rkolsen 1678 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 WRAL was the first station in the US to launch an HD channel under an experimental license in 1996 and the station who launched the first regular HD newscast in 2001 is back at it again. Two weeks ago the signed on a digital ATSC 3.0 signal under an experimental license by the FCC on channel 39. They are broadcasting from their 1740 foot tall tower transmitting at 40KW ERP in the horizontal plane and 32 KW vertically. Currently they are airing a simulcast of their main channel in 1080p with their newscasts originating in that format. A second feed airing a loop of a 22 minute baseball documentary shot in and transmitted in the 4K HDR format. Eventually they plan to use the extra bits for video on demand and other video channels. http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/95854/first-again-wral-launches-atsc-30-service It's amazing the innovation this small family station contributed to the television world. I wonder if they could strike up a deal with NASA to rebroadcast their 4K channel. About a year or two ago Sinclair would sign off WNUV in the middle of the night to trial an ATSC 3.0 signal. But this is the first full time channel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRolyPoly 1847 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I'm always excited about WRAL 5 and their technological advancements. This is no different. I'm curious as to what ATSC 3.0 would look like. Does it mean more subchannels? More bandwith for subchannels? Better quality? I'm very curious to know and excited to see WRAL 5 do this, as they've always tried everything. And if history does repeat itself, expect ATSC 3.0 televisions all across America by next year or by 2018. Now that'll be super exciting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skbl17 188 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Weren't the WNUV trials DVB-T2 instead of ATSC? And now, a noob question: Aside from 4K and UHD transmissions, what differences are there between ATSC 2.0 and ATSC 3.0 that would be noticeable by the viewer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleSeven 1944 Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Yeah, I thought Sinclair was running experimental ATSC 3.0 signals on Channel 43 in DC & B-more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broadcastfan9751 136 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 I'm always excited about WRAL 5 and their technological advancements. This is no different. I'm curious as to what ATSC 3.0 would look like. Does it mean more subchannels? More bandwith for subchannels? Better quality? I'm very curious to know and excited to see WRAL 5 do this, as they've always tried everything. And if history does repeat itself, expect ATSC 3.0 televisions all across America by next year or by 2018. Now that'll be super exciting. From what I hear, ATSC 3.0 is supposed to provide better reception due to it using OFDM instead of 8VSB for modulation (OFDM is better at dealing with multipath than 8VSB). Also, ATSC 3.0 has the ability to broadcast to mobile devices, which in the current standard (ATSC 1.0) requires a separate system called ATSC M/H. ATSC 3.0 also has almost double the bandwidth (28 Mbps compared to 19.3 Mbps for ATSC 1.0), which would allow for more subchannels and/or other services. Other benefits of ATSC 3.0 are IP-based services, on-demand content, enhanced emergency alerts, and more efficient video encoding. The primary disadvantage of ATSC 3.0 is that it is incompatible with ATSC 1.0, meaning consumers will have to buy new receivers. Weren't the WNUV trials DVB-T2 instead of ATSC? And now, a noob question: Aside from 4K and UHD transmissions, what differences are there between ATSC 2.0 and ATSC 3.0 that would be noticeable by the viewer? Yes, the tests conducted by Sinclair used DVB-T2, although like ATSC 3.0, DVB-T2 uses OFDM for modulation. ATSC 2.0 incorporates a lot of the same features as ATSC 3.0 (although I'm not sure if it supports 4K), but unlike ATSC 3.0 it is backwards compatible with ATSC 1.0 and uses 8VSB for modulation. However, because the broadcasters are insisting on ATSC 3.0 due to its better reception it's unlikely that ATSC 2.0 will ever be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRolyPoly 1847 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 From what I hear, ATSC 3.0 is supposed to provide better reception due to it using OFDM instead of 8VSB for modulation (OFDM is better at dealing with multipath than 8VSB). Also, ATSC 3.0 has the ability to broadcast to mobile devices, which in the current standard (ATSC 1.0) requires a separate system called ATSC M/H. ATSC 3.0 also has almost double the bandwidth (28 Mbps compared to 19.3 Mbps for ATSC 1.0), which would allow for more subchannels and/or other services. Other benefits of ATSC 3.0 are IP-based services, on-demand content, enhanced emergency alerts, and more efficient video encoding. The primary disadvantage of ATSC 3.0 is that it is incompatible with ATSC 1.0, meaning consumers will have to buy new receivers. Yes, the tests conducted by Sinclair used DVB-T2, although like ATSC 3.0, DVB-T2 uses OFDM for modulation. ATSC 2.0 incorporates a lot of the same features as ATSC 3.0 (although I'm not sure if it supports 4K), but unlike ATSC 3.0 it is backwards compatible with ATSC 1.0 and uses 8VSB for modulation. However, because the broadcasters are insisting on ATSC 3.0 due to its better reception it's unlikely that ATSC 2.0 will ever be used. Does it mean that more services/digital subchannels can broadcast in HD with the expanded bandwith? Because I know that stations would downgrade bandwith or remove a subchannel in order to provide at least two HD feeds (whether its major networks or something else). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broadcastfan9751 136 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 Does it mean that more services/digital subchannels can broadcast in HD with the expanded bandwith? Because I know that stations would downgrade bandwith or remove a subchannel in order to provide at least two HD feeds (whether its major networks or something else). Absolutely. Along with the increased bandwidth, ATSC 3.0 uses a video encoding technology known as High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), as opposed to ATSC 1.0 which uses MPEG-2. In a report on the channel-sharing test conducted by KLCS and KJLA, it talked about the implications of ATSC 3.0 on channel sharing and said that with HEVC, standard HD could fit into as little as 2-3 Mbps, which is about what an SD channel takes up with MPEG-2. When you do the math, it adds up to about 14 HD channels using 720p at 2 Mbps per channel and 9 HD channels using 1080p at 3 Mbps per channel. Of course, a regular broadcaster probably wouldn't have the content to fill up that many HD channels, but if they did, they would have no problem fitting it onto their signal. As for 4K UHD, a TVNewsCheck article said that one station might get close to fitting two 4K channels onto one signal, although it didn't exactly say how much bandwidth a 4K channel might require. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRolyPoly 1847 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 Absolutely. Along with the increased bandwidth, ATSC 3.0 uses a video encoding technology known as High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC), as opposed to ATSC 1.0 which uses MPEG-2. In a report on the channel-sharing test conducted by KLCS and KJLA, it talked about the implications of ATSC 3.0 on channel sharing and said that with HEVC, standard HD could fit into as little as 2-3 Mbps, which is about what an SD channel takes up with MPEG-2. When you do the math, it adds up to about 14 HD channels using 720p at 2 Mbps per channel and 9 HD channels using 1080p at 3 Mbps per channel. Of course, a regular broadcaster probably wouldn't have the content to fill up that many HD channels, but if they did, they would have no problem fitting it onto their signal. As for 4K UHD, a TVNewsCheck article said that one station might get close to fitting two 4K channels onto one signal, although it didn't exactly say how much bandwidth a 4K channel might require. This is one of the reasons why I'm excited for ATSC 3.0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkolsen 1678 Posted June 30, 2016 Author Share Posted June 30, 2016 Also it's worth noting that with the launch of ATSC 3.0 the FCC won't be giving stations companion channels like they did with the DTV transition. As stations transition to this new standard they will likely have to flash cut their signals. There's been some postings on either TVTechnology or TVNewsCheck that discussed that a possible scenario to maintain viewership was channel sharing - where one station launches 3.0 and they could lease subchannel space from another station that has yet to transition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broadcastfan9751 136 Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 Also it's worth noting that with the launch of ATSC 3.0 the FCC won't be giving stations companion channels like they did with the DTV transition. As stations transition to this new standard they will likely have to flash cut their signals. There's been some postings on either TVTechnology or TVNewsCheck that discussed that a possible scenario to maintain viewership was channel sharing - where one station launches 3.0 and they could lease subchannel space from another station that has yet to transition. That's exactly what the the broadcasters have proposed in their Petition For Rulemaking. The petition also suggests that the station broadcasting the ATSC 1.0 signal would have its programming carried reciprocally on the signal of the station broadcasting the ATSC 3.0 signal, although some broadcasters, like Gray, have said that while reciprocity should be permitted, it should not be required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkolsen 1678 Posted July 1, 2016 Author Share Posted July 1, 2016 This is one of the reasons why I'm excited for ATSC 3.0. It should be noted that while there will be room for extra 4K or more HD channels with this bandwidth I don't see any Freeview style service of cable making it way out here that's unencrypted. I think if they were planning on broadcasting ESPN or a news bundle they would have to figure out how to encrypt it. I could easily see some of the diginet up converting some programming for HDs or a dominant channel setting up a virtual duopoly akin to KCBS/KCAL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skbl17 188 Posted July 11, 2016 Share Posted July 11, 2016 I've been reading up on ATSC 3.0 and its data/content sharing capabilities, and a thought just hit me: ATSC 3.0 would allow for an American version of the BBC Red Button. (Not that broadcasters would set up such a thing. Well maybe PBS would, who knows.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.