# HDTV on FreeView



## terryeden (Nov 2, 2002)

Mux B to be MPEG4 DVB-T2, all other muxes (muxen?) to be 64QAM. So enough for 3 HD TV streams.

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/dttfuture/statement/summary/

Phased to come in at DSO. Just in time for our Series 4 TiVos.......


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

Also see here and here

TCM - you owe me a pint.


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

So nearly everyone who has bought a "HD Ready" TV with built in Freeview will have to buy an external new Freeview box to watch the three HD channels?

Also I assume these channels will also be transmitted in SD wasting even more of the very limited Freeview bandwidth for those who do not have a HD compatible Freeview box or TV?

Automan.


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

I'd say that's about the size of it.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Automan said:


> So nearly everyone who has bought a "HD Ready" TV with built in Freeview will have to buy an external new Freeview box to watch the three HD channels?


HD Ready didn't mean HD _broadcast _ready, as you well know.



> Also I assume these channels will also be transmitted in SD wasting even more of the very limited Freeview bandwidth for those who do not have a HD compatible Freeview box or TV?


The BBC will only (presumably) have one HD channel, so I think it's highly unlikely to be a simulcast of any of the existing ones, but a cherry-pick channel like the on currently on satellite. Same may well apply to C4/ITV.


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

TCM2007 said:


> HD Ready didn't mean HD _broadcast _ready, as you well know.


Yes but the poor man in the street may get confused...

Also of course if their TV only has 1 x HDMI they may already be using it for their game console, blu-ray player, obsolete HD-DVD player or upscaling DVD player.

And of course a solution to get the 5.1 sound assuming Freeview HD will have it?

Automan.


----------



## Sneals2000 (Aug 25, 2002)

4 HD services in one DVB-T2 mux? Great...

Doesn't that mean - optimistically - around 8-10Mbs per service? (My understanding is that DVB-T2 will deliver 32 maybe a max of 40Mbs in the space currently occupied by 18/24Mbs DVB-T muxes?) BBC HD is currently 16.5Mbs and many Sky HD channels nearer 18-20Mbs... 

Even if they use 720/50p which is a bit easier to compress - that doesn't suggest a high quality service to me.

No wonder the DTG are suggesting a minimum of two national HD muxes - not just one...

Be interesting to see if DVB-T2 silicon is available and consumer boxes on the market by next year...


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

The announcemet is 3 with a fourth to come later. Not sure why the fourth is delayed, unless it's actuall on another Mux altogether?


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Automan said:


> Yes but the poor man in the street may get confused...


The *poor* man in the street may be sticking with his SDTV for some while to come until HDTVs begin turning up on www.freecycle.org:p


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> Not sure why the fourth is delayed, unless it's actuall on another Mux altogether?


Wake up at the back there TCM. Its clearly explained in Ofcom's document that the fourth HD channel is not possible until the full completion of digital switchover in 2012. The other three HD channels can in theory start to be launched next year (2009).

What I am less clear about is how does this interface with Sky's Picnic proposal? Is Sky Picnic now dead or will Sky Picnic be allowed as well on another Mux but these will all be subscription only channels. Presumably the Sky Picnic boxes could then receive the FTA HD channels as well as the Sky HD channels but the FTA HD boxes not from Sky could not receive the Sky HD DTT channels due to propreitary encryption that only Sky Picnic boxes and viewing cards could decode?

As I don't read anything in the document mentioning Sky Picnic and have heard nothing else in recent weeks can I take it that that the Sky Picnic decision is still in train?

If I know Ofcom they come up with the good news first (FTA HD on DTT to sucker us in) before then coming up with the bad news later (DTT bandwidth wasted on unnecessary pay Sky SD and HD channels) later on. Or will Sky Picnic all be SD as otherwise they can't cram in enough channels. I bet there is at least one pay Sky HD channel in Picnic if not 2 - i.e. movies and sports.

Does anyone else have any more info on Ofcom's Picnic deliberations?

Initially these three HD channels (presumably one for BBC, one for ITV and one for C4 given that Five seem to be about as slow as a garden snail regarding HD broadcasting and so could easily wait until 2012) won't have much impact but once a lot of viewers have the equipment and the tvs eventually it could really disrupt the current conventional BBC1, BBC2, ITV1, ITV2 viewing pattern in favour of people simply tuning to the best HD program currently showing.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> Wake up at the back there TCM. Its clearly explained in Ofcom's document that the fourth HD channel is not possible until the full completion of digital switchover in 2012. The other three HD channels can in theory start to be launched next year (2009).


Yes, that's what I said - 3 at first then 4 later. What it doesn't explain is _*why *_the fourth has to be delayed. What magically happens in 2012 which couldn't happen in a switched-over region in 2009.



> What I am less clear about is how does this interface with Sky's Picnic proposal? Is Sky Picnic now dead or will Sky Picnic be allowed as well on another Mux but these will all be subscription only channels. Presumably the Sky Picnic boxes could then receive the FTA HD channels as well as the Sky HD channels but the FTA HD boxes not from Sky could not receive the Sky HD DTT channels due to propreitary encryption that only Sky Picnic boxes and viewing cards could decode?


Picnic had nothing to do with HD, which is probably why it's not mentioned! In fact if people have to buy a new ST for HD, that could be an advantage for Picnic if the Picnic box is alao made HD compatible.



> Or will Sky Picnic all be SD as otherwise they can't cram in enough channels. I bet there is at least one pay Sky HD channel in Picnic if not 2 - i.e. movies and sports.


I've not seen anything suggesting that any of Picnic would be in HD. Quite the opposite in fact as they will trying to get as many channels into the available bandwidth as possible.



> Initially these three HD channels (presumably one for BBC, one for ITV and one for C4 given that Five seem to be about as slow as a garden snail regarding HD broadcasting and so could easily wait until 2012) won't have much impact but once a lot of viewers have the equipment and the tvs eventually it could really disrupt the current conventional BBC1, BBC2, ITV1, ITV2 viewing pattern in favour of people simply tuning to the best HD program currently showing.


Quite possibly, I know that I always look at the HD Channels page in the Sky guide first!


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

Perhaps the delay till 2012 for the 4th HD channel relates to them pumping up the output power of most freeview transmitters?

Maybe then they will do another mux shuffle 

I know JVC have a TV ready for this new service but now will we need to look out for TV's branded "HD Freeview Ready" as well as "True HD"?

Automan.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

There will be TVs with built-in Freesat compatibility soon too!


----------



## Sneals2000 (Aug 25, 2002)

Automan said:


> I know JVC have a TV ready for this new service but now will we need to look out for TV's branded "HD Freeview Ready" as well as "True HD"?


Are you sure the JVC TV isn't compatible with the existing HD DVB-T H264 transmissions - as currently being used in Sweden, and used on the London trial.

This WON'T be compatible with the proposed UK HD Freeview standard which is DVB-T2. AIUI production silicon isn't available for DVB-T2 demodulation - so I'm not sure how JVC could have a production-ready model waiting. (I think DVB-T2 was only officially ratified late last year or early this?)


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

Yes,
Sorry the JVC ones are not out till Oct this year - maybe 

Models LT-42DV9 & LT-46DV9

Automan.


Sneals2000 said:


> Are you sure the JVC TV isn't compatible with the existing HD DVB-T H264 transmissions - as currently being used in Sweden, and used on the London trial.
> 
> This WON'T be compatible with the proposed UK HD Freeview standard which is DVB-T2. AIUI production silicon isn't available for DVB-T2 demodulation - so I'm not sure how JVC could have a production-ready model waiting. (I think DVB-T2 was only officially ratified late last year or early this?)


----------



## Sneals2000 (Aug 25, 2002)

Could the 3 channels in 2009, 4 by 2012 be related to hoped-for improvements in encoder efficiency? In other words, no more bandwith becomes available, but a reduction in bandwith required for each service appears?

That said - are Ofcom expecting broadcasters to start generating two version of their muxes in 2009 - so that in some areas they are running with channels arranged for post-DSO and others pre-DSO?

If the BBC are expected to run their SD services in a single mux in DSO regions, but in two muxes in non-DSO regions, as switchover takes place, then they are going to have to code and mux twice aren't they?

I know the Beeb are building a new coding and mux operation in W12 - and have introduced new circuits between regional centres that would allow backhaul of regional studio outputs to London at 270Mbs to allow for centralised coding, allowing statmuxing of BBC One in England potentially. (Currently BBC One is recoded at CBR at each regional centre and isn't statmuxed) However having to dual encode for a couple of years sounds like an expensive way of doing things...


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Sneals2000 said:


> That said - are Ofcom expecting broadcasters to start generating two version of their muxes in 2009 - so that in some areas they are running with channels arranged for post-DSO and others pre-DSO?
> 
> If the BBC are expected to run their SD services in a single mux in DSO regions, but in two muxes in non-DSO regions, as switchover takes place, then they are going to have to code and mux twice aren't they?
> 
> I know the Beeb are building a new coding and mux operation in W12 - and have introduced new circuits between regional centres that would allow backhaul of regional studio outputs to London at 270Mbs to allow for centralised coding, allowing statmuxing of BBC One in England potentially. (Currently BBC One is recoded at CBR at each regional centre and isn't statmuxed) However having to dual encode for a couple of years sounds like an expensive way of doing things...


The whole thing seems to be extremely badly thought through and must also be extremely badly timed from a BBC/ITV Freesat launch point of view. The previous compelling selling feature of BBC/ITV Freesat was HDTV without Sky but now what exactly is it? Presumably more HD channels and better quality than you will be able to get HD on Freeview? Or will the low spec of Freeview HD lower HD broadcast quality on all other platforms to the lowest common denominator.

It also seems a very incomplete solution in terms of any long term vision. For instance in the short term the BBC, ITV and C4 may have dedicated HD only channels and all their HD output will be only on those but on a 5 to 10 year view most of their programs will be in HD and they will want to start broadcasting all their channels in HD. What then? I imagine that on Satellite there will be HD and SD versions of BBC One, BBC Two, BBC Three and BBC Four but on Freeview there will be only SD versions with merely a best of from these channels on BBC HD, ITV HD and C4 HD. Satellite and Cable can clearly evolve organically as more HD programs come along but Freeview/DTT will still be massively constrained by lack of bandwidth.

On a 10 to 20 year view then surely IPTV via broadband at high speeds will take over in all UK homes and hence the need for terrestrial broadcasting as we know it (which is very space inefficient as all channels that need to be viewed must be broadcast at once) will surely eventually die?


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

Pete77 said:


> On a 10 to 20 year view then surely IPTV via broadband at high speeds will take over in all UK homes and hence the need for terrestrial broadcasting as we know it (which is very space inefficient as all channels that need to be viewed must be broadcast at once) will surely eventually die?


IPTV might be the future, but Terrestrial broadcasting is far more efficient than streaming when you consider the big picture !

1 broadcast of Eastenders vs 10 million downloads ?


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

mikerr said:


> 1 broadcast of Eastenders vs 10 million downloads ?


I hear what you say but eventually high speed resilient internet to UK homes will arrive at which point you might as well use that and free up the UHF tv spectrum to provide infinitely more wireless IP connections delivering end users with exactly the content that they want.


----------

