224 replies to this topic

[digitalj]

Seven Network today announced that it will be launching TV4, a datacasting service, in its five major metropolitan markets - Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide, Perth – and in regional Queensland through Seven Queensland.

Seven is partnering the new service, TV4, with Brand New Media which will supply content for the new service scheduled to commence in early December.

TV4 on Seven’s digital channel 74 has the potential to reach 15.8 million people in more than 5.8 million homes. The service will feature information rich content around lifestyle, finances, community, education and shopping. Seven Network’s signing with Brand New Media builds on a similar agreement with Seven’s regional television partner, Prime Media.

Commenting, Seven’s Chief Sales and Digital Officer, Kurt Burnette, said: “As Australia’s leading broadcast television platform, we are committed to taking the lead in innovation and are delighted to be in partnership with Brand New Media on this new datacasting service. Seven continues to focus on providing our advertising partners with new ways to engage with our audiences and TV4 on Channel 74 represents a significant new development for our clients and our audiences.”

Seven Network, again the technological innovator, will be the first television broadcaster in Australia to use spectrally efficient MPEG4 compression technology for this ground breaking channel.
Reply With Quote


http://www.knowfirst...ead.php?t=41089

Edited by digitalj, 23 December 2011 - 02:07 PM.

[digitalj]

and for the city markets, TV4 is very poor, just look at it's content: http://www.dtvforum....p...t&p=1753936

[DrP]

It makes you wonder why they are doing it at all given that they, so far, plan on doing with MPEG-4 AVC.  They say there is potential to reach "15.8 million people" but does anyone here* have any doubt at all that a significant number of those 15.8 million people live in households that have receivers that simply aren't capable of MPEG-4 AVC?  I wonder what the actual potential viewership is, ie, those that have a receiver that is capable.

None-the-less, its quite surprising to see that 7 is going to run an MPEG-4 AVC service.

I wonder where the bits are going to come from especially for 7 QLD.  7 QLD, last time I looked, appeared to be using static allocations.  7TWO showed obvious signs of bit starvation - very soft picture, blocking during complex scenes and 7mate showed obvious defects (images demonstrating can be supplied upon request).  I guess 7 QLD might take a chunk out of 7 SD since it has the most room to move.



*_{apart from the usual suspect who will no doubt be bouncing around the forum proclaiming "I told you so" even though this announcement has nothing at all to do with the regular programming which will is very much in MPEG-2 land now and for the forseeable future.}

[laurie]

Is this replacing the old analogue Teletext service ?

cheers laurie

[digitalj]

laurie, on Nov 7 2011, 12:33 PM, said:

Is this replacing the old analogue Teletext service ?

cheers laurie

that service was axed years ago, this is a new service on 74.

[GoForMoe]

I'm sure the bits will come from 7Mate.

[DrP]

Here 7mate is running at about 10Mbit/sec CBR, 7 SD 6.6 and 7two 4.1 with 500kbit/sec of nulls.  Assuming 1Mbit/sec for the ad channel and that all coming from 7mate, reducing it to 9Mbit/sec, its not going to be much chop.

[GoForMoe]

DrP, on Nov 7 2011, 05:26 PM, said:

Here 7mate is running at about 10Mbit/sec CBR, 7 SD 6.6 and 7two 4.1 with 500kbit/sec of nulls.  Assuming 1Mbit/sec for the ad channel and that all coming from 7mate, reducing it to 9Mbit/sec, its not going to be much chop.

Yeah, but since when has anyone cared about HD quality on FTA (or Foxtel now for that matter). The split is 10.5/6.5/4.0 with a bit of variance in Melbourne.

I'd hope they follow SC Tas' lead and go for 720p if they drop things further.

[digitalj]

DrP, on Nov 7 2011, 05:26 PM, said:

Here 7mate is running at about 10Mbit/sec CBR, 7 SD 6.6 and 7two 4.1 with 500kbit/sec of nulls.  Assuming 1Mbit/sec for the ad channel and that all coming from 7mate, reducing it to 9Mbit/sec, its not going to be much chop.

here it's:

7mate: 9Mbps
Prime7: 4.6Mbps
7Two: 4.6Mbps
TV4: 3Mbps

[GoForMoe]

Well hopefully MPEG-4 will mean no need to have such a high rate for TV4 in metro areas. I don't get why they can't do a multipass encode, none of it is live so why not just delay things a bit and do some optimising?

[DrP]

digitalj, on Nov 7 2011, 04:47 PM, said:

here it's:

7mate: 9Mbps
Prime7: 4.6Mbps
7Two: 4.6Mbps
TV4: 3Mbps

Is that all fairly CBR?

[fredofrog]

Isn't this a good move (not the content) to see how MPEG-4 works over a prolonged period. It might not be the driver for the move but it's a possible positive byproduct

Given the complaints over inadequate HD and even poor SD PQ in place now this could hasten the move away from MPEG-2 albeit it will still take years until the existing 15 channels changeover (if ever).

[digitalj]

DrP, on Nov 7 2011, 06:46 PM, said:

Is that all fairly CBR?

Yeah, they are fairly CBR.

[bellotv]

I'm confused .I thought that a multiplex was either MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 and not a mix of the two .

[alanh]

Bellotv.
Multiplexes have always been able to share data streams, all program identification specifications are identical except for the value of the type of compression. Since 2005 DVB-T has included MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 within the DVB-T standard.

All,
Whilst TV4 may not have popular programs, it will easily identify any receivers which cannot display MPEG-4 signals.

Nobody really knows how many receivers are capable of MPEG-4 decompression there really are in the population.
A very large proportion of HD TVs, PVRs and HD STBs currently on the market are already MPEG-4 capable, this includes the STBs being installed by the Household Assistance Scheme for full pensioner viewers.
HD STBs are now around $50 each.

So despite DrP's predictions that MPEG-4 would not be broadcast in the forseable future, we now have One, ABC24, SBSHD, 7mate and GEM being transmitted in the Central/Eastern as well as the Western remote licence area direct from satellite and now TV4 terrestrially 2 years prior to the end of analog broadcasting by the end of 2013.

Once it is know by the population that your receiver must be capable of MPEG-4 decompression then the stations will be able to get the confidence to convert all transmissions to MPEG-4 compression. Not only HD but all programs. Even more so perhaps the broadcasters are readying the public for a total conversion to MPEG-4 compression by the start of 2014??

The improvement of compression efficiency of at least 30 % is a powerful driver.

AlanH

[DrP]

Dear God.  You really are a ****wit aren't you.  Links please.  You keep saying that I said certain things but when it comes to backing it up, well you never have.  Why is that alanh?

For a long time alanh disputed the government's position regarding changes to permit MPEG-4 AVC in general programming, but now he appears to have adjusted his position to fall in line with the governments position of no changes until post analogue switch off at the earliest.  Why is that alanh?

Has the government altered its position?  No.  How is 7 'getting away with it'?  Its a datacasting channel and as such falls under different rules and always has fallen under a different set of rules.  As I've said before to alanh, when MPEG-4 AVC appears in general programming then he can run about, wave his arms and declare victory.  In the mean time, let it go.  He's been telling us that this, that and the other would be MPEG-4 AVC since 2007 (or perhaps earlier I just can't be bothered digging back further) and as each alanh declared date has past he's shucked it up a bit and started again.  This isn't the sign of someone that knows what they are talking about, this is the scattershot effect.  Keep blasting away for long enough and you're bound to hit something eventually.

30% of your audience going away is an even more powerful driver than compression efficiency.  Its all about bums on seats and improved picture quality isn't going to slap enough bums on seats to counter the write off the likely substantial number of viewers in 2014 with MPEG-2 only equipment.  Given the withering youth ratings the FTAs aren't going to do anything that results in less potential viewers, that's for sure.

So despite alanh's predictions, terrestrial ABC4 and ABC3 is not MPEG-4 AVC, PRIME SD is not and PRIME TWO is not, infact none of PRIME's services are, MPEG-4 AVC nor are any of WIN's terrestrial services.  These are all things that alanh had told us would be MPEG-4 AVC when these broadcasters started operations from their new facilities.  If we cast our eyes to the west of the country we see that the new terrestrial services there aren't MPEG-4 AVC either even though alanh told us they would be.  What was alanh's response when this crushing reality was pointed out?  Well, when it came to ABC he said 'they decided not to'.

He also told us repeatedly that ABC and SBS were not part of the VAST service... well not at least until he did a 180 and decided they were afterall!  

Need links?  I'm sure more than one can be found in The Facts.  

Edited by DrP, 07 November 2011 - 11:05 PM.

[alanh]

DrP,
There is no datacasting channels anymore. That died when it was removed from the only transmitter in Sydney as it was a failure even in MPEG2

The advertisers obviously do not think many of the audience cannot receive MPEG-4 otherwise they would not pay for such an advertising channel.


I forgot that all the 3-D soccer and NRL were broadcast in MPEG-4 last year.

VAST is still a commercial service which the ABC and SBS are transmitting to the same standard. Remember that the channels in the satellite for each broadcast are separate. The only difference is that the DBCDE is paying for the commercial VAST service, and was already paying for ABC and SBS as it has done for all their transmissions.

Look at all the times you and others told me that VAST was being used to feed WA regional digital transmitters when VAST was not even running, remembering that VAST is for direct to home reception.

Your other prediction you have conveniently forgotten about. You said that DVB-S2 would not be used for domestic satellite broadcasting. Thats exactly what is being used for all networks for the new satellite broadcasting for remote areas. You said they would continue to use DVB-S as used in Aurora and add the extra channels. As I said, too expensive.

You are still maintaining MPEG-4 will never happen as you have claimed for years?
Your claim is already broken so you can hardly complain about mine.

AlanH

Edited by alanh, 08 November 2011 - 01:27 AM.

[DrP]

The service is clearly being referred to as 'datacasting'.

An interim VAST service was in place, being referred to as VAST by the government and the broadcasters during the period in which you were claiming that it was simply not possible to receive such in the WA.  In fact you were claiming that dishes where not pointed at C1, instead they were pointed at D1 and were receiving terrestrial feeds.

You've claimed that I have said MPEG-4 AVC in terrestrial transmission would never happen.
You've claimed that I've said that MPEG-4 AVC in satellite transmission would never happen.
You've claimed that I've said that DVB-S2 in satellite transmission would never happen.
You've claimed that I've said that Aurora would be extended with additional channels.
You've claimed that I've said DVB-s would be used exclusively.

Challenge:  Links to posts.  I already know the outcome, a complete lack of posts that actually demonstrates what you claim.

[Basil]

DrP, on Nov 7 2011, 10:16 AM, said:

None-the-less, its quite surprising to see that 7 is going to run an MPEG-4 AVC service.
*_{apart from the usual suspect who will no doubt be bouncing around the forum proclaiming "I told you so" even though this announcement has nothing at all to do with the regular programming which will is very much in MPEG-2 land now and for the forseeable future.}

DrP, on Nov 7 2011, 09:40 PM, said:

Dear God. You really are a ****wit aren't you.

Dr.P. ,its just a shame to see someone with your obvious technical knowledge to be so far out of touch with what direction our FTA brodcasters are headed,even Radio engineers know MPEG4 is a given,its only the time frame.
However everyone is entitled to a view ,whats worries me is the conga line of posters that line up to agree with the obvious drivel & misinformation in your posts and bag AlanH,why do i get the feeling multiple accounts are involved ?

[DrP]

Basil, on Nov 8 2011, 08:28 AM, said:

Dr.P. ,its just a shame to see someone with your obvious technical knowledge to be so far out of touch with what direction our FTA brodcasters are headed,even Radio engineers know MPEG4 is a given,its only the time frame.
However everyone is entitled to a view ,whats worries me is the conga line of posters that line up to agree with the obvious drivel & misinformation in your posts and bag AlanH,why do i get the feeling multiple accounts are involved ?

Probably because that bandage around your avatar's head is remarkably indicative of your reality.  Since you've joined the alanh lunatic bandwagon, please indicate where I've said that MPEG-4 AVC will not appear... well rather than retype the list, please refer to earlier post.

What I think you'll discover, if you actually look, is that I've been advocating a sensible schedule for the introduction.  My personal opinions have matched the government's position and the publicly stated position of the very broadcasters themselves for quite a while.  Hop in the Way Back machine and you'll see me talking about 15+ year time frames^*, then 5 years later, 10+ year time frames, then 5 years later ... its not hard to see where this is going, is it?  As time moves on my suggested time of arrival remains the same.  Contrast that with alanh's continually variable slipping time frame (almost sounds like a transmission from a vehicle) and things suddenly become a bit easier to understand.

Here's an example of what I was saying in 2005.  Get the idea now?


_{*whoops, it looks like the archives of prior incarnations of the forum are no longer availabe so the way back machine can't reach that far into the past anymore.}

Edited by DrP, 08 November 2011 - 09:22 AM.

[MLXXX]

Basil, on Nov 8 2011, 08:28 AM, said:

why do i get the feeling multiple accounts are involved ?

A suspicious nature? A weakness in intuition when reading posts?  A mere cursory inspection of the posts?  A difficulty accepting that so many people can see similar flaws in the posts of the relevant member?  A natural tendency to support a 'victim' of criticism? Any or all of these are possible explanations for your 'feeling', Basil. However, if you care to examine the strings of posts of different members in detail, it shouldn't take too long to discover they reflect different personalities and different writing styles.

The use of MPEG-4 AVC for terrestrial broadcasting in Australia has been minimal. I don't think the test 3D side by side format transmissions last year intended for the new 3D TVs (which, being brand new sets, actually had MPEG-4 decoding capability) carry much weight.

No one doubts the technical efficiency of MPEG-4 AVC over MPEG-2. It is a question of timing of implementation. And that depends on the penetration of appropriate set top boxes, or sets with appropriate coding built-in, in people's homes.  It may also depend on the extent to which terrestrial broadcasting retains significant market share, compared with other means of disseminating TV to the public. And it might even be affected by a more efficient codec coming along that is adopted as part of a new standard, leapfrogging over MPEG-4 AVC, and incorporating other things at the same time, such as 1080p50, 1080p60 or 1080p24.  [Before alanh jumps up and down about the suggestion of p24, I'd remind him that a new set top box could readily convert that to i60 for use with all but the oldest TV displays.]

Edited by MLXXX, 08 November 2011 - 05:17 PM.

[CWulf]

FWIW (and that's not necessarily a lot), I agree with DrP.

[MLXXX]

CWulf, on Nov 8 2011, 01:19 PM, said:

FWIW (and that's not necessarily a lot), I agree with DrP.

Doctor P and me, how could I expect to get under Basil's all seeing all knowing radar with a short and humble post like that? He'll see right through that for sure!   I should give up my numerous multiple accounts and just admit that Basil and alanh are right.

Wait a sec...  If CWulf, DrP, MLXXX, and half a dozen other forum identities are in reality just a set of multiple accounts of one person, then perhaps AlanH and Basil are too.

After all, Basil agrees with AlanH.  Quite probably the same person then.

[GoForMoe]

Next you'll tell me DrP isn't a real doctor!

[Digital Penetration]

MLXXX, on Nov 8 2011, 05:05 PM, said:

Wait a sec...  If CWulf, DrP, MLXXX, and half a dozen other forum identities are in reality just a set of multiple accounts of one person, then perhaps AlanH and Basil are too.

Well I've never seen you all in the same room at the same time...