# Really Impressed With DTV's HD Quality



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

Have DTV for a long time now their HD has been really awesome. It looks even better than before Did they recently improve HD PQ?

Among the TV providers would it go like this for HD, DTV, Dish - Charter - Uverse?

I just wish HD wasn't more prone to rain fade. My numbers are in the upper 90's for all transponders and HD seems to go out longer than the SD channels. I think its about 5 mins for SD and 10 mins for HD, in heavy downpours. Would their be anyway for DTV to improve on that?


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

CraigerM said:


> Would their be anyway for DTV to improve on that?


very hard to beat the laws of physics

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

he is beating our brain ... making us think it's look better by simple well known technique: brainwashing.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I feel the HD PQ is worse then ever.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

peds48 said:


> very hard to beat the laws of physics


Ka was a business decision that DIRECTV made and these are the consequences of that decision. Blaming physics for something that is a matter of economics is deceitful.

Increased FEC might delay the on-set of fade incidents somewhat but it would cost bandwidth.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I feel the HD PQ is worse then ever.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


You must not remember MPEG2 HD-Lite.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

OVER COMPRESSED and Transponder Cramming is worse. PQ was best in 2007

The PQ from my broadcast basic cable HD with only a coax and no STB is better.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

harsh said:


> Ka was a business decision that DIRECTV made and these are the consequences of that decision. Blaming physics for something that is a matter of economics is deceitful.


really??? So how does Ku beat the laws of physics....


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

peds48 said:


> really??? So how does Ku beat the laws of physics....


I think he is implying that Ku is they way to go since rain fade is less of an issue over ka.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

Before I had the HR24-200 DVR on a WD 1tb EHD, And yes it was 4 years old, then lately it got really slow with remote response, And the PQ was mediocre at best, except local networks and ESPN, then I replaced it and received a new(or appears to look new) HR24-500 with old software, that still had Weather Channel local forecast app, and previous TV apps, Once I got it up and running, I could definitely tell the difference in PQ, I looked much better, Keep in mind that I have it setup on the same TV with the same picture settings, and same TV input, and also same hdmi straight to TV, plugged to the same EHD also, Previous DVR was having internal fan issues, as it was getting warm to the touch, also making loud fan noise when rebooting, I don't know what's different between the two DVR's, besides the last three numbers(HR24-xxx) But it definitely improved the PQ since that replacement, before I would get too distracted by the bad PQ that I would keep changing the TV picture settings, and resolution to remedy the issue to no avail.


----------



## larryah (Jul 29, 2010)

I too have noticed an improvement in PQ lately but thought it was my imagination....now I wonder.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

It looks better than Dish, which is my only other option so I cannot complain. Some channels are worse than others, also depends on content. Just like how all blu-rays dont look the same, or great.

From 11 feet or so on a 65", Im happy and Im pretty picky about PQ.

I wish they could do a little better because certain shows on FX and Discovery show more compression artifacts than others for example. My locals could be better too, but none of it is bad. At the end of the day I can be a month behind, only use 30% of my genie's hdd, and be happy with PQ. Not bad.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

harsh said:


> Ka was a business decision that DIRECTV made and these are the consequences of that decision. Blaming physics for something that is a matter of economics is deceitful.
> 
> Increased FEC might delay the on-set of fade incidents somewhat but it would cost bandwidth.


Using ka was a business decision, but insinuating that physics has nothing to do with rain fade is what is deceitful.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

same as the opening post ?


----------



## WB4CS (Dec 12, 2013)

I have to say I'm very happy with the HD PQ as well. It's not Blu-Ray quality but no one can offer that. Some channels are better than others. For example, FX looks more compressed than Univision (which looks fantastic.) Standing right in front of the TV I do see a lot of compression artifacts, but at normal viewing distance it looks great - much better than the HD I had with Comcast. 

I'm pretty picky when it comes to PQ and I don't seem to complain too much about DIRECTV's PQ. Now SD on the other hand........... :bang


----------



## PCampbell (Nov 18, 2006)

It still looks good to me but some programs look like they soft focus a bit to make the actors look better.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

PCampbell said:


> It still looks good to me but some programs look like they soft focus a bit to make the actors look better.


I think they call that artistic license and I hate it. They do it on some of my favorite programs.
There is no accounting for differences in taste. Deliberately darkened and reduced contrast is common in dramas.


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

harsh said:


> Ka was a business decision that DIRECTV made and these are the consequences of that decision. Blaming physics for something that is a matter of economics is deceitful.
> 
> Increased FEC might delay the on-set of fade incidents somewhat but it would cost bandwidth.


Yes, yes...your favorite issue. Just like it was a business decision on the part of Dish Network to broadcast everything twice (once each on the Eastern and Western arcs) thereby doubling the number of satellites and uplinks, and increasing operating costs and reducing profit.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

hasan said:


> I think they call that artistic license and I hate it. They do it on some of my favorite programs.
> There is no accounting for differences in taste. Deliberately darkened and reduced contrast is common in dramas.


They do that with NCIS. I noticed that show looks softer than NCIS LA


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Diana C said:


> Yes, yes...your favorite issue. Just like it was a business decision on the part of Dish Network to broadcast everything twice (once each on the Eastern and Western arcs) thereby doubling the number of satellites and uplinks, and increasing operating costs and reducing profit.


they got too much profit and to avoid legal implications just made new sats  released money from deep pockets


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

CraigerM said:


> They do that with NCIS. I noticed that show looks softer than NCIS LA


The perfect example, and precisely what shows I had in mind!


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

> Yes, yes...your favorite issue. Just like it was a business decision on the part of Dish Network to broadcast everything twice (once each on the Eastern and Western arcs) thereby doubling the number of satellites and uplinks, and increasing operating costs and reducing profit.


A nessisary evil. DISH cannot serve the entire country from the same "arc" ... and splitting the locals allows DISH to provide local channels to every market in the US, plus HD locals to most of the markets. Locals in every market was a major goal for DISH.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> A nessisary evil. DISH cannot serve the entire country from the same "arc" ... and splitting the locals allows DISH to provide local channels to every market in the US, plus HD locals to most of the markets. Locals in every market was a major goal for DISH.


Dish Networks Idea of a served market is having one Network. :hurah:
RSN networks are also locals, Guess they for got about them too. :righton:
But at least Dish has over 200 HD channels :rotfl:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

> Dish Networks Idea of a served market is having one Network. :hurah:


Every channel that agrees to carriage is carried. The only one channel market I know of is Lafayette Indiana ... as they only HAVE one local channel in the market. DISH provides Indianapolis channels to provide a complete lineup.



> RSN networks are also locals, Guess they for got about them too. :righton:


RSNs are pay channels - not Local-into-Local broadcast channels.



> But at least Dish has over 200 HD channels :rotfl:


Not my count ...


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

I must agree with the PQ on DirecTV. When blown up on my 106" projection system, it looks more than adequete for watching a movie. Not as good as Blu-Ray obviously but still quite watcheable. The VOD HD kinda sucks however.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> Every channel that agrees to carriage is carried. The only one channel market I know of is Lafayette Indiana ... as they only HAVE one local channel in the market. DISH provides Indianapolis channels to provide a complete lineup.
> 
> RSNs are pay channels - not Local-into-Local broadcast channels.
> 
> Not my count ...


What ever you have to tell yourself.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

CraigerM said:


> They do that with NCIS. I noticed that show looks softer than NCIS LA


This show has always looked funky as long as I can remember. Even on a low-def TV. _NCIS_ must be using some kind of weird (or reversal-type) film stock.

Overall I've been satisfied pretty much with D* HD picture quality since I've had HD. Of course, it varies by channel, but there are a few that seem to stand out lately.

As far as old mpeg 2 HD went, I've got DVHS recordings from up to11 yr back that still pop. As far as I knew, back then they were using around 19.5Mbps each for most (maybe around 10 channels, incl premiums) of the HD programming. (Ahh, the good old days, when Universal HD showed uncut movies w/o commercials and _Art Mann_ was uncensored and in full, clear 60 fields-per-second!)


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I agree with all of this.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I never said I wasn't satisfied with the HD PQ. 
But to say it's better then ever, I'm sorry no way is that true. 


Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

James Long said:


> A nessisary evil. DISH cannot serve the entire country from the same "arc" ... and splitting the locals allows DISH to provide local channels to every market in the US, plus HD locals to most of the markets. Locals in every market was a major goal for DISH.


Of course. It was the logical path for Dish to follow. DirecTV had the choice of doing the same thing, or use Ka and have the entire country served from a single location. I just get tired of Harsh chiming in on every thread where Ka broadcasting comes up, implying that using Ka was some big mistake.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

studechip said:


> Using ka was a business decision, but insinuating that physics has nothing to do with rain fade is what is deceitful.


Rain fade is entirely a matter of physics and I'm not arguing that it isn't. That DIRECTV chose Ka knowing what the consequences would be is the issue.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

What consequences? You really think that the rain fade from directv vs Dish networks KU is really that much different?
Well it's not.

I've had both side by side for the whole 3 years with dish.

For every 10 minutes Dish was out , Directv Ka was out 12 
And both services in the history of my satellite experience never were out more that 30 minutes a shot.

You want to talk about consequences. 
maybe dish should think about where they are going to pull their future channel offerings from. My guess they are praying directv takes them.
Cause last I heard dish is out of bandwidth. 
And they don't even offer close to what Directv does.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

harsh said:


> Rain fade is entirely a matter of physics and I'm not arguing that it isn't. That DIRECTV chose Ka knowing what the consequences would be is the issue.


The consequences are that both experience rain fade, and Ka is subjected to it for a little longer than Ku - _for a specific satellite location_. That is a very important point, because Directv's satellites are more tightly packed than Dish's, especially if you ignore 110/119 that most Directv customers don't have/need.

So as a storm moves from west to east over a given location, Dish will be affected longer than Directv will be, even if a specific Dish satellite location is affected for a shorter duration than Directv's 99/101/103 cluster thanks to the Ka frequencies being attenuated to a greater degree.

If you're a Dish customer watching one channel (or multiple channels from a specific satellite location) at the time rain moves through "you win" because you would see a few minutes less rain fade than a Directv customer doing the same. If you're watching/recording channels from multiple satellite locations "you lose", because a Directv customer doing the same would see a few minutes less rain fade (maybe 10-15 minutes less, for a slow moving storm) I don't think either provider can claim an advantage over the other here, it's a toss up.

In the future when Directv drops MPEG2/SD (and the clock is ticking, since Directv reportedly announced at this week's dealer conference that they would no longer do SD only installs starting this summer) 101 will open up for other use. I'm sure among the first channels to move from Ka satellites will be heavily watched channels like ESPN and HBO. Maybe locals in larger markets will use the 101 spots.

So if you still want to make the argument that Dish has a better rain fade story to tell than Directv, you better hurry. Once they're delivering HD from 101, even someone as biased as you will have to admit that Directv customers are getting the better end of things.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

slice1900 said:


> The consequences are that both experience rain fade, and Ka is subjected to it for a little longer than Ku - _for a specific satellite location_. That is a very important point, because Directv's satellites are more tightly packed than Dish's, especially if you ignore 110/119 that most Directv customers don't have/need.
> 
> So as a storm moves from west to east over a given location, Dish will be affected longer than Directv will be, even if a specific Dish satellite location is affected for a shorter duration than Directv's 99/101/103 cluster thanks to the Ka frequencies being attenuated to a greater degree.
> 
> ...


Are you saying DTV is going to drop all the SD channels and only have the MPEG 4 HD channels on the 101? If so I hope they will do something about HD Channels being out longer during bad weather.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

DirecTV can't move all HD channels to 101, but since the wavelength for Ku is wider than Ka it takes more rain to attenuate 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

peds48 said:


> DirecTV can't move all HD channels to 101, but since the wavelength for Ku is wider than Ka it takes more rain to attenuate
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


So if DTV only offered MPEG 4 HD channels on Ku their would be less rain fade?


----------



## WB4CS (Dec 12, 2013)

I wonder if on cellular telephone forums there's as much discussion about loosing signal while driving in a tunnel as there are about rain fade on satellite forums? :hurah:

Rain fade is a limitation of the technology. There's nothing that DIRECTV nor Dish can do about it, short of moving to C-Band and 10 foot dishes. When it rains, you loose signal for a short time, it happens, we deal with it, and we move on.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

CraigerM said:


> So if DTV only offered MPEG 4 HD channels on Ku their would be less rain fade?


I would take a stronger storm to loose the signal, but not by much

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

peds48 said:


> I would take a stronger storm to loose the signal, but not by much
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Would you say DTV has the best HD among all the TV providers? I guess it would be if DTV does go all MPEG 4 HD only? I wonder when that transition would happen?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

DISH eastern arc is all mpeg 4. 
And that's nothing special.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

CraigerM said:


> Would you say DTV has the best HD among all the TV providers? I guess it would be if DTV does go all MPEG 4 HD only? I wonder when that transition would happen?


All HD is already mpeg4 on DirecTV.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

sigma1914 said:


> All HD is already mpeg4 on DirecTV.


Oh, I didn't know that. Newbie with MPEG, does MPEG 4 make the HD PQ better? I think Charter is on MPEG 2, however since they are going all digital does that make them MPEG 4 HD?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> Oh, I didn't know that. Newbie with MPEG, does MPEG 4 make the HD PQ better? I think Charter is on MPEG 2, however since they are going all digital does that make them MPEG 4 HD?


MPEG4 is better compression (think of being able to fit 100 books into a bookshelf that used to only fit 50) If you devote the same bandwidth to it, MPEG4 will offer better PQ than MPEG2, but that's not how it has been used by cable and satellite providers.

Most cable companies use MPEG2 for HD because they have a lot of old set tops out in the field that would have to be replaced to allow MPEG4. They're converting to MPEG4, but slowly, because they have less need to do so than satellite providers have.

MPEG2/MPEG4 has nothing to do with going all digital - all that means is that where today most cable systems have low numbered channels that can be tuned by an old "cable ready" TV - in fact even a 50 year old TV can tune channels 2-13 on any cable system until they go all digital! When they go digital the old "cable ready" TVs won't work, you'll need a set top box even for the basic package.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

slice1900 said:


> The consequences are that both experience rain fade, and Ka is subjected to it for a little longer than Ku - _for a specific satellite location_. That is a very important point, because Directv's satellites are more tightly packed than Dish's, especially if you ignore 110/119 that most Directv customers don't have/need.


If rain fade knocks out the channel(s) you want to watch it doesn't matter how wide the arc is. I really don't care if some other channel is available when I lose a channel I'm watching.

But to help in your "arc" comparison, DISH customers in the "western arc" receive nearly all of their HD channels from one orbital location - 129. Locals can come from any of the three orbitals in that arc. DISH customers in the "eastern arc" have all but four HD channels from 72.7. The latest four additions were placed on 61.5 and most locals are on 61.5 (there are no locals on 72.7). One feature that DISH added that can take advantage of the arc is fallback to SD. If for some reason the HD signal is lost the receiver will fall back to the SD signal ... which means as long as the SD is not also faded there is a second chance. (And while SD is not HD it is better than no program at all.)


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

peds48 said:


> I would take a stronger storm to loose the signal, but not by much
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


For me it would take a much bigger storm. My SD signals almost never go out at all and are often on during the HD outages. Not that the HD outages are too bad but the SD ones on 101 are almost nonexistent where I live.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

tonyd79 said:


> For me it would take a much bigger storm. My SD signals almost never go out at all and are often on during the HD outages. Not that the HD outages are too bad but the SD ones on 101 are almost nonexistent where I live.


Since I almost never watch SD, I can't compare.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

so ? do we lost a track ?

where is the "impressive DVT's HD quality" seen?


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

peds48 said:


> Since I almost never watch SD, I can't compare.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I only watch about three channels but when the HD goes out, I switch to an SD channel if I am home. Very few times they go out. During a hurricane a couple years ago, I had to turn of HD for an entire evening but SD stayed strong. That is all Ka versus Ku.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

tonyd79 said:


> I only watch about three channels but when the HD goes out, I switch to an SD channel if I am home. Very few times they go out. During a hurricane a couple years ago, I had to turn of HD for an entire evening but SD stayed strong. That is all Ka versus Ku.


This is very true. Happens a lot during major rain events. Normal rain won't do it, but a hurricane or any tropical system, noreaster, etc will often knock out HD but not SD. I think I have lost SD for no more than 2 minutes total in the past 3 years. Like you, I switch over when the HD goes. I don't think I have ever seen the 119 SD channels go out, for what it's worth.

The instances of this are very rare overall. I must say that, after having my dish aligned again, I have had no signal issues. We had heavy rain last week and my signal barely fluttered. After the ice storm in March, TWC was out for a long time (weeks for some) but D* came back when the power did.

To be on topic, I think something has changed because the OP is right - Baseball, Hockey, and many other things have been looking quite good recently. The picture on the Braves (646), Red Sox (640), Yankees (213-1), and Bruins (220) games tonight, for example, is flawless. That being said, I am sure the EPL games tomorrow morning will be awful as always, though. We shall see.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

check last Gary's transponder map, perhaps there was re-balancing of the channels ?


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

PQ on D* is decent but there is certainly a lot of room for improvement.

Sent from my Galaxy Note 3 via DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

I think the HD picture quality is excellent. It's the SD picture that has degraded in the past decade. SD is so over-compressed. Thankfully most of the channels are available in HD, but there are still a handful that are SD-Lite only. 

Rain fade could be mitigated by auto switch-over to SD, or maybe pull in the missing bits from the Internet. DirecTV has about 100 channels available via live streaming to tablets and mobile devices and their website. So they already have these channels in an IP format. If your receiver is internet connected I don't see why it couldn't "tap" into this as well. All tuners busy recording? Tuners blinded by rain or snow? Dish hardware issue? A fallback to internet streaming feed would be a good alternative. Unfortunately DirecTv would have to write that into the receivers software and to do that they would have to have enough benefits to devote time and resources to do so. That's a question we cannot answer here.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Since it has been so long since I had a storm big enough to cause loss of signal, I can't remember which, but either D* or E* does do an auto-switch to the SD channel when signal is lost. Unfortunately it doesn't do an auto-switch back to the HD channel when the signal gets better.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

I've never seen DIRECTV receivers switch to a SD channel automatically when there's rain fade.


Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

RAD said:


> I've never seen DIRECTV receivers switch to a SD channel automatically when there's rain fade.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using DBSTalk


Never in the 18 years off and on with Directv have I ever seen this either.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I would love to know how dish networks KU only systems that switching automatically between HD and SD makes any difference when experiencing rain fade.
Mr parsons

In my 3 long years with dish, all I remember during rain fade was all my vips locked up running through transponders looking for signals. You couldn't even change the channel without many complications.
Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

I have no idea how they do it, but they do. Not to say that it always does any good, but it does do the switching. That's on a Hopper setup.

And yes, the VIPs do it just as you described.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> I have no idea how they do it, but they do. Not to say that it always does any good, but it does do the switching. That's on a Hopper setup.
> 
> And yes, the VIPs do it just as you described.


Maybe on the hopper, but I've yet to see any of my HR'S switch to SD from HD during rain fade. The screen freezes or just states satellite signal is lost.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

:backtotop:

the PQ "enhancement" pitch looks like is very subjective ... and not supported by major part of DTV customers ... another hoax.


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

Seeing how great the PQ is on Netflix made me realize how far off DirecTV is in terms of PQ. Hopefully the launch of the new satellite will give DirecTV the opportunity to close the gap.

Sent from my Galaxy Note 3 via DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

P Smith said:


> :backtotop:
> 
> the PQ "enhancement" pitch looks like is very subjective ... and not supported by major part of DTV customers ... another hoax.


What "enhancement" pitch?
And please post a link to your stats regarding the "major part of DTV customers."

Sent from my Galaxy Note 3 via DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I hope as well Directv 14 and 15 bring better HD PQ. I think directv is maxing out them transponders currently. 

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

SPACEMAKER said:


> What "enhancement" pitch?
> And please post a link to your stats regarding the "major part of DTV customers."
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Note 3 via DBSTalk mobile app


Well I'm not convinced it's the best, but that's how it's" Pitched" by directv and some customers.

Don't get me wrong it's good. But I'm sorry I don't feel it's what it once was.

I'M not talking about HD from 2005 or 6 either, I think the best PQ was September 2007 up until directv 12. Now it seems they over crowed the cap out of their space.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## jamieh1 (May 1, 2003)

Ive also noticed pq seems better on alot of HD channels over the last week. I watch WWE on USA and SYFY in HD, and also have ROKU3 and watch WWE on the WWE Network in HD. There is a big difference in HD quality on ROKU vs Directv. Roku (wwe network) is alot clearer than the HD on Directv. This shows me the difference in compression on Directv. Directv HD is really good but I can see the compression when watching between the 2.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

SPACEMAKER said:


> What "enhancement" pitch?
> And please post a link to your stats regarding the "major part of DTV customers."
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Note 3 via DBSTalk mobile app


you could start thinking by yourself (instead asking your Galaxy Note 3  )

- major part of DTV ppl is these 20 mil customers who are not posted here "I'm impressed with DTV PQ quality"


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

hasan said:


> I think they call that artistic license and I hate it. They do it on some of my favorite programs.
> There is no accounting for differences in taste. Deliberately darkened and reduced contrast is common in dramas.


Yeah, I think _NCIS_ does that deliberately too.

Rich

Well, after reading the rest of the thread, I see a lot of people agree with this.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

P Smith said:


> so ? do we lost a track ?
> 
> where is the "impressive DVT's HD quality" seen?


The most impressive HD PQ is not on any cable or satellite provider, it's on Netflix. Takes a little time after watching an HD program on NF to get used to watching D*'s HD again. The eyes adjust.

Rich


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

P Smith said:


> check last Gary's transponder map, perhaps there was re-balancing of the channels ?


Possibly a conversion to a new modulation scheme, compression hardware or "sweetening" (proc amp) scheme.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

harsh said:


> Possibly a conversion to a new modulation scheme, compression hardware or "sweetening" (proc amp) scheme.


that would create a PR statement, make some buzz to attract customers and investors ... seems to me it's not the case


----------



## Araxen (Dec 18, 2005)

I think the picture quality is getting worse imho. It seems like more and more channels are suffering from pixelization from compression. Watching Man of Steel right now on HBO2 East and it looks decent but has a ton of pixelization.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Araxen said:


> I think the picture quality is getting worse imho. It seems like more and more channels are suffering from pixelization from compression. Watching Man of Steel right now on HBO2 East and it looks decent but has a ton of pixelization.


I feel the same, I feel the Premiums are worse then ever.
Starz used to be the best, and now it lacking the detail those channels once had.
HGTV ,Travel, Discovery, Velocity ,YES, NBC4, Palladia all used to look Fantastic, Now they are just Acceptable HD quality.
I Haven't felt like I'm sitting right the in the action in a few years now.

After looking at my local cable company's HD that right out of the coax, sorry Directv, your slipping!


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Perhaps that explains why I can see even less difference between D* and E* HD these days. The only noticeable thing is that E* seems a bit 'brighter'. One other thing I've noticed more with D* is more motion artifacting, just slight enough that I know something isn't quite right but can't quite consciously see. Both still excellent imo, and much better than Mediacom does around here.

This with a dual-sub setup, Dish w/Hopper on eastern arc.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I feel the same, I feel the Premiums are worse then ever.
> Starz used to be the best, and now it lacking the detail those channels once had.
> HGTV ,Travel, Discovery, Velocity ,YES, NBC4, Palladia all used to look Fantastic, Now they are just Acceptable HD quality.
> I Haven't felt like I'm sitting right the in the action in a few years now.
> ...


YES still seems damn near perfect to me, the best PQ IMO.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> YES still seems damn near perfect to me, the best PQ IMO.


Most likely still is the best, but the best is a lower standard then what it once was.

You have your opinion and I have mine.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

I think once you stare at it long enough you start to notice things. i can say for a fact when I swapped back from Dish, Directv is noticeably better. As I watch it over time though, you see issues. Just like a new HDTV, every one thinks theirs is perfect when you buy it, once you spend some time with it you find out that most panels are far from perfect.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> YES still seems damn near perfect to me, the best PQ IMO.


I was gonna mention that. The Yankee games on YES are damn near perfect. I'd like to know what kind of TVs everyone is using when we're discussing PQ. The difference in PQ is obvious when the game is on Fox, but ESPN does manage to put out a pretty good 720p picture.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> Most likely still is the best, but the best is a lower standard then what it once was.
> 
> You have your opinion and I have mine.


We're using Panny plasmas. What are you using?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Jason Whiddon said:


> I think once you stare at it long enough you start to notice things. i can say for a fact when I swapped back from Dish, Directv is noticeably better. As I watch it over time though, you see issues. Just like a new HDTV, every one thinks theirs is perfect when you buy it, once you spend some time with it you find out that most panels are far from perfect.


Yup, just like the salesman told me when Vizios first came out. Once people get them home they think they've got the best picture they've ever seen. I bought one and compared it to my plasmas and quickly brought it back.

Rich


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Rich said:


> We're using Panny plasmas. What are you using?
> 
> Rich


Samsung LED I have a 6030 55 inch and a 40 inch 5000

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

But you're not going to tell me that the transponders aren't crammed now more then ever.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> Samsung LED I have a 6030 55 inch and a 40 inch 5000
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


Since we usually agree on most things I really don't want to argue the point, but there are reasons why I don't own an LCD set. PQ is one of them. I know Sammy makes some really nice plasmas, from what I've seen in the stores, anyhow. I've never had an LCD with LED backlighting at home to do a side by side comparison.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> But you're not going to tell me that the transponders aren't crammed now more then ever.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


If your post was pointed at me, I don't know enough about transponders to know whether they're crammed or not. If you say so, I'll be happy to believe you.

Rich


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Rich said:


> If your post was pointed at me, I don't know enough about transponders to know whether they're crammed or not. If you say so, I'll be happy to believe you.
> 
> Rich


Not direct to you , it's for anyone who knows.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

I'm a plasma snob, now. lol


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Rich said:


> If your post was pointed at me, I don't know enough about transponders to know whether they're crammed or not. If you say so, I'll be happy to believe you.
> 
> Rich


YOu could knew that being here last 7 years  ; we discussed the trend, see Sixto thread and Gary's weekly reports


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

damondlt said:


> But you're not going to tell me that the transponders aren't crammed now more then ever.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


They are putting more on each transponder, but the encoding method and equipment is improved. That's why they can do it. The quality of the results is subjective, of course.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

studechip said:


> They are putting more on each transponder, but *the encoding method and equipment is improved*. That's why they can do it. The quality of the results is subjective, of course.


it's not a fact ! we have no evidence to conlude it - the 'cramming' more channels in one mux/tpn is a simple adjustment of statmuxes' profile; no need new equipment, no need to pay for new encoding software ...
nope !


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> Not direct to you , it's for anyone who knows.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


Oh good, I feel really stupid when someone directs such a question at me. :rolling:

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> I'm a plasma snob, now. lol


Me too and I'm getting to be a Netflix snob too. I spent the weekend watching all the Rocky movies they just added to their streaming content.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

P Smith said:


> YOu could knew that being here last 7 years  ; we discussed the trend, see Sixto thread and Gary's weekly reports


I could know lots of things, but I don't. Nothing wrong with ignorance Pete. And I'll freely admit ignorance every time I don't know something. I don't even read the sticky threads.

Rich


----------



## PCampbell (Nov 18, 2006)

Lets hope D14 and D15 open up a lot more room.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

PCampbell said:


> Lets hope D14 and D15 open up a lot more room.


It will, because there really isn't much left not in HD. At least nothing major. I don't see another major HD channel launch.
I predict when D 14 goes live we see a PQ improvement.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

P Smith said:


> it's not a fact ! we have no evidence to conlude it - the 'cramming' more channels in one mux/tpn is a simple adjustment of statmuxes' profile; no need new equipment, no need to pay for new encoding software ...
> nope !


I hope this is tongue in cheek.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

damondlt said:


> It will, because there really isn't much left not in HD. At least nothing major. I don't see another major HD channel launch.
> I predict when D 14 goes live we see a PQ improvement.


At a minimum, D14 will open up transponder space equivalent to about 100 HD channels. Presumably some of that will be used for 4K, but probably not a whole lot unless it really catches on.

D14 enables some new bands beyond that, but whether Directv actually uses them for customer programming or internal use is unknown at this time - plus some/all customers would need a new LNB to receive them.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

damondlt said:


> It will, because there really isn't much left not in HD. At least nothing major. I don't see another major HD channel launch.
> I predict when D 14 goes live we see a PQ improvement.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


don't they also need to replace some of the old birds?

But maybe don't the road getting rid of / moving SD to MPEG 4 will free up room as well.


----------



## CraigerM (Apr 15, 2014)

JoeTheDragon said:


> don't they also need to replace some of the old birds?
> 
> But maybe don't the road getting rid of / moving SD to MPEG 4 will free up room as well.


When will getting rid of all SD happen?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

CraigerM said:


> When will getting rid of all SD happen?


No one knows, but word from last week's dealer conference is that Directv will no longer do SD only installs for new customers starting this summer. That was the first step they needed to take down that road, but it will still be several years at the very least.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

JoeTheDragon said:


> don't they also need to replace some of the old birds?
> 
> But maybe don't the road getting rid of / moving SD to MPEG 4 will free up room as well.


Moving SD to MPEG4 requires new boxes, so you might as well drop all SD then


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> No one knows, but word from last week's dealer conference is that Directv will no longer do SD only installs for new customers starting this summer.


I better start to stock up on SD dishes from now..... :rotfl:


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

P Smith said:


> you could start thinking by yourself (instead asking your Galaxy Note 3  )
> 
> - major part of DTV ppl is these 20 mil customers who are not posted here "I'm impressed with DTV PQ quality"


Well that certainly clears things up.

Sent from my Galaxy Note 3 via DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> No one knows, but word from last week's dealer conference is that Directv will no longer do SD only installs for new customers starting this summer. That was the first step they needed to take down that road, but it will still be several years at the very least.


Agree it's hard to make a Happy SD customer pay more for services like HD if they don't want it or can't afford it.
I think it's time HD is considered the norm, and providers need to stop treating it like a premium.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

I predict D14 for missing HD channels over time
and D15 4K


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Agree it's hard to make a Happy SD customer pay more for services like HD if they don't want it or can't afford it.
> I think it's time HD is considered the norm, and providers need to stop treating it like a premium.
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


I agree with the second part. But, just because they won't do SD installs doesn't mean they can't limit the output to SD for their non-HD customers. They already do that in MPEG 4 SD locals markets.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

acostapimps said:


> I predict D14 for missing HD channels over time
> and D15 4K


It hasn't yet been announced where D15 will be going, but most believe it will be backup/replacement at 101. There isn't anywhere it can go that will increase capacity using the bands current LNBs are known to receive.

The wildcard for D14/D15 is whether the new RDBS band (17.3 - 17.7 GHz) they support and Directv is licensed for will be used for customer programming or not. Some/all LNBs would need to be replaced to receive that band, so it may be more likely to be used for niche content so Directv doesn't have millions of customers needing an upgrade at once.

My hunch is that if RDBS is used it would mirror the international programming on 95 (and perhaps 119) to eliminate the second dish in new installs, private corporate and internal Directv channels would migrate to it, and would be used for the initial 4K rollout.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

damondlt said:


> Agree it's hard to make a Happy SD customer pay more for services like HD if they don't want it or can't afford it.
> I think it's time HD is considered the norm, and providers need to stop treating it like a premium.


I'll bet it won't be long before they raise the price of top package by $10, with "free HD".

That will quickly move through the packages except the lowest, it won't happen there until they announce the cut-off date for MPEG2/SD, whenever that is.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

slice1900 said:


> It hasn't yet been announced where D15 will be going, but most believe it will be backup/replacement at 101. There isn't anywhere it can go that will increase capacity using the bands current LNBs are known to receive.
> 
> The wildcard for D14/D15 is whether *the new RDBS band (17.3 - 17.7 GHz)* they support and Directv is licensed for will be used for customer programming or not. Some/all LNBs would need to be replaced to receive that band, so it may be more likely to be used for niche content so Directv doesn't have millions of customers needing an upgrade at once.
> 
> My hunch is that if RDBS is used it would mirror the international programming on 95 (and perhaps 119) to eliminate the second dish in new installs, private corporate and internal Directv channels would migrate to it, and would be used for the initial 4K rollout.


what if current Ka LNBF would convert the range [17.3-17.7] with current LOF 18.05 to useful 350-750 MHz ?


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

P Smith said:


> what if current Ka LNBF would convert the range [17.3-17.7] with current LOF 18.05 to useful 350-750 MHz ?


If Directv intends to use RDBS for customer content, I believe the SWM LNB may already do exactly as you suggest, at least in more recent revs. Both the SWM LNB and KaKu must have an image filter to reject frequencies below 18.05 GHz - if they did not customers who live in the areas where D12's RDBS spot beam tests were conducted would have lost all their 103cb channels. Not to mention whatever else may be broadcasting on frequencies in the 16 GHz range that would stomp on 103ca.

If the incoming signal was split and the "other path" was filtered above 18.05 GHz, it could capture RDBS in an inverted band at 350-750 MHz as you say. It would cost essentially nothing to add this capability (what's the cost of a circuit to split and a couple extra filter circuits, a few cents?) The SWM LNB has two inputs waiting to be used - the inputs to the C2 chip that are used for the flex ports in a SWM module.

There's a small problem with that if they intend to use RDBS from both 99 & 103 though. They'd have to use a different LO for one of them, since there's only room for evens and odds at 350-750 MHz from one satellite, not two. The other sat would be 1650-2050 MHz or something like that.

It would be interesting to see the circuit board for the most recent rev of the SWM LNB and check if the inputs for C2 are connected, and count whether there are two or three DROs. If Directv intends to and has been planning all along to use RDBS for customer content, I think there's just no way they haven't been making SWM LNBs capable of receiving it for a long time, perhaps even from the very beginning. As I've said before in the D14 thread, they have to deal with RDBS in some way - either filter it out, or receive it. If they know they're going to be using it, why not start designing LNBs to receive it so they don't have to replace so many (maybe just the KaKu ones) down the road?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

P Smith said:


> that would create a PR statement, make some buzz to attract customers and investors ... seems to me it's not the case


Neither may ultimately be to the customer's benefit so it shouldn't necessarily be given a lot of fanfare.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

JoeTheDragon said:


> don't they also need to replace some of the old birds?


Converting to MPEG4 or a new multiplexing scheme doesn't require new satellites.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

damondlt said:


> It will, because there really isn't much left not in HD. At least nothing major. I don't see another major HD channel launch.


There are probably a couple dozen available HD channels at least. Some of them are surely obscure but others are getting regular requests. Then again, if DIRECTV isn't going to play ball with some of the sports nets, that cuts the numbers significantly.

If bundling weren't the way things are done by the big players (Disney, MTV, Discovery), the better of the missing channels could already be available.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

harsh said:


> There are probably a couple dozen available HD channels at least. Some of them are surely obscure but others are getting regular requests. Then again, if DIRECTV isn't going to play ball with some of the sports nets, that cuts the numbers significantly.
> 
> If bundling weren't the way things are done by the big players (Disney, MTV, Discovery), the better of the missing channels could already be available.


Yeah, at least a couple dozen! The TWC NYC lineup is mindboggling...


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

ejbvt said:


> Yeah, at least a couple dozen! The TWC NYC lineup is mindboggling...


should we be back on topic ? and discuss so proclaimed "impressive" PQ ?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

P Smith said:


> should we be back on topic ? and discuss so proclaimed "impressive" PQ ?


Yea I'm watching Yankees on My9 and the HD quality is not shockingly wow full on Directv, it looks better on Cable.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> Yea I'm watching Yankees on My9 and the HD quality is not shockingly wow full on Directv, it looks better on Cable.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


I got a pretty shabby picture on the two TVs I watched the game on last night too.

Thought my new TV was needing readjustment and went to another one and saw the same thing.

Rich


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

now tell me how I could trust TS statement ? :shrug:


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Because I tell it how I see it.
Not what people always want to hear.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

Also have camera variations. HD camera's need to be calibrated, just like tv's. Reason why some ESPN fball games look great, and others do not. Also, if its a busy time of day, say Saturday afternoon, ESPN may not have quite the bandwidth it does at night when there are less games. Reason some sports channels vary in PQ. On FX, for example, Sons looks pretty darn good, but Americans does not. Americans is shot with the 70's grain look on purpose.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Jason Whiddon said:


> Also have camera variations. HD camera's need to be calibrated, just like tv's. Reason why some ESPN fball games look great, and others do not. Also, if its a busy time of day, say Saturday afternoon, ESPN may not have quite the bandwidth it does at night when there are less games. Reason some sports channels vary in PQ. On FX, for example, Sons looks pretty darn good, but Americans does not. Americans is shot with the 70's grain look on purpose.


Of course it's not Directv fault. I would credit your analysis if I didn't switch my Yankees game over to cable and found a better picture.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

My9 games never look as good as YES.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Not on Directv that's for sure.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

The quality of a "high interest" channel on your local cable provider (I think Yankees games when you live close enough to NYC to have it on your locals qualifies) should always beat Directv, because they can't boost the quality level for a specific area and something like YES isn't "high interest" measured across Directv's entire subscriber base. For locals cable is likely to be higher quality (and OTA often higher still) because Directv is constrained by the way they deliver locals.

Surely your cable company knows there's a lot of interest in Yankees games and makes sure that the channels that carry them have high quality. If your cable company adds SEC Network where you live this fall you probably won't see the same quality as a guy in Tuscaloosa would see on cable, because Tuscaloosa's cable companies will be damn sure it is of the highest possible quality! I imagine the quality of the BTN feed Tuscaloosa gets on Comcast isn't up to snuff with the quality they enjoy in Columbus. Directv is probably somewhere between the two.

For a more "objective" test you'd probably do better comparing ESPN, or AMC, or HBO, where the popularity is pretty much the same in all places. Some cable companies will beat Directv, and some won't, and it will vary even with the same company depending on location. Some areas have newer headends and plants than others, they don't upgrade that stuff all at once nationwide.

Since coding can be a lot more efficient sending a signal across town rather than to orbit and back, a typical cable system has more potential capacity. Directv has 44 CONUS transponders on the HD satellites (99 & 103) Each 36 MHz wide transponder can manage a bit under 40 Mbps. A 6 MHz wide QAM256 cable channel is a bit higher at 42 Mbps, so cable would need fewer than 44 channels to replicate all of Directv's national HD channels, *if* they used MPEG4. Most don't, and many still deliver a couple dozen analog channels. Those using MPEG4 that have also dropped analog have far more effective capacity than Directv, and should therefore have higher quality. Those that remain all MPEG2 and still carry analog channels are likely behind.

Directv will be adding 18 more HD transponders when D14 launches, and possibly more (depending on if they make use of the RDBS band, which would add the equivalent of another 18 HD transponders) so they should be able to improve quality and number of HD channels in less than a year.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

sigma1914 said:


> My9 games never look as good as YES.


Everything is the same except the graphics and the channel you are watching it on.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

studechip said:


> Everything is the same except the graphics and the channel you are watching it on.


No, it's not. There's other factors in play with getting the signal out.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Of course it's not Directv fault. I would credit your analysis if I didn't switch my Yankees game over to cable and found a better picture.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S5


I never said it wasn't. I was merely giving other options to explain "certain" scenarios. My advice to you, since you just really come here to complain about Directv (some of it not so accurately), why not just use the cable and save yourself some grief.

You have been around a long time (here and the other site, as well as I). When you were with Dish you ragged on Directv, when you were with Directv you ragged on Dish. Seen a trend?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Jason Whiddon said:


> I never said it wasn't. I was merely giving other options to explain "certain" scenarios. My advice to you, since you just really come here to complain about Directv (some of it not so accurately), why not just use the cable and save yourself some grief.
> 
> You have been around a long time (here and the other site, as well as I). When you were with Dish you ragged on Directv, when you were with Directv you ragged on Dish. Seen a trend?


to me it's looks like he doing honest review for both sides without prejudice


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Jason Whiddon said:


> I never said it wasn't. I was merely giving other options to explain "certain" scenarios. My advice to you, since you just really come here to complain about Directv (some of it not so accurately), why not just use the cable and save yourself some grief.
> 
> You have been around a long time (here and the other site, as well as I). When you were with Dish you ragged on Directv, when you were with Directv you ragged on Dish. Seen a trend?


It's not your job to worry about what I rag on.
I have 4 directv accounts and 3 cable accounts. If I'm displeased with something , it's going to be known.
I see lots of trends here too,
One of them seem to be a degrading HD PQ from Directv, 
Another is the same old it's not Directv fault. 
3rd is The other site is a joke and a half when it comes to dish brown nosing. 
4 when you don't agree with someone it automatically turns personal.

You really think they don't calibrate their hundreds of thousand dollar HD cameras. 
You are really grasping at straws.

Here , I just watched News 4 NY and was going to say tonight it looked really good. 
So don't tell me it's not some type of delivery or bandwidth issue .
LIVE events should be consistent and it's not.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

P Smith said:


> to me it's looks like he doing honest review for both sides without prejudice


Thank you

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

sigma1914 said:


> My9 games never look as good as YES.





studechip said:


> Everything is the same except the graphics and the channel you are watching it on.





sigma1914 said:


> No, it's not. There's other factors in play with getting the signal out.


Like what?


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

Um.. like the fact that My9 and YES are different channels....


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

And one is transmitted OTA, needing a different conversion.


----------



## studechip (Apr 16, 2012)

ejbvt said:


> Um.. like the fact that My9 and YES are different channels....





sigma1914 said:


> And one is transmitted OTA, needing a different conversion.


We are talking about Yankee games on both channels. They use the same equipment, exact same. They are sent to Directv by fiber, and most people watch them on Directv, so the coding is all the same. If the MY9 signals were grabbed ota by Directv they should look better than YES, not worse.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

ACC Network and SEC Network Broadcasts originate from a master source. ACC Network is from Charlotte, Raycom Sports. The (now former) SEC Network broacasts may have too, from ESPNU in Charlotte, but they are ESPN-based at any rate. Each are the same when they go out. I was able to watch SEC Network on 3 channels: WCWG, WNCN, and MSG. There were noticeable differences in all three broadcasts that I saw on D*. ACC Network games on certain channels look better than others. Just because the origination is the same, doesn't mean the end will be the same. See also: ALL LOCAL CHANNELS!


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

I was very impressed with the DIRECTV's HD picture quality when I first subscribed back in Jan. but a little less so now. When it's at its best, it definitely surpasses anything I've had before (AT&T U-verse, Dish, Comcast); at those times, it looks close to Netflix's "Super HD" quality when you have plenty of bandwidth. Of my prior providers, Dish had the best HD PQ. But DIRECTV seems more variable than Dish -- higher highs and lower lows. The worst thing I see with DIRECTV is occasional random macro blocking/pixelation. It will pop up for just a second and go away. I think I've only seen it on the Showtime channels (lots of times) and once on one of the HBO channels, nowhere else. Sometimes it may happen only once every 90 minutes, other times once every 5 minutes. I never had anything like that with Dish. Anyone else seeing that?


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

NashGuy said:


> I was very impressed with the DIRECTV's HD picture quality when I first subscribed back in Jan. but a little less so now. When it's at its best, it definitely surpasses anything I've had before (AT&T U-verse, Dish, Comcast); at those times, it looks close to Netflix's "Super HD" quality when you have plenty of bandwidth. Of my prior providers, Dish had the best HD PQ. But DIRECTV seems more variable than Dish -- higher highs and lower lows. The worst thing I see with DIRECTV is occasional random macro blocking/pixelation. It will pop up for just a second and go away. I think I've only seen it on the Showtime channels (lots of times) and once on one of the HBO channels, nowhere else. Sometimes it may happen only once every 90 minutes, other times once every 5 minutes. I never had anything like that with Dish. Anyone else seeing that?


That's not PQ. That is signal breakup. Something is wrong with your system.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

P Smith said:


> to me it's looks like he doing honest review for both sides without prejudice


Me too. You never cease to amaze me, Pete. Good post.

Rich


----------



## wilbur_the_goose (Aug 16, 2006)

Today's HD PQ on D* gets a C-. In comparison, my Verizon FiOS gets a solid A.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

wilbur_the_goose said:


> Today's HD PQ on D* gets a C-. In comparison, my Verizon FiOS gets a solid A.


Have you compared Verizon's PQ to NF's PQ? The Super HD I mean.

Rich


----------



## Sea bass (Jun 10, 2005)

Directv HD over the past 6 months gets a B+ from me. Lately (past 3 weeks) it's been more of an A+. Not sure whats changed, but really good pq


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Watched the Yankees on FS1 yesterday. After about ten minutes, I said to myself something's wrong. Sure enough, 720p. I figured this was coming. I can only hope it doesn't extend to YES and My9, since Fox now owns YES. The closeups were good, better than I hoped for, but the long shots made it clear that I wasn't looking at a 1080i picture.

Rich


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I didn't catch game on FS1 yesterday,
but lately I've been watching more Steaming from Netflix and Even Amazon, which I might add have Much better PQ and I can actually stream a Video ON demand. Not wait for the Slow Directv HD VOD downloading process, that still has average HD PQ.

This is going to be interesting summer for my TV world.
I think some Major change is coming for me.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Rich said:


> Watched the Yankees on FS1 yesterday. After about ten minutes, I said to myself something's wrong. Sure enough, 720p. I figured this was coming. I can only hope it doesn't extend to YES and My9, since Fox now owns YES. The closeups were good, better than I hoped for, but the long shots made it clear that I wasn't looking at a 1080i picture.


A lot of people (myself included) think 720p provides a superior picture for fast action i.e. sports. There's no one "right" answer there, but probably as many people would applaud the change as would condemn it like you.

Though perhaps baseball has too little action vs standing around for it to be worth displaying at a higher frame rate.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> I didn't catch game on FS1 yesterday,
> but lately I've been watching more Steaming from Netflix and Even Amazon, which I might add have Much better PQ and I can actually stream a Video ON demand. Not wait for the Slow Directv HD VOD downloading process, that still has average HD PQ.
> 
> This is going to be interesting summer for my TV world.
> I think some Major change is coming for me.


Me too. Left alone, I only watch the Yankees on D*. I can't get off Netflix, with its superb HD PQ.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> A lot of people (myself included) think 720p provides a superior picture for fast action i.e. sports. There's no one "right" answer there, but probably as many people would applaud the change as would condemn it like you.
> 
> _*Though perhaps baseball has too little action vs standing around for it to be worth displaying at a higher frame rate.*_


You might well hold that opinion of baseball. I don't and I think the action I see on my plasmas is just as good in 1080i as in 720p. I realize the problems with sports and LCDs, but that's one of the main reasons I have so many plasmas and no LCDs.

To get back to your comment: I think baseball is a very explosive sport to play. On the field a player might stand around for quite a while, but once the ball is hit to him he has to put everything he's got into making that play. In other words, he goes from nothing to everything at once. That's why homer hitters look exhausted after hitting one into the stands. Everything he had went into that swing. It's also another reason why so many baseball players get hurt. In most other sports the players are in constant motion and they stay "warmed up". Not so in baseball.

Rich


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

Spankee fans should want SD, much harder to see pine tar lol


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

242424 said:


> Spankee fans should want SD, much harder to see pine tar lol


No we should just know better then to take players whom are known for it.

Sent from my Galaxy S5


----------



## acostapimps (Nov 6, 2011)

Rich said:


> .
> 
> . That's why homer hitters look exhausted after hitting one into the stands. Everything he had went into that swing.
> Rich


That's like basketball players look exhausted shooting free throws, but they do run back and forth on the court, plus constant jumping and reaching.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Rich said:


> To get back to your comment: I think baseball is a very explosive sport to play. On the field a player might stand around for quite a while, but once the ball is hit to him he has to put everything he's got into making that play. In other words, he goes from nothing to everything at once. That's why homer hitters look exhausted after hitting one into the stands. Everything he had went into that swing. It's also another reason why so many baseball players get hurt. In most other sports the players are in constant motion and they stay "warmed up". Not so in baseball.


The idea that you can be exhausted from a single swing of the bat is ridiculous. Is Tiger Woods winded after he goes all out with a driver? Anyone who played baseball when they are younger knows it is possible to hit home runs without exhausting oneself or even breaking a sweat. It doesn't require any more physical effort to hit one out of the park off a major league pitcher versus off a regular guy, just (a lot) more skill so you swing your bat where the ball is.

My comment wasn't trying to imply baseball players aren't athletes, it isn't a sport or whatever, just that the amount of fast action as a percentage of the total game time is quite low for baseball, compared to a sport like basketball.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Back to PQ: my experience with 720p vs. 1080i for fast moving scenes is that on a good plasma, 1080i wins out. No artifacts. On smaller sets, say 32" and smaller, there's virtually no difference even on LCDs. 

However, capture method, compression method, transmission method (meaning possibly re-encoding) all have a possible negative effects on PQ, and often trump any inherent differences between the above.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

acostapimps said:


> That's like basketball players look exhausted shooting free throws, but they do run back and forth on the court, plus constant jumping and reaching.


I don't like basketball for that very reason. It's gotta be one of the most exhausting games to play. I've watched the World Cup a couple of times and that's gotta be another exhausting sport.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> _*The idea that you can be exhausted from a single swing of the bat is ridiculous.*_ Is Tiger Woods winded after he goes all out with a driver? Anyone who played baseball when they are younger knows it is possible to hit home runs without exhausting oneself or even breaking a sweat. It doesn't require any more physical effort to hit one out of the park off a major league pitcher versus off a regular guy, just (a lot) more skill so you swing your bat where the ball is.
> 
> My comment wasn't trying to imply baseball players aren't athletes, it isn't a sport or whatever, just that the amount of fast action as a percentage of the total game time is quite low for baseball, compared to a sport like basketball.


You might think it is, I played until I was 45 and I have to disagree with you. Please don't compare golf to baseball, it's just not the same thing. How fast is that ball Tiger Woods is hitting going?

Rich


----------

