ATSC 3.0 HDTV is almost here!

Originally Posted by Rmay635703
Originally Posted by wag123
https://www.cordcuttersnews.com/lg-will-add-atsc-3-0-nextgen-tv-tuners-to-some-2020-smart-tvs/
There are currently 61 TV stations in the US now transmitting ATSC 3.0 NextgenTV signals.
ATSC 3.0 is a major improvement over the current OTA ATSC 1.0 HDTV standard with the capability of offering true 4K content.


I like how it's broadcast but if you want to actually watch you need to drop a grand plus on an import.
LG's announcement is just a tip of the iceberg. Watch for a flood of them soon thereafter, even on lower priced TVs and STBs. The other TV manufacturers are not going to be left-out on this.This is a classic chicken and egg scenario. Consumers are not going to pop for a new TV unless there is content available so there has been a concerted effort to get the TV stations on-line first.
 
Last edited:
From what I understand the ATSC 3 tuner and standard is meant to lower cost and improve reception.

Should be about $50 a tuner once we get volume.

The reality is that we could have been getting dual standard tuners in TVs for a couple years now without any real cost associated.

One would hope that an ATSC 3 ready set would be a selling point just as the HD ready sets 20 years ago were a thing.

Odd they weren't marketed that way from the start instead of years later.
 
The quality won't be better. Station management will still add more subchannels and resultant video compression until everything's barely viewable, in their eyes, and horrible in ours.

If you could see the network feed off a full satellite transponder, you'd spot the difference.
 
Right now the big reason why TV stations still do OTA broadcasts is that such is a condition of mandatory carriage on cable TV networks.

But we all know that cable TV subscriptions are collapsing. I don't even have any friends who have cable TV at this point. Replaced with various IP on demand streaming services.

Bandwidth is getting cheaper all the time as well.

How much longer until traditional "TV stations" simply make live streams of their broadcasts available with custom-injected ads? And do away with all the OTA infrastructure altogether?
 
Originally Posted by pitzel
Right now the big reason why TV stations still do OTA broadcasts is that such is a condition of mandatory carriage on cable TV networks.

But we all know that cable TV subscriptions are collapsing. I don't even have any friends who have cable TV at this point. Replaced with various IP on demand streaming services.

Bandwidth is getting cheaper all the time as well.

How much longer until traditional "TV stations" simply make live streams of their broadcasts available with custom-injected ads? And do away with all the OTA infrastructure altogether?


There are still a good 20% of the country stuck on dialup or worse speeds. There is also an increasing number of cord cutters that have cut phone, internet and cable out. (Myself included yet I still get all the text based internet I want)

The trouble I see is that the cost of IP TV is more expensive than the $19.99 basic cable used to cost.

Reason is
1. Cost of connecting is a monopoly in many areas
2. There are literally hundreds of pay per month services for content.

The direction I see streaming content going is a place I won't follow and many agree with me,

See the following video for a good take on where monthly streaming costs are headed (and it's not wrong)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qejGHLAbo_c
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Rmay635703
From what I understand the ATSC 3 tuner and standard is meant to lower cost and improve reception.
ATSC 3.0 will offer a HUGE advantage in signal reception, particularly in dense urban environments, deep fringe areas, and for moving receivers (handheld devices and vehicles). It is a truly mobile-friendly advancement (unlike current ATSC 1.0) and doesn't require a big antenna. Within a couple of years there will be ATSC 3.0 receiver chips in smartphones. This is the technological advance that will keep OTA commercial TV alive and relevant for the foreseeable future. I'm excited about it.
 
Paying ATSC 3.0 TVs with tuners would be a major waste of money for Americans, unless of course Tvs with the tuners were the same cost as those without.

Bottom line there is no mandate from the FCC that TVs be manufactured with them nor is there a mandate from the FCC that TV stations broadcast the signal and one thing for sure, the public is not going to care.

There is a mandate from the FCC that if any station choses to broadcast in 3.0 they still have to broadcast in 1.0, meaning they would have to broadcast both signals. I dont see TV stations across the country jumping on that idea.

Anyway, save your money and dont pay extra for it because if and when it gets around to 99% of Americans it will be another 10 years or more and by then the cost will be the same.

Right now, standard 1080P over the air broadcasts are just as good and better then most streaming 4K. I just dont see a public demand for it and I am someone who loves technology.

Just the fact that to this day, I can not watch a true 4k picture or rent a true 4k disc amazes me, bottom line, current stuff is good enough for the general public and that is why true 4k is almost non existent.
Now for the public to demand true 4k over the air broadcasts, I doubt it will happen because the 1080p picture they are seeing in over the air signals is better or same as 4k streaming.

I can understand your excitement for whatever features you talk about, Im not up to date on this, just commenting on what I think the public will think and what the TV stations will spend money on.
Remember, they were forced by the FCC to start broadcasting digital signals they are not going to do anything more then being forced and the FCC is not forcing them nor requiring it, in fact the FCC is protecting them in this case, stating if they go to the new standard, they still have to broadcast the old.

Anyway, yes, I think it will happen maybe some day but not anytime soon in the USA. Much goes for the new 8k TVs public cant even get true 4k yet.
I know we have to move forward but we also need a demand form other people besides you and me, most people are clueless.
Because they are clueless is why the new 8K TVs are coming out, yet they never in their life saw a true 4k on their 4k TVs ... hey, you know what? I guess maybe with the right marketing they can be sold anything.

Imagine that? being sold 8k TVs at higher markups and for the first time in their lives, they maybe will get to see a true 4k picture... :eek:) ...

Hey, just so you know, I am in your corner on this, I am typing out of the frustration that the general public is just too dumbed down and most dont even know what a true 4k picture looks like, if they did or if they cared it wouldn't be so hard to get a disc to rent.
 
Last edited:
The vastly improved coverage area that ATSC 3.0 affords (almost triple the area at the same transmission power) is more than enough incentive for the broadcasters to add ATSC 3.0, 61 stations have already done so (and that is with NO current audience). It is the broadcasters themselves that have been really pushing for this. Many people who live in rural areas and very congested urban environments who can't currently receive an ATSC 1.0 signal will be able to receive the ATSC 3.0 signal. In addition to the larger coverage area, there are the additional viewers that will be able watch programming from mobile receivers because multipath pixelation and freezing have been addressed and substantially minimised or virtually eliminated. Other major incentives for the television industry to adopt ATSC 3.0 are the possibility of being able to provide (and SELL) targeted advertising as well as pay TV programming because of the fact that ATSC 3.0 has an Internet connectivity component designed into it. If the government didn't require the broadcasters to keep ATSC 1.0 alive, they wouldn't do so.
Besides the elimination of pixelation and freezing, picture resolution WILL also improve, even on non-4k programming, because the standard resolution on ATSC 3.0 is 1080p where ATSC 1.0 is limited to 1080i or 720p. ATSC 3.0 is even capable of 8k resolution.
Set top boxes will be available by the end of 2020 at reasonable prices, just like when ATSC 1.0 HDTV first came out.
 
Last edited:
WAG123 -

I read up a bit on the 3.0 and I think you are right but I do think we are looking at 5 to 10 years for mainstream.
I read that broadcasters who switch only have to continue 1.0 for five years once they make the switch to 3.0 however I only saw that statement in one place and not interested enough to look further..

The broadcasters want it because it will will make them money. Much like streaming, for the first time OTA broadcasters will actually be able to collect your data and watching habits.
This will allow them, like the rest of our wired world to start delivering target advertising.

Add to that, and I agree, sooner or later they will have to go up to the 4k standard since new 8k sets are coming out. I suspect the broadcasters 4k video will be better then any claimed 8k streaming and once again, the public in general will not notice a difference. There will also be a compromise in the 3.0 as the broadcasters will be using bandwidth to continue the 1.0 for the time being.

Im not so sure or convinced about how much further signals will travel for rural America but not a subject that matters to me.

Anyway, its an interesting subject I do wonder in that 5 to 10 year time frame if OTA will become more popular or become more obsolete. Its a fast changing landscape and what is now may not be tomorrow.
Heck, wired internet connections to homes might be a thing of the past too, time will tell. We still are very much in the "dark ages" ... much like when the light bulb was first invented and electricity started to be delivered to homes.

Anyway, one thing for sure, except for a very few who like to experiment, I wouldn't go rushing out to buy a TV with a tuner if you cant get anything with it as in coming years, even those tuners will be refined and improved making what you have dated.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by wag123
The vastly improved coverage area that ATSC 3.0 affords (almost triple the area at the same transmission power) is more than enough incentive for the broadcasters to add ATSC 3.0, 61 stations have already done so (and that is with NO current audience). It is the broadcasters themselves that have been really pushing for this. Many people who live in rural areas and very congested urban environments who can't currently receive an ATSC 1.0 signal will be able to receive the ATSC 3.0 signal. In addition to the larger coverage area, there are the additional viewers that will be able watch programming from mobile receivers because multipath pixelation and freezing have been addressed and substantially minimised or virtually eliminated. Other major incentives for the television industry to adopt ATSC 3.0 are the possibility of being able to provide (and SELL) targeted advertising as well as pay TV programming because of the fact that ATSC 3.0 has an Internet connectivity component designed into it. If the government didn't require the broadcasters to keep ATSC 1.0 alive, they wouldn't do so.
Besides the elimination of pixelation and freezing, picture resolution WILL also improve, even on non-4k programming, because the standard resolution on ATSC 3.0 is 1080p where ATSC 1.0 is limited to 1080i or 720p. ATSC 3.0 is even capable of 8k resolution.
Set top boxes will be available by the end of 2020 at reasonable prices, just like when ATSC 1.0 HDTV first came out.


How much gear has to be replaced to make ATSC 3.0 possible? One machine in a rack? That could be quick then, especially if it allows the TV station to reduce its power output (taking advantage of the more efficient coding) to cover the same footprint and thus achieve mandatory carriage.
 
Originally Posted by pitzel
How much gear has to be replaced to make ATSC 3.0 possible? One machine in a rack? That could be quick then, especially if it allows the TV station to reduce its power output (taking advantage of the more efficient coding) to cover the same footprint and thus achieve mandatory carriage.

All anyone would have to do is purchase a set top box (STB), like what they offered when ATSC 1.0 HDTV first came out in the 2000's, and now days they can be quite small because the entire tuner itself is built on one tiny microchip.
I don't think that the broadcasters are looking to reduce their power, I think that they are looking to increase the number of viewers by covering a larger area.
 
Originally Posted by wag123
Originally Posted by pitzel
How much gear has to be replaced to make ATSC 3.0 possible? One machine in a rack? That could be quick then, especially if it allows the TV station to reduce its power output (taking advantage of the more efficient coding) to cover the same footprint and thus achieve mandatory carriage.

All anyone would have to do is purchase a set top box (STB), like what they offered when ATSC 1.0 HDTV first came out in the 2000's, and now days they can be quite small because the entire tuner itself is built on one tiny microchip.
I don't think that the broadcasters are looking to reduce their power, I think that they are looking to increase the number of viewers by covering a larger area.


I was asking from the point of view of the transmitters, ie: how much gear would they have to change? I don't know if the encoders and power amps are in the same chassis or not.

Being able to reduce transmission power to reach the same footprint is a powerful incentive (no pun intended) for an accelerated transition as keeping a transmitter running can be at considerable electrical expense.
 
I'm unwilling to deal with another broadcast TV change requiring new equipment this soon and will just stop watching if ATSC 1.0 goes away. NTSC (starting with B&W only) served from 1941 through 2009. Now it's a planned obsolescence treadmill. No thanks.
 
My two 2010 Samsung LCDs say hi. My 720p/1080i cable tv says hi. I continue to enjoy both and won't be worrying about 4K any time soon.
 
Originally Posted by GrtArtiste
My two 2010 Samsung LCDs say hi. My 720p/1080i cable tv says hi. I continue to enjoy both and won't be worrying about 4K any time soon.


... and you saved yourself a lot of money, once your TV dies, 4K TVs are now cheap and moving into the future will start to maybe get marked down to clearance items as the 8K sets come out.

With that said, for me, Ill be holding happy with my 4K Sony as to this day, I still can not rent and watch true 4k movies, never mind finding an 8K.

So why pay the 8K price when a non 4k Blu Ray disc has the same and better picture quality then a 4K streamed movie?
I can see the ATSC 3. as being a big plus because I am sure a 4k over the air broadcast signal will be far superior to 4k streaming. Just as a current ATSC 1.0 is equal to or better then a 4K streaming.

All this early morning post is about until source material improves, I think 4K is the standard and I am saying this because now we have the new 8K sets coming out. Im wondering if it will be a flop if Joe public realizes that he can not even watch TRUE 4K on his current set without buying a 4k disc..
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Saabist
I'm unwilling to deal with another broadcast TV change requiring new equipment this soon and will just stop watching if ATSC 1.0 goes away. NTSC (starting with B&W only) served from 1941 through 2009. Now it's a planned obsolescence treadmill. No thanks.
IMO ATSC 1.0 was flawed from the get-go and should never have been pushed on the public. The other digital HDTV standard used in most of the rest of the world, DVB, was/is superior to HDTV 1.0, but corporate interests pushed for the ATSC 1.0 standard to be adopted even though it was essentially obsolete when it was introduced. ATSC 3.0 corrects the mistakes they made and is vastly superior in every respect. It is a valid LONG TERM solution because many more improvements are possible within the system without the risk of having the entire platform become obsolete again.
So, what happened to ATSC 2.0? ATSC 2.0 was proposed because it was backwards compatible with ATSC 1.0, upgraded the stream to 1080p, and had Internet connection interactivity, but also had most of ATSC 1.0's flaws. It was deemed unworkable and DOA. They started with a clean sheet of paper on the ATSC 3.0 standard with the objective of making it a long term solution (like NTSC was).
 
Originally Posted by wag123
IMO ATSC 1.0 was flawed from the get-go and should never have been pushed on the public. The other digital HDTV standard used in most of the rest of the world, DVB, was/is superior to HDTV 1.0, but corporate interests pushed for the ATSC 1.0 standard to be adopted even though it was essentially obsolete when it was introduced. ...

That may well be the case but as I said I am unwilling to go through buying another round of equipment, whether that consists of adapters or new TVs. Sorry, had enough of that forced on me. Not going to do it again. ATSC 1.0 sucks in a lot of ways but it basically works well enough for the most part and equipment for it is well-established. If you want to buy into ATSC 3.0 you are free to go for it. I'm not going there.

Right now I'm listening to the radio on a Westinghouse transistor radio that is so old it was made in the United States. That's the kind of longevity and usability I expect from consumer electronics.
 
Originally Posted by Saabist
Originally Posted by wag123
IMO ATSC 1.0 was flawed from the get-go and should never have been pushed on the public. The other digital HDTV standard used in most of the rest of the world, DVB, was/is superior to HDTV 1.0, but corporate interests pushed for the ATSC 1.0 standard to be adopted even though it was essentially obsolete when it was introduced. ...

That may well be the case but as I said I am unwilling to go through buying another round of equipment, whether that consists of adapters or new TVs. Sorry, had enough of that forced on me. Not going to do it again. ATSC 1.0 sucks in a lot of ways but it basically works well enough for the most part and equipment for it is well-established. If you want to buy into ATSC 3.0 you are free to go for it. I'm not going there.

Right now I'm listening to the radio on a Westinghouse transistor radio that is so old it was made in the United States. That's the kind of longevity and usability I expect from consumer electronics.


You need not worry, IF (and that is a big if) and when ATSC becomes widely available your new TV will have it already built in, as some day, those 10 year old TVs of yours will stop working and its at least 10 years away for ATSC 3.0 to be wide spread, add to that, the 5G revolution will revolutionize so many things in the human race that we cant say what will be up with ATSC by then or even if there will be a call for broadcast TV ,, (though I think that is an extreme)
 
Back
Top