On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Colby Boyer <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks for response Tom and Ron.
>
> I'll take a crack at improving the ATSC decoder efficiency first, just
> to get my feet wet with GNURadio again. Tom, are there test vectors
> available for the ATSC 1.0 decoder?
>
> Whether or not ATSC 3.0 will ever be a thing... I agree with what Ron
> has said, and I don't know if it will ever succeed. But with that
> said, ATSC 3.0 has a better chance in existing in NA as opposed to
> DVB-T2.
>
> Colby


Colby,

It's been a while since I've looked at it, but we keep this file in our set
of data:

http://gnuradio.org/data/atsc_ref_data_low_snr_6.4Msps.16sc

If that doesn't work for you, I can get you a good snapshot that I've used
myself just captured locally off air. We don't have a good "pure" test
signal lab generated or anything, though.

Tom



> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Ron Economos <[email protected]> wrote:
> > ATSC 3.0 is very much like DVB-T2, so at least for the transmitter, you
> can
> > use many of the DVB-T2 blocks in gr-dtv as a starting point for your
> > development.
> >
> > I'm definitely in wait and see mode on this standard. This is pure
> > speculation, but I have a feeling that ATSC 3.0 may never see the light
> of
> > day. Some reasons are:
> >
> > 1) There will be no second channel and no government funded converter box
> > program like the analog to digital (ATSC 1.0) transition. Unless the FCC
> > mandates that all TV's must have an ATSC 3.0 tuner and until these TV's
> > penetrate the market, no station is going to switch over.
> >
> > 2) If the upcoming 600 MHz incentive auction is successful, then there
> may
> > be large number of TV stations that will need to change frequency after
> the
> > repack. There will be some government financial relief, but it's likely
> not
> > to be nearly enough. After spending large sums of money getting on a new
> > channel, TV stations may not be too keen to spend more money on ATSC 3.0
> > equipment.
> >
> > 3) One of the main features of ATSC 3.0 is mobile TV. But mobile TV has
> > failed over and over again. The primary reason is that no cell phone
> > provider will put a mobile TV receiver in a handset. Without some "killer
> > app", ATSC 3.0 doesn't provide enough incentive to upgrade.
> >
> > But I could be wrong. :-)
> >
> > Ron
> >
> >
> > On 12/27/2015 11:26 PM, Colby Boyer wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi GNURadio folks,
> >>
> >> Some portions of the candidate standard for ATSC 3.0 have been posted
> >> to the ATSC website (http://atsc.org/standards/candidate-standards/),
> >> and specifically the PHY/bootstrap sections are now available.
> >>
> >> As far as I know there is no one working on a GNURadio version, but I
> >> thought it would be worth while to check for collaborators before
> >> venturing out.
> >>
> >> Note, this would be a personal project for me not for a dissertation or
> >> work.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Colby
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio

Reply via email to