# what will MPEG 4 do for me??



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

Up front this is not a bash E* post. I'm seriously perplexed.

I have had HD via STB and early D* then VOOM[sigh] and now E*s 811.

Now with a 62" MITs 1080P wobulator, as alway the SD is awfull, always has been going back to the SAM 50"DLP and the the 62'' MITs 720p. [The 720 croaked so MITS/SEARS replaced it with the 1080P :hurah:]{HOLY MOLEY HD PICTURE BAT MAN :eek2: }
Even the 40" Pany crt SD is lousey.

The only really great PQ in SD and HD [SD was like EDtv] was with VOOM's [sigh] MPEG 4 high bitrate. It was really a dark, dark day when VOOM's [sigh] lights went out.

What is E* going to do for me if I give them a 18 mo pre-nup. I want to lower my bill at least for the summer with one of the metals and since I rarely watch SD {I'll watch a HD repeat first} most of the T180 is IMHO crap But want MILT. Science, HIST, DIY, Hallmark etc.

I'm very lucky to get great OTA in a circle from HARTFORD,NEW HAVEN, WATERBURY CT, PROVIDENCE RI, BOSTON MA, ALBANY NY, SPRINGFIELD MA and occ NEW YORK CITY. with a couple of stacked yagies at 1050 ft elev. 
So I dont need E*s sullyed locals.

For this 18 mo unilateral marriage, other than qualifying for a "metal" and getting a so far troublesome vp211 and best I can tell no MPEG 4 yet which I have no idea how MPEG$ will improve my life or PQ anyhow. And I don't need another ESPN or a crappy VOOM.
I don't really hear any{ and I wouldn't believe "Chas" anyway}noise about the future 18 mo. and more HD. I already fell for the thinly vailed "sort of" promise from E* when VOOM [sigh] went dark. Well that was a PENN and TELLER.

I forgot the question Oh ya, some one tell me how or what this upgrade will do for me? Other than $49 poorer and a 2nd marriage. 
Oh and which 2 hd channels is dropped from Plat to Gold?

Bear!


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

bear paws said:


> Up front this is not a bash E* post. I'm seriously perplexed.
> 
> I have had HD via STB and early D* then VOOM[sigh] and now E*s 811.
> 
> ...


Bear,

MPEG4 will get you access to any and all NEWLY added HD channels. MPEG4 will also get you your Local CHANNELS in HD if you subscribe to local into local and Dish is providing them in HD. Eventually all HD will migrate to MPEG4 I would guess by the middle to the end of 2007 ALL HD will REQUIRE MPEG4 STB's.

The HD package is the same from Bronze to Platinum, except for the added Premium channels and the only way to get them is to subscribe to the Premium package (either HBO or SHO). The only reason both SHO and HBO are in the Platinum package is that the base package is "Americas Everything Package" which includes HBO and SHO. If and when Starz HD is added I would assume it would be available to any and all Starz subs, and in the Everything package.

In other words, if you had either Bronze or Gold HD packages you would get either HBO HD or SHO HD if you subscribed to either premium without the Platinum HD package.

John


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

bear paws said:


> Up front this is not a bash E* post. I'm seriously perplexed. ...


Yeah, sure. (I love 1:03AM posts.

I think you've answered your own question. An MPEG4 (or MPEG$) receiver would not seem of value to you at this time. Don't blame Dish.:eek2:


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

MPEG$ will do nothing for you....

But MPEG4 could allow them to offer more channels in the same bandwidth, or better PQ meaning increased bitrate and resolution for the same number of channels...will it do you any good today, not really, but it is the direction they need to go both from an increased PQ perspective, and the ability to add more channels without having to add another hundred sats up there......

I dont really want more channels either, but there are a few I'd like to see replaced, but we all have a list like that and our lists are all different....hence the necessity for more channels....


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

JohnL said:


> Bear,





JohnL said:


> > MPEG4 will get you access to any and all NEWLY added HD channels
> 
> 
> .
> ...


TNX Bear!


----------



## kmcnamara (Jan 30, 2004)

bear paws said:


> Oh and which 2 hd channels is dropped from Plat to Gold?
> 
> Bear!


I believe it's the 2 premium HD channels (HBOHD and SHOHD). Someone else correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## jerryez (Nov 15, 2002)

I would assume that eventually all SD channels, not just the hd channels with migrate to MPEG4. In this way Dish can offer more channels with less bandwidth.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

> SaltiDawg said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, sure. (I love 1:03AM posts.
> ...


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

kmcnamara said:


> I believe it's the 2 premium HD channels (HBOHD and SHOHD). Someone else correct me if I'm wrong.


SEE,SEE, I'm not the only one.:grin:

Bear!


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

jerryez said:


> I would assume that eventually all SD channels, not just the hd channels with migrate to MPEG4. In this way Dish can offer more channels with less bandwidth.


The problem is that "Chas" is promoting large screen tv,s [2 chats ago]but provideing small screen content.

It makes no differance if its MPEG-4 or MPEG gee-wiz if the compression and bitrate gives us crappy [read;awfull] SD PQ. and less than good HD.

10-4 ???
Bear!


----------



## IowaStateFan (Jan 11, 2006)

JohnL said:


> Eventually all HD will migrate to MPEG4 I would guess by the middle to the end of 2007 ALL HD will REQUIRE MPEG4 STB's.


I'm willing to bet you are wrong. The reason for MPEG4 is because they need the extra bandwidth for the HD LiLs. IMO, they won't switch any of the current MPEG2 stuff over until they really need the bandwidth and I don't think that will happen until they switch everything (HD and SD) over to MPEG4. In other words that will be years from now.

As to the OP's original question: I don't think MPEG4 will do anything for you in the near term. It doesn't affect the SD PQ in any way that I'm aware of. It's only being used for HD LiLs (which you get OTA with better PQ) and any new national HD programming. That's currently ESPN2, Universal HD (and maybe another 1 or two that I've forgotten) plus 5 or so new Voom channels. They have plans to add Food Network and HGTV. Your post seemed to indicate you didn't care about ESPN or Voom so I see no advantage to MPEG4 for you.


----------



## dsanbo (Nov 25, 2005)

"Ask not....what MPEG-4 will do for you....."


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

kmcnamara said:


> I believe it's the 2 premium HD channels (HBOHD and SHOHD). Someone else correct me if I'm wrong.


The OP somewhere in the 1:00AM post *did* ask whuich two *hd* chaneels were lost. Actually, the difference is the two Premium *Packages* (HBO & Showtime) which certainly do include those two HD Channels - and all the other SD feeds.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

Iowa.
TNX , I get the old HD pac with VOOM [sigh] at 61.5 and occ we will watch equator , Disc, occ Rave and TNT later in the year for NASCAR and watch the HBO and SHOW's. 
JUst because I get 44 OTA HD channels doesn't mean I watch OTA a lot but at least I don't pay for them just to sit there. I may not have said it right. What I ment was that I watch mostly HD both SAT and OTA, the more HD the better except espn and some of the ,IMO, wierd VOOMs

If I don't get the Platnum [25 HD + 180 SD + 4 Prem] I would loss the very and only DBS channels I do watch.

So it appeares that for a hand full of HD programming I have to keep shelling out for the BIG $$$ packages and pay for 180 cjhannel I never watch.

I think I will wait till after summer when E* has satisfied all the "Bleeding Edgers", fixed thier VP211/622 bugs and want to do something for me. right dsanbo Maybe FIOS will be on my street.

SaltiDawg. And don't call me OP :nono:  
You really have a problem with that 1:00 am thing don't you :lol:

Bear!


----------



## auburn2 (Sep 8, 2005)

bear paws said:


> The problem is that "Chas" is promoting large screen tv,s [2 chats ago]but provideing small screen content.
> 
> It makes no differance if its MPEG-4 or MPEG gee-wiz if the compression and bitrate gives us crappy [read;awfull] SD PQ. and less than good HD.
> 
> ...


You are wrong about that. MPEG 4 is a more efficient compression scheme than MPEG 2, PQ with MPEG 4 will beat PQ with MPEG 2 with the same bandwidth.

Obviously neither of them are as good as full bandwidth uncompressed video. But if Dish did that you would have about 4 channels total.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

auburn2 said:


> You are wrong about that. MPEG 4 is a more efficient compression scheme than MPEG 2, PQ with MPEG 4 will beat PQ with MPEG 2 with the same bandwidth.
> 
> Obviously neither of them are as good as full bandwidth uncompressed video. But if Dish did that you would have about 4 channels total.


SOOO,? then how come everybody is saying there is NOOO improvement in the PQ with E*s MPEG-4 in either SD or HD. Where am I wrong here. 
Because They compress the hell out of it and short us on bitrate to get more crappy channels than a few less really good ones. 
I repeat, {see P#8} I know the advantages of MPEG-4 , I've seen it first hand, it was great, on my TV sets from a 13'' to 62"DLP RP to 110" FP. But that DBS Co. went dark. I can't even say their name any more without a tear

Bear!


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

I think the point, currently only, is that there isn't any mpeg4 currently. there are mpeg2 streams with mpeg4 wrappers or markers so only the mpeg4 box will tune the signal, but the consensus seems to be the programming hasn't converted to mpeg4 yet (though voom claimed during the Jan Charlie Chat their new channels are mpeg4, so maybe those really are). over time as Dish gets a better handle on mpeg4, I think it is expected the PQ will either get better or stay the same but take up less bandwidth/harddrive space.


----------



## DougRuss (Oct 16, 2005)

> SaltiDawg. And don't call me OP
> You really have a problem with that 1:00 am thing don't you


Haha.... when I worked 2nd Shift( 3pm-11pm) It wasn't uncommon for me to unwind some after work and watch some Tv and maybe get on the Computer !

I know when I was younger,my parents wouldn't let me stay up past 10Pm


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

auburn2 said:


> You are wrong about that. MPEG 4 is a more efficient compression scheme than MPEG 2, PQ with MPEG 4 will beat PQ with MPEG 2 with the same bandwidth.


Yes, but the bandwidth will not be the same. E* is switching to MPEG4 in order to pick up bandwidth, ie add more channels. The MPEG4 channels will have a lower bitrate than their MPEG2 counterparts. The question is whether or not the bandwidth decrease will be more or less than the pickup in bitrate efficiency from MPEG4. Only time will tell, I suppose.


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

bear paws said:


> ...
> SaltiDawg. And don't call me OP :nono:
> You really have a problem with that 1:00 am thing don't you :lol:


You were and are the OP and that is appropriate when I referred to the original post.

Go back and do a FST on that post.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

[quoteSaltiDawgYou were and are the OP and that is appropriate when I referred to the original post.
:lol: Ah, GEE;

I guess maybe your too young {no offense} A long time ago there was a TV program called Mayberry RFD wih Andy Griffith And RON HOWARD [happy days Ron] who played a little boy ,about 6 yr old, called OPEE.

Fast forward to the movie AIRPLANE where [?brain blank?] says to his co-pilot "and don't call me Sherrly" in response to a question by the Co. "surely you can't be serious".

Got -it?? :hurah:

DougRoss I got used to working 18-20 hrs a day and now that I'm retired I still only sleep from 2am to 6:00. 
 Though actually, working is not the correct word in that for 42 yrs I never had a real JOB, I was self employed and had so much fun I could not call it work.:grin:


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

> Rogueone said:
> 
> 
> > I think the point, currently only, is that there isn't any mpeg4 currently.
> ...


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

bear paws said:


> ...
> 
> I guess maybe your too young {no offense} A long time ago there was a TV program called Mayberry RFD wih Andy Griffith And RON HOWARD [happy days Ron] who played a little boy ,about 6 yr old, called OPEE. ...


I take it you don't understanding what "OP" means on a Forum. You've also demonstrated a lack of understanding about much of the issues you are ranting about.

I doubt you could offend me by suggesting I'm too young. I attended Electronics Technician School in the Navy in 1960. Built my first color TV in 1967/68.

Best of luck to you.:hurah:


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

bear paws said:


> > any ways, There where [still is] 10s of thousands of the really excellent V*motorola MPEG-4 set tops already configured for Sat @ 61.5 that worked. THe manufacture already had the RND and the assembly process in place.
> 
> 
> The challenge for E* is the MPEG4 encoding, not the set top / decoding end of things. Dish has to be able to properly encode numerous channels in MPEG4 on the fly, which currently limits the full amount of compression realized. I suspect VOOM did not have this problem because they had a fairly limited set of programs in HD that were repeated with some frequency. The programs were surely all encoded offline at their leisure and held on the in-house servers. Quite a different situation vs receiving hundreds of channels live from providers and having to immediately encode and uplink.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

Satlidawg. Geez, Get over yourself. It was a joke. Of coarse I know what OP stands for.
Not that it means anything but at 11, I was KN1LYU:12, General K1LYU: 14, Xtra class K1LYU. and I built a radar from parts I got down on Canal ST. NYC at 15 when I was /2 for the winter of "58". SO what? WHO CARES?

If you don't like my "ranting " don't participate. Simple enough? But don't try to pick a fight and belittle because of your inability to fit into a social envior.

Geez!

Bear!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Does anyone really know what the old Voom was doing with MPEG4? Maybe they were pre-encoding as suggested rather than using a real-time encoder. Or maybe they weren't really using MPEG4 either.

But since they went out of business anyway... it is probably a moot point.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

Ltmunst. 

Not sure where to start. Voom had I think 34? HD channels plus almost most of the "good" SD,s that E* has. So they certainlly where not limited in program. and the 120 or so SD 's where on the fly real time so to speak 

All I was suggesting was that V* had in place,if nothing else, the foundation of Really good MPEG-4 to build on. Even Their "end" set worked like a fine watch right out of the box compared to the cranky mpeg2 811's or now the troublesome 211's.
The V* boxs even had coaxial audio along with tos-link and Diplexers on the back for sat and ant inputs for a single coax from the switch. You could run the ota to the switch outside or not.

My real big B--tch is the really poor Q of the SD's from E*. Like I said early on I rarely watch SD and only on the smaller and analog TV's. THe big Screens are just awfull and yet thats what Charly is kind of pushing by ramping up more HD. 
In most cases , as costs come down, People will buy a larger TV because we can sit so much closer with HD{ Thats why HD was developed, For the Japanese market and thier lack of space, we just made it bigger} and when they get it home they will blame the TV. 
I already have a few friends that I have to console about this. 

Bear!


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

HDme.
All the chatter on the VOOOM chat sites by people a lot smarter then me in this stuff at the time said it was pure and perfect MPEG-4 . THat was part of V*s promotion as being first in the industry and nobody I ever saw disputed it..

Bear!


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

bear paws said:


> ...
> If you don't like my "ranting " don't participate. Simple enough? But don't try to pick a fight and belittle because of your inability to fit into a social envior.
> ...


Err, it's not *me* with the anti-social behavior.

I learn a lot on this forum each and every day.


----------



## ieee1394 (Apr 7, 2006)

bear paws said:


> My real big B--tch is the really poor Q of the SD's from E*. Like I said early on I rarely watch SD and only on the smaller and analog TV's. THe big Screens are just awfull and yet thats what Charly is kind of pushing by ramping up more HD.


This is a timely post. I agree with bear paws in that I'm baffled about the worth of Dish these days, well, other than that it gives me _something_ to watch (no cable out here). When I first went satellite with the other guys, six years ago, the picture was so impressive. Likewise, when I switch to E* three years ago (because of more programming options) the picture was awesome. But in the past 12 months PQ has taken a serious nosedive. I noticed this first watching primetime on the locals and this was with a 21" tube. I knew this would be a problem then when I picked up a 37" 1080p LCD a couple of months ago. And it is.

SD is so poor (PQ-wise) on the big screen that I pretty much can't stand to watch it. And since HD is compressed too, I somehow doubt I'd not be disappointed by upgrading to Dish 1000 and the new DVR (which I want because the 510 is pretty useless without NBR since the networks keep on changing their schedules).

So the conclusion then, is that MPEG4 is only going to benefit anyone with respect with Dish being able to offer more channels across a limited number of transponders. PQ is not going to get better any time soon. So I'm stuck wondering why I bother to spend $60/mth just so my daughter can watch 3 or 4 kids shows. Heck, they don't broadcast PPV in widescreen anyhow so even that's a bust--we get much better value from Netflix (unlimited movies, in widescreen, AND upconverted to 1080i).

I'd say to the OP if you get your locals in HD maybe just dump E* and go for Netflix. I dunno, there's got to be something better than this. Since everyone is going to be upgrading their tv's over the next few years you gotta wonder how delivering more channels is a better strategy than delivering ever increasing PQ to go with all of the new hirez screens. I bet IPTV will wipe these guys out in the next decade.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

ieee1394 said:


> SD is so poor (PQ-wise) on the big screen that I pretty much can't stand to watch it. And since HD is compressed too, I somehow doubt I'd not be disappointed by upgrading to Dish 1000 and the new DVR (which I want because the 510 is pretty useless without NBR since the networks keep on changing their schedules).
> 
> I do have to say as compressed HD is, it isn't all that bad. But OTA does nox its sox off.
> 
> ...


----------



## ieee1394 (Apr 7, 2006)

bear paws said:


> I do have to say as compressed HD is, it isn't all that bad. But OTA does nox its sox off.


But that's the thing. DBS used to be sold on the fact that PQ was superior to that offered OTA or via cable. Now it's completely the other way around with OTA offering the best PQ. Neither DBS or cable can begin to compare because of the limited capacity available over those broadcast mediums. Satellite is now at the bottom of the list because in order to increase capacity you need more transponders, which means more satellites, which means (at the moment) more dishes or dishes that are going to increase in size. This is a slipperly slope I foresee for satellite. Their market will dwindle to serving only those who have no other alternatives (meaning no cable or broadband).


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

ieee1394 said:


> . Their market will dwindle to serving only those who have no other alternatives (meaning no cable or broadband).


IEEEEE; thats a intresting observation of the turn of events. Thats how it was 20 so years ago crappy OTA and spotty cable when PrimeStar lit up the sky. AND as you pointed out the SIG/PQ was ssssoooo much better than cable and OTA via sat that veiwers spent the extra $$$ to get a better PQ with SATS._ I did._

Unfortunatlya couple things happened since then. HDTV sets became a sort of reallity, opening the way to affordable?? larger screen size and Sat and compression techno got better? giveng DBS companies the ability to cram more pickles into the jar. [an anoligy I like to use to show why the picture comes out mushy} The 2 not being mutually compatible with each other if the DBS company wants to make more money unless they sacrifice some thing and since they can't stop large screens the chioce is more pickles and brag about more channels AND still keep up the OLD myth by slight of perception that its 100% digital as if that alone would give us a great PQ. :nono2:

Will it dwindle? I don't know. Most people I know say they get GREAT PQ be it on cable or sat but they have 21" to 30" square TV's. I'm the only odd one amongst my 25 or so close friends {close enough to talk about and see thier TVs} to have a large screen [really odd because I have 2] TV with 250 W 7.1 sound 1000w subs It still amazes me I used to watch Capt. MIdnight on a 13" b&w crt with tin foil wrapped around the rabbit ears thinking this is as good as it gets. I do have a few friends like that and they think HD is a passing fad and thier waiting. [Not sure for what][halography??]

I guess unlike them, when I upgrade its in feet and kilowatts not inches and jouls.

The complant I have is; thats where I'm willing to spend my $$ but as I do I keep getting less value for it, unlike as you say a few year ago for "a few dollars more"you could really see the improvment. Gets really annoying after a while and unlike my butcher friend I refered to earlier there isn't an another one around the corner. Fios broadband I hear is the answer??? but thats a ways from here yet.

Bear!


----------



## alfbinet (May 19, 2002)

bear paws said:


> > ????
> >
> > ] Not at all. I under stand the advantage to the SUBS that need local off the sat for what ever reason, be it fring/remote, blocked, or just don't want to or can't OTA.
> >
> ...


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

alfbinet said:


> bear paws said:
> 
> 
> > Don't you just love "wobulator". I have a Mitz 52628 which I have had for two weeks and love it. Have to agree with you on the SD. Not very good, but the HD is breathtaking.
> ...


----------



## ieee1394 (Apr 7, 2006)

I like to wait around and take great leaps when I upgrade my technology too. That's why the 1080 native res. LCD replaced an 8 year old 21" tube. Sure it meant I had to suffer with a tiny tv for a while longer but at least I didn't have to spend $20K to get the upgrade I wanted.  Plus, my family didn't upgrade to cable until 1974 and we didn't get color until 1976....so I'm preconditioned. :sure:



bear paws said:


> Do we think this might help SD ?


Nothing can help the SD signal from E*. It's lossy compression.

I'm gonna try and see if I can pull in some OTA HD channels. I don't expect much since I'm on the wrong side of a hill.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

ieee1394 said:


> Nothing can help the SD signal from E*. It's lossy compression.
> 
> I'm gonna try and see if I can pull in some OTA HD channels. I don't expect much since I'm on the wrong side of a hill.


I find it intresting that elsewhere on this forum a large number of poster say they have good SD PQ, even on large displeys, and others complain about it. 
What I noticed recently {couple weeks} is that some are getting a little better{even HD] or my eyes are adjusting??, Fox news seems better but WGN is still awfull. As if it goes thru multiple compressions.

Some of the 622 posters are saying the PQ has improved. Albait, this is a subjective matter. But as I said, I used to get terrific SD and HD from VOOM[sigh] and still do OTA. It may be just the 811 stb.

I have seen good signal levels on the "wrong" side of the hill in some intsallations. A good multi-bay bowty ant and a good LOW noise [not rad-shack] Pre-amp like Channel Master. There are some good sites on the net. Just got to search.

Bear!


----------



## koralis (Aug 10, 2005)

ieee1394 said:


> Nothing can help the SD signal from E*. It's lossy compression.
> 
> I'm gonna try and see if I can pull in some OTA HD channels. I don't expect much since I'm on the wrong side of a hill.


Not entirely true... there is further digital manipulation of the signal once that reduced signal enters the TV. By playing around with some of the hidden settings on my Samsung 1080p set I improved SD picture quality 80% (subjective obviously) for overly compressed signals.

Basically, when the SD is very compressed they seem to eliminate the number of potential colors within a block (and the block is larger.) The HDTV electronics have some processing functions that analyze that picture and lump large swaths of nearly-the-same-color into a single color to enhance contrast and "pop", getting rid of some grainyness. It works really well for good HD signals and DVDs and isn't so bad for low-compression SD signals either. But for bad SD, you end up seeing large areas of solid color that shift around that don't blend into other nearby similar colors, etc. In addition these functions really screw with shadow detail even in HD.

After playing around with the settings while viewing several bad SD recordings I'd made, I came up with settings that make SD look pretty decent even on a 56" screen. Blurrier than the HD equivilent, but not ugly. The Colbert Report on Comedy Central actually looks quite good and fairly sharp (probably less compression than the local networks.)

In any event, you might want to research how to get into the good controls for your Mitsubishi and tinker. Buying the service manual would actually document what all of the settings do... I was floundering for a while just trying things out.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

From what I have read over at AVS calibration site there is not a whole lot of Adj in the service mode on a Mits 62'' 1080P DLP Wobulator{ }I do usaully get a Service manual for what ever I have its that I just got this a few weeks ago a have not yet.

THe Mits 720P this replaced I did go into the service modes and found very litlle that helped. 
I was able to do more on the Sam 50"DLP I have [esp in the #2)GM1601 mode with the R-G-B offset and gain controls and the 12-13 sharpness for H&V ] and it helped some but as you say It can only do so much with a mushy picture.

Bear!


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

koralis said:


> I was floundering for a while just trying things out.


BTW> That is a Very bad thing to do.The potential to really screw up the calibration is huge. They make it ''secret" because most of use don't have the Expertise, experiance or the $20,000 + equipment to make the adjustments. The most important thing is always write down the values before adjusting anything. ISF calibrators do this.


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

LtMunst said:


> bear paws said:
> 
> 
> > The challenge for E* is the MPEG4 encoding, not the set top / decoding end of things. Dish has to be able to properly encode numerous channels in MPEG4 on the fly, which currently limits the full amount of compression realized. I suspect VOOM did not have this problem because they had a fairly limited set of programs in....
> ...


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

tnsprin said:


> LtMunst said:
> 
> 
> > Voom, when it was a satellite operator, never actually activated mpeg4.
> ...


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

bear paws said:


> tnsprin said:
> 
> 
> > Are you sure??? Every thing I read and heard about VOOM[sigh] on the Voom forums and Secrets of Home Theater and Audioholics reviews etc,etc indicated without any equivocation that it was indeed MPEG-4 and a high bit-rate too.
> ...


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

LtMunst said:


> bear paws said:
> 
> 
> > The challenge for E* is the MPEG4 encoding, not the set top / decoding end of things. Dish has to be able to properly encode numerous channels in MPEG4 on the fly, which currently limits the full amount of compression realized. I suspect VOOM did not have this problem because they had a fairly limited set of programs in HD that were repeated with some frequency. The programs were surely all encoded offline at their leisure and held on the in-house servers. Quite a different situation vs receiving hundreds of channels live from providers and having to immediately encode and uplink.
> ...


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

WHATCHEL1 Not my quote See my post #27 

Bear!



LtMunst said:


> bear paws said:
> 
> 
> > The challenge for E* is the MPEG4 encoding, not the set top / decoding end of things. Dish has to be able to properly encode numerous channels in MPEG4 on the fly, which currently limits the full amount of compression realized. I suspect VOOM did not have this problem because they had a fairly limited set of programs in HD that were repeated with some frequency. The programs were surely all encoded offline at their leisure and held on the in-house servers. Quite a different situation vs receiving hundreds of channels live from providers and having to immediately encode and uplink.


----------



## bear paws (Jan 11, 2006)

tnsprin said:


> bear paws said:
> 
> 
> > Yes I am sure. They were just getting ready to start MPEG4 when they started to sell things off. The Receiver (with a software upgrade) was suppose to be able to do mpeg4.
> ...


----------



## ieee1394 (Apr 7, 2006)

koralis said:


> ... there is further digital manipulation of the signal once that reduced signal enters the TV. By playing around with some of the hidden settings on my Samsung 1080p set I improved SD picture quality 80% (subjective obviously) for overly compressed signals.


You cannot restore what lossy compression has taken away. Any additional manipulation would just result in a guess and the end of result of that is, as you note, entirely subjective. I'm sure the vast majority of E* viewers wouldn't even know what to look for to identify poor PQ. Blocking and poor shadow detail are just two things. Colors also tend to suffer in the process.

As bear paws pointed out, you need to be extremely careful when altering settings in any diagnostic (hidden menu) mode. But no matter what you do there, you will never be able to restore the picture to its noncompressed quality.


----------



## ieee1394 (Apr 7, 2006)

Back tracking a bit more...



bear paws said:


> I find it intresting that elsewhere on this forum a large number of poster say they have good SD PQ, even on large displeys, and others complain about it.
> What I noticed recently {couple weeks} is that some are getting a little better{even HD] or my eyes are adjusting??, Fox news seems better but WGN is still awfull. As if it goes thru multiple compressions.


That's because E* seems to compress different channels at different levels. My assumption is that this is based on available capacity vs number of channels to be offered from a particular transponder. Your eyes are not fooling you. I find that all of our locals have been highly compressed. But Discovery looks pretty good. I don't know if E10 will help alleviate this problem or if its just going to get worse so we can get more ESPN and other sports channels.



bear paws said:


> Some of the 622 posters are saying the PQ has improved. Albait, this is a subjective matter. But as I said, I used to get terrific SD and HD from VOOM[sigh] and still do OTA. It may be just the 811 stb.


This must be subjective for the most part. The 622 may very well have more processing power and better software, but there's only so much magic it can perform on a poor source. OTA has no requirement for compression because each transmitter has exclusive use of the bandwidth for its own signals. Obviously, your local CBS affiliate is not going to offer NBC capacity on its signal. But, I believe they could offer multiple streams and the more they do that, the less you have for a full stream HD signal.


----------

