[Autopilot]

BBC - Press Office - Press Release

Freeview HD: launch timetable revealed | Electricpig

Jolly good





(sorry if this is a repost, i did look)

[Sonic67]

I've still yet to hear of an actual HD box or TV. Shouldn't there be a something now other than the usual 'due at the end of the year' rumours.

[akiratoo]

There are already serveral threads about this
The word is that there will be no boxes etc until around spring of next year

[Bilbob]

everything I've read so far indicates that it will be next year before equipment is available...

What a waste of time!

[mattrixdesign2]

Fingers crossed for Sony to launch PlayTV HD first
I doubt they would be that quick.

[mrash]

I've done a quick search for associated hardware... this is what i found:-

DVB Direct - CubeRevo HD Twin Tuner Black DVB-T

It isnt totally clear as to wether it will be able to recieve HD Freeview...

[Sonic67]

Looking elsewhere I think the HD bit is via satellite.

Just to confuse things but other countries have their own HD systems which is what I kept finding last time I looked.

[SpaceMumps]

The HD stuff is via a Freeview HD box or Freeview HD TV. Available Spring/Easter 2010 respectively.

See Freeview HD

I just found about this today. My brand new TV is now out of date ! I was going to buy a PVR and thought my only problem was Freesat or Freeview!! I can't afford all this stuff!

So much for the 'green' movement!

[Autopilot]

I believe the HD trials in parts of the UK were using Humax and Sagem boxs. Of course there are none to buy right now, but all the usual companies will have stuff ready to go. I'm not sure what the availability of receivers has to do with anything.

[Sonic67]

I'd like to know the price and then go from there. Is the box going to be £100 or more? Things like that.

[200p]

They shouldn't launch it until it is 1080p50 capable.

[Autopilot]

Originally Posted by 200p

They shouldn't launch it until it is 1080p50 capable.

Why?

[200p]

Originally Posted by Autopilot

Why?

Because 1080p50 is great and 1080p25 is rubbish . 1080/50i (shot field based) is better than 1080p25 but not as good as 1080p50 which is the best. And the project manager of the EBU said 1080p50 doesn't need any more bitrate than 1080i25. Shooting and broadcasting at higher fps rate than 1080p50 would be even better but isn't going to be likely for a while in Europe. Because if they don't launch with 1080p50 capability, it will be harder to change to 1080p50 broadcasting later on (they'll have to wait around 7 years or whatever the expected lifetime of the original set top boxes are). Other broadcaster(s) have chosen 1080p50 or 1080p60 so if it isn't used for Freeview HD they'll get left behind. Sky are adding 1080p50 as part of their facilities and 1080p50 is already available on outside broadcast units.

[pdoherty76]

Freeview HD is a complete shambles. Why exactly was it so difficult to make sure boxes were available at the launch date?

Even freesat managed that.

Just wait until we actually see the picture quality..........I predict many threads titled "This isn't HD".

[grahamlthompson]

Originally Posted by 200p

Because 1080p50 is great and 1080p25 is rubbish . 1080/50i (shot field based) is better than 1080p25 but not as good as 1080p50 which is the best. And the project manager of the EBU said 1080p50 doesn't need any more bitrate than 1080i25. Shooting and broadcasting at higher fps rate than 1080p50 would be even better but isn't going to be likely for a while in Europe. Because if they don't launch with 1080p50 capability, it will be harder to change to 1080p50 broadcasting later on (they'll have to wait around 7 years or whatever the expected lifetime of the original set top boxes are). Other broadcaster(s) have chosen 1080p50 or 1080p60 so if it isn't used for Freeview HD they'll get left behind. Sky are adding 1080p50 as part of their facilities and 1080p50 is already available on outside broadcast units.

Where on earth did you get this idea, If you transmit twice as much data it needs twice the bandwidth using the same encoder technology. Much better to increase the bitrate as encoders get better. The best pictures you can currently get are not 1080p50 but 1080p24 from bluray. In any case what about the millions of HD TV's out there that won't display 1080p50 signals. I doubt that Sky will transmit in this format when only a tiny number of there subscribers can view it. And which broadcaster's use 1080p50 AFAIK there's a tiny few (maybe only 1) in the US on a satellite system ?

[Geofbob]

Originally Posted by pdoherty76

Freeview HD is a complete shambles. Why exactly was it so difficult to make sure boxes were available at the launch date?

Even freesat managed that.

Just wait until we actually see the picture quality..........I predict many threads titled "This isn't HD".

(a) There was no new technology involved - the Freesat box is basically a satellite receiver - only the soft/hardware to handle the EPG is new.

(b) I doubt very much that Freesat boxes were not tested - with the Freesat EPG being beamed from the Eurobird satellite - before being put on the market.

(c) Surely the position is that the Freeview HD service has not been launched, but is being tested - just as, for example, Windows 7 was tested for months before it was launched the other week.

(d) I tend to agree with your point about HD PQ - I think this is much more subjective than some would have us believe; and that those who rave about high quality HD may simply be used to low quality SD.

[seasidersrock]

Humax have just released details of the Fox-HD-T2, which will be available early in 2010....

[Peter Kendrick]

A couple of months ago I asked at a digital switchover caravan in Liverpool if I would be able to tune into Freeview HD with a new plasma TV. I was assured I would. I bought a new TV and now it appears it won't be Freeview HD compatable and I'll have to buy a Freeview HD box. What a shambles. The digital swithover is another shambles here in North Wales. I have had to retune 4 times so far!

[Aur]

Originally Posted by seasidersrock

Humax have just released details of the Fox-HD-T2, which will be available early in 2010....

Link please. Can't see anything on Humax UK.

[YellowSphere]

Originally Posted by 200p

And the project manager of the EBU said 1080p50 doesn't need any more bitrate than 1080i25.

He said that 1080p50 MPEG-4 uses as much bandwidth as 1080i50 MPEG-2, if memory serves.

I still believe that 1080i50 is the best compromise for all the different content we have available. 720p50 sport would be nice though.

Does anyone have any idea if broadcasters have the theoretical ability to broadcast different programming at different resolutions, or do they have to pick something and stick with it?

[seasidersrock]

Originally Posted by Aur

Link please. Can't see anything on Humax UK.

Sorry technical numpty...It,s on the home page of What Hi Fi.

[200p]

Originally Posted by grahamlthompson

Where on earth did you get this idea, If you transmit twice as much data it needs twice the bandwidth using the same encoder technology. Much better to increase the bitrate as encoders get better.

No, compressed 1080p50 does not take twice the bitrate as compressed 1080i25 (ie. 50 fields per sec). It only takes twice the bitrate if you record/transmit it uncompressed (about 3 Gb/s compared to 1.5 Gb/s or something like that). At this years HD masters conference, the project manager of the EBU said:

"If 1080p50 is used for transmission it "provides better quality at reasonable bitrates. You do not need higher bitrates than 1080i," he stated. Indeed, EBU testing has shown that users could get the same perceived quality at lower bitrates."

TVBEurope - Act now for 1080p50

Here's the EBU's "10 things you need to know about 1080p50" document:
http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/testmaterial...gs_1080p50.pdf
which says:

The DVB Project has incorporated 1080p/50 in its recommended distribution compression formats, which may be used for future broadcasting. Perhaps surprising at first, initial tests at the EBU have shown that 1080p/50 will not require more bitrate than 1080i/25 for broadcasts, but naturally it will show better picture quality on large displays. Ask an EBU Engineer for the detail of the results. So, whilst production systems will require more bit-rate than older HDTV formats, distribution should require the same bit-rate as 1080i/25, and only about 15-20% more than 720p/50.

The best pictures you can currently get are not 1080p50 but 1080p24 from bluray

1080p24 has less than half the motion samples as 1080/50i or 1080/60i or 720p50 or 720p60 or 1080p50 or 1080p60. The motion qualities of all the latter formats are more than twice as good as 1080p24, which judders/strobes with it's low temporal resolution.

Originally Posted by grahamlthompson

In any case what about the millions of HD TV's out there that won't display 1080p50 signals. I doubt that Sky will transmit in this format when only a tiny number of there subscribers can view it. And which broadcaster's use 1080p50 AFAIK there's a tiny few (maybe only 1) in the US on a satellite system ?

More European HDTVs can receive 1080p50 than can receive 1080p24 (that Blu-ray titles are mostly encoded at). Every European HDTV that can accept 1080p24 can also accept 1080p50 and 1080p60. The decoder boxes (just like Blu-ray players) can have outputs that will output in whatever format your TV accepts (eg. 1080p50, 1080/50i, 720p, 576i or whatever).

[200p]

Originally Posted by YellowSphere

He said that 1080p50 MPEG-4 uses as much bandwidth as 1080i50 MPEG-2, if memory serves.

I still believe that 1080i50 is the best compromise for all the different content we have available. 720p50 sport would be nice though.

Does anyone have any idea if broadcasters have the theoretical ability to broadcast different programming at different resolutions, or do they have to pick something and stick with it?

See my links on my post above. No mention is made by Hans Hoffman of mpeg2 vs mpeg4.

Also, see this document which says the same/similar thing (from the HD masters conference 2009):
http://tvbeurope.com/pdfs/HDEurope/2...009_P12-34.pdf

Article quote:

If broadcasters are to move to 1080p/50 production, they should start installing the necessary infrastructure now.

EBU Project Manager Hans Hoffman believes that broadcasters need to invest now as “the window of opportunity is closing,”
because once the current round of upgrades to HD are finished,
investment cycles mean that it could be some time before there is an opportunity to upgrade further

If 1080p/50 is used for transmission it “provides better quality at reasonable bit rates. You do not need higher bit rates than 1080i,” he stated. Indeed EBU testing has shown that you could get the same perceived quality at lower bit rates.

[pdoherty76]

Here is the Humax prototype that will be on the market in 2010.

Humax's new Freeview HD player pictured - Pocket-lint

Looks quite cool actually.

[pdoherty76]

Originally Posted by Geofbob

(a) There was no new technology involved - the Freesat box is basically a satellite receiver - only the soft/hardware to handle the EPG is new.

(b) I doubt very much that Freesat boxes were not tested - with the Freesat EPG being beamed from the Eurobird satellite - before being put on the market.

(c) Surely the position is that the Freeview HD service has not been launched, but is being tested - just as, for example, Windows 7 was tested for months before it was launched the other week.

(d) I tend to agree with your point about HD PQ - I think this is much more subjective than some would have us believe; and that those who rave about high quality HD may simply be used to low quality SD.

Freeview HD is being launched on December 2nd in the granada region. It is NOT a test, it will be broadcasting channels full time......to NOBODY.

Now what I find bizarre is that poverty-stricken ITV are going to waste loads of money broadcasting that stream when nobody can pick it up until 2 months later when the first boxes are sold. And of course the BBC are going to spend license fee money on broadcasting their channel to nobody.

Worse still, I expect BBC HD, Channel 4 HD and ITV HD will have decent christmas schedules, but nobody on freeview will see it because there are no boxes.

The boxes, if they had been on the market by december, would have probably sold like hot cakes over xmas.

[Mr_Sukebe]

There was mention of a recent PlayTV upgrade allowing for HD recording. I assumed that this was support people in other countries. I wonder if might also be preparing UK customers with a solution?

Does anyone know if this might require a new receiver box for the PlayTV?

[vassey]

Originally Posted by pdoherty76

Freeview HD is being launched on December 2nd in the granada region. It is NOT a test, it will be broadcasting channels full time......to NOBODY.

Now what I find bizarre is that poverty-stricken ITV are going to waste loads of money broadcasting that stream when nobody can pick it up until 2 months later when the first boxes are sold. And of course the BBC are going to spend license fee money on broadcasting their channel to nobody.

Worse still, I expect BBC HD, Channel 4 HD and ITV HD will have decent christmas schedules, but nobody on freeview will see it because there are no boxes.

The boxes, if they had been on the market by december, would have probably sold like hot cakes over xmas.

DVB-T2 has never, IIRC, been transmitted at full power, over an entire TV region and it's relays, and carried a full multiplex. A commercial launch the second the transmitter was switched on could be disastrous if there was a problem with any one of a number of the new technologies/systems in place, from distribution, recievers etc, to the fact ITV HD in it's Freeview form doesn't even exist yet. Surely it is best to spend a few months getting everything working correctly, with test units and engineers, before letting it loose on consumers?

[Aur]

Originally Posted by seasidersrock

Sorry technical numpty...It,s on the home page of What Hi Fi.

Thank you.

[Starburst]

Originally Posted by Mr_Sukebe

There was mention of a recent PlayTV upgrade allowing for HD recording. I assumed that this was support people in other countries. I wonder if might also be preparing UK customers with a solution?

Does anyone know if this might require a new receiver box for the PlayTV?

Yeah the EU countries that are using DVB-T and mpeg4 for HD are ideal for the PS3/PlayTV solution but in the UK the current PlayTV module will have to be replaced with a DVB-T2 version.

[pdoherty76]

Originally Posted by vassey

DVB-T2 has never, IIRC, been transmitted at full power, over an entire TV region and it's relays, and carried a full multiplex. A commercial launch the second the transmitter was switched on could be disastrous if there was a problem with any one of a number of the new technologies/systems in place, from distribution, recievers etc, to the fact ITV HD in it's Freeview form doesn't even exist yet. Surely it is best to spend a few months getting everything working correctly, with test units and engineers, before letting it loose on consumers?

Well that is another strange thing....there have been trials from crystal palace, both in 2006 when ITV HD transmitted the world cup in HD on terrestrial to testers, and last year when they did similar tests with the euros.

So with all that testing, including THREE years ago, how on earth have boxes taken so long to come to market?

With freesat, the boxes were sold before ITV HD went on air. I cannot see any logic in starting to broadcast months before we even have a box.