I was watching HBO on Dish tonight, and noticed that they've dropped HBO-HD on 110W to 1440x1080. I checked Showtime (on the same transponder) - Same deal - Also 1440x1080.

I subscribe to dish because their quality is higher that DirecTv - Now they pull this crap?! Come on Dish - You can do better than this!!

I was watching HBO on Dish tonight, and noticed that they've dropped HBO-HD on 110W to 1440x1080. I checked Showtime (on the same transponder) - Same deal - Also 1440x1080.

I subscribe to dish because their quality is higher that DirecTv - Now they pull this crap?! Come on Dish - You can do better than this!!

That expalins it! I could not get my 169time to work last night. Normally I switch to HBO to get it to lock on a full 1920h signal then onto to the 1280 channels.

I guess I now need a 169time update or an R5000.

They made this change last Thursday.

Surprisingly up until now no one has really said anything about it.

The question now is, is anyone watching TV, or Dish Dish Networks MPEG2 encoders get better?

Almost no one has noticed any change, which actually surprises me.

This switch might very well improve the quality of the picture. For any given bit rate, there is a (subjectively) optimal resolution that gives the best trade-off between sharpness and compression noise.

Its a sad day when we percieve the solution to improving HD picture quality is decreased resolution to compensate for overcompression and low bitrates. Unfortunately there is little reason for either DBS provider to provide outstanding picture quality. As much as I like my dish622, the HD picture quality from my local cableco was much better.

So who can actually SEE a difference on a 42" or a 50" set?

Forget the measurements and charts.

This apparently started some days ago. So who can see the difference?

Stevie Wonder (he has a touch screen)

1440x1080i is still HDCAM resolution, which is what's used for much of the video that members rave about on The Discovery Channel. However this is a conversion and there is potential loss from this process.

So who can actually SEE a difference on a 42" or a 50" set?

Forget the measurements and charts.

This apparently started some days ago. So who can see the difference?

Unless someone were to watch two displays side by side or the same content back to back, its unlikely a subtle change would be noticeable. Does that make it right for them to downrez HD content?

I have recordings which I could compare before and after the switch if the same programming is shown although its quite likely other variables other than just resolution were changed in the interval so while possibly interesting, the comparison wouldn't be entirely apples to apples. More importantly, I have no desire to do such a comparison and I'm guessing not many others will as well. Honestly if you compare to the picture quality of the majority (not all) of the HD satellite content to the same content on HD-DVD or Blu-ray, there isn't much of a comparison.

I agree with your comments about screen size except I'm one of those with a screen bigger than 50" :(

So who can actually SEE a difference on a 42" or a 50" set?

Forget the measurements and charts.

This apparently started some days ago. So who can see the difference?

Everybody and nobody. The bitrate was never sufficient to achieve transparency begin with so there's not much of difference one way or the other. At broadcast bitrates the high-frequency detail you'd see at 1920 and not 1440 would by thrown away by the mpeg2 encoder except in a very, very static scene.

Now if you want to challenge me to A/B a Blu-ray to an HD broadcast, I'd expect to get the answer correct every single time even on a 32" set.

I can see a huge difference in picture quality between a bluray and satellite hd. If you can't then you must have a vision problem.

Everybody and nobody... At broadcast bitrates the high-frequency detail you'd see at 1920 and not 1440 would by thrown away by the mpeg2 encoder except in a very, very static scene...

I have to disagree. I've seen the same episodes of Desert Speaks, Smart Travels, etc on PBS at full rez and then when they are shown on V* Equator they look like crap. It's almost like I can see what some describe as scanlines or tiling or jaggies when I'm watching any V* channel.

I can see the difference on my 1999 56in Panasonic crt rptv. Sadly there's nothing I can do about it. I don't have any movie channels, but if I did I would complain and cancel them until they are returned to full rez.

Hammer

I think a portion of the quality perception may have to do with the source material. I've seen some stuff from that Japanese company(can't think of the name right now - starts with an "N") that has looked stunning on Equator, even with the lower bitrate/res.

So who can actually SEE a difference on a 42" or a 50" set? No one can. How did the OP discover the change ? His post doesn't suggest that he noticed a visual or PQ problem. He obviously has tools that tell him the resolution 'cause no one's eyes do !
Forget the measurements and charts. I argue that all the time. The saying "what you don't know won't hurt you" firmly applies. I'm not defending the practice but 99% of the time people don't KNOW something's changed from watching. We've got people constantly monitoring this stuff 24/7 and posting to forums when a minute bit changes.

It's be proven on this forum time and again that it's useless to argue with the HD-lite evangelists, but the vast, vast majority of PQ woes are directly related to bitrate NOT reduced horizontal resolution.

If you try to understand how mpeg2 coding works (especially the DCT basis transform and quantization) you'll realize how little downrezzing affects the picture at broadcast bitrates.
In fact, DCT-based lossy compression (mpeg2) is around precisely because it happens to be a mathematical way of throwing away resolution in an aesthetically pleasing manner.

So there's a reason the higher frequencies in the quantizing matrix have larger values? :D

I thought Big Love looked bad tonight. guess this answers that question. shame on E*.

Bit rate is more important than resolution.

In the beginning there was darkness. Then the ATSC created 1920X1080i. In late-'95 it spaketh (2.1 Resolution (http://www.atsc.org/news_information/papers/1995_acats/tsreport.pdf)): The Expert Group assumed that " ...horizontal resolution would be
limited to about 80 % of the number of active samples because of filtering,..." (Active sampling along each HDTV scan line is at ~74 MHz with TV cameras or telecines.)

Since HDTV is all about higher resolutions, seems logical to ask whether ~80% of 1920 is preferable to ~80% of 1440 (or even 1280 with HDLite). Should also ask, since most here report measuring only ~1300 resolvable lines horizontal resolution ( effective resolution (http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5667245&&#post5667245)), using HDNet test patterns with various set-top boxes, how this factors in. (Here's just one report (http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8509731&&#post8509731) of >1900 resolvable lines with a 1080p display and 8300HD STB from a smaller cable system.) Also, ought to factor in earlier reports of only 800--1000 resolvable lines equivalent maximum horizontal resolution from typical movie master tapes (see quotes/sublinks (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9314235&&#post9314235)). -- John

i watched a movie on hbo over the weekend and did notice that the pq was not as good as past movie broadcasts. before, hbo on e* was one of my best hd pq sources. now they've dropped it down to hd lite. bummer.

at least i got both star wars trilogies in non hd lite from hbo before they gutted the signal.

Also when they lowered the resolution of the HBO and Shotime, they added a FOURTH signal to the transponder so the bitrates were decreased, and now run in the 7-9 Mbps per signal. The HDNet transponder also had a fourth signal added so the bitrates dropped on those signals also. Maybe this is the beginning of switching them to Mpeg4 encoding.

Bit rate is more important than resolution.
I agree, but surely we should not be lowering the bitrate to the point where we have to lower the resolution to compensate? BEV in Canada still runs 30MBit/transponder @ QPSK, and for their HD channels, they put no more than 2 channels per transponder. Yeah, there's a lot less channels, but the ones they do get look a lot better.

It's be nice if the broadcasters can switch things like HBO and SHO to 720p24 or 1080p24 and stop wasting bandwidth on sending 60i frames when over half of them are a duplicate of the previous frame...

Of course, you have the other end of the spectrum of ABC uplinking all their stuff in 720p60 @ 40 MBit - That looks FANTASTIC!

Also when they lowered the resolution of the HBO and Shotime, they added a FOURTH signal to the transponder so the bitrates were decreased, and now run in the 7-9 Mbps per signal. The HDNet transponder also had a fourth signal added so the bitrates dropped on those signals also. Maybe this is the beginning of switching them to Mpeg4 encoding.

The golden age of broadcast HD is behind us, seriously... and has been since the HDNets were downrezzed last July... =(

Of course, you have the other end of the spectrum of ABC uplinking all their stuff in 720p60 @ 40 MBit - That looks FANTASTIC!That's the network fronthaul. The stations re-encode the signal to ATSC bitrates. Multicasting is common on ABC O&Os. CBS & CW also send the network fronthaul at 40+ Mbs. So far the CBS O&Os are not multicasting. Fox's network stream does not require re-encoding at the station.

...and NBC, well...who cares... :p :D

I subscribe to dish because their quality is higher that DirecTv - Now they pull this crap?! Come on Dish - You can do better than this!!DirecTV sends these channels at 1280x1080, so I guess Dish is still ahead.

anyone have an opinion if we'll see 1920x1080i again when they switch hbo/sho to mpeg4?

anyone have an opinion if we'll see 1920x1080i again when they switch hbo/sho to mpeg4?
IMO, no we won't, but I'm just one idiot in a sea of thousands.

Pretty soon we'll have better PQ on our cell phones than from the sat providers.

honestly, i think people have stopped caring..the ones that watch movies on HBO have probably gone dual format now and the sopranos is done - so who cares?

The cynic I am asks; why give you back what has already been taken away? For the newbie, you don’t miss what you haven’t seen. And most of the world hasn’t been witness to HDTV in its truest sense. Therefore, when more people own HDTV’s, what will seem to be true HD will be what you have first been introduced to. Yet, it will be far from true HDTV and you will be paying top dollar for it. This kind of mentality goes far beyond electronic equipment and providers.

It's be nice if the broadcasters can switch things like HBO and SHO to 720p24 or 1080p24 and stop wasting bandwidth on sending 60i frames when over half of them are a duplicate of the previous frame...

Mpeg2 has provisions for repeat field/frame flags. There is practically zero encoding overhead to wrapping a 24p source in a 60i container.

IMO, no we won't, but I'm just one idiot in a sea of thousands.

You overestimate your intelligence - and underestimate our numbers. :)

Oh well. Good thing I already cancelled HBO. This just means that I won't be resubscribing. It's definitely not worth the $14.99 now. I'll just wait until some of the original programming becomes available on Blu-Ray and rent it then. Then, I don't have to worry about HD-Lite.

With E* continuing to promise external hard drives and not delivering on this, plus the downrezzing of all their HD content, they're making it really hard to stay a customer. I have always thought in my head, "It's okay that they down-rez most of their programming. At least they're not dumb enough to down-rez their premium programming that people pay extra for." I guess they finally got dumb enough.

You overestimate your intelligence - and underestimate our numbers. :)
Then we're definitely in sad shape. :p

Hmm, lets compare the arguments in the HD-lite debate.

Bitrate:

PQ is ultimately dependent on the quantizer applied to the DCT matrix. Large quantizers inherently lead to resolution loss as the quantization matrix is weighted to discard high frequency coefficients.

Horizontal resolution:

The HDNet test pattern looked better on one guys set.

I was watching HBO on Dish tonight, and noticed that they've dropped HBO-HD on 110W to 1440x1080. I checked Showtime (on the same transponder) - Same deal - Also 1440x1080.

I subscribe to dish because their quality is higher that DirecTv - Now they pull this crap?! Come on Dish - You can do better than this!!
Time to send Dish a message.
I have:
Eric:
Long story, short. I've been a loyal Dish Network customer for over 6 years. I'm also very passionate about home theater. I have the Sony Qualia 004 1080p projector that throws an 8' wide picture of stunning quality, as long as the source is up to it. It used to be that Dish was the leader in HD. But over the past months, I've noticed a significant decrease in quality when I view your HD channels via your 622 receiver. I see macro-blocking, resolution pumping, dropouts and noise, due in most cases to the practice of down-rezzing your signal to accommodate quantity over quality. This may be acceptable for your customers who have 40" (or smaller) plasma/LCD flat screens or RPTVs, but it's unacceptable in my environment. Also, your 622 receiver is unstable, prone to reboots and the HDMI connector broke long ago. Last week, when I gave up trying to watch a program on Dish HD due to dropouts and rebooting, I decided to take the initiative to research my options. And I found what I believe will provide me with the quality and service I use to get from Dish - that would be Verizon FIOS. It's well known that they provide a true 1080i full signal. I've been using their excellent FIOS Internet service for over two years, and their FIOS TV service provides a greater value than what I currently have with Dish.

Eric, I've done my research, and my mind is made up. Now here's the issue: I'm still required to honor a contract that I have with you until mid-October. I realize the benefit that I received with the terms of the contract, but it's not worth a damn to me if Dish doesn't hold up it's end of the bargain. And IMHO as the paying customer, Dish has failed to meet my reasonable expectations. What are my rights in this situation?

BTW, Verizon will be out this Friday to perform the install. If you check the recent history on my account I talked with a CSR last Saturday (code: P4W) who was very patient as I described my situation, and offered to send someone out this Saturday to review my system. Actually, I will instruct the technician to remove my two dishes from my roof. I will also call Dish to confirm that I want my subscription cancelled, and if I must pay a cancellation fee, so be it. I'm simply not willing to put up with disappointing quality and unreliability one more day. I will not wait for October.

This should send you the strongest of messages - I am an unhappy Dish customer.

Mike Ferrara

Seems it's best to separate the issues. As usual, it all depends on how many variables you want to factor in. Since requantization, changing quantization levels on the fly without decoding, isn't unusual for cable/DBS delivery (providing them more bandwidth), helps to know whether your premium movie source in employing requantization.

Not sure if that would noticeably degrade HDNet's static resolution-wedge resolvability or not. Seems it might if the quant level choosen limits all effective resolution above a certain level, even though MPEG-2 can deliver static resolution patterns easily at low bit rates. Of course if your STB can't provide effective resolutions higher than about 1300 lines, that's all you'll see from HDNet.

And if the movies being delivered still only have a maximum equivalent effective resolution of 800--1000 lines (my link, previous page), that limits maximum resolvable detail from them, too. So it seems best to match the delivery format to maximize the resolvable detail available while minimizing blocking artifacts if bit rates become too low. My preference is full 1920X1080i, no requantization, maximum bit rates possible, and STBs/displays that can resolve ~1920 lines from HDNet's test pattern. (Oh, and apple pie, too.) -- John

One of the few SD channels I get from their 61.5 bird really went down the tubes in quality about a month and a half back.

I sent them an e-mail saying that it was one of the few channels I really watch with any regularity, and that if they cut down the bandwith or whatever, I might consider cancelling.

They denied everything and said that there was no known problem on the content provider's end, and told me to contact their service dept., as if it was more likely a problem with my equipment, which I'm pretty sure it isn't - because I have a couple of their "info" channels from that bird, and they're sharp as a tack. There is also another, regular programming channel that I fortunately never watch which is also bad, to prove that it's on their end.

So now I have to look at a blurry picture on it every night. The text is especially hard to read.

I have the Sony Qualia 004 1080p projector that throws an 8' wide picture of stunning quality... This may be acceptable for your customers who have 40" (or smaller) plasma/LCD flat screens or RPTVs, but it's unacceptable in my environment. Who do you think Dish is more interested in catering to ??

Who do you think Dish is more interested in catering to ??
ROTFLMAO :p
Heck, Charlie's a good ol' boy redneck. He is the definition of Joe 6Pac.

Indeed. I think a lot of folks overlook the fact that when a supplier evaluates how much a customer is "worth" they include both revenue AND expense attributable to that customer. The more support a customer needs, due to the manner in which that customer chooses to interact with the product or service offering, the less attractive the customer is.

you poor guys, I gave up on any HD from any provider over a year ago, for those that were still enjoying 1920x1080i Showtime and HBO, sorry for your loss

HD via broadcast is totally DOA, all satellite providers are destroying it, local OTA stations are multiplexing, most cable companies are cramming in too much :(

the answer for me was simple: BD and HD-DVD

I refuse to watch the utter garbage that is delivered via Dish or Directv, 100$ a month for the bill will buy nearly 6 top quality HD releases :)

-Gary

recorded alexander off hbo tuesday on 622. pq was terrible, awful, unwatchable (not to mention that the movie really sucks).

the down rezzing and reduction in bit rate is absolutely noticeable. i'm thinking of cancelling hbo as what was one of my best hd channels is now worse than voom.

anyone have an email address to dish cs. i think we should all let them know how p.o. ed we are.

HBO-HD and SHO-HD are stll 1920x1080i on the 148 degrees West satellite.

you poor guys, I gave up on any HD from any provider over a year ago, for those that were still enjoying 1920x1080i Showtime and HBO, sorry for your loss

HD via broadcast is totally DOA, all satellite providers are destroying it, local OTA stations are multiplexing, most cable companies are cramming in too much :(

the answer for me was simple: BD and HD-DVD

I refuse to watch the utter garbage that is delivered via Dish or Directv, 100$ a month for the bill will buy nearly 6 top quality HD releases :)

-Gary
Pretty much my view as well regarding HD TV, although I'm beginning to accept it for what it is, similar to the relationship between DVD and analog TV years ago, BD and HD-DVD replacing DVD and HDTV replacing analog TV, both versions of TV being in second place in the PQ department.

recorded alexander off hbo tuesday on 622. pq was terrible, awful, unwatchable (not to mention that the movie really sucks).

the down rezzing and reduction in bit rate is absolutely noticeable. i'm thinking of cancelling hbo as what was one of my best hd channels is now worse than voom.

anyone have an email address to dish cs. i think we should all let them know how p.o. ed we are.I started to watch Alexander on HBO-HD on D* last night but gave up. It was awful PQ as you mentioned.

HBO-HD and SHO-HD are stll 1920x1080i on the 148 degrees West satellite.

If only I had line of site to 148 I would try it.

you poor guys, I gave up on any HD from any provider over a year ago, for those that were still enjoying 1920x1080i Showtime and HBO, sorry for your loss

HD via broadcast is totally DOA, all satellite providers are destroying it, local OTA stations are multiplexing, most cable companies are cramming in too much :(

the answer for me was simple: BD and HD-DVD

I refuse to watch the utter garbage that is delivered via Dish or Directv, 100$ a month for the bill will buy nearly 6 top quality HD releases :)

-Gary

Oooh, I like that a lot Gary! What's really valueable to us - PQ or variety? It's nice to have a bizillion channels but if they all look like crap is it really worth it? I guess it depends on who you are - if you like to turn on the tube and start surfing for something to watch then channels over quality - if you want to enjoy the best quality, I like Gary's approach.

I have to say I am pretty much done with american TV and HD. There was a point I would turn on the tube just for the eye candy but not anymore, and not for a long time. Like Gary says if you want some great HD Bluray and HD-DVD are where they are. Additionally, the Europeans broadcast some AMAZING HD (some of which clearly rivals blu and Hddvd). Hook a computer up to your TV, and prepare to sweat a bit, but in the end this may be the only way to really get top notch HD anymore.

ROTFLMAO :p
Heck, Charlie's a good ol' boy redneck. He is the definition of Joe 6Pac.

You find Charlie raking in the most amount of new subs last quarter very funny too?:)

Look you obviously think you can scare the hell out of Charlie, but the fact of the matter is quantity sells, sad but true. Cable is actually a shining example of retaining good HD quality, but they continue to lose subs to both E* and D* left and right. And both E* and D* are compressing their HDs.

I don't think the use of Verizon will scare Charlie, he knows Verizon has very limited market, he also can care less about someone with a 8' screen, his model is going after the HD J6P you got that right.

HD via broadcast is totally DOAWell maybe not totally DOA - CBS O&Os still do not multicast yet, though it's still not the bitrate and quality that optical discs offer. We may see improved PQ as cable moves towards better codecs and transmission, but I think that's not going to be any time soon. For now optical discs provide the best HD we've ever had for consumers. Even home HD camcorders look better than much of the broadcast/cable/sat HD.

Oooh, I like that a lot Gary! What's really valueable to us - PQ or variety? It's nice to have a bizillion channels but if they all look like crap is it really worth it? I guess it depends on who you are - if you like to turn on the tube and start surfing for something to watch then channels over quality - if you want to enjoy the best quality, I like Gary's approach.

I have to say ultimately the content is the important thing.

Suppose there is an SD channel which you watch all the time and has a LOT of great content.

Now, suppose your satellite or cable provider says "That channel is launching an HD version. All our bandwidth is used up, so we will have to reduce bandwidth on all HD channels by 5% to fit it in, but we are going to do that to add this channel".

Given that you like the content on this channel, you know that you are going to grudgingly agree that this is the best decision.

The problem that satellite and cable providers have, is that each channel is a favorite channel for someone. If that were not true, they would have gotten rid of it to make space for other channels (and in fact, that does happen from time to time).

So it is not "quantity vs quality". It's someone's favorite show vs. quality.

...So it is not "quantity vs quality". It's someone's favorite show vs. quality.

I agree, but what new content do we get with this change at E*?

It's be nice if the broadcasters can switch things like HBO and SHO to 720p24 or 1080p24 and stop wasting bandwidth on sending 60i frames when over half of them are a duplicate of the previous frame...
It's not "over half of them". It's more like 25% (film content takes 48 fields per second).

I wonder if the reencoding propagates those flags.

I agree, but what new content do we get with this change at E*?

Someone's favorite show, which in the near term, is probably HD RSNs.

They will probably keep lowering quality until the average consumer notices. At that point, they will up it slightly and make a PR event out of it saying they listen to their customers and are improving quality based on this.

They will probably keep lowering quality until the average consumer notices. At that point, they will up it slightly and make a PR event out of it saying they listen to their customers and are improving quality based on this.

I can understand the cynicism, but after having HD for these many years and showed off HD to my many guests both on a regular HDTV and a 12' screen, I must agree content is the king. Almost none noticed any difference between a "true" HD picture and a slightly "down rezzed" one, except me.

We all think we are so important in our quest for the pure and true HD PQ, but the providers only have to look at their quarterly reports to know our view don't matter. OK we do matter but only if they have a lot of bandwidth left over.

If E*'s recent move means they can add all the new HDs coming out this fall to combat D*, before their own new sats are up, then you have to admit it is a winning plan as far as their bottom line is concerned.

It's not "over half of them". It's more like 25% (film content takes 48 fields per second).



Aren't you guys both right?

For 1080/60i (CBS,NBC, PBS etc.) you are correct - 1080/24p material requires 1080/48i for broadcast, leaving 12 redundant fields, which is less than half.

However if you are carrying 1080/24p or 720/24p material via 720/60p (ABC, Fox) then you potentially have 36 redundant frames - which IS well over half.

Gary commented:
> HD via broadcast is totally DOA, all satellite providers are destroying it, local OTA stations are multiplexing, most cable companies are cramming in too much <

I understand the sentiments, but you're exaggerating, as usual. It's not totally DOA (yet), because contrary to your claim, lots of cable cos. across the US of A are still preserving PQ. However, you may wind up correct when the sat cos. start claiming they have 5x the HD as cable cos. (even though 80-90% of that content is upconverted), and the cable cos. feel pressured to start making similar compromises to keep up with the numbers. FIOS would be great, if they could get significant market penetration.

> the answer for me was simple: BD and HD-DVD <

That's one answer, but how are you enjoying, say the SW Trilogys on HD discs? Or any of many thousands of other films that air via broadcast avenues, that are not, and will not be available on disc for some time to come? (Perhaps never, for some titles.)

> I refuse to watch the utter garbage that is delivered via Dish or Directv, 100$ a month for the bill will buy nearly 6 top quality HD releases <

No argument about sat PQ, but are there even 6 top quality HD releases every month on HD discs one could buy? (That's an honest question, not sarcasm.) When I've checked, it always seemed the release schedule was pretty anemic. Perhaps this has changed over the past few months.

- Tim

Tim, I have over 250 HD/BD titles and counting in less than a year

I hit various sales over the past few weeks and picked up 32 releases for under 500$ or around 15$ each

stuff like Big Lebowski, Seven Years in Tibet, Hellboy, Lost in Translation, Trading Places, Road Warrior, Blood Diamond, Donnie Brasco, Revenge, Dog Day Afternoon, Matrix Trilogy, Pirates 2, Daylight, Smokey and the Bandit, Harts War, Meet Joe Black, Scanner Darkly and the list goes on

I enjoy those other thousands of films on DVD, which are more enjoyable to me than HD-Lite trash, with a top end Scaler and a SDI modified DVD player things are pretty darn good

-Gary

Gary commented:
...> the answer for me was simple: BD and HD-DVD <

That's one answer, but how are you enjoying, say the SW Trilogys on HD discs? Or any of many thousands of other films that air via broadcast avenues, that are not, and will not be available on disc for some time to come? (Perhaps never, for some titles.)

> I refuse to watch the utter garbage that is delivered via Dish or Directv, 100$ a month for the bill will buy nearly 6 top quality HD releases <

No argument about sat PQ, but are there even 6 top quality HD releases every month on HD discs one could buy? (That's an honest question, not sarcasm.) When I've checked, it always seemed the release schedule was pretty anemic. Perhaps this has changed over the past few months.

- Tim

And most people do not watch TV for the blockbuster movies, but sports, reality shows, TV series and many many more that are not going to be on DVDs or not worth buying and collecting.

However if you are carrying 1080/24p or 720/24p material via 720/60p (ABC, Fox) then you potentially have 36 redundant frames - which IS well over half.
The weird thing about 24p material over 720p is that in my experience the frames that should be redundant are almost never duplicates. With my ABC affiliate, the second "redundant" frame often has more detail than the previous frame. In some cases the first frame will be pixelated but the second frame "fixes" it. In rare cases the third duplicate can add even a little more detail. Good thing our eyes don't notice this at 60 fps.

I'm guessing this is because of how the network feeds are set up. My ABC affiliate is receiving a fantastic 45 Mbps feed and the station's encoder is trying hard to create a similar stream with only 18 Mbps (only 15 Mbps now since the station got a new encoder).

Maybe this is why filmed material can look incredibly good in 720p. It can use the "duplicate" frames to add detail to the original frames and effectively show detail that would have come from a true 24 fps feed.

I don't know why they can't just cram all the detail into the first frame and use the duplicate flags for the redundant frames (the duplicate flags do work with progressive frames). Is there a maximum data size for a single frame in ATSC?

> Tim, I have over 250 HD/BD titles and counting in less than a year <

Gary, I have over 4,000 HD titles and counting. But it did take me 3 years to record those from my cable co., all at 1920x1080i, with pass-through data-rates (admittedly, not always spectacular from the source). Unfortunately, not all are OAR (d@mn HBO :)), but most look significantly superior to upscaled DVD.

If you've acquired 250 HD discs, then you've already got the major portion of what's currently available from both camps. The selection just isn't there yet.

> I hit various sales over the past few weeks and picked up 32 releases <

That's cool, but you dodged the question I asked, which was how many new releases are currently coming out each month? Those 32 you picked up quickly probably trickled out over 5-6 months. It's my impression that both BD and HD-DVD owners are chomping at the bit for more content. But perhaps I'm misinformed.

> I enjoy those other thousands of films on DVD, which are more enjoyable to me than HD-Lite trash, with a top end Scaler <

No argument there. The sat cos. are definitely dropping the PQ ball. And so are some cable cos., I'm sure. But not all of them, and not mine (yet). Upscaled DVDs are great, and you don't have to worry about getting 25% hacked off your scope films, because they're always OAR.

But your blanket statements indicate that no cable cos. are offering a quality PQ product, and I'd take issue with that. Certainly not as good as either HD disc format, but 1000% better than an HD disc that doesn't exist. I'm simply saying that cable HD is still a viable option, and certainly not "totally DOA", as you claimed.

Are you indicating that you'd rather watch the SW Trilogies on upscaled DVD, rather than full bit-rate HD 1920x1080i OAR as aired this year on Cinemax and HBO?

I take it you don't have a quality cable co. in your neck of the woods?

- Tim

i'd rather have a smaller selection with high quality instead of 5000 macroblocked turds.

i'd rather have a smaller selection with high quality instead of 5000 macroblocked turds.
But what if the smaller selection had none of the channels that you watch ?

But what if the smaller selection had none of the channels that you watch ?
but but but what if.....like we have a real choice in what HD programs we can get...we get what E* or D* gives us. Personally, I would rather have a higher quality picture over quantity too...most of the channels are parttime HD with mostly upconverted SD. Pristine, crystal clear programs....hogwash. I truly hope that when E* and D* get their new birds in play that they truly improve picture quality for both SD and HD channels. If they don't, we as subscribers should demand that they do. If my expectation isn't met, I will drop my programming with E* and look elsewhere for the quality I should get and that I pay a lot for each month that I'm not currently getting.

... If my expectation isn't met, I will drop my programming with E* and look elsewhere for the quality I should get and that I pay a lot for each month that I'm not currently getting.

But why should E* or D* care if both of them continue to gain large number of new subs--apparently most of them don't see the difference between 1920x1080 and 1440x1080?

because a lot of people who buy HD tvs today don't have a clue what good HD really is. As more and more people see HDDVD or Bluray and compare it to what E* and D* calls HD, then and only then will DBS providers have to change to meet people's expectations and demands. You're right, why should they change when they keep gaining subscribers each month. SD used to be crystal clear. Look what it is today. HD was much much better two years ago. Look what it is today. Hopefully, competition will force all providers to improve picture quality AND add more HD channels to compete. All we can do is wait to see what will unfold.

Well maybe not totally DOA - CBS O&Os still do not multicast yet....A common misconception.

Out of the 4 OTA markets I can get CBS from at any given time, 3 of them multicast.

A common misconception.

Out of the 4 OTA markets I can get CBS from at any given time, 3 of them multicast.

Are the 3 CBS multicasters you receive O&Os?

The quoted post was specific about O&Os (AIUI stations owned by CBS) not multicasting but didn't state that no CBS stations multicasted, as those that are not owned by CBS, but instead are owned by others and affiliated to CBS for network programming, can do what their owners wish, which may be different to what CBS wishes when it comes to multicasting.

I'm a Brit so the specifics of US broadcasting are still a slight mystery. Over here we have no real concept of "stations" - the OTA networks have total control from playout to transmitter these days. (ITV used to be a regional confederation of franchises but is now entirely merged in England and Wales, with just the franchises in Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Channel Islands retaining some independent ownership)

Tim, I have over 250 HD/BD titles and counting in less than a year

I hit various sales over the past few weeks and picked up 32 releases for under 500$ or around 15$ each

stuff like Big Lebowski, Seven Years in Tibet, Hellboy, Lost in Translation, Trading Places, Road Warrior, Blood Diamond, Donnie Brasco, Revenge, Dog Day Afternoon, Matrix Trilogy, Pirates 2, Daylight, Smokey and the Bandit, Harts War, Meet Joe Black, Scanner Darkly and the list goes on

I enjoy those other thousands of films on DVD, which are more enjoyable to me than HD-Lite trash, with a top end Scaler and a SDI modified DVD player things are pretty darn good

-Gary

Each to their own Gary - but some of us enjoy live programming (sport, concerts, entertainment programming) and the experience of common viewing.

I love watching BD/HD DVD/DVD movies - but also love being able to chat to friends and family about shows I watched last night.

I'd certainly find it a much duller "viewing life" if I only watched pre-recorded material.

I'd also miss my fix of "real video" 50i material - I've seen very few HD pre-recorded releases that aren't 24p (or 24p/25p sourced in 50i/60i)

Are the 3 CBS multicasters you receive O&Os?That I'm not sure of. I'm pretty sure at least one isn't, and that's the one that doesn't multicast (Chicago). How would I find out?

About your last post, I'm with you all the way. I think I could go completely without TV altogether rather than be fed a steady diet of American major motion pictures.

And it isn't even so much a matter of being able to have something to relate to with other people, although that's part of it. It just makes me feel more in touch with the world around me in general.

I was actually very close to someone like that. All they cared about were movies and movie stars. I don't think they ever watched anything at all that was on TV. Just major motion pictures, with major stars, day in and day out.

Talk about being in your own, little world and out of touch with reality.

That I'm not sure of. I'm pretty sure at least one isn't, and that's the one that doesn't multicast (Chicago). How would I find out?

Check the Wikipedia article on the station or the station's website

because a lot of people who buy HD tvs today don't have a clue what good HD really is. As more and more people see HDDVD or Bluray and compare it to what E* and D* calls HD, then and only then will DBS providers have to change to meet people's expectations and demands. You're right, why should they change when they keep gaining subscribers each month. SD used to be crystal clear. Look what it is today. HD was much much better two years ago. Look what it is today. Hopefully, competition will force all providers to improve picture quality AND add more HD channels to compete. All we can do is wait to see what will unfold.

I agree with you Richie. I currently have DirecTV service and pay extra each month for their HDLite package of channels. I have not acquired either the H20 or the HR20 STB and still just have the 3 LNB dish. I've decided to wait until the new HD channels are launched in the Fall of 2007 to see if D* will increase bandwidth for the new MPEG4 HD channels. If the true HD quality is provided on the new channels, then I will install the slimline dish and acquire the required STB. If the new HD channels are still in HDLite, then my plan is to drop the HD package and just continue with the Total Choice SD package. I don't mind waiting until the new satellites are online to see if D* will return to high quality HD. I am bothered by paying out extra dollars each month for the "HD package" when it is less quality than when I originally subscribed to that package. As you said, we just have to wait and see what will happen.

That I'm not sure of. I'm pretty sure at least one isn't, and that's the one that doesn't multicast (Chicago). WBBM Chicago is owned by CBS.

I have the older 811 box from DishNetwork. Recently I noticed that my HD channels all have the black bars horizontally, ESPN is no longer labeled "ESPNHD" and TNT is no longer labeled "TNTHD"...there is still a difference between SD ESPN & TNT but I was wondering if this is the same thing going on that you guys are talking about? None of my tv settings have changed, it just started showing up like that about a week ago.


My brother told me tonight he started looking at his settings and his tv is now telling him he's getting 480p on his HD channels...even though his dish receiver is clearly set at 1080i...something is fishy with all this. You don't think Dish put out some sort of compression update do ya?


I'd get real pissed but living out in the sticks leaves me with Dish Net or Direct TV. The cable company around here has never heard of such nonsense as High Def tv...hey maybe they are on to something afterall. And excuse me if I don't long to buy all these "high quality" HD-DVD's some of which are worthless....I think I'll just hold out for the ones I really want like the Matrix trilogy and forget about all the lesser titles.

811 is being swapped for free for an MPEG4 box (211) between now and August 15th.

In theory, Dish is supposed to contact you, but it wouldn't hurt to call about it.

811 is being swapped for free for an MPEG4 box (211) between now and August 15th.

In theory, Dish is supposed to contact you, but it wouldn't hurt to call about it.


I might look into that but I don't think I want to sign up for another agreement if the programming doesn't get much better. I may wait and see what the story is with Direct and their alleged 150 HD channels...something tells me this is 150 channels at 540p or some trash.

I have the older 811 box from DishNetwork. Recently I noticed that my HD channels all have the black bars horizontally, ESPN is no longer labeled "ESPNHD" and TNT is no longer labeled "TNTHD"...there is still a difference between SD ESPN & TNT but I was wondering if this is the same thing going on that you guys are talking about? None of my tv settings have changed, it just started showing up like that about a week ago.

Dish renamed the HD channels and dropped the HD about a week ago.


My brother told me tonight he started looking at his settings and his tv is now telling him he's getting 480p on his HD channels...even though his dish receiver is clearly set at 1080i...something is fishy with all this. You don't think Dish put out some sort of compression update do ya?

Don't have an 811 but this really sounds like a settings problem on the TV or box, but possibly a bad box. If the box is set to 1080i I don't know why it wouldn't send out 1080i

I confirmed what the previous poster here claimed. 148 is still full rez on HBO and Showtime. For how long, who knows.

What's funny is on this month's "Charlie Chat," Charlie Ergen claimed they don't "recompress" anything - they deliver the signal to you in the format they are sent.

I suppose 1400x1080 is still 1080i, but really…

Don't have an 811 but this really sounds like a settings problem on the TV or box, but possibly a bad box. If the box is set to 1080i I don't know why it wouldn't send out 1080i

Well I've got the 811 and it's been a piece of crap since the day I got it 3 years ago, but that doesn't have anything to do with my brothers reciever...I'm thinking it's a the 622. He's got a wife, nanny, and 3 tiny kids so there's no telling what settings might have gotten messed with while he's a work.

DirecTV sends these channels at 1280x1080, so I guess Dish is still ahead.

congrats E* fan boy.

For what it's worth my brothers's 622 settings were set to 480p and he doesn't know how it got like that. I'll check my setup when I get home tonight...would be interested if anyone else has checked their settings since that last big update they rolled out a while back. What happened to the DBS forum link on AVS...did they do away with that entirely?

Maybe this is why filmed material can look incredibly good in 720p. It can use the "duplicate" frames to add detail to the original frames and effectively show detail that would have come from a true 24 fps feed.The duplication of frames does give you a somewhat cleaner picture (due to lower motion compared to 60-fps content), but 60-fps content can look incredibly good in 720p also.

Broadcasters don't send 720p with repeat flags because there is little incentive for them to do so. They need to use a bit rate high enough for the 60-fps content anyway. Many broadcasters use cheap encoders. Their broadcast platform is just not optimized for efficient multicasting, like it usually is for cable & satellite.

I confirmed what the previous poster here claimed. 148 is still full rez on HBO and Showtime. For how long, who knows.


so how do you know what sat you're getting the signal from? do we as subs have any options to tune to this sat as opposed to the sat we're getting the signal from?

if so, pray tell how do we tune to this sat?

so how do you know what sat you're getting the signal from? do we as subs have any options to tune to this sat as opposed to the sat we're getting the signal from?

if so, pray tell how do we tune to this sat?
If you go into the check switch menu it will tell you what sats you're getting, it does a check of the switch and displays all the relative feeds.

You'll need line of sight to 148, which is easily done in the SF bay area, as long as there's no immediate obstacles close by(buildings, trees, etc). I use 148 for HBO and SHO here in Santa Rosa.

congrats E* fan boy.LOL. Hardly. I've never been a Dish customer -- I'm former DirecTV, now Fios. I'm just reporting the facts. 1440 > 1280. But both are way less than 1920.

Dish renamed the HD channels and dropped the HD about a week ago.

I thought I would clarify, since this sentence could be misinterpreted. :)

Dish renamed the HD channels are removed the letters "HD" from the names of most of them.

This is so that they could have more than one HBO channel (and so forth), since their channel names are 5 characters.

So, HBO HD channel was "HBOHD" which would not allow them to have names for any other HBO channels in HD, such as "HBO2E" (which is the name of HBO2 East).

(Now the separate "HD" designation is the only way to distinguish the HD channel from the SD channel in the Guide, if you are using "map down".)

...since their channel names are 5 characters...

Should have allowed up to 256 characters for expansion:)

The duplication of frames does give you a somewhat cleaner picture (due to lower motion compared to 60-fps content), but 60-fps content can look incredibly good in 720p also.
But not as good as 24 fps content. There has always been a huge difference in my eyes.

Broadcasters don't send 720p with repeat flags because there is little incentive for them to do so. They need to use a bit rate high enough for the 60-fps content anyway.
The repeat flags don't reduce bitrate unless the encoder uses them specifically to reduce the bitrate. They can simply allow more data for frames with actual content, assuming ATSC allows this (there might be a maximum data size for a single frame).

Many broadcasters use cheap encoders. Their broadcast platform is just not optimized for efficient multicasting, like it usually is for cable & satellite.
I have never heard of a "cheap" professional encoder. Old ones, yes.

The reason they can't use the repeat flags, from what I understand, is because these flags aren't passed to the station's encoder if the network is including them in their feed. The network feed is fully decoded into raw video so the station can add it's ID and it's up to the encoder to figure out which frames are repeats when it reencodes it. From what I've seen there are few frames that are encoded as true duplicates in 720p.

WBBM Chicago is owned by CBS.Makes more sense then, since they're "sub-less".

The reason they can't use the repeat flags, from what I understand, is because these flags aren't passed to the station's encoder if the network is including them in their feed. The network feed is fully decoded into raw video so the station can add it's ID and it's up to the encoder to figure out which frames are repeats when it reencodes it.Generally speaking, when a broadcast uses repeat flags, it's because the encoder is smart enough to identify the 3:2 pull-down pattern, and perform inverse telecine before encoding. This can be done independent of how the picture is delivered to the affiliate. (i.e. it doesn't matter that the picture is decoded to raw before re-encoding, and it doesn't matter that repeat flags are not passed through.) Most encoders can't do inverse telecine.

Cheap is relative.

Generally speaking, when a broadcast uses repeat flags, it's because the encoder is smart enough to identify the 3:2 pull-down pattern, and perform inverse telecine before encoding. This can be done independent of how the picture is delivered to the affiliate. (i.e. it doesn't matter that the picture is decoded to raw before re-encoding, and it doesn't matter that repeat flags are not passed through.) Most encoders can't do inverse telecine.
It has to do inverse telecine on it's own because the video is being fully decoded, the MPEG flags (if they're even there) are being thrown away and it has no correct repeat flags to use when reencoding it. There is free transcoding software that can optionally use the pulldown flags when reencoding if the flags are there so it won't have to do inverse telecine. It's unfortunate that expensive affiliate encoders have to rely on inverse telecine to do this.

anyone else seeing this? my hbo signal on e* is now noticeably better. recorded 3 movies off hbo last week and the pq seems back to pre- down rezzing standards. am i too optomisitc to think that e* actually reacted to all the complaints about degrading the hbo signal and went back and improved it?

maybe there is some power to this forum

anyone else seeing this? my hbo signal on e* is now noticeably better. recorded 3 movies off hbo last week and the pq seems back to pre- down rezzing standards. am i too optomisitc to think that e* actually reacted to all the complaints about degrading the hbo signal and went back and improved it?

The other people are too pessimistic.

E* is reconfiguring their transponders and encoders. Unlike the representations in Forums, encoders use a lot more variables and adjustments than just "resolution" and "bitrate". It takes the engineers a little time to get the adjustments right on a new configuration.

Don't forget that amongst the thousands of Dish employees, there have to be a few videophiles who are giving their feedback to the engineers...

"Big Love" looked noticeably better to night.

anyone else seeing this? my hbo signal on e* is now noticeably better. recorded 3 movies off hbo last week and the pq seems back to pre- down rezzing standards. am i too optomisitc to think that e* actually reacted to all the complaints about degrading the hbo signal and went back and improved it?

maybe there is some power to this forum


anyone else think the pq is now improved?

anyone else think the pq is now improved?

I don't see the improvement.

Don't forget that amongst the thousands of Dish employees, there have to be a few videophiles who are giving their feedback to the engineers...

oh no you didn't :confused:

-Gary

oh no you didn't :confused:

-Gary

That will be me!*








No just kidding :D

I noticed this immediately and have been complaining incessantly, but I thought the problem had something to do with my 211 receiver upgrade, which happened about the same time. Dish is installing a 1000.25 dish next week. Will it make any difference? (My current dish is a SuperDish.)

I'm currently They made this change last Thursday.

Surprisingly up until now no one has really said anything about it.

The question now is, is anyone watching TV, or Dish Dish Networks MPEG2 encoders get better?

Almost no one has noticed any change, which actually surprises me.

I noticed this immediately and have been complaining incessantly, but I thought the problem had something to do with my 211 receiver upgrade, which happened about the same time. Dish is installing a 1000.25 dish next week. Will it make any difference? (My current dish is a SuperDish.)

I'm currently

Nope. If you're getting the signal without breakups then nothing will change. The amount of signal strength you have will not improve PQ.