I was wonding why they don't do that.. On my 622 when I output to the RG6 to my other TV it looks pretty good watching a HD show on a SD TV. just get the stretch right and it looks nice..
if we could mix some SD and HD, we could get more channels.
HD Net Awsome tonight!
- Thread starter Drone35
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 78
- Views 13K
I was wonding why they don't do that.. On my 622 when I output to the RG6 to my other TV it looks pretty good watching a HD show on a SD TV. just get the stretch right and it looks nice..
if we could mix some SD and HD, we could get more channels.
they dont mix them because the HD channels are sent on 8PSK transponders, and most SD receivers do not support 8PSK.
>ESPN is a 720p channel
Data transmission wise 720p60 or 1080i30 are just flags in the header of the data stream, it's really all about bitrates, a bit is a bit. It would be nice to get native resolution pass through on the 622.
1920x1080ip30 = 19.2Mbps
1280x720p60= 18Mbps
Yes, I read AMC(?) running 12-13mbps mentioned in earlier thread. Wasn't that for the RUSH preview on 287 awhile back (Everybody was complaining at the how HDNMV PQ degraded, 38Mbps divided 3 is 12.6Mbps each)
287 - RUSH renamed to AMC (NA)
http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=86392&highlight=Uplink+Activity+Report+amc
That is outdated information. HDNET and HDNMV were down-rezzed to 1440x1080 last August. ESPN has always been 1280x720p. RUSH is a VOOM 1280x1080 channel. I can't recall if TNTHD and/or Discovery HD have been left at 1920x1080. Wouldn't matter a whole lot for TNTHD given how much S T R E T C H - O - V I S I O N they show on it.
Is there an better channel Bitrate chart URL available? The page does say Bitrates last updated on 11/24/06
http://www.satelliteguys.us/bfg/dish-hd.htm
Did I say RUSH, guess I did, I should of caught that.
I was just pointing out TP7 E*8 AMC(?) running 12-13mbps mentioned in earlier thread. Wasn't that for the RUSH preview on 287 awhile back (Everybody was complaining at the time, how HDNMV PQ degraded when HDNMV, HDNET, AMC (RUSH) sharing T7 E*8),.
This claims to be up to date. DISH Transponder Load Chart
http://ekb.dbstalk.com/dishlist.htm
If
1920x1080i30 = 19.2Mbps
then
1440x1080i30 = 14.4Mbps
1440x1080i30 at 14.4Mbps TS probably looks better than 1920x1080i30 at 14.4Mbps TS. Probably makes more sense to down res using bilinear or bicubic or drop every fifth pixel or something like that than transcoding each frame. Heck, what do I know.
Mark Jackson said mpeg4 is 11% more efficient (now) then mpeg2 and maybe up to 50% (future) if they could pre-process, hopefully they can add more hd content
with decent PQ and not degrade what we got..
Not complaining, if I were, fast motion pans on HGTV are blurry. I've watch a few good movies (non-streached) on TNTHD, Gone with the Wind, Wizard of Oz. I switched by TNTHD tonight and wow, S T R E T C H - O - V I S I O N made the women look real fat and busty, pretty funny. I was watching EQUTR 'Under Water Odyssey' earlier and it looked great. Been pretty happy with DishHD PQ on my
LCOS 60 inch SXRD. Maybe I better not get BluRay, might wreck my little fantasy
on Dish HD PQ. I've seen DTV HD on my sisters 720p Pioneer Elite plasma and
I'll take DISH.
Bottom line
2 HD channels per TP = Great
2 HD and 1 SD channels per TP = Good
3 HD channels per TP = DTV, VOOM 1280x1080 HD Lite
4 HD channels per TP = MPEG4 Locals 1280x1080 HD Lite
:
you guys are scaring the crap outta me!!! Here I am, getting ready to purchase a nice new Toshiba 42LZ196, and from all that I am hearing, I won't be getting what I should be getting as far as PQ is concerned thru Dish....
Thats disheartening....I really don't want to, but should I go to cable??? FIOS isnt availble near me yet, so those are my two choices....Any suggestions?
Thats disheartening....I really don't want to, but should I go to cable??? FIOS isnt availble near me yet, so those are my two choices....Any suggestions?
Most people seem to be satisfied with DishHD. With a 42" set the flaws won't be as noticable as on 50" & above. So that works in your favor.
It depends upon how demanding you are as a viewer. Some of us are familiar with what true HD looks like and would love to get it from E*. Others are pretty happy with DVDs and are satisfied with any "HD" that is better than DVD quality.
It depends upon how demanding you are as a viewer. Some of us are familiar with what true HD looks like and would love to get it from E*. Others are pretty happy with DVDs and are satisfied with any "HD" that is better than DVD quality.
I see someone picked up an 8PSK module
Just knowing E*, I bet that AMC stream is still the same HD preview channel that was there before. Was it Rush or Rave?
Yup having a good time with it, Tsreader does some increadable graphs on this stuff.
I can't see anything but colorbars for the channels but the data I get is worth it to me.
I can't see anything but colorbars for the channels but the data I get is worth it to me.
Bottom line
2 HD channels per TP = Great
2 HD and 1 SD channels per TP = Good
3 HD channels per TP = DTV, VOOM 1280x1080 HD Lite
4 HD channels per TP = MPEG4 Locals 1280x1080 HD Lite
Interesting Bottom line - can you give us one example - just 1 example - of a service with 2 HD and 1 SD Channel on a TP that you can claim is good?
Unfortunately his calculations on the bitrate are not very accurate - as shown on AVSFORUM where its reporting OTA ATSC NBC shows in Phoenix at 26Mbps - even though the NBC Affiliate has a SD Multicast and their HD Channel is set to a max of 15.00Mbps.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9392433&&#post9392433
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9368127&&#post9368127
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9381905&&#post9381905
HDNET is sent out at a constant 17.57 Mbps Video on 127W. Add in the 384k of audio and other mux info - it was set at this bitrate to allow for HDNET and HDNET Movies to just squeeze in 1 38.81Mbps Cable 256 QAM.
The readings TSREADER gives you are on the high side from what this shows.
Last edited:
Thats my problem...I know what true HD looks like...I used to install it....Not ever seeing HD thru E* I am beginning to question whether or not I should do it through them....The other thing that is killing me is this 18 month commitment. If I really am disappointed, I don't want to have to hang around if something better comes along.
You'd think they would have one or two high PQ channels to help them sell HD to more people.
I fear though that it will only get worse as they try and keep up with D*'s latest 100 national HD channel hail mary play.... Then again, they supposedly were gonna seize the high ground with their talk of 150 HD channels last year (um, most of those are locals you can't get).
I can see the sad D* exec.... "I was supposed to be the HD leader by now, but all I got was this lousy tshirt and an HDLite lawsuit...."
I fear though that it will only get worse as they try and keep up with D*'s latest 100 national HD channel hail mary play.... Then again, they supposedly were gonna seize the high ground with their talk of 150 HD channels last year (um, most of those are locals you can't get).
I can see the sad D* exec.... "I was supposed to be the HD leader by now, but all I got was this lousy tshirt and an HDLite lawsuit...."
You can't apply simple arithmetic like that to MPEG-2 compressed video.
The original 4:2:2 sources are hundreds of megabytes per second uncompressed, and the resulting bit rate of the compressed stream depends far more on the compressor settings and compressability of the source than the original resolution. Reducing resolution before compressing enables you to use lower bit rates and maintain the same quality, but you can't make simple assumptions like you have about the bit rate being reduced by the same percentage as the number of pixels in a frame. Heck, I've seen higher bit rates out of HDNet's 1440x1080 than on OTA full 1920x1080i.
`
I would suggest waiting for Canon's SED instead of Toshiba's TV since it will have infinitely better PQ.
As for HD why not get Cable right now if they offer True HD? If not them maybe just buy an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player for now.
As to HDNet I can't BEGIN to express my level of disgust at the fact Dish is downrezzing it.
But isn't the Canon SED going to cost around $7000-$8000? Those are the numbers I've been reading. And it isn't even guaranteed to ever come out. Some analysts believe that with the drop in plasma pricing & improvements in plasma & LCD, that SED sets may never ship because it might be impossible to fully recover the R&D cost given the decreasing performance difference between the best plasmas and LCDs vs SED.
I wouldn't count on SED. The big joint Canon/Toshiba SED manufacturing plant has been put on hold. And due to litigation, Toshiba has been forced out as a partner. Canon is now using a much smaller plant and hopes to produce a limited number of SED sets by Q4, 2007.
I wouldn't count on SED. The big joint Canon/Toshiba SED manufacturing plant has been put on hold. And due to litigation, Toshiba has been forced out as a partner. Canon is now using a much smaller plant and hopes to produce a limited number of SED sets by Q4, 2007.
Last edited:
Ugh. If SED doesn't make it to market I hope those Aussies that were developing that laser tv get it out otherwise I'm NEVER getting a big screen because I believe in the picture quality over the size. I'll take a technology like CRT that can produce a perfect picture over LCD, Plasma and DLP.
I don't know if I'd go that far! CRT is an analog technology, and imho digital signals look better on digital displays. This is coming from a CRT owner. Full res channels on full res plasmas (and even downrezzed plasmas) look outstanding.
I agree,
I wonder what the actual resolution is for a CRT? Anybody know? Or does it vary set to set?
Similar threads
