Could DVB-NGH (Next Generation DVB-H) be the ‘universal’ broadcast saviour?


Alberto Morello explained the concept that a single broadcast system might serve to provide all types of media?    There are diferent business models when the services are in different organisations, but for a broadcaster who provides different types of media, the concept  of a single technology would be very attractive.   There is currently a call for proposals for technology for DVB-NGH.    The tools of the new system which may allow the system to be ‘universal’  include such elements as the SVC coding system of MPEG4 and the use of multiple antennas.    Alberto’s conclusion was that with NGH we have a real chance of  ‘breakthrough’ system, which will serve a universal market.    Fantastic stuff.

5 Responses to “Could DVB-NGH (Next Generation DVB-H) be the ‘universal’ broadcast saviour?”

  1. Stefan Wallner Says:

    At the end of Alborto’s presentation the questions was raised if DVB-NGH full indoor coverage is achievable in reality. Or is it more desireable to go the same approach like 3G devices that switch for indoor internet reception to WiFi.
    But if we look at why WiFi is such a success, I believe it is because it is not controlled by the ISP but by the building owner in most of the cases. Everybody understands that WiFi is a wireless extension of the internet, and everybody can install a WiFi router by themselves. If we put that analogy to MoTV, could or should the set-top-box become a DVB-NGH repeater?

  2. reslfj Says:

    Don’t forget broadcast radio.

    While most multimedia applications needs the attention of the user – radio is in most cases a background activity while doing other things.

    And the ‘listening-hours’ can be hugely larger for radio than for almost any other broadcast service.

    And radio devices MUST be available as inexpensive ‘commodities’, yet have universal coverage even 3 or 12 nautical miles beyond the costline.

    And the most important broadcast radio is the top 5-10 FTA public service radio stations. And I should have written the F in FTA with a 10 or 100 times larger letter. Stefans remark on not using ISP’s above is well put and can be extended to Telcos.

    And local radio is important – but will never have much money and often almost no money for running the stations.

    And commercial radio needs very low transmissions costs.

    And any newer technology can beat DAB+, but it should nevertheless be the very best, that is put forward – for a chance to beat FM on both cost and quality.

    Lars 🙂

  3. alberto Says:

    Stefan, I share the idea that user-operated small indoor repeaters are a great solution for mobile TV (cheap, flexible,..). They can be plugged in the master antenna outlet and radiate less than a mW on the same channel as the broadcast signal (in SFN). There is already a technical specification developed by DVB for DVB-T (now in ETSI). Using wireless Internet for indoor coverage? It is an even more attractive solution, much more complex but leveraged by Internet developments.
    Regarding Lars position on Radio, I see the technical possibility for a single second generation DVB system to cover TV and Radio; from a market and business point of view I’m more doubtfull. Is it reasonable to destabilize the DMB/DAB+ developments for Radio? From a performance point of view, the DVB-2 ingredients I listed in the conference are: (i) a new FEC (3-4 dB gain over DMB), (ii) less overhead, (iii) double tuner (but this can also be applied to DMB), (iV) SVC (not aplicable to Radio). I wouldn’t stop digital radio development for some years just to wait for NGH; but when NHG will be a reality, perhaps…

  4. Lars Mossberg Says:

    Dear all,

    There is a pilottest with DAB Plus in Stockholm, Uppsala and Gävle in Sweden.
    Yes DAB+ is better if I compare with the ordinary DAB. You can observed that specially in bad receiving areas (indoor reception and other bad places), but the capacity versus soundquality is still very bad. All the future extensions will stop because that limits. We need a system that can handle more and higher bitrate, better FEC, more intelligent “green powersafe”, diversity transmit, variable bitrate, statistical multiplex, real 5.1 soundquality as in the EBU D_Mae test, higher bitrate for all channels that can handle transparance in a soundchain (production and the whole distributionchain). The EBU D_Daba test was showing that very clear even if there were no cascading or more detailtest as in ITU BS 1116. DAB Plus is to old today. DVB-T2 can handle alot of radiochannels and NGH can take the whole mobile market in a very near future. Why don´t you argument for this soloution. There are a bunch of other countries in Europe that not yet has taken any decision.

  5. Says:

    “Could DVB-NGH (Next Generation DVB-H) be the universal broadcast saviour?
    The DVB World Blog” was indeed a great post.
    However, if it had more images it would likely be quite possibly even better.
    Thanks -Lori

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: