How bad is DBS HD compared to OTA HD???
- Thread starter vurbano
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 14
- Views 2K
- Status
I use OTA and have MPEG-4 HD locals, on a couple of channels that I can receiev OTA in my market I can flip flop back and forth to compare them. The DirecTV MPEG-4 feeds are of better quality and more stable than OTA, at least in my market. I'm using a 1080p Samsung DLP, H20 DirecTV tuner. MPEG-2 HD is a different story, and the difference is quite clear. Hopefully the MPEG-4 is a view of things to come. It's not like they can cram much more into a feed than they are.
On the channels where I can get a decent OTA picture, there is very little difference on my 42 in. Vizio plasma. On the channels where the OTA is non-existent or marginal there is no comparison, of course. Hopefully DTV will carry the Seattle ABC and Fox stations pretty soon (the Fox station said "within 30 days" three weeks ago, but nothing yet).
Oh my, Skyboss and Viper, Vurbano is not gonna like those answers at all. Be ready to be called blind, stupid and everything else. On a serious note though, I am sure glad to hear this!
I use OTA and have MPEG-4 HD locals and can't tell the differnce between the two. Both look good on my 61" DLP Samsung with the H20.
The comparison is an mpeg2 comparison. Things may be different with mpeg4. But when someone can extract the data as they did in that AVS thread Im not sure how they would compare Mpeg2 OTA to mpeg4 DBS. At that point its sort of apples and oranges.
Last edited:
I get very strong signals on all of my OTA channels. I also have an H-20 with an AT-9.
Flipping back and forth it really is hard to tell if there is any difference between D* and OTA.
I used to be really into analyzing all the numbers especially in my Ham radio days. But after a while it became an exercise in futility.
The numbers would tell me the signal is garbage, Overmodulated, Standing wave out of whack, noise ratio terrible etc. Yet, I'm 5x5 on all of my contacts.
Now, get it all set up, tweak it a little and move on. I figure if it looks and sounds good, I'm not going to sweat it anymore. One less headache to cause.
Flipping back and forth it really is hard to tell if there is any difference between D* and OTA.
I used to be really into analyzing all the numbers especially in my Ham radio days. But after a while it became an exercise in futility.
The numbers would tell me the signal is garbage, Overmodulated, Standing wave out of whack, noise ratio terrible etc. Yet, I'm 5x5 on all of my contacts.
Now, get it all set up, tweak it a little and move on. I figure if it looks and sounds good, I'm not going to sweat it anymore. One less headache to cause.
vurbano said:
I for one don't care about the data, I just want the pic to look great. It's like looking at two pictures printed out at 3 by 5. If one is at 5 megapixels and the other is at 8. Doesn't really matter if the eye can't tell the difference.
For me, in the Denver DMA, my OTA channels are far superior to those provided by D*. When watching anything with fast motion (i.e., Prision Break and NFL Football) there is a very high level of pixelation. This does not happen with OTA, but I am only able to pull FOX and UPN OTA. Since I am an NBC viewer ... I have to watch L&O etc via D*'s MPEG4 overcompressed HD and it looks like crap in any action scene.
You have to remember, vurbano is an engineer. He lives in a different world than we mere mortals... a world of numbers, empirical measurements, formulas and specifications. He seems to be to the point where he can't believe his eyes, he has to trust his measurements. Just the opposite of us mere mortals who watch TV for enjoyment.
Last edited:
- Status
