# Directv 4K Channel?



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

I got an email from Directv last night advertising the first full time 4K channel. I haven't heard any talk of this, is it streaming or over Sat?


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

How about checking the other 17 threads about it? 
http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/220039-directv-4k-launch-%E2%80%9Cearly-2016%E2%80%9D/


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

yeah !!! go get it; Tiger


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

jclangston said:


> I got an email from Directv last night advertising the first full time 4K channel. I haven't heard any talk of this, is it streaming or over Sat?


I got one also, Think it was a SCAM
Mine also hinted of a NEW 4-K Receiver ??
""Upgrade Now: 4K Ultimate Experience"" (Title of my e-mail)
They made it sound like there is a NEW Receiver you can UP-Grade to.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

ragweed10 said:


> I got one also, Think it was a SCAM
> Mine also hinted of a NEW 4-K Receiver ??
> ""Upgrade Now: 4K Ultimate Experience"" (Title of my e-mail)
> They made it sound like there is a NEW Receiver you can UP-Grade to.


HR54 and either DirecTV Ready 4K TV or a 4K TV and a C61k. It's not a scam.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

dpeters11 said:



> HR54 and either DirecTV Ready 4K TV or a 4K TV and a C61k. It's not a scam.


Can you explain why we need a C-61k mini, if a HR-54 will do the job ?
It has also been said a C-61k will work with a HR-44 ?
If that is true, why do we need to UP-Grade to a HR-54 ?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Hr54 records 4k, but can't play it back. RVU and clients can't operate without a genie, so have to have both. 

Sent from my Priv using Tapatalk


----------



## Whiskey River (Apr 7, 2009)

dpeters11 said:


> Hr54 records 4k, but can't play it back. RVU and clients can't operate without a genie, so have to have both.
> 
> Sent from my Priv using Tapatalk


why would they design a receiver that can only play 4K using a client, everyone knows that the clients are not
as fast as the main genie box. If they can build a client then they technically have hardware that can do it,
but why only make a client to do the work, then theres the additional cost. What happens to those people
that only have ONE TV, and its a 4K, they get an extra client charge. Sounds like they designed the setup
to charge for extra equipment. NO 4K for me , well I don't even have a 4K TV.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

Whiskey River said:


> why would they design a receiver that can only play 4K using a client, everyone knows that the clients are not
> as fast as the main genie box. If they can build a client then they technically have hardware that can do it,
> but why only make a client to do the work, then theres the additional cost. What happens to those people
> that only have ONE TV, and its a 4K, they get an extra client charge. Sounds like they designed the setup
> to charge for extra equipment. NO 4K for me , well I don't even have a 4K TV.


Sounds like a good Plan to me. 
Up Grade to a HR-54 so you can Record a 4-K show but can't watch it.
Good chance you will get the benefit of getting HOOKED into a NEW (2) year contract.
Where do I sign-up ? Can't wait.
Better yet, make sure you have ONLY (1) 4-K TV, then you can be assured you will get NAILED for (2) Receiver charges.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I wouldn't say they designed the system for it, we are VERY early in 4K in terms of programming, particularly for things that aren't On Demand. It's the way it is now, I don't think this is the way it will always be going forward.

Yes, there would be a two year contract. I wasn't exactly happy with that either as the installer didn't do anything I couldn't have done if they shipped me the equipment and I'd have only gotten a one year.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

I knew that the streaming 4K was available. Their advertisement email is very misleading. This is the exact headline "Watch the first full-time 4K Ultra HD Channel from DIRECTV" To me, thatsounds like there is a channel available over Sat.


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

There is Channel 104 has launched or is here shortly It will require a HR54 and a C61 Plus Ultimate or higher package


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

jclangston said:


> I knew that the streaming 4K was available. Their advertisement email is very misleading. This is the exact headline "Watch the first full-time 4K Ultra HD Channel from DIRECTV" To me, thatsounds like there is a channel available over Sat.


EXACTLY my thoughts.
They also have an ad that says this: "There are always at least three 4K movies (pre-loaded on the user's DVR) to watch instantly
OH Yea, Where, and since when ? 
and here is another I got this morning, Sounds like a NEW Receiver: Upgrade Now: 4K Ultimate Experience
What gives ?


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

ragweed10 said:


> EXACTLY my thoughts.
> They also have an ad that says this: "There are always at least three 4K movies (pre-loaded on the user's DVR) to watch instantly
> OH Yea, Where, and since when ?
> and here is another I got this morning, Sounds like a NEW Receiver: Upgrade Now: 4K Ultimate Experience
> What gives ?


You are all over the damn place.... If you have 4K active on your account, you can go to the 4K on demand channel 1102 There you can see which movies are pre loaded and which you have to download to watch

And yes. Unless you have a 4K RVU TV you will need a C61 to watch 4K. a HR44 will work for on demand to support the C61. But a HR54 will be required to support Linear 4K channels. The HR54 is basically a gateway to the C61 for 4K


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

compnurd said:


> You are all over the damn place.... If you have 4K active on your account, you can go to the 4K on demand channel 1102 There you can see which movies are pre loaded and which you have to download to watch
> 
> And yes. Unless you have a 4K RVU TV you will need a C61 to watch 4K. a HR44 will work for on demand to support the C61. But a HR54 will be required to support Linear 4K channels. The HR54 is basically a gateway to the C61 for 4K


Read it Closer, It says: pre-loaded on the user's DVR. Nothing about channel 1102.
What is the difference between Linear 4K channels and 4K ?


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

ragweed10 said:


> Read it Closer, It says: pre-loaded on the user's DVR. Nothing about channel 1102.
> What is the difference between Linear 4K channels and 4K ?


Yes pre loaded goes with the on demand channel When you get to channel 1102 if you have a Green Play button next to the program it indicates it is pre loaded. Linear 4K is how the future 4K channels will be transmitted


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Generally, the only users that would get a n HR54 is for 4k. I replaced my HR34 not long ago, got a 44.

All this is more in preparation for April, starting with the Masters in 4K.

At some point a new LNB will be needed, so probably will be fairly limited until then.

And add the fact that there are no actual channels that offer 4K, this is all done through DirecTV directly.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

compnurd said:


> Yes pre loaded goes with the on demand channel When you get to channel 1102 if you have a Green Play button next to the program it indicates it is pre loaded. Linear 4K is how the future 4K channels will be transmitted


Sounds like Only Pay On Demand channels have it available. 
Are they from the Satellite or Internet feeds ?
How will Linear 4K work ?
Thur the Internet, off the NEW DTV Satellites or ?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

This has already been explained in the multiple other 4K threads, including the one I WANT MORE linked to in the second post of this thread.

The linear 4K channels are from the satellites. They're currently in test mode and will launch next week. The first live event will be 4K coverage of the Masters golf tournament next weekend.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

dumbest thread I would say


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

KyL416 said:


> This has already been explained in the multiple other 4K threads, including the one I WANT MORE linked to in the second post of this thread.The linear 4K channels are from the satellites. They're currently in test mode and will launch next week. The first live event will be 4K coverage of the Masters golf tournament next weekend.


If I read an article correctly a few weeks ago, a 4K linear channel will launch April 4 and the Masters to follow starting April 7.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

ep1974 said:


> If I read an article correctly a few weeks ago, a 4K linear channel will launch April 4 and the Masters to follow starting April 7.


Right, but those first few days won't be live. Unless they air the practice rounds


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

dpeters11 said:


> Right, but those first few days won't be live. Unless they air the practice rounds


Here's the link to the website I saw.

http://www.twice.com/news/home-satellite/directv-launch-live-4k-ultra-hd-channel-april-4/60702


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

P Smith said:


> dumbest thread I would say


Which one ?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

A summary of what Gary recently posted in the TPN map thread for the linear 4K channels in test mode for launch early next month.

A 4K movie, original series, and live event channel. A 4K movie and event channel. And a PPV event channel.

NET 10	Test *DTV4K Ch. 104	CONUS xpndr 13 D14 @99W - The ultimate in home entertainment has arrived. Watch movies, original series and live events in nearly four times the resolution of HD.

NET 10	Test *CINE4K Ch. 105 CONUS xpndr 15	D14 @99W -	The ultimate in home entertainment has arrived. Watch movies and events in nearly four times the resolution of HD.

NET 10	Test *PPV4K	Ch. 106	CONUS xpndr 11 D14 @99W - The ultimate in home entertainment has arrived. Watch events in nearly four times the resolution of HD.

Indeed, none of these are on Reverse Band. But all on Ka band xpndrs from D14 for now.


Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jclangston said:


> I knew that the streaming 4K was available. Their advertisement email is very misleading. This is the exact headline "Watch the first full-time 4K Ultra HD Channel from DIRECTV" To me, thatsounds like there is a channel available over Sat.


D* lies on its commercials and ads quite frequently. Business as usual.

Rich


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

How is it a lie though? Ok, so it's not live yet, but they want to get customers that want to watch the Masters in 4K ready beforehand, as it's next week.


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

dpeters11 said:


> How is it a lie though? Ok, so it's not live yet, but they want to get customers that want to watch the Masters in 4K ready beforehand, as it's next week.


I agree with you, no big deal.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

ragweed10 said:


> What is the difference between Linear 4K channels and 4K ?


Look up the word linear and learn something.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

RunnerFL said:


> Look up the word linear and learn something.


And this may help, particularly for the layman. ..

http://blog.solidsignal.com/content.php/4291-NICE-AND-EASY-What-is-linear-TV

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

And I will say this:

Are the 4K requirements a bit cumbersome and in some cases artificial (package requirement)? Yes.
But those with 4K for live events and linear TV are very early adopters. DirecTV's setup may be a bit convoluted, but what other provider will be airing a major sporting event in 4K next week?
RVU is also more complex than I thought. Maybe I'm just a really lucky edge case.

So, how about the Tour de France?


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> And this may help, particularly for the layman. ..
> 
> http://blog.solidsignal.com/content.php/4291-NICE-AND-EASY-What-is-linear-TV
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Thanks for the input.
Some people think I am from the OLD School. 
I grew up with REAL CARS, 1960's etc. Colors, Fins, Knobs & Ignition Keys, (Could turn the car off) GOOD LOOKING, FUN, Made in USA, gave Americans jobs, etc. (NOT these cheap "Ball Cars", that ALL look the SAME)
REAL TELEPHONES, Cords, COLORS, WORKED ALL the Time, Never loose them, DON'T need to get a NEW one at Apple's whim for $$$$$$$.
People communicated with each other, NO TEXTING 24/7, at dinners, people used to know there was someone else eating with them. When DRIVING, people were polite and paid attention to DRIVING. Now they TEXT and see how fast they can kill them-self and a few others, walking - paying NO attention to anything, waiting to walk into a manhole, tree, or a Bus to run you over.
REAL COMPUTERS, that sit on a Desk. NOT a HIGH Priced "TINY" thing (Cell Phone) you need a tooth pick to send an e-mail, or put ALL your personal information into so some yahoo walking down the street could rob you blind, ruin your credit and make you spend the rest of your life trying to recoup all your personal and financial information.
TV'S, you could watch with an antenna and NOT have to RE-Finance your House to get JUST the channels you want.
BEST part from the OLD Days: You could pick-up the PHONE and talk to someone in ENGLISH and get your question answered in short order.
So when I ask about Linear TV don't say: Look up the word linear and learn something. This 4-K confusion is the Best yet. Maybe it will go the way of 3-D
Act like HoTat2.
Thanks again HoTat 2


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Yeah, back in the day when you had to lease your phone from the phone company, and maybe hear your neighbor when you pick up the phone. And good luck stealing my phone and getting my data, it will be wiped in short order.

OTA still works as well, it's even HD 

I do agree about the styling of cars back then, along with things like art deco architecture.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

dpeters11 said:


> Yeah, back in the day when you had to lease your phone from the phone company, and maybe hear your neighbor when you pick up the phone. And good luck stealing my phone and getting my data, it will be wiped in short order.
> 
> OTA still works as well, it's even HD
> 
> I do agree about the styling of cars back then, along with things like art deco architecture.


Thanks for the acknowledgement.
The REAL Phones were only a $ 1.00 a month, 1st one included in the apx. $ 6.00 Bill
Party lines went south about 1960's ?
Those were the days.
yea, OTA still works GOOD & in HD.


----------



## Whiskey River (Apr 7, 2009)

HoTat2 said:


> Indeed, none of these are on Reverse Band. But all on Ka band xpndrs from D14 for now.


Hrmph!!!!!!!, and when I heard them saying we launched a new satellite to provide 4K TV I was
laughing and saying no way they would use a new satellite that is not being used for much
of anything D15 that is for 4K TV. Whats going to happen to the spaceways once they unload
them, is it to mirror puerto rico programming for signal quality?


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

MODS??????????????????????????????


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Whiskey River said:


> Hrmph!!!!!!!, and when I heard them saying we launched a new satellite to provide 4K TV I was
> laughing and saying no way they would use a new satellite that is not being used for much
> of anything D15 that is for 4K TV. Whats going to happen to the spaceways once they unload
> them, is it to mirror puerto rico programming for signal quality?


They aren't using reverse band for 4K yet, because very few reverse band LNBs have been installed so far. Once they have sufficient production quality, and enough 4K channels that it makes a difference, they'll use reverse band for 4K. I doubt it will be required until the end of the year at the earliest, but it is coming. D14 also broadcasts reverse band.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

However, there is really nothing unique to 4K about utilizing the Reverse Band payloads of D14 and 15 as all the press releases and statements by DIRECTV officials appeared to suggest. It's just additional RF spectrum which can carry SD, HD, or UltraHD TV and in any compression format. DIRECTV did (or still does) the same misleading advertising about the Ka band as though technically necessary for HD.

Also, don't know what the future of the Spaceways are once unloaded. SW2 at 99W has already been emptied and now dark for a good while now according to the system information tables. SW1 at 103W appeared to be headed in the same direction, until the transfers suddenly stopped and reversed slightly with some local markets placed back on it and it's channels to PR stopped transferring off as well. Not sure what happened.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

When they originally applied for the reverse band licenses the writeup they supplied to the FCC stated it would be used for 3D, back when some people actually thought 3D was going to be a thing.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

They may leave what launches in the next few weeks on those satelites and use the bss for other channels as they come online too. We just don't know. 

At this point I almost expect mirroring of 95 to be a higher on the list of reasons for them wanting to get the bss lnb out than 4K.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> They may leave what launches in the next few weeks on those satelites and use the bss for other channels as they come online too. We just don't know.
> 
> At this point I almost expect mirroring of 95 to be a higher on the list of reasons for them wanting to get the bss lnb out than 4K.


I agree, I think we may see mirrors of 95 on reverse band before 4K channels using it. It isn't like there is going to be a bunch of 4K channels coming in the next year so their Ka capacity can satisfy that and they can roll out reverse band LNBs at their own pace. They'll also lock out customers in MDUs or who have a lot of receivers if they start using reverse band too soon - they have to have the legacy reverse band LNB ready, and a new SWM switch.

I'm not sure why they would leave what launches now on Ka once they start adding 4K channels like you suggest though. I think they'll double up each 4K channel at that time, one on Ka and one on reverse band. The one on Ka will start showing messages "please contact Directv for an upgrade to continue receiving 4K content" for a few months and then shut them off. Basically like they did when they started using Ka band for HD channels, except this time the upgrade is much easier since it is just swapping a LNB instead of replacing the dish and receivers!

They seem to be doing the same thing with the numbering of the 4K channels now they did for the number of the original MPEG2 HD channels - putting them in a special temporary lower range. When they add 4K channels to reverse band, I'd expect them to follow their usual numbering scheme, so next year's Masters 4K channel(s) would be in the 700s somewhere where the Masters channels have historically been.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

DIRECTV 4K information for the technicians posted by Scott today over on satelliteguys.us. Thought I'd pass it along, may be helpful ...









Then the following directives went out to technicians today ...

Note: The understanding for the 13 tuner limitation for the Reverse Band LNB by other posters there in the know, is that the firmware to support the known 21 program tuner limit just hasn't been made official yet.

I don't quite understand it myself.



> Following a successful pilot, we are excited to announce that the Digital Reverse Band 3 LNB will be available to use nationally as of April 7.
> 
> Effective April 7, some work orders will systemically require the installation of the Digital Reverse Band 3 LNB when there are 4K assets on the work order. While the Digital Reverse Band 3 LNB won't be a technical requirement to deliver the 4K channels being launched in April since they are initially being delivered via Ka-Band, it is going to play a pivotal role in the company's future 4K plans; as such, we are proactively future-proofing customers with this equipment. The introduction of the work order requirement to install Digital Reverse Band 3 on 4K work orders now ensures that customers will be able to continue enjoying 4K channels without a future LNB swap.
> 
> ...


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> DIRECTV 4K information for the technicians posted by Scott today over on satelliteguys.us. Thought I'd pass it along, may be helpful ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


WOW !!


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

Hopefully it won't be too long of a wait for the Digital Reverse Band 5 LNB. Also I noticed there's two HR-54's mentioned in the Genie models... uuhhhhh I hope DirecTV provided me the right one. Otherwise I'm not going to be too happy.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Read the second column. It's both for the HR54, the difference is that people with a HR54 won't get channel 104 if they don't subscribe to Ultimate or higher and will be limited to VOD and the 4K PPV.

To explain it a little simpler, starting April 7th, Reverse Band LNBs will be standard for any installer with a work order involving 4K service, unless they have a requirement for programming from 119 (Spanish, Chinese, some Sonic Tap channels, and SD only locals in the few markets where they didn't add MPEG4 SD mirrors). People who need/want programming from 119 will have to wait for the 5 LNB version comes out. The reverse band LNB will not be required for these 3 channels so these people will not be missing out on content, they're just starting the rollout now so they'll have less to do when the reverse band LNB becomes a requirement and they have to swap LNBs for all the exsiting 4K subscribers.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

The 13 tuner thing makes no sense, but it has never been clear if the mention of firmware refers to receiver firmware or firmware in the LNB itself. While it is certainly possible there is firmware in the LNB that can be updated, it would be interesting to know how that's being accomplished. The only way I can think of is for a receiver to dribble it out slowly at 39 kbps via the SWM channel. It has no tuner so it can't update directly from the satellite.

I think it far more likely there is no software being updated in the LNB, and it is the receiver that needs to be updated to know the LNB has 21 tuners instead of 13. But haven't all receivers been updated by now? I don't know why they would think there are still receivers out there running firmware several months old that can't handle all 21 tuners....maybe the ones that installers get if they've been sitting in a warehouse long enough?

Anyone have a D12 or R16 able to tell me if they have DSWM options in the satellite setup? I don't think they've received any firmware updates in a while - I know the H20s haven't since Sept 2013 (unfortunately redh dropped the historic info that showed this) Directv's policy may be to replace outdated equipment rather than provide firmware that handles the new LNBs so they might not be worried about those three models.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> The 13 tuner thing makes no sense, but it has never been clear if the mention of firmware refers to receiver firmware or firmware in the LNB itself. While it is certainly possible there is firmware in the LNB that can be updated, it would be interesting to know how that's being accomplished. The only way I can think of is for a receiver to dribble it out slowly at 39 kbps via the SWM channel. It has no tuner so it can't update directly from the satellite.
> 
> *I think it far more likely there is no software being updated in the LNB*, and it is the receiver that needs to be updated to know the LNB has 21 tuners instead of 13. But haven't all receivers been updated by now? I don't know why they would think there are still receivers out there running firmware several months old that can't handle all 21 tuners....maybe the ones that installers get if they've been sitting in a warehouse long enough?
> 
> Anyone have a D12 or R16 able to tell me if they have DSWM options in the satellite setup? I don't think they've received any firmware updates in a while - I know the H20s haven't since Sept 2013 (unfortunately redh dropped the historic info that showed this) Directv's policy may be to replace outdated equipment rather than provide firmware that handles the new LNBs so they might not be worried about those three models.


wrong thinking

there is an OS in DLNB and it's could be updated; coupled with a provision to keep two versions ...


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

HoTat2 said:


> DIRECTV 4K information for the technicians posted by Scott today over on satelliteguys.us. Thought I'd pass it along, may be helpful ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The table totally misleading regular users in the wrong requirement of RB DLNB who are looking for Masters in 4k !
and the site is spreading such info not first time


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> wrong thinking
> 
> there is an OS in DLNB and it's could be updated; coupled with a provision to keep two versions ...


I never doubted it could be updated, I just don't see any evidence that it is actually happening. What would be the purpose for having it support only 13 tuners at release? And if so, why did texasbrit find his supported 21 when he got one of the very first batch released?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

if I could get the DLNB open on my workbench ...

as to 13 vs 21 channels, no I don't have any evidence of possible upgrade, exclude facts of that chip capabilities what I found inside and its specs posted by you


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> The table totally misleading regular users in the wrong requirement of RB DLNB who are looking for Masters in 4k !
> and the site is spreading such info not first time


Well, in fairness to satelliteguys, the chart as well as the rest of the info. posted was not intended for the "regular users," but for internal use by DIRECTV technicians. However, Scott felt it also had a lot of relevant info. to the subscribers as well.

And while I agree that there is some confusion from with the chart, when taken together with the rest of the written material it's just saying that though initially the Reverse Band LNB will not be required. Eventually it will be to continue receiving the 4K related channels 104 (if you have an eligible programming package), 105, and 106. So will begin future proofing customers for that day now by mandating the installation of RB LNBs on all 4K installs (minus the exceptions stipulated) beginning on April 7th.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

KyL416 said:


> Read the second column. It's both for the HR54, the difference is that people with a HR54 won't get channel 104 if they don't subscribe to Ultimate or higher and will be limited to VOD and the 4K PPV.


Yep just now noticed that. Ugh... I shouldn't post stuff when I'm half asleep. And I do have several channels that are on 119 as well (UniMas, CCTV News).


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

HoTat2 said:


> Well, in fairness to satelliteguys, the chart as well as the rest of the info. posted was not intended for the "regular users," but for internal use by DIRECTV technicians. However, Scott felt it also had a lot of relevant info. to the subscribers as well.
> 
> And while I agree that there is some confusion from with the chart, when taken together with the rest of the written material it's just saying that though initially the Reverse Band LNB will not be required. Eventually it will be to continue receiving the 4K related channels 104 (if you have an eligible programming package), 105, and 106. So will begin future proofing customers for that day now by mandating the installation of RB LNBs on all 4K installs (minus the exceptions stipulated) beginning on April 7th.


they are all for hype and bring an attraction to the site  In case of posting such controversial part, normal poster would preface it by own warning.
We knew someday RB bands will be using by DTV, just not this April. No way all golf addicts will have RB DLNB so soon. As MDU users and having 5 LNBFs setup.


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> I never doubted it could be updated, I just don't see any evidence that it is actually happening. What would be the purpose for having it support only 13 tuners at release? And if so, why did texasbrit find his supported 21 when he got one of the very first batch released?


maybe as slice1900 suggested there are some receivers that for some reason can't support the 21 tuners yet, D15, R16 maybe? Certainly the NR on all the Genies and DVRs work with 21 tuners OK. I


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

Can't thank YOU ALL for this Important Information.
I don't think I would have survived with-OUT it.
Thanks again


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> if I could get the DLNB open on my workbench ...
> 
> as to 13 vs 21 channels, no I don't have any evidence of possible upgrade, exclude facts of that chip capabilities what I found inside and its specs posted by you


I've considered buying one off eBay just to open it up, but I figure at some point someone here will have one go bad on him and open it up for pictures.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

P Smith said:


> they are all for hype and bring an attraction to the site  In case of posting such controversial part, normal poster would preface it by own warning.
> We knew someday RB bands will be using by DTV, just not this April. No way all golf addicts will have RB DLNB so soon. As MDU users and having 5 LNBFs setup.


'They' are not any more about hype than here.

And the chart and post was spot on and easy enough to read and understand.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

texasbrit said:


> maybe as slice1900 suggested there are some receivers that for some reason *can't support the 21 tuners yet*, D15, R16 maybe? Certainly the NR on all the Genies and DVRs work with 21 tuners OK. I


nope,
if its FW doesn't support Advanced DLNB, then it will fallback to old SWiM protocol and will work just fine !


----------



## twizt3dkitty (Aug 29, 2009)

All reverseband lnbs are capable of 21 useable tuners +1 shared network tuner. There is a Reverseband 5, it's just not being piloted yet, and there is also a Reverseband lnb for mdus. Here's you first new piece of information. The mdu lnb does use 6 wires and will require a dswm module. Don't shoot the messenger guys.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

twizt3dkitty said:


> ... Here's you first new piece of information. The mdu lnb does use 6 wires and will require a dswm module. Don't shoot the messenger guys.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


Ahhhh ... finally the first piece of new information on the long debated legacy RB LNB.

So they are going with increased multiline scheme instead of a frequency shift method of placing the LNB converted Reverse Band band somewhere above 2150 MHz.

But I would think a new ODU with a wider LNB support arm would be required to mount an LNB with 6 female output F connectors and to run 6 coax cables (or 3 coax pairs) through it.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

The OLD HD System doesn't look so bad.
and the Picture is Great


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

ragweed10 said:


> The OLD HD System doesn't look so bad.
> and the Picture is Great


Well then 4K is going to amaze you!


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

Who are you going to get to hook it up ?
I am a TV Geek.
It is too complicated for the average Installer


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

twizt3dkitty said:


> All reverseband lnbs are capable of 21 useable tuners +1 shared network tuner. There is a Reverseband 5, it's just not being piloted yet, and there is also a Reverseband lnb for mdus. Here's you first new piece of information. The mdu lnb does use 6 wires and will require a dswm module. Don't shoot the messenger guys.


Since the analog SWM modules are capable of supporting a six coax LNB, it would seem to add a lot of unnecessary up front expense to large MDUs being forced to upgrade all SWM switches at once, rather than over time as needed by the unit a SWM switch serves. I thought there was a good chance they'd use a digital front end that would allow sticking with the four coax plan, but obviously was wrong - so most likely this is still the same old analog front end as the KaKu LNB with a couple more LO frequencies in use.

However, I always figured regardless of how many coaxes they ended up using that their number one goal would be to leave the existing stack 'as is' to avoid those large MDUs having to make an investment of tens of of thousands of dollars for a wholesale switch replacement just to support 4K in their units. I am _much_ more surprised to be wrong about that than I am about the number of coaxes. I wonder if Directv will do something to offset that significant upfront cost, as otherwise residents in cheapskate MDUs wouldn't be able to get 4K service!

If you learn the stack plan for the new legacy rbLNB please let us know. I wonder if the choice of using six coaxes in the stack plan was made to leave room for the possible future addition of the Ka bands from 101?


----------



## twizt3dkitty (Aug 29, 2009)

So what I was told was literally it will be 6 wires, and need an external dswm module. I wasn't privileged with whether analog will work, or what happens to 95 programming. That's why I said don't shoot the messenger. It's not much information, and it may raise more questions than answers, but I'm just trying to share what I'm allowed to. Or at least what is not covered with nda. I was told I will receive the equipment for testing, but was also told it won't be for a while. And unfortunately I am not technical enough to get into stack plans, I'm just an extremely active beta tester that happens to be an employee of a company close to directv with the right contacts. And im active on satellite forums. I just do what I'm told and report what I see. The upside is I get to keep everything they send me.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

I have a question to all you experts, just so I'm clear. Currently if I wanted activate 4K programming, I would need to upgrade to a HR54 and have a C61? If thats the case why would anyone want to do that, why not just wait until a new Genie is released that can record and allow you to watch 4K all in one.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

twizt3dkitty said:


> So what I was told was literally it will be 6 wires, and need an external dswm module. I wasn't privileged with whether analog will work, or what happens to 95 programming. That's why I said don't shoot the messenger. It's not much information, and it may raise more questions than answers, but I'm just trying to share what I'm allowed to. Or at least what is not covered with nda. I was told I will receive the equipment for testing, but was also told it won't be for a while. And unfortunately I am not technical enough to get into stack plans, I'm just an extremely active beta tester that happens to be an employee of a company close to directv with the right contacts. And im active on satellite forums. I just do what I'm told and report what I see. The upside is I get to keep everything they send me.


We appreciate you sharing what you have, and understand that you might not be given all the answers or allowed to provide them. As usual answering some questions raises others, but isn't that always the case? 

Sounds like this legacy rbLNB won't be released for a while if it will be a while before testers even get them. Did you test the 3DR or just the 5DR you are testing now? If you tested the 3DR also, I'm curious when you first received that? Since we know the national release for the 3DR is next month knowing when you got yours would give us an estimate of how long it takes from when testers receive a new LNB to its wide release. Thanks again!


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

jclangston said:


> I have a question to all you experts, just so I'm clear. Currently if I wanted activate 4K programming, I would need to upgrade to a HR54 and have a C61? If thats the case why would anyone want to do that, why not just wait until a new Genie is released that can record and allow you to watch 4K all in one.


That's my thoughts exactly.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jclangston said:


> I have a question to all you experts, just so I'm clear. Currently if I wanted activate 4K programming, I would need to upgrade to a HR54 and have a C61? If thats the case why would anyone want to do that, _*why not just wait until a new Genie is released that can record and allow you to watch 4K all in one.*_


That's exactly what I'm doing. Might be a long time until we see that particular Genie, but there's really not much D* content in 4K right now and I'd much rather wait until this mess gets sorted out. Meanwhile, Dish has a DVR that puts out 4K without all the messy stuff we have to go thru and NF and Amazon have enough 4K content to satisfy me.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Curtis0620 said:


> That's my thoughts exactly.


Kinda mind boggling what you have to go thru to watch the upcoming Master's golf match in 4K. You need an HR54, C61K, and either the Ultimate or Premier package (for some ungodly reason).

Rich


----------



## WestDC (Feb 9, 2008)

Rich said:


> Kinda mind boggling what you have to go thru to watch the upcoming Master's golf match in 4K. You need an HR54, C61K, and either the Ultimate or Premier package (for some ungodly reason).
> 
> Rich


The Reason for that -will be the upcomming PRICE (Monthly) Charge for 4K Chanel Package when & if Offered (still waitig on 3D chanels to return  (see) HD pricing as example.
.


----------



## twizt3dkitty (Aug 29, 2009)

So the chart posted at sat guys, reposted here a few posts back explains what is needed for different 4k options, we are set to have 3 levels of 4k. Vod, vod+ppv/events, and vod+ppv/events+live.

I got my wnc rev3 and rev5 in November 2015, and I was part of the 2nd group to get them. There are still two manufacturers for rev3 that have yet to end testing. The 2nd just started not too long ago. The national release of rev3 starting the 7th is only for wnc 3s.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Rich said:


> That's exactly what I'm doing. Might be a long time until we see that particular Genie, but there's really not much D* content in 4K right now and I'd much rather wait until this mess gets sorted out. Meanwhile, Dish has a DVR that puts out 4K without all the messy stuff we have to go thru and NF and Amazon have enough 4K content to satisfy me.
> 
> Rich


Yeah, with Dish 4K to those of us with a single TV have it easy. Get Hopper 3, connect, watch in 4K if available.

And that last is the kicker! There isn't a ton of 4K out there and certainly not live 4K. Netflix and Amazon have done a fair job of bringing some 4K shows. UltraFlix has the biggest selection but almost all of it is PPV. Dish has a small selection of 4K VOD as does Direct(?).


----------



## twizt3dkitty (Aug 29, 2009)

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

WestDC said:


> The Reason for that -will be the upcomming PRICE (Monthly) Charge for 4K Chanel Package when & if Offered (still waitig on 3D chanels to return  (see) HD pricing as example.
> .


Yeah, I'm waiting for that shoe to drop! So far Dish isn't charging extra nor do you have to sub to high end packages, but then they do not have any linear UHD channel.

D* is doing a backdoor fee increase by requiring a high level package to get the linear channels they'll have.

If/when E* lights up something linear I suspect they'll figure out what they want to do to monetize it.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

jclangston said:


> why not just wait until a new Genie is released that can record and allow you to watch 4K all in one.


If you are sure that there will be a new Genie you may want to wait. But I have seen no guarantee that there will be a Genie with a direct 4K output. Until then, one just needs to decide how much they want 4K from DIRECTV. Some seem to be violently opposed to the HR54+C61 setup (or HR54+specific RVU TV).

I don't see that big of a problem.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

jclangston said:


> I have a question to all you experts, just so I'm clear. Currently if I wanted activate 4K programming, I would need to upgrade to a HR54 and have a C61? If thats the case why would anyone want to do that, why not just wait until a new Genie is released that can record and allow you to watch 4K all in one.


No telling when such a box would be available. May not be until next year. With 4k broadcasts starting soon it would be crazy to wait.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

RunnerFL said:


> No telling when such a box would be available. May not be until next year. With 4k broadcasts starting soon it would be crazy to wait.


Unless you're a big golf fan or absolutely MUST have the latest thing the moment it is available, I sure don't see why you'd be "crazy to wait". What are you going to be missing?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

lparsons21 said:


> Yeah, with Dish 4K to those of us with a single TV have it easy. Get Hopper 3, connect, watch in 4K if available.
> 
> And that last is the kicker! There isn't a ton of 4K out there and certainly not live 4K. Netflix and Amazon have done a fair job of bringing some 4K shows. UltraFlix has the biggest selection but almost all of it is PPV. Dish has a small selection of 4K VOD as does Direct(?).


Exactly. With Dish it is simpler but there's no word on when live 4K channels will appear. With Directv they are here now (well next week) but not exactly anything of broad interest, just a special event and basically a channel that will show demo loops. I don't understand why people are so excited about it, and so unhappy that Directv's current solution isn't what they want.

Those who rush out to get the HR54 upgrade now might be disappointed when Directv introduces their new hardware later this year or early next year, and Directv tells them they already used up their free upgrade and the HR54 is just fine for receiving 4K programming.

Those who are waiting for Directv to introduce a new Genie with 4K output may grow old waiting on that, because I am betting it will never come.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> Unless you're a big golf fan or absolutely MUST have the latest thing the moment it is available, I sure don't see why you'd be "crazy to wait". What are you going to be missing?


Golf is just the start. At this point who knows what could be after the Masters... A NASCAR race, Baseball games, etc...


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

RunnerFL said:


> Golf is just the start. At this point who knows what could be after the Masters... A NASCAR race, Baseball games, etc...


Exactly, hopefully this is just the beginning of many more 4K programs. BTW my sevice tech said there will be a satellite update for the HR54, enabling it to broadcast 4K. Is this possible? He just didn't know when this update would be made available.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

ep1974 said:


> Exactly, hopefully this is just the beginning of many more 4K programs. BTW my sevice tech said there will be a satellite update for the HR54, enabling it to *broadcast *4K. Is this possible? He just didn't know when this update would be made available.


I guess you mean output to HDMI port, because it's "broadcast" to DECA C61k client; actually send to ONE client, not broadcast !
nay, shouldn't as it's HW part of hr54


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

ep1974 said:


> Exactly, hopefully this is just the beginning of many more 4K programs. BTW my sevice tech said there will be a satellite update for the HR54, enabling it to broadcast 4K. Is this possible? He just didn't know when this update would be made available.


No it is not the HR54 lacks the physical hardware ability to do it


----------



## twizt3dkitty (Aug 29, 2009)

He was either misinformed or meant that we were launching 4k programming soon. Techs get slammed with all this news and the general "how to" basically a day or two before if not the day off new products.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

And really, the only reason the 54 is needed is due to the transponder use, needing two transponders per 4k channel.


----------



## WestDC (Feb 9, 2008)

The HR54 Will Be able to To record 4k Content (when Transmitted) - But it will only be able to stream it to be viewed in 4K to a connected C61K Mini or a RVU 4K TV


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

twizt3dkitty said:


> He was either misinformed or meant that we were launching 4k programming soon. Techs get slammed with all this news and the general "how to" basically a day or two before if not the day off new products.
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


No, it wasn't about upcoming 4K programming. Guess then, as you say, he was miinformed. It would have been nice though.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> Exactly. With Dish it is simpler but there's no word on when live 4K channels will appear. With Directv they are here now (well next week) but not exactly anything of broad interest, just a special event and basically a channel that will show demo loops. I don't understand why people are so excited about it, and so unhappy that Directv's current solution isn't what they want.
> 
> Those who rush out to get the HR54 upgrade now might be disappointed when Directv introduces their new hardware later this year or early next year, and Directv tells them they already used up their free upgrade and the HR54 is just fine for receiving 4K programming.
> 
> Those who are waiting for Directv to introduce a new Genie with 4K output may grow old waiting on that, because I am betting it will never come.


and when dish says with hopper you don't need to pay for 2 outlets to get 4k when you only have 1 tv what will Directv do then?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Advertise thing like:
They're the only one offering live 4K progamming (people may not care about the Masters, but whenever channels like ESPN 4K launch that would be a big deal)
They won't blow Comcast's expanding bandwidth caps like binging full seasons of House of Cards and Orange is the New Black in 4K on Netflix would. (Even on providers with tierd caps, unless you have one the higher plans, the cap will be too low, even if the speed on the lower tiers is fast enough for 4K streaming)
They make 4K content available to areas where internet speeds fast enough to support 4K streaming isn't available


Also, does Dish use satellite pushes for 4K VOD content like DirecTV does, or do they do it over the internet?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

If they where brilliant they'd do a deal with Netflix for a Netflix 4K premium channel for Netflix produced content for 8 a month.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

KyL416 said:


> Also, does Dish use satellite pushes for 4K VOD content like DirecTV does, or do they do it over the internet?


Pushed satellite plus Internet ... and Netflix built in.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

JoeTheDragon said:


> and when dish says with hopper you don't need to pay for 2 outlets to get 4k when you only have 1 tv what will Directv do then?


So what if they do? How many single TV households are there where that one TV is a 4K TV? Let Dish have that tiny market segment for six months or however long it takes for Directv to get the new hardware out that replaces Genie.

Since they are talking about having their OTT packages available in Q4 this year, I think that's probably when we'll see that new hardware. Presumably there are people in this forum or the other already testing it who have signed NDAs and can't say anything.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I don't get why DTV is getting rid of the HDMI output with the new hardware? Why can't they do a 4k server that outputs 4k through HDMI? What if someone only has one TV? Unless the new requirement will be that with the new hardware is that you have to have two boxes? Arris/Pace makes one.

http://www.arris.com/globalassets/resources/data-sheets/ms6506.pdf


----------



## twizt3dkitty (Aug 29, 2009)

Has anyone said the new server will not have hdmi? I'm pretty sure that was just speculation but I'm not going to comment on that subject for a while...

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

twizt3dkitty said:


> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


Sorry if I missed the description here, but which LNB is this?

The Digital Reverse Band 3 LNB by PBI under test?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## alnielsen (Dec 31, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Sorry if I missed the description here, but which LNB is this?
> 
> The Digital Reverse Band 3 LNB by PBI under test?
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


That's not a 3 RB LNB. It must be his 5 RB LNB that until now, no one else here has seen.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

alnielsen said:


> That's not a 3 RB LNB. It must be his 5 RB LNB that until now, no one else here has seen.


No, the 5 LNB version has been posted before and is here;









And twizt3dkitty showed installed on his ODU once here ....









This though is some kind of new 3 LNB version. ..

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

twizt3dkitty said:


> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


Nice pics, it still has the DirecTV cyclone logo! When will they change That?

The pace set top linked here is quite powerful. 12000 DMIPS is pretty quick. Suppose that's enough horsepower to do real "app" like stuff too, like xfinity X1 and voice remote type stuff.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

dpeters11 said:


> And really, the only reason the 54 is needed is due to the transponder use, *needing two transponders per 4k channel.*


seems to me you don't follow facts at the site ... *current 4K channels taking ONE tpn per channel*

future bonding of tpns (not tested yet with real stream/mux/channels) is targeting cramming more then one channel into two tpns

adding to that (have you read lately ?!) HR54 is one model what allow stream live 4K to a client [c61k] what is only one way to watch it on your 4k TV


----------



## sangs (Apr 2, 2008)

cypherx said:


> Nice pics, it still has the DirecTV cyclone logo! When will they change That?
> 
> The pace set top linked here is quite powerful. 12000 DMIPS is pretty quick. Suppose that's enough horsepower to do real "app" like stuff too, like xfinity X1 and voice remote type stuff.


That's the same dish and LNB they just installed for my father this week.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

sangs said:


> That's the same dish and LNB they just installed for my father this week.


The dish yes, but are you sure it's the same LNB in question in the photos earlier?

Careful not mistake it for the non-Reverse Band 3D2 pictured below which is what your Father might actually have.








Note: The LNB on the left is the 3D1 for comparison.







Front view of the 3D2.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

could be just different mfg, but DLNB is the same: 3D2RB


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> could be just different mfg, but DLNB is the same: 3D2RB


That's my thinking since twizt3dkitty who posted the photos previously mentioned in other forum that he had received a new 3D2RB by PBI for testing.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

WestDC said:


> The Reason for that -will be the upcomming PRICE (Monthly) Charge for 4K Chanel Package when & if Offered (still waitig on 3D chanels to return  (see) HD pricing as example.
> .


Mmm. I'm looking forward to my locals being in 4K and I don't see why I'd need the movie package for that. I don't care about that one channel they're talking about. I guess my question should be: When we finally get 4K on our locals will that movie package still be part of the cost of the 4K programming? I really don't want the movie packages.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Yeah, with Dish 4K to those of us with a single TV have it easy. Get Hopper 3, connect, watch in 4K if available.
> 
> And that last is the kicker! There isn't a ton of 4K out there and certainly not live 4K. Netflix and Amazon have done a fair job of bringing some 4K shows. UltraFlix has the biggest selection but almost all of it is PPV. Dish has a small selection of 4K VOD as does Direct(?).


Same problem with the lack of content on D*. But one of these days CBS or NBC will start putting out 4K content and that will force the other big networks, at least ABC and Fox, to follow suit. This happened with stereo and IIRC, HD programming. Once one channel jumps on something the others follow rather quickly. I only have one 4K set and I'm not sure I plan to buy any more 4K sets in the near future and Dish for that one set would surely be an option. Really find it mind boggling what D* is doing.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

James Long said:


> If you are sure that there will be a new Genie you may want to wait. But I have seen no guarantee that there will be a Genie with a direct 4K output. Until then, one just needs to decide how much they want 4K from DIRECTV. Some seem to be violently opposed to the HR54+C61 setup (or HR54+specific RVU TV).
> 
> _*I don't see that big of a problem.*_


It's not that big of a problem right now. My set upscales D* content really well...it's sure not true 4K, but it's better than my 1080p plasmas put out, I think. They have to come out with a DVR that does 4K. If they don't, I'll be adding another dish (Dish) to my roof, unless Dish comes out with a similar ridiculous 4K plan that includes unwanted movie packages.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

RunnerFL said:


> No telling when such a box would be available. May not be until next year. _*With 4k broadcasts starting soon it would be crazy to wait.*_


When would you expect that to happen? I've seen no mention of any networks getting set to pump out 4K programming.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> Exactly. With Dish it is simpler but there's no word on when live 4K channels will appear. With Directv they are here now (well next week) but not exactly anything of broad interest, just a special event and basically a channel that will show demo loops. I don't understand why people are so excited about it, and so unhappy that Directv's current solution isn't what they want.
> 
> Those who rush out to get the HR54 upgrade now might be disappointed when Directv introduces their new hardware later this year or early next year, and Directv tells them they already used up their free upgrade and the HR54 is just fine for receiving 4K programming.
> 
> _*Those who are waiting for Directv to introduce a new Genie with 4K output may grow old waiting on that, because I am betting it will never come.*_


You really think that won't happen? I don't see how they can afford not to. I'm already thinking about adding a Dish sub.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

JoeTheDragon said:


> and when dish says with hopper you don't need to pay for 2 outlets to get 4k when you only have 1 tv what will Directv do then?


That's the kicker there.

Rich


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Maybe they wont use the Genie name anymore? What if they use another company that will make one that outputs 4k?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

CraigerM said:


> Maybe they wont use the Genie name anymore? What if they use another company that will make one that outputs 4k?


I think the Genie name is here to stay. I had a small install job done the other day and the installer was a guy that also does Dish installs. His opinion was that Dish always has better, more advanced equipment than D* has. His opinion. I don't know how true that is, but he was referring to the Dish DVR that does 4K without any add ons.

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Rich said:


> It's not that big of a problem right now. My set upscales D* content really well...it's sure not true 4K, but it's better than my 1080p plasmas put out, I think. They have to come out with a DVR that does 4K. If they don't, I'll be adding another dish (Dish) to my roof, unless Dish comes out with a similar ridiculous 4K plan that includes unwanted movie packages.
> 
> Rich


Come on in, the water's fine!! 

The Hopper 3 puts out really good PQ and the 4K VOD I've gotten from Dish looks great too. I'm enjoying rewatching the last season of Defiance in 4K a lot. But yeah, my 4K TV does a great job of upscaling all my 720p to 1080p content so I'm happy with that too!

And we all get to wait a bit to see just how Dish will monetize 4K. So far there isn't any, but then there aren't any 4K linear channels being talked about for Dish yet either. Direct seems to have figured out how to monetize it though with the requirement of top tier package requirement. I suspect if Dish does a linear 4K channel in the future, they will come out with something. No way either will not monetize 4K in some way.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Rich said:


> I think the Genie name is here to stay. I had a small install job done the other day and the installer was a guy that also does Dish installs. His opinion was that Dish always has better, more advanced equipment than D* has. His opinion. I don't know how true that is, but he was referring to the Dish DVR that does 4K without any add ons.
> 
> Rich


I think how DTV could get one that's better than the new Hopper would be to combine UVerse's DSL Modem/Router with Genie Whole Home DVR that outputs to 4k and have it be in a small box. Also have it use wireless AC and the same tuners as the new Hopper. However one bad thing would be what would happen if one part of it broke down?


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

The other bad thing is that UVerse isn't available in most places.


----------



## WestDC (Feb 9, 2008)

Rich said:


> When would you expect that to happen? I've seen no mention of any networks getting set to pump out 4K programming.
> 
> Rich


Hey RICH:

Did you see these - I thik they are i your price range For 4K Avr

http://www.onkyousa.com/Products/model.php?m=TX-NR646&class=Receiver&source=prodClass


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Rich said:


> Same problem with the lack of content on D*. But one of these days CBS or NBC will start putting out 4K content and that will force the other big networks, at least ABC and Fox, to follow suit. This happened with stereo and IIRC, HD programming. Once one channel jumps on something the others follow rather quickly. I only have one 4K set and I'm not sure I plan to buy any more 4K sets in the near future and Dish for that one set would surely be an option. Really find it mind boggling what D* is doing.


In order for the networks to start broadcasting 4K to their affiliates, they have to have affiliates able to deliver it to someone otherwise what's the point? That will take a couple years at the very soonest and may never happen since unlike with the HD transition the FCC isn't allocating local stations a second channel so they can broadcast in both formats. If a local station switches to ATSC 3.0 to broadcast 4K, everyone who has an ATSC tuner receiving HD broadcasts today will lose their channel overnight. Why would a local station cut off their audience, are they going to tell all their OTA viewers they need to buy an ATSC 3.0 tuner to continue watching?

Now maybe the local station won't broadcast in 4K, but will offer 4K fiber feeds to cable/satellite providers. Cable companies could start delivering 4K broadcasts without much difficulty, but for Directv and Dish it would take many many years because they'd need to build and launch new satellites with much more spot beam capacity to deliver those locals, and such satellites are not even on the drawing board. I feel pretty confident in saying we will never see 4K locals broadcast via satellite by Directv or Dish, unless they compress them so much they are hard to tell apart from HD. You might need to switch to cable to get them, though maybe if you can put up an antenna on your house someday you'll be able to pick them up that way if Directv produces an ATSC 3.0 capable AM21 follow-on.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Rich said:


> You really think that won't happen? I don't see how they can afford not to. I'm already thinking about adding a Dish sub.


Why do you think it is better having a DVR with 4K output versus a client with 4K output? The current situation with Directv is confusing, because the HR54 has an HDMI output but can't output 4K. If they make a new box that doesn't have an HDMI output at all (so no per TV fee) but is just a box that contains a hard drive for recording and outputs to clients like a Genie does, in what way is that inferior to Directv building an HR64 that outputs 4K itself?


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

lparsons21 said:


> The other bad thing is that UVerse isn't available in most places.


Good point. Could another companies modem/router be able to work with something I described? If not then maybe it would be good to leave it out. Plus they could make it smaller that way.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

slice1900 said:


> Why do you think it is better having a DVR with 4K output versus a client with 4K output? The current situation with Directv is confusing, because the HR54 has an HDMI output but can't output 4K. If they make a new box that doesn't have an HDMI output at all (so no per TV fee) but is just a box that contains a hard drive for recording and outputs to clients like a Genie does, in what way is that inferior to Directv building an HR64 that outputs 4K itself?


I guess it is more expensive adding 4k output to a DVR? Maybe moving the HDMI 4k output to a client device would be better. Then that way DTV would let consumer use their own 4k or regular HD devices as client boxes?


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Rich said:


> When would you expect that to happen? I've seen no mention of any networks getting set to pump out 4K programming.
> 
> Rich


It's all starting with The Masters....


----------



## alnielsen (Dec 31, 2006)

Rich said:


> Same problem with the lack of content on D*. But one of these days CBS or NBC will start putting out 4K content and that will force the other big networks, at least ABC and Fox, to follow suit. This happened with stereo and IIRC, HD programming. Once one channel jumps on something the others follow rather quickly. I only have one 4K set and I'm not sure I plan to buy any more 4K sets in the near future and Dish for that one set would surely be an option. Really find it mind boggling what D* is doing.
> 
> Rich





slice1900 said:


> In order for the networks to start broadcasting 4K to their affiliates, they have to have affiliates able to deliver it to someone otherwise what's the point? That will take a couple years at the very soonest and may never happen since unlike with the HD transition the FCC isn't allocating local stations a second channel so they can broadcast in both formats. If a local station switches to ATSC 3.0 to broadcast 4K, everyone who has an ATSC tuner receiving HD broadcasts today will lose their channel overnight. Why would a local station cut off their audience, are they going to tell all their OTA viewers they need to buy an ATSC 3.0 tuner to continue watching?
> 
> Now maybe the local station won't broadcast in 4K, but will offer 4K fiber feeds to cable/satellite providers. Cable companies could start delivering 4K broadcasts without much difficulty, but for Directv and Dish it would take many many years because they'd need to build and launch new satellites with much more spot beam capacity to deliver those locals, and such satellites are not even on the drawing board. I feel pretty confident in saying we will never see 4K locals broadcast via satellite by Directv or Dish, unless they compress them so much they are hard to tell apart from HD. You might need to switch to cable to get them, though maybe if you can put up an antenna on your house someday you'll be able to pick them up that way if Directv produces an ATSC 3.0 capable AM21 follow-on.


The FCC is already narrowing the TV band and giving the spectrum to mobile phones. Unless they allow them to do 4K on VHF Hi/Lo, there won't be any space left after adjustments are made on UHF to avoid possible interference.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

alnielsen said:


> The FCC is already narrowing the TV band and giving the spectrum to mobile phones. Unless they allow them to do 4K on VHF Hi/Lo, there won't be any space left after adjustments are made on UHF to avoid possible interference.


What's the story about DirecTV SUCCESSFULLY launching (2) NEW HD & 4-K capable Satellites last year ?


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

ragweed10 said:


> What's the story about DirecTV SUCCESSFULLY launching (2) NEW HD & 4-K capable Satellites last year ?


Not sure what you mean. The satellites they launched have nothing to do with OTA spectrum


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

So after having read this entire thread it looks like I will need a new LNB when linear 4K hits. I currently have one from somewhere like 7 years ago.

I have a tech coming out this Wednesday to help my troubleshoot my issues with my clients not dropping the 4K stream and it saying I have hit the maximum after I put one to sleep and woke it up again. Fortunately that is resolved either due to the latest software update or using the advice from a couple great people here on the the forums.

Sounds like I should call them and ask the that the tech brings one of the new LNBs out with them.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

compnurd said:


> Not sure what you mean. The satellites they launched have nothing to do with OTA spectrum


Slice 1900 said
It will be YEARS before DirecTV will build and Launch 4-K Satellites
""but for Directv and Dish it would take many many years because they'd need to build and launch new satellites with much more spot beam capacity to deliver those locals, and such satellites are not even on the drawing board. I feel pretty confident in saying we will never see 4K locals broadcast via satellite by Directv or Dish""


----------



## twizt3dkitty (Aug 29, 2009)

I posted the pbi rev3.

And @psmith, unless I am misunderstanding you, you are incorrect saying the dswm gen2 is the same as the reverse band.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

ragweed10 said:


> Slice 1900 said
> It will be YEARS before DirecTV will build and Launch 4-K Satellites
> ""but for Directv and Dish it would take many many years because they'd need to build and launch new satellites with much more spot beam capacity to deliver those locals, and such satellites are not even on the drawing board. I feel pretty confident in saying we will never see 4K locals broadcast via satellite by Directv or Dish""


Yeah that's totally different. The recent ones are all about conus. Locals 4K are an entire other kind of discussion.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> Yeah that's totally different. The recent ones are all about conus. Locals 4K are an entire other kind of discussion.


What are conus ?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

ragweed10 said:


> Slice 1900 said
> It will be YEARS before DirecTV will build and Launch 4-K Satellites
> ""but for Directv and Dish it would take many many years because they'd need to build and launch new satellites with much more spot beam capacity to deliver those locals, and such satellites are not even on the drawing board. I feel pretty confident in saying we will never see 4K locals broadcast via satellite by Directv or Dish""


For spot beams ... not for ConUS. And since there will not be 4K local stations the whole concept is moot.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

ragweed10 said:


> What are conus ?


Conus is continental US. Although that really includes pr hi and ak. It really means stations that are broadcast to everyone.

Spots or locals are for stations that only go to a specific market.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

twizt3dkitty said:


> I posted the pbi rev3.
> 
> And @psmith, unless I am misunderstanding you, you are incorrect saying the dswm gen2 is the same as the reverse band.


well, sure 3D2 and 3D2RB cannot be same, most likely it was a remark about 3 sats DLNB kind of
directed to those people who are not tech geek


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Come on in, the water's fine!!
> 
> The Hopper 3 puts out really good PQ and the 4K VOD I've gotten from Dish looks great too. I'm enjoying rewatching the last season of Defiance in 4K a lot. But yeah, my 4K TV does a great job of upscaling all my 720p to 1080p content so I'm happy with that too!
> 
> And we all get to wait a bit to see just how Dish will monetize 4K. So far there isn't any, but then there aren't any 4K linear channels being talked about for Dish yet either. Direct seems to have figured out how to monetize it though with the requirement of top tier package requirement. I suspect if Dish does a linear 4K channel in the future, they will come out with something. No way either will not monetize 4K in some way.


I'm really not planning on doing much until the networks get 4K programming. I just reduced my bill to about $125 a month, most of which is my equipment fees. We just don't watch "normal" TV that much anymore.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> In order for the networks to start broadcasting 4K to their affiliates, they have to have affiliates able to deliver it to someone otherwise what's the point? That will take a couple years at the very soonest and may never happen since unlike with the HD transition the FCC isn't allocating local stations a second channel so they can broadcast in both formats. If a local station switches to ATSC 3.0 to broadcast 4K, everyone who has an ATSC tuner receiving HD broadcasts today will lose their channel overnight. Why would a local station cut off their audience, are they going to tell all their OTA viewers they need to buy an ATSC 3.0 tuner to continue watching?
> 
> Now maybe the local station won't broadcast in 4K, but will offer 4K fiber feeds to cable/satellite providers. Cable companies could start delivering 4K broadcasts without much difficulty, but for Directv and Dish it would take many many years because they'd need to build and launch new satellites with much more spot beam capacity to deliver those locals, and such satellites are not even on the drawing board. I feel pretty confident in saying we will never see 4K locals broadcast via satellite by Directv or Dish, unless they compress them so much they are hard to tell apart from HD. You might need to switch to cable to get them, though maybe if you can put up an antenna on your house someday you'll be able to pick them up that way if Directv produces an ATSC 3.0 capable AM21 follow-on.


Well, I do get the NYC locals and I'd think they'd be the first ones to go to 4K. Aside from that, we just watched five episodes of SVU last night and the PQ was really good. I ran into the bedroom and turned on the plasma and watched a couple minutes of the episode we were watching on the 4K set and the difference was very clear.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> Why do you think it is better having a DVR with 4K output versus a client with 4K output? The current situation with Directv is confusing, because the HR54 has an HDMI output but can't output 4K. If they make a new box that doesn't have an HDMI output at all (so no per TV fee) but is just a box that contains a hard drive for recording and outputs to clients like a Genie does, in what way is that inferior to Directv building an HR64 that outputs 4K itself?


I don't know how to answer that. I think, at the moment, the Dish 4K DVR sounds like its a better solution.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

RunnerFL said:


> It's all starting with The Masters....


I get that, but how long until it becomes "normal" TV. Any guesses? I have absolutely no intention of paying for movie channels that I don't watch.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

James Long said:


> For spot beams ... not for ConUS. _*And since there will not be 4K local stations the whole concept is moot.*_


Never? Could you explain that? I thought all we had to do was wait for the networks to start pumping out the shows in 4K, is that completely wrong?

Rich


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Rich said:


> I get that, but how long until it becomes "normal" TV. Any guesses? I have absolutely no intention of paying for movie channels that I don't watch.
> 
> Rich


Based on how things went from "first HD broadcast" to full time HD channels... Not long.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Rich said:


> Never? Could you explain that? I thought all we had to do was wait for the networks to start pumping out the shows in 4K, is that completely wrong?


Except for the lack of OTA bandwidth, even less with the upcoming spectrum auction which means if there is a switch to ATSC 3.0, which is not backwards compatible with the current system, there can be no transition period where stations broadcast dual signals until enough people acquire tuners that support ATSC 3.0.

Even if they do it via fiber only, there's also the lack of spotbeam bandwidth to deliver those 4K locals. Especially if the carry one carry all rule applies and they have to devote 4K spotbeam bandwidth to a bunch of independents who are just upconverting the majority of their programming like they have to do today with HD locals. Back when HD locals via satellite started that carry one carry all rule didn't exist so they were able to just launch the Big 4 in the initial markets, that's not the case today.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I'm the first to admit we're all just guessing on if/when 4K locals ever happen, and if they do will Directv ever deliver any. But even those who are optimistic would have to agree there are many hurdles. Maybe they will be overcome, but you have to be very optimistic to think they will all be overcome and in only a few years.

- waiting for final ATSC 3.0 standard - it is at the very least a year away, then more waiting for ATSC 3.0 capable chipsets
- 600 MHz auction and repack
- additional cost for networks to produce and uplink in 4K, will their bean counters think it is worth it?
- local stations lack of money to pay for new broadcasting hardware (antennas, transmitters, etc.) for ATSC 3.0 (think about where that money will come from...)
- lack of government mandate to force inclusion of ATSC 3.0 tuners on all new TVs like there was with ATSC
- lack of government mandate to force stations to switch to ATSC 3.0 like there was with ATSC
- lack of government support for ATSC 3.0 set tops like there was with ATSC
- lack of government support for broadcasters running two channels to ease ATSC 3.0 transition like they did with ATSC
- lack of bandwidth in big markets for broadcasts to run two channels, due to 600 MHz auction
- lack of satellite spot beam bandwidth for Directv or Dish to deliver 4K locals - especially if 'carry one carry all' applies
- unclear future demand for 4K (some people here are excited about it, but the mass market has to become excited about it)
- possibility networks might only deliver 4K via streaming rather than broadcast


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

4K will happen for locals when they find an algorithm that makes then the same size transmission as Hi Definition. Or when 28k is the norm... Whichever is first.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Rich said:


> Never? Could you explain that? I thought all we had to do was wait for the networks to start pumping out the shows in 4K, is that completely wrong?


The stations need someplace to put the signal ... and there is no OTA place to put it. With the direction that the FCC is pushing there will be less space for OTA broadcasts, not more.

The best you (not me) can hope for is a 4K feed to the station where they add local commercials and content and feed it via private networks to cable and satellite. A lot of work for a minimal audience. The broadcast networks would be better off focusing on their cable networks. They would reach more customers with 4K than via local broadcasters.

Perhaps "never" is an overstatement ... so how about "not in your lifetime"? I believe there is a better chance that the broadcast networks will dump their affiliates and create a national satellite/cable/subscription feed than to upgrade their networks to 4K.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> 4K will happen for locals when they find an algorithm that makes then the same size transmission as Hi Definition. Or when 28k is the norm... Whichever is first.


Remember a big announcement from that company called V-Nova about a year ago, claiming they could deliver 4K at HD bit rates and HD at SD bit rates? The past is littered with such claims, but let's say this time it was actually true. Sounds great, right? The problem is, all that does is solve the bit rate problem. There are still many others. I suppose theoretically since you don't need the moderately increased bandwidth ATSC 3.0 provides you could stick with ATSC 1.0, but that assumes the standard even permits use of a different compression technology - and even if it does there are zero ATSC tuners that know what to do with a signal using something other than MPEG2 so you still have the same problem as if you switched to ATSC 3.0. If it was so easy to switch, some local stations would already be using MPEG4 now, to crowd in a lot more subchannels!

This super compression would make things easier for Directv, but they would still need more spot beam bandwidth. Even if they used the spot beams currently used for SD locals (after the MPEG2 phaseout in a few years) these only cover a subset of DMAs. All the MPEG4 only DMAs would be SOL and need new satellite(s) launched. And oh yeah, Directv would need to replace all the C61Ks in the field, and all 4K RVU TVs would become useless for that function, because you aren't going to install a new codec with a firmware upgrade.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Well I was being semi sarcastic because the likely hood of all that happening is low... But if that compression worked.... And you figure the channel counts stay about the same for locals... Hi Definition moves to the SD spots and frees the Hi Definition spots for 4K spots....

But yeah without being able to flash cut markets for that it'd be a nightmare and won't happen. 

I mean we see how long DIRECTV is taking to phase out mpeg2. Can you imagine them going any faster with a new compression scheme that isn't even on the market? Nope... 20 years away at least...and by then who knows what will be available....


----------



## stasiakm (Apr 4, 2016)

Hello Everyone,

I just recently upgraded my HR44 to an HR54 and I also added the CK61 client to my Sony VPL-VW350es projector so that I could get 4K programming. I bought both receivers from SolidSignal and installed them myself and had Directv activate the receivers. Everything seemed to be working fine as I was able to get 4K video on demand. I downloaded a couple of documentaries and movies and was able to do so and watch them without issue. I realized however, that I am not seeing Channels 104, 105 and 106 in the guide. I'm confused because some people have said these channels won't show up until April 4th or April 7th, yet others are already seeing those channels. I have a Swimline dish and 3 LNB with four cables going to a 16 tuner SWM splitter. I have the HR54 alone on SWM1, which is how I had my HR44 hooked up, so there should be no issue there. I also have 3 HR24's, but those are on SWM2. Long story short, everything appears in order, except for not seeing those channels in my guide. Could it be that I need a new LNB in order to receive those channels? I've heard that eventually a new LNB and/or dish will be required for 4k programming, but for now, you should be able to receive 4k programming with the Swimline dish and 3 LNB. If anybody has any ideas, I'd appreciate the input.

Thanks!


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

stasiakm said:


> Hello Everyone,
> 
> I just recently upgraded my HR44 to an HR54 and I also added the CK61 client to my Sony VPL-VW350es projector so that I could get 4K programming. I bought both receivers from SolidSignal and installed them myself and had Directv activate the receivers. Everything seemed to be working fine as I was able to get 4K video on demand. I downloaded a couple of documentaries and movies and was able to do so and watch them without issue. I realized however, that I am not seeing Channels 104, 105 and 106 in the guide. I'm confused because some people have said these channels won't show up until April 4th or April 7th, yet others are already seeing those channels. I have a Swimline dish and 3 LNB with four cables going to a 16 tuner SWM splitter. I have the HR54 alone on SWM1, which is how I had my HR44 hooked up, so there should be no issue there. I also have 3 HR24's, but those are on SWM2. Long story short, everything appears in order, except for not seeing those channels in my guide. Could it be that I need a new LNB in order to receive those channels? I've heard that eventually a new LNB and/or dish will be required for 4k programming, but for now, you should be able to receive 4k programming with the Swimline dish and 3 LNB. If anybody has any ideas, I'd appreciate the input.
> 
> Thanks!


I can see 104,105,106 in my guide. A couple of days after my initial 4K install, the tech returned unannounced saying he had to install a reverse band LNB due to e-mail he only just received. Hope that helps.


----------



## stasiakm (Apr 4, 2016)

Thanks ep1974. That makes sense. Since everything else seemed to be setup correctly, the only thing I could think of was that the LNB needed to be upgraded. I set up an appointment for a tech to come out this Saturday. Hopefully, the guy knows what he's doing and replacing the LNB will resolve the issue.


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

stasiakm said:


> Thanks ep1974. That makes sense. Since everything else seemed to be setup correctly, the only thing I could think of was that the LNB needed to be upgraded. I set up an appointment for a tech to come out this Saturday. Hopefully, the guy knows what he's doing and replacing the LNB will resolve the issue.


Good luck, probably took my tech 5 mins to change LNB.


----------



## stasiakm (Apr 4, 2016)

Thanks EP1974. Hopefully that's all it is. It's confusing because according to Directv's own website, the reverse band LNB will definitely be needed around mid to late 2016 to received 4k programming, but it should not be needed now, unless they were referring to VOD only, as I'm able to get that without issue. I guess I'll find out if that's true or not on Saturday. Probably best to get it installed anyway if it's going to be a future requirement. I've had some good experiences with Directv installers and an equal amount of bad ones, so it always concerns me when I have to have them come out.


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

stasiakm said:


> Thanks EP1974. Hopefully that's all it is. It's confusing because according to Directv's own website, the reverse band LNB will definitely be needed around mid to late 2016 to received 4k programming, but it should not be needed now, unless they were referring to VOD only, as I'm able to get that without issue. I guess I'll find out if that's true or not on Saturday. Probably best to get it installed anyway if it's going to be a future requirement. I've had some good experiences with Directv installers and an equal amount of bad ones, so it always concerns me when I have to have them come out.


Let us know how it turns out.


----------



## stasiakm (Apr 4, 2016)

Will Do!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

James Long said:


> The stations need someplace to put the signal ... and there is no OTA place to put it. With the direction that the FCC is pushing there will be less space for OTA broadcasts, not more.
> 
> The best you (not me) can hope for is a 4K feed to the station where they add local commercials and content and feed it via private networks to cable and satellite. A lot of work for a minimal audience. The broadcast networks would be better off focusing on their cable networks. They would reach more customers with 4K than via local broadcasters.
> 
> _*Perhaps "never" is an overstatement ... so how about "not in your lifetime"?*_ I believe there is a better chance that the broadcast networks will dump their affiliates and create a national satellite/cable/subscription feed than to upgrade their networks to 4K.


OK, I get all that. Thanx. Much clearer now. "Not in my lifetime" means "forever" as far as I'm concerned. 

Rich


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

stasiakm said:


> Thanks ep1974. That makes sense. Since everything else seemed to be setup correctly, the only thing I could think of was that the LNB needed to be upgraded. I set up an appointment for a tech to come out this Saturday. Hopefully, the guy knows what he's doing and *replacing the LNB will resolve the issue*.


there is nothing to resolve by installing RB DLNB; so far all 4K coming from Ka band


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

P Smith said:


> there is nothing to resolve by installing RB DLNB; so far all 4K coming from Ka band


I am in the same boat as stasiakm where I do not see those specific channels either and have an old LNB from many years ago. Are you sure that does not make a difference?


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

mutelight said:


> I am in the same boat as stasiakm where I do not see those specific channels either and have an old LNB from many years ago. Are you sure that does not make a difference?


it does not... Do you have the ultimate package or above?


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

compnurd said:


> it does not... Do you have the ultimate package or above?


I have the Premiere package.

Was having issues before my clients updated where I would frequently run into "Maximum 4K" error after they went to sleep and woke them up and had to reset the system so I have a tech coming out Wednesday anyway. Do you think it is worth telling them I am no longer having that issue but seeing if I can get a new LNB to future-proof?

**EDIT* *OK this is weird. When I was on one of the C61Ks yesterday, I was not seeing those channels. Out of curiosity I remoted into my Slingplayer which is on the HR54 and they are showing up. (Even though that box doesn't even output that resolution.)

I may need to restart the clients when I get home tonight to see if that resolves the issue.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

Question about the C61K, if I did decide to go to this setup one day. So currently I have 2 HR 24's and a HR44. From what I understand the HR 44 would get replaced with a HR54. Can the HR54 still only record 5 things at once. I guess what I'm getting at is, down the road when recording a 4K show, will that tie up 2 tuners at the same time? Also if the C61K is in a separate room from the HR54 can it control all recordings and have full DVR functionality?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Correct, the 54 can record 5 things at once. It does need 7 tuners when doing "tuner math", so that's why it's still 5 even with 4k in the future.

A client is a full extension of the genie.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

dpeters11 said:


> Correct, the 54 can record 5 things at once. It does need 7 tuners when doing "tuner math", so that's why it's still 5 even with 4k in the future.
> A client is a full extension of the genie.


If the 6 and 7th tuners of the HR54 are enabled on a 4K setup, but no channel bonding is being used yet. Does the HR54 function like a 7 tuner DVR?

Or are the 6 and 7th tuners, even though showing as enabled, still sealed off as an unused pair reserved for receiving only bonded transmissions?

I think it's the later myself, but wasn't completely sure ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

I guess the main thing is that once bonded pairs start being used then the 6th and 7th start being used so that the other 5 could still record as normal. If Directv is truly going to the server/client setup going forward, hopefully they will release a genie that has 10-12 tuners so that you can have several 4K mini genies around the house and not have to worry about recording conflicts. Thats the reason I never went with mini genies over the years because I preferred having HR24's in the other rooms to allow for more tuners.

I called CS this afternoon, they will hook me up with all the 4K equipment for free. I already had the ultimate package so nothing to worry about there. After thinking about it over last weekend I will probably pull the trigger. The way I see it, I have a 4K tv why not take advantage of new programming. I can always upgrade for free again in 2 years if newer equipment is released by then.

When the installer comes should I try to get him to upgrade my LNB? I would hate to have to have another service call in a few months because he didn't upgrade me the first time.


----------



## alnielsen (Dec 31, 2006)

I have a 5 sat legacy lnb and swm16, connected to my HR54. I do not have a C64 or RVU TV. I can see 103-106. I can't receive them but they are in the guide.


----------



## CTJon (Feb 5, 2007)

I think we'll see special networks - ESPN, HBO, SHO, etc before we see the old (CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox, etc). As stated those network broadcasts are owned by the local stations so they have big investment and I'm sure NY will see before a lot of the country. Also how much benefits is there for a lot of programs - talk shows, news, game shows to be in 4k? So the networks have to invest to produce those shows and the locals invest in the equipment etc. Now there are plenty of movies that could immediately get some benefit and only have to feed DirecTv or Dish or? I suspect that as local stations have to replace equipment because of age they will install the latest and greatest 4K or ??

So I think it will be a while until we see significant 4K other than special events - Masters, Superbowl, etc.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

alnielsen said:


> I have a 5 sat legacy lnb and swm16, connected to my HR54. I do not have a C64 or RVU TV. I can see 103-106. I can't receive them but they are in the guide.


Same here with the same setup as yours. But the 4K channels are on 104-106.

Can't tune any of them except ch. 106 which is just showing the DIRECTV slate in 1080i for now. But reads in the info. as the channel for the upcomming golf broadcast.

The two others carrying live 4K programming on ch. 104 and PPV 4K cinema ch. 105. only display a message that 4K cannot be viewed from this location. And would I like to search elsewhere for the program not in 4K if you try and tune to either of them.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

P Smith said:


> there is nothing to resolve by installing RB DLNB; so far all 4K coming from Ka band


Correct. You *DO NOT* need the RB DLNB "at this time". 
I have had the 54 for a couple of weeks and a C61K for months and channels 104,105, and 106 just showed up in my guide yesterday.


----------



## dwilliam_houston (Feb 6, 2007)

I have the HR54 and using a Samsung TV setup remotely and receiving the three channels mentioned. Channel 104 actually had programming last night and it was definately 4k and crystal clear. I have not done anything to switch out the DLNB.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

I WANT MORE said:


> Correct. You *DO NOT* need the RB DLNB "at this time".
> I have had the 54 for a couple of weeks and a C61K for months and channels 104,105, and 106 just showed up in my guide yesterday.


Do you think the technicians will have the new DLNB on the trucks? I'm calling today to get hooked up with 4K equipment. I would rather get everything I need now v/s having someone come back out in a few months.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

jclangston said:


> Do you think the technicians will have the new DLNB on the trucks? I'm calling today to get hooked up with 4K equipment. I would rather get everything I need now v/s having someone come back out in a few months.


They might;

But the rule is beginning April 7th they are not supposed to do any 4K installs without the Reverse Band DLNB. So the 7th is the most certain date for it to be on the trucks.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

HoTat2 said:


> They might;
> 
> But the rule is beginning April 7th they are not supposed to do any 4K installs without the Reverse Band DLNB. So the 7th is the most certain date for it to be on the trucks.


yeah, let us know when your install will done


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

P Smith said:


> yeah, let us know when your install will done


Just set it up, my install will be Friday the 8th.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

pay attention to new DLNB, better get a picture [readable] of its label or just copy its model from it


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

P Smith said:


> pay attention to new DLNB, better get a picture [readable] of its label or just copy its model from it


Is there a particular model I should be looking for or are you wanting me to post a picture on here for folks to see?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

jclangston said:


> Is there a particular model I should be looking for or are you wanting me to post a picture on here for folks to see?


The only Reverse Band model being distributed right now that you should receive as part of all 4K installations beginning April 7th is the 3 LNB type 3D2RBLNBR0-01 by WNC.

Another 3 LNB one, 3D2RBLNBR0-02 by PBI, is still in early testing and will enter distribution along with the WNC model sometime later on.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

HoTat2 said:


> The only Reverse Band model being distributed right now that you should receive as part of all 4K installations beginning April 7th is the 3 LNB type 3D2RBLNBR0-01 by WNC.
> 
> Another 3 LNB one, 3D2RBLNBR0-02 by PBI, is still in early testing and will enter distribution along with the WNC model sometime later on.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Hot Tat2 I saw the picture you posted back in November, is it correct that is a single wire LNB?

I currently have a 4 wire setup going from the LNB to a SWM 16 switch. Will I have to get my switch replaced?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

You won't have your switch replaced, it will be removed, and you will have a single wire from your dish to the splitter(s) currently connected to your SWM16. Well, you could have a single wire - depends whether the installer removes the other three. You will have only one in active use, regardless.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> You won't have your switch replaced, it will be removed, and you will have a single wire from your dish to the splitter(s) currently connected to your SWM16. Well, you could have a single wire - depends whether the installer removes the other three. You will have only one in active use, regardless.


Got ya, thats what I assumed would happen. So for future reference, this new LNB can handle 21 tuners?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

jclangston said:


> Got ya, thats what I assumed would happen. So for future reference, this new LNB can handle 21 tuners?


Yep ... 21 tuner max. support.

Don't know why DIRECTV engineering is claiming initially a 13 tuner max. support for the Reverse Band DLNB to be later upgradable by receiver firmware to 21.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## JB292 (Apr 25, 2009)

I just had an HR54 and Genie installed today. I has specifically asked for a 4k setup. I regret not reading here earlier. I don't think he installed the reverse LNB. Here it is.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

JB292 said:


> I just had an HR54 and Genie installed today. I has specifically asked for a 4k setup. I regret not reading here earlier. I don't think he installed the reverse LNB. Here it is.


Photo shot is at an angle so can't quite makeout the model number.

Can you read the lable again, or else go into the satellite setup of the Genie and check the LNB type?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

JB292 said:


> I just had an HR54 and Genie installed today. I has specifically asked for a 4k setup. I regret not reading here earlier. I don't think he installed the reverse LNB. Here it is.


An HR-54 is the "GENIE"
I just had an HR54 and Genie installed today. ??
You can't (TWO), they will ONLY install (1) per Account


----------



## JB292 (Apr 25, 2009)

Sorry for my lack of knowledge. He added 2 new boxes., an HR54 and a C61k, The LNB has the following numbers:SL3K4NR2-01 and XEK3C1531A0297. The C61K is connected to the 4K TV.


I also added whole home DVR, and I was under the impression that all HD DVR's would be connected as one. I have an HR22 that still has it's own recordings, but I can't see it from anywhere else, or access my other HR23. Is the HR 22 not compatible , or am I wrong with my assumption?


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

Not sure about older Models, but I think if you call (800) 531-5000
and ask them to turn ON the WHOLE HOME Feature for the other Receivers, they should ALL work together.
Let me know if it works


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

JB292 said:


> Sorry for my lack of knowledge. He added 2 new boxes., an HR54 and a C61k, The LNB has the following numbers:SL3K4NR2-01 and XEK3C1531A0297. The C61K is connected to the 4K TV.
> 
> I also added whole home DVR, and I was under the impression that all HD DVR's would be connected as one. I have an HR22 that still has it's own recordings, but I can't see it from anywhere else, or access my other HR23. Is the HR 22 not compatible , or am I wrong with my assumption?


Can you describe more about your setup?

That LNB model is a 4 output legacy type.

Is there a SWiM multiswitch module installed somewhere?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

JB292 said:


> Sorry for my lack of knowledge. He added 2 new boxes., an HR54 and a C61k, The LNB has the following numbers:SL3K4NR2-01 and XEK3C1531A0297. The C61K is connected to the 4K TV.
> 
> I also added whole home DVR, and I was under the impression that all HD DVR's would be connected as one. I have an HR22 that still has it's own recordings, but I can't see it from anywhere else, or access my other HR23. Is the HR 22 not compatible , or am I wrong with my assumption?


Both the HR22 and HR23 are SWM compatible and should work.

But if you have the HR54 (7/5 tuners) and one each HR22 and HR23, you either have 11 or 9 tuners.

I don't know the nomenclature of your LNB and whether it supports 11 (or 9) tuners. Do you have one wire coming off the LNB and then that is split to your boxes? Or do you have 4 wires going to a SWM 16 and then 1 wire from there to each box? (and if that multi-switch is a SWM8, you need DIRECTV to change that to a SWM 16 based on your equipment).

While waiting someone to answer the LNB question, go to your HR22/HR23 and under Settings, go to Whole Home and make sure the Share Playlist is set to Yes. Then ensure that under External Device, you have External Access, Current Program and Recordings also set to Yes.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

trh said:


> Both the HR22 and HR23 are SWM compatible and should work.
> 
> But if you have the HR54 (7/5 tuners) and one each HR22 and HR23, you either have 11 or 9 tuners.
> 
> ...


The model number he posted is for a four output legacy SL-3 LNB. Which is why I asked him about the SWiM multiswitch.

Also check the HR22 to make sure the tech. installed a receiver DECA.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> The model number he posted is for a four output legacy SL-3 LNB. Which is why I asked him about the SWiM multiswitch.
> 
> Also check the HR22 to make sure the tech. installed a receiver DECA.


Yes, I was typing my response and missed your post.

Also, won't the HR23 need a DECA also?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

trh said:


> Yes, I was typing my response and missed your post.
> 
> Also, won't the HR23 need a DECA also?


Yes ...

But since the poster said he could see the HR23 I gather it must be hooked up and set correctly for WH.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Yes ...
> 
> But since the poster said he could see the HR23 I gather it must be hooked up and set correctly for WH.


I read post #179 that he was also having issues with the HR23.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

trh said:


> I read post #179 that he was also having issues with the HR23.


Ok, while it's written a little confusing as to one or two receivers aren't being seen on WH. Perhaps he's having trouble with both. So therefore he needs to check the HR23 for a receiver DECA as well.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Jammasterd (Jul 6, 2006)

104,105 and 106 are listed in the Guide.


----------



## JB292 (Apr 25, 2009)

OK, I just looked at the setup, except for outside. I "think" it's 4 wires going under the house, with 1 wire going to each receiver. As for the equipment, he added the HR54 and C61. I already "owned" an HR 22, 23, and 24. The 24 I can see. The 23 seemed to have died today, I can't get it to power up at all, and the HR 22 IS set to whole home dvr. I still can't see it from the living room, where I have the C61. The 24 I can see. I have a service call tomorrow to replace the dead 23, so I'll make sure everything is OK before he leaves.

Again, pardon my ignorance, what is a DECA? It appears from a search it's a network device that resembles the old B Band converters?


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

JB292 said:


> OK, I just looked at the setup, except for outside. I "think" it's 4 wires going under the house, with 1 wire going to each receiver. As for the equipment, he added the HR54 and C61. I already "owned" an HR 22, 23, and 24. The 24 I can see. The 23 seemed to have died today, I can't get it to power up at all, and the HR 22 IS set to whole home dvr. I still can't see it from the living room, where I have the C61. The 24 I can see. I have a service call tomorrow to replace the dead 23, so I'll make sure everything is OK before he leaves.
> 
> Again, pardon my ignorance, what is a DECA? It appears from a search it's a network device that resembles the old B Band converters?


I think HoTat2 was correct -- your 24 is working because it has an internal DECA. Your 22 and 23 each need one. Looks like this:

http://pimages.solidsignal.com/DECA1MR01_zoom.jpg


----------



## alnielsen (Dec 31, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Same here with the same setup as yours. But the 4K channels are on 104-106.
> 
> Can't tune any of them except ch. 106 which is just showing the DIRECTV slate in 1080i for now. But reads in the info. as the channel for the upcomming golf broadcast.
> 
> ...


103 was previously showing as PPV 4K. It's now back to 3D.


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

JB292 said:


> Sorry for my lack of knowledge. He added 2 new boxes., an HR54 and a C61k, The LNB has the following numbers:SL3K4NR2-01 and XEK3C1531A0297. The C61K is connected to the 4K TV.
> 
> I also added whole home DVR, and I was under the impression that all HD DVR's would be connected as one. I have an HR22 that still has it's own recordings, but I can't see it from anywhere else, or access my other HR23. Is the HR 22 not compatible , or am I wrong with my assumption?


The HR22 is compatible, but it needs to be connected using a CCK so it can receive Ethernet over coax to see and be seen by the other receivers in the house. You should be able to view recordings from any DVR on any receiver on the home network (DVR or non-DVR), but only one recording from a HR2x can be viewed at a time. The HR34, HR44, and HR54 can serve multiple recordings at a time (i.e., three different TVs on the network can watch recordings from one Genie at the same time).


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

JB292 said:


> I have a service call tomorrow to replace the dead 23, so I'll make sure everything is OK before he leaves.


Please let us know the outcome after your service call.


----------



## Jammasterd (Jul 6, 2006)

Channel 104 4K is odd-weird. 
Sometimes there's a show on and other times the screen says programming will be right back. 
Audio sometimes disappears when changing channels and returning to the 4K channel.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

Jammasterd said:


> Channel 104 4K is odd-weird.
> Sometimes there's a show on and other times the screen says programming will be right back.
> Audio sometimes disappears when changing channels and returning to the 4K channel.


When it does work, what do the channels Broadcast ?


----------



## JB292 (Apr 25, 2009)

trh said:


> Please let us know the outcome after your service call.


It was simple enough. I had already deduced from here that I needed the DECA for the HR 22. He replaced the dead HR23 with an HR 24. I was so excited to have whole home DVR working correctly, that I completely forgot about asking about the LNB. Old age and CRS sucks, LOL. I do remember him saying that I had a SWM 16 switch.


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

JB292 said:


> It was simple enough. I had already deduced from here that I needed the DECA for the HR 22. He replaced the dead HR23 with an HR 24. I was so excited to have whole home DVR working correctly, that I completely forgot about asking about the LNB. Old age and CRS sucks, LOL. I do remember him saying that I had a SWM 16 switch.


Glad it is all working now. Yes, if you didn't have the SWM16, your system wouldn't have worked.


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

Jammasterd said:


> Channel 104 4K is odd-weird.
> Sometimes there's a show on and other times the screen says programming will be right back.
> Audio sometimes disappears when changing channels and returning to the 4K channel.


There's no ads on channel 104 so in between programming they have that "be right back" screen.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Jammasterd said:


> Channel 104 4K is odd-weird.
> Sometimes there's a show on and other times the screen says programming will be right back.
> Audio sometimes disappears when changing channels and returning to the 4K channel.


It's a test channel.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

9800 is a test channel; recently 104,105 and 106 become regular 4K channels as DTV system tables reveal.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

P Smith said:


> 9800 is a test channel; recently 104,105 and 106 become regular 4K channels as DTV system tables reveal.


There's nothing "regular" about them at this time. They are being used for testing.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

yeah, sure ... "used" but not anymore


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

P Smith said:


> yeah, sure ... "used" but not anymore


As a tester I can tell you they are still testing with those channels. Are you a tester? Didn't think so..


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

nope, I'm not
and again according a fact: latest DTV system tables define the three 10x channels as regular, not as test channels


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

P Smith said:


> nope, I'm not
> and again according a fact: latest DTV system tables define the three 10x channels as regular, not as test channels


Well without being a tester you have no idea what's going on with them, do you? They are not "regular" at all. They come and go, content isn't following a guide, etc. They are TEST channels at this time.


----------



## sat4r (Aug 27, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Sorry if I missed the description here, but which LNB is this?
> 
> The Digital Reverse Band 3 LNB by PBI under test?
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## sat4r (Aug 27, 2006)

I have a Slimline 3 that DTV says that works with 4K setup My question is that true or are they trying not to change it out?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

sat4r said:


> I have a Slimline 3 that DTV says that works with 4K setup My question is that true or are they trying not to change it out?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It's true on one hand ....

But on the other hand you are entitled to request a changeout to a RB LNB since you are a 4K customer for future-proofing.

So you may as well get it over with now even though actual broadcasting of 4K programming from the RB is still probably months away.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Jammasterd (Jul 6, 2006)

I keep going back and forth from the Masters coverage(106) and (104) Guitar Center Sessions- Chicago.
I lose audio.
I have to go to a HD channel then back to the 4K channels to get sound back. 

My mini is connected directly to a Onkyo receiver.
This audio loss did not happen before today.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

RunnerFL said:


> Well without being a tester you have no idea what's going on with them, do you? They are not "regular" at all. They come and go, content isn't following a guide, etc. They are TEST channels at this time.


Oh ... from this document for instance to DIRECTV sales personnel effective 3/30/2016, I too thought like P. Smith that these 4K channels were out of test and had formally launched by now.

Why remove the "*TEST" moniker for them in the system tables and make the channels visible to DIRECTV customers in general?

View attachment 4K_Channels_2016_Q1.pdf


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Oh ... from this document for instance to DIRECTV sales personnel effective 3/30/2016, I too thought like P. Smith that these 4K channels were out of test and had formally launched by now.
> 
> Why remove the "*TEST" moniker for them in the system tables and make the channels visible to DIRECTV customers in general?
> 
> ...


Documents mean nothing. Watch the channels and you'll clearly see they are still testing.


----------



## sat4r (Aug 27, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> It's true on one hand ....
> 
> But on the other hand you are entitled to request a changeout to a RB LNB since you are a 4K customer for future-proofing.
> 
> ...


----------



## sat4r (Aug 27, 2006)

I talked to a manager at DTV and he told me you are going to get the upgrade as time goes and more 4K channels are released but your ok for now Does not surprise me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## thyname (May 10, 2015)

Question: if I have only one RVU 4K tv and this one tv is connected to an HR55, can I use the RVU to watch 4K linear channels? I realize there is extra cost for RVU. Thanks!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

thyname said:


> Question: if I have only one RVU 4K tv and this one tv is connected to an HR55, can I use the RVU to watch 4K linear channels? I realize there is extra cost for RVU. Thanks!
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Yep ...

And just to note, it's the "HR54" ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## thyname (May 10, 2015)

HoTat2 said:


> Yep ...
> 
> And just to note, it's the "HR54" ...
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Sorry, you are right. HR54. It was a typo.

No need to unplug any cables from HR54 and/or tv?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

thyname said:


> Sorry, you are right. HR54. It was a typo.
> 
> No need to unplug any cables from HR54 and/or tv?


The RVU TV will need to be hooked up (at least initially) via ethernet through a CCK adapter (preferably the USB powered one) to the satellite coax network the HR54 is on.

Check with DIRECTV though before doing this yourself, as they may request an installer come out to do it before they will activate the built-in RVU client of the TV. Plus the tech. may have the new USB-CCK specifically designed for RVU TV setups to give you for free.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## thyname (May 10, 2015)

So basically the HR just sits there not hooked up to anything? There is only one 4K RVU tv


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

thyname said:


> So basically the HR just sits there not hooked up to anything? There is only one 4K RVU tv
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Not necessarily. ..

Many don't care for the generally slower perfomance of the RVU TV option so leave the Genie connected by HDMI to use for all non-4K viewing and channel surfing. Then switch the TV to the RVU connection input only when needed for viewing/channel surfing 4K programming.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

thyname said:


> So basically the HR just sits there not hooked up to anything? There is only one 4K RVU tv
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Don't forget,
you get the benefit of paying for (2) Boxes every month.


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

I thought the first tv fee was discounted off?


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

Ok, I got my 4K stuff installed this morning. Amen Corner looks great by the way! My question is, is it just my eyes or does the guide and menu graphics on the mini genie not look as sharp and crisp as my previous HR44? I have the resolution turned up as high as it will go, it just seem the letters look a little blurry.

Does my client possibly need a firmware update?


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

cypherx said:


> I thought the first tv fee was discounted off?


NOT "NEW" Customers


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

jclangston said:


> Ok, I got my 4K stuff installed this morning. Amen Corner looks great by the way! My question is, is it just my eyes or does the guide and menu graphics on the mini genie not look as sharp and crisp as my previous HR44? I have the resolution turned up as high as it will go, it just seem the letters look a little blurry.
> 
> Does my client possibly need a firmware update?


I the mini Genie "wireless" or "HARD WIRED" ?


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

It is hard wired.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

jclangston said:


> It is hard wired.


I am talking from the Splitter to the mini genie. Not the mini to the TV
How do the Graphics on the TV connected to the "MAIN Genie" appear ?


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

ragweed10 said:


> I am talking from the Splitter to the mini genie. Not the mini to the TV
> How do the Graphics on the TV connected to the "MAIN Genie" appear ?


The graphics on the tv connected to the HR54 look very crisp like I'm used to with all of my other boxes.

The client and the Genie are both running through a swm 16 switch. The installed didn't have a reverse band LNB, so I still have my old swm setup. He is coming back next week to install a reverse band LNB and get rid of my swm 16 switch.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

jclangston said:


> The graphics on the tv connected to the HR54 look very crisp like I'm used to with all of my other boxes.
> 
> The client and the Genie are both running through a swm 16 switch. The installed didn't have a reverse band LNB, so I still have my old swm setup. He is coming back next week to install a reverse band LNB and get rid of my swm 16 switch.


Let us know if this fixes the problem.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

ragweed10 said:


> Let us know if this fixes the problem.


what problem ?!


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

I don't know that I have a problem. I just noticed today when i got my C61K, the guide and menus doing look as sharp and crisp as they did on the HR44 I had. The guide looks great on the HR54 but on the client its a little blurry. I adjusted the resolution on the client but didn't notice much change.


----------



## ragweed10 (Jul 10, 2013)

P Smith said:


> what problem ?!


Look at: jclangston, on 08 Apr 2016 - 09:44 AM, Question.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

ragweed10 said:


> Look at: jclangston, on 08 Apr 2016 - 09:44 AM, Question.


are you kidding me? the post is not posted yet by your time stamp !


----------



## Bill Broderick (Aug 25, 2006)

P Smith said:


> are you kidding me? the post is not posted yet by your time stamp !


He's on the west coast. What he's seeing as a 9:44am time stamp in San Diego, I'm seeing as a 12:44pm on Long Island.


----------



## HarryG (Jul 9, 2007)

Jammasterd said:


> I keep going back and forth from the Masters coverage(106) and (104) Guitar Center Sessions- Chicago.
> I lose audio.
> I have to go to a HD channel then back to the 4K channels to get sound back.
> 
> ...


I'm having the same issue. The problem is not with your Onkyo receiver. I disconnected the HDMI cable from my Yamaha receiver, and plugged it directly into an HDMI port on my 4K TV. Still had the same issue of no audio on Channels 104 and 106. Audio will return to either 4K channel by switching to Channel 200, and then back to 104 or 106. Lack of reliable audio on a newly launched channel that has undergone engineering diagnostics and testing for a period of time (prior to launch) is disappointing.


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

Don't really think this should be disappointing. All the 4K users are early adopters and this type of thing is to be expected I think.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

texasbrit said:


> Don't really think this should be disappointing. All the 4K users are early adopters and this type of thing is to be expected I think.


not today when DTV opened 4K streaming to regular customers ! not CE participants
testing and adopting time does cut here

or DTV will follow dish bad trend to pinching guinea pigs eg customers?


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

jclangston said:


> Ok, I got my 4K stuff installed this morning. Amen Corner looks great by the way! My question is, is it just my eyes or does the guide and menu graphics on the mini genie not look as sharp and crisp as my previous HR44? * I have the resolution turned up as high as it will go*, it just seem the letters look a little blurry.
> 
> Does my client possibly need a firmware update?


How do you "turn up" the resolution?


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

I WANT MORE said:


> How do you "turn up" the resolution?


I originally had my 4k rvu set up in the BR and the guide looked dull and washed out. Tech switched back to C61 and guide now looks normal. Maybe call the tech back to look into it.


----------



## gator1234 (Jul 21, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Not necessarily. ..
> 
> Many don't care for the generally slower perfomance of the RVU TV option so leave the Genie connected by HDMI to use for all non-4K viewing and channel surfing. Then switch the TV to the RVU connection input only when needed for viewing/channel surfing 4K programming.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


So it is just a matter of changing the input on the TV to go back and forth between the Genie HR54 and the RVU 4K TV?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

people at avsforum reporting RVU (using 1 Gb Ethernet) is fast then C61K


----------



## gator1234 (Jul 21, 2007)

So if you have an HR54 and a RVU 4K TV then there would be no additional charge for 4K other than maybe an installation charge? Of course unless you need to upgrade to one of the packages.


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

You pay the same receiver fee for an RVU set as you would for a C61K


----------



## NR4P (Jan 16, 2007)

gator1234 said:


> So if you have an HR54 and a RVU 4K TV then there would be no additional charge for 4K other than maybe an installation charge? Of course unless you need to upgrade to one of the packages.


Yes you need Ultimate or Premier for the 4K linear services


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

texasbrit said:


> Don't really think this should be disappointing. All the 4K users are early adopters and this type of thing is to be expected I think.


_*RunnerFL *_has stated that those channels are for testing at this moment and I think anything that happens on those channels should be taken with a grain of salt.

Rich


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Rich said:


> _*RunnerFL *_has stated that those channels are for testing at this moment and I think anything that happens on those channels should be taken with a grain of salt.
> 
> Rich


Exactly...


----------



## thyname (May 10, 2015)

ragweed10 said:


> Don't forget,
> you get the benefit of paying for (2) Boxes every month.


I am aware of that. I have not decided yet. I still have the HR44. I don't care about golf, and already have multiple sources for 4K and HDR content (Netflix, Amazon and the Samsung BD 4K player)

Maybe when they start live broadcasts in 4K for soccer or NFL, I will really start implementing. Hopefully, DTV has a 4K DVR available by then, or maybe I switch to Dish and Hopper 3....


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Rich said:


> _*RunnerFL *_has stated that those channels are for testing at this moment and I think anything that happens on those channels should be taken with a grain of salt.


With all due respect, DIRECTV is advertising these 4K channels as part of their 4K service.
DIRECTV is charging customers for their subscriptions.

Perhaps DIRECTV should not be advertising these channels if they are only "beta" or "test" channels?

http://www.directv.com/technology/4k


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

James Long said:


> With all due respect, DIRECTV is advertising these 4K channels as part of their 4K service.
> DIRECTV is charging customers for their subscriptions.
> 
> Perhaps DIRECTV should not be advertising these channels if they are only "beta" or "test" channels?
> ...


You're right, they shouldn't be advertising them yet because they are clearly just testing channels. The channels go in and out, not everyone who should be getting them is getting them, guide data isn't always right, audio hiccups, etc.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

with such _small_ hiccups DTV wouldn't constitute them as test channels in a view of DTV marketing/billing Depts


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> with such _small_ hiccups DTV wouldn't constitute them as test channels in a view of DTV marketing/billing Depts


I agree;

DIRECTV may be hard at work trying to fix bugs and glitches on the fly. And could be propably faulted for offering the service too soon before it was ready.

Certainly wouldn't be the first time DIRECTV has done this.

But this service is no longer in the testing phase and has formally launched.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

At least any issues weren't like the play from beginning bug. 

Sent from my Priv using Tapatalk


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

P Smith said:


> with such _small_ hiccups DTV wouldn't constitute them as test channels in a view of DTV marketing/billing Depts


They aren't small at all.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

P Smith said:


> with such _small_ hiccups DTV wouldn't constitute them as test channels in a view of DTV marketing/billing Depts


Gee, that must mean that marketing and engineering aren't on the same page. Has that ever happened before? :blackeye:


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

No audio at all on 106 right now... "Formally launched" my butt...


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

RunnerFL said:


> No audio at all on 106 right now... "Formally launched" my butt...


Well just last night while watching CNN I saw a DIRECTV advertisement for the Masters in 4K on channel 106.

Why would they do things like that unless the service is formally launched?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Jammasterd (Jul 6, 2006)

Ch 104 is black, but I can hear it.
They hit the wrong switch, haha!


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

HoTat2 said:


> Well just last night while watching CNN I saw a DIRECTV advertisement for the Masters in 4K on channel 106.
> 
> Why would they do things like that unless the service is formally launched?
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


These ads have been airing for a couple of weeks. It mentions a channel that most people can't see and only in the fine print does it tell you that you need special equipment. I know fine print is just that - fine - but I can't read the fine print on my smaller bedroom TV, but I just barely can make it out on my bigger TV. I would be curious as to the number of people who actually had the equipment and watched the 4K event. I am really starting to dislike 4K - it seems to be taking the attention away from SD to HD, which is an actual picture improvement, vs HD to 4K which only matters on really big sets from what I can tell.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

RunnerFL said:


> No audio at all on 106 right now... "Formally launched" my butt...


Formally launched but not ready for prime time?

Generally speaking, using the "these are test channels" excuse ends when the channels are launched. Perhaps DIRECTV could be giving a better "first impression" than any reported glitches. But to say that the channels are not "launched" just so one can use the "test channels" excuse? Sorry - not buying that.

One might as well claim that the HR34 was not launched and point to the litany of complaints about it over the years.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

James Long said:


> Formally launched but not ready for prime time?


Sure, I could live with that or "Launched but still being used to test". And 106 is even now gone since The Masters is over.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Well just last night while watching CNN I saw a DIRECTV advertisement for the Masters in 4K on channel 106.
> 
> Why would they do things like that unless the service is formally launched?
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Why would they have a commercial that states you can get D* for only $19.95 a month. Why would they blatantly lie about how MRV works on one of their commercials? Might as well get used to it, most sheeple don't even know they're not telling the truth.

Rich


----------



## Jammasterd (Jul 6, 2006)

Getting tired of having to reset the mini Genie to be able to watch 104 properly. 
Either there's no picture or no sound. 
Sometimes even taped shows from 104 are blacked out but I can hear them. 
I get "this location not authorized" error. 

Bad box?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Jammasterd said:


> Getting tired of having to reset the mini Genie to be able to watch 104 properly.
> Either there's no picture or no sound.
> Sometimes even taped shows from 104 are blacked out but I can hear them.
> I get "this location not authorized" error.
> ...


Or bad bug, ... among the many others it seems are plaguing DIRECTV's 4K service rollout here early on.

However, it wouldn't hurt to have DIRECTV to come out and try swapping the C61K box out just to be sure.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

DirecTV announced today that up to 25 MLB Network games will be available in 4K starting with this Friday's Dodgers vs Giants game.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

AngryManMLS said:


> DirecTV announced today that up to 25 MLB Network games will be available in 4K starting with this Friday's Dodgers vs Giants game.


That is awesome news, I will be there!

Hopefully it doesn't require a reverse band LNB since they aren't in my area yet. 

Actually since it will be only 25 games, they will only need one channel so likely still on the Ka band.


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

They will probably air them on 104.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

AngryManMLS said:


> They will probably air them on 104.


Very true, I realized that after my post and the initial rush of excitement.


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

mutelight said:


> That is awesome news, I will be there!
> 
> Hopefully it doesn't require a reverse band LNB since they aren't in my area yet.
> 
> Actually since it will be only 25 games, they will only need one channel so likely still on the Ka band.





AngryManMLS said:


> DirecTV announced today that up to 25 MLB Network games will be available in 4K starting with this Friday's Dodgers vs Giants game.


Excellent. Where did you see this, on their website? Is a schedule available?


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

ep1974 said:


> Excellent. Where did you see this, on their website? Is a schedule available?


There are a couple articles out there, here is one: http://fortune.com/2016/04/12/directv-4k-major-league-baseball/

I haven't seen a full schedule anywhere yet.


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

mutelight said:


> There are a couple articles out there, here is one: http://fortune.com/2016/04/12/directv-4k-major-league-baseball/
> 
> I haven't seen a full schedule anywhere yet.


Thank you.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

AngryManMLS said:


> They will probably air them on 104.


Most likely 106 actually.


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

RunnerFL said:


> Most likely 106 actually.


You are right I completely forgot until now that 106 is for events like this. This gives me further confidence of perhaps a few NFL games happening in 4K this season.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

AngryManMLS said:


> You are right I completely forgot until now that 106 is for events like this. This gives me further confidence of perhaps a few NFL games happening in 4K this season.


That would be amazing. Fingers crossed!

If I recall correctly they're already using some 4K cameras for regular broadcasts so they have the ability to zoom the frame and retain detail.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

The press release from AT&T:
http://about.att.com/story/mlb_network_showcase_games_in_4k_ultra_hd.html

It's going to be the MLB Network showcase games, the broadcasts that MLB Network produces themselves as opposed to the simulcasts of RSN coverage, and they'll be subject to blackout. (So people in Dodgers and Giants territory will be blacked out of the first game)


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

KyL416 said:


> (So people in Dodgers and Giants territory will be blacked out of the first game)


Nooooooooo!


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

You would think given that the regional broadcast isn't in 4K that the black out issue would be taken into consideration a bit more for those markets.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

AngryManMLS said:


> You would think given that the regional broadcast isn't in 4K that the black out issue would be taken into consideration a bit more for those markets.


They blacked out Ted Williams funeral. 4k wouldn't thaw them.

Sent from my Priv using Tapatalk


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

AngryManMLS said:


> DirecTV announced today that up to 25 MLB Network games will be available in 4K starting with this Friday's Dodgers vs Giants game.


And what do you need to get them? Aside from a 4K set. Did you see any Yankees games on that list?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mutelight said:


> There are a couple articles out there, here is one: http://fortune.com/2016/04/12/directv-4k-major-league-baseball/
> 
> I haven't seen a full schedule anywhere yet.


And I did see the two Yankees games on that list. I also saw the requirement for the Ultimate or Premier packages and the extra equipment. I saw an interesting column the other day about ATT "price gouging their customers". Glad someone else noticed that.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

AngryManMLS said:


> You would think given that the regional broadcast isn't in 4K that the black out issue would be taken into consideration a bit more for those markets.


Aww, that's just being logical. D* doesn't do logical.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dpeters11 said:


> They blacked out Ted Williams funeral. 4k wouldn't thaw them.
> 
> Sent from my Priv using Tapatalk


I had forgotten that. What a scummy thing to do.

Rich


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Rich said:


> Aww, that's just being logical. D* doesn't do logical.


It's not up to DirecTV if it's blacked out, take it up with MLB or convince YES to not air the game locally those nights since MLB Network can only air the game in market if it's not airing on a local channel.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> It's not up to DirecTV if it's blacked out, take it up with MLB or convince YES to not air the game locally those nights since MLB Network can only air the game in market if it's not airing on a local channel.


No matter who's to blame, I think blackouts are an anachronism and should be done away with. With MLB and the NFL making billions of dollars each year, why they continue this practice is beyond me.

Rich


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

Rich said:


> And I did see the two Yankees games on that list. I also saw the requirement for the Ultimate or Premier packages and the extra equipment. I saw an interesting column the other day about ATT "price gouging their customers". Glad someone else noticed that.
> 
> Rich


Yup, requirements are exactly the same as The Masters, so far from a surprise.

With the 4K programing that they have now, it is certainly tough to justify getting a higher package with the main driver being 4K. It is a great perk if you were going to have all the hardware and correct package anyway though.



KyL416 said:


> It's not up to DirecTV if it's blacked out, take it up with MLB or convince YES to not air the game locally those nights since MLB Network can only air the game in market if it's not airing on a local channel.


Exactly this.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

The problem is, outside of national exclusives like Sunday Night Baseball, the rights themselves are split in market and out of market. In market the carriage fees go to the RSN and is split amongst the teams they air, out of market the carriage fees go to the national networks who split it with the leagues they have the rights to, while for Extra Innings the money is split between the provider and MLB.

If it wasn't for the RSNs, many of which are also responsible for the cameras and production facilities at the stadiums that are also used by national and international broadcasters, the games themselves wouldn't be available at all. And if they just removed the in market blackouts, there's nothing stopping providers from refusing carriage to the RSNs and pocket the money they'll get from in market subscribers who would now have no choice but to get Extra Innings for local games.


----------



## Riverpilot (Aug 13, 2010)

Tried calling a couple of times asking for a HR54 to replace my HR44 due to 4k. New TV will be here Friday so I figured why not? Won't do the exchange without a new 2 year agreement. Which, ya.... I get it but nope. I'll wait until AT&T/Directv comes out with new equipment that doesn't require 2 boxes for one TV. :shrugs:


----------



## dwrats_56 (Apr 21, 2007)

Woohoo!!!! With the MLB announcement I decided to take the plunge to 4k. Just scheduled the HR54 upgrade for Saturday. Got a no charge, no 2 year contract extention, no changes in my current monthly. The CSR was great. This is going to be great.


----------



## thyname (May 10, 2015)

That is great news! Live sports in 4K is coming! I don't care about baseball, but this is a good omen for NFL and soccer. Especially when knowing that EPL is already broadcast in 4K in UK


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

I'm hoping once ESPN 4K launches that at least some of the weekly MLS games will be in 4K. Because we all need to see Bobby Shuttleworth and his overkill amount of gel in his hair in 4K! LOL!


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

the jays are airing all home games in 4K. Now if they make playoffs will they try to make out a deal have a 4k feed for the playoff home games,


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

JoeTheDragon said:


> the jays are airing all home games in 4K. Now if they make playoffs will they try to make out a deal have a 4k feed for the playoff home games,


Rogers SportsNet doesn't produce playoff games, once the playoffs start they have to simulcast the coverage from either TBS, MLB Network or Fox, even if the Blue Jays are in the playoffs. The only thing special they did was have a live in stadium report during some commercial breaks, but because of MLB regulations, the camera shot couldn't show the field. So if there is 4K coverage of the post season, it will be up to the MLB Network or Fox or TBS to produce it.

Oddly enough Canada did have the Masters coverage in 4K as well, but since TSN has the rights, it was only available on Bell Fibe TV, and not on Rogers or any other provider or Bell Satellite (the former ExpressVu)


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

thyname said:


> That is great news! Live sports in 4K is coming! I don't care about baseball, but this is a good omen for NFL and soccer. Especially when knowing that EPL is already broadcast in 4K in UK
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Technically it is streamed and not broadcasted.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

AngryManMLS said:


> I'm hoping once ESPN 4K launches that at least some of the weekly MLS games will be in 4K. Because we all need to see Bobby Shuttleworth and his overkill amount of gel in his hair in 4K! LOL!


I think Premiere League games are much more likely to be carried on Directv rather than MLS. That's where the big money is, and 4K is a little further along in Europe. Apologies to your nickname, but MLS just isn't a big enough deal in the US to justify the investment of producing and uplinking it in 4K. Maybe the championship finals or something, but I'd be surprised to see it weekly like they're taking about with MLB.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Rich said:


> No matter who's to blame, I think blackouts are an anachronism and should be done away with. With MLB and the NFL making billions of dollars each year, why they continue this practice is beyond me.


Because the team owners are worried about TV hurting stadium attendance. College football doesn't have blackout rules, and attendance has dropped for five straight seasons - even some top tier teams doing very well have failed to fill every seat like they used to. There are many potential reasons, but one contributing factor might be how most people have big screen HDTVs in their home now, making it a more attractive proposition than a decade ago when most were watching in SD on a much smaller TV. With TVs getting even larger, and 4K coming, that may only get worse.

Sure you can argue they're already making billions, who cares if the NFL and MLB fill the stands or not, but it isn't just the team owners who care. The cities that funded the stadiums in many cases, and the owners of the businesses who depend on those crowds will also do everything they can to keep the blackout rules in place.

What is ridiculous to me is how far they extend. The whole state of Iowa is covered under blackout rules for the Cubs, White Sox, Cardinals, Royals, Twins and Brewers. It is pretty far from the NW corner of Iowa to St. Louis, or the SW corner to Milwaukee, etc. I really can't see anyone in Iowa making a decision on whether to attend any of these team's home games based on whether they can watch it on TV or not. Now people who live within an hour and a half of the stadium, that's a different matter.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Only the NFL blackouts are sell out related, and in those cases it only affects a 75 mile radius, not the entire TV territory of a team. (i.e. if somehow a NY Giants game doesn't sellout, it would be blacked out in NYC but nearby markets like Albany and Binghamton would still be able to get the game on TV)

NHL, MLS, NBA and MLB's blackouts are to protect local RSN rights and have nothing to do with stadium sellouts. (If that were the case there would be a LOT of daytime and late season games not on TV at all) They divided up the country so every part of the country is claimed by at least one team, along with inbetween areas that get multiple teams like Northeastern PA where, because of the proximity to other cities, there's an equily rabid fanbase of the Mets, Yankees, Phillies and Pirates. It's either that or losing fans in smaller cities and rural areas because they wouldn't get any local pro sports on TV without subscribing to $150+ out of market packages for every sport they want to watch.

Plus without these neighboring areas being claimed, it would mean the RSNs would have to jack up their rates even more if they can only get money from one DMA, while the neighboring DMAs are forced to get packages like Extra Innings where most of the money goes to the provider and the league instead of the RSN and teams.


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

slice1900 said:


> I think Premiere League games are much more likely to be carried on Directv rather than MLS. That's where the big money is, and 4K is a little further along in Europe. Apologies to your nickname, but MLS just isn't a big enough deal in the US to justify the investment of producing and uplinking it in 4K. Maybe the championship finals or something, but I'd be surprised to see it weekly like they're taking about with MLB.


Just a gentle reminder NBC has the rights to English Premiere League. Meanwhile ESPN does air a weekly MLS game and this year has been putting more of said broadcasts on the main ESPN as compared to the past where they got relegated to ESPN 2.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

the topic is ruined totally 

:backtotop:


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

slice1900 said:


> Because the team owners are worried about TV hurting stadium attendance. College football doesn't have blackout rules, and attendance has dropped for five straight seasons - even some top tier teams doing very well have failed to fill every seat like they used to. There are many potential reasons, but one contributing factor might be how most people have big screen HDTVs in their home now, making it a more attractive proposition than a decade ago when most were watching in SD on a much smaller TV. With TVs getting even larger, and 4K coming, that may only get worse.
> 
> Sure you can argue they're already making billions, who cares if the NFL and MLB fill the stands or not, but it isn't just the team owners who care. The cities that funded the stadiums in many cases, and the owners of the businesses who depend on those crowds will also do everything they can to keep the blackout rules in place.
> 
> What is ridiculous to me is how far they extend. The whole state of Iowa is covered under blackout rules for the Cubs, White Sox, Cardinals, Royals, Twins and Brewers. It is pretty far from the NW corner of Iowa to St. Louis, or the SW corner to Milwaukee, etc. I really can't see anyone in Iowa making a decision on whether to attend any of these team's home games based on whether they can watch it on TV or not. Now people who live within an hour and a half of the stadium, that's a different matter.


Blackouts are in place not to protect the leagues, but to protect the local broadcast stations and networks that are paying for the exclusive rights to carry the games. Only the NFL has blackouts within a certain distance of the home stadium if the game is not sold out, but everyone, including college football and basketball has blackouts of some sort.

The ACC used to have the most extensive blackout rules in college sports. If any ACC game was broadcast on a local station, all other ACC games were blacked out. That has been changed, and now the ACC is like every other league with respect to blackouts, but they are still probably the worst because they do not coordinate their local and national broadcasts as well as the Big 10 and SEC do. Even before the SEC network launched as a stand alone network, there was an SEC network made up of local stations in the SEC footprint. Games that were not on CBS, FOX Sports, or one of the ESPN channels were broadcast on the SEC network, so there was no need to apply blackouts. The ACC still has their own broadcast network, but often times the same game is on the ACC network and on ESPN. When that happens, ESPN is blacked out in DMAs that are showing the game locally, and those of us who live in ACC territory are forced to watch the Raycom/Jefferson Pilot announcers instead of the ESPN announcers. Until recently, when CBS in the Raleigh-Durham DMA moved from WRAL to WNCN, WRAL would pre-empt the SEC game on CBS to show an ACC game that was shown everywhere else on ESPN. The ACC games are still shown on WRAL, but since the SEC games are now on WNCN, there is no conflict for me.

MLB is the worst because of the archaic way in which territories are determined. This dates back to the pre 1956 days when Chicago and St. Louis were the farthest west cities that had a MLB team. Territories might not make sense, but blackout rules are the same. If a local channel has paid for the rights to a game, the game cannot be shown in that area by any other channel. Regardless of whether the game is on a x.2 sub-channel in SD and there is a nationally available 4K broadcast, if the local station paid for the exclusive rights to the game, no one else can show it.

With the exception of NFL games that are blacked out locally because the game was not sold out, the blackouts are in place to protect the local station and not MLB or the viewers. DirecTV has no control over where it can and cannot show a game. The leagues could change the way they sell the rights to the games, but without exclusivity protected by blackout rules, no local station would pay to show a game.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mutelight said:


> Yup, requirements are exactly the same as The Masters, so far from a surprise.
> 
> With the 4K programing that they have now, it is certainly tough to justify getting a higher package with the main driver being 4K. It is a great perk if you were going to have all the hardware and correct package anyway though.


I just dumped the Premier package last year (never used it for anything but the occasional series and I can pick them up on the various apps and just keep the apps active until I finish the series) and I'm not about to go back to it to watch a couple baseball games. My upscaled PQ on the Yankees games is superb (well, it's a lot better than my 1080p plasmas) and I can live with that.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> The problem is, outside of national exclusives like Sunday Night Baseball, the rights themselves are split in market and out of market. In market the carriage fees go to the RSN and is split amongst the teams they air, out of market the carriage fees go to the national networks who split it with the leagues they have the rights to, while for Extra Innings the money is split between the provider and MLB.
> 
> If it wasn't for the RSNs, many of which are also responsible for the cameras and production facilities at the stadiums that are also used by national and international broadcasters, the games themselves wouldn't be available at all. And if they just removed the in market blackouts, there's nothing stopping providers from refusing carriage to the RSNs and pocket the money they'll get from in market subscribers who would now have no choice but to get Extra Innings for local games.


I'd still be perfectly happy to pay for the RSNs, not that the games I want are ever blacked out but the idea of blacked out games just bothers me.

Rich


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

Rich said:


> I'd still be perfectly happy to pay for the RSNs, not that the games I want are ever blacked out but the idea of blacked out games just bothers me.
> 
> Rich


But even if you paid for the RSNs, the MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL games would be blacked out if you do not live in that region. The RSNs are only licensed to air the game in specific geographical areas, and even though you can pay to receive the out-of-market RSN, that RSN cannot show the game outside of its own footprint. College blackouts can be different, and usually (but not always) you can get a game on an out-of-market RSN. Sometimes, when you cannot get it on one out-of-market RSN, you can get it on a different out-of-market RSN. It all depends on who has paid for exclusive rights to show the game and in which geographical location the rights are valid.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

not again :facepalm: enough for blackouts in the topic


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

I found that article about D*'s "price gouging". Here's the _*link*_. I know it's a Swanni report, but I think it hits home.

Rich


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

I have been watching the 1 free 4K channel in the evenings some this week. I have caught 3 or 4 shows about science and nature that seem to be Imax films. The ones I saw were about Antarctica, garbage in space orbiting the Earth, and Coral Reefs. All 3 of these shows looked spectacular. Its great to see where the future of broadcast tv will be heading for the rest of this decade.


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

jclangston said:


> I have been watching the 1 free 4K channel in the evenings some this week. I have caught 3 or 4 shows about science and nature that seem to be Imax films. The ones I saw were about Antarctica, garbage in space orbiting the Earth, and Coral Reefs. All 3 of these shows looked spectacular. Its great to see where the future of broadcast tv will be heading for the rest of this decade.


Broadcast TV will not get there by the end of this decade. 4K will be limited to VOD and a few specialty channels for a long time. 4K takes up too much bandwidth to be mainstream anytime soon.


----------



## gpg (Aug 19, 2006)

I think Swanni's position is mostly sour grapes. While I think $30 is too much to charge for streaming a movie, there's nothing wrong with Sony limiting its streaming service to its tvs. It's a way to offer added value to its products that distinguishes them from Samsung, LG, Vizio etc. if I were to complain about this issue, it would be to criticize the other manufacturers for not offering services of their own.

As for his criticism of Directv, I think his position is even weaker. Directv had three choices for its 4K offering: offer it for free, offer it ala carte, or add it to selected programming packages. 4K delivery has increased costs associated with it, so Directv chose to recover them with its pricing. No surprise there although as a consumer, I would have very much preferred it added 4K for free. Directv decided to offer it "free" only to customers who subscribe to its top two packages. It could have added a 4K fee, and offered it to all customers, but then Premier and Choice subscribers would complain that they were being gouged. 

Companies place features in tiers all the time. I just got a new car, and I wanted LED headlights so I had to get a more expensive model of the car than I would otherwise need because the option was only available on the top version of the car. So I had to pay more for the base car as well as pay for the LED option. If you want the feature, you have to pay the price.

I think Swanni's strongest criticism of Directv is that it charges a tv charge for both the HR54 and an RVU tv or a 61K to receive 4K programming. That sure seems like doubling dipping to me, and it's one of the most egregious anti-consumer moves I can remember Directv doing in the 20 years that I've subscribed to the service. There had to be a better way.

I know many of you will disagree with me, but we shall see how other providers charge for 4K programming when they begin offering it. My guess is that all of them will find a way to extract more money from subscribers who want 4K service.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

fleckrj said:


> Broadcast TV will not get there by the end of this decade. 4K will be limited to VOD and a few specialty channels for a long time. 4K takes up too much bandwidth to be mainstream anytime soon.


Everything I have read has said that certainly is not the truth.

DirecTV already has the hardware in place to broadcast 50 UHD channels, possibly as soon as this year.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/12/directv-will-broadcast-live-4k-content-by-early-next-year/


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

Rich said:


> I found that article about D*'s "price gouging". Here's the _*link*_. I know it's a Swanni report, but I think it hits home.
> 
> Rich


I thought I would never say this, but I think Swanni got it right this time.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

gpg said:


> I think Swanni's strongest criticism of Directv is that it charges a tv charge for both the HR54 and an RVU tv or a 61K to receive 4K programming. That sure seems like doubling dipping to me, and it's one of the most egregious anti-consumer moves I can remember Directv doing in the 20 years that I've subscribed to the service. There had to be a better way.


It is only double dipping for someone with only one 4K TV. Otherwise you just put the HR54 on some other TV. Even if you have a house full of 4K TVs and no HDTVs, the HR54 only supports delivering 4K to one at a time so it isn't like you get any use of out having a C61K on every single TV.

This setup is temporary, it isn't like the HR54 and C61K are going to be the last STBs Directv ever makes. Would you rather they waited until the end of the year when the new hardware is ready to offer 4K programming? No one is making anyone sign up today and pay the extra $7/month, if they don't like it they don't have to get 4K.

Likely the premium packages thing is also temporary - someday there will be enough 4K channels and they'll probably institute a monthly fee for 4K service and allowed it to be added to any package. And people will ***** about that too.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

mutelight said:


> Everything I have read has said that certainly is not the truth.
> 
> DirecTV already has the hardware in place to broadcast 50 UHD channels, possibly as soon as this year.


Broadcast TV refers to over the air broadcasters ... your local ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, CW, etc stations.
DIRECTV has room for 4K/UHD. That space will be consumed by national "cable" channels such as ESPN, HBO and others - not "broadcast TV".

Also, space to broadcast does not mean space filled with broadcasts. DIRECTV has space to broadcast additional HD channels and yet still has channels that could be carried in HD stuck in SD.

At this point no one can name 50 channels that will be 4K/UHD by the end of the year. Launching a channel is bigger than DIRECTV ... I expect ESPN to launch a 4K channel because they like to be cutting edge. They had a 3D channel when companies were testing those waters. But how many other companies want to invest in a linear channel to reach a fraction of 20 million subscribers? I believe most will wait until DIRECTV is not the only linear carrier for 4K. Or keep their content PPV/VOD.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

gpg said:


> ....
> 
> I think Swanni's strongest criticism of Directv is that it charges a tv charge for both the HR54 and an RVU tv or a 61K to receive 4K programming. That sure seems like doubling dipping to me, and it's one of the most egregious anti-consumer moves I can remember Directv doing in the 20 years that I've subscribed to the service. There had to be a better way.
> 
> I know many of you will disagree with me, but we shall see how other providers charge for 4K programming when they begin offering it. My guess is that all of them will find a way to extract more money from subscribers who want 4K service.


Although in an interesting twist to this I was just thinking, with the way the equipment is designed and the existing pricing structure up to now. How can DIRECTV "fairly' (that is, in relation to what they charge other subscribers) not appear to double-dip here?

For instance, if you have a 4K setup and they don't charge you the receiver fee for the Genie, then you can potentially be getting free SD or HD programming on a second TV through the HDMI connection whereas other subscribers must pay for all their TV outlets with receiver fees.

Or if DIRECTV does not charge for the 4K RVU client, then how is that fair to all other subs. who must pay the monthly fee for all their standard RVU clients and Genie Minis since TV 4K RVU or the C61K can also serve the standard function as well?

The only way I can see for DIRECTV not in fairness double charge is to either disable all local display ports on the Genie for 4K subs. and waive the monthly receiver fee. Or limit the 4K RVU clients, on the TV or C61K, to only capable of receiving 4K programming on chs. 104-106 and then waive that fee.

And who would want either of these choices?


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

James Long said:


> Broadcast TV refers to over the air broadcasters ... your local ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, CW, etc stations.
> DIRECTV has room for 4K/UHD. That space will be consumed by national "cable" channels such as ESPN, HBO and others - not "broadcast TV".
> 
> Also, space to broadcast does not mean space filled with broadcasts. DIRECTV has space to broadcast additional HD channels and yet still has channels that could be carried in HD stuck in SD.
> ...


I can see broadcast as OTA as well as linear streams that are broadcast by DTV. It depends on the definition. Undoubtedly local affiliates OTA and even cable TV transmissions are a much longer way out due to the infrastructure implications.

I of course do not expect anywhere near all 50 channels to be filled this year, it will likely be a small fraction at best. My point was that they have the infrastructure in place already to serve up a large quantity of 4K content already and are far ahead of the curve compared to OTA and cable.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

bobnielsen said:


> I thought I would never say this, but I think Swanni got it right this time.


Yup, that surprised me too.

Rich


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> It is only double dipping for someone with only one 4K TV. Otherwise you just put the HR54 on some other TV. ...


And even if you have only one 4K TV, if DIRECTV waived the Genie receiver fee, how can they really be assured you won't do the later stated above at some future time behind their back so now you're getting two programming outlets for the price of one?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> And even if you have only one 4K TV, if DIRECTV waived the Genie receiver fee, how can they really be assured you won't do the later stated above at some future time behind their back so now you're getting two programming outlets for the price of one?


If they really wanted to do that, they could add support to the firmware for deactivating the ability to watch programming via the video outputs, only showing the menus. I think they view this is a non-issue because it is a temporary situation.


----------



## paranoia (Jun 13, 2014)

Rich said:


> I found that article about D*'s "price gouging". Here's the _*link*_. I know it's a Swanni report, but I think it hits home.
> 
> Rich


I think that is so true, no need for all the extra charges and higher tier packages.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

gpg said:


> I think Swanni's position is mostly sour grapes. While I think $30 is too much to charge for streaming a movie, there's nothing wrong with Sony limiting its streaming service to its tvs. It's a way to offer added value to its products that distinguishes them from Samsung, LG, Vizio etc. if I were to complain about this issue, it would be to criticize the other manufacturers for not offering services of their own.
> 
> As for his criticism of Directv, I think his position is even weaker. Directv had three choices for its 4K offering: offer it for free, offer it ala carte, or add it to selected programming packages. 4K delivery has increased costs associated with it, so Directv chose to recover them with its pricing. No surprise there although as a consumer, I would have very much preferred it added 4K for free. Directv decided to offer it "free" only to customers who subscribe to its top two packages. It could have added a 4K fee, and offered it to all customers, but then Premier and Choice subscribers would complain that they were being gouged.
> 
> ...


and there is no way that ESPN will say yes to ESPN 4K being in ultimate or higher. HBO 4k May want to be part of the HBO pack and not HBO + ultimate or higher.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I doubt ESPN will care so long as it isn't a permanent thing. With the cutbacks ESPN is having, they may have put 4K on the back burner. Previously rumor was it would be ready by beginning of the year, but here it is April and still no sign.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

JoeTheDragon said:


> and there is no way that ESPN will say yes to ESPN 4K being in ultimate or higher. HBO 4k May want to be part of the HBO pack and not HBO + ultimate or higher.


I dont think ESPN would care about that at this point in time. But I imagine they'd want a clause that said once they have so many installs for 4K something get done. But it wouldn't be blocking access to the channel. And also if you think about it, if everyone that has a 4K system could get the channel why would they care if it requires a higher package. Reality is they'd still have 100% coverage.


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

mutelight said:


> Everything I have read has said that certainly is not the truth.
> 
> DirecTV already has the hardware in place to broadcast 50 UHD channels, possibly as soon as this year.
> 
> http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/12/directv-will-broadcast-live-4k-content-by-early-next-year/


50 channels would still be far from mainstream. DirecTV has more than 200 HD channels. If all of those were taken down and the space was used to broadcast 4K, that would give DirecTV an additional 50 4K channels. DirecTV would have to double its current used and unused capacity to get to 200 4K channels or else the compression would have to be so great that it would not be possible to tell 4K from HD. By the end of the decade, DirecTV could have 50 4K channels, but I am willing to bet that 40 of those will be PPV movies and no more than 10 will be linear programming.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

fleckrj said:


> 50 channels would still be far from mainstream. DirecTV has more than 200 HD channels. If all of those were taken down and the space was used to broadcast 4K, that would give DirecTV an additional 50 4K channels. DirecTV would have to double its current used and unused capacity to get to 200 4K channels or else the compression would have to be so great that it would not be possible to tell 4K from HD. By the end of the decade, DirecTV could have 50 4K channels, but I am willing to bet that 40 of those will be PPV movies and no more than 10 will be linear programming.


When you say "all those taken down" and "additional 50 4K channels", do you mean to total 100? Just clarifying because I have not read anywhere that has indicated they would have to remove any channels to turn on the initial 50 UHD channels.

It will undoubtedly take some time to fill the initial 50 UHD channels but I am glad to see DirecTV thinking ahead by flying up the DirecTV 14 satellite to support this higher resolution content. Then they have plans to launch another one next year.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

fleckrj said:


> 50 channels would still be far from mainstream. DirecTV has more than 200 HD channels. If all of those were taken down and the space was used to broadcast 4K, that would give DirecTV an additional 50 4K channels. DirecTV would have to double its current used and unused capacity to get to 200 4K channels or else the compression would have to be so great that it would not be possible to tell 4K from HD. By the end of the decade, DirecTV could have 50 4K channels, but I am willing to bet that 40 of those will be PPV movies and no more than 10 will be linear programming.


Directv doesn't have to take down any of the current HD channels to add up to 50 4K channels. They currently have the capacity for both.


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

jclangston said:


> Directv doesn't have to take down any of the current HD channels to add up to 50 4K channels. They currently have the capacity for both.


I agree. My comment was in response to mutelite, who implied that DirecTV had the capacity to make 4K mainstream. Currently, they have the capacity for about 50 4K channels and more than 200 HD channels. If they wanted to convert all 200+ HD channels to 4K, they would need twice the capacity they have now. If they want to keep the 200+ HD channels and duplicate them in HD, they would need three times the capacity they have now. 4K is not going to be the future of broadcast TV. 4K will be limited to PPV, VOD, and a small number of linear channels for far longer than the end of this decade.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

fleckrj said:


> I agree. My comment was in response to mutelite, who implied that DirecTV had the capacity to make 4K mainstream. Currently, they have the capacity for about 50 4K channels and more than 200 HD channels. If they wanted to convert all 200+ HD channels to 4K, they would need twice the capacity they have now, so 4K is not going to be the future of broadcast TV by the end of this decade.


Nope, I was responding to you implying that they were only capable of few specialty channels and VOD, which is far from the truth, as I consider 50 far more than "a few".

Also as I mentioned they have the launch of DirecTV on the horizon which will add even more capacity. Overall it is great to see DirecTV so far ahead of the curve as far as infrastructure and capacity to serve up so much UHD once available.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

Are they calling the next sat to launch Directv 16? Any projected launch date?

i know this is off topic...just curious.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

jclangston said:


> Are they calling the next sat to launch Directv 16? Any projected launch date?
> 
> i know this is off topic...just curious.


Nothing that's been filed yet with the FCC if there is ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

And we generally know about new birds years before launch, since these aren't exactly off the shelf stock.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Why is other DTV sat should come when newest one [D15] have no load?!


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

P Smith said:


> Why is other DTV sat should come when newest one [D15] have no load?!


I actually did not realize earlier that DirecTV 15 was already in orbit.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

mutelight said:


> I actually did not realize earlier that DirecTV 15 was already in orbit.


Yep, been at it's orbital assigned slot of 102.825°W (103W nominal) since July of last year I think.

But for some reason, still none it's authorized Ka and Reverse Band payload xpndrs are in use yet.

The 8 lower Ka-hi ones I can understand, but as for the unuse of everything else? .... unknown. ..

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

paranoia said:


> I think that is so true, no need for all the extra charges and higher tier packages.


Right, and they pick a time when there's really no 4K content that's available on D* to do it. I paid for the Premium (or Premier, whatever they want to call that repetitive movie package) package for 11 years and never thought is was worth the price. Now when you can get HBO series on HBO NOW for $15 a month and watch the series and then cancel the app they think it's necessary for 4K? Not going there again.

Rich


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> Why is other DTV sat should come when newest one [D15] have no load?!


They will need to replace the satellites at 101 eventually, and since the time from announcement to orbit is about 4-5 years, we should probably not be surprised to see D16 announced before long, it just depends on how long they expect the satellites there now to last. D8 design life is until May 2017, D9S until January 2022, though D8 has fuel life beyond 2020 (they didn't say how much beyond, could be many years) If they are working fine and have enough fuel perhaps we won't see replacements announced until the next decade. I think they will need to renew D8's license within the next year, the narrative in that request should shed some light on its fuel situation.

Back to the topic of 4K here...if 4K is a raging success and most current HD channels start going 4K, they have room for more. When they eventually drop MPEG2 SD, that will free up 101 for HD which would free up enough room on 99/103 for up to 50 more 4K channels, a total of 100. If even that isn't enough, they already have a Ka license at 101 (D8 & D9S actually have Ka transponders, but they are not designed for CONUS broadcast to subscriber) so new satellites at 101 could add 48 more Ka transponders, enough for 75 more 4K channels, should there be that many 4K channels (which I doubt) Those Ka transponders at 101 would require a new LNB to receive.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

So I wonder what happened to the 4K Giants game last night? I went to bed about 10 but at that time the game hadn't aired yet and they had changed the guide to "to be announced".


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

jclangston said:


> So I wonder what happened to the 4K Giants game last night? I went to bed about 10 but at that time the game hadn't aired yet and they had changed the guide to "to be announced".


Same thing happened here. Technical problems? Maybe someone can fill us in.


----------



## dels28 (Apr 30, 2009)

I just found out the Dodgers Giants game was on 9800 or 213, so glad DTV put that in the guide to let us know. Unfortunately I missed what I found out was a beautiful presentation.


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

dels28 said:


> I just found out the Dodgers Giants game was on 9800 or 213, so glad DTV put that in the guide to let us know. Unfortunately I missed what I found out was a beautiful presentation.


9800 is only accessible for people with CE firmware.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

Channel 104 was offline last night and still off as of now.


----------



## alnielsen (Dec 31, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Yep, been at it's orbital assigned slot of 102.825°W (103W nominal) since July of last year I think.
> 
> But for some reason, still none it's authorized Ka and Reverse Band payload xpndrs are in use yet.
> 
> ...


Isn't the 103W RB slot still in dispute with the Canadians?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

alnielsen said:


> Isn't the 103W RB slot still in dispute with the Canadians?


Supposedly a coordination agreement for use of Reverse Band at 103W was reached with Canada back on April 15, 2015. But no one can seem to locate a copy of the actual agreement itself . .. At least online.

See David Ortiz's post here ...

http://dbstalk.com/index.php?/topic/[email protected]#entry3415774

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

What will be on those 50 channels that DTV wants to launch? Not sure it would be worth the extra cost upgrading and let the 4k TV upconvert the regular HD channels if the shows weren't any good? Network and cable shows aren't even in 1080p yet.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Same thing that was on the 3D channels Directv used to have. Whatever is launched by providers. If there are a lot of 4K channels launched, they'll carry them (within the limits of their contracts) If they don't, or if like the 3D channels they launch and then pull them, there won't be much. Time will tell.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

And don't look to see any [email protected] Way too marginal a gain over the cuurent HD formats to invest in that.

Heck, people are debating if the increase in PQ of 4K programming over HD is really worth it ... 

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Maybe DTV should just go all HD first and move them to that better band? Sorry I forgot which one is better.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

CraigerM said:


> Maybe DTV should just go all HD first and move them to that better band? Sorry I forgot which one is better.


What do you mean?

Eliminate SD MPEG-2/Ku band feeds?

Way too much SD legacy equipment still in customer use to do that anytime soon unfortunately.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

HoTat2 said:


> What do you mean?
> 
> Eliminate SD MPEG-2/Ku band feeds?
> 
> ...


No I actually I meant this old report. I know its by Swanni but it quotes a person from DTV.

http://www.tvpredictions.com/dhd100112.htm


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

The famous out of context quote that was full of holes...


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

KyL416 said:


> The famous out of context quote that was full of holes...


Yeah. ..

1) You cannot use LiL Ka band capacity for national HD. That makes no sense. ...

2) They are no current plans to use the Ku DBS band free of SD programming for UHD. Though perhaps Phil Goswitz thought so back in 2012.

3) Even if they had planned to use the Ku band for UHD, to think they were going to convert all customers to MPEG-4/Ka band equipment and clear out all legacy MPEG-2/Ku band gear in only 4 years was ridiculously optimistic of course.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

before DTV will cleanup of Ku tpn , they must solve a transition of APG data streams from DSS media to DVB-S[2D] and made an adaptation of net-tuner to that and re-write processing of APG in FW and at Control Center's computers/DBs.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

CraigerM said:


> What will be on those 50 channels that DTV wants to launch? _*Not sure it would be worth the extra cost upgrading*_ and let the 4k TV upconvert the regular HD channels if the shows weren't any good? Network and cable shows aren't even in 1080p yet.


Agreed. I'm gonna wait. I get a better picture on D* content than I ever did using the 4K set as an upscaler. I'm quite satisfied at the moment.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> And don't look to see any [email protected] Way too marginal a gain over the cuurent HD formats to invest in that.
> 
> _*Heck, people are debating if the increase in PQ of 4K programming over HD is really worth it *_...
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


You mean people that don't have 4K sets are doing the debating, right? I see absolutely no evidence of that debate from folks that have 4K sets.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> The famous out of context quote that was full of holes...


Would be nice to see all HD content in 1080p, that upscales really well on a 4K set.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

P Smith said:


> before DTV will cleanup of Ku tpn , they must solve a transition of APG data streams from DSS media to DVB-S[2D] and made an adaptation of net-tuner to that and re-write processing of APG in FW and at Control Center's computers/DBs.


 :scratch:

Rich


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

HoTat2 said:


> 3) Even if they had planned to use the Ku band for UHD, to think they were going to convert all customers to MPEG-4/Ka band equipment and clear out all legacy MPEG-2/Ku band gear in only 4 years was ridiculously optimistic of course.


Had they really wanted to do that, they could have made it happen in half that time if they made the investment to do so. They seem content to let attrition do most of the work for now, I used to think they'd be fairly aggressive but since they don't need the bandwidth I think it could be several years before they take the next step in this direction.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> Had they really wanted to do that, *they could have made it happen in half that time* if they made the investment to do so. They seem content to let attrition do most of the work for now, I used to think they'd be fairly aggressive but since they don't need the bandwidth I think it could be several years before they take the next step in this direction.


I don't think it;s just easy as you could imagine... just one word APG, well two: DSS & APG


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> before DTV will cleanup of Ku tpn , they must solve a transition of APG data streams from DSS media to DVB-S[2D] and made an adaptation of net-tuner to that and re-write processing of APG in FW and at Control Center's computers/DBs.


Nothing stops them from continuing to use DSS on some Ku transponders if necessary for APG or possible limitations in the network tuner in some HD receivers. AFAIK nothing stops them from carrying MPEG4 on those DSS transponders, either, but if they couldn't they have enough 'push' type stuff for ads and what not they could dedicate the necessary number of DSS transponders on 101 carrying such data and continue to support APG and convert the rest of DVB-S2.

If they will need to replace APG, I'm sure they have already begun that effort. If it fixes the station ID > 65535 problem for OTA locals (assuming they plan to support OTA at all in the future...) that would be a positive outcome for some of us from the change.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Rich said:


> You mean people that don't have 4K sets are doing the debating, right? I see absolutely no evidence of that debate from folks that have 4K sets.


People who thought 3D was worth the upgrade weren't numerous enough to support that, despite a lot of early support from Directv. Not saying they are equivalent, there are obviously key differences, but the one thing that remains the same is that it isn't the fact that people who have 4K TVs think it is worthwhile, but the number of those who are willing to spend more money on their monthly bill to get 4K content.

You've said you see a big improvement in HD content viewed on a 4K TV - it is that difference between upscaled HD content and native 4K content that will be the driver. Will you pay more per month to get native 4K content, and if so how many of you are there? That will determine whether we see a mere handful of 4K channels, most major channels go 4K, or just about everything except niche channels go 4K eventually as happened with HD. The upgrade isn't free, even if parts of the content creation and distribution chain are upgraded for other reasons, the money for the rest has to come from somewhere. As with HD, it will have to come from those willing to pay more to get native 4K content.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

I am thinking its not worth it to upgrade and if I ever got a 4k TV I would let it upconvert it. I hate repeating myself again but I am thinking now maybe the only way I would uprgrade to a 4k server and I would want to get the latest one, is if you need the new 4k server for rain/snow fade backup? Maybe I would consider going the full upgrade route if they merged all the fees into one. Maybe they would merge the advanced receiver fee and 4k fee into one and you could get that with any package? Even then would it be worth it if nothing on the 50 4k was worth watching anyway?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> People who thought 3D was worth the upgrade weren't numerous enough to support that, despite a lot of early support from Directv. Not saying they are equivalent, there are obviously key differences, but the one thing that remains the same is that it isn't the fact that people who have 4K TVs think it is worthwhile, but the number of those who are willing to spend more money on their monthly bill to get 4K content.
> 
> You've said you see a big improvement in HD content viewed on a 4K TV - it is that difference between upscaled HD content and native 4K content that will be the driver. _*Will you pay more per month to get native 4K content*_, and if so how many of you are there? That will determine whether we see a mere handful of 4K channels, most major channels go 4K, or just about everything except niche channels go 4K eventually as happened with HD. The upgrade isn't free, even if parts of the content creation and distribution chain are upgraded for other reasons, the money for the rest has to come from somewhere. As with HD, it will have to come from those willing to pay more to get native 4K content.


Can't answer that yet. At the moment I'm not sure I would. I'm satisfied with the upscaled PQ, but if linear broadcast ever becomes a choice...I guess I would pay extra for it. I doubt I would if I had to carry movie packages that I really have no use for.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

CraigerM said:


> I am thinking its not worth it to upgrade and if I ever got a 4k TV I would let it upconvert it. I hate repeating myself again but I am thinking now maybe the only way I would uprgrade to a 4k server and I would want to get the latest one, is if you need the new 4k server for rain/snow fade backup? Maybe I would consider going the full upgrade route if they merged all the fees into one. Maybe they would merge the advanced receiver fee and 4k fee into one and you could get that with any package? Even then would it be worth it if nothing on the 50 4k was worth watching anyway?


Lots of things to consider, but the value of having a 4K set right now should not be overlooked.

Rich


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Rich said:


> Lots of things to consider, but the value of having a 4K set right now should not be overlooked.
> 
> Rich


I thought about keeping my current set until the picture started going dark and then get one. I know you can't keep up with current tech because it constantly changes but at least I would have the latest one when that happened.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Rich said:


> You mean people that don't have 4K sets are doing the debating, right? I see absolutely no evidence of that debate from folks that have 4K sets.
> 
> Rich


Well actually no Rich,

I'm sure I've read people right here on the forum with 4K sets primarily commenting on the latest golf broadcast on ch. 106 that they weren't really "wow'ed" over the PQ.

Oh there was definitely an improvement, but nothing like the big jump from SD to HD was.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Riverpilot (Aug 13, 2010)

Received my new Samsung KS8000 on Thursday. Really like the set. 4k & HDR shows look pretty impressive to me. Still will need to bring in a calibrator in a couple months to get everything set up properly.
Now, just need to wait for AT&T/Directv to come out with new hardware that has 10+ tuners & doesn't require 2 boxes just to get 4k. For me, watching baseball, or a couple shows isn't worth the hassle of needing two boxes. If HBO, ESPN, etc.. started broadcasting in 4k, I MIGHT change my mind, but....

So for now, I'm content with what I can get on Netflix, Amazon and physical discs. (Yes, I have the Samsung k8500 player as well).


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

HDR and WCG are a must.
I would NOT purchase a 4K display that did not include these.


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

CraigerM said:


> What will be on those 50 channels that DTV wants to launch? Not sure it would be worth the extra cost upgrading and let the 4k TV upconvert the regular HD channels if the shows weren't any good? Network and cable shows aren't even in 1080p yet.


And they probably will never be. 720p or 1080i is as good as it will be for networks. Some cable channels might adopt 4K, but I would not expect 1080p for anything other than PPV movies.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

No network will ever adopt 1080p, because it is not an improvement over what we have today - almost all 1080i broadcast originates as 1080p30 and your TV reassembles the fields and displays it as such. Not to mention the set tops from many providers either don't support 1080p at all or (like Directv) only support 24p. 1080p60 would be an improvement, but still pretty marginal over 720p60. If they wanted to improve image quality at this point they'd go 4K.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Well actually no Rich,
> 
> I'm sure I've read people right here on the forum with 4K sets primarily commenting on the latest golf broadcast on ch. 106 that they weren't really "wow'ed" over the PQ.
> 
> ...


I've said several times that the jump to 4K wasn't the wow factor that SD to HD was. Old news.

Rich


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Rich said:


> I've said several times that the jump to 4K wasn't the wow factor that SD to HD was. Old news.
> 
> Rich


But that's why 4K is controversial as some ask if the improvement over HD is really worth the additional investment. ..

And not all agree it is ... at least to nowhere near the agreement was of HD over SD.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## CTJon (Feb 5, 2007)

I'm probably pretty standard here - I don't currently have a need for a new TV and at the moment there isn't enough 4k to make the change now. When I need a new TV it will be 4k but hopefully that is a couple of years from now when things have settled down, for at least a while.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> But that's why 4K is controversial as some ask if the improvement over HD is really worth the additional investment. ..
> 
> And not all agree it is ... at least to nowhere near the agreement was of HD over SD.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Look, my Sammy JS8500 has a much better picture than my 2 year old 60" 1080p Panny plasma. No 4K D* equipment attached to the 4K set and I don't even want to watch the plasma anymore. Isn't that enough of an argument? You've always been rational, that's my rational answer.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

CTJon said:


> I'm probably pretty standard here - I don't currently have a need for a new TV and at the moment there isn't enough 4k to make the change now. When I need a new TV it will be 4k but hopefully that is a couple of years from now when things have settled down, for at least a while.


That's a sensible approach. I wouldn't have gotten a 4K set if I didn't need a new set. Once you get a good one (there are some really poor sets out there) you won't want to use anything else. It's kinda like "parrot fever".

Rich


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

9800 looking pretty sweet at the moment .


----------



## sat4r (Aug 27, 2006)

9800 is not listed on my system how is it accessed?


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

sat4r said:


> 9800 is not listed on my system how is it accessed?


You need to be part of the Edge Cutter program.

http://iamanedgecutter.com/


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Rich said:


> Look, my Sammy JS8500 has a much better picture than my 2 year old 60" 1080p Panny plasma. No 4K D* equipment attached to the 4K set and I don't even want to watch the plasma anymore. Isn't that enough of an argument? You've always been rational, that's my rational answer.
> 
> Rich


Enough of an argument?

No offence, but you're just one person ... don't other 4K veiwers who may not as sold on the format get a vote as well?

Why is it irrational of me if I do not summarily dismiss any opposing or less supporting views on the efficacy of 4K than yours?

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

Riverpilot said:


> Received my new Samsung KS8000 on Thursday. Really like the set. 4k & HDR shows look pretty impressive to me. Still will need to bring in a calibrator in a couple months to get everything set up properly.
> Now, just need to wait for AT&T/Directv to come out with new hardware that has 10+ tuners & doesn't require 2 boxes just to get 4k. For me, watching baseball, or a couple shows isn't worth the hassle of needing two boxes. If HBO, ESPN, etc.. started broadcasting in 4k, I MIGHT change my mind, but....
> 
> So for now, I'm content with what I can get on Netflix, Amazon and physical discs. (Yes, I have the Samsung k8500 player as well).


Have they come up with a standard to calibrate HDR? And will you have it separately calibrated for regular and HDR?


----------



## Riverpilot (Aug 13, 2010)

Christopher Gould said:


> Have they come up with a standard to calibrate HDR? And will you have it separately calibrated for regular and HDR?


From what Spectracal has stated, it sounds like yes. Though I'm not 100% sure on that one, which is partly why I'm going to wait a few months more just to make sure. I use Chad B as my calibrator, and as of yet I haven't shot him an e-mail to see if he has what's necessary to calibrate HDR. Though I would be very surprised if he doesn't have the equipment.

Yes. I'm sure he'll calibrate it for different sources as well as different modes such as regular & HDR. I know when I watch a HDR show/movie, (like Marco Polo on Netflix) it automatically switches the settings. For me, HDR is more impressive than just the 4k part. 4k makes things look better, no doubt, but HDR really ups the game for me.

I have a Panasonic ST60 in my basement that I use for movies, etc.. which I REALLY like. But seeing what 4k & HDR can do so far, makes me kind of itching to upgrade that TV too. I think I'll probably wait until next year to do that though, unless prices come down this fall. I'd really like a 70" + for this TV, so price is a factor. lol

If somebody needs a TV right now or really wants to watch 4k/HDR movies show, then get one. If you don't really need a new TV or don't care about 4k/HDR yet, then no point IMO. :shrugs:
But ATT/Directv really aren't making it easy to get shows in 4k from them. Hence why I won't "upgrade" to Directv 4k until it's only one box. Netflix, Amazon, and discs have enough content for me at the moment until that one box happens.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

Rich said:


> I've said several times that the jump to 4K wasn't the wow factor that SD to HD was. Old news.
> 
> Rich


But if Directv SD wasn't so watered down/overcompressed there would have been much less of a wow factor.


----------



## Scott MS (Oct 21, 2009)

HoTat2 said:


> Well actually no Rich,
> 
> I'm sure I've read people right here on the forum with 4K sets primarily commenting on the latest golf broadcast on ch. 106 that they weren't really "wow'ed" over the PQ.
> 
> ...


I think a lot depends on the size of the monitor. There was a reason the original 4K sets from Sony, LG, and Samsung were in the 84-85" range. I have two 4K displays. One is a Sony 123" projector and the other is a Sony 55" TV. 4K is much more dramatic on the 123" screen because HD starts to look lousy that large. On a 55" TV it looks good but the magnification isn't really there to see the massive improvement.

Now, NHK in Japan is preparing 8K broadcasts of the Olympics and LG sells a massive 98" 8K TV for a lot of money. I personally think 4K is a great stepping stone to 8K. I also record my own personal 4K video and the quality is far, far superior to 1080i/p HD. But, a 4K image is essentially equivalent to an 8.3 MP image from a camera with a resolution of 3840x2160. An 8K frame is equivalent to a 33.6MP photo with a resolution of 7680×4320. I have a Nikon D810 and shoot pictures with a 36MP sensor and I love the detail. We will have 8K recording capability within a year or two and 8K displays will come to market for both TVs and computer monitors (already are). Added resolution is fantastic.

And, by the way, a 1080P frame is equivalent to a 2.1 MP camera. It was based on the ATSC standard developed in the 1990s.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

You're dreaming if you think there will ever be 8K broadcasts, 4K won't be a "stepping stone" to anything. It remains to be seen if the mass market considers native 4K broadcasts enough of an improvement over HD broadcasts upscaled on a 4K TV to support much in the way of 4K broadcasts, but unless substantially everything goes 4K (which I highly doubt) no one will be willing to make the investment to broadcast in 8K.

Japan does a lot of weird stuff with technology for technology's sake that never leaves the country. 8K will be one of those.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> You're dreaming if you think there will ever be 8K broadcasts, 4K won't be a "stepping stone" to anything. It remains to be seen if the mass market considers native 4K broadcasts enough of an improvement over HD broadcasts upscaled on a 4K TV to support much in the way of 4K broadcasts, but unless substantially everything goes 4K (which I highly doubt) no one will be willing to make the investment to broadcast in 8K.
> 
> Japan does a lot of weird stuff with technology for technology's sake that never leaves the country. 8K will be one of those.


While I'm siding with slice in first part of his post above, I'm totally disagree with his forecast.

8K will find its way into professional world pretty quick, when new ISO standard for better compression will be set in documents; just a couple targets in near future: movie industry (original shots), special purpose like science/military/spacecraft, etc. I'm pretty sure TV/PVR/8K BR/etc consumer's mfgs will push sales of 8K devices same way as we see for 4K/UHD doing now. sure It will cover smaller niche lesser then 4K, but there are more then 10,000 rich guys/girls who are waiting to buy 8K TV sets, new 8K BR device and 8K BR disks with movies to impress their peers...


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I said there would be no 8K _broadcasts_. Even if 8K TVs become as common as HDTVs today there won't be enough demand for 8K broadcasts to justify the cost - the jury is still out on whether there will be much demand for 4K broadcasts, if the difference between native 4K and 4K upscaled from HD isn't enough to make a sufficient number of people willing to pay extra to get it.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Enough of an argument?
> 
> No offence, but you're just one person ... don't other 4K veiwers who may not as sold on the format get a vote as well?
> 
> ...


See anybody that has a 4K set who is not "sold on the format" posting here or anywhere else?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

bobnielsen said:


> But if Directv SD wasn't so watered down/overcompressed there would have been much less of a wow factor.


I don't really remember what I thought about SD when that was the only option. I had rather expensive Sony CRTs that didn't cause me to complain about the SD pictures I saw at the time. A couple of them were HDTVs but the HD picture on the CRTs was so small that I didn't really bother with HD, but I do remember getting a very good HD picture out of them. Then I got rid of the CRTs and bought my first plasma and that was a real Wow factor. Only a 720p set, but it really made a huge difference.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> I said there would be no 8K _broadcasts_. Even if 8K TVs become as common as HDTVs today there won't be enough demand for 8K broadcasts to justify the cost - the jury is still out on whether there will be much demand for 4K broadcasts, _*if the difference between native 4K and 4K upscaled from HD isn't enough to make a sufficient number of people willing to pay extra to get it.*_


I do get true 4K from NF and Amazon and my D* content is only upscaled. I really hate to keep repeating myself, but even the upscaled to 4K D* content is better on the 4K set than any set I've ever had. I'm not imagining this or trying to baffle anybody with BS. This is a real experience. I don't even bother with the 4K content on NF or Amazon all that much, any 1080p feed looks really great on the 4K set. My ATV4 pumps out a gorgeous picture when I use it on the 4K set and I can really see the difference between that and what I get when I put the ATV4 on one of my 1080p plasmas.

Rich


----------



## detroit1 (Feb 8, 2012)

when it comes to 4K, Distance TRUMPS everything, Period ! The amount of garbage and misinformation I read from the mass public is a joke

I also record in 4K and have a 4K Computer Monitor, 4K Laptop, 4K TV and just got a JVC 4K eshift projector

the Biggest difference by far is viewing on the 28 inch Computer Monitor since you less than 2 feet away, the 4K is incredible and noticeable over 1080

it is also good on the TV but not as much, good on the projector but also not nearly as much because I'm sitting 15 feet away

on the Computer and Laptop Monitor you are always less than 2 feet away and you can't miss seeing the difference if you try


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Rich said:


> I do get true 4K from NF and Amazon and my D* content is only upscaled. I really hate to keep repeating myself, but even the upscaled to 4K D* content is better on the 4K set than any set I've ever had. I'm not imagining this or trying to baffle anybody with BS. This is a real experience. I don't even bother with the 4K content on NF or Amazon all that much, any 1080p feed looks really great on the 4K set. My ATV4 pumps out a gorgeous picture when I use it on the 4K set and I can really see the difference between that and what I get when I put the ATV4 on one of my 1080p plasmas.


That's my point. The better the HD upscaling works, the less of an upgrade native 4K will be. Millions of people have to be prepared to pay extra every month for native 4K to support 4K broadcasting. If that doesn't happen, it will die on the vine like 3D broadcasting.

You would still enjoy your 4K TV for the better picture it provides, but Directv's reverse band spectrum that was supposed to support up to 50 4K channels would end up utilized for something else. It is important to remember that Directv originally planned to use reverse band for 3D channels, back when they thought 3D would be a big deal.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> That's my point. The better the HD upscaling works, the less of an upgrade native 4K will be. Millions of people have to be prepared to pay extra every month for native 4K to support 4K broadcasting. If that doesn't happen, it will die on the vine like 3D broadcasting.
> 
> You would still enjoy your 4K TV for the better picture it provides, but Directv's reverse band spectrum that was supposed to support up to 50 4K channels would end up utilized for something else. It is important to remember that Directv originally planned to use reverse band for 3D channels, back when they thought 3D would be a big deal.


The resolution is only part of the equation though. It is really the new codec and higher bitrate that improves the quality even further.

A couple times I have had the macro on my remote be wonky when I had left my C61K on a 4K channel so when it wakes up and connects there is no HDCP 2.2 handshake because the TV is on the incorrect input, so it falls back to 1080p. The quality at 1080p is notably better than any 1080i broadcast.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Doesn't matter what the reason is or how you watch, you still have to be willing to pay more every month to get those higher bit rate 4K broadcasts, and millions of others nationwide also have to. Without money to pay the cost of required upgrades, and the higher ongoing costs to continue producing them, they won't happen, and even 4K channels that are launched would eventually disappear.

BTW - are you sure you were watching a 4K channel at 1080p _without_ HDCP 2.2? I was told the C61K refused to output 4K content _at all_ if an HDCP 2.2 connection wasn't present, not even a downscaled version. Perhaps more recent firmware versions have made that possible.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> Doesn't matter what the reason is or how you watch, you still have to be willing to pay more every month to get those higher bit rate 4K broadcasts, and millions of others nationwide also have to. Without money to pay the cost of required upgrades, and the higher ongoing costs to continue producing them, they won't happen, and even 4K channels that are launched would eventually disappear.
> 
> BTW - are you sure you were watching a 4K channel at 1080p _without_ HDCP 2.2? I was told the C61K refused to output 4K content _at all_ if an HDCP 2.2 connection wasn't present, not even a downscaled version. Perhaps more recent firmware versions have made that possible.


Currently, yes, you do have to pay more but what the tiers and pricing looks like down the line, we can only speculate. With the price of 4K sets decreasing all the time, if there is enough market saturation and competition that can support 4K content delivery, it could look very different a year from now. 3D you needed glasses and enough of them for all the viewers, many TVs had poor implementation of 3D tech with a lot of cross-talk, some people can't see 3D, made people nauseous, there are bad conversions where the 3D is done in post. Overall there is a lot more caveats with 3D vs. a display at 4x the resolution and a higher bitrate which decreases macroblocking.

Yes, I am sure. The port is still active on the TV so it does the HDCP 2.2 handshake but it doesn't receive the displays metadata stating it can do 4K resolution so I get an on-screen dialog from the C61K indicating it fell back to 1080p. If, I unplug the HDMI and plug it back in, it reestablishes the connection and switches to 4K.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Enough of an argument?
> 
> No offence, but you're just one person ... don't other 4K veiwers who may not as sold on the format get a vote as well?
> 
> ...


You seem to be missing his point. Many here have claimed an arbitrary (and frankly useless for moving pictures) spec says 4K is useless in many situations. He is saying they are wrong and the question has been asked if anyone with a 4K disagreed with what Rich said and no one has. While any given particular tv may not be an enhancement a generally acceptable good one has been for everyone who's purchased one based on feedback here so far.

And it's "irrational" in his mind (your words) and mine as well for people to believe people who only denote specs and have never had one in their home. That's the key. Put one in your home for a while then you can carry as much weight as others who have. People who haven't had one in their home for a real length of time shouldn't be give the same level of standing in their thinking of if a 4K tv is good or not or any different than a non 4K tv.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

mutelight said:


> Currently, yes, you do have to pay more but what the tiers and pricing looks like down the line, we can only speculate. With the price of 4K sets decreasing all the time, if there is enough market saturation and competition that can support 4K content delivery, it could look very different a year from now. 3D you needed glasses and enough of them for all the viewers, many TVs had poor implementation of 3D tech with a lot of cross-talk, some people can't see 3D, made people nauseous, there are bad conversions where the 3D is done in post. Overall there is a lot more caveats with 3D vs. a display at 4x the resolution and a higher bitrate which decreases macroblocking.


You are making the mistaken assumption that just because a lot of people will have 4K TVs, that 4K content will come. All those 4K TVs will also be upscaling HD content, making the difference between HD and 4K that much smaller the better job of upscaling they do. You are right that we can only speculate about the pricing/tiers but it is indisputable that production, delivery and broadcast of 4K channels is more expensive than HD. Networks and MVPDs aren't charities, they will not provide 4K channels unless they have a way to recover their costs.

This cost was recovered for HD by most providers charging an "HD fee", and networks charging more for delivering their channels in HD - something that persists even to this day. Many subscribers were willing to pay that HD fee (but not all, which is why Directv still has millions of SD only subscribers) because the step up in quality from SD was deemed to be worth it to them. Will people deem the increase in native 4K quality big enough to be willing to pay $10/month in a "4K fee", or subscribe to premium tiers? The jury is out, but if they don't why should networks spend all that money to deliver 4K channels for free?

I agree that 3D and 4K aren't the same thing, and already said so, but that doesn't mean 4K can't suffer the same fate. 3D suffered from a lack of demand for those issues you mention and others, 4K may suffer from a lack of demand because it simply isn't seen as much of a step up from upscaled HD in the mind of the typical viewer - at least not enough of a step up to be worth paying extra for. As for 4K's high bit rate, I guess you forget the sort of bit rates and quality that was typical in the early days of HD. It looked pretty amazing back then, a lot better than what passes for HD now. HD was a victim of its own success in that way, the more demand there was for HD channels the less bandwidth networks and providers were able to allocate to each one.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> You are making the mistaken assumption that just because a lot of people will have 4K TVs, that 4K content will come. All those 4K TVs will also be upscaling HD content, making the difference between HD and 4K that much smaller the better job of upscaling they do. You are right that we can only speculate about the pricing/tiers but it is indisputable that production, delivery and broadcast of 4K channels is more expensive than HD. Networks and MVPDs aren't charities, they will not provide 4K channels unless they have a way to recover their costs.
> 
> This cost was recovered for HD by most providers charging an "HD fee", and networks charging more for delivering their channels in HD - something that persists even to this day. Many subscribers were willing to pay that HD fee (but not all, which is why Directv still has millions of SD only subscribers) because the step up in quality from SD was deemed to be worth it to them. Will people deem the increase in native 4K quality big enough to be willing to pay $10/month in a "4K fee", or subscribe to premium tiers? The jury is out, but if they don't why should networks spend all that money to deliver 4K channels for free?
> 
> I agree that 3D and 4K aren't the same thing, and already said so, but that doesn't mean 4K can't suffer the same fate. 3D suffered from a lack of demand for those issues you mention and others, 4K may suffer from a lack of demand because it simply isn't seen as much of a step up from upscaled HD in the mind of the typical viewer - at least not enough of a step up to be worth paying extra for. As for 4K's high bit rate, I guess you forget the sort of bit rates and quality that was typical in the early days of HD. It looked pretty amazing back then, a lot better than what passes for HD now. HD was a victim of its own success in that way, the more demand there was for HD channels the less bandwidth networks and providers were able to allocate to each one.


If I am making the assumption that if a lot of people have 4K sets, the content will come, you are making the assumption that it will not because of 3D. To clarify, I am not making an explicit assumption, more I am saying it increases the market demand for content, in turn increases the _chances_ of its creation.

Another differentiation this time around, compared to 3D, is that you have companies like Netflix and Amazon who are building up the amount of 4K content they have and are shooting and streaming their series and upcoming ones. With the YoY increase in people migrating to internet streaming services, this could cause a competitive market for 4K content. 4K content may not be the primary driver for most but could be the icing on the cake.

Do you watch any 4K content currently?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> You are making the mistaken assumption that just because a lot of people will have 4K TVs, that 4K content will come. All those 4K TVs will also be upscaling HD content, making the difference between HD and 4K that much smaller the better job of upscaling they do. You are right that we can only speculate about the pricing/tiers but it is indisputable that production, delivery and broadcast of 4K channels is more expensive than HD. Networks and MVPDs aren't charities, they will not provide 4K channels unless they have a way to recover their costs.
> 
> This cost was recovered for HD by most providers charging an "HD fee", and networks charging more for delivering their channels in HD - something that persists even to this day. Many subscribers were willing to pay that HD fee (but not all, which is why Directv still has millions of SD only subscribers) because the step up in quality from SD was deemed to be worth it to them. Will people deem the increase in native 4K quality big enough to be willing to pay $10/month in a "4K fee", or subscribe to premium tiers? The jury is out, but if they don't why should networks spend all that money to deliver 4K channels for free?
> 
> I agree that 3D and 4K aren't the same thing, and already said so, but that doesn't mean 4K can't suffer the same fate. 3D suffered from a lack of demand for those issues you mention and others, 4K may suffer from a lack of demand because it simply isn't seen as much of a step up from upscaled HD in the mind of the typical viewer - at least not enough of a step up to be worth paying extra for. As for 4K's high bit rate, I guess you forget the sort of bit rates and quality that was typical in the early days of HD. It looked pretty amazing back then, a lot better than what passes for HD now. HD was a victim of its own success in that way, the more demand there was for HD channels the less bandwidth networks and providers were able to allocate to each one.


I think you are forgetting one thing. Content makers upgrade their stuff every so often. As they do they'll simply upgrade to 4K stuff and push it on through. There's less hurdles to getting 4K to market than there ever was Hi Definition. That's stuff that didn't and couldn't happen for 3D.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

mutelight said:


> If I am making the assumption that if a lot of people have 4K sets, the content will come, you are making the assumption that it will not because of 3D. To clarify, I am not making an explicit assumption, more I am saying it increases the market demand for content, in turn increases the _chances_ of its creation.


No, I'm not. I'm just saying that one doesn't necessarily follow the other. Everyone having a 4K TV would create the conditions for watching it - no one would have to spend money to upgrade their TV first. But the chances of its actual creation will depend on there being some money in it for those creating it. That in turn will depend on viewers being willing to pay for it.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> _*That's my point. The better the HD upscaling works, the less of an upgrade native 4K will be.*_ Millions of people have to be prepared to pay extra every month for native 4K to support 4K broadcasting. If that doesn't happen, it will die on the vine like 3D broadcasting.
> 
> You would still enjoy your 4K TV for the better picture it provides, but Directv's reverse band spectrum that was supposed to support up to 50 4K channels would end up utilized for something else. It is important to remember that Directv originally planned to use reverse band for 3D channels, back when they thought 3D would be a big deal.


I agree with that statement. I don't really care about D* coming out with 4K channels. I'm really quite satisfied with the upscaled PQ.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> You seem to be missing his point. Many here have claimed an arbitrary (and frankly useless for moving pictures) spec says 4K is useless in many situations. He is saying they are wrong and the question has been asked if anyone with a 4K disagreed with what Rich said and no one has. While any given particular tv may not be an enhancement a generally acceptable good one has been for everyone who's purchased one based on feedback here so far.
> 
> And it's "irrational" in his mind (your words) and mine as well for people to believe people who only denote specs and have never had one in their home. That's the key. Put one in your home for a while then you can carry as much weight as others who have. People who haven't had one in their home for a real length of time shouldn't be give the same level of standing in their thinking of if a 4K tv is good or not or any different than a non 4K tv.


Thanx. It makes me happy to see that someone understands what I've been trying to say. I've tried to make my posts as simple and easy to comprehend as I possibly can and I find it rather astounding that I can't get thru to the nay-sayers who, obviously, don't have 4K sets.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> You are making the mistaken assumption that just because a lot of people will have 4K TVs, that 4K content will come. All those 4K TVs will also be upscaling HD content, making the difference between HD and 4K that much smaller the better job of upscaling they do. You are right that we can only speculate about the pricing/tiers but it is indisputable that production, delivery and broadcast of 4K channels is more expensive than HD. Networks and MVPDs aren't charities, they will not provide 4K channels unless they have a way to recover their costs.
> 
> This cost was recovered for HD by most providers charging an "HD fee", and networks charging more for delivering their channels in HD - something that persists even to this day. Many subscribers were willing to pay that HD fee (but not all, which is why Directv still has millions of SD only subscribers) because the step up in quality from SD was deemed to be worth it to them. Will people deem the increase in native 4K quality big enough to be willing to pay $10/month in a "4K fee", or subscribe to premium tiers? The jury is out, but if they don't why should networks spend all that money to deliver 4K channels for free?
> 
> I agree that 3D and 4K aren't the same thing, and already said so, but that doesn't mean 4K can't suffer the same fate. 3D suffered from a lack of demand for those issues you mention and others, 4K may suffer from a lack of demand because it simply isn't seen as much of a step up from upscaled HD in the mind of the typical viewer - at least not enough of a step up to be worth paying extra for. As for 4K's high bit rate, I guess you forget the sort of bit rates and quality that was typical in the early days of HD. It looked pretty amazing back then, a lot better than what passes for HD now. HD was a victim of its own success in that way, the more demand there was for HD channels the less bandwidth networks and providers were able to allocate to each one.


I'll agree with this post in its entirety.

Rich


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> No, I'm not. I'm just saying that one doesn't necessarily follow the other. Everyone having a 4K TV would create the conditions for watching it - no one would have to spend money to upgrade their TV first. But the chances of its actual creation will depend on there being some money in it for those creating it. That in turn will depend on viewers being willing to pay for it.


The difference this time around is that as technology continues to improve at a faster rate with the prices dropping at fast rate as well, it isn't as large of an investment as transitioning from SD to HD. Also the transition from SD to HD required production companies to change the way everything was shot due to the aspect ratio change.

Another advantage to shooting at 4K for companies is that it is far better for archival purposes, allows a lot more flexibility during post production as far as image stabilization and cropping, which is why the NFL already uses some 4K cameras . In the end even if you still present the same footage to people at 1080i/p, the end user receives a better image.

Working for a content creation company myself, a big driver for where we deliver our content is based on install base. Also when HD broadcasts were lighting up, there was no Netflix or Amazon HD streaming competition. We are now in a place where they offer their original content at 4K as well as movies, and people are walking around with small devices in their pockets that shoot the resolution, which was not the case when HD broadcast was first starting up.

It is a bummer you and Rich appear to have the attitude that it is overkill for you so you seem to think it isn't necessary for the market. I hope that it does gain traction and there are some good reasons it may and if it does, we all benefit. I will have no problem paying an extra fee for the content because I care about quality and would like my DirecTV quality to catch up to the image quality that I get through my streaming services. You guys might be pleasantly surprised by native 4K content DirecTV has delivered if you gave it a chance.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Rich said:


> It makes me happy to see that someone understands what I've been trying to say. I've tried to make my posts as simple and easy to comprehend as I possibly can and I find it rather astounding that I can't get thru to the nay-sayers who, obviously, don't have 4K sets.


The trouble is separating 4K as a service and 4K as a capability on a better quality TV set. In a generic equipment forum it would be easy to say a 4K set was better than an HD model (or not, if it was a poor quality 4K set). But this is a service forum ... discussing primarily DIRECTV's service with some thread drift. I believe most participants want to see real 4K signals via DIRECTV - not just marginally better quality TVs.

Many of the 3D sets sold over the past few years were of value not because of the 3D capability but because of better HD capabilities. Some people bought 3D because it happened to be on the set that they wanted for other reasons - not explicitly for 3D. There is a promise of more actual 4K in the future (there was a promise of more 3D as well) but the immediate reward is a marginally better quality TV.

Please don't read "marginal" as an insult. Margins can be wide or narrow. You will never get a true 4K display from a HD or SD source ... but you may be able to get a better picture than on a HD display.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mutelight said:


> _*It is a bummer you and Rich appear to have the attitude that it is overkill for you so you seem to think it isn't necessary for the market.*_ I hope that it does gain traction and there are some good reasons it may and if it does, we all benefit. I will have no problem paying an extra fee for the content because I care about quality and would like my DirecTV quality to catch up to the image quality that I get through my streaming services. You guys might be pleasantly surprised by native 4K content DirecTV has delivered if you gave it a chance.


Where have I said that? You're inferring something that I didn't mean and certainly didn't mean to imply. I have no problems with a bunch of 4K channels that hold interest for me, but I just don't see that coming anytime in the near future. I still haven't bought a 4K compliant AVR for that reason, just as I haven't bought a C61K or swapped my 44 for a 54 or had my TV's RVU option hooked up. What I've been saying is I'm quite happy with the upscaled D* content AT THIS TIME. I hope that's clear. I have no idea of the technical aspects of broadcast 4K TV and have simply never commented on them. I leave that for the more techy folk.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

James Long said:


> The trouble is separating 4K as a service and 4K as a capability on a better quality TV set. In a generic equipment forum it would be easy to say a 4K set was better than an HD model (or not, if it was a poor quality 4K set). But this is a service forum ... discussing primarily DIRECTV's service with some thread drift. I believe most participants want to see real 4K signals via DIRECTV - not just marginally better quality TVs.
> 
> Many of the 3D sets sold over the past few years were of value not because of the 3D capability but because of better HD capabilities. Some people bought 3D because it happened to be on the set that they wanted for other reasons - not explicitly for 3D. There is a promise of more actual 4K in the future (there was a promise of more 3D as well) but the immediate reward is a marginally better quality TV.
> 
> _*Please don't read "marginal" as an insult. Margins can be wide or narrow. You will never get a true 4K display from a HD or SD source ... but you may be able to get a better picture than on a HD display.*_


That's pretty much all I've ever meant. When the time comes, if it ever does, I will happily do whatever it takes to get true 4K D* content. Right now, I have to agree with your previous statements as to when we can expect 4K broadcasts of the local stations. And you're correct about the TV set making all the difference in the "marginal" sense. That's why I spent a lot more than I originally intended to on my Samsung 4K set.

Rich


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

Rich said:


> Where have I said that? You're inferring something that I didn't mean and certainly didn't mean to imply. I have no problems with a bunch of 4K channels that hold interest for me, but I just don't see that coming anytime in the near future. I still haven't bought a 4K compliant AVR for that reason, just as I haven't bought a C61K or swapped my 44 for a 54 or had my TV's RVU option hooked up. What I've been saying is I'm quite happy with the upscaled D* content AT THIS TIME. I hope that's clear. I have no idea of the technical aspects of broadcast 4K TV and have simply never commented on them. I leave that for the more techy folk.
> 
> Rich


No I get that, I am just very excited and hopeful that 4K catches on because it benefits the advancement of technology and can improve the experience for many viewers as well as bring more content so everyone can find something they care enough to watch.

I have been neck deep in tech for some time and I am primarily trying to point out that there are a myriad of differences in this tech vs. 3D as well as advantages to viewers.

There is no doubt that a good 4K set that upscales yields fantastic results with HD broadcast. Having played loads of games, watched and own 10 4K Blu-rays, then lots of streaming 4K, and most recently 4K through DirecTV, I can appreciate a notable difference in overall fidelity across the board. That said, I have the proper seating distance and large enough displays for those distances that I could sit down almost anyone and do an A/B comparison and people could tell the difference in the content quality immediately. How much of a difference the viewer perceives would vary by the individual but would be willing to bet all would at the very least be able to tell the difference.

I recognize that I am much more sensitive than the average viewer as far as the nuanced differences whether it comes to displays, resolution, and even when I switch out my audio gear.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

mutelight said:


> The difference this time around is that as technology continues to improve at a faster rate with the prices dropping at fast rate as well, it isn't as large of an investment as transitioning from SD to HD. Also the transition from SD to HD required production companies to change the way everything was shot due to the aspect ratio change.
> 
> Another advantage to shooting at 4K for companies is that it is far better for archival purposes, allows a lot more flexibility during post production as far as image stabilization and cropping, which is why the NFL already uses some 4K cameras . In the end even if you still present the same footage to people at 1080i/p, the end user receives a better image.
> 
> ...


As I said before, producing in 4K versus uplinking in 4K versus providers offering 4K channels are three different things. You and other content creation companies might eventually produce everything in 4K, once all you have are 4K or better cameras, and your video editors are all set up to work in 4K. Just because you produce a new series or documentary or whatever it is you do in 4K doesn't mean that if it is going to be broadcast that the network doing it will have their studio set up for 4K, or even if they do whether they will spend the (not insignificant) extra money on enough uplink bandwidth to deliver it to MVPDs in 4K. And even if all that is done, it doesn't guarantee that providers will offer it on a 4K channel.

Even today, there are many channels that are uplinked in SD only, and more than a few that are uplinked in HD but most MVPDs carry only in SD. They don't consider it worth paying extra to get the HD version, or don't consider the channel important enough to their subscribers to deliver in HD. There's a much larger difference between SD and HD than there is between HD and 4K. And those who think the coming of 8K TVs and 8K cameras down the road will mean we get 8K channels will have to realize that the difference between 4K and 8K is tinier yet. Whether the diminishing returns is already here with 4K, or hits at 8K, or whatever, it will arrive eventually and there won't be money to pay for the upgrade of the entire chain from content creator to viewer.

I don't "have the attitude that it is overkill [and therefore] isn't necessary for the market". I hope that you aren't saying because you think 4K is worthwhile that the market as a whole will. Reading forums like dbstalk or avsforum exposes one to an extremely narrow segment of the TV watching public, who are not remotely representative of the average viewer. As I keep saying, it will come to down whether enough people are prepared to pay more to get 4K channels. I don't know why you dispute that, unless you think because 4K is better it will just happen. SACD and DVD-A were better than CD, but they never achieved market success - in fact MP3 and AAC have since taken over despite having _lower_ quality because they were cheaper than CDs for music listeners. Similar to how Directv still has millions of SD only subscribers because they didn't think the $10/month to go HD was worth it.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

James Long said:


> The trouble is separating 4K as a service and 4K as a capability on a better quality TV set. In a generic equipment forum it would be easy to say a 4K set was better than an HD model (or not, if it was a poor quality 4K set). But this is a service forum ... discussing primarily DIRECTV's service with some thread drift. I believe most participants want to see real 4K signals via DIRECTV - not just marginally better quality TVs.
> 
> Many of the 3D sets sold over the past few years were of value not because of the 3D capability but because of better HD capabilities. Some people bought 3D because it happened to be on the set that they wanted for other reasons - not explicitly for 3D. There is a promise of more actual 4K in the future (there was a promise of more 3D as well) but the immediate reward is a marginally better quality TV.
> 
> Please don't read "marginal" as an insult. Margins can be wide or narrow. You will never get a true 4K display from a HD or SD source ... but you may be able to get a better picture than on a HD display.


Agreed ....

I myself was merely trying to be fair and allow for the critiques and skepticism of others primarily from Geoffrey Morrison of CNET and other 4K testers he refers to, who certainly do have 4K sets. As well as those posting in their comments section who agree.

But hey, since he has now backed off somewhat for the very reasons you cite here and now recommends 4K sets. That is, not so much the mere increase in pixels to 4K, but for other set improvements, I will give it a rest here as well.

http://www.cnet.com/news/4k-tvs-arent-stupid-anymore/

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> No, I'm not. I'm just saying that one doesn't necessarily follow the other. Everyone having a 4K TV would create the conditions for watching it - no one would have to spend money to upgrade their TV first. But the chances of its actual creation will depend on there being some money in it for those creating it. That in turn will depend on viewers being willing to pay for it.


Eh..... Not so sure that matters as much as you might think for 4K. I think that in some ways it will for premium content today but in the long run as I said before this move will be more like the move of everyone to smart phones. It's just that that is the equipment available to producers at the same or lower prices than what the Hi Definition equipment costs today.

Or to say it another way I believe the back end costs of 4K will be lower than that of hd in the future because that's just how technology changes. So as the need to replace hardware shows up they'll naturally replace it with 4K hardware throughout. And because of how technology changes so fast I think it'll actually happen for the busier stations much faster than Hi Definition did. That was such a different kind of upgrade than 4K is.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

> *slice1900, on 21 Apr 2016 - 10:46 AM, said:*
> As I said before, producing in 4K versus uplinking in 4K versus providers offering 4K channels are three different things. You and other content creation companies might eventually produce everything in 4K, once all you have are 4K or better cameras, and your video editors are all set up to work in 4K. Just because you produce a new series or documentary or whatever it is you do in 4K doesn't mean that if it is going to be broadcast that the network doing it will have their studio set up for 4K, or even if they do whether they will spend the (not insignificant) extra money on enough uplink bandwidth to deliver it to MVPDs in 4K. And even if all that is done, it doesn't guarantee that providers will offer it on a 4K channel.


Yeah, I totally get all that but that is why I was explaining that the overall investment compared to the SD to HD transition is far less, making it less of a burden. It is a chicken or the egg situation where yes, to want to expand 4K content you need people willing to pay, then to get people to pay, you need enough content to get them to do so. This means that a calculated risk and investment needs to be made to open a new market. Then this is what leads into my previous points of staying competitive with an already growing market against Netflix, Amazon, and even YouTube to an extent.



> *slice1900, on 21 Apr 2016 - 10:46 AM, said:*
> I don't "have the attitude that it is overkill [and therefore] isn't necessary for the market". I hope that you aren't saying because you think 4K is worthwhile that the market as a whole will. Reading forums like dbstalk or avsforum exposes one to an extremely narrow segment of the TV watching public, who are not remotely representative of the average viewer. As I keep saying, it will come to down whether enough people are prepared to pay more to get 4K channels. I don't know why you dispute that, unless you think because 4K is better it will just happen. SACD and DVD-A were better than CD, but they never achieved market success - in fact MP3 and AAC have since taken over despite having _lower_ quality because they were cheaper than CDs for music listeners. Similar to how Directv still has millions of SD only subscribers because they didn't think the $10/month to go HD was worth it.


Sorry, just got the feeling you did based on your posts since you were drawing high level parallels against different technology as reasons you are unsure it will be successful and I was pointing out the key differences in your comparisons.

I don't recall ever disputing that people being willing to pay for it isn't a large factor at any point, it certainly is, among others, I assumed we both realized that was a given then was advancing the discussion.

SACD and DVD-A vs 4K are only similar in that they offer higher quality and that is where the similarities end. People listen to music in far more different places than they watch TV. Sure this is changing with tablets and high speed cellular data but nowhere near the spike there was with portable MP3 players. Audio quality is a significantly more difficult sell to the average consumer than something they can see with their eyes. With SACD and DVD-A you needed a good player, good DAC, good amplification, and good speakers to begin to tell the differences. With 4K, you just need a good 4K set.

You mention the SD subscribers and they didn't think the $10/mo was/is worth it, sure but look where HD is now. The providers balanced their margins and execution of deployment bringing in key channels with high viewership in conjunction with bringing in new subscribers to make it profitable. That is why there are a ton more HD channels today then there were initially. It is beyond unrealistic to think you could convert everyone, the key is converting _enough_.


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

:bang


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

mutelight said:


> Yeah, I totally get all that but that is why I was explaining that the overall investment compared to the SD to HD transition is far less, making it less of a burden.


I am not sure that is true. For the broadcasters, the switch from SD to HD coincided with the switch from analogue to digital and the savings in bandwidth that switch brought. As long as the broadcasters were forced to switch from analogue to digital, they might as well move up to HD, because there was not any savings by staying with SD digital. The switch from HD to 4K will either use four times the bandwidth or the signal will have to be compressed to the point that the result will not be much, if any, improvement over HD. The burden for the viewer might be less, but if everything that DirecTV has in HD now was switched to 4K, DirecTV would need three times the bandwidth they currently have available. Similarly, if the broadcast stations ever were to broadcast in 4K, they would have to go back to one channel, and even then, it would have to be compressed more than the HD is compressed now for a channel that currently broadcasts one HD and one SD channel.


----------



## mutelight (Oct 6, 2008)

fleckrj said:


> I am not sure that is true. For the broadcasters, the switch from SD to HD coincided with the switch from analogue to digital and the savings in bandwidth that switch brought. As long as the broadcasters were forced to switch from analogue to digital, they might as well move up to HD, because there was not any savings by staying with SD digital. The switch from HD to 4K will either use four times the bandwidth or the signal will have to be compressed to the point that the result will not be much, if any, improvement over HD. The burden for the viewer might be less, but if everything that DirecTV has in HD now was switched to 4K, DirecTV would need three times the bandwidth they currently have available. Similarly, if the broadcast stations ever were to broadcast in 4K, they would have to go back to one channel, and even then, it would have to be compressed more than the HD is compressed now for a channel that currently broadcasts one HD and one SD channel.


Because 4K is 4x the resolution of 1080p it does not require 4x the amount of bandwidth because it uses H.265 which is far more efficient.

For example Netflix delivers 4K content at around 15mbps which is a decent amount below the average bitrate of a 1080p Blu-ray disc. While I can tell a decrease in visual fidelity, YouTube manages to pull off 4K at 10mbps. It is susceptible to macroblocking under high motion but no more than what I see on DirecTV and shots with a lower amount of motion you definitely resolve more detail.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mutelight said:


> No I get that, I am just very excited and hopeful that 4K catches on because it benefits the advancement of technology and can improve the experience for many viewers as well as bring more content so everyone can find something they care enough to watch.
> 
> I have been neck deep in tech for some time and I am primarily trying to point out that there are a myriad of differences in this tech vs. 3D as well as advantages to viewers.
> 
> ...


I understand your enthusiasm, but please bear with me. I have nothing against early adopters and what equipment they have. Without early adopters and enthusiastic folk nothing would get off the ground. You just have to realize that not all of us have the same mindset you do, nor the technical knowledge to understand what's happening at any given time. When I quit working I never expected to have to bother with technology at this level ever again. For what it's worth, I can hardly understand _*Slice's*_ posts when he gets "techy" and to lump us together really bothered me (nothing against you, _*Slice*_, I always struggle thru your posts trying to understand them and sometimes I do and sometimes I don't :shrug: ) because we've been at odds many times mainly because I don't understand what he's trying to get across. That's my cross to bear. I've had the same problem following some of your posts.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> I don't "have the attitude that it is overkill [and therefore] isn't necessary for the market". I hope that you aren't saying because you think 4K is worthwhile that the market as a whole will. Reading forums like dbstalk or avsforum exposes one to an extremely narrow segment of the TV watching public, who are not remotely representative of the average viewer. As I keep saying, it will come to down whether enough people are prepared to pay more to get 4K channels. I don't know why you dispute that, unless you think because 4K is better it will just happen. SACD and DVD-A were better than CD, but they never achieved market success - in fact MP3 and AAC have since taken over despite having _lower_ quality because they were cheaper than CDs for music listeners. Similar to how Directv still has millions of SD only subscribers because they didn't think the $10/month to go HD was worth it.


Well said! Were you as surprised as I was?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Agreed ....
> 
> I myself was merely trying to be fair and allow for the critiques and skepticism of others primarily from Geoffrey Morrison of CNET and other 4K testers he refers to, who certainly do have 4K sets. As well as those posting in their comments section who agree.
> 
> ...


I'm glad to see he finally backed off on his critiques of 4K sets. I've disagreed with many (most) of his articles, to the extent that I gave up on CNET as a viable site for reviews of any kind.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> Eh..... Not so sure that matters as much as you might think for 4K. I think that in some ways it will for premium content today but in the long run as I said before this move will be more like the move of everyone to smart phones. It's just that that is the equipment available to producers at the same or lower prices than what the Hi Definition equipment costs today.
> 
> Or to say it another way I believe the back end costs of 4K will be lower than that of hd in the future because that's just how technology changes. So as the need to replace hardware shows up they'll naturally replace it with 4K hardware throughout. And because of how technology changes so fast I think it'll actually happen for the _*busier stations*_ much faster than Hi Definition did. That was such a different kind of upgrade than 4K is.


Which stations would you think that would be? Good, rational post, BTW.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

I WANT MORE said:


> :bang


Well placed emoticon! I believe this is the first time I've ever hit the Like button for such a post.

Rich


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Rich said:


> Which stations would you think that would be? Good, rational post, BTW.
> 
> Rich


I see the higher rated stations. Just look at starz and Viacom. They have many stations in Hi Definition but a few that are still SD. Those stations are still SD for one of two reasons or a combination... They have low viewership and it's not worth it to switch and more importantly their content is so old it'd cost more than it did to make the shows originally to transfer it to a true Hi Definition version. So why change those channels. Same thing here.

So live sports and stations like TNT and HBO etc I see going 4K as time progresses. (Years) Ones like religious channels I don't see them doing that. And some of the other low rates niche channels.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

mutelight said:


> Because 4K is 4x the resolution of 1080p it does not require 4x the amount of bandwidth because it uses H.265 which is far more efficient.
> 
> For example Netflix delivers 4K content at around 15mbps which is a decent amount below the average bitrate of a 1080p Blu-ray disc. While I can tell a decrease in visual fidelity, YouTube manages to pull off 4K at 10mbps. It is susceptible to macroblocking under high motion but no more than what I see on DirecTV and shots with a lower amount of motion you definitely resolve more detail.


It depends on the frame rate. 4Kp60, which will be used for sports, is 9x the raw bit rate of 720p and 8x the raw bit rate of 1080i. 4Kp30, which will be used for "regular" programming is 4.5x or 4x as much.

While HEVC is more efficient, don't be fooled by the "up to 2x better compression at equivalent quality" claims. That's where they plan for it to get to, when they have fine tuned it. It is not there yet. If you remember when MPEG4 was new it wasn't nearly as efficient as it is today. Right now HEVC is around 70% more efficient for pre-encoded content, like Netflix, but only 30% more efficient for real time encoded content (i.e. anything that is broadcast, whether live or not, due to the use of a stat mux) Directv is planning to use 30 Mbps for 4K, though a few years down the road they'll probably be able to decrease that as the real time encoders improve.

But even using the same compression method, it doesn't take 9x as much bandwidth for MPEG4 compressed 4Kp60 versus MPEG4 compressed 720p60 just because the raw bit rate is 9x higher. All those areas where the color is the same doesn't take much extra, nor do areas where there is no change frame to frame - think of an overhead shot of a golfer putting on a green, he's moving and the ball is moving, but if the camera is stationary then the rest of the picture will compress really well. The problem is in complex images where there is a lot of motion and a lot of difference between frames, like a pan shot that has a big explosion that fills the screen. It really will need something close to 9x the peak bit rate (or maybe 6x the peak if MPEG4 versus HEVC) or you would notice diminished quality. That's why you tend to see macroblocking in shots like that.

If you look at what Directv is doing for MPEG4 HD, they have 5 or 6 channels per 39.4 Mbps transponder. So that's 6 to 7.5 Mbps per channel. They are planning on 30 Mbps per HEVC 4K channel, or 4-5x as much. If the stat mux is able to peak at 42-45 Mbps it will cover that 6x peak, so it will handle such scenes as well as HD. The 30 Mbps nominal should mean notably better image quality for less complex images, like golf or nature programs where (aside from an image of thousands of birds or fish swirling around) there tend to be large areas with little motion.


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

DT is now advertising two 4K MLB games (under messages) on April 29&30 on channel 106. Hopefully, all the tech issues have been resolved.


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

mutelight said:


> Because 4K is 4x the resolution of 1080p it does not require 4x the amount of bandwidth because it uses H.265 which is far more efficient.
> 
> For example Netflix delivers 4K content at around 15mbps which is a decent amount below the average bitrate of a 1080p Blu-ray disc. While I can tell a decrease in visual fidelity, YouTube manages to pull off 4K at 10mbps. It is susceptible to macroblocking under high motion but no more than what I see on DirecTV and shots with a lower amount of motion you definitely resolve more detail.


As far as I understand the technology, DirecTV is planning to have three 4K channels on a pair of bonded transponders. Currently, they have up to six HD channels per transponder. That would be three 4K channels per two transponders as opposed to 12 HD channels per two transponders. So you are correct - it is only three times the bandwidth, and not four times the bandwidth. That still means that if DirecTV plans to offer everything they currently have in HD in 4K, they will need to nearly double their current capacity (counting the unused bandwidth that will allow for 50 4K channels if they drop HD and only have 4K, and they will need triple their current capacity if the keep HD and duplicate everything in 4K.

It is true that they may use new compression techniques to reduce the bandwidth, but that will also reduce the quality. In that case, it will be much more difficult to tell the difference between a native 4K broadcast and a native HD broadcast that has been upscaled to 4K by one of the better 4K televisions.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

fleckrj said:


> As far as I understand the technology, DirecTV is planning to have three 4K channels on a pair of bonded transponders. Currently, they have up to six HD channels per transponder. That would be three 4K channels per two transponders as opposed to 12 HD channels per two transponders. So you are correct - it is only three times the bandwidth, and not four times the bandwidth. That still means that if DirecTV plans to offer everything they currently have in HD in 4K, they will need to nearly double their current capacity (counting the unused bandwidth that will allow for 50 4K channels if they drop HD and only have 4K, and they will need triple their current capacity if the keep HD and duplicate everything in 4K.
> 
> _*It is true that they may use new compression techniques to reduce the bandwidth, but that will also reduce the quality. In that case, it will be much more difficult to tell the difference between a native 4K broadcast and a native HD broadcast that has been upscaled to 4K by one of the better 4K televisions.*_


Which, if true, gives me even less reason to get a D* 4K overhaul. I get a really good picture now on most of D*'s HD channels (I never watch SD content) and still don't see any reason to upgrade.

Rich


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

fleckrj said:


> As far as I understand the technology, DirecTV is planning to have three 4K channels on a pair of bonded transponders. Currently, they have up to six HD channels per transponder. That would be three 4K channels per two transponders as opposed to 12 HD channels per two transponders. So you are correct - it is only three times the bandwidth, and not four times the bandwidth. That still means that if DirecTV plans to offer everything they currently have in HD in 4K, they will need to nearly double their current capacity (counting the unused bandwidth that will allow for 50 4K channels if they drop HD and only have 4K, and they will need triple their current capacity if the keep HD and duplicate everything in 4K.
> 
> It is true that they may use new compression techniques to reduce the bandwidth, but that will also reduce the quality. In that case, it will be much more difficult to tell the difference between a native 4K broadcast and a native HD broadcast that has been upscaled to 4K by one of the better 4K televisions.


While I think adding 4K for everything that's currently HD is unlikely to the extreme, if did happen it would be many many years from now. Directv would have phased out MPEG2 SD by that point, opening up 32 more transponders. They could also add 48 more Ka transponders at 101, once the satellites there are replaced and with a new LNB able to receive it. Real time HEVC encoders would be better so they could probably fit four 4K channels into a pair of transponders at the same quality three fit today. As with HD, they'd give more bandwidth to some channels that need it, less to others. They could manage in the very (very very) unlikely event that every current HD channel went 4K.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

If 4k is widely available for many channels, the TV landscape may look very different by then, and there may be a lot less cable channels than we have now. Streaming is changing the game in terms of non-live 4k, and sports will probably drive 4k, like they did in some ways for HD. I'm glad someone is actually pushing 4k, but it's going to be a long time, if ever, that most people actually care about it. Most people are fine with about 720p. D*'s big thing right now for us in the nearish to NYC area is having YES network. That's what I'm hearing about DirecTV from average folks, not 4k. They really couldn't care less.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Bigg said:


> If 4k is widely available for many channels, the TV landscape may look very different by then, and there may be a lot less cable channels than we have now. Streaming is changing the game in terms of non-live 4k, and sports will probably drive 4k, like they did in some ways for HD. I'm glad someone is actually pushing 4k, but it's going to be a long time, if ever, that most people actually care about it. Most people are fine with about 720p. D*'s big thing right now for us in the nearish to_* NYC area is having YES network. That's what I'm hearing about DirecTV from average folks, not 4k. They really couldn't care less.*_


YES is one of the main reasons I haven't cut off my D* sub. Seeing YES content (I only watch the Yankee games on it) in upscaled 4K might very well change people's minds about buying a 4K set. It certainly changed my mind.

Rich


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

Rich said:


> YES is one of the main reasons I haven't cut off my D* sub. Seeing YES content (I only watch the Yankee games on it) in upscaled 4K might very well change people's minds about buying a 4K set. It certainly changed my mind.
> 
> Rich


Upscaled 4k is meh. Sports might get people on board with 4k, but I was referring to DirecTV's business overall. I'm glad they are looking ahead, but here and now, they are getting subs who want YES in regular old HD, and far fewer from 4k efforts.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Bigg said:


> Upscaled 4k is meh. Sports might get people on board with 4k, but I was referring to DirecTV's business overall. I'm glad they are looking ahead, but here and now, they are getting subs who want YES in regular old HD, and far fewer from 4k efforts.


Do you have a 4K set in your home?

Rich


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Bigg said:


> Upscaled 4k is meh. Sports might get people on board with 4k, but I was referring to DirecTV's business overall. I'm glad they are looking ahead, but here and now, they are getting subs who want YES in regular old HD, and far fewer from 4k efforts.


Oooops. ..

Hope you've got a 4K TV to back up that view. Or you're going to find yourself in a lot of trouble here with Rich and others who will have none of that, lol. 

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

I think the idea that your opinion is worthless unless you own a 4K TV is silly. If you look at 4K in the stores or someone else's home, and are underwhelmed, you won't buy one. Talk about a self-selection bias!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> I think the idea that your opinion is worthless unless you own a 4K TV is silly. If you look at 4K in the stores or someone else's home, and are underwhelmed, you won't buy one. Talk about a self-selection bias!


I've never said anybody's opinion is worthless. We're all entitled to our opinions. What those opinions are based on might factor in on what a person wants or buys.

What's a "self-selection bias"? Does that mean just because all of us that have 4K sets are just making up our opinions based on the bias of our buying one and not wanting to admit we made a mistake? If that's true, you should really know that I, and the great majority of us that have one, wouldn't do that. I think. I hope I misread your post. You know I've admitted I made mistakes with the first four 4K sets I bought.

Rich


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

HoTat2 said:


> Oooops. ..
> 
> Hope you've got a 4K TV to back up that view. Or you're going to find yourself in a lot of trouble here with Rich and others who will have none of that, lol.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


I have a 65" Samsung JS850D. That being said, I'll step aside for discussion of TV content, as I have Comcast right now, and it's a hot mess unless you view it on a relatively small TV. It looks worse on this TV than it did on my 1080p TV. That being said, for HD sources that are not Comcast, it looks about the same as my 1080p TV, maybe marginally better. I haven't looked at Blu-Ray though, which might well look really amazing since there is so much to work with to upscale. That being said, the actual 4k content is positively stunning. I've been watching Season 1 of Narcos, and it is really, really stunning. House of Cards and Breaking Bad are next on the list to work on over the next couple of months.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

Rich said:


> I've never said anybody's opinion is worthless. We're all entitled to our opinions. What those opinions are based on might factor in on what a person wants or buys.
> 
> What's a "self-selection bias"? Does that mean just because all of us that have 4K sets are just making up our opinions based on the bias of our buying one and not wanting to admit we made a mistake? If that's true, you should really know that I, and the great majority of us that have one, wouldn't do that. I think. I hope I misread your post. You know I've admitted I made mistakes with the first four 4K sets I bought.
> 
> Rich


I love my 4k TV. I'm not going to pretend that it makes HD content look any better though. I don't think it does. Even if Blu-Ray looks better, average that with Comcast, and it's about a net wash.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Rich said:


> I've never said anybody's opinion is worthless. We're all entitled to our opinions. What those opinions are based on might factor in on what a person wants or buys.
> 
> What's a "self-selection bias"? Does that mean just because all of us that have 4K sets are just making up our opinions based on the bias of our buying one and not wanting to admit we made a mistake? If that's true, you should really know that I, and the great majority of us that have one, wouldn't do that. I think. I hope I misread your post. You know I've admitted I made mistakes with the first four 4K sets I bought.


The selection bias I was referring to is that people who own 4K TVs have already made the decision that they are worth it, so asking them "is a 4K TV worth it?" is going to get a very high rate of agreement - not because they won't admit mistakes but because they already answered the question with their purchase. It is like asking iPhone owners whether paying more for an iPhone is worth it, they obviously thought so or they wouldn't have bought it.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

well ... do we lost the topic finally or could get back and discuss "*DTV 4K channels(s)*" ?
:backtotop:


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> The selection bias I was referring to is that people who own 4K TVs have already made the decision that they are worth it, so asking them "is a 4K TV worth it?" is going to get a very high rate of agreement - not because they won't admit mistakes but because they already answered the question with their purchase. It is like asking iPhone owners whether paying more for an iPhone is worth it, they obviously thought so or they wouldn't have bought it.


Or IOW, it's the classic logical fallacy of "begging the question" or "circular reasoning" where you assume the conclusion or outcome you wish to reach before the question is really even broached.... 

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

Was reading on the solid signal website that come Sept. when Sunday Ticket returns, that we'll need a different dish for 4K as the 4K channels will be on another satellite. Is this correct? My installer never mentioned anything about a different dish.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

ep1974 said:


> Was reading on the solid signal website that come Sept. when Sunday Ticket returns, that we'll need a different dish for 4K as the 4K channels will be on another satellite. Is this correct? My installer never mentioned anything about a different dish.


Got a link to that?

Sounds like what they meant to say is that DIRECTV 4K channels will be on the Reverse Band by September, so you will need a RB LNB installed at that point if you don't already have it to continue to receive 4K service. Not an entire new dish however ...

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Without DTV press-release the "info" I would classify as unsupported rumor.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

P Smith said:


> Without DTV press-release the "info" I would classify as unsupported rumor.


Well I don't doubt Stuart, if he said or confirms this that is, has high level contacts at DIRECTV. Which he really needs as a major representative nowadays of SolidSignal which must stay in close sync with DIRECTV as a major 3rd party product retailer for them. 
Pehaps September really is the planned date by DIRECTV engineering for the switchover to Reverse Band for 4K. At least at 99W.

But I would like the link to read the claim myself.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

month ago we have been loaded by "reliable source" the RB LNBF's installation will start April 7th ... now telling September ... 2017 perhaps ?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> month ago we have been loaded by "reliable source" the RB LNBF's installation will start April 7th ... now telling September ... 2017 perhaps ?


The April 7th date was for widespread distribution of the LNBs for 4K customers, and from what we're hearing people signing up for 4K service are (mostly, there are some hiccuprs as with anything new) getting the rbLNBs.

The September date appears to be when Directv will actually begin using reverse band, assuming it is confirmed. That seems reasonable, as they would need a cushion of a few months from distribution of the LNBs to using reverse band to insure everyone who needs one gets it installed.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Bigg said:


> I love my 4k TV. I'm not going to pretend that it makes HD content look any better though. I don't think it does. Even if Blu-Ray looks better, average that with Comcast, and it's about a net wash.


OK, that's your opinion and I'll respect it even tho I disagree with it. I can't help but wonder if the TVs sold by Costco and numbered slightly differently have any bearing on this. I bought two 650Ds from Costco and they weren't acceptable and I've read some posts from members who have 6500s (I initially thought that they were the same TVs as the 650Ds) and they don't seem to have the same issues I had. I've never seen an 850D at any of our local Costcos. I have seen Sonys that had slightly different model numbers than what Sony usually had on their website and called Sony and was told not to buy them. I do see a really different picture than I see on my 1080p Panny plasmas but I've never had a 1080p LCD with a 240 refresh rate. I did try a 1080p Samsung with a 120 refresh rate during my 4K adventure and found that to be very jittery and returned it quickly.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> The selection bias I was referring to is that people who own 4K TVs have already made the decision that they are worth it, so asking them "is a 4K TV worth it?" is going to get a very high rate of agreement - not because they won't admit mistakes but because they already answered the question with their purchase. It is like asking iPhone owners whether paying more for an iPhone is worth it, they obviously thought so or they wouldn't have bought it.


I wouldn't have kept my JS8500 if I didn't see a major improvement over the 4K sets with a 120 refresh rate. I wouldn't have kept the JS8500 if I hadn't seen a major improvement over my Panny plasmas. I simply don't settle on something just because I bought it. That's why I have such a hard time buying cars...they're kinda hard to return if you don't like them once you get your hands on them and really have a chance to drive them. But you know all this, I hope.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Or IOW, it's the classic logical fallacy of "begging the question" or "circular reasoning" where you assume the conclusion or outcome you wish to reach before the question is really even broached....
> 
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


I assumed nothing after my 1080p plasma went kaput and I had to buy a new TV. I always try what's supposed to be the "best thing available" when I buy something and the only choices I had (without spending a fortune on an OLED) were a 1080p or 4K set. Simply because the 4Ks were more expensive I tried them. And I did have problems with the first four I bought and quickly returned them. I don't think "circular argument" applies here. And I have to admit I'm getting tired of writing the same thing over and over. I'm beginning to think there's a comprehension problem with some of our more argumentative members.

Rich


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

HoTat2 said:


> Got a link to that?
> Sounds like what they meant to say is that DIRECTV 4K channels will be on the Reverse Band by September, so you will need a RB LNB installed at that point if you don't already have it to continue to receive 4K service. Not an entire new dish however ...
> Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


Here's the link. Last paragraph on the bottom. Definitely mentions a new dish.

http://forums.solidsignal.com/content.php/5396


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

slice1900 said:


> The April 7th date was for widespread distribution of the LNBs for 4K customers, and from what we're hearing people signing up for 4K service are (mostly, there are some hiccuprs as with anything new) getting the rbLNBs.


Yeah, and as for those "hiccups", there's reports in threads here and in other forums of installers coming back to replace the LNB if they didn't have them in stock yet when they did the initial HR54+C61K/RVU upgrade.

There's also the 5-LNB version that's currently being piloted in the markets that need them because they have SD only locals that are only available with 119. (That picture in the other thread is from someone in one of those markets)


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

ep1974 said:


> Here's the link. Last paragraph on the bottom. Definitely mentions a new dish.
> 
> http://forums.solidsignal.com/content.php/5396


"Right now, because NFL Sunday Ticket isn't running (that's the biggest single use of bandwidth) there's enough room to put 4K programs on the regular transponders your dish already gets. Eventually (like, you know, September) that won't be possible and DIRECTV will move 4K to transponders that use the Reverse DBS frequencies. That's when you'll need a new dish."

I consider that good speculation ... not an official statement from DIRECTV.

The last official word I recall was that you need the reverse LNB now. So new installs should be good and DIRECTV can go back and upgrade the others.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

That speculation is wrong anyway. Sunday Ticket doesn't take up any extra space, they just use the HD Cinema channels.

They didn't take down ANY HD Cinema channels to launch the 4K feeds, the 3 channels are coming from new space on D14.

If the NFL season started this weekend, they have enough bandwidth to do it without displacing the 4K channels.


----------



## AngryManMLS (Jan 30, 2014)

And if I needed the reverse band LNB right now I would be screwed since I need the 5LNB version so I can still get UniMas and CCTV News.


----------



## compnurd (Apr 23, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> That speculation is wrong anyway. Sunday Ticket doesn't take up any extra space, they just use the HD Cinema channels.
> 
> They didn't take down ANY HD Cinema channels to launch the 4K feeds, the 3 channels are coming from new space on D14.
> 
> If the NFL season started this weekend, they have enough bandwidth to do it without displacing the 4K channels.


Being that came from Stuart.. I tend to believe him


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

AngryManMLS said:


> And if I needed the reverse band LNB right now I would be screwed since I need the 5LNB version so I can still get UniMas and CCTV News.


And I really think this is the main reason for the RB 5 LNB. For 4K subs. that also need the Spanish and other non-English channels on 119W, and not really for the comparatively few subs. in 119W local markets that have SD channels without HD versions.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

compnurd said:


> Being that came from Stuart.. I tend to believe him


Then Stuart is wrong, we have transponder maps from when Sunday Ticket was in season. They do NOT use additional feeds, they use the designated part time HD Cinema channels for Sunday Ticket's HD feeds, while the Sunday Ticket SD feeds use a mix of SD infomercial channels, SD Cinema channels and other space shared by SD RSN alternates on the 101 slot.

The 4K channels did NOT use any transponders previously occupied by Sunday Ticket channels (or anything else), they were launched on 3 D14 transponders that were vacant up until the time they first started testing the feeds a few months ago. (A few of them were even reporting a 0 signal up until the day the 4K test channels first were added)

If Roger Goddell were to come out on stage tonight, declare the draft cancelled and orders all players to report to their stadiums within the next hour for the first game of the season which is going to start immediately so Tom Brady can't appeal his suspension again, they can launch Sunday Ticket tonight without losing ANY 4K channels.


----------



## David Ortiz (Aug 21, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> Then Stuart is wrong, we have transponder maps from when Sunday Ticket was in season. They do NOT use additional feeds, they use the designated part time HD Cinema channels for Sunday Ticket's HD feeds, while the Sunday Ticket SD feeds use a mix of SD infomercial channels, SD Cinema channels and other space shared by SD RSN alternates on the 101 slot.
> 
> The 4K channels did NOT use any transponders previously occupied by Sunday Ticket channels (or anything else), they were launched on 3 D14 transponders that were vacant up until the time they first started testing the feeds a few months ago. (A few of them were even reporting a 0 signal up until the day the 4K test channels first were added)
> 
> If Roger Goddell were to come out on stage tonight, declare the draft cancelled and orders all players to report to their stadiums within the next hour for the first game of the season which is going to start immediately so Tom Brady can't appeal his suspension again, they can launch Sunday Ticket tonight without losing ANY 4K channels.


Of course, by September there may be more than 3 4K channels. I wouldn't be surprised to see multiple 4K feeds for the coming NFL season.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Even if they do, they're not going to be able to launch those 4K channels using the space used by Sunday Ticket. The Sunday Ticket channels do not sit vacant for the other 347 days of the year. When Sunday Ticket isn't live, those designated part time HD Cinema channels are also used for RSN alternates and other part time HD channels like Fox Soccer Plus, Premier League Extra, ESPN College Extra and bonus feeds of non-carried RSNs for Center Ice, Direct Kick, League Pass and Extra Innings.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

Rich said:


> OK, that's your opinion and I'll respect it even tho I disagree with it. I can't help but wonder if the TVs sold by Costco and numbered slightly differently have any bearing on this. I bought two 650Ds from Costco and they weren't acceptable and I've read some posts from members who have 6500s (I initially thought that they were the same TVs as the 650Ds) and they don't seem to have the same issues I had. I've never seen an 850D at any of our local Costcos. I have seen Sonys that had slightly different model numbers than what Sony usually had on their website and called Sony and was told not to buy them. I do see a really different picture than I see on my 1080p Panny plasmas but I've never had a 1080p LCD with a 240 refresh rate. I did try a 1080p Samsung with a 120 refresh rate during my 4K adventure and found that to be very jittery and returned it quickly.
> 
> Rich


There is a LOT of variation within the JS8500 production line, but the Costco model is the same TV with black trim. They only reason it has a different colour/SKU is so that people can't price shop Best Buy off of the Costco/BJs/Sams down the street. The TV itself is the same TV.

To be fair to the Samsung TV, I am comparing it to a 60" Sharp LED-LCD with an external video processor (DVDO EDGE) for some sources, and internal processing only for Netflix. I have basically the same setup, but obviously 4k content doesn't go through the video processor, as it maxes out at 1080p. DirecTV may well look better upscaled on a TV like this, and I haven't had much time to really play with Blu-Ray. I'm basically comparing based off of 1080p Netflix, which looks the same to me (that's a good thing, it looked great on the Sharp too). Comcast, as expected looks worse. It doesn't matter the screen resolution, it's just that if you make it bigger, the compression artifacts get bigger too. The video processor makes them less annoying, but at some point, you can only fix the mess Comcast makes so much. I will say that UHD Blu-Rays and 4k Netflix streaming are absolutely stunning, and go way beyond even the best 1080p content I could feed into the Sharp.

I am an enthusiast in the sense of wanting the best picture I can get out of what I'm watching, but I don't pick content solely based on quality, so some of my basketball games are SD on my local non-rebuild Comcast system, and I still watch them. It's painful, but I watch them. When I have an actual house that I own, it's getting D* with 4k, but more for the HD quality for sports, and to get every game in HD, not 5-10 in SD like on Comcast. My sense is that if I'm lucky, I might get a couple of basketball games a year in live 4k for the next few years if ESPN takes up 4k.



AngryManMLS said:


> And if I needed the reverse band LNB right now I would be screwed since I need the 5LNB version so I can still get UniMas and CCTV News.


Is CCTV News the English Language version that's included in regular package? Or Mandarin or Cantonese with the corresponding international package? Why do they still have oddball channels hanging around on 119? You'd think they would straighten their stuff out. It's not like they're that crunched for space on 99c/103c....


----------



## David Ortiz (Aug 21, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> Even if they do, they're not going to be able to launch those 4K channels using the space used by Sunday Ticket. The Sunday Ticket channels do not sit vacant for the other 347 days of the year. When Sunday Ticket isn't live, those designated part time HD Cinema channels are also used for RSN alternates and other part time HD channels like Fox Soccer Plus, Premier League Extra, ESPN College Extra and bonus feeds of non-carried RSNs for Center Ice, Direct Kick, League Pass and Extra Innings.


I think you're missing Stuart's point. If this were September, there could very well be multiple 4K feeds on Sunday for NFL games, in addition to however many full-time 4K channels. So the space needed for 4K in September may/will be much greater than the space needed for 4K today. I don't think it has anything to do with the space used for HD Sunday Ticket, but rather that the limited number of 4K channels will currently fit without needing the reverse band capacity. That probably won't be the case later, which is why DIRECTV is requiring the HR54 and reverse band LNBs from the get go.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Bigg said:


> Why do they still have oddball channels hanging around on 119? You'd think they would straighten their stuff out. It's not like they're that crunched for space on 99c/103c....


CCTV News is a P/I channel, FCC rules require satellite providers to devote bandwidth on each satellite to them, as long as 119 is in use, there will always be P/I channels there. 101, 99c, 103c and 95 have their own share of P/I channels too. 110 did as well until it was removed from Domestic use and repurposed for Puerto Rico.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

David Ortiz said:


> I think you're missing Stuart's point. If this were September, there could very well be multiple 4K feeds on Sunday for NFL games, in addition to however many full-time 4K channels. So the space needed for 4K in September may/will be much greater than the space needed for 4K today. I don't think it has anything to do with the space used for HD Sunday Ticket, but rather that the limited number of 4K channels will currently fit without needing the reverse band capacity. That probably won't be the case later, which is why DIRECTV is requiring the HR54 and reverse band LNBs from the get go.


Yeah, that could be what Stuart meant ...

One thing though by Stuart in th article is definitely wrong from everything known about 4K so far ...



> .. You can fit between 4 and 6 HD channels on one transponder.
> You need 2 whole transponders for one 4K channel.


No, the future channel bonding is to be 3 4K channels per 2 whole xpndrs.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

David Ortiz said:


> Of course, by September there may be more than 3 4K channels. I wouldn't be surprised to see multiple 4K feeds for the coming NFL season.


I would not bet on seeing any NFLST games in 4K. The only chance is games on ESPN (assuming the ESPN4K channel launches by then) and maybe the simulcast NFL Network games. Since the networks produce the NFLST games and they don't have anywhere to deliver 4K, they aren't likely to produce and uplink NFLST games in 4K for Directv unless Directv greases their palms with a LOT of money.

I agree with James Long's interpretation. Come football season there are a lot more demands on Directv's Ka bandwidth as they'll have all the college football feeds (BTN/SECN and various regional alts etc.) on Saturday and then the NFLST feeds on Sunday. Good time to move 4K to reverse band to avoid taking up Ka bandwidth. It isn't "because they will be showing NFLST in 4K" it is "because football season sucks up a lot of transponder bandwidth".


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Not sure who was claiming it takes two transponders per 4K channel, I think they were basing that on some wildly inaccurate information on satelliteguys a while back. As HoTat2 said, Directv has specifically said they will be delivering 4K at about 30 Mbps, and will place three 4K channels in each pair of bonded transponders.

Someone on satelliteguys said he recorded 8 1/2 hours of the Masters in 4K and how much storage it required. I did the math, and it came out to around 36 Mbps. Pretty much what you'd expect when they have an entire transponder's worth of bandwidth (39.4 Mbps) to play with.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> I would not bet on seeing any NFLST games in 4K. The only chance is games on ESPN (assuming the ESPN4K channel launches by then) and maybe the simulcast NFL Network games. Since the networks produce the NFLST games and they don't have anywhere to deliver 4K, they aren't likely to produce and uplink NFLST games in 4K for Directv unless Directv greases their palms with a LOT of money.
> 
> I agree with James Long's interpretation. Come football season there are a lot more demands on Directv's Ka bandwidth as they'll have all the college football feeds (BTN/SECN and various regional alts etc.) on Saturday and then the NFLST feeds on Sunday. Good time to move 4K to reverse band to avoid taking up Ka bandwidth. It isn't "because they will be showing NFLST in 4K" it is "because football season sucks up a lot of transponder bandwidth".


Actually, i tend tho think we might get some ST games in 4k since they are doing random mlb games now. Would be interesting if they do.....


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

inkahauts said:


> Actually, i tend tho think we might get some ST games in 4k since they are doing random mlb games now. Would be interesting if they do.....


Not as long as they are mostly on OTA tv. Maybe MNF and TNF (both have the ESPN / NFLN feed open to all)

But ST can't view local games in 4K?? and the local systems will not have away to due for a very long time?

At least with the MLB / NBA / NHL your local RSN can start there own 4k feed or even mirror out the local OTA feed to an local non OTA 4k channel.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

KyL416 said:


> CCTV News is a P/I channel, FCC rules require satellite providers to devote bandwidth on each satellite to them, as long as 119 is in use, there will always be P/I channels there. 101, 99c, 103c and 95 have their own share of P/I channels too. 110 did as well until it was removed from Domestic use and repurposed for Puerto Rico.


Weird. What's a P/I channel anyway? That kinda sucks, as that's actually an interesting channel.



HoTat2 said:


> Yeah, that could be what Stuart meant ...
> 
> One thing though by Stuart in th article is definitely wrong from everything known about 4K so far ...
> 
> ...


Once they get their compression dialed in, I should think they could get 2 per xpndr, although maybe online encoding really takes a lot more bandwidth than offline, which has been at about 16mbps for well over a year now.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

JoeTheDragon said:


> Not as long as they are mostly on OTA tv. Maybe MNF and TNF (both have the ESPN / NFLN feed open to all)
> 
> But ST can't view local games in 4K?? and the local systems will not have away to due for a very long time?
> 
> At least with the MLB / NBA / NHL your local RSN can start there own 4k feed or even mirror out the local OTA feed to an local non OTA 4k channel.


Who's to say they won't simulcast CBS or FOX in 4K on DIRECTV for ST subs? It can happen. For national games I doubt it since they are not a part of ST except for ESPN. I could see that game and maybe the Thursday games since they are also already simulcast.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

looks like the near future of DTV 4K channels is not that clear - using up-conversion of 1080p cameras ... yeah !
http://www.fiercecable.com/special-reports/directvs-trials-and-tribulations-early-days-live-4k


----------



## David Ortiz (Aug 21, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> Not sure who was claiming it takes two transponders per 4K channel...


Note the part I bolded in your earlier post:



slice1900 said:


> I doubt that. 4Kp120 has 18x more pixels/second than 720p60, and Directv is just able to cram 6 HD channels on a transponder, which is an average of only 6.5 Mbps each. Of those six, some are more bit starved along with others of better quality. If compressing 18x more pixels resulted in 18x more compressed data, that would be 3 full transponders with MPEG4. I assume you meant HEVC, but even then it is 1.5 to 2 transponders. Average, not peak.
> 
> Of course, you don't really get 18x more data compressing 18x more pixels, as HEVC has variable sized blocks so large areas where the color is the same/similar will compress better, and the static parts of an image require little additional bandwidth when the frame rate rises. Still, for equivalent quality to the best HD Directv currently delivers you'd need to be able to peak at more than one transponder even for HEVC encoded 4Kp120. *Probably even for 4Kp60.* Hence the ability of DVB-S2X to allow bonding up to 3 transponders.


4Kp60 hopefully will be given the space to make it look good. Really, sports should look fantastic once the learning curve is tackled. Movies and scripted TV shows are still mostly 24fps, so we should have a big difference in file sizes, depending on the source.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Bigg said:


> Once they get their compression dialed in, I should think they could get 2 per xpndr, although maybe online encoding really takes a lot more bandwidth than offline, which has been at about 16mbps for well over a year now.


Offline encoding is more efficient than real time encoding, because they can devote effectively unlimited processing power to getting the best possible compression. Also, Netflix is showing 24 fps or 30 fps content, while 4K sports will all be 60 fps. But keep in mind that just because Netflix is using 15.6 Mbps that doesn't mean that's all you need. The 4K Blu Ray standard provides for up to 128 Mbps for video/audio, for content that is mostly 24 fps, so it will be far higher quality than what Netflix delivers.

I think in a few years, as real time encoders become better, Directv will probably be able to switch from three to four 4K channels per pair of transponders in at least some cases. Sort of like how they have five HD channels on some transponders and six on others. Depends on the bandwidth needs for the channel and/or how much bandwidth Directv thinks the channel is "worth". MPEG4 encoders went through the same process, there's no way Directv could have tried to put five let alone six HD channels in a single transponder a decade ago.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Bigg said:


> What's a P/I channel anyway?


Public Interest ... these channels pay the cost of carriage. DBS companies are required to set aside a percentage of their channels on each orbital location and offer the space to qualified channels. PIs must be non-commercial and the amount they pay is based on the cost of retransmission (uplink and satellite space). Because of the restrictions on what channels can be PIs many end up being religious or educational channels.

Non PI channels can also buy space on satellite carriers.


----------



## paranoia (Jun 13, 2014)

P Smith said:


> looks like the near future of DTV 4K channels is not that clear - using up-conversion of 1080p cameras ... yeah !
> http://www.fiercecable.com/special-reports/directvs-trials-and-tribulations-early-days-live-4k


Very informative article, thanks.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

slice1900 said:


> Offline encoding is more efficient than real time encoding, because they can devote effectively unlimited processing power to getting the best possible compression. Also, Netflix is showing 24 fps or 30 fps content, while 4K sports will all be 60 fps. But keep in mind that just because Netflix is using 15.6 Mbps that doesn't mean that's all you need. The 4K Blu Ray standard provides for up to 128 Mbps for video/audio, for content that is mostly 24 fps, so it will be far higher quality than what Netflix delivers.
> 
> I think in a few years, as real time encoders become better, Directv will probably be able to switch from three to four 4K channels per pair of transponders in at least some cases. Sort of like how they have five HD channels on some transponders and six on others. Depends on the bandwidth needs for the channel and/or how much bandwidth Directv thinks the channel is "worth". MPEG4 encoders went through the same process, there's no way Directv could have tried to put five let alone six HD channels in a single transponder a decade ago.


True, I guess online will never be as efficient as offline, and good point on 60fps. 1080i is genius in a way, although so many people have crappy de-interlacers that I guess no one wanted to continue doing it that way...

Also true. Cable went to tri-muxing and then quad-muxing MPEG-2, and now they are running up to 10 MPEG-4 HDs per QAM. It's amazing how the channels look equally as crappy as they did a few years ago, but use less bandwidth.



James Long said:


> Public Interest ... these channels pay the cost of carriage. DBS companies are required to set aside a percentage of their channels on each orbital location and offer the space to qualified channels. PIs must be non-commercial and the amount they pay is based on the cost of retransmission (uplink and satellite space). Because of the restrictions on what channels can be PIs many end up being religious or educational channels.
> 
> Non PI channels can also buy space on satellite carriers.


Interesting. So CCTV news is paid by the Chinese Government?


----------

