abricko said:
Again this what gave us SD LITE. This type of thinking only can give us HD Lite back and forth. Maybe we all should go and get EDTV and be happy with that.
Dish fixed STARZ HD
- Thread starter MikeD-C05
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 54
- Views 7K
Again this what gave us SD LITE. This type of thinking only can give us HD Lite back and forth. Maybe we all should go and get EDTV and be happy with that.
Note to complaint complainers: If they didn't give us HD-Lite, we wouldn't complain about it.
Also, with all due respect Scott, it doesn't matter if the HDTV can do 1920 or can only do 1440. If E* received the video at 1920, scales it down to 1440, compresses it, sends it to a receiver, the receiver upscales it to 1920, there is a LOT of conversions there that rely on so many variables (compression artifacts, compression hardware, receiver decompression hardware, etc.) that the video stream, by the time it is displayed on the HDTV, is no where near the original source.
Let's be straight here, do we really want E* thinking it's okay play to the lowest common denominator here? I mean, I guarantee that all of our HDTVs will display 480i. Should we just stick to that? And just because some HDTV's can only do 1440, doesn't mean that no HDTV's can do 1080.
Look, I understand that they may be having problems with their encoders when they try to do 1920x1080i in MPEG4 (personally, I believe it's a made-up excuse who really buys "HD" encoders that can't reliably do full-HD encoding?), but maybe they'll understand when I don't buy their programming because it's not true HD.
The one and ONLY thing that will get the consumer better quality is by keeping our money in OUR pockets and not E*'s. And we all know that won't happen if it's just one or two of us. So, in order to feel like we're making a difference, we have a duty to educate the consumers. If a potential customer is turned off by HD-Lite and decide not to subscribe because of what we say here, that's their decision. At the very least, they are educated consumers. If they know that they'll be getting HD-Lite and they subscribe anyway, at least they know what they are getting themselves into.
Also, with all due respect Scott, it doesn't matter if the HDTV can do 1920 or can only do 1440. If E* received the video at 1920, scales it down to 1440, compresses it, sends it to a receiver, the receiver upscales it to 1920, there is a LOT of conversions there that rely on so many variables (compression artifacts, compression hardware, receiver decompression hardware, etc.) that the video stream, by the time it is displayed on the HDTV, is no where near the original source.
Let's be straight here, do we really want E* thinking it's okay play to the lowest common denominator here? I mean, I guarantee that all of our HDTVs will display 480i. Should we just stick to that? And just because some HDTV's can only do 1440, doesn't mean that no HDTV's can do 1080.
Look, I understand that they may be having problems with their encoders when they try to do 1920x1080i in MPEG4 (personally, I believe it's a made-up excuse who really buys "HD" encoders that can't reliably do full-HD encoding?), but maybe they'll understand when I don't buy their programming because it's not true HD.
The one and ONLY thing that will get the consumer better quality is by keeping our money in OUR pockets and not E*'s. And we all know that won't happen if it's just one or two of us. So, in order to feel like we're making a difference, we have a duty to educate the consumers. If a potential customer is turned off by HD-Lite and decide not to subscribe because of what we say here, that's their decision. At the very least, they are educated consumers. If they know that they'll be getting HD-Lite and they subscribe anyway, at least they know what they are getting themselves into.
Sean Mota said:
According to Mr. Sie, we cant tell the difference in it and HDTV anyway!
As to the HD Lite issue, I can only comment on what my eyes and my set do. Its a year 2002 Mitsubishi WS-55511, not ASF calibrated, and on my set, with my eyes sending video information to my brain, I can distinctly tell a difference between D* HD-Lite, E* HD-Lite (1280), and full rez 1920x1080i. Does my set resolve 1920 lines? Hardly! But a prime example is a show like Smart Travels, on HDNet vs. Equator. HDNet has an obvious sharpness and crispness vs Equator's airings.
Geez, remember what E* picture used to look like back when they first went on the air? What did they have, 50 SD channels? 6 per transponder? Those were the days (at least for small dish systems)!
Wrong. This technology is being made for Dish Network, NO ONE ELSE IS DOING THIS, (not even DirecTV) this is cutting edge stuff not soome off the shelf solution.
If Dish wanted everything at 1280 x 1080i or even 1440 x 1080i they would do it across the board and not like they are doing it now.
The was a reason why only local LIL HD were first in HD because the quality was not good enough for a national audience, Dish just put the HD LIL up not only a test for the encoders but to say that they had HD locals.
The encoders are much better now (just 5 months later) but still have a LONG way to go to achieve the compression that is promised by MPEG4.
As I have said before (and perhaps it was in the pub area) but one of the things I heard from a few at Dish was they are working to so that they can be the first broadcaster in the USA broadcasting some HD channels in 1080p (Not 1080i but full 1080p!)
I am sorry Sean that you are so upset about the hd lite thing. I meant that the obvious stuttering on the video quality is fixed . The whole hd lite vs full hd was not what I was talking about. I don't think you will see full hd untill they get everything moved over to mpeg 4.
I for one , am happy that I can watch the channel now and record the shows now without taking a motion sickness Pill. Would I want better picture quality or full hd resolution? SURE I would, but right now both Dish and Directv are doing full transition to mpeg4 on all their programming which will take about 3 full years. I would rather have a lot of channels in hd lite that looks good on my hdtv than a few in full hd that looks great. OR like Directv with very few in bad low grade hd lite. Dish's version of Hd lite is not that noticable by most people right now due to the fact that not many people have the hdtvs to see the difference.
Yes Sean, I fully support you in your quest to get full hd resolution but this is not what this thread was about. This is about the stuttering mpeg 4 video artifacts that we suffered through on Starz hd and the dish hd locals , that have now been FIXED.
I for one , am happy that I can watch the channel now and record the shows now without taking a motion sickness Pill. Would I want better picture quality or full hd resolution? SURE I would, but right now both Dish and Directv are doing full transition to mpeg4 on all their programming which will take about 3 full years. I would rather have a lot of channels in hd lite that looks good on my hdtv than a few in full hd that looks great. OR like Directv with very few in bad low grade hd lite. Dish's version of Hd lite is not that noticable by most people right now due to the fact that not many people have the hdtvs to see the difference.
Yes Sean, I fully support you in your quest to get full hd resolution but this is not what this thread was about. This is about the stuttering mpeg 4 video artifacts that we suffered through on Starz hd and the dish hd locals , that have now been FIXED.
Last edited:
Scott,
I hope you are right about the encoders and soon we will see Starz HD and NBC HD and CBS HD at 1920x1080i. This way I will "believe" that Dish is not supporting HD Lite. Now regarding 1080p. I hope is not 1280x1080p?
I hope you are right about the encoders and soon we will see Starz HD and NBC HD and CBS HD at 1920x1080i. This way I will "believe" that Dish is not supporting HD Lite. Now regarding 1080p. I hope is not 1280x1080p?
Depending on content, it could be less bandwidth to transmit 1080p than 1080i.
If (for example) we're talking about films transmitting @ 1080p/24, that's less bandwidth than 1080i/60 (which equates to roughly 1080i/30).
If (for example) we're talking about films transmitting @ 1080p/24, that's less bandwidth than 1080i/60 (which equates to roughly 1080i/30).
ChetK says:
Do you understand much about video compression? When we're talking about online (ie real time encoders) there is one shot to do the encode. This is the situation Dish (and everyone else in the broadcast business) is in.
MPEG-4 (really H.264 AVC) encoders haven't been in use for 6 months in production and it is a substantially tougher job than off line (ie > real time) encoding.
I have a friend that works directly on the VC-1 encoder for Microsoft. He will be one of the first to tell you that online encodin is a dramatically tougher task than off line encoding.
Personally, I'd say cut Dish some slack on MPEG-4 for a little while longer. Great improvements have been made already; and I suspect that more will come as they get a few more months under their belts.
Cheers,
Do you understand much about video compression? When we're talking about online (ie real time encoders) there is one shot to do the encode. This is the situation Dish (and everyone else in the broadcast business) is in.
MPEG-4 (really H.264 AVC) encoders haven't been in use for 6 months in production and it is a substantially tougher job than off line (ie > real time) encoding.
I have a friend that works directly on the VC-1 encoder for Microsoft. He will be one of the first to tell you that online encodin is a dramatically tougher task than off line encoding.
Personally, I'd say cut Dish some slack on MPEG-4 for a little while longer. Great improvements have been made already; and I suspect that more will come as they get a few more months under their belts.
Cheers,
Last edited:
Let's be clear, there are noticeable improvements with StarzHD and, as some have reported, with HD LIL. In fact, the quality differences are striking considering these channels were, at one time, unwatchable for any great length of time. However, let me also be clear when I say, "StarzHD on DishHD does not look as good as it does on my local Adelphia cable system nor as it did while I was with VOOM DBS, and my 1920x1080i HD LIL are pale in comparison when viewed side-by-side against their native OTA sources." It's very nice that E* engineers and medical personnel were able to correct the seizure disorder with StarzHD and many of the HD LIL, but we're now left with gnat noise and PQ resembling my flabby behind (not a pretty sight, I can assure you!).
To be honest, I felt the VOOM 1440x1080i channels looked quite good on two of my three HDTVs and, other than the mosquito noise on EquatorHD, I was satisfied with the resolution. However, I had old MonstersHD recordings on my 942 (back when they were 1920x1080i) which I later compared to duplicate recordings after MonstersHD was downrezzed to 1280x1080i. The difference was striking...could tell an huge difference on all but my 26" 720p Samsung CRT. Of course, when Samsung later replaced this set (under warranty) with a 30" 1080i Slimfit, I could once again see a visibe difference.
The Bottom Line: I can tell the difference between 1920x1080i and 1440x1080i on one of my HDTVs, I can tell the difference between 1920x1080i and 1280x1080i on all three of my HDTVs, but I sometimes find it hard to tell the difference between 1280x1080i and my...well, my bottom. The real bottom line is that were're paying for an ATSC HD standard, and there is no way some of these DishHD channels meet this requirement nor do they meeting many of our members expectations.
While there are improvements with StarzHD and HD LIL; while channels like the HDNets and DiscoveryHD look excellent on any HDTV; and while DishHD continues to be the HD Leader by adding more HD than the competition...the fact is the problems with VOOM-Lite and the MPEG-4 woes have been going on for months (10 months for VOOM - 5 months for HD LIL). Again, while we applaud E* for improving service, we're paying for premium HD services and E* is only delivering the good approximately half of the time...it's just that simple.
Is there a pattern evolving? Seriously! Do the HD-Lite problems appear to be isolated to StarzHD, HD LIL, and the not-so-new MPEG-4 codecs...and are they related, in any way, to VOOM-Lite? Is it reasonable to conclude that VOOM's HD channels are at 1280x1080i so they can be easily encoded using MPEG-4 due to the variety of problems we are seeing with the MPEG-4 1920x1080i channels? Honestly, which HD channels are the "best candidates" for MPEG-4 when additional national HD and RSN HD channels are brought online this fall? Certainly the best candidates would be all 15 of VOOM's HD channels, so why wouldn't E* downrez them now and save some major complaining down the road.
To be honest, I felt the VOOM 1440x1080i channels looked quite good on two of my three HDTVs and, other than the mosquito noise on EquatorHD, I was satisfied with the resolution. However, I had old MonstersHD recordings on my 942 (back when they were 1920x1080i) which I later compared to duplicate recordings after MonstersHD was downrezzed to 1280x1080i. The difference was striking...could tell an huge difference on all but my 26" 720p Samsung CRT. Of course, when Samsung later replaced this set (under warranty) with a 30" 1080i Slimfit, I could once again see a visibe difference.
The Bottom Line: I can tell the difference between 1920x1080i and 1440x1080i on one of my HDTVs, I can tell the difference between 1920x1080i and 1280x1080i on all three of my HDTVs, but I sometimes find it hard to tell the difference between 1280x1080i and my...well, my bottom. The real bottom line is that were're paying for an ATSC HD standard, and there is no way some of these DishHD channels meet this requirement nor do they meeting many of our members expectations.
While there are improvements with StarzHD and HD LIL; while channels like the HDNets and DiscoveryHD look excellent on any HDTV; and while DishHD continues to be the HD Leader by adding more HD than the competition...the fact is the problems with VOOM-Lite and the MPEG-4 woes have been going on for months (10 months for VOOM - 5 months for HD LIL). Again, while we applaud E* for improving service, we're paying for premium HD services and E* is only delivering the good approximately half of the time...it's just that simple.
Is there a pattern evolving? Seriously! Do the HD-Lite problems appear to be isolated to StarzHD, HD LIL, and the not-so-new MPEG-4 codecs...and are they related, in any way, to VOOM-Lite? Is it reasonable to conclude that VOOM's HD channels are at 1280x1080i so they can be easily encoded using MPEG-4 due to the variety of problems we are seeing with the MPEG-4 1920x1080i channels? Honestly, which HD channels are the "best candidates" for MPEG-4 when additional national HD and RSN HD channels are brought online this fall? Certainly the best candidates would be all 15 of VOOM's HD channels, so why wouldn't E* downrez them now and save some major complaining down the road.
Scott Greczkowski said:Well said.
I'll second that.
MPEG4 is where we are headed. They are making progress on it. That seems like good news to me. It's a heck of a lot better than no progress. I appreciate that MikeD-C05 took the time to post that someone at Dish gave him a heads up to check PQ because they believed they had a fix. To my casual eye it does look better. Before reading his post I thought I noticed improvement. You kind of leave yourself open if you express that opinion. I do think HD Lite is a major issue. But it isn't the only issue.
Last edited:
Scott Greczkowski said:What I find funny about some of these HD Lite folks are....
1) They don't have a HD Display which can display above 1440 x 1080 (Or can even display that much!)
2) In certain cases I know of at least 2 people who have whined about HD Lite so much, yet I later found out that they don't even have HDTV's or subscribe to HD services from Dish. (In other words they like listening to themselves talk)
I will take 1440 x 1080 any day over 1280 x 1080.
Who are you referring to with "HD Lite folks" remark Scott? I'm not sure I particularly care for the tone, if you're referring to me.
I assure you I have an HDTV and I assure you I can and do see the difference.
Correct me if I'm wrong but given the context of your post and it's proximity, it appears like you're jumping in with the "complaining about the complaining" crowd.
If there is some kind of a rule I've broken here - tell me about it. If there's something I'm doing that you don't like - tell me about that too.
What's also pertinent here (to the StarzHD issue and Dish's provision of HD in general) is that they are marketing products and services within the context of being the "HD Leader" and "Better TV for ALL".
That has a nice ring and all that and it probably has a lot of people snookered but if that were their real concern, they'd have resolved the "Voom Fiber" issue a long time ago or had Voom on the carpet about it. If those statements were any more than marketing hype, they would make a better effort to follow through on what they say or if they can't, then explaining why they can't. I won't tie up this thread now but the list of things that Dish has said that nothing ever came of is quite extensive.
The trouble is some just don't care....and that's fine but beyond that, they want to stop the one's that do care from talking about it.
What's also pertinent here (to the StarzHD issue and Dish's provision of HD in general) is that they are marketing products and services within the context of being the "HD Leader" and "Better TV for ALL".
WALTINVT
Well having both D* and E* HD I don't see anything wrong with DISH stating they are the HD Leader. They are!
As a past VOOMER they were the leader at the time too. Were they perfect. No! Were they working on their problems up till the end. Yes saw many improvements.
Feel the same about DISH MPEG4 now. See that both of us have Platinum HD package. You must be somewhat pleased to have their "everything package" Sure things could be better with DISH, but who is better with 29 HD channels (plus OTA HD too) now? NO ONE!
Still feel I was spoiled by the original VOOM with PQ, but I have been presently surprised with DISH HD with their addition of HD programing and continued up-grades and improvements. NOT complaining here, but some people are just complainers. And lets face it, it's easier to get someone to post a complaint or get involved if they are not satisfied. It's just the way things are.
For me I very pleased to have DISH HD and use it as my #1 HD programing source. I only use Directv as my SD and backup HD programing source.
Thanks DISH, keep up the great service and stay the HD Leader!
PS If you are please with your E* programing or service, you should also state that here. Maybe everyone will not agree, but lets not become a Group of complainers only. Enjoy!
WALTINVT
Well having both D* and E* HD I don't see anything wrong with DISH stating they are the HD Leader. They are!
As a past VOOMER they were the leader at the time too. Were they perfect. No! Were they working on their problems up till the end. Yes saw many improvements.
Feel the same about DISH MPEG4 now. See that both of us have Platinum HD package. You must be somewhat pleased to have their "everything package" Sure things could be better with DISH, but who is better with 29 HD channels (plus OTA HD too) now? NO ONE!
Still feel I was spoiled by the original VOOM with PQ, but I have been presently surprised with DISH HD with their addition of HD programing and continued up-grades and improvements. NOT complaining here, but some people are just complainers. And lets face it, it's easier to get someone to post a complaint or get involved if they are not satisfied. It's just the way things are.
For me I very pleased to have DISH HD and use it as my #1 HD programing source. I only use Directv as my SD and backup HD programing source.
Thanks DISH, keep up the great service and stay the HD Leader!
PS If you are please with your E* programing or service, you should also state that here. Maybe everyone will not agree, but lets not become a Group of complainers only. Enjoy!
waltinvt said:
I'm sure I was one of the people who do not have a "Top End" TV and felt I was referenced also.... My 1368 set shows the difference in 1140 vs 1280... MI:2 on CBS OTA the other night blew away anything we see on the "hd-Lite" channels.
How does you OTA HD compare to your Dish HD?rickaren said:
When I first got Dish HD, it was dazzling. Now it's not.
My PBS HD OTA blows most of the "E" HD away.
"up till the end" being the operative phrase.rickaren said:
Well they had to recently change the name because it wasn't "everything" anymore.nickaren said:
That's true - which is why I'm not somewhere else.nicnaren said:
I am pleased with some of the aspects of Dish Network - in fact they're my # 1 HD source too (since I only have them, my cable doesn't do HD and I only get NBC and PBS HD OTA) but when they say something and don't do it or say one thing and do another, I'm going to call them on it every chance I get.richaren said:
When "E" starts calling a spade a spade and being honest with their customers, THEN maybe I too will be "pleased" with them but in the meantime, I don't lie - I won't tolerate it in others. If I say I'm going to do something, I make every possible effort to do it - I expect the same of others. Customers who pay for my services get what I tell them I'm going to give them - I won't tolerate less from those I pay my money to. These might be obscure concepts to some people today but I stand by them.
rickaren said:
I guess I don't understand Walt's problem with *E saying they are the "HD Leader". Who else has 29+ HD channels at the resolution we are getting from *E?
I know *E is not perfect, and their Mpeg 4 leaves room for improvement. BUT, I for one am "digging-it"! And it's nice to know that it will just keep getting better and better........what's not to like guys..........just crank up the projector, tune in some HD, kick back and FRIGGING enjoy
: , cause it is the best anybody has to offer right now!!!!!!!!!!Robert
Last edited:
While that's an admirable goal, I'd rather see them be the first satellite broadcaster in the USA to actually broadcast all their HD programming in HD rather than devote resources to 1080P, since there aren't any channels being offered in that format yet. (Have we even heard a solid start date for 1080P from any channels yet?)Scott Greczkowski said:
We've seen this tango of "we'd really to implement X, but we're busy working on Y," from Dish before. It isn't that long ago that we were promised NBR 501/508/510/721.
I wonder which we'll see first: NBR or 1080x1920P.
Scott
You will see NBR first (In fact within the next month or so.)
There are a few 1080p channels on the drawing board, this I know but I can't comment on which ones are looking at going this route. (But imagine a channel that shows lots of films) 
No Walt I am not signling you out.
There are a few 1080p channels on the drawing board, this I know but I can't comment on which ones are looking at going this route.
(But imagine a channel that shows lots of films) No Walt I am not signling you out.
Timeframe was when it was technologically feasable. Actually (and I think John Jotches covered it above) with 1080p and moves they would be using LESS bandwith then they do no for 1080i.
Makes sense to me.
Makes sense to me.
