My mother n' law has the hopper and from what i've seen the PQ is good! But, at times the picture does the same weird blur, kind of like a haze that spreads across the screen, hard to explain. But, i don't see it on Directv! And the article above is most likely BS! I mean serious where did Dish get all the bandwidth? Did they launch new Sats to enable them to run each HD channel at 6-10mbps?
Newbie here, hello. My hd is not very good, why?
- Thread starter rfc
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 106
- Views 12K
My mother n' law has the hopper and from what i've seen the PQ is good! But, at times the picture does the same weird blur, kind of like a haze that spreads across the screen, hard to explain. But, i don't see it on Directv! And the article above is most likely BS! I mean serious where did Dish get all the bandwidth? Did they launch new Sats to enable them to run each HD channel at 6-10mbps?
The fact that D* transmits HD at a higher bit rate than E* is well known and has been beaten to death. D* receivers also have native mode capability which E* doesn't have, but when I was with D* they recommended that subs use 1080i because of delays involved when switching from a 720P channel, like ABC or Fox, to a 1080i channel like CBS or NBC. I used native mode and ate the delay because most good TVs have better DSP capabilities than sat receivers. I think that PQ with D* was a little better than with E*. Unless E* raises their bit rate and allows native pass through things aren't going to change IMO.
DirecTV does have better PQ .
Dish downrezzes everything to 1440x1080. DirecTV keeps it at 1920x1080.
They both just bitrate starve it. Creating a good but not perfect picture.
Dish downrezzes everything to 1440x1080. DirecTV keeps it at 1920x1080.
They both just bitrate starve it. Creating a good but not perfect picture.
This will get moved to the war zone eventually as everyone will start beating the dead horse of who has better picture quality.
There is no right or wrong. It is all subjective and personal opinion. The op may have a problem from the source dish is using for locals in their market or tv adjustments may be needed. The op will have to make that decision everything else is just personal opinions. As always everyone needs to make their own decision and choose the provider they feel is best for them
There is no right or wrong. It is all subjective and personal opinion. The op may have a problem from the source dish is using for locals in their market or tv adjustments may be needed. The op will have to make that decision everything else is just personal opinions. As always everyone needs to make their own decision and choose the provider they feel is best for them
I believe the only way to get really good HD is to have a blu-ray movie or show or to put up an outdoor HD antenna. Further, Not even Directv's picture quality is what it should be. I just came from there. IMO it is slightly better than Dish's, but they have nothing to brag about in terms of being pure and true to what HD can and should be. Those days are long gone.
to Satelliteguys rfc!I'll ad some more information to my question about HD being somewhat watered down.
As we all know, the larger the screen in 1080, not 4k, the larger the pixels. Like a billboard. If you're too close you see the pixels. My screen is 70", sitting distance is 9 feet. SD is unacceptable at that distance, where hd is and rewards with immersion. Best pq is of course blu-ray 1080p. I run the hdmi out of the hopper to my Anthem D2v processor, which is one of the best on the market. It recommends that all sources going to it be pass thru if possible and let it do the upscaling. I don't remember if the Directv box had pass thru, but it seems my hd was a bit sharper, not as blurry around edges as the hopper. I don't think the hopper offers pass thru. I've run the hopper to the D2v and also the hopper direct to the Pro-70x5fd. I've confirmed no problem with the hdmi cable. There's that saying, garbage in garbage out. The better the monitor, the more it will reward you with an outstanding picture as it will also show you the low quality signal you run into it. As I mentioned in my prior post, I've tried all the motion setting and it does not affect the blur/halo/ghost around objects. Looks like lower quality hd. Once a tv has been calibrated, it should show all content on those setting. So deductive reasoning would be the Dish signal is the problem. Which as others have pointed out, some stations broadcast in more compressed formats of 720. Understand. On my system, fox is the worst, however a lot of other stations appear to be watered down too. I recorded Chimpanzee on Starz and it looks fantastic. I wonder if the premium stations provide a less compressed signal...thoughts?
As we all know, the larger the screen in 1080, not 4k, the larger the pixels. Like a billboard. If you're too close you see the pixels. My screen is 70", sitting distance is 9 feet. SD is unacceptable at that distance, where hd is and rewards with immersion. Best pq is of course blu-ray 1080p. I run the hdmi out of the hopper to my Anthem D2v processor, which is one of the best on the market. It recommends that all sources going to it be pass thru if possible and let it do the upscaling. I don't remember if the Directv box had pass thru, but it seems my hd was a bit sharper, not as blurry around edges as the hopper. I don't think the hopper offers pass thru. I've run the hopper to the D2v and also the hopper direct to the Pro-70x5fd. I've confirmed no problem with the hdmi cable. There's that saying, garbage in garbage out. The better the monitor, the more it will reward you with an outstanding picture as it will also show you the low quality signal you run into it. As I mentioned in my prior post, I've tried all the motion setting and it does not affect the blur/halo/ghost around objects. Looks like lower quality hd. Once a tv has been calibrated, it should show all content on those setting. So deductive reasoning would be the Dish signal is the problem. Which as others have pointed out, some stations broadcast in more compressed formats of 720. Understand. On my system, fox is the worst, however a lot of other stations appear to be watered down too. I recorded Chimpanzee on Starz and it looks fantastic. I wonder if the premium stations provide a less compressed signal...thoughts?
Last edited:
Thank you. I just made the change in settings. Much easier to view posts as page one shows the op post and replies under it. (Easy to click on page one to read the original question) Now as pages increase you're always on the most current new page. (Seems the default setting is the other way.)
I know most of the AV lingo, but being a newbie here, D* is Directv and E* is Dish? or do I have it reversed.
"D* they recommended that subs use 1080i"...subs? I'm lost in that comment....subs. Pls elaborate, thank you.
Last edited:
Blur and halo typically refer to problems with motion interpolation. I've never seen a cable or satellite signal induce blur, unless you consider macro blocking and the image breaking up as blur. Same with halos, unless you are referring to mosquito noise. So I don't quit understand what you are seeing, but I will say I also have a 70" display and watching Dish at 11ft and the image is most often a disappointment so at 9ft I would expect more problems.
For newbies and whoever need it and regarding where you start reading a thread:
Pressing the title will start you at the first post.
Pressing the little circle to the left of the thread's title takes you to the last you read plus 1. Very nice feature and a big database.
(Provided it is not more that some number of months since you last looked at that thread.)
-Ken
Pressing the title will start you at the first post.
Pressing the little circle to the left of the thread's title takes you to the last you read plus 1. Very nice feature and a big database.
(Provided it is not more that some number of months since you last looked at that thread.)
-Ken
Direct may broadcast "full" HD @ 1920x1080 at a higher bitrate, but that doesn't tell the whole story. While that may look better on paper, that doesn't necessarily translate into better PQ. Many events are shot at 1440x1080 anyway so there will be times where there is no discernible difference in sharpness between the two resolutions. The human eye is also more sensitive to vertical resolution than horizontal resolution. The jump from 1280x720 to 1440x1080 is a lot more noticeable than the difference between 1440x1080 and 1920x1080. 1440x1080 has rectangular (1.33:1) pixels vs 1920x1080's square pixels.
For example take Direct's higher bitrate/horizonal resolution vs Dish's lower bitrate/horizontal resolution. Direct has 518,400 more pixels to deal with in regards to bandwidth. So of course a higher bitrate is required, but that doesn't necessarily mean that Direct is not bit starved. So while still/slow scenes may look more crisp on direct (that is, if the content was actually shot in 1920x1080,) Dish has a lower horizontal resolution to deal with and can take advantage of the fact that many adjacent pixels are redundant and so Dish can make fast moving scenes look better with a lower bitrate/horizontal resolution i.e. less macroblocking.
Long story short, having an appropriate bitrate for a given resolution is what really matters more so than 480 lines of horizontal resolution.
Sent from my iPhone 4S using Forum Runner
For example take Direct's higher bitrate/horizonal resolution vs Dish's lower bitrate/horizontal resolution. Direct has 518,400 more pixels to deal with in regards to bandwidth. So of course a higher bitrate is required, but that doesn't necessarily mean that Direct is not bit starved. So while still/slow scenes may look more crisp on direct (that is, if the content was actually shot in 1920x1080,) Dish has a lower horizontal resolution to deal with and can take advantage of the fact that many adjacent pixels are redundant and so Dish can make fast moving scenes look better with a lower bitrate/horizontal resolution i.e. less macroblocking.
Long story short, having an appropriate bitrate for a given resolution is what really matters more so than 480 lines of horizontal resolution.
Sent from my iPhone 4S using Forum Runner
Last edited:
Dish works very hard to keep picture quality the same so millions of people won't go crazy wanting to switch arcs.
DirecTV does have better PQ .
Dish downrezzes everything to 1440x1080. DirecTV keeps it at 1920x1080.
They both just bitrate starve it. Creating a good but not perfect picture.
No longer true as I linked to above.
Even if they are running 1920x1080I. There's no way they can run 9 channels on a 45 mb transponder and still get the minimum 6 mbps for full rez according to the link you posted above!
The math doesn't make since. If they were cband TP's running at 30000 sr. Then yeah, it could be done!
I'm not saying this would make it possible, but not every channel needs "full" bandwidth 24 hours a day. Dish uses a technique that the name escapes me at the moment, but basically, it adjusts on-the-fly, as needed. Is it perfect ? Nope, can't be... Does it work pretty well ? Well, that's subjective, of course !Even if they are running 1920x1080I. There's no way they can run 9 channels on a 45 mb transponder and still get the minimum 6 mbps for full rez according to the link you posted above!
Most channels don't need the full bandwidth for a perfect picture due to lack of action so their bandwidth is shifted to the channel that does need it for a fast moving action scene. Satellite transmission uses this variable bandwidth technology.
