Should I have any hope for better PQ?

[slimoli]

For those familiar with the new satellites to be launched soon, is there any chance that SD and HD picture can be improved ? Premium CH SD on my 73" looks terrible, even my free analog cable looks better. I am stuck with a 2 years plan and 2 HD-TIVO and that's why I don't move to Dish tomorrow.

Sergio

 

[salvatorep]

I can second this. In Tallahassee, Florida on my 65" the DirecTV locals are horrible, the rest of the SD lineup is watchable, and the HD is quite nice...albeit way too few HD channels.

Im on antenna number three in a search to find something that'll pick up the OTA HD locals. Are we waiting in vain for improved picture quality from the new satellites?

 

[dragon002]

soon, very soon.

 

[vurbano]

Sometime in 2007 IF it improves. There are NO promises from D* and NO admissions that they have a problem.

 

[vurbano]

I can second this. In Tallahassee, Florida on my 65" the DirecTV locals are horrible, the rest of the SD lineup is watchable, and the HD is quite nice...albeit way too few HD channels.

Im on antenna number three in a search to find something that'll pick up the OTA HD locals. Are we waiting in vain for improved picture quality from the new satellites?

If they can advertise "HD" and deliver HD lite with 2 year contracts and outrageous equipment fees in order to lease why on earth would they change? If you could get away with selling YUGO's at Mercedes prices would you change your business plan?

 

[dragon002]

wait until BOTH spaceways light up, then make a decision.

 

[FlyingJ]

Notice they are asking about SD pictures on HD sets...I still have never seen a good pic from any SD channel on any large HD set. And yes V, from any provider including E*. Now, I did notice that on my Sixers game tonight on even my 36 inch SD set, channel 752 I think, the PQ was horrible.

 

[Brewer4]

wait until BOTH spaceways light up, then make a decision.

I agree. Its really hard to figure out if D* gets it given the bandwidth constraints. IF after the next 2 sats go up and PQ does NOT improve, then its fair to lay it on D*. I will be with Vurbano on this one in 2007 if they continue its current hardware PQ model. Right now I am ok with the current mix but I do think it needs to improve. I am just a bit more patient and less vocal (and realistic).

 

[HCI]

I can second this. In Tallahassee, Florida on my 65" the DirecTV locals are horrible, the rest of the SD lineup is watchable, and the HD is quite nice...albeit way too few HD channels.

Im on antenna number three in a search to find something that'll pick up the OTA HD locals. Are we waiting in vain for improved picture quality from the new satellites?

On the local side Directv or Dish can only make the PQ look as good as the signal they receive.

 

[VIPERS-PIT]

My SD D* picture on my 65 inch is 100% better than my cable was on my 36 in WEGA tv. If you do not like it then simple pay the fee and go to E* today, that way you do not have to come on here and be upset.

 

[slimoli]

My SD D* picture on my 65 inch is 100% better than my cable was on my 36 in WEGA tv. If you do not like it then simple pay the fee and go to E* today, that way you do not have to come on here and be upset.

Why is that? Do you think the board should be exclusive to D* cheerleaders? Your cable picture was probably VERY bad and it doesn't mean you have a decent picture on your 65". Some people really don't care about quality and that's fine. I am not complaining about SD quality in general, I know I can't expect a wonderful SD picture. What I am trying to say is all about COMPRESSION. It means something already not so good becomes terrible. If you read my post again you can see it was not a bash, just a simple question about what can we expect with the upcoming satellites launches. I have free analog cable and the picture is 100% better than D*. I had Dish before and the SD was pretty good, then became very bad and then good again. It all depends on how D* will manage the space and I hope they don't add more HD music channels and other cheap stuff to eat up even more bandwidth.

 

[logixrat]

I switched over to D* the middle of last week. I have a SD 55" big screen and the quality is very clear and crisp, almost like watching a DVD on everything. I will admit the locals are less crisp, but not bad by any means.

In my comparison of PQ, I have had the following services:

1. Cox Cable Oklahoma
2. E*
3. D*

No doubt about it, the locals look best with Cox. Mainly because they broadcast in HD and are simply beautiful. Even though my SD set cannot take full advantage of the broadcast, it does look very awesome. Put the locals aside, and it's hit and miss. The digitals look nice, the analogs look like crap.

In regards to E*, I'm not sure when you last had their service but based on my last experience with them just January of this year, right before the big Rose Bowl game between USC & Texas I might add, I must say they suck royally. I was looking very forward to the game on the satellite feed, and was vastly disappointed. The compression was so horrible that most the time, I could not see the football in the air when it was thrown. Mind you, this was on my 55" SDTV, so I tried the 27" SD set in my bedroom. It's the same, just a smaller version. After numerous service calls to my house, and the fight of my life I was *finally* able to get out of my contract.

Just FYI, I had E* about 3 years back and the quality was good. I would have stayed but customer service was jerking me around when I moved to a new house. Now IMO, they not only have bad customer service but also bad PQ.

I'd gladly take Cox cable over E* anyday. Luckily I found D* to be 100x better than either of the 2 previous services, plus it is alot cheaper.

 

[slimoli]

loxixrat

Thank you for your comments. I presume your 55" SD TV is a RPTV, right? This is a much better option to SD than my Mitsubishi 73927. Your comment that D* looks better than E* for SD makes me wonder if the problem I have is not the HD-TIVO receiver. I have never used any other type of D* receiver to compare the SD picture but I remember that when I had Dish the SD picture from my HD receiver was much worse than the picture produced by a SD-only receiver. My HD-TIVO is hoked through HDMI to my TV and tomorrow I will make some tests using the S-VIDEO to see if anything change.

 

[Questioner]

The best solution I have to say right now with directv is a good plasma edtv. SD is much better on these than HD models, and since Directv HD is not the most advanced, you won't notice HD being much better on a true HD set, though it will still look much better than SD even on an edtv.

 

[charper1]

The best solution I have to say right now with directv is a good plasma edtv. SD is much better on these than HD models, and since Directv HD is not the most advanced, you won't notice HD being much better on a true HD set, though it will still look much better than SD even on an edtv.

So your saying that you actually advise people to consider only buying plasma? and only buying ED? I have to say I disagree greatly with both.

 

[VIPERS-PIT]

Why is that? Do you think the board should be exclusive to D* cheerleaders? Your cable picture was probably VERY bad and it doesn't mean you have a decent picture on your 65". Some people really don't care about quality and that's fine. I am not complaining about SD quality in general, I know I can't expect a wonderful SD picture. What I am trying to say is all about COMPRESSION. It means something already not so good becomes terrible. If you read my post again you can see it was not a bash, just a simple question about what can we expect with the upcoming satellites launches. I have free analog cable and the picture is 100% better than D*. I had Dish before and the SD was pretty good, then became very bad and then good again. It all depends on how D* will manage the space and I hope they don't add more HD music channels and other cheap stuff to eat up even more bandwidth.

The HDMI cable will give a much better picture than s-video. Picture quality is the #1 reason I spent 8 grand on my system. I have a good idea what a SD and HD picture should look like. Yes compression can be an issue in certain situations. But how do you think the cable companies recieve their siginal?

 

[charper1]

and how do they re-distribute it to their users

 

[loki23]

loxixrat

Thank you for your comments. I presume your 55" SD TV is a RPTV, right? This is a much better option to SD than my Mitsubishi 73927. Your comment that D* looks better than E* for SD makes me wonder if the problem I have is not the HD-TIVO receiver. I have never used any other type of D* receiver to compare the SD picture but I remember that when I had Dish the SD picture from my HD receiver was much worse than the picture produced by a SD-only receiver. My HD-TIVO is hoked through HDMI to my TV and tomorrow I will make some tests using the S-VIDEO to see if anything change.

the problem you may have changing over to the s-video output is that the hd-dvr will not output multiple connections at the same time

you might also check that the rcvr or tv is not trying to convert the sd signal to anything other than 480i

I have heard from people who think they get better picture on sd channels using any of the analog connections instead of the hdmi

 

[vurbano]

Notice they are asking about SD pictures on HD sets...I still have never seen a good pic from any SD channel on any large HD set. And yes V, from any provider including E*. Now, I did notice that on my Sixers game tonight on even my 36 inch SD set, channel 752 I think, the PQ was horrible.

Ive seen great SD pictures on HD sets. Usually OTA. And the OP is talking about SD and HD pictures. He owns 2 HDtivo's.

 

[scotsmanron]

On the local side Directv or Dish can only make the PQ look as good as the signal they receive.

That may be, but the cable version of the same channels is a LOT better.