Get Ready for ATSC 3.0
 

Could be here within 5 years. Paves the way for UHD 4K programming and theoretically up to 8K if there is interest.

http://hdguru.com/new-broadcast-tv-s...on/#more-15902

Thanks, I will read that.

So I can watch Father Knows Best in 4K, or 8K with surround 3D Super Dolby .....?!?!

Well better signal quality at 60 miles would be nice..... And a nice
Chinese converter to NTSC for my 1985 TV would make me
adopt ATSC 3.0...... COOL ! !

.

Another full-scale system transition? I'll wager a lot of broadcast outlets will throw in the towel with that fresh financial burden on their backs so soon after ATSC 1.0.

"In addition to providing TV viewers with a range of new capabilities and features, ATSC 3.0 is being developed to keep over-the-air (OTA) TV broadcasters competitive with wireless companies like AT&T and Verizon"

Not sure how that'll work but it sounds like a good thing.

"Where support appears to be growing is on the station ownership group level, where Pearl, a partnership comprising eight major station groups: Gannett, Hearst, Cox, Scripps, Graham Media, Meredith, Raycom and Media General, is actively involved with others in the system development. Pearl represents TV stations in 43 of the top 50 U.S. markets"

There will be resistance, but it's enevitable. ATSC 3.0 is a "catch up" to streaming and physical storage devices. It will keep broadcast TV competitive. I think it will take longer then 5 years though.

NHK of Japan is working hard to leap frog everyone and roll out 8K television in time for their 2020 Olympics. They already successfully tested and transmitted the 2012 Olympics in London.

I thought ATSC 3.0 was going to affect everything having to do with TV, not just broadcast. I'm glad I'm not watching broadcast anymore (I have a cable connection, but only because it is part of my service package with Time Warner, and because I can't get local TV on my Roku player without it). In other words, if ATSC 3.0 only applies to broadcast TV, the change, if and when it comes, probably will not affect alternative methods of TV viewing such as streaming video, et al.; in fact, I can't imagine how it would, since streaming video, being distributed over the Internet, has nothing to do with OTA or cable TV.

I still have cable connected to my TV, but I probably could disconnect it altogether and my Roku box would still work as it does now. . . . On second thought, I would probably have ghosts and other distortion of my TV picture if I disconnected the cable, since I would then have one open port on the 2-way splitter behind the TV--which would upset impedances, among other things.

I can see how the new standard will affect TV broadcasting, as it will be an upgrade, if you will, of the current ATSC 1.0 platform, but to eventually put the public through another transition is too much. And the advertising the TV stations would put out (again) about the second transition....I hate to think of it. The CBS station in Cleveland made a huge to-do over the first DTV transition in June 2009, referring to it as "The Big Switch", and running those PSAs every chance they got--during commercial breaks, etc. I got tired of them after the first couple of days.

I shudder to think of what the advertising for the second transition might be like. :eek: Seeing how aggressive advertising seems to be these days, however, it wouldn't surprise me if the ads for the second DTV transition are at least as dramatic (if not more so) as the ones for the first switch were.

I am highly skeptical of the whole plan for over-the-air TV, long term. The biggest problem I see is that most people have already got used to paying for TV "service", independent of whether it has commercials or not. Many younger people (maybe even most of them, scarily) are not even aware of the concept of "free TV", I am afraid.

Even now, the mobile-friendly add-on to our existing digital TV system (ATSC M/H) already includes provision for, and approval of, encrypting those mobile-only channels and requiring payment to watch them. (Here, in the San Francisco area, one or more of my TV tuners comes up with some channels with names like ESPN that I cannot receive; I am guessing that there is already some pay-only service on the air or being tested here.)

With so many people already using cell phones or other Internet-connected devices to watch video (and paying for all of it as they do so, of course, and accepting that as reasonable), I have to wonder how any over-the-air broadcasters would have a plan to counteract that with some flashy, multichannel, mobile-friendly service that was only ad-supported. It just seems unlikely.

MUCH more likely, I fear, is the use of ATSC 3.0 to gradually turn the vast majority of the existing over-the-air channels, bands, and stations into mobile-friendly but full-fledged pay-TV systems, in other words, "cable TV without the cable, but at the same prices", more or less. That is my worst possible nightmare for television.

I agree - Well Said!

We have a few pay-OTA channels here in the NY market already. ATSC -3
will make reception easier because of mobile friendlier signals, and as
said, the younger generation is already aware of and use to a pay
wall for everything, so OTA will most likely become Cable tv without the cable....

.

You make very good points. I to, agree that young people barely watch OTA TV. Also many people are cutting the chord (cable) and using streaming services. This trend will likely increase with more streaming services coming on line. Sony and Apple will introduce new services in September. Yet old folks in the retirement communities where I live, still have their old analogue antennas on their roofs.

I fear as you do that we will lose free TV, but we have the 75 year government mandated business model concept of free OTA in place and Congress upheld the concept that "every household should be able to receive free unobstructed television and radio transmissions". (This came about when condo and apartment owners tried to prevent tenants from installing antennas on their balconies)

My Direct TV bill is getting ridiculous and I too, am thinking about severing my subscription after 20 years with Direct TV. I'm anxious to see the Sony and Apple streaming models. 50 to 85 channels for $50. Being an old guy, was skeptical about streaming, but my wife bought me an Apple TV last Christmas and I have to say it is amazingly good. Video as good as Direct TV and better 7.1 sound. UHD is promised as well. I have not used the Netflix 4K service, but understand it's good.

Having said all this, where dose this leave traditional OTA television? They will either have to catch up with improved service, hopefully for free as always or die off.

Have any broadcasters even adopted the features available in ATSC 2.0?

The specs for ATSC 3.0 look interesting (OFDM modulation, h.265 codec), but I can't help but wonder why they don't coordinate with other groups (DVB, ISDB, etc.) and move to one worldwide broadcast standard if they plan on breaking backwards compatibility. At least they are finally adopting OFDM like everyone else uses, which might make it easier to build multisystem tuners/TVs. Hopefully this also means the end of interlaced OTA broadcasts too.

I agree on the ATSC 2.0, it's specs also say it's backwards compatible with 1.0.
I had always thought that would be the way to go, show an improvement at no
additional cost, then 3.0 would go down easier, because an improvement
was already shown, in the 2.0 switch. Also reception would improve because of
the OFMD, and the ability of booster transmitters to take care of weak areas....

Yes I thought 2.0 would be implemented first.

I think OTA is going to hold on, after all a lot of cable only channels still advertise
their new shows on ABC, NBC, CBS......etc. Same with AMC, and I few others that
escape me right now.... They know where the big number of viewers are.... Still
the networks..... And look at all the HD Antenna outfits that sprang up after
the '09 digital devolution...... I wonder if there will be an upstart antenna installation
service - kinda like Dish and DirecTV have antenna installers.... In a lot of areas
there is a bit of knowledge to get the right stuff.... And most people ain't gunna
handle it themselves.....

.

IMHO: OTA may only survive if they can create some form of compelling product.

In my area, the major networks' affiliates monopolize rights to programming for a huge area and yet DO NOT have an off air signal (Seattle WA affiliates, and I'm in Whatcom county, well out of range of their transmitters). Unless they figure on putting up translators (never have), or their viewer installing 75' towers for aerials, it's only a matter of time. Heck the local tv station KVOS was sold to Michael Dell, who shows no interest in tv but rather selling the RF spectrum for wireless data services. He shut down the entire show and feeds it from somewhere in California, leaving the transmitter and a token office in here town. They don't even make any bones about it, they stopped identifying as "Me TV Bellingham" to "Me TV Seattle".

ATSC 3.0 front and center at NAB show in Las Vegas April 24 through 27, 2017.

http://atsc.org/news-release/next-ge...2017-nab-show/

FCC Approves Next-Gen TV For OTA Broadcasting

http://www.tvtechnology.com/atsc3/00...casting/282290

In the Phoenix Valley where I live:

http://www.tvtechnology.com/atsc3/00...atsc-30/282269

Hum .Whos pockets got filled this time.I cant say here.LOL.......

If it ain't broke, break it for a cash grab.

There are a couple of exceptions to this rule I can think of, the Bear and the BUFF. Of course they were never sold to the public.

I read about the possibility of ATSC 3.0 being used for surveillance. No new box, no new set, no new antenna. When the current system expires I'll rely on disc and streaming. Take THAT FCC and broadcast TV!!!

Whatever happens with broadcast TV, now or in the future, won't bother me in the least. I gave up on broadcast TV and cable some time ago, and did not look back. I now watch TV via streaming video (Roku, with the Spectrum TV app for local channels) and DVD/VHS. I don't miss broadcast or cable a bit. I must maintain a cable account, but that is strictly so the Spectrum (formerly Time-Warner Cable) app will receive local TV; however, I don't use the cable at all--I couldn't if I wanted to, since the full-digital switch mandates the use of a cable box ahead of the TV, which I don't want (don't care for the extra charge which would appear on my cable bill). The cable that once was connected to my VCR and cable outlet is now rolled up in a coil in my bedroom closet, unused.

If the new standard is successful, I would suspect that eventually 4k streams would eventually prevail... Of course, Roku and other stream box sellers would likely jump at the chance to sell new boxes... much $$$$ could be made if they force an upgrade, by phasing out lower quality streams. But, that is years away, nevertheless, a distant possibility, IMHO. :scratch2:

jr

I'm still trying to figure out the appeal of 4K TV. Don't you have to sit 3' away from your 90" 4K TV to tell the difference from a regular 1080p TV?

I'm really suprised they would even bother with a 4K spec'd ATSC standard. Most of the TV broadcasted in my neck of the woods is still 720p or less and looks like crap due to compression artifacts.

4k does make improvement in vernier resolution (fine discrimination of object position) even at regular viewing distances, but trials show that this is not as noticeable an improvement as high dynamic range and, secondarily, wide color gamut. So, 4k may be broadcast simply as a numbers race, but it is likely that the real visual improvement will be HDR, which ATSC 3 will also enable.

Also, WCG, emersive audio, portable on the move A/V, and it allows broadcasters to be on the same playing field with streaming services.

Undoubtedly, there will be charges from “premium” services, but free OTA is still mandated by Congress.

Oh goody. More junk on the way. I wish they could have left things alone and stayed with ntsc.:thumbsdn:

I agree 110 percent.If it aint broke dont fix it..Blame the numnuts with the 1996 telebill disaster .Whats next.The whole country got to ditch their AM/FM radios for crappy digital radio.

The system has been "fixed" already, and the so-called fix was a disaster, IMHO. Whatever was or was not done to AM or FM radio today doesn't matter in the least to me, as I don't listen to radio much anymore. In my area near Cleveland, all anyone can hear from one end of the radio dial to the other is noise. That is, I get plenty of stations, but their idea of music isn't mine. :no:

The stations also carry more commercials than I think they need to, a problem we didn't have 30-40+ years ago when there were definite, strict regulations as to how many commercials any radio or TV station could run in any given hour. When the FCC did away with those rules in the '80s, the stations were (and are, to this day) free to run as many commercials as they want or feel they need. There is at least one FM station in Cleveland that runs commercials and even infomercials (!) all night long, from midnight Saturday until about six o'clock Sunday morning. This has been going on at that station, and most others in this area (including TV stations), for quite some time; this is also why TV stations no longer sign off at 2-3 a.m. local time as they once did.

As to HD (digital) AM and FM radio, I don't know who actually listens to those stations, as there aren't that many radios (except perhaps car stereo systems) that can receive these HD stations anyway. I have a feeling that HD radio will eventually die a quiet death, as did quadraphonic (four-channel) stereo sound broadcasting. There is such a thing as 5.1-channel stereo (CBS-TV is now or was using this system a few years ago, while NBC and ABC may or may not be currently transmitting their programs' audio in MTS stereo; I remember NBC's MTS stereo system, begun in 1986 or so, in which the beginning of every show the network telecast in stereo sound had a disclaimer on the screen: "In ((stereo)) where available", but most MTS stereo TV sound is just that, stereo sound broadcast from TV stations and received, for the most part, over TVs with small transistor-radio speakers, either at both sides of the LCD panel or, as in my own flat-screen set, mounted so that the speakers talk to the shelf or stand the TV is mounted on, not to the viewer.

My point is that four-channel stereo was a flop, as will be HD radio if it survives long enough. I agree that if the system (in this case, the ATSC television standard) isn't broken no one has any right to fix it, but the TV industry has been constantly trying to "reinvent the wheel" for years in the name of making more money (!), a practice that eventually will reach a point of diminishing or even no returns; after all, there is just so much anyone (or any group) can do with TV signals. HDTV itself isn't bad, as it provides viewers with sharper, clearer pictures (shaped like the original broadcast picture, as all HDTVs have square screens) than NTSC analog could ever have delivered, not to mention more channels; however, as I said, I feel eventually the industry is going to run out of ideas, as there is only so much anyone (or any organization, industry, etc.) can do to improve anything. I once read a pie-in-the-sky prediction (I don't remember where) that a system or systems are currently being researched that may eventually enable humans to watch television in their eyes (!), of all places.

I am all for improvements if they will actually make our ATSC TV system better than it is now, but as far as improvements simply for the sake of improvements are concerned, no. I was against HDTV at first, as I do not adjust well to change; however, when I saw how much better my TV picture was on a flat screen, I changed my tune in a hurry and bought a 19-inch flat-screen TV in 2011. I did not care at first for ATSC 3.0; I eventually realized, however, that it will only affect OTA TV reception, not cable, satellite or streaming video (the last being how I watch TV these days). I don't want another converter box on my TV (my Roku player, with the Spectrum TV app, is plenty good enough for me and is, along with DVDs, how I watch TV, now and in the foreseeable future), not to mention an extra charge on my cable bill. I sometimes wish I could do away with my cable account altogether (which would save me quite a bit), but if I did, the Spectrum app on my Roku would no longer receive local TV channels--another not-so-subtle money grab by Spectrum (formerly Time Warner Cable). The company recently converted all its cable systems in this area to full digital, requiring a cable box or streaming-video box to receive anything; yup, you guessed it, yet another cash grab. I would go back to using an OTA antenna were it not for a pesky reception problem I have here; fortunately, my Roku player has solved this problem, and the results are so pleasing I haven't looked back.

Thank you Jeff for the great post.I understand what you are saying.

Quadraphonic was beset by multiple incompatible standards. SQ matrix wasn't really ready until nearly the end of the line as was CD-4 or "chain saw" playback using the supersonic sub-carrier. No such thing as high fidelity 8-track tape. Also, I still have a quad open reel TEAC A3340S. Quadraphonic FM was either matrix (SQ, QS, EV4) or the Dorren system using an addition subcarrier requiring double the transmitting power and messing up MUSAK.

Don't forget the debacle of Dolby FM and FMX. The current system of FM is a kludge which degraded it's fidelity. Only TV FM audio was improved with DBX using noise reduction on the L-R audio subchannel.

There's still a battle over which audio multi channel format will be used for movies and home theatre. Optical multi channel disk formats are also silently at war. Why can't somebody get these "jerks" to come up with compatible standards? As long as nobody can make up their minds don't expect multi channel audio to replace stereo in any media. And as long as there's continued inertia in the markets don't expect ATSC 3.

The only Quad FM format which would have been viable would have been QS. It's the only phase coherent, truly backwards compatible matrix of the lot. And the only record format which was broadcast friendly, and encoded records on FM would have stayed encoded and decodeable at the FM receiver end.

And also don't expect ATSC3 to be practical either when Cable TV and Satellite can't even give us pristine 1080p without being downrezzed either.

At times watching cable TV at this point is like watching TV though a FP PXL2000 camcorder.Its horrible here at times.

And for many who live beyond strongest signal area, that or satellite is your choice if you want much to watch that isn't discs.

I believe WRAL in North Carolina is test broadcasting the noon news in ATSC 3.0. They were the first station to do local broadcasts in HD .

I just read two articles about the new ATSC 3.0 television standard. One of them said not to panic when the new standard is enacted, as the existing ATSC 1.0 system will be with us until at least the year 2023; however, after that, everything will change, with new TVs, converter boxes, etc. being required to receive anything at all on TV (not unlike the warning that was issued when TV went from analog to digital in 2009), even if you do not have cable and watch all your TV over the air.

My question, however, is this: Will the new ATSC 3.0 standard affect viewers who watch TV via video streaming devices such as Roku, Apple TV, Google TV, Amazon Fire TV, et al., or is the new standard poised to be just another money grab for broadcasters and TV/converter box manufacturers, as was the DTV transition itself? In other words, will the ATSC 3.0 standard force people to buy all new equipment, including new televisions? I read in the two articles I mentioned that the new standard will not be backward-compatible, whatever that means, so everyone will need to buy a new TV or use a converter box when the new standard goes into effect in 2023 or whenever.

Good grief! I think this whole thing is just going to be another cash grab. The articles I read did mention that the new standard will result in better TV pictures by way of higher image resolution, better sound and so on; however, I think ATSC 3.0, as I mentioned earlier, will be just another money grab, forcing everyone to buy new equipment. The standard's developers need to realize that many people, particularly older people on fixed incomes (such as myself; I am 61 years old and live on Social Security Disability due to a brain injury at birth), will not be able to afford new TVs, at least not until they come down in price after having been on the market awhile, as did large-screen HD and 4K TVs.

Cable operators will provide set-top boxes that will allow older sets to work with the new standard, but these are only stopgap measures until the old set quits, then the viewer will have no choice but to get a new one. The articles I read and mentioned earlier are telling readers not to panic, as the new standards will not go into effect for "at least" another five years, but I just don't know. The first DTV transition, eight years ago, was bad enough; now another one has just been approved that will put the American public through the same monkey business of having to buy new TVs, converters, etc. as we went through then. Good grief, I even read that the new ATSC 3.0 standard will permit broadcasters to air more commercials, only now these annoying things will be aimed at specific states, cities, towns and even individual viewers.

Sheeeeesh! Where will all this end......I'm afraid? :scratch2:

This topic make my blood boil. No offense to you guys.With all the corruptness from the telecommunications corps and the higher up elites,Hollyweird and the fake MSM are pushing it saying its better then ever BS .It will continue forever or until OTA TV is completely will be eliminated.The later is more likely to happen.Radio will be next.

ATSC was approved by the FCC on November 16, 2017. As Jeffhs said, ATSC 1.0 will be required to be broadcast for 5 years then it goes away as things stand now. ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 will broadcast simultaneously during the next 5 years in the individual markets that adopt ATSC 3.0. ATSC 3.0 IS VOULENTARY. Television manufacturers will incorporate dual tuners for 1.0 and 3.0. on new sets. Converter boxes will be available to receive ATSC 3.0 on existing sets just as digital converter boxes allow OTA 1.0 to be seem on analog sets.

Broadcasters now have the ability to send “premium” OTA 4K broadband services along side the free 4K broadcasts. As it stands now Congress mandates every household to be able to receive free OTA television. ATSC 3.0 claims to be more reliable that can be received from longer distances including deep into concrete buildings. It can be received by mobile devises and fast moving cars and commuter trains. It has multi channel sound beyond 5.1 surround. Wide color gamut and high dynamic range is available for those that care.

Premium services OTT will be go beyond what cable and satellite provide with better quality. This is why the cable companies were fighting the adoption of ATSC 3.0

This will probably force the cable companies to innovate (increase their bandwidth) or cut back channels (to divide existant bandwidth among fewer channels) available. If OTA provides higher bit rates than cable for the same content, then viewers will notice.

We will be loosing channels that are going off the air with the DTV repack.So probably a few channels will be open for them.


Will that sounds promising about better reception or is it another sales pitch to make viewers happy.

I was asking whether the change to ATSC 3.0 will have any effect on streaming video services such as Roku, Google TV, etc. Since these services have nothing to do with OTA television, I would think the streaming services would continue unfettered just as they are now, regardless of what OTA TV standard happens to be in effect. I saw nothing in either of the two articles I read which would indicate streaming video would be affected in any way once ATSC 3.0 becomes the new standard; if anyone else here has heard or read anything to the contrary, I would appreciate any comments. I am personally sick and tired of all this "reinventing the wheel" every few years (first b&w TV, then color, then MTS stereo TV sound, NTSC to ATSC 1.0, and now this), forcing the public to buy new TVs or converter boxes when the standards change.

The system (ATSC 1.0) is not "broken", so why even attempt to fix it? If such is attempted, I believe the result will be a worse TV system than we have today. The only real reason the FCC wants to change the present DTV standard is, you guessed it, to give cable operators, TV manufacturers and makers of set-top boxes the opportunity to sell more and more of these devices, not to mention new TVs. I don't even want to think of what the FCC may have in mind after ATSC 3.0 has been around a few years; my best guess is they will want to implement yet another standard, say, 10 years from now. If and when that happens, well, here we go again!


BTW, I read the comments regarding the future of OTA AM and FM radio, and honestly, I couldn't care less what happens to either service. AM radio is now mostly talk, while FM stations in most cities play nothing but rock, which in my opinion is just noise. I live 30 miles from Cleveland and 40-50 miles from the city's FM stations, and cannot stand any of the stations' programming; therefore, most of the time I listen to my own cassettes, CDs and mp3 audio files.

I am very disappointed in an Internet music service, known as "The Breeze" (http://www.thebreez.com) from Crown Point, Indiana, which used to play easy listening. The service may still offer this type of music, but to date I haven't been able to stream it on my computer, after months of trouble-free streaming until earlier this year. The company that owns this is known as Radionomy.com; it took over the former owners of The Breeze, but I swear they must have done something to encrypt their streams, since I cannot hear them any longer. This station, as "The Breeze", was my one escape from the constant rock noise blaring from Cleveland's FM stations. ......

Oh well. :sigh:

Sorry about not understanding some of your last post.I dont know much about Roku since I dont have one here.The streaming online here is great.Better if you download the videos .I see already corrupt Hollyweird will more likely have everything encrypt so watching it on TV probably be over .Note on the radio end I dont like the idea that the little people will get screwed with out of a job if they shut down.I do agree on their crappy shot playlists that rotate about 20 songs.Thats on any format including Christmas formats too.My local AM station is a a full service live and local station that plays oldies from the 1940s to the 1980's .News on the hour .No talk shows . Now they are Christmas which I enjoy too.Its even in AM Stereo to boot.LOL............................


Strange if the Breeze stream is encrypt.I wonder if they just change their streaming format.Stations have a habit doing that.