# True HD ?



## 356B (Oct 11, 2008)

I just had a Direct TV installer tell me that Direct offers the only "True HD". Dish he claimed is manipulated at the receiver and not true HD. 
This discussion came about at a rental property that is wired with undersized coax by modern standards, he claimed it would not transmit / work with Directs brand of HD. When I countered that my home had the same wire size and worked perfectly he countered with the true HD comment.
I'm just wondering the relevancy of this... in how it relates to the real world ? I presume if you have a pre-wired home with so called undersized coax, Direct would not be an option for you? or would Direct TV attempt to sell a new coax wiring job to accommodate ?

Seems to me Direct is manipulating more than a HD signal here.
Any education on this would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Chas.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

I would be unsurprised at a contractor attempting to upsell you.

That said, Dish and Direct both work over the same type of coax. It's not like the pixels get stuck in there on the way down from the satellite. *sigh*


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

356B said:


> .... This discussion came about at a rental property that is wired with undersized coax by modern standards, he claimed it would not transmit / work with Directs brand of HD. ....


 Either satellite provider probably specifies at least RG6 coax. RG59, commonly used for OTA antenna installations is insufficient for the higher frequencies used in satellite systems. There is no coax that would work for one satellite provider and not the other (HD or otherwise - since between the dish and receiver really has nothing to with the signal being HD or not).


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

If it is older coax (RG-59) it should work with an older dish (legacy) system. But BOTH DirecTV and DISH specify the same high quality coax standards for their modern installs.


----------



## 356B (Oct 11, 2008)

l8er said:


> Either satellite provider probably specifies at least RG6 coax. RG59, commonly used for OTA antenna installations is insufficient for the higher frequencies used in satellite systems. There is no coax that would work for one satellite provider and not the other (HD or otherwise - since between the dish and receiver really has nothing to with the signal being HD or not).


The Direct TV guy's story was their signal from the satellite is HD and Dish's is not. Is that true?
Seems to me either this guy is wrong? or trying to manipulate something ?
Thanks,
Chas.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

He's trying to manipulate something alright - YOU. Into changing to DirectTv


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

356B said:


> The Direct TV guy's story was their signal from the satellite is HD and Dish's is not. Is that true?
> Seems to me either this guy is wrong? or trying to manipulate something ?


Does the installer also sell DISH? If not it seems pretty obvious that he was trying to manipulate you with stories about how the system that provides him money is better.

There are a lot of derogatory messages coming from DirecTV fans about DISH's HD offerings.


----------



## 356B (Oct 11, 2008)

I assumed he was blowing smoke, what bothered me was he total distain for Dish TV and his smug attitude. He was in a Direct truck, local I think.
Thanks,
Chas.


----------



## erosroadie (Jan 9, 2007)

356B said:


> I assumed he was blowing smoke, what bothered me was he total distain for Dish TV and his smug attitude. He was in a Direct truck, local I think.
> Thanks,
> Chas.


Or, he was supporting the position of several posters here that Dish's HD is really "HD-Lite" (fewer overall pixels) compared to DirecTV's...
:read:


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

356B said:


> I just had a Direct TV installer tell me that Direct offers the only "True HD". Dish he claimed is manipulated at the receiver and not true HD.
> This discussion came about at a rental property that is wired with undersized coax by modern standards, he claimed it would not transmit / work with Directs brand of HD. When I countered that my home had the same wire size and worked perfectly he countered with the true HD comment.
> I'm just wondering the relevancy of this... in how it relates to the real world ? I presume if you have a pre-wired home with so called undersized coax, Direct would not be an option for you? or would Direct TV attempt to sell a new coax wiring job to accommodate ?
> 
> ...


In the HD forum, I have been posting quite a bit about how DISH doesn't have HD. Their flavor of "HD" is very good, but it is isn't HD, since it's transmitted at 1440x1080i, while HD is 1920x1080i. That being said, the chance of you being able to tell the difference is probably pretty low unless you have the biggest plasma you can buy and really good eyes.

That has nothing to do with the cabling in your house. DirecTV's SWiM (Single Wire Multiswitch) technology uses the lowest frequencies of all of the satellite systems, and it theoretically requires RG-6. There are known cases of it being run on RG-59, but it is not supported that way by DirecTV, nor will they install it that way, as RG-59 has heavy signal drop-off above 1ghz (the top end of the most built-out HFC (cable) plants). I think it's actual frequency use is something like 900-1800mhz, but I'm not sure. Someone please correct those numbers.

DirecTV's older multiswitched technology, which is what most customers have, but is not installed for new installs AFAIK, uses signals up to either 2200 or 2400mhz, not sure which.

DISH's DISHPro technology goes up to 2300mhz.

Good quality quad shielded cable today is sweep tested to 3000mhz, well above what any satellite system uses.

What's more debatable is whether 1000mhz "CATV" RG-6 will work with DISH or DirecTV, since it is RG-6, even though it's not rated to a high enough frequency. I don't know if DISH or DirecTV will allow an install on this stuff, I would think so, since it is RG-6, but that's only a conjecture.

Short of the story, the installer's technically correct, but practically speaking, full of ****. If you have RG-59 now, either system will need new cabling.

Cable also offers a true HD signal, but if you want to be really picky, Fios is the only carrier that passes the stream through without re-compressing as long as you live in one of the little tiny Fios islands around the country or in Massachusetts. Fios is the best way to get HD in the US, it's just not widely available. Technically speaking, however, HD is defined by the resolution, but not by the amount of compression, as long as it leaves the original pixel count intact.


----------



## pstr8ahead (Mar 26, 2007)

DirecTV's SWM: 2.3 -1790 MHz
Non SWM HD: 250 - 2150 MHz


----------



## 356B (Oct 11, 2008)

Thank you all for your comments and information. I am not considering a move to DirecTV personally, I like what I have and that is what I told the installer. 
I was concerned about his remarks overheard by the new renter, but they are not interested in HD so it's mute. I am concerned about future renters and satisfying their needs where possible. 
The installer also claimed DirecTV has four 3D channels..........?
Thanks,
Chas.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

pstr8ahead said:


> DirecTV's SWM: 2.3 -1790 MHz
> Non SWM HD: 250 - 2150 MHz


And for Dish:

Legacy: 950-1450 MHz (just like a DirecTV legacy system)

DishPro/DishProPlus: 950-2150 Mhz

It is true that Dish lowers the resolution of their 1080 content to 1440x1080, vs the standard of 1920x1080. Both carriers also have channels that only broadcast (on all systems) at 1280x720. All of these are technically HD resolutions.

Picture quality with HDTV has MANY factors, and resolution is only one of them. It's a complicated question with complicated answers.

The bottom line is:

RG59 (the older, thinner coax cable) is not supported for carrying satellite signals by any satellite company, though there are situations where it will work. Techs are required to use RG6 exclusively if they are doing residential work directly for the company.


----------



## JWKessler (Jun 3, 2004)

356B said:


> I just had a Direct TV installer tell me that Direct offers the only "True HD". Dish he claimed is manipulated at the receiver and not true HD.


Time to put on your boots cause the bulls*** is getting pretty deep.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

pstr8ahead said:


> DirecTV's SWM: 2.3 -1790 MHz
> Non SWM HD: 250 - 2150 MHz


That's not possible, because either can be diplexed with OTA, which carves out something like 70-650mhz, and SWiM has to handle DECA.

It's true that there are a lot of factors affecting HD quality.

1440x1080i, however is not HD. It's HD-Lite. HD-Lite is HD-Like, but it's not HD.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Bigg said:


> 1440x1080i, however is not HD. It's HD-Lite. HD-Lite is HD-Like, but it's not HD.


Please see the other thread for a better discussion of DISH's HD.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

pstr8ahead said:


> DirecTV's SWM: 2.3 -1790 MHz
> Non SWM HD: 250 - 2150 MHz





Bigg said:


> That's not possible, because either can be diplexed with OTA, which carves out something like 70-650mhz, and SWiM has to handle DECA.


Note that he didn't say these were continuous. SWM uses a control frequency around 2.3 MHz, but has nothing between 5-850 MHz, which is why OTA (or DECA, but not both) can be diplexed into the line.

Non-SWM HD is continuous between 250-2150 MHz (well, there are 200 MHz gaps between the 3 bands), so OTA can generally NOT be diplexed in. Some folks have used a work-around where the BBCs are relocated to the switch, which removes the 250-750 MHz band from the cable between the BBC and the receiver, but this has never been a supported configuration, and isn't possible if you're using an H23 or HR23, which use wideband tuners instead of BBCs.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

Bigg said:


> 1440x1080i, however is not HD. It's HD-Lite. HD-Lite is HD-Like, but it's not HD.


Then, by your standards - neither is 1280x720p60. Would you like to express your opinion to the FOX and ABC networks ?


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

scooper said:


> Then, by your standards - neither is 720x1280. Would you like to express your opinion to the FOX and ABC networks ?


Thats what some many of the "complainers" about Dish's signal, forget.
All those stations that don't even OFFER thier signal in 1080. All those football games, are in 720p, not 1080i or 1080p(1080p issomething no broadcaster does).
Directs' 1920x1080 is theoretically, better. Problem is to actually see the difference with the naked eye, takes something in the 80" TV range. 
You need something that is actually filmed at 1920x1080, and not captured as 1440x1080HD, to see any difference smaller than that.

1440x1080 is the definition of consumer HD signal. 1440x1080 is good enough for HDNET, National Geographics, The Discover Network, its what they film in. Lets not forget how many sports events are actully captured at 1280x720. One day when all the HD video equipment is updated and those sports, nature and destination shows are captured in 1920x1080, this will be an issue. Right now... its all fluff


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

I don't know why we have two threads going at the same time over this complicated issue. But IMHO the argument is irrelevant without discussing the context - what the viewer "sees" on the screen which is the brain's interpretation of colors and "brightness/contrast."

Not only can you wander down the aisle of an electronics store and see the differences between the displayed image from the same BD from the same BD player on different TVs, but people respond differently to what their brain "sees."

Frankly, I don't like most "live action" TV series and movies shot with HD video cameras and retained in that format for distribution to viewers, even more particularly if it is displayed on a high contrast display that tends to towards higher color saturation. Yeah, the credits are easy to read. Big deal.

To me this is an area where art meets science meets my brain. To start off with, I'm put off by HD displaying the pores in the skin of most actors. In my brain, fuzzy isn't inherently bad here.

Bigg's brain apparently must have the crispest, most well-defined, ideal picture. That ideal leaves only a lossless-compressed 1080p digital stream coming straight from the video camera which isn't available. If it were, it couldn't be displayed on my 42" 720p Pany plasma and if I had a display that could display it, my brain probably wouldn't "like" it because it seems to force me to "see" things that I wouldn't "see" in person and which I find distasteful in the art.

Or, to simplify, this whole thing about picture quality is a matter of opinion, not some universal truth.


----------



## Bigg (Feb 27, 2010)

BattleZone said:


> Note that he didn't say these were continuous. SWM uses a control frequency around 2.3 MHz, but has nothing between 5-850 MHz, which is why OTA (or DECA, but not both) can be diplexed into the line.
> 
> Non-SWM HD is continuous between 250-2150 MHz (well, there are 200 MHz gaps between the 3 bands), so OTA can generally NOT be diplexed in. Some folks have used a work-around where the BBCs are relocated to the switch, which removes the 250-750 MHz band from the cable between the BBC and the receiver, but this has never been a supported configuration, and isn't possible if you're using an H23 or HR23, which use wideband tuners instead of BBCs.


Ah ok, didn't know that. Makes sense about the SWiM.



scooper said:


> Then, by your standards - neither is 720x1280. Would you like to express your opinion to the FOX and ABC networks ?


That's 720p, which is legitmate HD. If you go interlaced, you have to get up to 1920x1080 to have HD. 720p and 1080i have the same amount of data in them, since 1080 is twice the resoultion of 720, but 720 refreshes twice as often.


----------



## Matt9876 (Oct 11, 2007)

I've had both D* and E* HD services,I bet I could make money on most people trying to tell them apart.

Also a few Dish HD feeds look slightly better than D* in a side by side comparison.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Matt9876 said:


> I've had both D* and E* HD services,I bet I could make money on most people trying to tell them apart.
> 
> *Also a few Dish HD feeds look slightly better than D* in a side by side comparison.*


Could you tell us ? Not just channels, as I imagine it was particular show/movie.


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

Matt9876 said:


> I've had both D* and E* HD services,I bet I could make money on most people trying to tell them apart. ....


 I've been a customer of both services as well, and I will say the HD is different if you compare Dish Network and DIRECTV, but it's certainly not crystal clear that one is "better" than the other in any respect. (Viewed on a 60" Sony Bravia KDS-60A3000).


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

l8er said:


> I've been a customer of both services as well, and I will say the HD is different if you compare Dish Network and DIRECTV, but it's certainly not crystal clear that one is "better" than the other in any respect. (Viewed on a 60" Sony Bravia KDS-60A3000).


I agree, they are very slightly different ln 54" plasma set. But to call one better would be a bit of a stretch, IMO.


----------

