I must say that it saddened me a bit to make this video. A great new TV standard is being screwed up by a combination of corporate suits, idiots, or some combination of both. I don't try to think I know everything or that the industry needs to listen to be, but it needs to at least acknowledge the DRM issues and stop blaming others for the botched rollout of ATSC 3.0. The consumer needs to be the priority or this is going to fail.
Corporate greed is killing the potential goose that lays the golden egg. How many people are going to pay for OTA TV when they can stream it at their choice as they see fit? If ATSC 1.0 dies,what will be next. OTA broadcast radio? Sunset a standard with an unacceptable replacement and you are creating a failure. Keep giving us updates,Tyler,you are a great source of information.
Ironically, I see radio going before broadcast TV. I see AM radio being mostly abandoned within the next decade, FM becoming the wasteland AM is now, the most of the TV spectrum being sold to cell phone companies. Switzerland actually shut off OTA TV entirely.
@@AntennaMan Interesting news about Switzerland. Perhaps in mountainous regions OTA is so spotty that most people won't miss it. Losing OTA would matter less if we had good, cheap, universal broadband. If I were King of the FTC I'd mandate that every station with a broadcast license must simulcast a digital feed of whatever they are broadcasting. Then you could watch them anywhere with broadband.
I see it a little differently in that OTA TV will still be around, but most of the interesting stuff will be switched over to internet streaming where the national networks have more control. With streaming they just distribute one/multiple feeds out over the internet and they control pricing of those feeds it at whatever level they want. ATSC 3 would be more of a headache as the broadcast feed would involve multiple markets, thus multiple feeds to multiple stations (and their staffs and equipment support) to broadcast individually, across the USA.
@@AntennaManI hope America doesn't do what Switzerland did because there's a lot of remote areas where relying upon internet for content just isn't gonna work. Also a lot of people are gonna be getting rid of internet service due to inflation being out of control and the wages not keeping up.
Excellent presentation, to the point. I will NEVER buy or support DRM on OUR *PUBLIC* airwaves. They don't belong to ANY individual entity. The FCC is supposed to protect PUBLIC AIRWAVES.
Amen. And cable companies and others shouldn’t be able to charge RETRANSMISSION FEES. That is absolute bullshit. If you’re using PUBLIC airwaves, then ANYONE can retransmit.
The FCC hasn't protected public airwaves since the Clinton administration. I saw it during George W. Bush's administration on how the FCC was moving away from protecting public interest and moving towards protecting broadcaster's interest. During the Obama, Trump, and now Biden's administration, the issue with the FCC has only gotten worse. I don't see changes in the near future and, on top of that, I do see this move away from public interest to continue at a faster rate.
@@AgentOffice "Apples and oranges". Your cell phone is replacing the wired telephone service for your private conversations. Broadcasting is powerful transmitters reaching many miles. The total number of independent simultaneous transmissions is limited. The airwaves belonging to the public, the FCC is a federal commission there to protect the public's airwaves and do stuff like making sure a CB radio doesn't "step on" ambulance communications, etc. I'll give you an example. That's what the "bug" in the corner of the video is for. Any use of that free recording has the broadcaster ID in the video. Anyone reusing it would willingly need to identify the source or be knowingly misusing a previous broadcast. Simple, I recorded the Superbowl. I can watch the half time show again as often as I like. It was on the air. Only a dope would try to sell a video of the half time show. It was FREE over the air. You can't rebroadcast or sell it without the copyright holder's permission. Only an idiot would do that.
@@AgentOffice While encryption can be used in DRM, they're not the same thing. Nobody's been promised access to your phone call with your parents. People have been promised access to OTA channels.
I was watching an episode of the classic "Green Acres" TV show last night and Mr. Douglas was installing a TV antenna on his roof. Today I watched your latest video "Deep Concerns for the Future of ATSC 3.0 Products and decided that, even the folks who live in Hooterville make more sense than the idiots currently surrounding ATSC 3.0 and DRM. You deserve to be pissed Antenna Man and I like your guts when confronting these lamebrains. Nobody looks out for the cord cutters like you. 10 thumbs up!
I want to the next, next gen to also include improvements to FM radio. I may make people mad, but let's remove vhf-lo channel 6 and UHF channel 35? (The upper most channel) from strictly being video and into a multi purpose spectrum for high bandwidth emergency alerts that will enable precise targeted alerts, along with a constant data stream of other information like weather forecasts, train/airplane/bus departures, maybe local schools could host a virtual classes with at home activities for children at home because they are sick or can watch repeat lessons after school, we could also include a host of new digital audio streams. The idea is to target mobile people: cars via Fm antennas, and cell phones via higher frequency UHF. The most efficient use of airwaves is for mass live data. In emergency every uses the internet to look up the weather and slows down the network, but if that data is being constantly pushed, your phone can simply grab that data without ever needing the internet.
@@thedude5040 Just making an option in ATSC-5.0 that allows sub carriers that would normally carry a TV station instead carry several "radio stations" would be a better idea. On TV channel could carry a lot of high quality audio. Lets take a very generous case so you can see what I mean One channel of audio of "CD quality" would be 16 bit numbers at about a 44KHz rate. Doing no optimization at all gets you 16*44KHz = 704KHz A TV channel is about 6MHz AKA 6000MHz wide 6000MHz/704KHz = 8.5 Audio channels This could be 4 stereo programs and one (pick the broadcasting you don't like)
ATSC 3.0 is like Olympians - the only ones that make a profit from the Olympics are the broadcasters, those that get the contracts to build the stadiums, and some local hotels/motels/restaurants.
I share your frustration with the rollout of ATSC 3.0. We live in a fringe area and have always used OTA TV so I was excited about the technical improvements of ATSC 3.0 compared to 1.0. As you posted the industry has largely squandered the technical advantages not to mention the DRM debacle. So at least in the short term we have no intention of purchasing ATSC 3.0 gear and in the distant future may just give up on OTA altogether.
@AntennaMan, I just wanted to say thanks for staying on top of this, and keeping us informed. Also for being an advocate for all of us regarding OTA TV broadcasting.
I've been watching your videos about ATSC 3.0 for literally several years. I have watched your initial enthusiasm slowly decline due to the issues you have made very clear in this video, and many of your other ones. It's really a shame. Have you ever actually got a chance to speak to a TV station's engineer that is currently running DRM? Is it up to the Engineering Team to make those decisions, or some fat cat corporate overlord? Thanks for the great video as always.
It's really sad how the tables have turned with ATSC 3.0 along with my enthusiasm of what I realized is an anti-consumer TV standard. From the engineers I spoke with, DRM is being forced at the corporate level. Someone told me their local engineer was told by a corporate executive that DRM would not impact consumer receivers. I understand it's hearsay, but I don't think it was made up....
It's neither really. Answer is a web of media industry practices that have very little to do with broadcasters or other distributors of content. It's like blaming the gas station for the price of gas. The bottom line is no broadcaster can transmit copyrighted 4k/HDR content without DRM. If they did, they are liable to be sued for damages by the content owner.
DRM issues were the main reason I dropped DirecTV 12 years ago. I was trying to get their PC video player working off the whole house DVR and could only get 1 of 3 PCs to work even though all 3 passed their DRM compatibility test program. DirecTV support was no help and they basically said you get what you paid for with the "free" PC viewer. Mind you, I was not trying to break any rules with the DRM, I was only trying to view programs recorded on my DVR on a PC over the network using the DirecTV supplied viewer program. In the end, I built my own whole house DVR/media server setup using HD HomeRun ATSC 1.0 tuners. Paid for all that in about 2 years with the subscription savings.
I am an American that lives in Japan. All of our home Japanese TV tuners have built in encryption and it is a pain in the butt. Your tv has a built in CAS card, your blue ray/DVD tv recorder has its own CAS card. Your USB dongle to watch tv on a computer has a CAS card. It is all designed to keep you from recording/watching TV the way you want. The signal cannot be tuned unless the card is valid. Plus it drives up the price of equipment. Also the cards eventually need to be replaced. I think every 10 years. Had a old tv I had to get rid of that could no longer work because the encryption card update was no longer made. Even with a recorder, some things are not allowed to be recorded and you have no say in it. I also believe they also have the ability to erase recordings but this has not happened to me. And forget setting up a media server to attempt to watch recordings you made on your own. It can only be done if you are locked in to a venders system meaning everything must match. And when vendor support is over it will not work.
Yeah, Japan is *very anal* about copyright enforcement. It would be the same across the United States, if not for the constitution (I suspect that's why the establishment hates it so much, copyrights fly against the 1st, 4th and 8th amendments) and the first sale doctrine.
😀And, don't forget the NHK fee collectors come to harass your place every once in a while, although I love ISDB-T (and all other systems, even DTMB) much, much more than ATSC 1.0.
As long as tv stations who transition to ATSC 3.0 must also broadcast in 1.0, I don’t care. If I need a new tv I’ll just buy one without a built in 3.0 tuner. I’ve also read that 3.0 will enable targeted ads and make it easier to track viewership. Even without drm issues I would probably ignore this transition.
@@blahblah5603 If that happens, I guess the OTA viewership will go down the drain. People do not have to subscribe to ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX these days anyway, as if they want certain programs they get them on demand from many sources. Live TV is no longer popular with many. The BCers are just shooting themselves in the foot over this if they think the public will embrace paid OTA TV.
Youngster, you're my favorite nerd. This Xer grew up in a time when nearly everything was getting better & more reliable. TVs, VHS to SVHS to DVD to bluray. Even the lowly cassette performed well with the right gear. Audio in general continued to improve. As did automobiles and appliances. But something happened. Everything became microprocessor controlled & that was a good thing in the beginning. Now it's used to usurp ownership & control of everything. Between gov't regulation that has made everything more expensive, decreased longevity, and just generally make things suck we also have designed in obsolescence. You have little control over your car, phone, and now even your TV. I recently bought the ADTH and a Sony A80CL with 3.0 tuners. I'm only 17 miles from 2000' towers in flat Houston but there are buildings & trees and mega multipath. The 3.0 signals work considerably better in this environment even with decent outdoor antennas. For now. At some point I'll just kick all these products and the douchebags who ruin them for profit/control out of my life.
thank you for this important news, Tyler. I watched a similar report on another cord-cutter channel and I find that you present information more clearly and understandably. you also mentioned my friend Tom Butts' article in TV Tech; I'm pleased to see him being recognized for his work in the broadcast tech news domain. thank you for looking out for us OTA viewers.
All broadcast technologies used should be open. We shouldn't allow PUBLIC airwaves to be used to enrich specific companies that helped set the standard. This is the RDIMM issue all over again, but on a public asset.
You might want to produce a short video on how to try an antenna BEFORE you cut the cord? I messed around with a TV antenna for about a month before deciding I didn't need cable. And I (temporarily) mounted my antenna out my attic window, to avoid using a ladder. Good job on your videos.
I suspect many, it not most of your subscribers who watch your videos may not be old techy guys, but people who enjoy hearing from a nice guy who reminds them of the good old days of antenna tv, and just like your passion and your personality. Like me❤
When I was younger, I remember having an old Montgomery Wards black and white TV, and late at night, I would flip through the stations to see if I could pick up a distant station. I used to get stations from Dallas, San Antonio, Shreveport, even one time from New Orleans. Sadly, because everything is digital, I can't do that anymore. Those were fun days indeed.
In this regards it's just going back to the way it was prior to cable going mainstream. If they'll just focus on making better content for channels they can get better quality advertisements leading to making more money.
@@blahblah5603 So, I guess the future for public safety is a paid subscription. Do you want to be warned that a dangerous tornado is on the ground and heading for you? You'll need to pay for that. The only good viewer is the one that pays. - TV Broadcasters.
Another informative video! I hope that everyday consumers are not left out in the cold with ATSC 3.0 equipment, only to see it become obsolete before they can fully benefit from this new technology, which has the potential to be significantly better than the legacy 1.0 standard. Let's not go backward but rather embrace this relatively new technology with the consumer in mind first and foremost. Let’s be reasonable and ensure that everyone is on the same page without succumbing to corporate greed. Corporate greed is threatening the future of ATSC 3.0. At the very least, DRM issues need to be resolved quickly, or the rollout might deter consumers from purchasing new TVs or standalone set-top boxes until these issues are sorted out by all parties concerned.
Thank you Tyler for your continued efforts in educating others to what’s going on behind the scenes. It seems to be the public would best be served by sticking with ATSC 1.0 but switching to more efficient codecs as demonstrated by the station in Eugene, Oregon you had featured in a previous video. Give your viewers 1080p main and sub channels (not 4K) and they would be very happy. If I could advocate for this type of solution tell me where to sign up!
This may be the way forward. You can't trust big media to do what is best for the consumer. The FCC is supposed to be for the consumer. Yet they caved in to Media company lobbyist.
One other point of note: K03IM-D proved that most of the problems with the ATSC1.0 standard are entirely down to the video side of the payload. I'm sure most are content with using AC3 as it currently stands, never mind Dolby making bank on E-AC3. The only thing that could make the 3.0 standard viable would've been the fact that movement doesn't kill your signal, but the copy protection hampered that benefit.
I used work in broadcasting. Broadcasters promised the world with ATSC 1.0 but delivered nothing but digi-nets that can be produced for pennies on the dollar. They're greed about ATSC 3.0 is stunning. Broadcasters are living in a dream. The ratings for local television continue to drop every year. They don't seem to grasp that they are making themselves obsolete.
It was just announced today that in the Chicago market that all the Bulls, Blackhawks and White Sox games will be carried over the air on WJYS channels 62.2 and 62.3.
I'm an older woman on a fixed income trying to watch my funds. I'm so irritated at how everything now has to be online! Trying to save money I bought an outdoor antenna, and darn if I didn't have to go online to figure out the gibberish that came in the 1 page manual. Fortunately I'm computer literate, but many elderly senior citizens are not. So what Tyler is saying is very disturbing on what may be the future for over the air TV 😕
spend your funds on broadband... more than enough "free" content online...I spent part of the 90s teaching seniors to use the internet, now I suppose I'm one of them, but the internet actually pretty liberating and everything you need to do there is described there... the most disturbing trend I see is skilled nursing facilities and rehabs with no wifi: do they really expect seniors who can't do much anything else to be chained to the vegetabilitating confines of tvs all day?
We could change over to DVB-T or ISDB-T like other countries if our ever so wonder FCC allows it as it offers more than ATSC from what I herd. What do you think Tyler is it better? -Cheers!
All we watch now are stations like MeTV, COZI TV, Rewind and similar. No "big" network shows at all. If they move the small stations we watch to some sort of pay scheme, we have enough DVDs to carry us through.
Sounds like a win. How about we skip the proprietary ATSC 3.0 and create an open standard ATSC 4.0 without encryption. That's what broadcast TV is supposed to be.
ME! ME! I want to be in charge of a 2D compatible 3D standard. The easiest way to make 3D 2D compatible is to poke out one of the two eyes therefore just like how Dolby surround has two over channels for stereo and encoded channels for the extra speakers one I should be overt and the other should be encoded To be both bandwidth neutral, And because of the desire by TV producers and directors to make TV look more movie-like, make the minimum 3d standard 30 Hz by 2 eyes using an alternate Overt frame/encoded frame method. By default all you get is the overt Eye. You could buy a really cheap 3D decoder that will convert it to dechromed red and cyan, and for some more money by a second frame alternator with 3D glasses sinker to add 3D to typical 2D TV. That way the 3D haters can't buy 3D out of the market.
The FCC would need to set the standard. You can't trust greedy corporations. They need to set standards just like they did for the HD rollout. Why would the FCC allow ATSC 3.0 have the ability to track viewers. Seems a bit odd. They were really totally hands off. A huge mistake on their part.
I think your new tag line should be, "I tell broadcasters to not encrypt their transmissions and lose viewers, but what do they do? They encrypt them anyway."
I do wonder about the actual future of local channel television. Most people I know just go with streaming television. I had my contractor install a Clear Stream 4 Max for me. I am the only client of my contractor to request an antenna installation. I hope ATSC 1.0 stays around for a long time. I feel like ATSC 3.0 is way too complex that many TV manufacturers just go with an ATSC 1.0 turner.
We can't all afford to pay for streaming services, especially those of us on fixed incomes. Too bad about ATSC 3.0. I was hoping to eventually take advantage of more of the audio and video formats available on my new a/v receiver.
I put up an antenna and that's primarily what I watch - the regular locals (ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX,PBS.ETC) for news and some sports, plus MeTV for some favorite old re-runs,plus a DVD/Bluray player for discs from the local library's collection. Streaming is kind of a mess to me since there are so many stations broadcasting(?) the same stuff; it really needs to consolidate. Even movies on the free streaming channels have upp'd their number and frequency of commercials to the point they are unwatchable. And no, I'm not a sports fan. especially the tidal wave of football being broadcast/streamed these days.
Unless circumstances resolve soon, this will be another HD radio in two years. Some markets will even carry the signals, but manufacturers won't compete to build sets and converters. Unless they sell many, there's nothing in it for them. Just like HD radio, only certain stores sell the receivers.
In theory you should be correct, but my concern is that with a enough lobbying, ATSC 3.0 can be forced on us. Hopefully the FCC has the back of antenna viewers and not mega corporations. We'll have to see.
@@AntennaMan Thanks for the great video again. They can mandate it all they want. The consumer still has the final say, if they watch OTA or not. I have not bought a 3.0 box as yet, as we will not have 3.0 for years out here on the Northern Oregon Coast, where we have translators. It sounds like the TV stations with DRM, just want to lose their OTA audience. Where is the FCC on all of this?
@@AntennaMan There comes a time when the citizenry forces things back to what is right. The way the government is and becoming, would not be supersized if that happens someday. This DRM thing is a symptom of what our government really thinks of us. But that is a subject for another channel.
When this standard came out I was hopeful 4k would be coming soon. Now I'm not even sure it will be adopted. We need to ftc to force channels to broadcast in 4k by 2028 or something like that. If you did such the industry would fight less & make something work.
Great video! Glad that DRM is killing this new possible standard. ATSC 1 is fine with me unless there can be a new standard without drm. Love your comment that OTA should be bringing content to as many people as possible with no roadblocks! Thanks
What's funny about all of this ATSC 3.0 drama is that there are small broadcasters who are making ATSC 1.0 do things that were only possible with ATSC 3.0, such as 4K TV. It's using the ATSC 1.0 2009 specifications, which can do everything that ATSC 3.0 can do, but doesn't have the DRM encryption.
The broadcasters claim that DRM was needed to stop pirate streams, that of course cut into their local access fees..Yet what they really are doing is killing off atsc 3.0 as a whole. With the better reception in 3.0 a lot more ppl could use OTA,which of course is free.
@@TELEVISIONARCHIVESNo one is pirating it and nobody would. It's just not worth all the expense and the trouble that goes along with it. It's just a lame excuse to try to charge people for the airwaves that belong to the public anyhow.
@@TELEVISIONARCHIVES There are pirate services that pick up OTA and they stream it,charging ppl like 6 bucks a month. The DRM is designed to stop that. Unfortunately the DRM also can break DVRs and network sharing devices people use at home. This is much like the copywrite protection companies used on VHS tapes that often made the picture look crappy. The real stinker is that the DRM requires licensing for the device makers. The freaking broadcasters created this monster , by using elements that were not open source. The broadcasters are playing a game, they I think want to try and kill off atsc 3.0, in fact kill off broadcast entirely and force ppl to pay to see their content either steaming or on cable. Right now they have a dilemma, bc if they openly let atsc 3.0 die that potentially could face anti trust action, in that there is a fundamental conflict between OTA and streaming in terms of their business. The government may be morons, but they can see where the broadcasters have a vested interest in ATSC 3.0 dying. If they do this they are eliminating competition, which would enrich them. Not to mention that atsc 3.0 makes ota a lot more useful to a lot more ppl.
@@TELEVISIONARCHIVES It's the TV business' fear of illicit IPTV relays. Never mind that they wouldn't be needed, much less exist, if cable was affordable. Cable's prices are rising because the floor has been hit and nobody wants it.
Honestly, as long as DRM and other political issues make it impossible to enjoy ATSC 3.0 with the same myriad of products available for ATSC 1.0 then it might as well die. It is insane that the broadcasters get to determine when and where I can watch TV.
Is it the masses that are getting hosed, or just early adopters? Consider that K03IM-D in Eugene already made the promoted '4k video' bullet-point moot.
I blame the FCC for Not having any technical people at least look at it before they LET the Networks do whatever they want. They should have at the least built the DRM equipment before adopting a new standard, and specifications. I would stay away from putting that tuner in TVs, too. There's other ways to do it.
Thanks Tyler for bring this to our attention ☺️ I feel blessed to still have TV stations in Jackson,Ms area that still have A.T.S.C. 1.0 and never have pursued the 3.0 !! It's sad to say but 1.0 may be the Standard in some small and rural areas !! Politricks still the norm in keeping areas DOWN !! Thanks to U and Lon that keep us aware and abreast of the newer technology!! It's sad to see 3rd World 🌍😭 countries that have 3.0 and are running 💨 with it . God Bless U 🙏❤️ Tyler and stay safe ........ :)
Thank you for all your videos. I don't know what roof antenna I have, Got from my Dad but it works. I was missing all channel 4's. I looked it up on antenna point to be DTV35. When I searched for 35 and got it I them also had all the missing channel 4's. I don't know why that worked but it did. I'll do that before I rescan from now on. Thanks from long island ny. I would never have been able to cut the cord a year ago without your help .
The summary of the argument is that currently manufacturers pay $3.30 for about 11,000 ATSC patents. And, therefore, $6.75 for just two more patents is ridiculous. Constellation's royalty rate is skewed and hopefully the courts will agree. Otherwise, a royalty of $10.75 for ATSC, plus Dolby, plus HEVC, plus H.264 will make for a very expensive set-top box. The industry needs to move towards a transparent line-item licensing regime where all royalties are disclosed to the consumer as separate line items so that price gougers can be named and shamed.
DRM is bad news. The equivalent at the HDMI level is HDCP and it's a nightmare. I work for an A/V OEM and probably 90% of the issues we have to deal with are HDCP-related. You'd think the FCC would be pushing for maximum compatibility of broadcast signals and ban OTA DRM. Pity.
Well FCC modified the rules for sunsetting ATSC 1.0 to July 17th 2027 so this issue may have time to get resolved if it ever does. Maybe Pearl TV might beg the FCC to help out with this situation.
I'll be honest, I use 2 silicon dust network tuners including an 2 ATSC 3.0 tuners. Encryption has no place in OTA. The "standard" sucks. The antenna is important, no problems here since I have line of sight to the towers with a second story eve mount. Only 20 miles, so worst channel is 98%. Thanks for the content, BTW.
My FCC comment, as of 9/7/2024: I strongly oppose allowing DRM in ATSC 3.0 transmissions. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984), also known as the "Betamax case", that the making of individual copies of complete television shows for purposes of time shifting does not constitute copyright infringement, but is fair use. Access to the airwaves is granted to broadcasters in the interest of them performing a public service. The addition of digital rights management technology (DRM) and its associated encryption does not serve this purpose. The ability to freely view and record broadcast content on the devices of our choosing (within technical limitations) needs to be retained. For the above two reasons, I most strenuously OPPOSE the inclusion of encryption and DRM technology in any and all broadcast media, to include ATSC 3.0, a/k/a "Next-Generation Television." In closing, I wished to point out that DRM encryption of ATSC 3.0 is in opposition of broadcasting in ATSC 3.0 in the first place now, versus ATSC 1.0, due to the fact that general public will not be able to realize "higher audio and video quality, improved compression efficiency, robust transmission for reception on both fixed and mobile devices, and more accessibility, personalization and interactivity." of ATSC 3.0. Sincerely, SMSGT Keneth W. Jones (U.S.A.F) P.S. I recently purchased a Hisense U8N (65U8N) on July 16, 2024 due to the fact it possessed an ATSC 3.0 TV tuner for "Next Generation," and I just discovered that the ATSC 3.0 major selling point for this TV of being able to view Free OTA ATSC 3.0 channels in 4K with dolby digital audio was false advertising. The general public was "once again" not served by our government institutions.
ATSC 3.0 is facing significant challenges and may be on the verge of obsolescence. The financial viability of over-the-air (OTA) broadcasting continues to dwindle. With limited revenue potential, broadcasters are shifting focus. Streaming platforms, with their direct-to-consumer model, continue to dominate the landscape, offering more flexibility, content variety, and monetization opportunities. The future of media consumption is undeniably moving toward streaming apps, leaving traditional OTA including ATSC 3.0 in the dust.
I happened to notice a few minutes before it started that there was a live American Music Awards 50th Anniversary Special on CBS starting at 8 PM yesterday, on Sunday. So I set my DVR to record it (transmission reencoded and down-converted from 1080i to 720 by Comcast starting in January 2020 for local broadcasts), and I also set my antenna and recording software on my MacBook to record the over-the-air signal. Yesterday and today looked at at least a dozen articles online about where to watch the show. One said the cheapest way was Paramount+. She lied. Others headline how to watch it for free, but they were all free trial subscriptions to streaming services. Not one mentioned over-the-air-broadcasts. A few years ago at least one article might mention you can get it with an antenna. It's totally disgusting that they don't even include that information. They are so in the pockets of the telecommunications corporations. They are serving them, not the public.
Keep in mind that 4K is not being offered over ATSC 3.0, only 1080p which is the same 720p and 1080i video upconverted. This might result in less compression artifacts but it's not a huge improvement. Also know that LG is no longer actively supporting ATSC 3.0 in their TVs, so if your TV has issues picking up ATSC 3.0 in the future, don't expect a fix.
You're right, Antenna Man. It's not about us. For me, it's about making it difficult to enjoy (or record) old shows on the "Oldies" TV stations. Does anybody really NEED to make it difficult to watch "Benson" or "The Nanny"? And give me more and more commercials? What is the statute of limitations on monetizing every last penny out of "Green Acres" or "Gomer Pyle" or "I Dream of Jeanie"? And since we have so many OTA channels, there are more infomercials as well. Free is cheaper than cable or satellite, but the quality of "free" has sunk so low that you're getting (a poor experience) what you pay for.
Paranoia will destroy ya. Most TV shows are not worth watching once let alone recording them. I hope the networks drop DRM. I was really looking forward to the better resolution and signal strength of ATSC 3.0.
The FCC could step in and do something to correct some of this but they do nothing. I bought a new atsc 3.0 set two years ago as I needed a larger screen and my TV was 13 years old at the time.
FCC needs to earn there pay and protect public tv like they have since they stated the ruling for all OTA tv, if no one support 3.0 and end users don't demand it then 2 things will happen it dies or they release it OTA with the same rules ATSC 1.0
Thank you Tyler. This is what I found. The Communications Act. The FCC was created by Congress in the Communications Act for the purpose of “regulating interstate and foreign commerce in communication by wire and radio so as to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communications service . . . .” (In this context, the word "radio" covers both broadcast radio and television.) The Communications Act authorizes the Commission to "make such regulations not inconsistent with law as it may deem necessary to prevent interference between stations and to carry out the provisions of the Act." It directs us to base our broadcast licensing decisions on whether those actions will serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity.
The FCC should step in and ban DRM encryption on any over the air tv broadcast. I also would like to see cable companies or satellite or internet streaming services providers not have to get permission from broadcasters or pay them anything for carrying the broadcast station on their cable system or satellite tv service.
As I recall there was legislation passed in 1992 that specifically required cable companies to pay OTA broadcasters to carry their signals (unless the station elected "must carry" status)
For curiosity's sake, I wonder if that's even legal to lock up those 3.0 local channels. There is most likely a subset of the population that uses OTA TV for Severe WX / Events news alerts as they don't have internet/smartphone plans. Blocking OTA availability would be a safety risk in my opinion. (Great PSA video, Tyler. Continued success.)
I remember decades ago people were protesting against "pay tv". They were protesting against paying cable tv because they understood how it would diminish public tv offerings and advertising which paid for the content. Now today look at the monster that streaming has become, which are now including advertising in their subscriptions. Too many hands in the cookie jar affects the film industry as well.
If the ATSC 3 transition ends here; I see this as a good thing. If it requires an Internet connection then it isn’t broadcast TV. I was an early adopter of both ATSC 1 and ATSC 3; but at this point I hope ATSC 3 is dead.
Honestly I think everyone's going to have to agree that they should really be considering improving ATSC 1.0 before they start forcing ATSC 3.0 standards on to the consumer that would be the more logical and better alternative and solution to the problems
I hope that all manufactures drop ATSC3.0. This will unfortunately fix the DRM issue. 🤷♂🤦♂ Screw the broadcasters! They can go down with the ATSC3.0 ship too!
At this point, I would like to see all TV manufacturers pull ATSC 3.0 capability on newer TVs. We are in the market to replace one of our two TVs, and we will be looking at Samsung and LG TVs that don't have ATSC 3.0 capability. We have Sling TV as our streaming service, so OTA is needed for our local channels. We're ~17 miles from the antenna farms, but reception is not an issue, so ATSC 1.0 works perfectly fine for us.
My old 49" Samsung TV used to have a signal meter built-in, but my newer Samsung QLED 65" only has "got the channel" or "don't have the channel". Signal meters are way too expensive for only occasionally using it!
Personally, I hope the ATSC-3.0 thing fails bad enough and for long enough that the broadcasters who encrypted get to the point of just switching off their ATSC-3 hardware and having to declare it as a loss. This is about the only way I think the lesson will sink in. Nothing makes a company learn a lesson quite like red ink on the balance sheet.
It is disappointing that this is what US broadcaster have decided to do. I guess if I go to South Korea or India I might get to experience 3.0 without DRM. It looks like it is going to be another HD Radio were everyone is just waiting on the patients to run out.
This new standard would take OTA broadcasting to a whole new level with better picture quality and new features but it looks like DRM might kill it single handedly before consumer, on a broad level, will know it exists. Ultimately greed is killing innovation
I must say that it saddened me a bit to make this video. A great new TV standard is being screwed up by a combination of corporate suits, idiots, or some combination of both. I don't try to think I know everything or that the industry needs to listen to be, but it needs to at least acknowledge the DRM issues and stop blaming others for the botched rollout of ATSC 3.0. The consumer needs to be the priority or this is going to fail.
Anything with DRM needs a warning label.
“Society is being screwed up by a combination of corporate suits, idiots, or some combination of both.” (Fixed that for you, Tyler! 😂)
DRM is the main reason why I don't want to get any TV or device with ASTSC 3.0. Just get rid of all DRM and it will be good.
Should I sell my zapperbox?
It is all part of the roll out of unprofitable streaming??
The DRM alone killed my interest in ATSC 3.0. If public airwaves are used, encryption of any kind is unacceptable.
Should be illegal.
@@eminence_front6043 Agreed.
I agree 100%.
@@eminence_front6043 Could be, but the FCC isn't going to do it. We've seen how they handled this debacle.
It's contradictory. They're broadcasting on public airwaves but you can't watch the signal without paying some third-party.
Corporate greed is killing the potential goose that lays the golden egg. How many people are going to pay for OTA TV when they can stream it at their choice as they see fit? If ATSC 1.0 dies,what will be next. OTA broadcast radio? Sunset a standard with an unacceptable replacement and you are creating a failure. Keep giving us updates,Tyler,you are a great source of information.
Ironically, I see radio going before broadcast TV. I see AM radio being mostly abandoned within the next decade, FM becoming the wasteland AM is now, the most of the TV spectrum being sold to cell phone companies. Switzerland actually shut off OTA TV entirely.
@@AntennaMan am is only a wasteland in some areas, in my area it still gets high ratings.
@@AntennaMan Interesting news about Switzerland. Perhaps in mountainous regions OTA is so spotty that most people won't miss it.
Losing OTA would matter less if we had good, cheap, universal broadband. If I were King of the FTC I'd mandate that every station with a broadcast license must simulcast a digital feed of whatever they are broadcasting. Then you could watch them anywhere with broadband.
I see it a little differently in that OTA TV will still be around, but most of the interesting stuff will be switched over to internet streaming where the national networks have more control. With streaming they just distribute one/multiple feeds out over the internet and they control pricing of those feeds it at whatever level they want. ATSC 3 would be more of a headache as the broadcast feed would involve multiple markets, thus multiple feeds to multiple stations (and their staffs and equipment support) to broadcast individually, across the USA.
@@AntennaManI hope America doesn't do what Switzerland did because there's a lot of remote areas where relying upon internet for content just isn't gonna work. Also a lot of people are gonna be getting rid of internet service due to inflation being out of control and the wages not keeping up.
Excellent presentation, to the point. I will NEVER buy or support DRM on OUR *PUBLIC* airwaves. They don't belong to ANY individual entity. The FCC is supposed to protect PUBLIC AIRWAVES.
Amen. And cable companies and others shouldn’t be able to charge RETRANSMISSION FEES. That is absolute bullshit. If you’re using PUBLIC airwaves, then ANYONE can retransmit.
The FCC hasn't protected public airwaves since the Clinton administration. I saw it during George W. Bush's administration on how the FCC was moving away from protecting public interest and moving towards protecting broadcaster's interest. During the Obama, Trump, and now Biden's administration, the issue with the FCC has only gotten worse. I don't see changes in the near future and, on top of that, I do see this move away from public interest to continue at a faster rate.
Well your cell phone is encrypted
@@AgentOffice "Apples and oranges". Your cell phone is replacing the wired telephone service for your private conversations. Broadcasting is powerful transmitters reaching many miles. The total number of independent simultaneous transmissions is limited. The airwaves belonging to the public, the FCC is a federal commission there to protect the public's airwaves and do stuff like making sure a CB radio doesn't "step on" ambulance communications, etc. I'll give you an example. That's what the "bug" in the corner of the video is for. Any use of that free recording has the broadcaster ID in the video. Anyone reusing it would willingly need to identify the source or be knowingly misusing a previous broadcast. Simple, I recorded the Superbowl. I can watch the half time show again as often as I like. It was on the air. Only a dope would try to sell a video of the half time show. It was FREE over the air. You can't rebroadcast or sell it without the copyright holder's permission. Only an idiot would do that.
@@AgentOffice While encryption can be used in DRM, they're not the same thing. Nobody's been promised access to your phone call with your parents. People have been promised access to OTA channels.
I still firmly believe that all OTA transmissions should be free!
It is over the PUBLIC airways. Yeah , should be free. FCC is corrupt like the rest of the government is.
The average person is hit from all angles--taxes, fees, subscriptions, surcharges, pay-per-view, tolls, tariffs, etc. Like Taxman by the Beatles!
if you take a walk I'll tax your feet
Before that there was
ruclips.net/video/pzSWNEBdsVg/видео.htmlsi=E2pUOYlFCNWv68QS
@@mrheem44 And declare the pennies on your eyes.
As soon as I hear DRM I knew this was AM Stereo all over again.
"Let the market decide" - we all saw how that debacle worked out!
I was watching an episode of the classic "Green Acres" TV show last night and Mr. Douglas was installing a TV antenna on his roof. Today I watched your latest video "Deep Concerns for the Future of ATSC 3.0 Products and decided that, even the folks who live in Hooterville make more sense than the idiots currently surrounding ATSC 3.0 and DRM. You deserve to be pissed Antenna Man and I like your guts when confronting these lamebrains. Nobody looks out for the cord cutters like you. 10 thumbs up!
I'm ready to just skip ATSC 3.0 and start working on ATSC 5.0, without encryption.
I want to the next, next gen to also include improvements to FM radio. I may make people mad, but let's remove vhf-lo channel 6 and UHF channel 35? (The upper most channel) from strictly being video and into a multi purpose spectrum for high bandwidth emergency alerts that will enable precise targeted alerts, along with a constant data stream of other information like weather forecasts, train/airplane/bus departures, maybe local schools could host a virtual classes with at home activities for children at home because they are sick or can watch repeat lessons after school, we could also include a host of new digital audio streams. The idea is to target mobile people: cars via Fm antennas, and cell phones via higher frequency UHF. The most efficient use of airwaves is for mass live data. In emergency every uses the internet to look up the weather and slows down the network, but if that data is being constantly pushed, your phone can simply grab that data without ever needing the internet.
ATSC 5.0 will be pay to watch 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
Fact: ATSC whatever is next won't succeed if its voluntary
@@AudiophileTommythe airwaves are public so you can't charge people for it.
@@thedude5040 Just making an option in ATSC-5.0 that allows sub carriers that would normally carry a TV station instead carry several "radio stations" would be a better idea. On TV channel could carry a lot of high quality audio. Lets take a very generous case so you can see what I mean
One channel of audio of "CD quality" would be 16 bit numbers at about a 44KHz rate.
Doing no optimization at all gets you 16*44KHz = 704KHz
A TV channel is about 6MHz AKA 6000MHz wide
6000MHz/704KHz = 8.5 Audio channels
This could be 4 stereo programs and one (pick the broadcasting you don't like)
Broadcast TV should have absolutely zero encryption on it.
ATSC 3.0 is like Olympians - the only ones that make a profit from the Olympics are the broadcasters, those that get the contracts to build the stadiums, and some local hotels/motels/restaurants.
It's a shame that the broadcasters have to screw up everything for everybody else the movie later on maybe we'll go get some more information
James FCC didn't step in how does mess it up for everybody in she'll see if we can't get the channel 3 going back again
Until next time thanks for keeping us informed
Unless the Olympians get cool prizes
Thanks antenna man tyler
A sad reality at this point. So much potential being whisked away.
This is what happens when you let private industry run the show without proper regulatory oversight and guardrails.
I share your frustration with the rollout of ATSC 3.0. We live in a fringe area and have always used OTA TV so I was excited about the technical improvements of ATSC 3.0 compared to 1.0. As you posted the industry has largely squandered the technical advantages not to mention the DRM debacle. So at least in the short term we have no intention of purchasing ATSC 3.0 gear and in the distant future may just give up on OTA altogether.
@AntennaMan, I just wanted to say thanks for staying on top of this, and keeping us informed. Also for being an advocate for all of us regarding OTA TV broadcasting.
It's happening because FCC is condoning it; allowing OTA encryption to keep existing.
Thank you Tyler for your hard work and coverage of this topic
Thanks for the heads-up about the ATSC 3.0 issue.
I've been watching your videos about ATSC 3.0 for literally several years. I have watched your initial enthusiasm slowly decline due to the issues you have made very clear in this video, and many of your other ones. It's really a shame. Have you ever actually got a chance to speak to a TV station's engineer that is currently running DRM? Is it up to the Engineering Team to make those decisions, or some fat cat corporate overlord? Thanks for the great video as always.
It's really sad how the tables have turned with ATSC 3.0 along with my enthusiasm of what I realized is an anti-consumer TV standard. From the engineers I spoke with, DRM is being forced at the corporate level. Someone told me their local engineer was told by a corporate executive that DRM would not impact consumer receivers. I understand it's hearsay, but I don't think it was made up....
It's neither really. Answer is a web of media industry practices that have very little to do with broadcasters or other distributors of content. It's like blaming the gas station for the price of gas. The bottom line is no broadcaster can transmit copyrighted 4k/HDR content without DRM. If they did, they are liable to be sued for damages by the content owner.
DRM issues were the main reason I dropped DirecTV 12 years ago. I was trying to get their PC video player working off the whole house DVR and could only get 1 of 3 PCs to work even though all 3 passed their DRM compatibility test program. DirecTV support was no help and they basically said you get what you paid for with the "free" PC viewer. Mind you, I was not trying to break any rules with the DRM, I was only trying to view programs recorded on my DVR on a PC over the network using the DirecTV supplied viewer program.
In the end, I built my own whole house DVR/media server setup using HD HomeRun ATSC 1.0 tuners. Paid for all that in about 2 years with the subscription savings.
I am an American that lives in Japan. All of our home Japanese TV tuners have built in encryption and it is a pain in the butt. Your tv has a built in CAS card, your blue ray/DVD tv recorder has its own CAS card. Your USB dongle to watch tv on a computer has a CAS card. It is all designed to keep you from recording/watching TV the way you want.
The signal cannot be tuned unless the card is valid. Plus it drives up the price of equipment. Also the cards eventually need to be replaced. I think every 10 years. Had a old tv I had to get rid of that could no longer work because the encryption card update was no longer made. Even with a recorder, some things are not allowed to be recorded and you have no say in it. I also believe they also have the ability to erase recordings but this has not happened to me.
And forget setting up a media server to attempt to watch recordings you made on your own. It can only be done if you are locked in to a venders system meaning everything must match. And when vendor support is over it will not work.
Yeah, Japan is *very anal* about copyright enforcement. It would be the same across the United States, if not for the constitution (I suspect that's why the establishment hates it so much, copyrights fly against the 1st, 4th and 8th amendments) and the first sale doctrine.
😀And, don't forget the NHK fee collectors come to harass your place every once in a while, although I love ISDB-T (and all other systems, even DTMB) much, much more than ATSC 1.0.
Good report! Keep speaking out.
This series is very useful, not just interesting, and might not exist without you. Thank you big time.
As long as tv stations who transition to ATSC 3.0 must also broadcast in 1.0, I don’t care. If I need a new tv I’ll just buy one without a built in 3.0 tuner.
I’ve also read that 3.0 will enable targeted ads and make it easier to track viewership. Even without drm issues I would probably ignore this transition.
The one thing I am worried about is when FCC (corrupt) will force ATSC 3.0 on us and drop 1.0. Then what are our choices?
@@blahblah5603 If that happens, I guess the OTA viewership will go down the drain. People do not have to subscribe to ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX these days anyway, as if they want certain programs they get them on demand from many sources. Live TV is no longer popular with many. The BCers are just shooting themselves in the foot over this if they think the public will embrace paid OTA TV.
Youngster, you're my favorite nerd. This Xer grew up in a time when nearly everything was getting better & more reliable. TVs, VHS to SVHS to DVD to bluray. Even the lowly cassette performed well with the right gear. Audio in general continued to improve. As did automobiles and appliances. But something happened. Everything became microprocessor controlled & that was a good thing in the beginning. Now it's used to usurp ownership & control of everything. Between gov't regulation that has made everything more expensive, decreased longevity, and just generally make things suck we also have designed in obsolescence. You have little control over your car, phone, and now even your TV. I recently bought the ADTH and a Sony A80CL with 3.0 tuners. I'm only 17 miles from 2000' towers in flat Houston but there are buildings & trees and mega multipath. The 3.0 signals work considerably better in this environment even with decent outdoor antennas. For now. At some point I'll just kick all these products and the douchebags who ruin them for profit/control out of my life.
thank you for this important news, Tyler. I watched a similar report on another cord-cutter channel and I find that you present information more clearly and understandably. you also mentioned my friend Tom Butts' article in TV Tech; I'm pleased to see him being recognized for his work in the broadcast tech news domain.
thank you for looking out for us OTA viewers.
Looking good Antenna Man
Thanks for Update on ATSC 3.0 😅
All broadcast technologies used should be open. We shouldn't allow PUBLIC airwaves to be used to enrich specific companies that helped set the standard. This is the RDIMM issue all over again, but on a public asset.
You might want to produce a short video on how to try an antenna BEFORE you cut the cord? I messed around with a TV antenna for about a month before deciding I didn't need cable. And I (temporarily) mounted my antenna out my attic window, to avoid using a ladder. Good job on your videos.
I suspect many, it not most of your subscribers who watch your videos may not be old techy guys, but people who enjoy hearing from a nice guy who reminds them of the good old days of antenna tv, and just like your passion and your personality. Like me❤
Some may be both....
When I was younger, I remember having an old Montgomery Wards black and white TV, and late at night, I would flip through the stations to see if I could pick up a distant station. I used to get stations from Dallas, San Antonio, Shreveport, even one time from New Orleans. Sadly, because everything is digital, I can't do that anymore. Those were fun days indeed.
@@ki5aok awesome.. good times
Tyler makes it look good.
Companies just don't like Antenna TV is becoming more popular than anytime before in history.
In this regards it's just going back to the way it was prior to cable going mainstream. If they'll just focus on making better content for channels they can get better quality advertisements leading to making more money.
Broadcast TV doesn't make them money. DRM encryption will. Greed
Satellite and cable are just to expensive, it's their fault
@@davidcarlen8363 Personally for me I wouldn't have a issue paying for a live TV service if things like Netflix didn't exist.
@@blahblah5603 So, I guess the future for public safety is a paid subscription.
Do you want to be warned that a dangerous tornado is on the ground and heading for you? You'll need to pay for that. The only good viewer is the one that pays. - TV Broadcasters.
Tyler, keep up the great work....J
Another informative video! I hope that everyday consumers are not left out in the cold with ATSC 3.0 equipment, only to see it become obsolete before they can fully benefit from this new technology, which has the potential to be significantly better than the legacy 1.0 standard. Let's not go backward but rather embrace this relatively new technology with the consumer in mind first and foremost. Let’s be reasonable and ensure that everyone is on the same page without succumbing to corporate greed. Corporate greed is threatening the future of ATSC 3.0. At the very least, DRM issues need to be resolved quickly, or the rollout might deter consumers from purchasing new TVs or standalone set-top boxes until these issues are sorted out by all parties concerned.
Thank you Tyler for your continued efforts in educating others to what’s going on behind the scenes.
It seems to be the public would best be served by sticking with ATSC 1.0 but switching to more efficient codecs as demonstrated by the station in Eugene, Oregon you had featured in a previous video. Give your viewers 1080p main and sub channels (not 4K) and they would be very happy. If I could advocate for this type of solution tell me where to sign up!
This may be the way forward. You can't trust big media to do what is best for the consumer. The FCC is supposed to be for the consumer. Yet they caved in to Media company lobbyist.
Great episode, Tyler.
DRM never made any sense for OTA TV. I'm with you. The broadcasters reaped what they sowed.
One other point of note: K03IM-D proved that most of the problems with the ATSC1.0 standard are entirely down to the video side of the payload. I'm sure most are content with using AC3 as it currently stands, never mind Dolby making bank on E-AC3.
The only thing that could make the 3.0 standard viable would've been the fact that movement doesn't kill your signal, but the copy protection hampered that benefit.
I used work in broadcasting. Broadcasters promised the world with ATSC 1.0 but delivered nothing but digi-nets that can be produced for pennies on the dollar. They're greed about ATSC 3.0 is stunning. Broadcasters are living in a dream. The ratings for local television continue to drop every year. They don't seem to grasp that they are making themselves obsolete.
It was just announced today that in the Chicago market that all the Bulls, Blackhawks and White Sox games will be carried over the air on WJYS channels 62.2 and 62.3.
I'm an older woman on a fixed income trying to watch my funds. I'm so irritated at how everything now has to be online! Trying to save money I bought an outdoor antenna, and darn if I didn't have to go online to figure out the gibberish that came in the 1 page manual. Fortunately I'm computer literate, but many elderly senior citizens are not. So what Tyler is saying is very disturbing on what may be the future for over the air TV 😕
spend your funds on broadband... more than enough "free" content online...I spent part of the 90s teaching seniors to use the internet, now I suppose I'm one of them, but the internet actually pretty liberating and everything you need to do there is described there... the most disturbing trend I see is skilled nursing facilities and rehabs with no wifi: do they really expect seniors who can't do much anything else to be chained to the vegetabilitating confines of tvs all day?
We could change over to DVB-T or ISDB-T like other countries if our ever so wonder FCC allows it as it offers more than ATSC from what I herd. What do you think Tyler is it better? -Cheers!
No sunset date and corporate greed equals disaster.
Thanks for caring and sharing this.
All we watch now are stations like MeTV, COZI TV, Rewind and similar. No "big" network shows at all. If they move the small stations we watch to some sort of pay scheme, we have enough DVDs to carry us through.
Same, we watch MeTV all day except for the evening news and Laurence Welk on PBS on Saturdays!
1 Metv 2 Metv toons 3 H&I and Grit and that's it.
There is already industry talk that the production of DVD or Blu-ray physical media going away.
Sounds like a win. How about we skip the proprietary ATSC 3.0 and create an open standard ATSC 4.0 without encryption.
That's what broadcast TV is supposed to be.
I totally agree with you
Me, too.
ME! ME! I want to be in charge of a 2D compatible 3D standard.
The easiest way to make 3D 2D compatible is to poke out one of the two eyes therefore just like how Dolby surround has two over channels for stereo and encoded channels for the extra speakers one I should be overt and the other should be encoded
To be both bandwidth neutral, And because of the desire by TV producers and directors to make TV look more movie-like, make the minimum 3d standard 30 Hz by 2 eyes using an alternate Overt frame/encoded frame method.
By default all you get is the overt Eye. You could buy a really cheap 3D decoder that will convert it to dechromed red and cyan, and for some more money by a second frame alternator with 3D glasses sinker to add 3D to typical 2D TV. That way the 3D haters can't buy 3D out of the market.
The FCC would need to set the standard. You can't trust greedy corporations. They need to set standards just like they did for the HD rollout. Why would the FCC allow ATSC 3.0 have the ability to track viewers. Seems a bit odd. They were really totally hands off. A huge mistake on their part.
@@BlobRob787 The FCC already did. But they appear to have missed a patent.
I think your new tag line should be, "I tell broadcasters to not encrypt their transmissions and lose viewers, but what do they do? They encrypt them anyway."
I do wonder about the actual future of local channel television. Most people I know just go with streaming television. I had my contractor install a Clear Stream 4 Max for me. I am the only client of my contractor to request an antenna installation. I hope ATSC 1.0 stays around for a long time. I feel like ATSC 3.0 is way too complex that many TV manufacturers just go with an ATSC 1.0 turner.
We can't all afford to pay for streaming services, especially those of us on fixed incomes. Too bad about ATSC 3.0. I was hoping to eventually take advantage of more of the audio and video formats available on my new a/v receiver.
Paid streaming services are too costly and with inflation outpacing the wages, more people are gonna stop subscribing to them.
I put up an antenna and that's primarily what I watch - the regular locals (ABC,CBS,NBC,FOX,PBS.ETC) for news and some sports, plus MeTV for some favorite old re-runs,plus a DVD/Bluray player for discs from the local library's collection. Streaming is kind of a mess to me since there are so many stations broadcasting(?) the same stuff; it really needs to consolidate. Even movies on the free streaming channels have upp'd their number and frequency of commercials to the point they are unwatchable. And no, I'm not a sports fan. especially the tidal wave of football being broadcast/streamed these days.
Unless circumstances resolve soon, this will be another HD radio in two years. Some markets will even carry the signals, but manufacturers won't compete to build sets and converters. Unless they sell many, there's nothing in it for them. Just like HD radio, only certain stores sell the receivers.
Yeah 3.0 is not going to happen if there are so many restrictions.
In theory you should be correct, but my concern is that with a enough lobbying, ATSC 3.0 can be forced on us. Hopefully the FCC has the back of antenna viewers and not mega corporations. We'll have to see.
@@AntennaMan Thanks for the great video again. They can mandate it all they want. The consumer still has the final say, if they watch OTA or not. I have not bought a 3.0 box as yet, as we will not have 3.0 for years out here on the Northern Oregon Coast, where we have translators. It sounds like the TV stations with DRM, just want to lose their OTA audience. Where is the FCC on all of this?
@@AntennaMan I have NO FAITH in any government body that should have stepped in and done something by now and didn't.
@@AntennaMan There comes a time when the citizenry forces things back to what is right. The way the government is and becoming, would not be supersized if that happens someday. This DRM thing is a symptom of what our government really thinks of us. But that is a subject for another channel.
@@AntennaManIf they can ban encryption it can work.
When this standard came out I was hopeful 4k would be coming soon. Now I'm not even sure it will be adopted. We need to ftc to force channels to broadcast in 4k by 2028 or something like that. If you did such the industry would fight less & make something work.
Most of what is on TV doesn't need 4K
@@kensmith5694true but that still doesn't mean it shouldn't be implemented for certain shows that could be.
Damn, so ‘ATSC 3.0’ is basically cursed. 💀😭😂
Great video! Glad that DRM is killing this new possible standard. ATSC 1 is fine with me unless there can be a new standard without drm. Love your comment that OTA should be bringing content to as many people as possible with no roadblocks!
Thanks
What's funny about all of this ATSC 3.0 drama is that there are small broadcasters who are making ATSC 1.0 do things that were only possible with ATSC 3.0, such as 4K TV. It's using the ATSC 1.0 2009 specifications, which can do everything that ATSC 3.0 can do, but doesn't have the DRM encryption.
The broadcasters claim that DRM was needed to stop pirate streams, that of course cut into their local access fees..Yet what they really are doing is killing off atsc 3.0 as a whole. With the better reception in 3.0 a lot more ppl could use OTA,which of course is free.
I heard that but who is pirating OTA signal? They would have to setup a system like locast
Stress on the word "claim".
"For safety reasons we want to take away your rights"
@@TELEVISIONARCHIVESNo one is pirating it and nobody would. It's just not worth all the expense and the trouble that goes along with it. It's just a lame excuse to try to charge people for the airwaves that belong to the public anyhow.
@@TELEVISIONARCHIVES
There are pirate services that pick up OTA and they stream it,charging ppl like 6 bucks a month. The DRM is designed to stop that. Unfortunately the DRM also can break DVRs and network sharing devices people use at home. This is much like the copywrite protection companies used on VHS tapes that often made the picture look crappy.
The real stinker is that the DRM requires licensing for the device makers. The freaking broadcasters created this monster , by using elements that were not open source.
The broadcasters are playing a game, they I think want to try and kill off atsc 3.0, in fact kill off broadcast entirely and force ppl to pay to see their content either steaming or on cable.
Right now they have a dilemma, bc if they openly let atsc 3.0 die that potentially could face anti trust action, in that there is a fundamental conflict between OTA and streaming in terms of their business. The government may be morons, but they can see where the broadcasters have a vested interest in ATSC 3.0 dying. If they do this they are eliminating competition, which would enrich them. Not to mention that atsc 3.0 makes ota a lot more useful to a lot more ppl.
@@TELEVISIONARCHIVES It's the TV business' fear of illicit IPTV relays. Never mind that they wouldn't be needed, much less exist, if cable was affordable.
Cable's prices are rising because the floor has been hit and nobody wants it.
Honestly, as long as DRM and other political issues make it impossible to enjoy ATSC 3.0 with the same myriad of products available for ATSC 1.0 then it might as well die. It is insane that the broadcasters get to determine when and where I can watch TV.
TRUE THAT
2:20 BIG VINDICATION ENERGY, I am here for it.
It looks 👀 like consumers got hosed ----- again. 😳🙄😵💫🤷♂️🤦♂️😡
You got that right.
Is it the masses that are getting hosed, or just early adopters? Consider that K03IM-D in Eugene already made the promoted '4k video' bullet-point moot.
Honestly, this is good news to me. I wanted ATSC 3.0 to fail because of the DRM issue.
Sure, the tech is great, but not worth giving up my freedoms.
I blame the FCC for Not having any technical people at least look at it before they LET the Networks do whatever they want. They should have at the least built the DRM equipment before adopting a new standard, and specifications. I would stay away from putting that tuner in TVs, too. There's other ways to do it.
Nextgentv looks like a failure at this point. Thanks for keeping us updated. 😢😢😢
Encypting over the public air broadcast should not be legal and should be forbidden by the FCC.
Thanks Tyler for bring this to our attention ☺️ I feel blessed to still have TV stations in Jackson,Ms area that still have A.T.S.C. 1.0 and never have pursued the 3.0 !! It's sad to say but 1.0 may be the Standard in some small and rural areas !! Politricks still the norm in keeping areas DOWN !! Thanks to U and Lon that keep us aware and abreast of the newer technology!! It's sad to see 3rd World 🌍😭 countries that have 3.0 and are running 💨 with it . God Bless U 🙏❤️ Tyler and stay safe ........ :)
Thanks for sharing !
Thank you for all your videos. I don't know what roof antenna I have, Got from my Dad but it works.
I was missing all channel 4's. I looked it up on antenna point to be DTV35. When I searched for 35 and got it I them also had all the missing channel 4's. I don't know why that worked but it did. I'll do that before I rescan from now on. Thanks from long island ny. I would never have been able to cut the cord a year ago without your help .
Thanks Tyler
Glad you're still doing vids. I gave up on TV and technology as a whole these days. Everything sucks due to greedy capitalism.
The summary of the argument is that currently manufacturers pay $3.30 for about 11,000 ATSC patents. And, therefore, $6.75 for just two more patents is ridiculous. Constellation's royalty rate is skewed and hopefully the courts will agree. Otherwise, a royalty of $10.75 for ATSC, plus Dolby, plus HEVC, plus H.264 will make for a very expensive set-top box.
The industry needs to move towards a transparent line-item licensing regime where all royalties are disclosed to the consumer as separate line items so that price gougers can be named and shamed.
DRM is bad news. The equivalent at the HDMI level is HDCP and it's a nightmare. I work for an A/V OEM and probably 90% of the issues we have to deal with are HDCP-related. You'd think the FCC would be pushing for maximum compatibility of broadcast signals and ban OTA DRM. Pity.
Well FCC modified the rules for sunsetting ATSC 1.0 to July 17th 2027 so this issue may have time to get resolved if it ever does. Maybe Pearl TV might beg the FCC to help out with this situation.
So im going to have to buy MORE converter boxes AGAIN?! Ill just abandon ota and have to teach my mom to use steaming
I think I will stick with ATSC 1.0. I hope the industry does not kill 3.0.
I'll be honest, I use 2 silicon dust network tuners including an 2 ATSC 3.0 tuners. Encryption has no place in OTA. The "standard" sucks. The antenna is important, no problems here since I have line of sight to the towers with a second story eve mount. Only 20 miles, so worst channel is 98%. Thanks for the content, BTW.
My FCC comment, as of 9/7/2024: I strongly oppose allowing DRM in ATSC 3.0 transmissions. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984), also known as the "Betamax case", that the making of individual copies of complete television shows for purposes of time shifting does not constitute copyright infringement, but is fair use. Access to the airwaves is granted to broadcasters in the interest of them performing a public service. The addition of digital rights management technology (DRM) and its associated encryption does not serve this purpose. The ability to freely view and record broadcast content on the devices of our choosing (within technical limitations) needs to be retained. For the above two reasons, I most strenuously OPPOSE the inclusion of encryption and DRM technology in any and all broadcast media, to include ATSC 3.0, a/k/a "Next-Generation Television." In closing, I wished to point out that DRM encryption of ATSC 3.0 is in opposition of broadcasting in ATSC 3.0 in the first place now, versus ATSC 1.0, due to the fact that general public will not be able to realize "higher audio and video quality, improved compression efficiency, robust transmission for reception on both fixed and mobile devices, and more accessibility, personalization and interactivity." of ATSC 3.0. Sincerely, SMSGT Keneth W. Jones (U.S.A.F) P.S. I recently purchased a Hisense U8N (65U8N) on July 16, 2024 due to the fact it possessed an ATSC 3.0 TV tuner for "Next Generation," and I just discovered that the ATSC 3.0 major selling point for this TV of being able to view Free OTA ATSC 3.0 channels in 4K with dolby digital audio was false advertising. The general public was "once again" not served by our government institutions.
Thanks
ATSC 3.0 is facing significant challenges and may be on the verge of obsolescence. The financial viability of over-the-air (OTA) broadcasting continues to dwindle. With limited revenue potential, broadcasters are shifting focus. Streaming platforms, with their direct-to-consumer model, continue to dominate the landscape, offering more flexibility, content variety, and monetization opportunities. The future of media consumption is undeniably moving toward streaming apps, leaving traditional OTA including ATSC 3.0 in the dust.
so the corporations will abandon OTA, leaving the airwaves exclusively to local and public broadcasting. works for me.
I happened to notice a few minutes before it started that there was a live American Music Awards 50th Anniversary Special on CBS starting at 8 PM yesterday, on Sunday. So I set my DVR to record it (transmission reencoded and down-converted from 1080i to 720 by Comcast starting in January 2020 for local broadcasts), and I also set my antenna and recording software on my MacBook to record the over-the-air signal. Yesterday and today looked at at least a dozen articles online about where to watch the show. One said the cheapest way was Paramount+. She lied. Others headline how to watch it for free, but they were all free trial subscriptions to streaming services. Not one mentioned over-the-air-broadcasts. A few years ago at least one article might mention you can get it with an antenna. It's totally disgusting that they don't even include that information. They are so in the pockets of the telecommunications corporations. They are serving them, not the public.
I was looking at buying a LG C4 so I can watch the superbowl with ASTC 3.0. Not sure I can go forward with the C4 anymore
Keep in mind that 4K is not being offered over ATSC 3.0, only 1080p which is the same 720p and 1080i video upconverted. This might result in less compression artifacts but it's not a huge improvement. Also know that LG is no longer actively supporting ATSC 3.0 in their TVs, so if your TV has issues picking up ATSC 3.0 in the future, don't expect a fix.
You're right, Antenna Man. It's not about us. For me, it's about making it difficult to enjoy (or record) old shows on the "Oldies" TV stations. Does anybody really NEED to make it difficult to watch "Benson" or "The Nanny"? And give me more and more commercials? What is the statute of limitations on monetizing every last penny out of "Green Acres" or "Gomer Pyle" or "I Dream of Jeanie"? And since we have so many OTA channels, there are more infomercials as well. Free is cheaper than cable or satellite, but the quality of "free" has sunk so low that you're getting (a poor experience) what you pay for.
Paranoia will destroy ya. Most TV shows are not worth watching once let alone recording them. I hope the networks drop DRM. I was really looking forward to the better resolution and signal strength of ATSC 3.0.
Networks make money from streaming, cable co.s . They don't like OTA channels , they don't make enough money form it. GREED
The FCC could step in and do something to correct some of this but they do nothing. I bought a new atsc 3.0 set two years ago as I needed a larger screen and my TV was 13 years old at the time.
Perhaps they're waiting to see how it's gonna play out first.
FCC needs to earn there pay and protect public tv like they have since they stated the ruling for all OTA tv, if no one support 3.0 and end users don't demand it then 2 things will happen it dies or they release it OTA with the same rules ATSC 1.0
Encryption needs to be fully outlawed.
@@benstandard There are valid uses for encryption, especially given how American spooks loophole around the constitution regularly.
Thank you Tyler.
This is what I found.
The Communications Act. The FCC was created by Congress in the Communications Act for the purpose of “regulating interstate and foreign commerce in communication by wire and radio so as to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communications service . . . .” (In this context, the word "radio" covers both broadcast radio and television.) The Communications Act authorizes the Commission to "make such regulations not inconsistent with law as it may deem necessary to prevent interference between stations and to carry out the provisions of the Act." It directs us to base our broadcast licensing decisions on whether those actions will serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity.
The FCC should step in and ban DRM encryption on any over the air tv broadcast. I also would like to see cable companies or satellite or internet streaming services providers not have to get permission from broadcasters or pay them anything for carrying the broadcast station on their cable system or satellite tv service.
As I recall there was legislation passed in 1992 that specifically required cable companies to pay OTA broadcasters to carry their signals (unless the station elected "must carry" status)
For curiosity's sake, I wonder if that's even legal to lock up those 3.0 local channels. There is most likely a subset of the population that uses OTA TV for Severe WX / Events news alerts as they don't have internet/smartphone plans. Blocking OTA availability would be a safety risk in my opinion. (Great PSA video, Tyler. Continued success.)
That, I think is an FCC issue. They are being paid off to NOT do there job.
I remember decades ago people were protesting against "pay tv". They were protesting against paying cable tv because they understood how it would diminish public tv offerings and advertising which paid for the content. Now today look at the monster that streaming has become, which are now including advertising in their subscriptions. Too many hands in the cookie jar affects the film industry as well.
If the ATSC 3 transition ends here; I see this as a good thing. If it requires an Internet connection then it isn’t broadcast TV. I was an early adopter of both ATSC 1 and ATSC 3; but at this point I hope ATSC 3 is dead.
Honestly I think everyone's going to have to agree that they should really be considering improving ATSC 1.0 before they start forcing ATSC 3.0 standards on to the consumer that would be the more logical and better alternative and solution to the problems
I hope that all manufactures drop ATSC3.0. This will unfortunately fix the DRM issue. 🤷♂🤦♂ Screw the broadcasters! They can go down with the ATSC3.0 ship too!
At this point, I would like to see all TV manufacturers pull ATSC 3.0 capability on newer TVs. We are in the market to replace one of our two TVs, and we will be looking at Samsung and LG TVs that don't have ATSC 3.0 capability. We have Sling TV as our streaming service, so OTA is needed for our local channels. We're ~17 miles from the antenna farms, but reception is not an issue, so ATSC 1.0 works perfectly fine for us.
True is all about the money 💰💰💰
My old 49" Samsung TV used to have a signal meter built-in, but my newer Samsung QLED 65" only has "got the channel" or "don't have the channel". Signal meters are way too expensive for only occasionally using it!
DRM is the bane of every law-abiding citizen. The courts need to rule that DRM is illegal.
Personally, I hope the ATSC-3.0 thing fails bad enough and for long enough that the broadcasters who encrypted get to the point of just switching off their ATSC-3 hardware and having to declare it as a loss. This is about the only way I think the lesson will sink in. Nothing makes a company learn a lesson quite like red ink on the balance sheet.
Excellent video 👍💯
Its an Absolute mess!!!!
It is disappointing that this is what US broadcaster have decided to do. I guess if I go to South Korea or India I might get to experience 3.0 without DRM. It looks like it is going to be another HD Radio were everyone is just waiting on the patients to run out.
This new standard would take OTA broadcasting to a whole new level with better picture quality and new features but it looks like DRM might kill it single handedly before consumer, on a broad level, will know it exists. Ultimately greed is killing innovation
It should be a standard with no royalities and no encription
I still don't even understand why local channels would want to lock out consumers, showing ads to as many people as possible is how they make money?!
This all sounds par for the course as far as modern times go. Things suck. It's the new normal.