Channel 5 HD will launch on Freeview
Brian Butterworth published on UK Free TV Channel 5 takes Freeview HD slot - Broadband TV News
"Channel 5 has been granted permission by Ofcom to launch its high definition channel on Freeview HD."
Channel 5 was the sole bidder for the fifth space on the "Freeview HD", BBCB multiplex, with a proposal to provide a full-time simulcast of the Channel 5 service in high definition.
Channel 5 will join BBC One HD, ITV1 HD (STV HD in Scotland, UTV HD in Northern Ireland in 2012), Channel 4 HD (or S4C HD in Wales) and BBC HD on the Freeview HD service.
Shortly BBC HD will be replaced by BBC TWO (England) HD.
It is not clear at this point if Channel 5 HD will also go on Freesat at the same time.
More soon.
All questions
In this section
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Stuart O.
12:31 AM
Wrexham
12:31 AM
Wrexham
Hope they work around this number and region problem sometime in the future to be able to have the HD channel numbers in the order I first suggested.
If they do, perhaps you could have S4C HD on 54 in Wales and Channel 4 HD on 54 outside Wales.
At least I now understand why there are so many gaps in the Sky EPG.
But what is the point though in allocating channel numbers in threes?
It means no-one else can use those channel numbers.
And it makes the EPG numbers so messy.
For example:
The main Entertainment channels are allocated 101-239 and at present the last channel (Watch HD) ends on 233 but there are gaps at the following channel numbers:
134, 141-2, 161-3, 181-2, 185-6, 192, 194, 196-7, 202, 207-8, 210, 213, 216, 221, 223-4, 229-30. If they all budged up with no gaps, they could run from 101-208.
Likewise, there are numerous gaps, some of which are very big gaps in the Lifestyle, Film, Music, Sports (443-453; 457-479), Documentary, Shopping, Box Office (Channels run from 700-744; gap of 745-751, Box Office HD 752&753, Box Office 754-761. Would be better to run Box Office from 700-752 then Box Office HD on 753&754), Adult (big gap 937-947, last channel could end on 939 instead of currently ending on 967) and Radio (the whole radio channel EPG order needs a complete numbering revamp - it's a disgraceful mess with so many gaps and the station order being all over the place!)
When it comes to radio channels, all (or at least, the majority) of the BBC stations could all do with being grouped together. Likewise for RTE, Absolute, UCB, all the commercial Pop stations and all the other foreign language and religious channels grouped together.
That way the last channel could end before 0180 instead of 0214 like present getting rid of gaps here, there and everywhere and making it easier and more enjoyable flicking through the radio channels to find stations that suit your genre and interest instead of (for example) if you are looking for modern pop music you don't have to go from 0109 to 0111 to 0113 to 0114 to 0120 to 0137 to 0146 etc. etc.
| link to this comment |
Stuart's: mapS's Freeview map terrainS's terrain plot wavesS's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage
T
trevorjharris12:39 AM
Why did no one else bit? Did everyone else not bother as Five was bound to get it.
According to join freesats latest survey I think most people wanted Film 4 HD more than 5 HD.
Of course the down side of this is a decrease in HD picture quality.
| link to this comment |
N
Nedbod12:49 AM
Film 4 HD would be a much better idea. I don't like the though of reduced picture quality though. Why bother with HD if it isn't ?
Perhaps they will call it LHD (Lower Higher Definition !!). Not really following the Japanese lead are we.
| link to this comment |
It's obvious really it was going to be 5 HD, makes sense being the 5th main channel
Bring it on, when it could likely appear ?
I would say this would mean FTA on Freesat also very soon
| link to this comment |
Dave's: mapD's Freeview map terrainD's terrain plot wavesD's frequency data D's Freeview Detailed Coverage
M
Mike Dimmick2:02 PM
Nedbod: The compression will be increased to make space.
trevorjharris: The bit rate will be reduced but the BBC and the other broadcasters are happy that, with improved MPEG-4 AVC encoders, picture quality will not be.
The specification provides a toolbox for how content could be encoded, and information on how to decode it. The difficulty is all in the encoder, how it is able to process the content to most efficiently reduce the redundant data, under near-real-time constraints. Early AVC encoders were basically MPEG-2 encoders not using any of the new tools, just using a few ways of packaging the resulting stream slightly more efficiently.
| link to this comment |
M
Mossard2:24 PM
Nedbod: Emmigrate to Japan then instead of starting "better than us" propaganda.
| link to this comment |
N
Nedbod4:09 PM
Not spreading any propaganda at all Mossard, what a strange view of my post. I just want to watch my BRITISH tele in the highest possible quality without having to spend a penny on MURDOCH TV. As was the case in the good old UHF COLOUR days, I am sick of bit rates being dropped to accommodate poor quality channels with very little to add to the mix. Fewer higher quality TV channels are better than loads of poor picture quality dross ones (especially where there are capacity issues). Too much dumbing down is apparent on digital TV in the last five years, as determined by the number of digital FREEVIEW channels I have deleted. In doing so the EPG looks much better however, even if the bit rate per channel left isn't as high as I would like.
| link to this comment |
I
Iain Davies6:50 PM
Good to hear! Right we are now back to square one, before switchover. We will now have the HD versions of BBC1, BBC2, ITV, CH4 & CH5. So lets stick with that, lets hope some manufacturer builds a box only able to get HD and do away with the multitude of trashy SD channels!!!
| link to this comment |
Thursday, 3 November 2011
P
Peter12:30 AM
Don't say that Iain, I'm sure there are middle aged people who like seeing themselves on Blockbuster from 30 years ago. :o))
| link to this comment |
Stuart O.: Let's go thought those points.
First, there are plenty of places where BOTH S4C HD and Channel 4 HD can be received, so they have to separate channel numbers.
"But what is the point though in allocating channel numbers in threes?"
Two reasons. First that there can be two other versions of the channel on the following numbers, such as "+1" and "HD". Second, it means that the channel number don't end up having either even numbers (every 2 or 4), or "0" and "5" (every 4).
The gaps in the numbers are intended to be there, Sky didn't want the numbers to be allocated sequentially.
Radio stations, when they were moved to "0000" format numbers, were allocated in the order the channels launched.
| link to this comment |
Select more comments
Your comment please