http://hdguru.com/?p=18

Chicago Tribune
Ask the HD Guru

Q. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate the following on their move into HDTV: the federal government, TV manufacturers, cable and satellite companies?

A. The feds get a 7. They lose points for not mandating a “must carry” rule requiring cable to rebroadcast all local HD programming, in native resolution and at full picture quality.

TV manufacturers rate a 9 for producing an explosion of HDTVs in a wide variety of sizes, technologies and price points. They could do a better job explaining the merits of the various HD sources (cable, satellite and over-the-air), as well as how CableCARD operates along with built-in free program guides.

Cable scores anywhere from 1 to 9 depending upon the provider. Verizon’s new FIOS fiber optic system promises to deliver the best picture quality because the system has sufficient bandwidth to deliver full resolution. Some systems reduce bit rates to fit more channels into the system.

Satellite bottom dwells as 2. DirecTV and Dish Network seem to be racing to the picture quality bottom, delivering less than full HD resolution, or what I call “low hi-def.”

Broadcasters get a 7. They’re almost all broadcasting digitally as required by the government, with many having already converted their studios to HD and others about to. Unfortunately, they’ve done a poor job of promoting the transition to digital and inviting viewers to switch over for a much better picture and better sound.


E* had a 2 when this was published. Because of events over the last 3 months - and this month when the final nail went in the coffine - where E* now has ZERO Full Resolution, Error Free, 1920x1080i MPEG2 Channels at bitrates higher than 17+Mb/s Video where they had 10+ 2 years ago, E* falls from a 2 to a ZERO.

The feds are ranked too high and "broadcasters" should be split into the national broadcast networks and the local affiliates. Nationals should get a bump and the affiliates should have a very wide score range.

Its truly sad that this is the state of HD in the USA; unfortunately, the vast majority of the public is so gullible, they will accept HD-Lite from anyone!!!

HDfanatic, would you mind stating what are your current/former HD programming providers and your thoughts on them, as of right now, regarding quality of picture, etc?

Some off-topic or baiting posts deleted.

We're aren't going to let this thread devolve like the last one. Comment on E*'s recent change to HD-Lite for some of their previously full HD channels if you want to - but this isn't about E* vs. D*.

No where in the first post is there a comment regarding E* now being below D* in PQ. This thread and the previously closed thread are discussing the recent developments at E*.

Where I live the cable company doesn't even have an STB with S-Video out yet. I'd give them a zero.

Dish on the other hand, gives me a bunch of fine looking HD networks, plus HD locals, which are problematic for me OTA. I'd give them a 7 or more.

As was pointed out in the other thread, there's much more to a successful encode than just raw resolution. 19.2mbps MPEG2 is not state of the art - modern codecs can do amazing things at bitrates below 10mbps. If D* and E* continue to improve their encoders, 1440 or 1280 lines of horizontal resolution could be a completely satisfactory compromise for the next couple of years while delivery issues get sorted out. And/or - they may find they can deliver a fine 1920x1080 stream at an acceptable bitrate. But it's entirely possible that at a given bitrate the 1440x1080 stream could look better than the 1920x1080 stream.

There's always shiny disks for the ultimate picture quality.

Strange there is no mention of multi casting by so many locals and the effect that has on PQ.

I guess all HD everywhere is R.I.P. ( >sniff< I'll miss you :( )

So the big question is:
Who do we blame for killing it? :D

Some off-topic or baiting posts deleted.

We're aren't going to let this thread devolve like the last one. Comment on E*'s recent change to HD-Lite for some of their previously full HD channels if you want to - but this isn't about E* vs. D*.

No where in the first post is there a comment regarding E* now being below D* in PQ. This thread and the previously closed thread are discussing the recent developments at E*.But as noted in this forum as nauseum, E* has dropped all HD to 1440x1080i (other than the 720p channels), which HDFan says rates a zero in his commentary to the above article. D* is still at 1220x1080i, so by the same scale, that rates a negative number. Is it only fair to bash E*?

1440 x 1080i is not HD. Why? Because it is not an accepted ATSC standard.

You could certainly classify E* as the "EDTV Leader", and you'd have to also acknowledge that D* is in second place. When D* adds 100 more sub-HD channels, they will rightfully gain that crown.

OK, let me try to keep this within bounds as described by CPanther95 -- I'll put it this way: If any of you think that E*'s HD pictures are bad now, wait until a) they lose some transponders at 129W, b) add more channels to compete. Then they'll look really bad. In fact, they'll be so bad, their bandwidth will become more valuable to other companies than to continued E* operation after a while. A company can buy another company for its bandwidth.

But as noted in this forum as nauseum, E* has dropped all HD to 1440x1080i (other than the 720p channels), which HDFan says rates a zero in his commentary to the above article. D* is still at 1220x1080i, so by the same scale, that rates a negative number. Is it only fair to bash E*?

Yes it's fair because that's what this topic is discussing. Should we praise E* for eliminating more HD?

We're supposed to be HD enthusiasts, when news breaks that a company is going backwards regarding HD, we don't say, "So what, others are just as bad". We should be opposed to all reductions in HD PQ.

We've all been slamming D* and E* about HD-Lite for years. As each channel goes HD-Lite, we're going to bitch about it. This thread is about the most recent additions to that rapidly growing list of HD-Lite channels.

In fact, that's a question that I'd like to ask: Are those providers D* or E* playing with the signal that they get from the 720p stations? Or, say, ESPN HD looks the same way via D*, E* or, for argument's sake, Comcast?

You still have the issue of insufficient bandwidth that can cause a difference between providers' 720p channel PQ delivered.

panther, what exactly are/can those providers be doing re the 720p channels? Using some sampling to transfer less bits through the pipes/waves?

1440 x 1080i is not HD. Why? Because it is not an accepted ATSC standard. But 1280x720 is an accepted HD standard, and 1440x1080i has greater resolution in all dimensions. I count it as HD.

When D* adds 100 more sub-HD channels, they will rightfully gain that crown.OK, you brought up D* vs. E*, so: D* will add transponders with those new channels. E* will lose transponders with those new channels (or shortly thereafter). If anything would make 1440x1080i "EDTV", it would be heavy macroblocking and/or artifacting during motion.

But 1280x720 is an accepted HD standard, and 1440x1080i has greater resolution in all dimensions. I count it as HD.

OK, you brought up D* vs. E*, so: D* will add transponders with those new channels. E* will lose transponders with those new channels (or shortly thereafter). If anything would make 1440x1080i "EDTV", it would be heavy macroblocking and/or artifacting during motion.

...and somebody please define the criteria for 'leadership' in this regard?

Is it who has the best EDTV? The worst EDTV? The most EDTV? :eek:

If D* DOES 'gain the crown' and become the leader in EDTV, is that what everyone lives in fear of? Is that supposed to be a good thing?

Man...sounds like we are comparing our fertilizers based on smell, and bragging about which scent is supposedly sweeter. :D

if anyones looking for me, I'll be buying my HD equipment out in the back under the oak tree, since its all pretty much R.I.P. anyway... :confused:

But 1280x720 is an accepted HD standard, and 1440x1080i has greater resolution in all dimensions. I count it as HD.

OK, you brought up D* vs. E*, so: D* will add transponders with those new channels. E* will lose transponders with those new channels (or shortly thereafter). If anything would make 1440x1080i "EDTV", it would be heavy macroblocking and/or artifacting during motion.
The 1440x1080i being used by the satcos is an interlaced format, 1280x720p is a progressive format, you can't compare the two by just noting their pixel structure and saying one is "HD" because it has more pixels than the accepted format of 1280x720p.

A better comparison would be to say 1440x1080i is akin to 960x720p, would you consider 960x720p an HD format...?

Again, I find it fascinating that people deal in speculation. Does anyone here really know what resolution D* will provide when the new satellites are launched and working? I don't think they do. I don't believe D* has provided any of those details. So, you can guess and speculate all you want. We won't know until it happens. As I said before, I have E* and can't say that I am unhappy with their service and yes I visually know what a good HD picture should be. The new MPEG4 decoders that E* is using are providing a hd quality picture no less than they were providing before the switchover of some channels (like Starzhd, UNIVhd and AEhd to name a few) even with 6 channels per transponder. In my opinion, the picture is better; but my loyalty lies with no one. He who has the best HD (in both quality and quantity) at the best price will get my business. At the present time, it's E*.

I guess all HD everywhere is R.I.P. ( >sniff< I'll miss you :( )

So the big question is:
Who do we blame for killing it? :D

D*

[I]Q. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate the following on their move into HDTV: the federal government, TV manufacturers, cable and satellite companies?

A. The feds get a 7. They lose points for not mandating a “must carry” rule requiring cable to rebroadcast all local HD programming, in native resolution and at full picture quality.
I don't know if this would gear more towards local or federal, but I'd give them about a 4. All 4 1080i stations in Memphis multicast and it ruins the HD PQ. One even sideconverts to 720p. It's the 2 720p's that don't multicast. :confused:

But if the feds didn't pass must carry then we wouldn't be worrying about it. But then again the stations don't have to multicast. We all lose.

People like me only have 2 choices, D* or E*. I’ve gone back and forth between providers for years based on certain needs, PQ, and the economics of switching every 2 years. I may not be picking my jaw up from the floor as I did years ago, but at the same time, I still find lots of programming that looks incredibly good on E*. I’ll see what the future holds for both D* and E* in regard to their pricing and PQ, and make a decision accordingly. Even if E* HD is now EDTV, it still beats the crap out of SD any day, and by a wiiiiide margin. I’m not saying I like what is happening in the satellite industry, but as a consumer, when one provider makes a significant jump ahead of the other, I’ll do what any smart consumer should do if they are able; make a change. One thing is certain; until one satellite provider takes the necessary steps to give the consumer what he is paying for, we are all screwed. Talk is cheap and hype is expensive. Lets hope the money going into hype is well spent, otherwise, it could have gone to better use. I have to say that when a provider doesn’t acknowledge the existence of HD-Lite, it doesn’t give me a warm and cuddly feeling for the future.

...and somebody please define the criteria for 'leadership' in this regard?

Is it who has the best EDTV? The worst EDTV? The most EDTV? :eek:

...............................................


Man...sounds like we are comparing our fertilizers based on smell, and bragging about which scent is supposedly sweeter. :D

That's exactly the point. Rabid fanboys aside, who can possibly view this as a good thing, or minimize it just because of an equally poor product available somewhere else?

The death of 1080i HD on D* occurred a couple years ago. We said RIP then. Some people seem to refuse to acknowledge the same thing now with E*.

I don't know if this would gear more towards local or federal, but I'd give them about a 4. All 4 1080i stations in Memphis multicast and it ruins the HD PQ. One even sideconverts to 720p. It's the 2 720p's that don't multicast. :confused:

But if the feds didn't pass must carry then we wouldn't be worrying about it. But then again the stations don't have to multicast. We all lose.

By refusing to incorporate HDTV officially into the transition, the feds have allowed a wide variety of HD PQ - and even HD availability - be determined by each individual station. If they ever pass multicast must-carry, they will be actively discouraging HDTV in the marketplace.

Considering that, it is hard to see how the feds would rate a "7". When you factor in the snail's pace at which they required digital tuners to be included in televisions - when accelerating that pace would have had very little negative economic impact - I can't see ranking them any higher than a "2" or "3" if we're looking at the digital transition as a whole.

Since the CEA defines HD as any format 1280x720 at 24 fps or higher, Dish Networks 1440x1080 is certainly HD by that definition. Calling it ED is not correct. I am disappointed that Dish doesn't provide 1920x1080. However to rate them a 2 because of their PQ disreguards the fact that in other categories they are better. The currently have more HD channels than anyone else. Three commercials an hour does not change the fact the DirecTV's 100 channels are sitting in a warehouse not in the sky.

Rick R

I give the Feds a zero for not mandating a la carte.
I give my local cableco a zero for not even offering HD.
I give the Guru a 10 for his D*/E* evaluation.

Even if E* HD is now EDTV, it still beats the crap out of SD any day, and by a wiiiiide margin.Not necessarily. That could depend on the quality of the SD and your set's scaler (and possibly the screen size). I've seen SD that was preferable to view over fast moving, badly compressed, bit-starved "HD" many times.

At least to me, anyways.

But as noted in this forum as nauseum, E* has dropped all HD to 1440x1080i (other than the 720p channels)

When did Discovery HD Theater drop to 1440??

Since the CEA defines HD as any format 1280x720 at 24 fps or higher, Dish Networks 1440x1080 is certainly HD by that definition. Calling it ED is not correct. I am disappointed that Dish doesn't provide 1920x1080. However to rate them a 2 because of their PQ disreguards the fact that in other categories they are better. The currently have more HD channels than anyone else. Three commercials an hour does not change the fact the DirecTV's 100 channels are sitting in a warehouse not in the sky.

Rick R

That's ridiculous. Are you suggesting 1280 x 720 i should be considered HDTV?

When did Discovery HD Theater drop to 1440??

That was the original issue that got lost with all the noise in the first thread.

That's ridiculous. Are you suggesting 1280 x 720 i should be considered HDTV?
I tried to make that same point earlier.

I guess another way to put it would be 1440x1080i equates to 720x540p if you're only looking at the numbers and not the display parameter.

Is 720x540p HD? I...don't...think...so.....

That was the original issue that got lost with all the noise in the first thread.

Sorry Panther, I'm confused. Did DHDT really drop to 1440?

That's ridiculous. Are you suggesting 1280 x 720 i should be considered HDTV?
If he isn't suggesting it, he certainly is implying it. ;) :D
Aren't the minimum standards for HD 1280x720p and 1920x1080i ?

...
I guess another way to put it would be 1440x1080i equates to 720x540p if you're only looking at the numbers and not the display parameter.
...
Nope. 1440x1080 is 1440x1080. If it's interlaced, it is drawn as 540 even numbered lines, followed by 540 odd numbered lines, each line still having 1440 pixels, and the complete frame having 1080 lines.

If he isn't suggesting it, he certainly is implying it. ;) :D
Aren't the minimum standards for HD 1280x720p and 1920x1080i ?

Not just the minimum standards, but those are two of only 3 specific standards that define HDTV. 1920x1080p, 1920x1080i or 1280 x 720p.

If we left it up to individuals or companies to define what HDTV is, FOX could have just called their High Resolution Widescreen "HDTV" and everyone could have been happy.

But they did call it "Digital Widescreen" in a sly and not-too-subtle effort to confuse almost everyone.

Nope. 1440x1080 is 1440x1080. If it's interlaced, it is drawn as 540 even numbered lines, followed by 540 odd numbered lines, each line still having 1440 pixels, and the complete frame having 1080 lines.
I understand that, but you can't say that 1440x1080i is HD because it has bigger numbers than 1280x720p. The statement was made earlier that "anything" above 1280x720p is HD. A full 1280x720p is an HD signal, a 1440x1080i signal is not, at least in my opinion.

The numbers I threw out earlier were based simply on the percentage of lines of resolution lost when going from 1920 to 1440i(25%), if you use the same formula for 1280x720p the result would be 960x720p and that's not an HD signal.

Nope. 1440x1080 is 1440x1080. If it's interlaced, it is drawn as 540 even numbered lines, followed by 540 odd numbered lines, each line still having 1440 pixels, and the complete frame having 1080 lines.
If it's a film source, sure, there's a full 1080 line frame to be reconstituted there (but still only 1440 pixels wide, not 1920), but for moving video that isn't exactly the case, is it? You just have half-frames that don't really correspond to each other.

Personally, I don't care what the satcos do, as I can't get HD from them (OTARD doesn't mean squat if you don't have line of sight to the birds!), but they shouldn't be misleading their customers by saying they're delivering HD when they're downrezzing it for transport. Neither should cable companies that do it, either, for that matter.

I would like to know how to find out the bitrate and resolution of my signal. I have cable. I think its pretty good and last time I was able recieve an OTA signal they were close but OTA was slightly better.

But they did call it "Digital Widescreen" in a sly and not-too-subtle effort to confuse almost everyone.

Even worse, it was "High Resolution Digital Television" or High Resolution Widescreen" - forget which.

Actually I believe the CEA says all ATSC resolutions 720p and above are HD. That is:
1280x720p/24
1280x720p/30
1280x720p/60
1920x1080i/60
1920x1080p/24
1920x1080p/30

Is 1440x1080i/60 above 1280x720p/24? It has 70% more pixels, more complete frames of data per second, but is not as sharp due to the interlace. I was just saying that they are comparable.

You can disagree, but I believe that while 1440x1080i is not the best HD and as sharp as I would like, it is HD.

Rick R

All ATSC resolutions. 1440 is not an ATSC resolution.

If you can reduce 1920 lines to 1440, why not 1080 to 810? Would you consider 1920x810i HD also? What about 1440x810i?

Sure hope Discovery HD Theater, the programming source as opposed to E*, etc., hasn't gone to 1440h. AIUI, home MPEG-2 decoding shrinks effective maximum horizontal resolution (resolvable detail) about 15%. Rather have that take place on 1920h, not 1440h. Of course, there are endless layers of complications, such as many Discovery productions being HDCAM-limited to 1440h to start with. -- John

Sure hope Discovery HD Theater, the programming source as opposed to E*, etc., hasn't gone to 1440h. AIUI, home MPEG-2 decoding shrinks effective maximum horizontal resolution (resolvable detail) about 15%. Rather have that take place on 1920h, not 1440h. Of course, there are endless layers of complications, such as many Discovery productions being HDCAM-limited to 1440h to start with. -- John

Not sure where this confusion came in. DiscoveryHD is 1920x1080i in distribution and on E*.

It has NEVER had bitrates of 17+ Mbps from E* - and it apprears that DHDT has gotten the new HD encoder treatment that HBO-HD and SHO-HD did from E* that has minor errors in the stream that E* is willing to live with as it buys its time in the waning days of MPEG2 HD via DBS.

Sorry Panther, I'm confused. Did DHDT really drop to 1440?

No, the original thread topic was discussing Universal HD going HD-Lite, not DHDT.

I will agree with the writer -

FIOS's HD picture is the best i've ever seen - and this is coming from DISH network.

Even worse, it was "High Resolution Digital Television" or High Resolution Widescreen" - forget which.
It was very misleading- 'FOX Widescreen High Resolution Digital TV'.

No, the original thread topic was discussing Universal HD going HD-Lite, not DHDT.

Oh, ok thanks. I was confused because mdonnelly said earlier in the thread that E* had dropped all HD channels (except 720p ones) to 1440. I guess he was wrong.

It was very misleading- 'FOX Widescreen High Resolution Digital TV'.

Now it's the almost identical "Fox Widescreen High Definition Digital TV". As if they are trying to make it look like it was "HD" all along.

I think many of you are confusing ATSC standards with consumer marketing terminology.

Not only that, NONE of the new HD coming from D* or E* is ATSC. There is no H.264 or MPEG4 or VC1 in the ATSC standard, only MPEG2.

I think many of you are confusing ATSC standards with consumer marketing terminology.You can thank David Hill for that.

I think many of you are confusing ATSC standards with consumer marketing terminology.
I was not confused. There are 18 ATSC formats. Of which 6 the CEA has defined as HD (which I listed earlier). I was only comparing the HD picture transmitted by Dish Network to those 6 HD formats.

Rick R

Its truly sad that this is the state of HD in the USA; unfortunately, the vast majority of the public is so gullible, they will accept HD-Lite from anyone!!!

Most of the public has no choice. I have the option of Dish, D*, Time Warner. AT&T doesn't provide their FIOS here yet. Plus they're actually SBC and SBC is an evil corporation. Time Warner is piss poor with customer service here in Houston so their out. I picked D* because of the NFL. I guess I'm gullible too!

Until there's an efficient lossless HD codec, every MSO will have to balance the quality vs. quantity equation.