dtt switch off

Sam Russell

My TV is a KDL40S300 which has a digital/analogue tuner that can decode DVB-T and DVB-C. It can receive the four FTA channels, and receive the sound from the HD channel. What I want to know is it possible to put in a CI card like the NEOTION one to decode MPEG4, and does anyone have one that I can try?
I think it should work, otherwise what is the CI slot for?

maxg

The ci slot is for paytv, ci modul and subscriber card.
The mpeg4 neotion modul give you additionally mpeg4 support if the provider use the same scrambling system and mpeg4.

watty

The Neotion pocket Duo should work for SD MPEG4, even FTA (in any TV's CI slot), even thought the CI is intended for a decryption system (CAM & viewing card) . But it will not work for HD. But I really think a set box is much better having compared both.

You really really don't want to get one Sam.

Sam Russell

I think STB solution is a bad one, a patch for inadequate TV's. I already have three zappers, I do not want a fourth. If the STB did everything, Sat FTA, DTV, PVR all in one box then maybe, but they currently do not.

I think 'HD Ready' on the TV is misleading, and should not be permitted. My set is not HD anything, unless I add something (expensive). My car is 'Turbo Ready' if I fit a turbo. But not if I do not.

I want my TV to do what it says it can do, but can't.

bk

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think STB solution is a bad one, a patch for inadequate TV's. I already have three zappers, I do not want a fourth.

Get yourself a logitech harmony remote. They are excellent.

reslfj

The Cush wrote: »

.-...this range of TV's includes Digital TV Tuner: DVB-T, MPEG Profiles and Levels: MPEG4 AVC/H.264 HP@L4.

This new TV line does NOT include a MPEG-4 tuner, but a DVB-T and/or DVB-C tuner.

But it does include a MPEG-4 HP L4 ( High Profile Level 4.0) decompressor. HP L4 is 720p (or 1080i) HDTV (they also support MP L3 SDTV and MPEG-2 SDTV)
http://pdf.crse.com/manuals/3298243111.pdf Page 33.

The line does not support MPEG-4 1080p (Full HD, HP L5 (or maybe L4.2/.3 ?), but 1080p is unlikely to be transmitted anytime soon, as it needs to much bandwidth and only makes a small difference for 55"+ displays.

Several of the current Sony models supports only MPEG-4 HP L3 SDTV via the DVB tuner and only HDTV via a HDMI connection.
Note the HD Ready mark has been and still is for the display and the HDMI interface ONLY.

The Cush wrote:

But as Sony indicates on their website Technical Specifications - Please be aware that the features/specifications can differ from country to country.

The spec. will be different for DTT in the UK - come November 2009 - where there must be a DVB-T2 tuner in front of the MPEG-4 decompressor in order to receive any HD from an aerial (DTT).
(Over time the current UK DTT SDTV will migrate to DVB-T2 and MPEG-4, too)

The new Sony models will not be able to use there integrated MPEG-4 decompressor in the UK - unless the DVB-T tuner chip is physically replaced by a DVB-T2 chip - (very unlikely to happen)

For any country that can wait with analogue switch off until late 2009/early 2010 - DVB-T2 and MPEG-4 HP L4 as minimum receiver spec., seems to be the ONLY smart choice for consumers.

The Cush wrote:

According to Minimum Receiver Requirements for DTT in Ireland, (v1.0, 6 Feb 2008) "If the Receiver supports middleware, the ability to receive and output Data Broadcast Services presented in accordance with the "MHEG-5 UK Profile, version 1.06[17]" is a minimum requirement".

This has nothing to do with MPEG-2 vs. 4 nor with DVB-T vs. T2.

Lars

watty

1080p versus 1080i gives NO EXTRA detail at ANY size, but uses twice the transmission bandwidth. It adds temporal information, it's important for usa 30fps as they have pul down artifact ftom 24 fps to 30i

1080p versus 1080i makes rapid movement better, the eye does not resolve rapid movement. It will eliminate single line flicker on CRT, but any decent LCD / Plasma doesn't have single line flicker as it uses Faruja or similar de-interlacer.

DVBs, DVBs2, DVBc, DVBt (DTT) and DVBt2 are all tuner/modulation technologies. You can't change by a SW upgrade. DVBs2 will also do DVBs and DVBt2 will also do DVBt

The DVBx2 versions give about 30% saving in spectrum or approx 30% more channels in same spectrum.

MPEG4 uses about 1/2 (or slightly better) the bitrate of MPEG2 compression for the video. SD or HD can be MPEG2 or MPEG4, though MPEG2 isn't used anymore for HD.

MHEG-5 is system for "middleware" or Interactivity or GUI. Sky uses "Open TV" (which of course is very proprietry) and some Operators use MHP.

MPEG2-TS is the method to multiplex Video (MPEG2 or MPEG4), Data (could be info for MHEG5 or Teletext, or PC download, anything) and Audio (MP2, AC3, AAC etc, not usually MP3, though possible) for one or multiple channels as a single serial data stream. This is what is received from the Tuner via DVB-s, DVB-c, DVB-t, DVB-h, DVB-S2 or DVB-t2 modulation.

DTT signal can be DVB-t AND DVB-h in the same multiplex, Hierarchical Modulation. This usually needs yet a different physical tuner to do both.

Some tuners use SDR / DSP zero IF techniques. Newer chip sets may indeed be able to add new tuner modes by firmware upgrade, but no current DVB-s tuner was upgradable to DVB-S2 by Firmware and is unlikely for current DVB-T designs (DVB-T2 is not even full formalised yet and may be a big mistake by Ofcom as it is not a huge saving).

reslfj

watty wrote: »

The DVBx2 versions give about 30% saving in spectrum or approx 30% more channels in same spectrum.

30% for DVB-S -> DVB-S2, but DVB-T2 will give much more. 45+ % for MFN like presently used in the UK and 65+% for larger SFN.




(Slides from DVB-T2 presentation by Alberto Morello, RAI April 3. 2008)

watty wrote:

MPEG4 uses about 1/2 (or slightly better) the bitrate of MPEG2 compression for the video. SD or HD can be MPEG2 or MPEG4, though MPEG2 isn't used anymore for HD

Real time MPEG-4 encoders cannot compress that much - more like 2/3 of MPEG-2.
( MPEG-2 encoded HD is still used in the USA - I think. )

watty wrote:

MPEG2-TS is the method to multiplex Video, Data etc.

Agree, but that name MPEG2-TS 'transport stream' ...
MPEG2-TS is an old and much misplaced name as it has nothing to do with MPEG-2/MPEG-4 video compression. The MPEG2 part is an early digital 'family name' much like the prefix DVB is today.

watty wrote:

DTT signal can be DVB-t AND DVB-h in the same multiplex, Hierarchical Modulation. This usually needs yet a different physical tuner to do both.

Do not count on Hierarchical Modulation in the future. DVB-H2 will be very different from DVB-H. Standards like MediaFLO and DVB-SH are much better than DVB-H.

watty wrote:

...but no current DVB-s tuner was upgradable to DVB-S2 by Firmware and is unlikely for current DVB-T designs (DVB-T2 is not even full formalised yet and may be a big mistake by Ofcom as it is not a huge saving).

DVB-T2 is final and has been for some time now, but it is only available to members of DVB.org - yet. The dvb.org members includes most or all of the important chip companies.

The benefit of DVB-T2 is much more than the 45-65% capacity increase. The DTG in the UK writes, that the most important feature of DVB-T2 is its ability to support much larger SFN. (DTG summit 2008).


Lars

watty

DVB-t and DVB-t2
Those aren't at same QAM and guard interval. I think the saving much less at same QAM. I'll bet on the real world saving as less than 45% and never near 65%. These things are always over hyped.

Qualcomm wants us to believe Mediaflo is better. Time will tell.

Very interesting

The leading makers of Multiplex /Re-encoding such as Scopus and Optibase etc all claim better than 50% real time for MPEG4

The US regards 480p as "HD". That is in MPEG2 (May be 840 approx x 480p rather than 720x 480p though)

MPEG-TS Transport stream is like saying VSAT Terminal (TS = Transport Stream. VSAT = Very Small Aperture Terminal)

reslfj

watty wrote: »

DVB-t and DVB-t2
Those aren't at same QAM and guard interval. I think the saving much less at same QAM. I'll bet on the real world saving as less than 45% and never near 65%. These things are always over hyped.

But it is the DVB-T2 equivalent modulation e.i. same signal robustness (signal/noise ratio) and have better impulse protection.
The guard interval is 100% the same in microseconds (224us) as 32k is used.

watty wrote:

Qualcomm wants us to believe Mediaflo is better. Time will tell.

MediaFLO is better than DVB-H - much better - but DVB-SH beats MediaFLO and expect DVB-H2 to perform even better.
But all of this are for mobile reception - DVB-T2 is for static reception.
The calculated performance of DVB-H, MediaFLO and DVB-SH has been verified by real measurements.

watty wrote:

The leading makers of Multiplex /Re-encoding such as Scopus and Optibase etc all claim better than 50% real time for MPEG4

But do they or do you and I have to watch the results ?
This may be true sometime in the future, but Freesat BBC-HD is encoded with 16 Mbps and France reports problems with HD and MPEG-4 at 10 Mbps for just the video.

http://www.dvb.org/news_events/dvbscene_magazine/DVB-SCENE25.pdf page 9.
"Video quality proved to be very

impressive, but some artefacts were
noticeable at a coding rate of 10 Mbps
(for video only) with actual MPEG-4 real
time encoders. Big improvements are

still expected."

Expected and much needed.

Lars

Before you write 'over hyped' take a look here: http://www.ebu.ch/en/union/news/2008/tcm_6-60107.php

watty

16Mbps HD is approx 3.2Mbps of SD at same quality.

10Mbps average will only be good for HD if peak rate can go to 18Mbps.

As a rule of thumb the peak needs to be about twice the average real time target. Hence statistical Mux and hope all the channels don't show the same football at same time


I forget that as you increase the number FFTs that the guard is improved. However my tests show that the phase distortion performance of amplifiers and mixers deterorates rapidly with increase of number of carriers per MHz (related to FFTs, 2K about 1,700 carriers and 8K about 6,900 carriers).

We won't really know how much advantage there is till real commercial receivers are deployed. Tests on MMDS type systems and CATV distribution show that even 2K OFDM can end up only supporting 1/3rd the bitrate of DVB-c after FEC.

I used to think OFDM was best thing since sliced bread, but only betweeen TX Aerial and RX aerial ( and for about 1.5Ghz and lower outdoors or up to 10Ghz indoors). As you increase number of carriers per MHz the electronics becomes a bigger problem.

reslfj

watty wrote: »

As a rule of thumb the peak needs to be about twice the average real time target. Hence statistical Mux and hope all the channels don't show the same football at same time

This is where the probability of all 3 HD channels in a DVB-T2 MUX will show the same football is much smaller than with 2 HD channels in a DVB-T MUX.

watty wrote:

I forget that as you increase the number FFTs that the guard is improved. However my tests show that the phase distortion performance of amplifiers and mixers deterorates rapidly with increase of number of carriers per MHz (related to FFTs, 2K about 1,700 carriers and 8K about 6,900 carriers).

The guard improvement alone is almost 18% better bitrate.

Sorry, bit when all of dvb.org has used two years and 10+ mill € (maybe even 10++ mill €) on the development of DVB-T2, I trust there simulations and tests more than I trust yours.

watty wrote:

I used to think OFDM was best thing since sliced bread, but only between TX Aerial and RX aerial . As you increase number of carriers per MHz the electronics becomes a bigger problem.

Note QAM256 CR3/5 has same net-bitrate as QAM64 CR4/5, but the T2-TM simulations apparently shows better noise performance for the higher QAM and the lower code-rate. The LDPC/BCH FEC is vastly superior to Vitabi/RS.
DVB-T2 is for TX antenna(s) to one RX aerial and you can be sure the electronics (one chip) will be able to perform. There are many modes that DVB-T2 can operate in. There are rumors that all DVB-T2 receivers will have 2 tuners as standard. This will enable 'deversity' receiption just by connecting an extra aerial.
The new dibcom.com DVB-SH chip has two tuners operating in 'diversity' mode. http://www1.dibcom.info/Images/Upload/pdf/CP/PR_DVB-SH_MWC_%20080204_UK.pdf


Lars

watty

My physical hardware is not as good as their simulations sadly. But I don't argue with them. I havn't got a DVB-T2 to test. I'm putting DVB-t through a transvertor. It behaves badly. DVB-s is fine.

I suspect many mast pre-amps / distribution amps won't be as good as their simulations.

It will be interesting in 2009 if UK does deploy it then to see how well it works.

I've had 30+ years of real life electronics not working as well as simulations.

Maybe this time someone has it right. Not long to wait to see.

I appreciate your input / posts.

Sligobuck

If it is any help i can recieve HD Ireland on Sony 46 X3500. Picture is excellent off indoor ariel in Shankill.

yellabelly

Why don't the BCI/RTE leave one multiplex as it is now with the main 4 channels mpeg2/FTA? There must be lots of Freeview TV set owners who don't want to have to buy another STB. Some will have a satellite STB (possibly just for FTA) picking up all the other channels they want. Also some people are happy with just the 4 Irish channels.

zilog_jones

They could do like what they did with the old 405-line system and continue broadcasting in areas where people were already receiving DVB-T from the trials or from the UK for a few years. However I don't know if there would be the bandwidth to do this and keep the same amount of channels in those regions as the rest of the country, and for how long will they need to do this?

IT Loser

byte wrote: »

Hm, not much of an article to be fair. An opinion piece is probably the best way of describing it. I get the feeling he's not looking forward to DTT! :pac:

Hardly surprising I suppose, most journos are just publicists for someone or other, and will shoot down the competition when they get a chance, or give their own guy a write up. Brendan O Connor and Paul Williams would be typical examples. In the world of Sports, Steve Bunce would be another example.

Sure RTE/The Irish Times have some retired Soldier dude working as their "Security Expert/Analyst"....:rolleyes: