# 2014 HD



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

i wanted to ask you does fox movies and movieplex and some of the encore channels have HD feeds and will dish will pick them up in HD,

Thanks

Allen


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

i am a huge jeff gordon fan it would be nice to watch nascar on fox sports 2 in HD.also with barrett jackson it would be nice to watch that in HD also,do you think fox sports 2 will go hd this year and when will it happen.

Allen


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

here is a list of HD channels that i want so bad and will dish pick these up

ABCFamily,africa channel,audience network,bbc world news,blue highways tv,BYUTV,CSpan 1-3,CatholicTV,Chiller,CNN International,Disney,DisneyXD,Disney Junior,ESPNU,Fox Sports 2,EWTN,FashionTV,Fearnet,Funimation Channel,FX Movie Channel,MoviePlex,HavocTV,HSN,ION East,JewerlyTV,Justice Central,Military Channel,MTV2,NHKWorldTV,NUVO,Outdoor Channel,Ovation,Oxygen,PBS Kids Spout,Pentagon Channel,PIVOT,QVC,sHOPHD,ShortsHD,Smithsonian Channel,sWRV,TBN,TVGN,TVone,UP,USN,WealthTV,World Fishing Network,

Thanks

Allen Culver
Streator,Illinois


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

ow about adding this channel from chicago it is called The U Too WCIU channel 26.2/48.1HD it is owned by weigel broadcasting i talked to them on the phone and they are willing to give you the channel for free.and they are broadcasting in HD here is the website



> http://www.theutoo.com/


Thanks

Allen Culver


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

bluegras said:


> here is a list of HD channels that i want so bad and will dish pick these up
> <snip>


Would you personally watch the programming on ALL of these channels, many of which target very different audiences, or are you just listing every channel you know of not carried by Dish in HD yet?

Bandwidth isn't unlimited, Dish also has the additional limitation of needing to add any new national HD channels to both arcs. I doubt you would ever see ALL of them unless Dish goes all MPEG4 on the Western Arc along with overly compressing everything so they can fit them all in. It will be at least a few years before they do that since they would need to swap out every SD receiver along with a truck roll to every western arc house that is still limited to a Dish 500 or older dish.


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

here is a message that i got from world fishing network today in a email to them

Allen:

Thanks for your message – great questions. I’d like to see World Fishing Network in HD on DISH as well (admittedly I’m an HD snob). Our affiliate team did recently query DISH on that very subject and they indicated there is nothing imminent on either the HD or HD-VOD front. DISH is in the process of launching another bird into orbit in the near future, which will expand their available bandwidth to add additional HD content should they choose to do so. Please be aware that our HD signal is available to all cable, satellite and telecommunications distributors at no additional cost to them – we offer both our HD and SD feeds at the same cost. In fact, some providers (AT&T U-verse, for example) take only our HD signal. In the meantime, I would ask that you call DISH and let them know you would like to see World Fishing Network in HD. We’ll keep working on it as well.

Thanks for watching!

Sincerely,

World Fishing Network

they also just told me that they have a huge VOD selection to choose from also.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

I keep after DISH as much as I dare about WFN HD.


----------



## fmcomputer (Oct 14, 2006)

I "am in northeast Ohio and I would like my Locals transferred from Western Arc to Eastern Arc.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

fmcomputer said:


> I "am in northeast Ohio and I would like my Locals transferred from Western Arc to Eastern Arc.


What does that have to do with adding HD channels to the DISH lineup?


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

KyL416 said:


> Would you personally watch the programming on ALL of these channels, many of which target very different audiences, or are you just listing every channel you know of not carried by Dish in HD yet?
> 
> Bandwidth isn't unlimited, Dish also has the additional limitation of needing to add any new national HD channels to both arcs. I doubt you would ever see ALL of them unless Dish goes all MPEG4 on the Western Arc along with overly compressing everything so they can fit them all in. It will be at least a few years before they do that since they would need to swap out every SD receiver along with a truck roll to every western arc house that is still limited to a Dish 500 or older dish.
> 
> there won't be all HD channels for a decade or more.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

KyL416 said:


> Bandwidth isn't unlimited, Dish also has the additional limitation of needing to add any new national HD channels to both arcs. I doubt you would ever see ALL of them unless Dish goes all MPEG4 on the Western Arc along with overly compressing everything so they can fit them all in. It will be at least a few years before they do that since they would need to swap out every SD receiver along with a truck roll to every western arc house that is still limited to a Dish 500 or older dish.


Western Arc is certainly the limiter when it comes to adding new HD. DISH currently has 9 available slots on Western Arc for new HD (without removing channels). Converting the SD channels to MPEG4 will clear up a lot of space ... but changing out the receivers is expensive. DISH would not need to change the dishes for SD customers (unless they were upgraded to HD) but getting all the non 8PSK/MPEG4 receivers off the system will take time and money. (Moving MPEG2 to 8PSK transponders will help but at this point they might as well install MPEG4 receivers for the full benefit.)

As long as DISH charges extra for HD there will be SD customers ... and DISH changed their new customer offer to be Free HD for two years (instead of for life) earlier this month. It seems that they are getting further away from the "HD or SD it all costs the same" approach.

Eastern Arc has plenty of space ... no limiting factor there. But to uplink a national channel DISH needs to be able to put channels on Western Arc.


----------



## zippyfrog (Jul 14, 2010)

James Long said:


> Western Arc is certainly the limiter when it comes to adding new HD. DISH currently has 9 available slots on Western Arc for new HD (without removing channels). Converting the SD channels to MPEG4 will clear up a lot of space ... but changing out the receivers is expensive. DISH would not need to change the dishes for SD customers (unless they were upgraded to HD) but getting all the non 8PSK/MPEG4 receivers off the system will take time and money. (Moving MPEG2 to 8PSK transponders will help but at this point they might as well install MPEG4 receivers for the full benefit.)


So if Dish makes a deal with Disney and we get all their HD channels, we have basically maxed out Western Arc it seems. ESPN-U, ESPN News, Disney Channel, Disney XD, Disney Junior, ABC Family, Fusion Channel are 7 HD channels.

If Western Arc were to be converted to 8PSK but not MPEG4, how much space would that yield? Would it be enough, in your estimation, to add RSN's full time in HD?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

zippyfrog said:


> If Western Arc were to be converted to 8PSK but not MPEG4, how much space would that yield? Would it be enough, in your estimation, to add RSN's full time in HD?


If 26 of the 28 QPSK transponders on WA were converted to 8PSK but the channels remained MPEG2 it would free up approximately 8 transponders ... room for up to 72 HD channels.

Full time RSNs could be done with only a few more channels than are in use now ... but there would be limitations. Currently DISH has 24 channels for part time RSNs. Convert them all to full time and DISH would need a few more channels to cover the rest of the RSNs currently uplinked and any alternates. If I count correctly DISH has 29 RSNs and 15 alternates? (Not counting Big Ten which is DISH's only full time RSN.) For full time RSNs DISH would need at least 20 more channels (2.5 transponders).


----------



## zippyfrog (Jul 14, 2010)

James Long said:


> If 26 of the 28 QPSK transponders on WA were converted to 8PSK but the channels remained MPEG2 it would free up approximately 8 transponders ... room for up to 72 HD channels.
> 
> Full time RSNs could be done with only a few more channels than are in use now ... but there would be limitations. Currently DISH has 24 channels for part time RSNs. Convert them all to full time and DISH would need a few more channels to cover the rest of the RSNs currently uplinked and any alternates. If I count correctly DISH has 29 RSNs and 15 alternates? (Not counting Big Ten which is DISH's only full time RSN.) For full time RSNs DISH would need at least 20 more channels (2.5 transponders).


Thank you for that information. Freeing up 8 transponders is an awful lot - seems like Dish would have no problem putting up full time HD RSN's as well as any other HD channels they would want to add. I know it has been said that Eastern Arc has a lot more space, but does it have room for 72 HD channels?


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

zippyfrog said:


> So if Dish makes a deal with Disney and we get all their HD channels, we have basically maxed out Western Arc it seems. ESPN-U, ESPN News, Disney Channel, Disney XD, Disney Junior, ABC Family, Fusion Channel are 7 HD channels.


That's another reason I think Dish is perhaps dragging the Disney negotiations out. They probably want these HD channels and want to do the deal... but if it maxes them out from being able to add any other HD channels short-term... then it might prevent them from the next deal that comes up.

Say... what happens when FOX is up and they want to add other HD feeds that Dish doesn't have right now (like Fox Sports 2)? There would be no way to make that deal after the Disney deal if they have filled up the bandwidth on western arc.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

zippyfrog said:


> Thank you for that information. Freeing up 8 transponders is an awful lot - seems like Dish would have no problem putting up full time HD RSN's as well as any other HD channels they would want to add. I know it has been said that Eastern Arc has a lot more space, but does it have room for 72 HD channels?


There are 9 transponders that are vacant or used for test channels on 61.5 ... so yes, there is room on the Eastern Arc.

The big challenge is to get Western Arc space cleared ... and getting SD customers over to 8PSK equipment is a non-trivial investment.


----------



## zippyfrog (Jul 14, 2010)

James Long said:


> There are 9 transponders that are vacant or used for test channels on 61.5 ... so yes, there is room on the Eastern Arc.
> 
> The big challenge is to get Western Arc space cleared ... and getting SD customers over to 8PSK equipment is a non-trivial investment.


If Dish were to make the jump to 8PSK MPEG2 and open up space for approx 72 HD channels on Western Arc, they really could blow Directv out of the water in terms of the number of HD channels they offer. They would easily round out RSN's in HD full time, plus they could add all the rest of the premiums that they don't have in HD and they would have space for the other channels they currently offered but aren't in HD, such as Military Channel or Universal Sports. (pending a transmission agreement for those channels)

James - if Dish were to make Western Arc 8PSK MPEG 4, approx. how many more additional HD channels could be added? If there are 9 transponders vacant on Eastern Arc, it would seem that if Western Arc were MPEG 4, there would be a lot more space on WA than EA.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

zippyfrog said:


> James - if Dish were to make Western Arc 8PSK MPEG 4, approx. how many more additional HD channels could be added? If there are 9 transponders vacant on Eastern Arc, it would seem that if Western Arc were MPEG 4, there would be a lot more space on WA than EA.


8PSK MPEG4 on WA instead of 8PSK MPEG2 would tip the tables to where EA would have the bandwidth crunch ... unless some WA transponders were taken away to be used as spots.

But the conversion of SD customers to 8PSK is far enough away that it will be more of DISH catching up to where DirecTV is today. Not really getting ahead. Just keeping up (at best).


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

zippyfrog said:


> If Dish were to make the jump to 8PSK MPEG2 and open up space for approx 72 HD channels on Western Arc, they really could blow Directv out of the water in terms of the number of HD channels they offer. They would easily round out RSN's in HD full time, plus they could add all the rest of the premiums that they don't have in HD and they would have space for the other channels they currently offered but aren't in HD, such as Military Channel or Universal Sports. (pending a transmission agreement for those channels)
> 
> James - if Dish were to make Western Arc 8PSK MPEG 4, approx. how many more additional HD channels could be added? If there are 9 transponders vacant on Eastern Arc, it would seem that if Western Arc were MPEG 4, there would be a lot more space on WA than EA.


You are mentioning only one or two channels DIRECTV doesn't have.

Reality is no one is blowing anyone out of the water with the number if Hi Definition channels they carry anymore.

Plus don't forget DirecTV's launching another satellite this year that all expand their capacity as well again another one next year.

I don't see the point of dish going to new equipment to get the more compressive scheme in there rather than just going all MPEG-4 equipment that also does that in the first place so they can eliminate SD HD duplicates. And that costs a ton of money for both this and DirecTV to make that move.

That will start happening more likely when it will cost less to do that than it would to just launch another satellite assuming they have the bandwidth to add to their capacity.

Right now it's much cheaper for DirecTV to just launch a satellite. I imagine that's also true for dish.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

inkahauts said:


> That will start happening more likely when it will cost less to do that than it would to just launch another satellite assuming they have the bandwidth to add to their capacity.
> 
> Right now it's much cheaper for DirecTV to just launch a satellite. I imagine that's also true for dish.


Not just cost, but ease of implementation. Even if the cost of launching the satellite is slightly more... it's much simpler to implement in terms of manpower since it is something they order and pay someone to launch for them... whereas the replacement of ALL the legacy non-MPEG4 equipment would require lots of manpower to make those installs/swaps happen.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I was adding in the cost of all that manpower to have all those truck rolls to everybody's house to replace all the boxes. And shipping for those that could do it on their own. But yeah that's all part of the question in the equation if when to do it.

Plus the longer they wait the more attrition will happen in the less boxes they will have to replace on their own outright rather than just letting people change them on their own to HD boxes.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> Right now it's much cheaper for DirecTV to just launch a satellite. I imagine that's also true for dish.


DISH needs a place to put this theoretical new satellite ... and licenses for the transponders. If the new satellite isn't just an upgrade to an existing location that means new dishes. There is only so much DISH can do at existing locations ... and if they need to roll trucks for new dishes (and switches, etc) they might as well just roll them for more bandwidth efficient receivers - which is a better long term solution.

Without adding transponder licenses or new satellite locations the best that can be done with a new satellite would be more spotbeams. DISH has a lot of transponders dedicated to spot beams - if they made the footprints smaller they could fit more beams on the same transponder and might be able to clear a couple of transponders for ConUS. But smaller footprints lead to coverage problems in the edges of large DMAs ... and the number of transponders cleared for ConUS may not be worth the cost.

MPEG4 8PSK SD is probably the best solution for clearing a lot of transponders.

The other solution is to use something more efficient than MPEG4 for HD. Put more than 9 channels on each transponder. The bonus is that file sizes would get smaller for DVR'd programs. The down side would be quality. There is only so much one can do to a signal before it is garbage.


----------



## bnewt (Oct 2, 2003)

no degrading of the signal


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

James Long said:


> DISH needs a place to put this theoretical new satellite ... and licenses for the transponders. If the new satellite isn't just an upgrade to an existing location that means new dishes. There is only so much DISH can do at existing locations ... and if they need to roll trucks for new dishes (and switches, etc) they might as well just roll them for more bandwidth efficient receivers - which is a better long term solution.
> 
> Without adding transponder licenses or new satellite locations the best that can be done with a new satellite would be more spotbeams. DISH has a lot of transponders dedicated to spot beams - if they made the footprints smaller they could fit more beams on the same transponder and might be able to clear a couple of transponders for ConUS. But smaller footprints lead to coverage problems in the edges of large DMAs ... and the number of transponders cleared for ConUS may not be worth the cost.
> 
> ...


I was under the impression they still had space for one more sat, still catching up from the one that didn't make it to orbit, as the next one took its place and that one still needed a replacement. I guess not then...

Another way is to do as Direct is doing and getting better mpeg4 encoders to become a little more efficient and get more channels per beam that way as well. Direct has added one more channel to each transponder on most their 99 and 103 sats over the last year. That is still cheaper than replacing everyone's hardware.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> I was under the impression they still had space for one more sat, still catching up from the one that didn't make it to orbit, as the next one took its place and that one still needed a replacement. I guess not then...


Satellites are nice - and they are needed to provide service - but DISH has already put all of their licensed transponders into service. Any expansion would require new licenses and new dishes to get those signals to customers.



inkahauts said:


> Another way is to do as Direct is doing and getting better mpeg4 encoders to become a little more efficient and get more channels per beam that way as well. Direct has added one more channel to each transponder on most their 99 and 103 sats over the last year. That is still cheaper than replacing everyone's hardware.


DISH is already doing 9 feeds per transponder ... 10 in some cases, a couple less in some cases. DirecTV's move from five to six feeds per transponder is practically a baby step compared to the way DISH shoehorns in HD.

I remember when DISH first put 12 SD channels on a transponder (MPEG2 QPSK). Now 9 HD channels is typical. It would take a really good encoder to do more channels than what DISH is doing and still call it HD.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

James Long said:


> Satellites are nice - and they are needed to provide service - but DISH has already put all of their licensed transponders into service. Any expansion would require new licenses and new dishes to get those signals to customers.
> 
> DISH is already doing 9 feeds per transponder ... 10 in some cases, a couple less in some cases. DirecTV's move from five to six feeds per transponder is practically a baby step compared to the way DISH shoehorns in HD.
> 
> I remember when DISH first put 12 SD channels on a transponder (MPEG2 QPSK). Now 9 HD channels is typical. It would take a really good encoder to do more channels than what DISH is doing and still call it HD.


Yeah that is a lot, maybe. I thought they used wider transponders with more bandwidth, no? if not, then they have to be hurting pq to do that if they are using the same delivery method and bandwidth space Directv is.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> Yeah that is a lot, maybe. I thought they used wider transponders with more bandwidth, no? if not, then they have to be hurting pq to do that if they are using the same delivery method and bandwidth space Directv is.


I do not know the bandwidth of DirecTV's transponders. DISH does have the benefit of using high powered Ku DBS for most of their service (all except internationals on 118 and business TV channels on 121).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

inkahauts said:


> Yeah that is a lot, maybe. I thought they used wider transponders with more bandwidth, no?


DISH's transponders are narrower (24MHz vs 36MHz). The saving grace is that because they use Ku band, they can use the latest multiplexing schemes and relatively low forward error correction. These technologies aren't as useful with Ka.


----------



## dish556 (Feb 18, 2014)

Hi Dish:

please upgrade Fox-2 with HD please the 24 hours race is coming soon it would be awesome to see it in full HD please Dish work thing's out with Fox-2

*FOX SPORTS BROADCAST SCHEDULE (subject to change; all times ET):*
Saturday, June 14 - 8:30 AM to 4:00 PM (FOX Sports 1, LIVE)
Saturday, June 14 - 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM (FOX Sports 2, LIVE)
Saturday, June 14 - 5:00 PM to 6:30 PM (FOX Sports GO, LIVE)
Saturday, June 14 - 6:30 PM to 1:00 AM (FOX Sports 2, LIVE)
Saturday, June 14 - 1:00 AM to 7:30 AM (FOX Sports 1, LIVE)
Sunday, June 15 - 7:30 AM to 9:30 AM (FOX Sports 2, LIVE)

or ask if Fox can put it on local fox channels that are HD or FXXHD or FX HD I mean that would put a spike in Ratings for those Network's what is really on FXX anyways replays of Sport report show who watch that anyways. put the race in HD please.


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

how about adding all the movie channels in HD we are missing these ones.and in HD

showtime beyond,showtime women,showtime next,showtime extreme
encore drama,encore classic,encore drama,encore espansol
thiller max,outermax,starz cinema,starz edge
movieplex

it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Allen bluegras
Illinois


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

How about cramming 11 "HD" channels on each transponder? That is what it would take to add everything.


----------



## bluegras (Jan 31, 2008)

shortstvhd and smithsonian channelhd it has been 2010 since they was pulled and it would be nice to have them back added thansk 


Allen bluegras


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Smithsonian wanted more money than Dish thought it was worth... and I don't think there have been any real complaints since either of those channels were dropped. It'll likely be a cold day before we see those again.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

bluegras said:


> shortstvhd and smithsonian channelhd it has been 2010 since they was pulled and it would be nice to have them back added thansk


Have they upped the rate at which they bring new content to bear? Smithsonian was adding less than five days of content per year to fill 365 days of programming.

Does adding HBOs actually add to the play list or are they just juggling the same tired content into different time slots?

HBO isn't alone as Epix can't seem to stop playing _Star Trek: Edge of Darkness_ for more than a few hours at a time.


----------



## rebelman (Jul 18, 2010)

*Are we ever going to getTvland in HD? Every other provider has the HD feed . They also produce new content in HD like "Hot inCleveland".*


----------

