Forums

  1. Audio Visual & Home Theatre Equipment

    1. 35,821
      posts
    2. 295,202
      posts
    3. 271,100
      posts
    4. 83,462
      posts
    5. 210,973
      posts
    6. 87,696
      posts
    7. 47,551
      posts
    8. 16,183
      posts
    9. 3,293
      posts
  2. Video and Audio Content

    1. 244,569
      posts
    2. 92,810
      posts
    3. 79,900
      posts
    4. 1,069
      posts
    5. 3,505
      posts
  3. Transmission & Reception Issues

    1. 59,457
      posts
    2. 29,848
      posts
    3. 807
      posts
  4. Digital TV - in the news

    1. 10,039
      posts
    2. 1,951
      posts



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • There was already a paucity of bidding for the rights this time.  It got scarily close to 2016 before the host broadcaster was known.
    • If SBS switched SBS1-HD to MPEG-4 what would they do with the remaining bitrate? They can't use MPEG-4 for *all* of the multichannels because you'd be ripping away a bunch of services for those with MPEG-2 HD terrestrial … though you didn't directly address how many of those remaining are out there, but looking at the 7flix experience, it's a lot. CK.
    • So that doesn't sound very relevant to DVB-T planning then? Foxtel's satellite has very different bitrate (and quality) MPEG-2 SD channels on it from the FTA channels.  They pay for the satellite bandwidth quite separately and skimp a bit as a result.  Those channels aren't going anywhere, and I wasn't talking about them. Foxtel's cable channels come off the stick, probably inserted via ASI streams, but adding a down-convert would be a doddle.  Or you know what would be just as easy?  Inserting the missing channel off the satellite version. The Foxtel argument is a non-starter. EDIT:  I just realised the Mystar T500 has terrestrial MPEG-2 SD only, but I really hope they've been cycled out for T600, T601 or IQ3 Sat. CK.
    • Three months ago I was in Germany, watching people take home new flat panels on the train, advertising "HEVC" and "DVB-T2" on them.  Looked like the new basic feature. Things are moving ahead in NTSC-land too:  They are breaking with backwards compatibility *again*, which goes against their history of loving an old standard to death — 525-line went from 1941 in B&W to 1953 in colour until 2009. The new ATSC 3.0 will be using OFDM much like DVB-Tx, but this time squeezing 26 to 28 megabits out of a mere 6 MHz channel. Apart from some keen South Korean networks, North Carolina's WRAL-TV is already running an ATSC 3.0 simulcast — in fact it's a triplecast, since their main channel is on ATSC at 1080i MPEG-2, their new simulcasts are at 1080p HEVC (cross-convert of their main channel) and 2160p HEVC (demonstration loop), all at 60fps.  (Not sure if it's true 60fps or 59.94fps).  WRAL-TV was the first on-air with ATSC 1.0 way back in 1996 ("MPEG! on a TV channel!") There's also a ton of interactive and multi-angle capability built into ATSC 3.0, which seemed to be a reaction a few years ago to the internet, or a catch-up to feature parity with UK's DVB+MHEG minimum requirements.  Overall, ATSC 3.0 is a great modernisation and seems to have more in common with DVBV-T2 than different now.  But all WRAL-TV is using it for is roughly 20-24 megabits for 4K video and 4-8 megabits for HD. Our capital cities have space at VHF 9 and 10 — has this been sold off?  If not, they should do about 35Mbps each.  In the 10-year timeframe it should become possible to achieve acceptable 4K quality within 2 channels statmuxed in HEVC in 35Mbps … total 4.  One each for the commercials, and one to share amongst ABC+SBS?   CK.