We're at bit of a fork in the road regarding the future direction of satellite. Before we get to that and what it means for signal distribution, it's probably useful to do a Pros-vs-Cons for Freeview (TV aerial) versus Freesat (sat dish) because this more than anything will determine whether one system over the other has a benefit to the reader.
The case for a TV aerial system for
Freeview
Pros:
- The most popular way of receiving a live TV transmission
- Every TV comes with a Freeview tuner, and every lounge-sized TV should include the ability to receive HD transmissions
- The signal is relatively easy to distribute, and the distribution amps themselves are not especially expensive
Cons:
- Although it's claimed that 98.5% of the country can get Freeview, not all of the UK receives the same coverage. Some parts are served by Freeview Lite transmitters with a more limited list of channels
- The space in the Freeview channel roster is limited, so we're unlikely to see significantly more HD channels unless something major changes. For this reason it's difficult to foresee Freeview supporting any UHD channels at all
- There is fairly high signal compression which shows up as a slight loss of picture resolution and a greater tendency for pixilation when the screen image shows a lot of motion e.g. explosions, moving water etc
The case for a TV aerial system for
satellite/Freesat
Pros:
- The channel list between Freeview and Freesat is not identical. Freesat offers more HD channel versions than its aerial-based counterpart
- UK area coverage nearly as good as Freeview (98% for Freesat), but, more importantly, every address gets the same channel range i.e. there's no Lite version as with Freeview. Every household gets the full-fat version
- Satellite is not so limited in transmission space as terrestrial aerial systems. This means that there's more chance of a growth in the number of HD channels available. There are even UHD channels on satellite, but these aren't yet part of the Freesat channel roster
- IMO the picture quality is marginally better because less signal compression is used compared to Freeview
Cons:
- The core public service broadcast (PSB) channel range is the same between Freesat and Freeview (it has to be, by law), but Freesat lost some of the bonus '+1' and HD channels in the Channel 4 bouquet after a disagreement on price between the service and the broadcaster
- Most TVs will need the added cost of a Freesat receiver/recorder
- Because the recorders require two cables, there's a little more work and a higher cost in signal cabling
- The signal isn't as easy/inexpensive to distribute as aerial signals for Freeview
Streaming as an alternative to linear TV from either Freeview of Freesat is gaining ground. It's still in the minority, but as today's teens and twenty-somethings become renters and home owners in their own right in the future then I can only see the trend increasing. The go-to entertainment services for this and a growing range of age groups is online.
Where catch-up and online can't currently compete with live TV is in the breadth of programming output per week and its relevance to local audiences. In simpler terms, there's very little local news or regional programming, and only a smattering of the more
specialist-interest program output that gets uploaded for streaming. Its forte is film and TV box sets.
The technological shift in the way we receive satellite signals
Sky launched its digital satellite in the late 90s. It also set us to continue down the path of one-cable-per-tuner for basic satellite installations. (Note: I'm not talking here about people with 1.5m dishes and multiple satellite signal reception). This is why we've had 4-output and 8-output LNBs and rooms wired directly from those dish signals with one or two cables.
In February 2016 Sky Q launched, and with it brought the first widespread used of wideband LNBs. This moved satellite signal reception and recording much closer to the way aerial systems work.
Putting it in very general terms, and aerial is a wideband receiving system. It presents all of the signals to the TV tuner, and it's the tuner which dips in to that stream to select a certain frequency. The stream can be distributed to several tuners all of which can dip in independently.
Conventional Sky digital LNB systems work differently. The signals are split first by polarisation: Horizontal and Vertical. And also by frequency range: low band is 10.70-11.70 GHz, and high band is 11.70-12.75 GHz. This gives us four different reception groups: Low band H, low band V, high band H, and high band V. An LNB with a single output connection switches between these four bands depending voltage and a pilot tone. There are two voltage levels; 13V and 18V. Each one can be with or without pilot tone. A Quad or an Octo LNB is simply four or 8 LNBs in a single housing.
The reason why satellite LNB feeds can't be split and distributed like aerial signals is because of this Low/High H/V switching. Each socket on a conventional Sky/SkyHD or Freesat recorder uses the voltage and pilot tone to direct one of the LNBs to the appropriate frequency and polarisation group that contains the channel required. Allowing two receivers to attempt to control one LNB will eventually lead to a clash
A wideband LNB as used by Sky Q does away with the low band / high band frequency split. The signal still has two polarisation elements though. A Sky Q recorder has two inputs. One is for horizontally polarised signals. The other is for vertically polarised signals. The recorder has multiple tuners, and all tuners requiring signals from the H polarisation can dip in to that stream at the same time. The same goes for any tuners requiring signals from the vertical polarisation.
The fork in the road relates to the satellite hardware and whether or not it is compatible with wideband LNBs.
All TVs with satellite reception appear to work on the legacy four-mode-switching system of LNB control. This goes for TVs with the Freesat tuner and EPG, and for those which simply say they have a satellite tuner but don't subscribe to Freesat's channel list. These won't work with the signal from a new wideband LNB. They need a conventional LNB as fitted to Sky Digital and Sky HD sat dishes.
Most Freesat receiver/recorder boxes work this way too. However, about 18 months ago the company newly appointed to manufacture official Freesat recorder boxes launched their products. This is a French company called Arris. They took over from Humax.
The Arris boxes are what you'll find in stores and online and they're marketed as Freesat 4K, but that's slightly misleading. However, these new boxes are compatible with either the wideband LNB signals or the Legacy 4-mode versions, and there are some important differences in the number of recordings that can be made simultaneously depending on which type of LNB is used.
So what happens in a house with a mix of old and new Freesat recorders?
For a house with a legacy LNB -
in most cases a quad LNB installed for Sky Digital - then the new Arris box will work with that and give the ability to record one channel whilst watching/pausing/recording another channel live on TV. The two remaining LNB outputs can be used for another dual channel recorder or to feed two receiver boxes.
Where more than two recorders are required, the LNB can be changed to a legacy Octo with 8 outputs. This will feed up to four dual channel recorders.
A third option is to change the LNB for a hybrid. This has six outputs. There are two wideband outputs to support a new generation Freesat recorder. The other four outputs are the legacy type.
These aren't the only options, but they are the main choices that use the existing wiring already in place going from the dish to each room.
Are satellite dishes redundant?
IMO, no. Far from it. Sky remains the most popular subscription TV service. Freesat offers some advantages, particularly in picture quality, which are becoming more important as TV screen sizes continue to increase.
Should I keep the wiring in place?
Where it's old and clearly past it then probably not if it's getting in the way of decorating and there's no chance you'll ever have a Freesat box in the room. On the other hand, running cabling takes time and costs money. Ripping it out now only to replace it in a couple of years time seems an odd choice.
