picture quality bud vs fta or dish or direct tv

[Bulbman2]

Many years ago I owned a 10' Bud I always felt that the picture quality was superior with the bud. I am not sure if it was a compression issue or just my own perception.

Are there any specifications that show actual difference in picture quality between the bud and fta or directv or dish?

 

[lumpkin666]

The BUD should not make a difference in picture quality when comparing the same signals - i.e. using a BUD to receive digital ku or c-band, except in the case where you are not getting optimal signal reception due to an undersized dish.

Although, if the source video where the same, using a BUD to receive source video transmitted in analog vs video transmitted in digital may result in a better quality picture - which may be what you're referring to. Think of it this way, Analog video gets most of a single transponder to transmit the video data, and digital video generally shares one transponder with several highly compressed digital video streams. The digital compression is where most of your quality is going to get lost (BUD vs mini dish has no bearing, other than the ability to achieve quality reception of the signal)

 

[tdti1]

With a big dish and 4dtv you can gain access to many distribution feeds, it comes down to compression, mini dish has very limited bandwidth and the feeds they obtain from c-band are re compressed and retransmitted to the point where they lose detail and get fuzzy.

A big dish with dvb (fta) will also get you access to many distribution feeds, with the proper equipment you will be able to get many great looking feeds, best to have c/ku 4dtv/dvb.

Analog on big dish was ok, lots of noise and other issues, digital will be best for picture quality but it comes down to engineers equipment and of course money

 

[Inno]

With a properly set up BUD receiving analog signals, the picture quality was 2nd to none.
With the exception of HD, there isn't a digital signal out there that can compare to pure, uncompressed, unmolested full bandwidth analog video!
Having said that, analog satellite IS susceptable to all kinds of interference, sparklies etc. if things aren't aimed properly or as equipment ages. But in all the years I had a BUD (and I will again soon) I never had a loss of signal from a rain storm..........snow would sometimes coat the dish and reduce signal strength but a quick sweep would fix that right up.

 

[tdti1]

With a properly set up BUD receiving analog signals, the picture quality was 2nd to none.
With the exception of HD, there isn't a digital signal out there that can compare to pure, uncompressed, unmolested full bandwidth analog video!
Having said that, analog satellite IS susceptable to all kinds of interference, sparklies etc. if things aren't aimed properly or as equipment ages. But in all the years I had a BUD (and I will again soon) I never had a loss of signal from a rain storm..........snow would sometimes coat the dish and reduce signal strength but a quick sweep would fix that right up.

I have seen many dvb feeds that blow away a noisy analog feed any day, also if you have ever seen the Disney feeds on Galaxy-14 when they are fp you will be amazed, digital picture quality can easily blow away analog, it comes down to compression and sadly most broadcasters take advantage of saving money over sending out a very high quality feed.

 

[duchen]

BUD is better

The BUD signal is better. However, of course, there are far fewer FTA signals available. DIRECTV just added a number of HD channels which are encrypted and cannot be received FTA on a BUD.

However, if you can get the same event or broadcast on a BUD and DIRECTV or DISH (such as an FTA sports or network feed), the BUD is better.

In part, here is why. DIRECTV or DISH receive that same feed and re-transmits it. So, the BUD owner can get a 1st generation or second generation signal (if, for example, it is a CBS Network feed).

DIRECTV or DISH get the 2nd generation signal and re-transmit it. If it is a local station broadcasting a game, DIRECTV or DISH get a 3d generation signal (there is the feed, the network transmission to the local and the local uplink to DIRECTV) and then send a 4th generation signal.

Of course, most locals are not available FTA and those that are available are not broadcast in HD.

I also believe the reception on the 10 foot dish is better than the smaller dish.

Still, I have DIRECTV and the picture is really good.

 

[Inno]

I have seen many dvb feeds that blow away a noisy analog feed any day, also if you have ever seen the Disney feeds on Galaxy-14 when they are fp you will be amazed, digital picture quality can easily blow away analog, it comes down to compression and sadly most broadcasters take advantage of saving money over sending out a very high quality feed.

I agree with what you're saying......compression is what kills a good signal and a lot of digital signals are better than a "noisy" analog feed.......but I'm talking about the good analog feeds with good equipment and a properly tuned system.
The "digital quality" that the DTH companies refer to is a joke. So what you're saying is correct, a digital picture CAN blow away analog......but often it simply doesn't.
I haven't seen the Disney feeds on Galaxy-14, but I hope to sometime in the near future. After moving I'll have room for a BUD and perhaps I'll get into 4DTV.

 

[truckracer]

analog c-band (with a strong signal and no sparklies) will usually give you much better color accuracy and detail over compressed digital signals. The only exception would be a very high bandwidth channel that is a master broadcast. pizza dishes will give you the most compressed signals.

The mini dish companies compress and cram as many channels as they can to give the customer "digital quantity" not necessarily "digital quality".

Just as audiophiles do not care much for satellite radio such as the two major companies we have now. This is because they have limited bandwidth and many of their channels sound like "internet radio" with the tinny sounds and inaccurate music reproduction. Most channels will have that "playing at 32K" sound.

 

[Anole]

Many years ago I owned a 10' Bud I always felt that the picture quality was superior with the bud.
I am not sure if it was a compression issue or just my own perception.

I don't take exception to any of the answers posted above.
But, a lot of things are not directly comparable.
And you have to be careful of generalizations.

Just as a for-instance: Dish several years ago, Dish today, Dish locals right now.
If you wanted to say anything good or bad about pizza performance, you'd have to qualify which of the above categories you used.

At one time, I found the digital, noise-free picture from Dish superior to my off-the-air analog reception.
Now, with digital off-the-air reception, the tables have turned.
And I'm just talking standard def, here.

Another big contributing factor is your television.
I was using a decent 27" unit at 8..10 feet away.
Even with good eyesight, a DVD or pizza dish looked pretty comparable.

Then, I got a hi def 42" LCD, wiith ATSC tuner.
OTA Los Angeles was a real eye-opener!

I'd read that customers who got hi def TVs found Dish standard def repulsive.
All I can say, is that either:
- they're idiots
- they're hyper-critical after seeing real HD
- they never bothered tuning up the sets to optimize each source.

I watch some sd and/or FTA material that is substandard on my bigger set.
That's what I have, so if it's worth watching, I have no option.
I'm still going to watch the game, race, or movie.
And if it's entertaining, the less-than-perfect picture is secondary.

Are there any specifications that show actual difference in picture quality between the bud and fta or directv or dish?

An indication, would be the resolution and bandwidth.
Those are easier to discover on a computer interfaced FTA card.
And when I make DVDs out of such material, it's right in front of me.
You'd be surprised how modest both can be and still get a good picture.
(under most conditions)
I don't think there is a list of either for the popular FTA channels, but that might be a good thing to compile. - :up

 

[Inno]

Anole,
I agree with the fact that if something is only available in SD and it's worth watching, you're gonna watch it.
The other thing I've noticed since most manufacturers have switched to making only "digital" tv sets is that most analog signals look quite bad on them. Imagine being a customer who sees a nice new LCD or Plasma set in a dealer's showroom running a Hi-Def signal or at the very least DVD then getting the set home and connecting to analog cable and seeing every annoying little flaw in the picture only magnified. They're seeing stuff with the new set that looked fine with their old analog CRT set. Of course they blame the new TV, "the old TV looked so much better". It all comes down to comparing apples to apples and trying to put things on a level playing field.
In this particular thread, there really is no level playing field. Everyone is using different signal sources, different receiving equipment, different TVs etc. etc. etc.