FCC Proposal to Raise HD Power Levels

[Kelly A]

Engineers have said that one or two ATSC 3.0 television stations could utilize their data to provide "CD quality" audio broadcast service of all existing AM and FM broadcast stations in a market.

In theory they're correct. Problem is; who's going to listen to it?

From my view as a radio broadcaster, that makes the ATSC 3.0 TV station my landlord and gatekeeper to the audience.
I don't like that, just as I don't like the vehicle dashboard toll keeper.

Nobody is suggesting forcing radio stations to put their audio on ATSC 3.0 TV stations. Besides, doing so wouldn't financially benefit anyone and therefore, is a non-starter.
The absolutely only reason the government would force ATSC 3.0 for TV stations, is to create a single ATSC 3.0 'lighthouse' carrier in every market which would carry all the existing HDTV stations within the market. This way all that extra UHF spectrum from abandoned 6MHz nATSC 1.0 stations across the country would be available for one huge final auction to cell/PCS providers. TV station group owners would get a percentage of the spectrum sale, and they ultimately get rid of the cost from towers and transmission hardware.

Once again- I say one-way over-the-air broadcasting has an important, good characteristic, and I hope consumers realize it when making choices.

I think you're right, but it's not up to us. Consumers drive what and how they listen-to or watch and when.

I support over-the-air radio broadcasting 100 percent.

Of course you do, so do I. But supporting and wishing won't change the course of the future. Don't get me wrong, I'm not giving up, but I'm a realist. We can't predict what devices consumers will use in the future, considering there are thousands of choices available via the same device they use for navigation, staying in touch with the social circle friends and family, entertainment, books, movies, TV shows, etc. One can try to ignore the Internet, smartphones, the metaverse, whatever technology, but doing so may mean you're just in denial. Look at what's happening to AM. Twenty years ago the old timers and their: 'There's nothing wrong with AM' were wrong.

 

[Greg Strickland]

Your comment about consumers is thought provoking. Power of the collective consumer is immense. Some may question or analyze consumer behavior, but it always prevails and is accepted.

 

[radiofan2023]

I would never get/use ATSC 3.0 because I don’t like the idea of more ads while I’m watching TV.

 

[Kelly A]

I would never get/use ATSC 3.0 because I don’t like the idea of more ads while I’m watching TV.

If the Commission wanted to sell off more UHF TV spectrum, there wouldn't be more ads. Just all your local OTA stations coming from one single ATSC 3.0 carrier. That's the case for ATSC 3.0 test markets currently. The only thing on there now are existing stations.
The whole concept of interactive ads was presented by the ATSC 3.0 working group/Sinclair. If you want to do interactive ads, the TV must also be connected to the Internet. Oh, and who's been doing interactive ads for years? You guessed it; the Internet.
Really groundbreaking stuff huh? No, not really.

 

[Greg Strickland]

Channeling ATSC 3.0: Less (DTV) is More (NEXTGEN TV) Part 1 (of 3) - PILOT

Television broadcast service based on ATSC 3.0 technology, or NEXTGEN TV, is better than ATSC-1 in virtually all respects. But the ATSC 3.0 transition is challenging because, unlike the original DTV transition, broadcasters do not have access to additional unused RF channels on which to transmit...

nabpilot.org

I think a fundamental question is balancing new technology and backwards compatibility. In television that ship sailed, and analog is no longer used. For decades over the air broadcasting technical system was stable and had a long shelf life. The basic building block of the Internet seems fairly stable, correct? What has changed are endpoint devices, and for most of the population frequent changes are considered normal and part of our culture.

 

[Greg Strickland]

If the Commission wanted to sell off more UHF TV spectrum, there wouldn't be more ads. Just all your local OTA stations coming from one single ATSC 3.0 carrier. That's the case for ATSC 3.0 test markets currently. The only thing on there now are existing stations.
The whole concept of interactive ads was presented by the ATSC 3.0 working group/Sinclair. If you want to do interactive ads, the TV must also be connected to the Internet. Oh, and who's been doing interactive ads for years? You guessed it; the Internet.
Really groundbreaking stuff huh? No, not really.

All local OTA stations in HD or SD on one ATSC 3.0 carrier?

 

[Kelly A]

All local OTA stations in HD or SD on one ATSC 3.0 carrier?

Yep. That's what's happening now in several markets testing:

NextGen TV: Using the Lighthouse Model to Make the Transition to ATSC 3.0 - NAB Amplify

Skip Pizzi, a key developer of the ATSC 3.0 digital TV standard, describes the ongoing transition to NextGen TV using the lighthouse model.

amplify.nabshow.com

 

[Kelly A]

I think a fundamental question is balancing new technology and backwards compatibility. In television that ship sailed, and analog is no longer used. For decades over the air broadcasting technical system was stable and had a long shelf life. The basic building block of the Internet seems fairly stable, correct? What has changed are endpoint devices, and for most of the population frequent changes are considered normal and part of our culture.

And the next steps appears to be 'wearable' technologies. Including smartphone glasses with headphones built in, heads up displays, or a smartphone pin, that projects the display on your hand or object rather than having to carry a physical device.

 

[radiofan2023]

If the Commission wanted to sell off more UHF TV spectrum, there wouldn't be more ads. Just all your local OTA stations coming from one single ATSC 3.0 carrier. That's the case for ATSC 3.0 test markets currently. The only thing on there now are existing stations.
The whole concept of interactive ads was presented by the ATSC 3.0 working group/Sinclair. If you want to do interactive ads, the TV must also be connected to the Internet. Oh, and who's been doing interactive ads for years? You guessed it; the Internet.
Really groundbreaking stuff huh? No, not really.

But I can block a lot of those with AdBlock Plus or other adblockers. There would be no way to do that with ATSC 3.0.

Plus the Digital Rights Management that's included in the signal prevents DVRing shows, which is probably part of the reason why people aren't adopting it.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Plus the Digital Rights Management that's included in the signal prevents DVRing shows, which is probably part of the reason why people aren't adopting it.

Nah. Consumers are mostly not aware of ATSC3 at all.

 

[Kelly A]

But I can block a lot of those with AdBlock Plus or other adblockers. There would be no way to do that with ATSC 3.0.

ATSC 3.0 currently has nothing more than existing TV stations and their existing commercial load. There are no extra commercials on existing ATSC 3.0 stations

Plus the Digital Rights Management that's included in the signal prevents DVRing shows, which is probably part of the reason why people aren't adopting it.

Actually, it's because most consumers either don't understand, don't care, or both. As I've stated before: Consumers don't adopt new broadcast standards because they're new. They only spend the money if they see/hear content they can't get anywhere else.

 

[davideduardo]

Consumers don't buy things like replacement radios to hear the same thing they can hear analog. Nor do consumers understand, let alone care about what type of modulation is being used to broadcast the same thing they already here. Content is, and has always been king. Not some broadcast technical standard.

During the earlier decade of both satellite radio and HD radio, I included questions about "digital" and "analog" and "stereo" and a number of other terms in thousands of listener research projects. The vast, huge, enormous percentage of adults (over 21) could not see any difference between "digital" and any other term. In focus groups, people either did not care "as that's just a way to sell me something" or "it all sounds the same to me".

Essentially, we found that "digital" did not help move satellite usage (I was programming 5 XM channels at the time) despite XM corporate's push on digital instead of the music variety and such. We found that, beyond "stereo", no term was effective in enhancing the appeal of broadcast radio; many people thought that AM sounded bad because it was not "stereo".

Pclover is under the impression that "digital" motivates buyers and consumers as a key factor. That is like saying (just to pick something out of the air) "radial tires", when they came out, were a key decision making factor in buying a car.

In fact, we don't buy an iPhone today because it is digital. We buy it because it is an iPhone and has a whole basket full of features, many, if not most of which, we will like and use.

This discussion is like the scam we see advertised on bad cable channels for "digital TV antennas".

 

[davideduardo]

Actually, it's because most consumers either don't understand, don't care, or both. As I've stated before: Consumers don't adopt new broadcast standards because they're new. They only spend the money if they see/hear content they can't get anywhere else.

And in radio, the technology of satellite was not a real motivator. But they put Howard Stern on satellite only, and got ten million or so subscribers.

My ISP offered me 3tb (both ways) FiOS connectivity. I looked at where this would benefit me and determined "nowhere" and gave it a pass.

 

[alok]

Will you be having crow?

Been gone, back now.

Radiofan2023 . . . that was funny - but no I didn't eat crow.
I feel no matter what some say, radio blew it, time will tell who is correct.

I’ve been listening to streaming stations since 1998. I’d never buy a digital radio if stations went all digital, I’d just stream or listen to even more podcasts.

Come on, you probably own an HD (Digital) radio now and DX at night trying to pick up the three stations, that are HD on the AM band.
After all you are RADIOfan2023 - or are you Streamfan2023 ????

 

[radiofan2023]

Been gone, back now.

Radiofan2023 . . . that was funny - but no I didn't eat crow.
I feel no matter what some say, radio blew it, time will tell who is correct.



Come on, you probably own an HD (Digital) radio now and DX at night trying to pick up the three stations, that are HD on the AM band.
After all you are RADIOfan2023 - or are you Streamfan2023 ????

Get ready to fall off your chair:

I don't have an HD radio

 

[Kelly A]

To use an admittedly anecdotal example; every one of our five cars including pickup has HD radio-capable factory radios. None of our family members have ever mentioned HD-Radio, nor care. All they know is when they press this physical or UI button, that a particular station plays. And I don't think there is any data that would indicate the vast majority of consumers know about digital or analog, other than they've heard the term. In other words; content is King, not what sort of modulation, digital or analog is being broadcast. Heck, I don't think most consumers who stream Spotify or IHR would even call it 'streaming'. All they know is when they take a certain action, they expect to hear a predictive result, no more than they think of what digital; modulation type their text message or phone call is using via smartphone.