No CBS Channel 10 is getting OLD!!

[HoTat2]

Where I work, DirecTV has a fiber feed and uses OTA as a backup. Comparing the two signals, I don't see any difference, and wouldn't expect to as they are both the same ~14 Mbps feed from the encoder. The subchannels on the OTA signal also affect what is sent through the fiber.

This is what I thought ...

Whether a local station's broadcast MPEG-2 transport stream is sent in ASI format by fiber links to the MVPDs. Or received by them OTA in ATSC format, the PQ should be identical.

Therefore, the subscribers should also see either the same PQ in comparison to OTA, or else somewhat poorer from the MVPDs due to their re-compression of the individual broadcast streams into MPEG-4 format.

 

[raoul5788]

This is what I thought ...

Whether a local station's broadcast MPEG-2 transport stream is sent in ASI format by fiber links to the MVPDs. Or received by them OTA in ATSC format, the PQ should be identical.

Therefore, the subscribers should also see either the same PQ in comparison to OTA, or else somewhat poorer from the MVPDs due to their re-compression of the individual broadcast streams into MPEG-4 format.

If they are getting the signal ota from a station with sub channels, won't the signal be a lower bitrate?

 

[HoTat2]

If they are getting the signal ota from a station with sub channels, won't the signal be a lower bitrate?

But the ASI fiber feeds to the MVPDs have those same sub-channels added in as well since it comes from the same station encoder output which feeds the ATSC broadcast transmitter.

So even though the MVPDs may demultiplex the local station's transport stream to separate out the channels they wish to broadcast and place them on separate channels of their systems. The individual streams have still been originally compressed to the same amount by the local station as the streams in the OTA broadcast signal.

 

[slice1900]

FWIW, my understanding is that when Directv's LRF (local receive facility) is co-located on premises with a station, typically they are getting the MPEG2 stream that is sent to the station's encoder, which means they get the same thing as if they picked it up OTA. That would be delivered to them via ASI. Whether OTA is better depends on how much extra compression they may do when they convert it to MPEG4 (i.e. how many other HD channels they have to carry on the same transponder depending on the needs of the market)

However, in some cases I've heard they get the raw uncompressed HD-SDI feed into their encoder, which means they can get better quality than OTA. Whether they actually do have better quality again depends on how many other channels share the same transponder.

The same applies for cable, if they get the raw HD-SDI feed they may have better quality than OTA, but some systems that really compress it (like Comcast's MPEG4 headends making everything 3 Mbps!) they may be worse.

Where I live the local Fox and CBS stations had no subchannels for a long time, and OTA was vastly superior to Directv's feed. Now all the local stations have three subchannels, and the quality is pretty much the same between cable, OTA and Directv. Unfortunately nothing compared to what it was with a pristine 19 Mbps MPEG2 HD via OTA!

 

[HoTat2]

...
Where I live the local Fox and CBS stations had no subchannels for a long time, and OTA was vastly superior to Directv's feed. Now all the local stations have three subchannels, and the quality is pretty much the same between cable, OTA and Directv. Unfortunately nothing compared to what it was with a pristine 19 Mbps MPEG2 HD via OTA!

Yeah ...

Only 2 stations left here in the LA market like that with no sub-channels ...

CBS owned KCAL-DT 9-1 (RF ch. 9)
Fox owned KTTV-DT 11-1 (RF ch. 11).

And FOX gets away with it by taking the bandwidth for sub-channels from local KCOP-DT 13 (RF ch. 13), which they also own, and PSIP mapping them to virtual channels on 11.

Needless to say, this combined with KCOP's own multicast subs., is squeezing the pajeebas out of that station's bandwidth. Turning its primary channel that carries the MNT network programming for this market into an overcompressed mess.

13-1 (MNT) 720p HD
13-2 (Buzzr) 480i 4:3 SD
13-3 (FOX Movies!) 480i 16:9 SD
13-4 (Heroes & Icons) 480i 16:9 SD
11-2 (FOX SD simulcast) 480i 16:9 SD
11-3 (Light TV) 480i 16:9 SD

 

[ejb1980]

Like I said, the Canadian channels have no subchannels. Hockey Night in Canada might as well be 4K on OTA CBC compared to NHL Network airing the same thing, and NHL Network isn't bad (except the aspect ratio). There's just something about the Canadian channels, they're awesome. We used to have 2 stations (Fox and ABC) without subchannels but they've always been just meh HD. But when you put subchannels in the mix (Fox and ABC do now) and multiple HD and channel sharing.... there's no way OTA can look better. And it shouldn't, it's free. We pay for Directv, it should be the absolute best it can be. If all you have if the OTA feed of a certain station, it isn't the end of the world; OTA HD while flawed is still better than SD and great to have free and as a backup!

 

[goaliebob99]

Yes, because in most cases, the signal provided by broadcasters to the cable and satellite providers is that same that will be sent to their transmitter. Stations typically have one “encoder” into which all their streams are fed — in the encoder, the desired bit-rate for each stream is set. The output of the encoder is sent to the transmitter, and optionally via fiber to the cable and satellite providers. In this scenario, both the OTA and fiber feeds are getting the same signal. There may be some stations that have a separate encoder to feed cable and satellite via fiber, but it’s rare from what I know. That’s a big extra expense for the station for no easily justifiable reason.

Actually, Each station or subchannel would have it's own encoder fed into a mux. The encoder would take the source material and re-encode it into a lower bit rate that the station specify's. All of the signals are then fed into a mux that will take the output of the encoders and multiplex it into one signal, using the bitrate from the output of the encoders. The output of the mux is usually sent to the transmitter where the signal is modulated and sent over RF to everyone's tv's.

 

[HoTat2]

Actually, Each station or subchannel would have it's own encoder fed into a mux. The encoder would take the source material and re-encode it into a lower bit rate that the station specify's. All of the signals are then fed into a mux that will take the output of the encoders and multiplex it into one signal, using the bitrate from the output of the encoders. The output of the mux is usually sent to the transmitter where the signal is modulated and sent over RF to everyone's tv's.

Technically true ...

But what was meant earlier by "encoder" is in the broader sense of the individual MPEG encoders for the input streams combined together with the multiplexer (specifically a "statistical multiplexer" or "statmux") on the same integrated equipment assembly at the station, called the "encoder."

 

[goaliebob99]

Technically true ...

But what was meant earlier by "encoder" is in the broader sense of the individual MPEG encoders for the input streams combined together with the multiplexer (specifically a "statistical multiplexer" or "statmux") on the same integrated equipment assembly at the station, called the "encoder."

I get that but that's not what it really is. Bad analogy time. It's like calling an F150 a car. While the F150 can do what a car does, the car cannot put a refrigerator in the back of the truck and haul it around, where the truck can haul a fridge all day long. You can attempt to put a fridge on the car but it won't work out well. Instead of calling it an encoder it should be called both encoder/multiplexor. It just doesnt sound right calling something an encoder that is much more than that.

 

[HoTat2]

I get that but that's not what it really is. Bad analogy time. It's like calling an F150 a car. While the F150 can do what a car does, the car cannot put a refrigerator in the back of the truck and haul it around, where the truck can haul a fridge all day long. You can attempt to put a fridge on the car but it won't work out well. Instead of calling it an encoder it should be called both encoder/multiplexor. It just doesnt sound right calling something an encoder that is much more than that.

Yes, it's loose terminology I know ...

But isn't that graphic pretty outdated today?

Aren't the input streams to the station's "encoder/multiplexer" pretty much all uncompressed digital streams nowadays, such as HD/SDI or SD/SDI?

Or even sometimes in compressed MPEG-2/4 format encapsulated in an SDI format?

 

[directv newb]

You guys hijacked my thread and are not giving me any SYMPATHY, over a month without CBS is a long time and there is no end in sight .

 

[goaliebob99]

Yes, it's loose terminology I know ...

But isn't that graphic pretty outdated today?

Aren't the input streams to the station's "encoder/multiplexer" pretty much all uncompressed digital streams nowadays, such as HD/SDI or SD/SDI?

Or even sometimes in compressed MPEG-2/4 format encapsulated in an SDI format?

Yes and kind of, most affiliates still get their content from a national feed, or through Vyvx or pathfire for stuff like Maury and other syndicated programming. It still has to get re-encoded into MPEG2 at some point as that is the standard for ATSC 3.0 transmissions, and when you have content that very's different compression methods used and bitrates, you still have to reencode them for a multitude of reasons. In any rate where you use HDSDI, still, have to re-encode it into MPEG 2 (ASI) and it all has to get muxed together before going to the transmitter.

 

[eric925]

I agree with directv newb he doesn’t care how it works he is just upset with the people that own cbs channel 10 and those people need to grow up and get it over with.

 

[HoTat2]

I agree with directv newb he doesn’t care how it works he is just upset with the people that own cbs channel 10 and those people need to grow up and get it over with.

Agreed ...

But for the customer when these things happen, which are naturally becoming ever more frequent as the local TV station ownership groups demand higher and higher carriage fees from the MVPDs. Anger and complaints won't do much good.

And since all negotiations are private leaving customers in the dark as to what if any progress is being made. All you can really do is try OTA or streaming solutions, and just wait it out as exasperating and frustrating as this may be.

 

[directv newb]

YEA, The dispute must be over CBS is back on after 40 some days

 

[directv newb]

Dispatch Stations Return To DirecTV, U-Verse | TVNewsCheck.com

 

[goaliebob99]

FWIW, my understanding is that when Directv's LRF (local receive facility) is co-located on premises with a station, typically they are getting the MPEG2 stream that is sent to the station's encoder, which means they get the same thing as if they picked it up OTA. That would be delivered to them via ASI. Whether OTA is better depends on how much extra compression they may do when they convert it to MPEG4 (i.e. how many other HD channels they have to carry on the same transponder depending on the needs of the market)

However, in some cases I've heard they get the raw uncompressed HD-SDI feed into their encoder, which means they can get better quality than OTA. Whether they actually do have better quality again depends on how many other channels share the same transponder.

The same applies for cable, if they get the raw HD-SDI feed they may have better quality than OTA, but some systems that really compress it (like Comcast's MPEG4 headends making everything 3 Mbps!) they may be worse.

Where I live the local Fox and CBS stations had no subchannels for a long time, and OTA was vastly superior to Directv's feed. Now all the local stations have three subchannels, and the quality is pretty much the same between cable, OTA and Directv. Unfortunately nothing compared to what it was with a pristine 19 Mbps MPEG2 HD via OTA!

Where I work, DirecTV has a fiber feed and uses OTA as a backup. Comparing the two signals, I don't see any difference, and wouldn't expect to as they are both the same ~14 Mbps feed from the encoder. The subchannels on the OTA signal also affect what is sent through the fiber.

But the ASI fiber feeds to the MVPDs have those same sub-channels added in as well since it comes from the same station encoder output which feeds the ATSC broadcast transmitter.

So even though the MVPDs may demultiplex the local station's transport stream to separate out the channels they wish to broadcast and place them on separate channels of their systems. The individual streams have still been originally compressed to the same amount by the local station as the streams in the OTA broadcast signal.

I can speak from experience and give direct incite. DirecTV gets the majority (I say 75 percent) of its local affiliate signals via OTA 8VSB like you do at home. The only time DirecTV sees an ASI feed or fiber feed is when the Local Collection Facility (NOT LRF LIKE E* calls them) is co-located at a TV station and that TV station usually hands off an ASI signal to them with OTA used as a backup. Outside of that, unless a TV station delivers that type of signal (ASI) to the LCF by running and paying for a fiber line or microwave link (Not usual) it’s all OTA. This is becoming less common sense ATT took over as most of the LCF's in ATT territories have moved to ATT properties to save cash on renting space at local TV stations. This is good as it allows ATT to keep expenses down.


Some areas have moved to locations co located with Uverse where Uverse gets an ASI feed it’s shared with DirecTV. Uverse also used a mix of ASI and OTA. Some providers are willing to provide an ASI link and handoff to ATT, whereas others don’t want that expense and are ok with OTA being the primary delivery mechanism. It all boils down to what the provider agrees with ATT and what’s available to them at the LCF site.


Generally, the ASI feed is the same feed that is going to the transmitter with sub channels included. Very useful for those markets where the TV station is a dual affiliate IE CBS/FOX, etc. That is not always the case though and there are times where DirecTV does get a better signal from the local affiliate that's better than the OTA. Generally when there is an ASI signal available, DirecTV takes that signal first, and uses OTA as a backup. It's all dependent upon what's contractually written though with the affiliate. DirecTV does not get a raw HDSDI feed.


DirecTV takes that affiliate signal and recompresses into both MPEG4 HD and MPEG2 SD and then that signal is sent to the regional uplink facility where it's multiplexed, the video signal is then encrypted and ancillary data is added for ad insertion / guide data, etc., (made DirecTV’s signal) and uplinked to your home.

 

[HoTat2]

I can speak from experience and give direct incite. DirecTV gets the majority (I say 75 percent) of its local affiliate signals via OTA 8VSB like you do at home. The only time DirecTV sees an ASI feed or fiber feed is when the Local Collection Faculty (NOT LRF LIKE E* calls them) is co-located at a TV station and that TV station usually hands off an ASI signal to them with OTA used as a backup. Outside of that, unless a TV station delivers that type of signal (ASI) to the LCF by running and paying for a fiber line or microwave link (Not usual) it’s all OTA. This is becoming less common sense ATT took over as most of the LCF's in ATT territories have moved to ATT properties to save cash on renting space at local TV stations. This is good as it allows ATT to keep expenses down.


Some areas have moved to locations co located with Uverse where Uverse gets an ASI feed it’s shared with DirecTV. Uverse also used a mix of ASI and OTA. Some providers are willing to provide an ASI link and handoff to ATT, whereas others don’t want that expense and are ok with OTA being the primary delivery mechanism. It all boils down to what the provider agrees with ATT and what’s available to them at the LCF site.


Generally, the ASI feed is the same feed that is going to the transmitter with sub channels included. Very useful for those markets where the TV station is a dual affiliate IE CBS/FOX, etc. That is not always the case though and there are times where DirecTV does get a better signal from the local affiliate that's better than the OTA. Generally when there is an ASI signal available, DirecTV takes that signal first, and uses OTA as a backup. It's all dependent upon what's contractually written though with the affiliate. DirecTV does not get a raw HDSDI feed.


DirecTV takes that affiliate signal and recompresses into both MPEG4 HD and MPEG2 SD and then that signal is sent to the regional uplink facility where it's multiplexed, the video signal is then encrypted and ancillary data is added for ad insertion / guide data, etc., (made DirecTV’s signal) and uplinked to your home.

Generally speaking though ...

Do you know if the local TV feeds collected at an LCF which are destined for final uplink through a regional uplink facility go directly to that regional facility for format conversion, encryption, ad insertion, etc., then uplink? And DIRECTV monitors and controls the various processes along the signal chain through remote links back to the main broadcast centers at the LABC and CRBC?

Or are all the locally collected feeds first sent to either of the two main broadcast centers the LABC or CRBC, for monitoring and processing and then back out to the RCFs for uplink (except for those locals uplinked from the broadcast centers themselves of course)?

 

[goaliebob99]

Generally speaking though ...

Do you know if the local TV feeds collected at an LCF which are destined for final uplink through a regional uplink facility go directly to that regional facility for format conversion, encryption, ad insertion, etc., then uplink? And DIRECTV monitors and controls the various processes along the signal chain through remote links back to the main broadcast centers at the LABC and CRBC?

Or are all the locally collected feeds first sent to either of the two main broadcast centers the LABC or CRBC, for monitoring and processing and then back out to the RCFs for uplink (except for those locals uplinked from the broadcast centers themselves of course)?

CRBC, and LABC are also regional uplink facilities even though they are also main broadcast centers. The signal goes from the LCF to it's designated RUF which could also be LABC or CRBC among the others. The signal processing happens at the RUF. Also, one RUF may do the MPEG 4 and another may do MPEG2 by design. There are special circumstances where CRBC may get a feed and send it to the appropriate RUF but it's only under emergency circumstances where an alternate feed is available. Everything is monitored in the complete chain, so if there is an issue with a particular piece of equipment, it's known where that failure is and action can be taken to fix it. Everything has a backup. Issues also can be identified even before it hits any of DirecTV's equipment, IE: an issue with the providers signal.

 

[Jimbo]

In my case, its the Fox that has been out for all this time, they are ran by the local CBS here, CBS has stayed on, either their contract wasn't up or they resolved it witbout taking them off the air.

When I checked late last night, FOX was still off the air.