# MPEG2 HD Channel Info (70's HD removal by 4/1/2010)



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

No, not *that* info. The MPEG2 HD Channels in the 70's channel range will be coming down at the end of March. HBO, ESPN, ESPN2, TNT, etc. There is a slide on channel 99 (starting tomorrow) that explains the details.

A heads up for some of you that may have DVR recordings scheduled, make sure you change it to the MPEG4 HD channel (i.e 206 for ESPN, 209 for ESPN2, etc,etc).

If you are one of the handful of folks in which their only HD receiver is of the MPEG2 variety, your last 6 HD channels are only going to be around until the end of the month. Moving forward, only the MPEG4 variety will be broadcast as of April 1st.


----------



## cforrest (Jan 20, 2007)

And I got all excited until I read the first sentence :grin:


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

Thanks for the heads up, Satelliteracer. I just posted this same information at Tivo Community in the "DirecTV HDTV Tivo Powered DVR" Forum.


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

Looks like I picked a good time to sell that HR10-250 on eBay last week. 

Cleared over $40 after shipping, fees etc!


----------



## MikeW (May 16, 2002)

I'm still good. Mostly used for OTA backups.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Hope the fix the audio breakup problems on the ESPNs Mpeg4 feeds first.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

How about changing the title of the thread to "MPEG2 HD channels in the 70's info" so you don't confuse everyone?

Thanks


----------



## Hdhead (Jul 30, 2007)

matt1124 said:


> Looks like I picked a good time to sell that HR10-250 on eBay last week.
> 
> Cleared over $40 after shipping, fees etc!


Not bad for a $900 investment.


----------



## jefbal99 (Sep 7, 2007)

SatelliteRacer, is there any chance of the SD bitrate on 110/119 will be increased by this move or is this space going to be allocated to internationals to get rid of the need for 95W?


----------



## CTJon (Feb 5, 2007)

of course I get better reception on those than on the MPEG4 channels - maybe time to have the dish aiming checked.


----------



## jefbal99 (Sep 7, 2007)

CTJon said:


> of course I get better reception on those than on the MPEG4 channels - maybe time to have the dish aiming checked.


really? Check your signal strengths for 99c and 103c. Do you have issues with all the MPEG4 HDs or just the ones that were duplicated in MPEG2? All the MPEG4/MPEG2 dups were on D11/99c, so look at those very closely.


----------



## Avder (Feb 6, 2010)

So whats DirecTV going to do with all the bandwidth it frees up by turning the Mpeg2 HD channels off?


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

Avder said:


> So whats DirecTV going to do with all the bandwidth it frees up by turning the Mpeg2 HD channels off?


They will hoard it for awhile then use it for more HD channels and PPV.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Avder said:


> So whats DirecTV going to do with all the bandwidth it frees up by turning the Mpeg2 HD channels off?


These are pretty much the last channels left on DIRECTV 5 (109.8W) which has (or at least had) 32 Ku transponders. They need to put something there or surrender their portion of the slot (DISH Network owns most of the slot).

With the advent of the SL3 dish, 110W and 119W are pretty much relegated to CONUS SD.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Avder said:


> So whats DirecTV going to do with all the bandwidth it frees up by turning the Mpeg2 HD channels off?


Nothing that the avg subscriber can use since most installs done today and for the past year or so as least are 99-101-103 and cant even see 110-119 where those were at.


----------



## sswheeler (Aug 27, 2008)

Shopping channels!!!! More Infomercials! D* can't lose their rep for not having the most to offer!!!!


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

sswheeler said:


> Shopping channels!!!! More Infomercials! D* can't lose their rep for not having the most to offer!!!!


If you're so cynical and unhappy, why are you a subscriber? If you are not a subscriber, why do you care?

Logically, the best way for Directv to use this spectrum is to offer niche services that bring in extra income, to help offset the higher cost of hardware necessary to receive it (e.g., the 5 LNB dish rather than a 3 LNB dish). The types of programming I expect Directv to offer in place of this existing MPEG2 HD might include an expanded international programming package or something along those lines. I don't see them giving up the license they hold, but who knows? Anything is possible.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

harsh said:


> These are pretty much the last channels left on DIRECTV 5 (109.8W) which has (or at least had) 32 Ku transponders.


 They only had three transponders from 110.


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> They only had three transponders from 110.


The satellite has more physical transponders and bandwidth capability than Directv's Ku license at 110º allows them to use.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

LameLefty said:


> The satellite has more physical transponders and bandwidth capability than Directv's Ku license at 110º allows them to use.


I guess I should have said "active", but considering how the 110 & 119 TPs are handled from the dish, there could only be 32 TPs total from 119 + 110.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

veryoldschool said:


> I guess I should have said "active", but considering how the 110 & 119 TPs are handled from the dish, there could only be 32 TPs total from 119 + 110.


DIRECTV has 14 channels between 110W and 119W.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

harsh said:


> DIRECTV has 14 channels between 110W and 119W.


14 TPs, not channels.


----------



## slimoli (Jan 28, 2005)

My hunch is internationals will be moved to the available spots. The need for the big dish to see the 95 is a big restriction for people interested in foreign language channels.


----------



## tkrandall (Oct 3, 2003)

On the surface it would seem to make sense for DirecTV and Dish to work out a deal by which DirectV gave Dish the 3 110w Transponders in exchange for 3 at 119w. DirecTV would need one less bird in the air and the transponder/channel mapping in the receivers could likely be changed in a flash. IDK, maybe there would be less in it for Dish than DirecTV. Seems like it would have made sense as a thing to do a long time ago if were to ever happen. 

As to DirecTV's plan for 110w, they have been publicly mum. I suspect it will go to niche services like internationals as part of a 110w/119w serviced package of channels. Maybe they will put international HDs in MPEG-4 there?


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

Hdhead said:


> Not bad for a $900 investment.


Actually it came in a lot of receivers from craigslist. 2 R15s, 1 HR10, and 1 HR20 for $50, so I am quite pleased!


----------



## looter (Oct 1, 2007)

Kind of weak not to wait until the new DIRECTiVo is out. Then they could offer it to those who prefer to continue to use TiVo.

What would someones option be now, buy, err, lease an HR2X then fork out the additional cash to lease the DIRECTiVo?

I don’t feel the timing of this decision is the best thing for the customer.


----------



## jhillestad (Jan 13, 2007)

Avder said:


> So whats DirecTV going to do with all the bandwidth it frees up by turning the Mpeg2 HD channels off?


Maybe some more BET channels.....


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

looter said:


> Kind of weak not to wait until the new DIRECTiVo is out. Then they could offer it to those who prefer to continue to use TiVo.
> 
> What would someones option be now, buy, err, lease an HR2X then fork out the additional cash to lease the DIRECTiVo?
> 
> I don't feel the timing of this decision is the best thing for the customer.


Since we have absolutely no idea when or really if a new HDTivo is going to be released, they've waited more than long enough for any of the Tivo holdouts to either move to another provider that has a Tivo based product they want, or you upgraded your HR10 to an HR2x model...this reminds me of the whole digital transition, lets keep putting it off because 1% of the people arent ready.


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

looter said:


> Kind of weak not to wait until the new DIRECTiVo is out. Then they could offer it to those who prefer to continue to use TiVo.
> 
> What would someones option be now, buy, err, lease an HR2X then fork out the additional cash to lease the DIRECTiVo?
> 
> I don't feel the timing of this decision is the best thing for the customer.


Yeah? When exactly will that fabled new device be available? Tivo has been promising it RealSoonNow™ for quite some time. It's silly for Directv to keep wasting that bandwidth for an ever-smaller group of subscribers who refuse to upgrade their equipment.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

looter said:


> Kind of weak not to wait until the new DIRECTiVo is out. Then they could offer it to those who prefer to continue to use TiVo.
> 
> What would someones option be now, buy, err, lease an HR2X then fork out the additional cash to lease the DIRECTiVo?
> 
> I don't feel the timing of this decision is the best thing for the customer.


Customers have had ample time to change equipment.


----------



## say-what (Dec 14, 2006)

looter said:


> Kind of weak not to wait until the new DIRECTiVo is out. Then they could offer it to those who prefer to continue to use TiVo.


Why? The decision to discontinue the mpeg-2 channels was made and announced prior to there being any hint of an mpeg-4 DirecTIVO. It's not like you haven't had fair warning for several years now and should have expected this after the first round of mpeg-2 shutoffs happened.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

say-what said:


> Why? The decision to discontinue the mpeg-2 channels was made and announced prior to there being any hint of an mpeg-4 DirecTIVO. It's not like you haven't had fair warning for several years now and should have expected this after the first round of mpeg-2 shutoffs happened.


Exactly. I can't even remember when it was announced. 2005? Earlier?


----------



## ub1934 (Dec 30, 2005)

harsh said:


> DIRECTV has 14 channels between 110W and 119W.


So why did " D " put some of their Sonic Tap on 119 where you cannot get them with a SL 3 set up only a SL 5 ??


----------



## jsmuga (Jan 3, 2008)

ub1934 said:


> So why did " D " put some of their Sonic Tap on 119 where you cannot get them with a SL 3 set up only a SL 5 ??


Good question I am one of the customers with a SL3 not getting some of the Sonic Tap stations.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

LameLefty said:


> If you're so cynical and unhappy, why are you a subscriber? If you are not a subscriber, why do you care?
> 
> Logically, the best way for Directv to use this spectrum is to offer niche services that bring in extra income, to help offset the higher cost of hardware necessary to receive it (e.g., the 5 LNB dish rather than a 3 LNB dish).


Nothing is "offset". The prices you pay for programming or equipment are not in any way shape or form reduced because of niche or shopping channels, so lets stop pretending they are.


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

raott said:


> Nothing is "offset". The prices you pay for programming or equipment are not in any way shape or form reduced because of niche or shopping channels, so lets stop pretending they are.


You seem awfully certain of that. Too bad you're wrong, in two ways. First, overall programming costs take everything into account, including the costs of equipment, churn rates, advertising revenue and costs, new subscriber costs, carriage fees paid by some channels and paid by Directv to carry others, etc. EVERYTHING goes into the calculus.

The second way you're wrong is that that the "offset" I was referring to was the increased cost of a now-nonstandard 5-LNB installation for niche products like international packages and so forth. Extra programming fees from such subscribers offset the extra costs involved.


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

ub1934 said:


> So why did " D " put some of their Sonic Tap on 119 where you cannot get them with a SL 3 set up only a SL 5 ??


I think that is just where they had room for them at the time. I think they will probably be moved to 103 once D12 is up and running.

I think D* will move all international programming to 110 & 119 so they don't have to do the 2 dish installs anymore. I believe that will also allow them to quit leasing a satellite from someone else.


----------



## ndole (Aug 26, 2009)

I really hope they move International programming there. Please please please! I can't stand the 95W dish.


----------



## doctor j (Jun 14, 2006)

Beerstalker said:


> I believe that will also allow them to quit leasing a satellite from someone else.


I agree with you. However, recall , Directv Latin America has 15 transponders on Galaxy 3C at 95 also. They may want the space for expanded TV/HDTV in their thriving South American markets.

Doctor j


----------



## Tom_S (Apr 9, 2002)

LameLefty said:


> RealSoonNow™


That's great! :lol:


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

Tom_S said:


> That's great! :lol:


In fairness, I do believe I was wrong there. I believe it's actually:

"RealSoonNow!™"


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

veryoldschool said:


> 14 TPs, not channels.


I originally put TPs, but DIRECTV 7S serves up somewhere around 519 TV channels and that wouldn't look right if people divided the number of TV channels by the number of transponders (>47 TV channels per transponder).

DIRECTV 7S (and 9S) can operate with either 54 transponders on 27 spotbeams or 44 transponders on 30 spotbeams. Ultimately DIRECTV has 11 allocated downlink channels and they've scattered them all over the place with spotbeams.

In hindsight, I probably should have used the term "downlink channels" to differentiate between those and TV channels.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Why we need to confuse ppl by creating the neologism "_downlink channels_" when there is well know definition of these: a transponder.


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

P Smith said:


> Why we need to confuse ppl by creating the neologism "_downlink channels_" when there is well know definition of these: a transponder.


Why? Isn't the answer obvious?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

"harsh" ?


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

P Smith said:


> "harsh" ?


I'd say, but I'm sure I'd get a pm from the moderator.


----------



## JoeTheDragon (Jul 21, 2008)

LameLefty said:


> Yeah? When exactly will that fabled new device be available? Tivo has been promising it RealSoonNow™ for quite some time. It's silly for Directv to keep wasting that bandwidth for an ever-smaller group of subscribers who refuse to upgrade their equipment.


tivo premiere is a big bust as it lacks tru2way. and maybe more then 2 tuners would of made it better.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

P Smith said:


> Why we need to confuse ppl by creating the neologism "_downlink channels_" when there is well know definition of these: a transponder.


I had an epiphany this morning. The correct term is probably transponder frequencies. Transponder alone doesn't get the job done.


----------



## CTJon (Feb 5, 2007)

jefbal99 said:


> really? Check your signal strengths for 99c and 103c. Do you have issues with all the MPEG4 HDs or just the ones that were duplicated in MPEG2? All the MPEG4/MPEG2 dups were on D11/99c, so look at those very closely.


Thanks will check - only the duplicated ones so I guess it is 99c


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

harsh said:


> I had an epiphany this morning. The correct term is probably transponder frequencies. Transponder alone doesn't get the job done.


Doesn't get what job done?


----------



## ChrisPC (Jun 17, 2003)

ub1934 said:


> So why did " D " put some of their Sonic Tap on 119 where you cannot get them with a SL 3 set up only a SL 5 ??


Some of the Sonic Tap channels are Latino. I think some of those were put at 119 with the Latino TV channels.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

SO, why was there a scroll last night on 640, MASN HD telling me "this channel will be affected ... tune to 99 for info"? Is that a mistake? It does not seem to be related to these at all.


----------



## ChrisPC (Jun 17, 2003)

ub1934 said:


> So why did " D " put some of their Sonic Tap on 119 where you cannot get them with a SL 3 set up only a SL 5 ??


Some of the Sonic Tap channels are Latino. I think some of those were put at 119 with the Latino TV channels.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

harsh said:


> I had an epiphany this morning. The correct term is probably transponder frequencies. Transponder alone doesn't get the job done.


OK, but "transponder alone" it's not "frequencies" exactly. It is a transponder.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

ub1934 said:


> So why did " D " put some of their Sonic Tap on 119 where you cannot get them with a SL 3 set up only a SL 5 ??


Dain Brammage?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

P Smith said:


> OK, but "transponder alone" it's not "frequencies" exactly. It is a transponder.


There are 54 physical transponders on DIRECTV7 and they are using most, if not all of them. Reuse allows them this with only 11 licensed frequencies.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

As you just clearly show us by yourself, frequencies are NOT transponders.


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

P Smith said:


> As you just clearly show us by yourself, frequencies are NOT transponders.


Sometimes all you have to do is be patient!


----------



## rahchgo (Feb 2, 2007)

My first HD receiver was a Hughes HTL-HD. It was replaced with an HR10-250
that I bought at Circuit City. The HTL-HD got moved to my office and has been used there ever since. Just found out that I can replace it for free with a new HD receiver, so I pulled the trigger. 

I did an upgrade to an HR20-700 in Jan '07 and moved my HR10-250 to the den.
I still have the HR10-250, but it's hooked to a SD TV, so I don't need to pay $99 to upgrade it. Since I used the HR10-250 in an upgrade already, they won't do any deals on upgrading it again.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

tkrandall said:


> On the surface it would seem to make sense for DirecTV and Dish to work out a deal by which DirectV gave Dish the 3 110w Transponders in exchange for 3 at 119w. DirecTV would need one less bird in the air and the transponder/channel mapping in the receivers could likely be changed in a flash. IDK, maybe there would be less in it for Dish than DirecTV. Seems like it would have made sense as a thing to do a long time ago if were to ever happen.
> 
> As to DirecTV's plan for 110w, they have been publicly mum. I suspect it will go to niche services like internationals as part of a 110w/119w serviced package of channels. Maybe they will put international HDs in MPEG-4 there?


IMHO, I don't see that happening. Why would Charlie make a deal like that in which Dish really doesn't gain anything and DirecTV doesn't need to dedicate a multimillion dollar satellite for only three transponders.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

P Smith said:


> As you just clearly show us by yourself, frequencies are NOT transponders.


But when you combine the words "transponder" and "frequency", you get what DIRECTV has 11 licenses for at 119W. Transponder alone isn't enough.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

Lee L said:


> SO, why was there a scroll last night on 640, MASN HD telling me "this channel will be affected ... tune to 99 for info"? Is that a mistake? It does not seem to be related to these at all.


Are you absolutely sure you saw that text crawl on 640?


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Satelliteracer said:


> Are you absolutely sure you saw that text crawl on 640?


Yes. I only saw it once, but it was on a 4th TV in our rec room during a ton of basketball games, so it may have run prior to me noticing.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

Avder said:


> So whats DirecTV going to do with all the bandwidth it frees up by turning the Mpeg2 HD channels off?


If it has spot beams or it gets a spot beam satellite hand-me-down, it could do some local stuff. Some DMA's, like Hartford-New Haven have locals on 119, this DMA had the PII, PIII, and now 5-lnb dishes.


----------



## Jotas (Jan 5, 2006)

Is D* still doing trade-ups for HR10-250s to newer models?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Bigg said:


> If it has spot beams or it gets a spot beam satellite hand-me-down, it could do some local stuff.


DIRECTV 5, where the HD channels are leaving, doesn't have spotbeams.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Jotas said:


> Is D* still doing trade-ups for HR10-250s to newer models?


Only DIRECTV can answer how they will treat you. I've seen evidence of some trades as recently as late last year, but these may have been customers who were eligible for a free HR2x anyway.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

harsh said:


> DIRECTV 5, where the HD channels are leaving, doesn't have spotbeams.


Ah ok. I still can't figure out why people still have HR10-250's. HD has been primarily in MPEG-4 for a long time now, even if there were a couple of channels in MPEG-2. Now if cable would just get rid of analog...


----------



## dengland (Aug 26, 2006)

Bigg said:


> Ah ok. I still can't figure out why people still have HR10-250's. HD has been primarily in MPEG-4 for a long time now, even if there were a couple of channels in MPEG-2. Now if cable would just get rid of analog...


For me it is OTA. 90+% of what I watch is the Networks. Picture looks better to me.


----------



## old7 (Dec 1, 2005)

Bigg said:


> Ah ok. I still can't figure out why people still have HR10-250's. HD has been primarily in MPEG-4 for a long time now, even if there were a couple of channels in MPEG-2. Now if cable would just get rid of analog...


They record HD OTA and the SD channels just fine. That frees up my 2 HR20-700s to record other HD channels. I still have a couple Sony and Hughes DirecTiVos that I use. They record SD channels without any problems and there are plenty of programs and/or channels that are still SD only.

I figure the DirecTiVos will die long before all the channels and programs are in HD.


----------



## mgrimse (Oct 5, 2006)

Just because I might be dense, after 4/1/10 the HR10-250 will not have HD at all? or just not on the channels in the 70s? Will channels like 501 still be in MPEG2?


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

mgrimse said:


> Just because I might be dense, after 4/1/10 the HR10-250 will not have HD at all? or just not on the channels in the 70s? Will channels like 501 still be in MPEG2?


The only MPEG2 HD is in the 70's. All the rest is MPEG4.


----------



## doctor j (Jun 14, 2006)

mgrimse said:


> Just because I might be dense, after 4/1/10 the HR10-250 will not have HD at all? or just not on the channels in the 70s? Will channels like 501 still be in MPEG2?


Only HD for the HR10-250 after 4/1 will be OTA.
Some want it for that.
I'm still using one as an SD recorder only connected to an old SD TV.

Doctor j


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

mgrimse said:


> Just because I might be dense, after 4/1/10 the HR10-250 will not have HD at all? or just not on the channels in the 70s? Will channels like 501 still be in MPEG2?


After the 70's are turned off on 4/1, there will be zero HD you can pick up with an HR10 from the satellite. It will still be usable as an HD OTA receiver. they've given everyone who has them literally 2-3 years to get off their butts and upgrade them if they want to use them for HD from the sats...


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

dengland said:


> For me it is OTA.  90+% of what I watch is the Networks. Picture looks better to me.





old7 said:


> They record HD OTA and the SD channels just fine. That frees up my 2 HR20-700s to record other HD channels. I still have a couple Sony and Hughes DirecTiVos that I use. They record SD channels without any problems and there are plenty of programs and/or channels that are still SD only.
> 
> I figure the DirecTiVos will die long before all the channels and programs are in HD.


I guess I could see that if they are both on the same TV, but to use one in another room would be pointless, as they can't MRV with the HR2x's.

I think that just highlights that they need to offer better HD upgrade options like Dish does with USB drive for offloading.

Personally, I want a SageTV setup to integrate the sources, then it could run on as large of a RAID array as you want.


----------



## Jotas (Jan 5, 2006)

Hell at least D* let's you remotely program recordings via mobile phone apps for the HR10-250. I'll miss those few lonely HD channels in the 70s. Great receiver just had short HD life span.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Jotas said:


> Hell at least D* let's you remotely program recordings via mobile phone apps for the HR10-250. I'll miss those few lonely HD channels in the 70s. Great receiver just had short HD life span.


Didnt it have like a 5 or 6 year life span?


----------



## looter (Oct 1, 2007)

Not much HD when it came out. I think I got mine around 2005 or 2006. Weren't they ~$1000 when they debuted.


----------



## oldcrooner (Feb 23, 2004)

I have an owned HR10-250 and an owned TS-160 that I don't use and need to clear out. Are there any suggestions as to how I can dispose of them other than EBay? I noticed this site has a sale/trade/etc. forum but it requires paid membership. I hate to just take them to some electronics recycling site.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

oldcrooner said:


> I have an owned HR10-250 and an owned TS-160 that I don't use and need to clear out. Are there any suggestions as to how I can dispose of them other than EBay? I noticed this site has a sale/trade/etc. forum but it requires paid membership. I hate to just take them to some electronics recycling site.


Craigslist.


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

HR10 beats a digital receiver from WalMart anyday. They are still selling them since the deadline for the digital transition.


----------

