and other things like 4k. This is revenue driven. I suspect we will see an increase in h.265 efficiency soon that will allow them to reduce bit rate with out sacrificing on quality.

harshness said:

You example offers up a scenario where the number of channels per station are reduced to no more than two and they're trying to pack three HD stations on a single DTV channel. Is that realistic?

I'm in a medium size market and we have an average of more than three channels per frequency. My PBS has two 1080p, one 480i and three stereo audio feeds so I don't imagine they can buddy up with that lineup.

Click to expand...

Yes you can run 3 channels at 720p on a single atsc 1.0 channel statmuxed together. Sports will look like crap but for a pbs or anything else that doesn’t have fast moving content it will look decent.

Voyager6 said:

The FCC says more like 10% of the US population with rural areas reaching 39%.
Rural and urban America divided by broadband access

Click to expand...

Let's go to the direct source, the FCC instead of some 3rd hand reporting. Here on the Eighth Broadband progress report from the fcc it clearly says, "Notwithstanding this progress, the Report finds that approximately 19 million Americans—6 percent of the population—still lack access to fixed broadband service at threshold speeds. In rural areas, nearly one-fourth of the population —14.5 million people—lack access to this service. In tribal areas, nearly one-third of the population lacks access. "

SOURCE: Eighth Broadband Progress Report

Regardless if it's 6 or 10 percent that's not enough to put a stop to the presses as you have 90 percent of America who has some sort of access.

K9SAT said:

Telsa on multiple fronts

Click to expand...

Did you mean to type "Tesla"? Last I checked, Tesla has lost more than a million dollars in the last six months. Tesla's competitors are also selling cars at substantial financial losses (the Bolt goes for thousands under cost). All the while, Tesla's "Market" is made up of customers who spent an average of over $80k for a car of somewhat limited utility. As with most automotive comparisons, this one fails to model the marketplace. Electric cars can have significant and immediate benefits to their owners. Next-get TV can make few such promises.

The fact this is a broadcaster initiated where as the last one was fcc initiated.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty certain we can set that aside as a well-known fact.

Basically the broadcasters have decided to clean up the mess from the last transition and want to utilize h.265 to put up additional content for mobile and other things like 4k. This is revenue driven. I suspect we will see an increase in h.265 efficiency soon that will allow them to reduce bit rate with out sacrificing on quality.

Click to expand...

The shortcoming in your consideration is that they broadcaster's can't be the only beneficiaries of a voluntary transition. The consumers need to win something substantially better than what they're curently getting to initiate their personal voluntary transitions. DTV brought HD and multi-channel sound at introduction. Next-gen will not have the same level of impact on the viewer's experience (by FCC decree, the DTV lighthouse broadcasts must remain as comparable as is practical within the bounds of DTV technology).

When you consider why we, as consumers, would want to make another change, the wins are fewer and further between. It is we that support (or withold support from) the "free market".