# Dish Vs DirectTv vs Cable PICTURE QUALITY



## DomceDXM1

Hey Everyone,

I currently have cable, but am looking at other options. The only thing I am concerned about is picture quality. I need to know if Dish and DirectTV have equal picture quality to cable or not. Ideally i would like to get Dish due to the hopper feature. Commercials ruin TV for me... But not if the quality is worse than what I have now. 

I know that dish used to downsample the video on their service in the past. Is this still the case? Has anyone viewed dish vs DTV vs cable side by side and compared them?

Thanks in advance for any help you may provide.


----------



## west99999

Both Dish and DirecTV in almost every case are going to have better quality than cable. Dish and DirecTV are very close so much so the human eye usually cant tell. But I think dish does still down res their HD and DTV doesnt I think.


----------



## damondlt

I had dish for 3 years, From 2007-2010 
Directv I've had from 1996-1999 ,2004-2010, 2012-present
I had Blue ridge Cable from 2010-2012

IMO, Cable is by far the worst HD, But very good SD
Dish and Directv are very close when I had them, But I still had to give Directv the edge, there seems like some channels were better PQ then dish, where as Dish seemed the same across the board and none any better then Directv. 


I would not choose one or the other based on PQ. Its too close, and one would not know a difference without having them side by side, and even then it wasn't all the time.

Dish I liked, I loved the VIPs, and if the company was ran to where I didn't feel cheated every other day. It might have worked out.
But they are missing things I like and they seem to continue to drop things I like.
Just my opinion.

I would tell you look at the channel line ups and see what suits your needs, but who knows with Dish whats on the chopping block.


----------



## damondlt

Fios Has the best HD PQ I've ever seen from a provider. But I hate their motorola boxes.


----------



## DomceDXM1

Thank you for all of your responses. I failed to mention that I am a cablevision subscriber (Not verizon FIOS). Does anyone know how Dish and DTV compare to this specific cable company? (i did not realize that diff cable companies had different qualit PQ).

Also, Only the HD signal matters to me. I have a big HDTV and our family never watches SD anymore.


----------



## sigma1914

DomceDXM1 said:


> Thank you for all of your responses. I failed to mention that I am a cablevision subscriber (Not verizon FIOS). Does anyone know how Dish and DTV compare to this specific cable company? (i did not realize that diff cable companies had different qualit PQ).


I notice you're in NY...If NY sports matter to, then don't get Disy.


----------



## DomceDXM1

My family actually only watches olympic games, so sports are not an issue. Looking at which channels were available, either DTV or Dish would be suitable. Only reason why I would lean toward Dish (if HD quality is up to par) is because of hopper feature.


----------



## damondlt

DomceDXM1 said:


> My family actually only watches olympic games, so sports are not an issue. Looking at which channels were available, either DTV or Dish would be suitable. Only reason why I would lean toward Dish (if HD quality is up to par) is because of hopper feature.


 Well the Hopper feature is in a Lawsuit, So who knows what will happen there, maybe nothing, maybe something. Just keep that in mind.


----------



## sigma1914

DomceDXM1 said:


> My family actually only watches olympic games, so sports are not an issue. Looking at which channels were available, either DTV or Dish would be suitable. Only reason why I would lean toward Dish (if HD quality is up to par) is because of hopper feature.


Just know the limitations of the Hopper...it's a cool product. You want to make sure a service matches your viewing habits in your family...like how many people watching tv and when.


----------



## DomceDXM1

That is good to know. I will definately take that into account. I am still hoping someone can vouch for Dish/ DTV vs Cablevision picture quality.

Also, does bad weather interfere with your service? (either DTV or Dish)?


----------



## damondlt

Thunderstorms, Yes 
Heavy wet snow, Yes,
Ice, yes


Thunderstorms, the HD goes first, the SD which comes of a KU satellite for Directv most times is ok, But sometimes its out too just depends how high the cloud tops are. Mostly at the begining of a storm when the clouds are just about on your doorstep.

Dish when I had the 1000.4 Dish was just about the same, except it went out after the Directv one and came back after Directv, The reason Dish faces Southeast and Directv Southwest. So the same IMO

Now snow and Ice, Dish by far worse in my location. 
Reason. The Dishnetwork 1000.4 was set at 42 degree elevation, so it was more like a snow catcher.

Directv slimline 36 degree Snow mostly falls off. 

If your in the northeast, put your dish where it can be reached, or put a heater on it.


----------



## Redbullsnation

should put telco in between, have uverse and the picture quality is superb, havent tried cable/sat yet, but I can tell you ATT is nice!!


----------



## steveT

I have the exact same question on PQ between Dish and Direct. Definitely appreciate all inputs, especially from folks with 60" screens or larger, where small differences definitely can be magnified. I'm a stickler for max picture quality, and am very interested in this question before switching.

This is my first ever post on a DirectTV forum. Been with Dish for 15 years, but will be switching to DirectTV on July 5th, if Dish's AMC dispute isn't resolved by then (Breaking Bad premiers on July 15...)


----------



## sigma1914

Redbullsnation said:


> should put telco in between, have uverse and the picture quality is superb, havent tried cable/sat yet, but I can tell you ATT is nice!!


Uverse is the worst PQ I've ever seen.


----------



## sigma1914

steveT said:


> I have the exact same question on PQ between Dish and Direct. Definitely appreciate all inputs, especially from folks with 60" screens or larger, where small differences definitely can be magnified. I'm a stickler for max picture quality, and am very interested in this question before switching.
> 
> This is my first ever post on a DirectTV forum. Been with Dish for 15 years, but will be switching to DirectTV on July 5th, if Dish's AMC dispute isn't resolved by then (Breaking Bad premiers on July 15...)


You will either notice no difference or that DirecTV is better...you will rarely find DirecTV to be worse.


----------



## MysteryMan

steveT said:


> I have the exact same question on PQ between Dish and Direct. Definitely appreciate all inputs, especially from folks with 60" screens or larger, where small differences definitely can be magnified. I'm a stickler for max picture quality, and am very interested in this question before switching.
> 
> This is my first ever post on a DirectTV forum. Been with Dish for 15 years, but will be switching to DirectTV on July 5th, if Dish's AMC dispute isn't resolved by then (Breaking Bad premiers on July 15...)


I have a Sony XBR-65HX929 in my home theater room. You won't be disappointed with DirecTV's picture quality if your using 60" screen or larger.


----------



## goinsleeper

Cable providers are limited on the physical hardware of wires and trunks. Because of this, they are able to offer less HD channels and may have some HD channels in 720p when they can get away with it.

Because satelite companies can send their programming through the air, they have less physical limitations, though the signal can then be disrupted from storms. I had a SEVERE thunderstorm about 2 days ago and I lost my Directv service for about 5 minutes. Only when the lightning was all around me did I lose picture, at which time I just watched something I had recorded on the DVR.

Technically fiber optics are becoming borderline limitless on bandwidth though FiOs and Uverse haven't quite got it right yet, especially since there is still a trunk involved.

Also 1080p can seem very similar on all providers (perhaps not enough difference to matter) based on the tv you watch. A 60hz tv is not going to show as many imperfections as 120hz or 240hz. 

I believe it will all come down to the setup you are looking for. If you only need 3 or 6 reliant tuners and you have no use for sports, Dish is probably the way to go. If you want the same with unreliant tuners, and could use some sports in the future, go with Directv.

Note: I use 'reliant' loosely to mean relying on availability to a central device. Joey's rely on availability of the Hopper they are connected to(in the event a program is recorded on a Hopper the Joey is not connected to or a Joey is connected to a Hopper with no free tuners). The 'unreliant' for Directv being that all receivers have their own tuner.


----------



## damondlt

steveT said:


> I have the exact same question on PQ between Dish and Direct. Definitely appreciate all inputs, especially from folks with 60" screens or larger, where small differences definitely can be magnified. I'm a stickler for max picture quality, and am very interested in this question before switching.
> 
> This is my first ever post on a DirectTV forum. Been with Dish for 15 years, but will be switching to DirectTV on July 5th, if Dish's AMC dispute isn't resolved by then (Breaking Bad premiers on July 15...)


 My experience is with 55 inch tv's. If you think dish is good with a 60" tv , then directv will be no problem for you.

As I said many times I wouldn't bother to base PQ on deciding your provider between Dish and Directv


----------



## Inkosaurus

damondlt said:


> My experience is with 55 inch tv's. If you think dish is good with a 60" tv , then directv will be no problem for you.
> 
> As I said many times I wouldn't bother to base PQ on deciding your provider between Dish and Directv


Agreed. There both good and you cant really go wrong with either one when it comes to PQ.


----------



## mirak

sigma1914 said:


> Uverse is the worst PQ I've ever seen.


Agreed. Uverse HD picture quality is significantly _worse_ than the cable in my area. The compression artifacts are terrible. Watch a football game and the field looks it is made of of green lego blocks. Just Google "Uverse Picture Quality" to see all the complaints. I switched back to cable after a few months.

FIOS is supposed to be the best, even better than satellite, but it is not available in my area.


----------



## jordanhallmann

mirak said:


> Agreed. Uverse HD picture quality is significantly _worse_ than the cable in my area. The compression artifacts are terrible. Watch a football game and the field looks it is made of of green lego blocks. Just Google "Uverse Picture Quality" to see all the complaints. I switched back to cable after a few months.
> 
> FIOS is supposed to be the best, even better than satellite, but it is not available in my area.


Exactly. They just got Uverse in my area and I went to a friends house and saw that he had Uverse. The worst PQ I have ever seen. I would have taken TWC back.

When I was in New York, I had Fios for about 3 months. It is the best service you can get. Now that I have DirecTV, Fios definitely has a better PQ than Direct.


----------



## RasputinAXP

DomceDXM1 said:


> That is good to know. I will definately take that into account. I am still hoping someone can vouch for Dish/ DTV vs Cablevision picture quality.
> 
> Also, does bad weather interfere with your service? (either DTV or Dish)?


My in-laws have Cablevision in Ocean County, NJ.

Their PQ is so bad as to be noticeable to my wife. And then she actually commented on it. That says a lot.

To me it's positively nauseating that they call their macroblocked channels HD.


----------



## Canyouhearme987

I had Comcast here in Atlanta for a few years before I made the switch to Directv 2 years ago. The picture quality is a lot better in both HD and SD.


----------



## Davenlr

Canyouhearme987 said:


> I had Comcast here in Atlanta for a few years before I made the switch to Directv 2 years ago. The picture quality is a lot better in both HD and SD.


You must have had one crappy Comcast system if their SD was worse than DirecTv. Im guessing that was when they still had 98 analog channels hogging space. Its improved dramatically since they got rid of analog channels here.


----------



## mirak

I just got Time Warner Cable hooked up in the KC area. So far, I've had Surewest (cable), Uverse, back to Surewest, and now over to TWC.

TWC has the best looking HD of the three. I have not compared to satellite, but the HD sure looks nice on my 64" Samsung d7000 plasma.

I would say TWC is lightly better than Surewest, and both cable providers are a LOT better than Uverse. There's a lot to like about Uverse, but anybody who says Uverse has great HD either needs to get their eyes checked or just doesn't know what they're missing.

TWC uses Cisco DVRs. They're fairly basic. The menu is not pretty, and it is a little slow to respond, but it is intuitive and easy to use.

I'm still on the fence about switching to DirecTV. Over the 2-year contract, the monthly average would be about $15 cheaper than TWC (and, while I'm not locked into a contract with TWC, my price is only locked for 1 year). Also, it appears that my TWC package actually offers _more_ HD channels than DirecTV.

I think the DirecTV HR34 would be nicer than TWC's Cisco boxes, but I can't say for sure. I hear DirecTV will have better HD, but again, I can't say for sure.


----------



## Ira Lacher

mirak said:


> Also, it appears that my TWC package actually offers _more_ HD channels than DirecTV.


Just about every provider offers more HD channels than DirecTV.


----------



## dpeters11

Ira Lacher said:


> Just about every provider offers more HD channels than DirecTV.


With cable, that is very dependent on market.


----------



## RAD

I happened to look at a Dish uplink report from today and see that they are now putting 9 HD channels on a transponder on the western arc. This was for Ciel-2 and just looked at TP 17 and 18. 

TP 17 looks like it has Lifetime, Food, HGTV, A&E, MTV, Discovery, TLC, TWC and MGM while TP18 has Comedy, FX, TBS, SPike, Nick, Toon, OWN, CNN and Retro.

Is 9 HD channels on a TP new or have they been doing it for awhile now? If new how does the PQ look on those channels, just curious?


----------



## VolFanLC

For what it is worth, I had my 2 year old Panasonic VT25 65" tv professionally calibrated earlier this week and the technician and I got to talking and he saw that I had a Dish Network box so he asked how I liked it. I said it had been fine since I got it two years ago. His reply was that Dish's PQ is not nearly as good as DirecTV's currently (his exact statement was "Dish sucks" I think) and that is coming from a guy that has calibrated TVs for the last 14 years. He said that Dish has fallen behind as far as upgrading certain things that enhance PQ so DirecTV is the best if you truly want the best PQ out there. Just my two cents.


----------



## HarryD

I had DirecTV from 1997-1999, DISH from 1999-2001, then back to DirecTV until 2011. I have now been now on RCN cable (Lehigh Valley). Their HD channels are excellent.. and the PQ is 90% of DirecTV... I did this to save some $$. Used to have DirecTV, Verizon phone and RCN Internet... all costing around $200 per mo... Going with RCN bundle deal saves me around $60 a month. I really hated leaving DirecTV... but $$ is $$.
And I get Showtime and Stars and Fox Soccer w/o spending anything extra...


----------



## jal

I've had TWC since June 2011. Before that, I had Directv from 2006-2011. I had Dish between 97 and 2006. My impression is that hands down, TWC has a far superior SD picture compared to either satellite provider. The HD on TWC is excellent, and I have more HD channels than I had with Directv. I suppose, in the comparision to cable, it really depends on where you live and how updated your cable system may be. If Directv pq on HD is better, it's very difficult to tell, and I make this statement using a 60" Samsung LED.

With TWC, I don't believe I've had any outages on the TV portion, but have had issues with internet dropping. I use Tivo Premieres. Without them, I'd be frustrated with the TWC Cisco boxes.


----------



## shadough

In terms of PQ w/ Dish (allthough I have a Directv box, its standard def so can't really compare), I can't really see a difference between Dish's HD locals when compared to the OTA broadcast FROM the locals, on my 42inch Sony w/ built-in digital tuner. It looks the same, course can't really compare ESPN since ESPN isnt an OTA channel


----------



## Hoosier205

Cable differs by location and provider. DirecTV obviously beats Dish Network in HD PQ. Dish Network intentionally limits their HD PQ and customers have chosen to ignore it.


----------



## RasputinAXP

*eyeroll*


----------



## Dude111

west99999 said:


> Both Dish and DirecTV in almost every case are going to have better quality than cable.


I can tell you this from MY EXPERIENCE!

DirecTV looks MUCH BETTER than the cable we have!!!! (OVER COMPRESSED GARBAGE)

I dont know how Dish looks but i gather it looks like DTV does..


----------



## cheetahz

PQ with Dish and Direct TV pretty much the same. Dish better are some channels Direct on others. Off Air HD is much better then either. Off air looks sharp, with vibrant colors and much more crisp. Then it's not compressed nearly as much. Difference of having your sharpness control set on TV soft to sharp somewhat like a film on screen. I have a 120 inch screen and Dish up converter for SD much better then Direct TV. This becomes important if you watch any OTA channels that are SD like sub channels 47-1 47-2 etc. Sub channels are always SD but then most of the time you don't get those channels on satellite or cable. We have Fibernet cable here which I believe looks as good if not a tad better then Direct TV or Dish but very expensive when you have to have additional HD boxes. OTA still trumps all if you are in area you can receive from antenna. Again this is on a 120 inch screen so on a 60 inch probably never see the difference except for OTA.


----------



## electrowiz64

My experience in terms of picture quality:

Google Fiber (fiber) = if they're in you're area, get it. If they have the throughput, they should have enough for TV too

Verizon FiOS (fiber) = I know for CERTAINTY this is the way to go (if they're in your area) I heard from a reliable source that they do the LEAST amount of compression to the video. Unfortunately there still is compression due to the networks but god bless fios. My uncle moved from Cablevision here in Sayreville, NJ to FIOS in staten island, NY and comparing the difference with a 2007 Samsung 30 inch 720P and a 2011 Samsung 60 inch 1080P with motionblur. immediately, you saw the difference. The lines were so beautifully sharp. Even my uncle with low vision noticed the difference. Even on the 720P TV you saw the difference. GET IT GET IT GET IT

DirecTV (satellite) = from word of mouth, this is the best if you can't get either of the two. They're available everywhere and has the best compression to not compromise quality. When I graduate college, this is the service I will get while I live at home for a few years

Dish network (satellite) = as you guys stated. I have friends who have this service and although his TVs are crap, the service looks really good. better than cable 4sure

Cable (cable) = AVOID, I have been a cablevision subscriber for years and am frustrated to see pixelation in my TV to this day. avoid

AT&T UVERSE (IPTV DSL) = Not only do you get the slowest speed possible, the equipment comes in through a phone cable, A PHONE CABLE, so this service is pretty much TV over the internet delivered through DSL internet, of course there will be compression avoid.

A little clarification over resolutions:
anything with i stands for interlaced and delivers at 30 frames per second
anything with p stands for progressive and delivers at 60 frames per second
The difference is subtle since movies are actually made in 24 frames per second
TV services & networks WILL NOT broadcast in 1080P because that's double the bandwidth of 1080i. Picture quality's the same, it just wont look as buttery smooth. Idk fully about directv but i heard the 1080P content is delivered through on demand so more to pay


----------



## ground_pounder

satellite looks better and sounds better over any cable system that I have seen. the only times I had problems with loosing service was when it rained so hard that I could not see where I was going. never had any problems in the winters back east. I guess that has something to do with how the dish is pointed as well I hear a lot of horror stories with people loosing service in the winter months


----------



## mexican-bum

electrowiz64 said:


> Verizon FiOS (fiber) = I know for CERTAINTY this is the way to go (if they're in your area) I heard from a reliable source that they do the LEAST amount of compression to the video. Unfortunately there still is compression due to the networks but god bless fios. My uncle moved from Cablevision here in Sayreville, NJ to FIOS in staten island, NY and comparing the difference with a 2007 Samsung 30 inch 720P and a 2011 Samsung 60 inch 1080P with motionblur. immediately, you saw the difference. The lines were so beautifully sharp. Even my uncle with low vision noticed the difference. Even on the 720P TV you saw the difference. GET IT GET IT GET IT


While definitely true a few years ago, according to post here and at AVS forum Fios has really started compressing the picture more the past year due to bandwidth limitations. Some people have both Directv and Fios, most recent post indicate that Directv is now slightly better.


----------

