Post 4.8

[arrbee99 1817]

Things that I'm sure will instantly be worked on the instant 4.8 is released -

Filter by decade

Sliding / selectable banners on homepage

NextGen TV

 

 

[jkramer 12]

I'm hoping for a new and improved OTA television performance experience. As it is now, it simply takes too long to switch channels or do anything with timeshifting while watching anything, especially sports.

Still on 4.7.x, to be fair I haven't tested it for 8–10 months but when I do, I am always disappointed in how it runs compared to Channels DVR.

 

[Gilgamesh_48 1240]

57 minutes ago, jkramer said:

I'm hoping for a new and improved OTA television performance experience. As it is now, it simply takes too long to switch channels or do anything with timeshifting while watching anything, especially sports.

Still on 4.7.x, to be fair I haven't tested it for 8–10 months but when I do, I am always disappointed in how it runs compared to Channels DVR.

 

I, also, use CH-DVR for my recording and such. I have tried many many times to get Emby to work for TV correctly but I have been unable to get consistent reliable performance from it. But, for me, that is not too important as CH-DVR handles everything I need quite reliably.

But, as a disclaimer, I do not watch live TV except for soccer and, if i do watch soccer live I use the app that has it (Max, Peacock, Paramount or others, or I use the actual YouTube TV app. I still have Emby's live TV enabled on one of my servers but I cannot remember, except for a few tests, the last time I actually used Emby for live TV.

I really think Emby should, though I have little hope, work on restoring Next up Legacy to the performance it had before. Namely when an episode is partially played, but not complete, said episode should NOT move to the first position in the list unless that is where it started. Some folks watch shows in rotation and, if you have to stop playback before the end for any reason you find it all the way back at the first position and, if you finish it from there you have to scroll to the original position to continue the rotation. 

There are also a large number of other functionality items that Emby should work on well before the relatively unimportant function of making live TV better. 

But Emby will do what Emby wants and we just need to wait and see what Emby "thinks" is important. <Sigh> 

[jkramer 12]

39 minutes ago, Gilgamesh_48 said:

There are also a large number of other functionality items that Emby should work on well before the relatively unimportant function of making live TV better. 

For me, it's mainly live sports. Pausing, rewinding, fast forwarding and such when the game is actually happening. Most don't understand that, since they likely record a show here and there and watch it later on, which works fine on Emby. Not my cup of tea. I want my own instant replays

[Gilgamesh_48 1240]

42 minutes ago, jkramer said:

For me, it's mainly live sports. Pausing, rewinding, fast forwarding and such when the game is actually happening. Most don't understand that, since they likely record a show here and there and watch it later on, which works fine on Emby. Not my cup of tea. I want my own instant replays

Yes, sort of. But for "live" sports the feature needed is the ability to FF past the current "real" time. Looking into the future is the holy grail of sport's betting. I do not bet but I bet that feature could make someone a LOT of money. (And, yes, I recognize the irony of that statement.)  

I do watch sports "live" often but I do NOT want Emby doing it.   

[daldana 122]

@Gilgamesh_48,

While Live TV may be unimportant to you, some of us use it as our primary source. I, for one, use it for all of my Live TV functions, watching sports and regular shows, scheduling and recording TV, etc. I also use CDVR, but mostly for porting shows over to Emby. So I will be extremely happy if NextGen TV is incorporated in the 4.8 release.

 

[jkramer 12]

16 minutes ago, daldana said:

I will be extremely happy if NextGen TV is incorporated in the 4.8 release.

Nextgen TV is a joke at this stage. Nothing the Emby devs or any devs can do at this point while the media cartels fight their patent fights and lock it down so it's completely unusable for recording as we now know it.

Sadly, if the above scenario pans out as it stands now, companies like Silicondust and Channels DVR could very well go out of business. Emby is geared more toward non-OTA media, so their odds are better. (IMHO of course)

 

[TMCsw 249]

I think we should clear-up the difference between ‘Nextgen TV’ and ‘TVnext’.

Nextgen TV (AKA ATSC 3.0): Is a much enhanced OTA broadcasting format currently being tested in the USA and a few other counties. It (potentially) greatly increases the A/V & signal quality over the current ATSC 1.0 that is in use. But unfortunately is being made useless by many broadcasters by implementing DRM. This doesn’t apply to most other countries that are using DVB-xxx (or other?) nor people that are using IPTV/M3U sources. Emby has no control over how any of this is done.

TVnext: (See: Tvnext Spreadsheet} Promises a feature rich Implementation and speedy channel tuning for emby to play/record Live TV, including all of the above and more (non-DRM at this point). That has been (mostly?) developed by @softworkz. This for me should be the very next emby public beta. (i’d even be willing for a private beta!)

[daldana 122]

@TMCsw,

Thanks for the clarification! I meant the TVnext implementation in my earlier post.

[softworkz 5072]

21 hours ago, TMCsw said:

Nextgen TV (AKA ATSC 3.0): Is a much enhanced OTA broadcasting format

Actually it's not really "enhanced" in significant ways. It uses AC-4 audio which ties it to Dolby, it uses HEVC, but that's not something for which ATSC3 is needed for, and it uses a different container format, which makes it incompatible to everything else. It brings in back-channels via internet connection which allows them to display targeted ads and track users for what they are watching, when, how and how long. It's primarily a wet dream of the industry in order to fence their market and push their patents into it. Digital TV has always been driven by DVB and probably they didn't want to be the little brother or passenger anymore, just cooking their own little soup on top of it. Probably it's also an attempt to work around FCC regulations demanding a certain amount of  free and non-DRM-protected content in broadcast TV.
Technically, there wouldn't have been any need for this (when proceeding in parallel to DVB like usual)

Interestingly, LG is no longer including ATSC 3 tuners in their TV models from 2024 onwards.

21 hours ago, TMCsw said:

currently being tested in the USA and a few other counties

North America, South Korea and Brazil (only testing/consideration), that's pretty much it.

21 hours ago, TMCsw said:

It (potentially) greatly increases the A/V & signal quality over the current ATSC 1.0 that is in use.

For using better video codecs, it doesn't require a new standard. Better radio transmission technologies could have been introduced with a small standard update which would have remained compatible (like DVT-T2 did).

21 hours ago, TMCsw said:

This doesn’t apply to most other countries that are using DVB-xxx

Content encryption has always existed for DVB standards. Actually, the first DVB broadcasts were paid services with encrypted content only, which hadn't changed for a while. Encryption exists and is in use for all variants  (S/C/T) but there is a reasonable balance between free and encrypted channels.

21 hours ago, TMCsw said:

(or other?)

ISDB is a derivate of DVB and used in Japan and Brazil (DVB tuners can be used to receive ISDB with different firmware)
Then there's DMB in China, about which I know nothing.
All the rest of the world uses DVB (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC_standards#/media/File:Digital_terrestrial_television_standards.svg)

21 hours ago, TMCsw said:

nor people that are using IPTV/M3U sources

It should be noted that these usually cannot compete with broadcast television in quality.

 

21 hours ago, TMCsw said:

TVnext: (See: Tvnext Spreadsheet} Promises a feature rich Implementation and speedy channel tuning for emby to play/record Live TV, including all of the above and more (non-DRM at this point). That has been (mostly?) developed by @softworkz. This for me should be the very next emby public beta. (i’d even be willing for a private beta!)

A private beta is already behind us. Next-up is a larger-scale beta, involving a broader audience, so it won't be just a few hand-picked people like the previous one. Yet, I can't say when and how. Only thing I can say is that it hasn't been filed dead, and it's surely good to keep asking, even though it's probably the most requested major feature already.

Edited December 3, 2023 by softworkz

[TMCsw 249]

softworkz, Thanks for the extra info!

By ‘much enhanced’ I was referring to the fact that ATSC1 as currently implemented tops out at 1080i/720p(8bit) and AC3 5.1, changing that would be a huge problems for many current TV/tuners (so that would effectively be the equivalent to a new standard (not unlike ATSC3)). But do note I’m not a huge fan of all that the ATSC3 spec is adding like requiring a license for AC4 and of coarse DRM (yes, it can easily be added to any digital stream but is useless if no one can decode it). As for targeted tracking/ads the cable providers already have and use this ability(mostly for regional ads currently).

IPTV quality I think comes down the providers wanting to keep cost down by using less bandwidth.

As it stands now US broadcasters will be allowed to turn off there ATSC1 channels as of June 2027(Cord Cutters) providing the have a ATSC3 channel to replace it.

Anyway I was really just trying to help people understand the difference in what they are asking for (‘Nextgen TV’ or ‘TVnext’)

Edited December 4, 2023 by TMCsw

[softworkz 5072]

14 hours ago, TMCsw said:

Anyway I was really just trying to help people understand the difference in what they are asking for (‘Nextgen TV’ or ‘TVnext’)

Yup, thanks for clarifying.

14 hours ago, TMCsw said:

ATSC1 as currently implemented tops out at 1080i/720p(8bit) and AC3 5.1, changing that would be a huge problems for many current TV/tuners (so that would effectively be the equivalent to a new standard (not unlike ATSC3))

In fact it wouldn't be a problem at all for most TVs and tuners - at least for more recent ones. The reason is that manufacturers are designing their models for international markets and as DVB supports HEVC and AVC/H264 for 4k resolutions, many models can handle that anyway. Some may not support HEVC in order to save the license cost for US models, but as soon as these are "Smart TVs" and support tv "apps", they still need to include HEVC.
Adding support for HEVC in the ATSC spec would have been a relatively small change, just adding a new stream-type ID and a new stream descriptor definition.

It would even be possible to craft an ATSC broadcast with HEVC which uses the DVB stream descriptor for the video stream and (surely not all but) some models would be able to play it without any modification. For standalone tuners like the HDHomerun, no change is required at all, because it transparently outputs the streams without having to deal with it.

14 hours ago, TMCsw said:

I’m not a huge fan of all that the ATSC3 spec is adding like requiring a license for AC4

The ATSC2.0 spec had E-AC3 added, just like DVB, but it never came into effect. BTW, the DVB spec defines support for AC4 as well, but it was just a minor spec update - not a big thing at all  

14 hours ago, TMCsw said:

As for targeted tracking/ads the cable providers already have and use this ability(mostly for regional ads currently).

That's a somewhat different story, because it is still one-way. It works as follows: The original broadcaster inserts SCTE35 messages into the stream to indicate begin and end of commercial blocks. Regional head stations use this to replace the original signal during that time and transmit regional commercials instead.
ATSC3.0 is at least provisioning for scenarios where they can identify who you are and locally replace the broadcast commercials with some which are coming from an IP stream and are "targeted" to your personal profile. I don't know whether this is being used already, but it's something they want to do. That's also why it's being stated at many places that ATSC3.0 presentation is more like a "web page", which is being presented as a kind of achievement or benefit, sometimes also referred to as "interactive tv".
But the one and only motivation behind all this is to overcome the anonymous (one-way) nature of broadcast TV. They are just trying to hide this behind some fancy marketing speech.

14 hours ago, TMCsw said:

IPTV quality I think comes down the providers wanting to keep cost down by using less bandwidth.

Correct. Providing full quality IPTV is usually implemented via multicast IP backbone which is hardly feasible to provide in a global way (i.e. crossing provider-boundaries).
Of course it's not generally a bad thing. In mobile situations, it's even beneficial to have lower-bandwidth streams as you don't need full quality on small device screens and the network wouldn't be capable to transport high-bandwidth streams.
But for recording and possibly viewing on large TV screens, you always want to have the best possible quality as input to Emby server, and TVnext will allow you to have both at the same time: record a tv broadcast in full quality while streaming it to a mobile device at lower bandwidth simultaneously (while receiving just a single stream from an IPTV provider or allocating just a single tuner otherwise).

14 hours ago, TMCsw said:

As it stands now US broadcasters will be allowed to turn off there ATSC1 channels as of June 2027(Cord Cutters) providing the have a ATSC3 channel to replace it.

I think the one and only important question in the context of this transition hasn't been really answered yet: What does the "substantially similar" requirement, which has been set up by the FCC, mean with regards to DRM. Will it mean that the "replacement broadcasts" must be free from DRM or not?
There's no clear statement on this yet, but I hope they will come to clear up on this during the next 3.5 years..

Edited December 4, 2023 by softworkz

[TMCsw 249]

9 hours ago, softworkz said:

In fact it wouldn't be a problem at all for most TVs and tuners - at least for more recent ones.

Well you are more optimistic about this than I am, I’m thinking that although the hardware can already handle the formats there would likely need to be a firmware upgrade required recognize the update. (my second TV is a 2012 model and hasn’t received a firmware or smart TV update in I don’t know how many years). Although this is pretty much a moot point as ATSC1 is unlikely to ever be upgraded.

9 hours ago, softworkz said:

BTW, the DVB spec defines support for AC4 as well, but it was just a minor spec update - not a big thing at all  

Ya, but it’s not a requirement unlike ATSC3.

9 hours ago, softworkz said:

That's a somewhat different story, because it is still one-way. It works as follows: The original broadcaster inserts SCTE35 messages into the stream to indicate begin and end of commercial blocks. Regional head stations use this to replace the original signal during that time and transmit regional commercials instead.

That is true for ‘traditional cable’ but this is rapidly changing… ...for instance, where I live the cable company has replaced their ‘cable’ backbone with a fiber optic backbone where only coax cables are used for the last leg(s) of the journey. The TV they offer requires a ‘box’ that does not connect to the coax cable but uses a Ethernet or WiFi connection. This ‘box’ has full 2-way communication abilities (and even worse it is probably running on android so it may share the info with google also).

P.S. Apologies to the OP for being way off-topic

[softworkz 5072]

Yes, the first part was just hypothetical, won't happen unfortunately.

10 minutes ago, TMCsw said:

That is true for ‘traditional cable’ but this is rapidly changing… ...for instance, where I live the cable company has replaced their ‘cable’ backbone with a fiber optic backbone where only coax cables are used for the last leg(s) of the journey. The TV they offer requires a ‘box’ that does not connect to the coax cable but uses a Ethernet or WiFi connection. This ‘box’ has full 2-way communication abilities (and even worse it is probably running on android so it may share the info with google also).

The use of fiber for cable TV distribution is nothing new. This has been done since more than 20 years ago here and allowed offerings of internet connectivity via tv cable. Lately, there are offerings here as well (often called "Triple-Play", phone+internet+tv). The TV is in this case IPTV, but "real" IPTV in the sense that you get the original broadcast signals (same bandwidths) delivered via IP. In many cases you also still get TV from the coax, but not that many channels.

But this is not an official successor to CableCard, just a different offering, right?

27 minutes ago, TMCsw said:

Apologies to the OP for being way off-topic

I'm sure @arrbee99won't mind as long as it's about TV  

[TMCsw 249]

30 minutes ago, softworkz said:

But this is not an official successor to CableCard, just a different offering, right?

58 minutes ago, TMCsw said:

As far as I can tell the (and was told by there tech support) is that there is no longer direct tuner support (I didn't put in any effort to prove/disprove this, as i don't really care) . If it matters I live on the north side of the Canada/USA border so my cable is limited by Canadian regs. but have no problem tuning in OTA stations form both Toronto and Buffalo (and a few other places).

[softworkz 5072]

20 minutes ago, TMCsw said:

As far as I can tell the (and was told by there tech support) is that there is no longer direct tuner support (I didn't put in any effort to prove/disprove this, as i don't really care) . If it matters I live on the north side of the Canada/USA border so my cable is limited by Canadian regs. but have no problem tuning in OTA stations form both Toronto and Buffalo (and a few other places).

Understood, so it's your provider which has exchanged the technology.

Thanks