It is too late for MPEG2, but is it too early for DVB-T2?

Sam Russell

Watty is right of course, but :-
first we need the Mpeg4 tv's to be the only new sets on the market. By law. Otherwise we get rhe [EMAIL="cr@p"]cr@p[/EMAIL] from the UK.
Then while the pay stuff gets organised, transmit MPeg2 on the idle muxes for a limited and advised temporary period. The purpose is to educate the public just how much better the digital signal is.
Then when the STB is decided, and available in numbers, turn the Mpeg2 off, and the analogue. If the box is cheap, and people have to buy it, they will. Tear off the coupon from your tv license for your discount.

RTE NL could convert to Mpeg2 at the transmitter, if necessary. It is easier to convert from Mpeg4 to Mpeg2 I would think. If Neotion can do the covertion in a credit card for 50 quid, a rack of kit would be able to do a better job.

It would only make sense for a few sites, not a full roll out. Even just the trial sites, where the kit was already installed, would make sense.

But only if we had a legal ban on non-Mpeg4 sets.

STB

JHMEG wrote: »

Fact is that hundreds of thousands of have MPEG2 capable TVs. Fact is shops are full of MPEG2 capable equipment, a lot of it dirt cheap. The reasons are irrelevant. They are here, now.

Fact is the only transmissions are in an incompatible technology, MPEG4.

Which is easier to change?

As far as I can see the only thing purpose MPEG4 serves in Ireland is for back patting and self congratulation.

Despite using the "wrong" compression, the UK has had a successful DTT system for years, we don't.

Fact is that Ireland has chosen MPEG4. Its a good thing. You'll learn to love it later.

BTW MPEG4 Encoders dont come cheap. The retailers dont dicate broadcasting policy despite what you think.

JHMEG

watty wrote: »

1) Because there will be possibly in a short while 8 or more Public Service channels. (Oireachtas, news, education at least.)
2) MPEG2 is twice as much bandwidth.
3) MPEG2 is Obsolete, by next year there will little or no cost saving vs MPEG4
4) It will waste over 100M to use MPEG2 now and change later.
5) Like sex, chocolate and money there is NEVER enough bandwidth.
6) we will need to simulcast some HD.
7) MPEG2 needs twice the feed bandwidth which costs twice as much
8) for same range and number of channels MPEG2 needs twice the power.
9) The number of people that inadvertently have MPEG2 only tuners already is irrelevant and worst reason to pick MPEG2.

Ok,
1) 8+4=12 channels. We'll still have loads of bandwidth left. The UK has over 40 using MPEG2.
2) We'll still have loads of bandwidth left.
3,4,5 not related
6) We'll still have loads of bandwidth left for HD.
7) No they won't cost twice. They may not cost anything extra at all.
8) Not sure of the maths there. You'd need to explain that one.
9) We should ignore the successful rollout of MPEG2 tuners?!

JHMEG

mjsmyth wrote: »

With regards to PVR's, they tend to record the digital stream as it is broadcasted.

BBC1 is currently the best quality MPEG2 SD on digital satellite. It peaks at 3Mbit/s, but would average less.

At 3Mbit/s a 300GB disk will be able to store 277 hours of programming. That's almost 12 days worth non-stop.

Ghost Train

While mpeg4 is the better technology, do think a dual format solution mpeg4 & mpeg2 for a few years for the 4 main channels would have been a clever solution. Don't see bandwidth as a big issue in the short term, UK have plenty of channels, hundreds of mpeg2 channels on satellite.

Yes mpeg4 saves a bit of space on DVRs, but do like the fact that mpeg2 is DVD format which is a more useful recording format for getting to DVD, for me anyway.

A load of mpeg2 hardware already in peoples homes, blame whoever you want, having a limited mpeg2 service would add a whole lot of value to hardware people already have.

Would be all for a ban on mpeg2 hardware in ireland, but should have happened as soon as the decision was made to go to mpeg4

Sam Russell

Ghost Train wrote: »

While mpeg4 is the better technology, do think a dual format solution mpeg4 & mpeg2 for a few years for the 4 main channels would have been a clever solution. Don't see bandwidth as a big issue in the short term, UK have plenty of channels, hundreds of mpeg2 channels on satellite.

.........

Would be all for a ban on mpeg2 hardware in ireland, but should have happened as soon as the decision was made to go to mpeg4

Why are we surprised at the failure to implement something new. We had great fun with kilometers in cars. Cars with MPH speedos were still being sold months after the kph was implemented. They should have been banned about two years earlier. No surprise that MPEG4 decision was made over 12 months ago and even now, the trade is ignorant of the fact - still selling useless DTT sets.

At least a temporary Mpeg2/Mpeg4 dual system would allow some of the sets to work until an official stb is launched.

The annalogue swith off should be linked to the stb availability, with the stb subsidised, possibly with the production of a tv license.

watty

The MPEG2 in TS frequently doesn't meet DVD PS specs.

There is not actually a "load" of MPEG2 DTT tuners. Especially not actually bought for Digital Terrestrial.

It doesn't just save a bit of space, you are talking about 60 to 90 features vs 30 features.

The only point of Digital terrestrial in the first place is actually to save spectrum for other applications such as broadband.

There is no MPEG2 ban as we don't yet actually have ANY DTT service.

Since analogue may not be turned off for 4 or 5 years in some cases, there is no rush to get a MPEG4 box. Dual transmission would impoverish RTE and put off MPEG4 switchover by 10 years as the number of MPEG2 only sets would boom.

There is more of a case to go MPEG2 than a dual format, but really no case at all.

Some background
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_terrestrial_television
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_digital_television_deployments_by_country
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_television_in_Europe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB-T
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4
http://www.dvb.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC


Some people argue we should not even be using DVB-T but ther DVB-T2 which launches next year (tests at the minute.)

watty

JHMEG wrote: »

BBC1 is currently the best quality MPEG2 SD on digital satellite. It peaks at 3Mbit/s, but would average less.

At 3Mbit/s a 300GB disk will be able to store 277 hours of programming. That's almost 12 days worth non-stop.

It peaks at 9Mbps. 3Mbps would be about average. Maybe a little more at times.

watty

Combined the T2 and MPEG2 threads.

Give all 3 camps a bigger perspective.

Added a stupid poll that will confuse everyone.

JHMEG

watty wrote: »

It peaks at 9Mbps. 3Mbps would be about average. Maybe a little more at times.

My bad, but it actually backs up the maths. (As I write BBC1 is averaging 4.269Mbit/s)

Peddyr

Sorry if this sounds like an ignorant question folks, but what essentially is the difference between the two? Will the Humax HDCI 2000T boxes used for the trial in Ireland work with the UK Freeview HD DVB-T2 channels later this year?

scath

Not at all. All questions are good. The different is the processing and energy consumptions reductions. The humax box will not be able to process T2 signals so you won't be able to get HD. However if u buy a Freeview HD box when they are released in Manchester/Liverpool, they will be compatible with Irish DTT unlike Freeview non-hD box. That is because T2 is backward compatible with DVB-T signals but obviously not the other way around. Watty or some of the lads will give ya more technical explanation on it but essentially its processing methods, power consumption during broadcasting to transmitters and capacity resulting from the type of processing.

Ghost Train

If the rte mux was mpeg2 it wouldn't need to be mpeg4 as well, since mpeg4 box would decode mpeg2.

Guess the whole topic is kind of pointless, since the standard has been selected or is it final yet?

maxg

Mpeg4 as compression method is fix since spring 2008. It makes not much sense to discuss the theme mpeg4/mpeg2 again.
Beside that the majority of all TV's from this model year are supporting mpeg4.
Samsung at the "B" series, LG at the LH and PS/PQ series, Sony at all series except the S-series and the v4000 from last year and so on.

watty

History lessons moved here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055605542

Sam Russell

I think that the T2 would be worth waiting for if it was backed by the legal requirement that all sets were compatible from a certain date. In the meantime, turn back on the old Mpeg2 system. Mpeg4 sd only benefits the tranmitters, since we do not need more channels in the short term. After aso, that is not necessarily true, as the spectrum released can be used for other things.

The T2 setup should also be HD only since we have so few channels. The programme material could be up converted by the broadcaster where appropriate. We would then havd an HD only service.

Once the stb is available in numbers, aso should happen. It is a waste of money to have analogue broadcasts when digital is available. RTE turned off the MW transmitter because it was not being listened to, the same applies to analogue. A simple low cost stb with reasonable functionality needs to be produced, it does not need to be advanced in anyway.

maxg

What is the sense to wait for DVB-T2.
3 Muxes sending nothing in DVB-T is the same than 3 muxes sending nothing in DVB-T2.
And at the PSB Mux RTE could send instead of 10 MBits nullbytes maybe 18 MBits nullbytes.

JHMEG

Ghost Train wrote: »

If the rte mux was mpeg2 it wouldn't need to be mpeg4 as well, since mpeg4 box would decode mpeg2.

Guess the whole topic is kind of pointless, since the standard has been selected or is it final yet?

Maybe, maybe not. No service has been launched and it's not likely one will be any time soon.

watty

It's likely the Public Broadcaster Mux will be launched this autumn. It's only additional Pay Channels that have no prospect of launching.

RTENL now has:
* MPEG4 headends
* mix of Fibre and Microwave Digital feeds
* Transmitter, aerials, feeds, modulators etc at all the main sites.
* About 85% population covered


It would be six months delay and millions of Euro to change to MPEG2.
It would up to a year delay and 10s of Millions of Euro to change to HD T2 or T2 with SD.


A final Launch date is only withheld as the plan was to launch simultaneously with PayTV. If it becomes obvious to BCI (it's already obvious to nearly everyone else) that PayTV won't happen, the public service launch date will be announced.

Pat Gleeson

MPEG-2 would be a total waste of time and money. Take a leaf from the French book - make it illegal to sell non compliant equipment in shops and educate people now on the correct standards.

Now is the time to use the current, most up to date standards
(MPEG-4 DVB-T2) and futureproof.

watty

I voted for MPEG4 + DVB-T (Already chosen solution: All new rollouts, inc UK from 2010) as while the most logical in the medium term is HD MPEG4 +DVB-T2 (Mostly up-scaled, will work SD TVs), don't think RTE has the money, the delay would be politically impossible and in short term set boxes would cost twice as much.

It could be a few years till we have an HD mux. Then it can use T2 as the HD DVB-T2 TVs & boxes arriving in UK next year will work with the current PBS mux.

reslfj

Note: This post is also posted in digitalspy.co.uk.

The Finish Government has just - 25.06.2009 - selected mobile telephone operator 'DNA Oy' as the winner of the two licenses for HD DTT multiplexes in VHF band III. The two DTT multiplexes will be named HD1 and HD2 to avoid naming conflicts with the VHF band names.
There was three other bids for the two HD licenses. DNA Oy was selected, as this choice was believed to increase the competition in the TV marketplace the most.
There is currently a 30 day period where complaints can be filed against the decision.
Both multiplexes will use DVB-T2/MPEG-4 and broadcast 6-8 HD channels (3-4 channels each). The state owned public service broadcaster - YLE - is expected to use at least one of the HD channels.

The decision paper available on the Finish Ministry web - in Finish - indicates that DNA will not use the traditional high tower/high power scheme, but smaller transmitters located at DNA's mobile telephone masts. This will be very interesting to follow.
Building the network will start later this year and focus on the more populated areas in the south of Finland and some few larger cities elsewhere. Transmissions will likely start rather early in 2010 and must start before the end of 2010
.
A few sites may even start this year? - Can Finland beat DSO Granada ?
60% coverage must be reached by the end of 2011 and the two licenses terminates December 2016.

Note: This post is also posted in digitalspy.co.uk.

Lars

Digitalspy May 11.: "What's on Band 3 nowadays?" post 10

Press:
The Ministry of Transport and Communications press release
"DNA Oy to intensify competition in Finland’s TV market /DNA"

Decision paper (Cut and paste into translate.google.com if you cannot read Finish)

reslfj

Why has this post been moved to this thread ???
It is reporting on a new development in Finland and was postet #1 in its own thread. It has no relation to this threads topic or any current situation in RoI - except maybe it shows that more countries are now reusing the VHF band III channels for DTT.

Lars

watty

This is the thread for DVB-t2 discussions. It would make more sense to have DVB-t2 on BandIII here than DAB.

This forum is for Terrestrial TV reception in Ireland and related information. I decided your post is most relevant to the active discussion on this thread and a contribution to it.

Also OneVision posts moved here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055543384
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=60906850&postcount=392

IN reality the PSB mux doesn't depend on a Commercial PayTV sign up. It can happen FASTER if there is no PayTV.

MPEG2

I voted "Dual MPEG4+MPEG2" because I am not convinced comercial DTT is viable in Ireland (certainly not the way it's been set up so far). In the absence of a comercial operator where are the decoders going to come from?

Subsidies and a distribution network are required for STBs. DTT is an inferior option to satellite and so has to be pitched at a price point lower than sky. The €9.99 per month Boxer were planning on charging is about all the market will bare, but would the take up be enough to pay for a TV service?

There's no carrot and no stick, so why would people move to DTT?

Well some of them will move if it's cheap and easy; that's where MPEG2 comes in. Most homes probably have an MPEG2 decoder at this stage solving the STB problem. You would reclaim the radio spectrum, achieve the objective and salvage some success from the national DTT project.

IMO the powers that be should be looking for the path of least resistance at this stage and a million euros (the figure Watty gave for a switch over to MPEG2) on the back end is not a lot for a public body to pay. (That's about two Gerry Ryans.:D)

Parser

I voted MPEG2 to piss everyone off :pac:

MPEG2 or dual MPEG2 + MPEG4 if Pay TV fails to launch (it will fail)

Like it or not, the country is flooded with MPEG2 equipment. There seems to be a strange stigma attached to it as some sort of evil British technology. But the fact remains, nearly every household who has an LCD or Plasma TV are ready to receive DTT right now if it was in MPEG2.

It will be years before we see the 4 PSBs in HD. Look at BBC HD, they struggle to come up with content. Most of the time you get to watch previews or repeats.

HD only seems to be viable in a subscription service like Sky, even then the HD content is limited to the extra premium movie and sports channels. As I said a subscription service over DTT is just not going to happen. There is simply no market and far too much competition from Sky and cable. So DTT really doesn't need to be concerned with HD H.264.

As for SD H.264, there is plenty of space, and will be plenty of space in the air for years to come, to offer high bit rate MPEG2 SD streams that equal the image quality of moderate bit rate MPEG4 streams. To the end user, one option offers them an easy and inexpensive transition to digital terrestrial, while the other option is awkward and incurs a higher cost. (I'm not sold on the notion that MPEG4 equipment will magically in 6 months or 12months be as cheap as MPEG2 is now, why will it?)

People talk of using saved frequencies for broadband services. But who exactly is going to provide these broadband services, and why?

By law we have to move digital. Multiple channels and subscription services over DTT is a pipe dream. There is likely going to be just the 4 PSBs and possibly 1 or 2 more channels ever offered over DTT. I'm afraid to say "newer" is not always the best option and MPEG2 / DVB-T would have been perfectly adequate for Irish DTT.

Knowing nothing about a headend, but is an MPEG4 headend specifically limited to MPEG4 or are they flexible that they can also produce other compression standards, like MPEG2?

GerardKeating

Parser wrote: »

Like it or not, the country is flooded with MPEG2 equipment. There seems to be a strange stigma attached to it as some sort of evil British technology. But the fact remains, nearly every household who has an LCD or Plasma TV are ready to receive DTT right now if it was in MPEG2.

I doubt if more than 5% of households have an MPEG-2 TV and many of those that do, do not even know they have one.

ethernet

MPEG2 wrote: »

There's no carrot and no stick, so why would people move to DTT?

Digital reception of the four terrestrial channels without the need to take out a cable/satellite subscription. This perfectly complements the current FTA line-up on satellite for many.

I think a handful of people are bitter having bought now incompatible equipment from the trials ages ago.

watty

They were warned though. Both here and by the Dept.

watty

Parser wrote: »

Like it or not, the country is flooded with MPEG2 equipment. There seems to be a strange stigma attached to it as some sort of evil British technology. But the fact remains, nearly every household who has an LCD or Plasma TV are ready to receive DTT right now if it was in MPEG2.

It will be years before we see the 4 PSBs in HD. Look at BBC HD, they struggle to come up with content. Most of the time you get to watch previews or repeats.
(I'm not sold on the notion that MPEG4 equipment will magically in 6 months or 12months be as cheap as MPEG2 is now, why will it?)

People talk of using saved frequencies for broadband services. But who exactly is going to provide these broadband services, and why?

Knowing nothing about a headend, but is an MPEG4 headend specifically limited to MPEG4 or are they flexible that they can also produce other compression standards, like MPEG2?

1) Nonsense. Flat screens are a minority. The majority of Plasma/Flat screens sold in the Irish market have VHF/UHF analogue tuners only. Even of those with MPEG2 DTT Tuners, over 80% were bought for cable/Sky, not DTT.

2) There will be HD before analogue switch off. There has to be spectrum provision now.

3) MPEG4 set boxes are virtually down to MPEG2 prices now. All new models use MPEG4 chipsets. We won't be launching till nearly December or even 2010 at current rate. No-one has to buy a DTT set box for possibly FOUR years!

4) Ireland has almost the worst BB infrastructure in Europe, an copper phone line telco with nearly 5Billion debt due to asset stripping and leveraged buyouts and most expensive line rental in the world. We need about twice to four times the spectrum of most European countries for Fixed Wireless Broadband so as to have Universal BB at 5Mbps minimum.

5) It depend on what gear RTE / RTENL have bought. Also there is the cost and install of connectivity for x2 to x3 more traffic to each transmitter. Before analog close down there will be very likely more DTT free channels that would fit in one Mux using MPEG2. The first channels will be Oireachtas TV (eventually possibly two of them, the channel has existed for some years already), 24 news, Education. The 3e may be on terrestrial. I'm not convinced the Irish Film Channel will get off the ground.