How DVB-T2 And ATSC 3.0 Stack Up: Technical Benefits, Limitations And Real-World Deployments

Discussion in 'Over the Air TV By RabbitEars.Info' started by comfortably_numb, Jun 4, 2019.

  1. comfortably_numb

    comfortably_numb Topic Starter Dogs have owners, cats have staff
    Pub Member / Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2011
    Posts:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    7,149
    Location:
    Missouri/Kansas
  2. osu1991

    osu1991 SatelliteGuys Master

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    Posts:
    9,429
    Likes Received:
    1,870
    Location:
    Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
    $$$$$$
     
    FTA4PA and comfortably_numb like this.
  3. comfortably_numb

    comfortably_numb Topic Starter Dogs have owners, cats have staff
    Pub Member / Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2011
    Posts:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    7,149
    Location:
    Missouri/Kansas
    The one thing the article didn't talk about (unless I missed it) was a signal penetration comparison between DVB-T2 and 3.0 (or even between ATSC 1.0 and 3.0). This is my biggest concern with the new standard. If signals carry further, I think it will be better embraced.
     
    N5XZS, navychop and FTA4PA like this.
  4. harshness

    harshness SatelliteGuys Master

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Posts:
    15,153
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Location:
    Salem, OR
    Further isn't better if you're trying to avoid trampling someone else's license.

    Proponents claim that they can make Single Frequency Networking work but that depends on being in sole control of your frequency and that can't happen if the signals propagate beyond the coverage area.
     
  5. comfortably_numb

    comfortably_numb Topic Starter Dogs have owners, cats have staff
    Pub Member / Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2011
    Posts:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    7,149
    Location:
    Missouri/Kansas
    Maybe I should have said "better penetration." A 1000 kW digital signal today doesn't carry as far as a 1000 kW analog signal did, right?
     
    edisonprime, N5XZS and navychop like this.
  6. Radioguy41

    Radioguy41 SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Posts:
    1,429
    Likes Received:
    815
    Location:
    Lehighton, Pennsylvania
    Considering we lost range when it went digital getting back to where we were with analog would be an improvement.
     
  7. comfortably_numb

    comfortably_numb Topic Starter Dogs have owners, cats have staff
    Pub Member / Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2011
    Posts:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    7,149
    Location:
    Missouri/Kansas
    Exactly!
     
    navychop likes this.
  8. Jim5506

    Jim5506 SatelliteGuys Master
    Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2004
    Posts:
    6,545
    Likes Received:
    1,120
    Location:
    Lubbock, Texas
    Actually the signal at the same frequency and wattage should travel the same distance and have the same penetration.

    The digital cliff cuts off the viewable digital signal at the point where data loss makes assembling a viewable picture impossible.

    NTSC (analog TV) continued giving you a snowier and snowier picture down to where the picture was barely discernable with the human eye/brain combination.

    The eye/brain combination is much better at building a picture you can see out of little dots on the screen than the ATSC tuner is a decrypting errors in a weak data stream.

    Other methods of encryption/decryption may be better than ATSC 1.0 but will surely struggle to match what your brain could build out of a snowy NTSC signal.
     
  9. harshness

    harshness SatelliteGuys Master

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Posts:
    15,153
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Location:
    Salem, OR
    Considering that this is typically going to happen in a post-repack TV band, things will be a lot more crowded. The amount of engineering that has to go into creating the coverage patterns must be substantial in some of the more closely-spaced markets. Some will almost certainly get shorted to protect some station using the same frequency on the other side of them (perhaps neither of which they can receive).
     
  10. dweber

    dweber SatelliteGuys Pro
    Pub Member / Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    Posts:
    724
    Likes Received:
    620
    Location:
    Plain City, OH
    What did it mean when it said “the introduction of MIMO forces the end user to install a new receive antenna”?
    Does that mean we will need new antennas for ATSC 3?


    Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
     
  11. harshness

    harshness SatelliteGuys Master

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Posts:
    15,153
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Location:
    Salem, OR
    Pay very careful attention to who wrote the article: The Head of Technology at DVB. It seems as if he may have an axe to grind.

    It is awfully hard to imagine using the term "State of the Art" in reference to a ten-year-old technology but that's perhaps what you do when you've been at it for a while.

    From a viewer perspective, I suspect that DVB-T2 would more than meet our needs but it doesn't support any of what the broadcasters are drooling over so that fact doesn't much matter.
     
    navychop and comfortably_numb like this.
  12. comfortably_numb

    comfortably_numb Topic Starter Dogs have owners, cats have staff
    Pub Member / Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2011
    Posts:
    7,061
    Likes Received:
    7,149
    Location:
    Missouri/Kansas
    I wondered that myself.
     
  13. N5XZS

    N5XZS SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,357
    Likes Received:
    550
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Don't forget that we used to run NTSC at 5 MW ERP!:eeek:biggrin

    But it would be interesting to see what the maximum TX ERP power in ATSC 3.0 world?:facepalm
     
    navychop likes this.
  14. harshness

    harshness SatelliteGuys Master

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Posts:
    15,153
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Location:
    Salem, OR
    MIMO requires more than one receive antenna. This probably isn't important in a stationary application but it would be very important in a mobile application.

    Next Gen TV does not require MIMO. The SFN feature of ATSC 3.0 does require MIMO. Picking up a MIMO broadcast with a single omnidirectional antenna may be a nightmare as the technology is built on multipath and we know how that goes.

    There's a lot of technology in the specification that may have been proven in other applications and at different frequencies but until it is deployed, how it actually works compared to what the models suggest isn't a lock.
     
  15. Wireless Engineer

    Wireless Engineer Active SatelliteGuys Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2019
    Posts:
    24
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Ohio
    Regardless of what modulation you use, rf is rf.
    .......
    I first installed OFDM transmitters in 2003 and they were touted as being able to eliminate signal drop outs, mobile flutter, and increased range.
    .....
    As i found out, most of these claims were merely hype.
    ......
    In the end it's still a rf carrier that is going to bounce, flip polarity, and be blocked by leaves and buildings and still subject to the same interference sources that affected analog tv signals 80 years ago.
    .......
     
    bcw and N5XZS like this.
  16. harshness

    harshness SatelliteGuys Master

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Posts:
    15,153
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Location:
    Salem, OR
    Things like error correction weren't contemplated 80 years ago. Being able to isolate a signal amongst the noise wasn't contemplated.

    The new schemes theorectically bring some new possibilities but they have to be proven in practice and that's where the breakdown is. The dollar signs won't win out over the physics because no amount of money can make physics go away entirely.
     
    N5XZS likes this.
  17. N5XZS

    N5XZS SatelliteGuys Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Posts:
    2,357
    Likes Received:
    550
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    And who's know what's will bring the next RF technology, maybe subspace radio pushing back 1 second delay light speed barrier beyond the moon which is 1.56 light speed delay "warp 1.0 barrier":bow
     
  18. harshness

    harshness SatelliteGuys Master

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Posts:
    15,153
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Location:
    Salem, OR
    I suspect that much of what is currently handled via RF will be consolidated and multiplexed for Internet transmission. The abandoned bandwidth will be turned over to short-range devices for wireless interaction.
     
    charlesrshell likes this.
  19. DarkStarPDX

    DarkStarPDX New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Posts:
    4
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
    It should be noted that the TV Technology opinion piece was written by Peter Siebert, Head of Technology at DVB. Just a little slanted...
     
  20. harshness

    harshness SatelliteGuys Master

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Posts:
    15,153
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    Location:
    Salem, OR
    I noted that in post #11.
     
    comfortably_numb likes this.

Separate names with a comma.

More...