directv 4k

[slice1900]

How about Notre Dame and Michigan last week? Or the Masters this year?

The Masters only did a hole or two from fixed camera positions, the whole production wasn't in 4K so watching that channel was not even close to a substitute for watching the real coverage. Golf will probably be the last sport to do a full 4K broadcast because the playing field is so large, there are so many cameras, and some of them are handheld.

As for NBC's Notre Dame games, they may have addressed that with their affiliates somehow - and this may have had something to do with why Notre Dame games were carried in 4K two years ago, then not carried last year, and now are back again. Maybe NBC had some pushback from them and had to come to some sort of arrangement?

Not saying its impossible to do, but the affiliates are doing to demand compensation, and that will make it really difficult for the networks to do NFL games in 4K unless/until affiliates can carry games in 4K. I could see room to maybe do a few games here and there that are carried on O&O stations since there is no one to complain, so maybe people in markets like NYC or LA that have O&O stations might get one of their games carried in 4K and subject to blackout in the rest of the country...

 

[goaliebob99]

The Masters only did a hole or two from fixed camera positions, the whole production wasn't in 4K so watching that channel was not even close to a substitute for watching the real coverage. Golf will probably be the last sport to do a full 4K broadcast because the playing field is so large, there are so many cameras, and some of them are handheld.

As for NBC's Notre Dame games, they may have addressed that with their affiliates somehow - and this may have had something to do with why Notre Dame games were carried in 4K two years ago, then not carried last year, and now are back again. Maybe NBC had some pushback from them and had to come to some sort of arrangement?

Not saying its impossible to do, but the affiliates are doing to demand compensation, and that will make it really difficult for the networks to do NFL games in 4K unless/until affiliates can carry games in 4K. I could see room to maybe do a few games here and there that are carried on O&O stations since there is no one to complain, so maybe people in markets like NYC or LA that have O&O stations might get one of their games carried in 4K and subject to blackout in the rest of the country...

Majority of the ads during prime time are from NBC National with maybe one or two local ads slots for about 1 min of local advertising. I really don’t see local affiliates having an issue with it. If it really kicks off that will give local affiliates even more of a reason to go ATSC 3.0 to recoup that revenue by providing a 4k stream.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[slice1900]

You're assuming that locals going ATSC 3.0 will result in locals going 4K. I think that's unlikely, given what we've seen with ATSC 1.0. They could have had (and many of us did have at first) pristine quality HD, but instead they've given us lower quality HD to cram in more and more subchannels. I think ATSC 3.0 will mean more subchannels - some of them encrypted and requiring payment to view (ATSC 3.0 allows for this, as does the FCC, so long as stations still offer some free to air programming)

What's the incentive for local stations to offer 4K? They have a monopoly in their markets, so people can't watch someone else's CBS etc. affiliate. They won't make any more money from broadcasting 4K. Maybe they can make cable companies pay them a bit more to carry them in 4K, but giving cable a 4K channel doesn't mean they have to broadcast that off their towers.

I think the only way it happens nationwide is if the networks force affiliates to offer 4K broadcasts by a certain date. But what's THEIR incentive for doing so, when they aren't going to make any more money off 4K either? It isn't like they can charge advertisers more to advertise on a 4K channel. The economics that made HD upgrades a fait accompli don't exist for 4K...

 

[goaliebob99]

You're assuming that locals going ATSC 3.0 will result in locals going 4K. I think that's unlikely, given what we've seen with ATSC 1.0. They could have had (and many of us did have at first) pristine quality HD, but instead they've given us lower quality HD to cram in more and more subchannels. I think ATSC 3.0 will mean more subchannels - some of them encrypted and requiring payment to view (ATSC 3.0 allows for this, as does the FCC, so long as stations still offer some free to air programming)

What's the incentive for local stations to offer 4K? They have a monopoly in their markets, so people can't watch someone else's CBS etc. affiliate. They won't make any more money from broadcasting 4K. Maybe they can make cable companies pay them a bit more to carry them in 4K, but giving cable a 4K channel doesn't mean they have to broadcast that off their towers.

I think the only way it happens nationwide is if the networks force affiliates to offer 4K broadcasts by a certain date. But what's THEIR incentive for doing so, when they aren't going to make any more money off 4K either? It isn't like they can charge advertisers more to advertise on a 4K channel. The economics that made HD upgrades a fait accompli don't exist for 4K...

I'm not assuming.. They are.. Dallas, Phoenix, Cleveland, Chicago, ect. We will see the big 4's network programming in 4K with the MNT's and the CW's of the world doing multiple HD as there is more than enough bandwidth for these stations to do 6-8 subchannels in HD via HVEC. This will happen around 2020, more like 2022. The HVEC codec is getting even more efficient, like we saw with MPEG 4 we may see some serious gains in the amount of bandwidth not needed for 4K HDR in HVEC as the required bitrates will be decreased thanks more efficient versions of it. This build out is already happening as we see in Phoneix, with single frequency networks being tested in Dallas.

The incentive for going 4K is the fact that demand for it is growing and it enhances the viewing experience especially when you tack on HDR and immersive audio. The NFL will be a big push for it. Believe it or not that still holds some value to the broadcasters. The issue with cable is people are cutting the cord. When they launch their own 4K channels, on their OTA broadcasts they are gaining all those eyeballs along with the VOD option ATSC 3.0 brings, makes a really compelling case to bypass the local cable companies. You can also tap on a youtube.tv type of service or in the case of CBS, All Access, you can stream that video content direct to the consumer.

The networks would be much willing to sell directly to you than through the Comcast's or Dish Network's of the world, and want to bring a premium experience direct to the consumer. The other incentive that NO ONE is talking about is by offering 4K they are using the valuable bandwidth the government keeps auctioning off. This will be able to give them ammo to go back to the government to reclaim that bandwidth or make an argument against any more auctions. They know its an investment, but that tipping point is coming where we see the industry go into full transition mode.

 

[slice1900]

They are building out ATSC 3.0, and SFNs are for ATSC 3.0 and have nothing to do with 4K. Maybe you're right, but I've seen nothing concrete about any affiliates with plans to go 4K. All they talk about is going ATSC 3.0, and even that will be a long process because it will be many years before the government allows dropping ATSC 1.0 signals and they aren't giving them new frequencies to run ATSC 1.0 & 3.0 at the same time. So they'll have to share channels with other stations in the area, meaning ATSC 3.0 will have to get by with fewer channels than ATSC 1.0 currently has.

Not that any of this will matter for Directv satellite or Dish customers, as they have no way to deliver 4K locals. An ATSC 3.0 LCC would be the only hope, if you live within range of the transmitters (which will be helped by SFNs, assuming they are deployed in all DMAs and not just here and there)

 

[Bruce]

I am surprised ESPN is not available in 4K yet. All their in studio stuff is done in 4K and has been done that way for a few years now.

Found this-

“Our mission, which is to entertain through sports, gest easier every day thanks to technology. Today, users can access any event from any device and anywhere. For that experience to be even richer, in 2018 we will offer content with 4k quality and with 5.1 dolby surround sound,” said Guillermo Tabanera, Senior VP and General Manager of ESPN Latin America, during the event.

I know it is Latin America but I read that they will be offering 4K online only and I would assume the same here in the states.

ESPN to offer 4K content | NexTV News

 

[slice1900]

They might be planning on doing their 4K testing using their new online streaming service, rather than random 4K broadcasts that are only available on satellite and a couple cable companies. Good way to get more subscribers if they can make people who want 4K pay for ESPN+ to get it.

"We will offer content" just means there will be at least 4K event this year. Though as that statement was made right around the second round of ESPN layoffs in late November, so take it with a grain of salt.

 

[RichManitoba]

EVERY Notre Dame game is on a 4K channel and we can't get NFL or NHL games? NBC was the NotreDame Broadcasting Company, now DirecTV is?

Sent from my SM-T350 using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[slice1900]

EVERY Notre Dame game is on a 4K channel and we can't get NFL or NHL games? NBC was the NotreDame Broadcasting Company, now DirecTV is?

Sent from my SM-T350 using the SatelliteGuys app!

Only Notre Dame's home games, due to their NBC contract.

 

[rad]

IIRC there were some NHL games on the 4K channel last year.

 

[RichManitoba]

Only Notre Dame's home games, due to their NBC contract.

Thanks, but still .



Sent from my SM-T350 using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[BrianMis]

I'm thinking of going to DirecTv and I want 4K. I've looked around the forum here and found a couple of references about how to get it if you are already a subscriber.

But how do I go about it if I am a new subscriber? Putting the order together online I didn't see any options for it. Any guidance would be appreciated.

 

[raoul5788]

I'm thinking of going to DirecTv and I want 4K. I've looked around the forum here and found a couple of references about how to get it if you are already a subscriber.

But how do I go about it if I am a new subscriber? Putting the order together online I didn't see any options for it. Any guidance would be appreciated.

Call and tell them you have a 4k tv and want 4k service. They will try to get you into an HS17 and 4k client. I think you are better off with the HR54, unless you want two 4k streams at the same time.

 

[BrianMis]

Call and tell them you have a 4k tv and want 4k service. They will try to get you into an HS17 and 4k client. I think you are better off with the HR54, unless you want two 4k streams at the same time.

Thanks Chip, I'm thinking I won't need the client as I have a Samsung Q8FN TV. Unless it's better to have a wired client. Would want the HR54, I think the HS17 is FUGLY.

 

[raoul5788]

Thanks Chip, I'm thinking I won't need the client as I have a Samsung Q8FN TV. Unless it's better to have a wired client. Would want the HR54, I think the HS17 is FUGLY.

I agree it's fugly! You could use the rvu in the tv instead of the client. It will still cost $7/month. The one issue I see with using rvu is that the tv manufacturer isn't likely to update it much if at all.

 

[slice1900]

Thanks Chip, I'm thinking I won't need the client as I have a Samsung Q8FN TV. Unless it's better to have a wired client. Would want the HR54, I think the HS17 is FUGLY.

IMHO it is better to have the client than to use your TV's RVU. The RVU client is often behind where Directv's are, and depending on smart TVs in general is IMHO dumb because they always cease updates after a couple years at most. Your Q8FN will be no exception, you'll see your last update sometime in 2020, if not before. Then all the apps in it like RVU, Netflix etc. will slowly get more behind until they stop working entirely.

 

[rad]

Agree with going with a DIRECTV client vs RVU client in the TV. I've tried RVU in the past and just too many little issues with it that DIRECTV says is Samsung's problem and Samsung saying it's DIRECTV's, eliminate the finger pointing when possible.

As for the HS17 vs HR54 debate, there are some things I miss like OTA support (which might be coming back for the HS17 with the new LCC), ESPN3 access, no idea what the HS17 is doing until the point where a client is working. Some things I like, it's hidden away in a closet with me router and on the same UPS with my networking stuff. Plus like having the additional tuners over the HR54. You can get more tuners if you get a HR24/34 to go with the HR54 but then you have multiple series links to manage plus if you use remote access you can only access recording on the HR54, none of the other DVR's.

 

[Jimbo]

I was curiuos, RVU has been out for awhile now ....
Do all RVU's handle 4k, as in serve as the 4k portion that the client does now, because you can still get a C61, that doesn't do 4k.

 

[raoul5788]

I was curiuos, RVU has been out for awhile now ....
Do all RVU's handle 4k, as in serve as the 4k portion that the client does now, because you can still get a C61, that doesn't do 4k.

In a 4k set I can only assume the rvu is 4k compliant.

 

[jcrandall]

I have a 2016 Samsung and use RVU, it works great for 4K, just watched a baseball game and two football games in the past couple weeks. I would assume any 4K set that does RVU will do 4K, but there is a list here:
https://www.att.com/esupport/article.html#!/directv/KM1040608?gsi=5WfWaCA
(Note it doesn't show the 2018 models yet. Also, from everything I've ready I would avoid RVU on 2014 or 2015 sets, at least on Samsung).

HS17 seems more stable than it was. I've had it for about a month, had a little trouble getting it up and running (couple reboots), but after the second day have had no trouble at all. Haven't rebooted, haven't had any issues with the clients, performance is about the same as the HR54 I had two years ago. Nice to have 7 tuners over 5, and 2TB over 1TB. I think most of the bugs have been ironed out at this point.

As for RVU vs. C61k, most prefer the C61k, I've found that it entirely depends on the TV. I have a KS8000 which is a 2016 Samsung higher end set, and it works really well. I've never used a C61k, but I have used the C51, and it is comparable, no significant difference in my experience.