FORUMS: list search recent posts

VC-1 Encoding for AT&T U-Verse

COW Forums : Broadcasting

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Boyce Johnson
VC-1 Encoding for AT&T U-Verse
on Oct 16, 2008 at 9:08:15 pm

The municipal television channel I work for is preparing to offer our signal on AT&Ts U-Verse system. Unfortunately, due to some short-sighted state legislation we will be responsible for providing our own encoder. AT&T has provided the following specifications:

Video Encoding Format: Windows Media Video 9 VC-1 Main Profile
Video Streaming Bandwidth: 1.25 Mbps
Input Video Format: NTSC
Frame Rate: 30/29.97 fps
Scanning Type: Non-interlaced
Key Frame Distance: 4 Seconds
Buffer Size: 2 Seconds
Output Resolution: 480x480
Captioning: Open Captions
Audio Encoding Format: WMA (Windows Media Audio)
Audio Streaming Bandwidth: 96 kbps
Audio Sample Rate: 48 kHz
Streaming Protocol: HTTP
Streaming Mode: Constant Bit Rate
Streaming Format: Unicast
Addressing: Public IP Address
Output: ASF Network Pull
Input Physical Connection: Component, Composite or SDI

I'm assuming the 480x480 resolution is incorrect.

They listed a number of hardware encoders that are known to be compatible with their system. These models ranged in price from $3900 to $17,000. That seems like a huge range and I'm not sure what separates a $4K encoder from a $17K encoder.

Although they strongly discourage it, I'm also considering building a high-end PC (dual Xeon or Opteron) with a high-quality capture card (Aja, Black Magic, etc.) and encoding via software. Assuming a fast machine and a high-quality capture card, is there any reason why something like this couldn't put out a compliant stream that is just as good as a stream generated by a hardware encoder? Would the software used matter? Microsoft, for example, says their Expression encoder offers better VC-1 encodes than their free Windows Media encoder.

Anyone out there dealing with this? Any Ideas?


Return to posts index

Scott Thorley
Re: VC-1 Encoding for AT&T U-Verse
on Feb 20, 2009 at 10:06:00 pm

Disclaimer: I am the Product Manager for one of the encoder companies listed on the sheet you mention.

Sorry I didn't see your post earlier, not sure if you have already implemented a solution.

I am very familiar with the AT&T PEG Uverse requirements, and would be happy to answer any questions. I can explain why 480x480 may seem wrong, but is correct if the encoder knows how to support it.

You can reach me at scott(dot)thorley(at)inlethd(dot)com.

Thanks,
Scott Thorley


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]