Interesting Video on ATSC 3.0

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
49,995
14,874
Northern VA
Well, I don’t see any major announcements or advances in the next few months
 

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,428
2,611
Salem, OR
I think it's getting off track here.
The problem is simple: its just too early in the game. Enabled TVs are likely at least 10 months away (the 2019 models come out in Spring?) and affordable standalone tuners haven't been whispered of.

For those who are hoping for an inexpensive SDR solution, you have to wonder given the bandwidth and the large amount of licensed IP involved in decoding. Does SDR for DTV exist? Articles from late 2016 suggest that it isn't feasible to use the SDR dongles of the day.

Broadcasts that may be available can't reasonably be received so what's the point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: primestar31

jayn_j

Press On Regardless
Supporting Founder
Sep 29, 2003
10,544
3,041
Sheboygan, WI
The same chicken and egg situation developed over HDTV and ATSC 1.0. The standard was approved in 1998, but manufacturers did not start including the ATSC tuner until the FCC mandated the cutoff date for analog broadcasts.
 

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,428
2,611
Salem, OR
The standard was approved in 1998, but manufacturers did not start including the ATSC tuner until the FCC mandated the cutoff date for analog broadcasts.
Absent a mandate, the Next-Gen battle is a completely different animal from the DTV Transition. There are some parallels, but in terms of the driving force, Next-Gen has few of the advantages that DTV had.

While some may feel confident in placing the prospect of UHD programming as a major win, they never manage to answer the question regarding what UHD they're crowing about. Heck, they're still shooting quite a few films and TV shows in 2K.
 

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
49,995
14,874
Northern VA
With the new Whizz-bang-olator, they can transmit what, 8 HD streams per channel?
 

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,428
2,611
Salem, OR
With the new Whizz-bang-olator, they can transmit what, 8 HD streams per channel?
While eight may be a theoretical limit, I suspect the reality is closer to five at the outset.

The PQ and SQ can't be noticeably inferior to DTV or uptake will be seriously hindered. Of course as we know, some broadcasters are already reducing their DTV PQ by adding HD feeds to their signals where it was once considered unthinkable.

We also can't forget all of the other streams that the broadcasters are champing at the bit to deploy along with the conventional TV programming.
 

Voyager6

Just lost in space
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Nov 30, 2005
14,733
4,696
Sol 3
While eight may be a theoretical limit, I suspect the reality is closer to five at the outset.

The PQ and SQ can't be noticeably inferior to DTV or uptake will be seriously hindered. Of course as we know, some broadcasters are already reducing their DTV PQ by adding HD feeds to their signals where it was once considered unthinkable.

We also can't forget all of the other streams that the broadcasters are champing at the bit to deploy along with the conventional TV programming.
The reality of ATSC 3.0 is one UHD channel or 6 to 8 1080P channels. Probably 6 1080P w/HDR channels. The breakdown of what combinations of channels are possible begins on Page 15 of the following article.
https://www.radioclubofamerica.org/...LACE_RCA_TECH_SYMPOSIUM_111317_PIT_Rev4-1.pdf
 
  • Like
Reactions: comfortably_numb

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,428
2,611
Salem, OR
What is expected and what is delivered are usually not all that in line with each other. You ask how many of one thing a system can do at a time and you get a theoretical maximum. If you ask what it is going to do with all of the extra goodies (graphic overlays, independent captioning, non-video data, ad insertion) thrown in, the numbers erode.

It goes both ways. There was a time when two HD channels was considered unthinkable with DTV and after a few years, they eventually got there (at a non-negligible cost).
 

Justin Hill

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 6, 2016
215
101
Green Bay
I also heard that ATSC 3.0 is perfect for people on the move, unlike the current ATSC standard. The people at WRAL-TV 5 demonstrated this with a flat screen TV inside a bus full of people watching the Olympic Games.
 

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
49,995
14,874
Northern VA

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,428
2,611
Salem, OR
I've always been wary of the mobile claims. There was supposed to be a mobile element of DTV. Having a documented standard doesn't mean it will be effectively implemented.

This is another one of those things that may be seeing wide use in Korea where SFN is the underlying broadcast technology but it perhaps doesn't hold up where SFN coverage isn't present.
 

harshness

SatelliteGuys Master
May 5, 2007
16,428
2,611
Salem, OR
The reality of ATSC 3.0 is one UHD channel or 6 to 8 1080P channels.
Isn't it theory until they deploy it in the real world on a broad scale?

The Ericsson bandwidth chart looks closer to five HD channels than eight and that would appear to be exclusive of WCG, HDR and "immersive sound".
 
Top