Minneapolis, MN - OTA - Page 73 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2161 of 2312 Old 06-23-2014, 07:34 PM
Newbie
 
mile_r7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
New Subchannel Alert!

Per northpine.com:

Quote:
getTV Signs Major Affiliation Deal With Sinclair Broadcast Group To Bring The Classic Movie Channel To 33 New Markets Including Minneapolis, Pittsburgh And St. Louis

CULVER CITY, Calif., June 23, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- getTV, Sony Pictures Television (SPT) Networks' U.S. digital broadcast television network, significantly increased its national distribution footprint today, announcing a deal with Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBG) (Nasdaq: SBGI) that adds 33 TV markets to getTV's growing affiliate roster. With getTV's new SBG agreement, the network's clearance level is close to 70 percent of U.S. television households, upping its current reach almost 20 percent, since the channel's debut four months ago.
getTV has now completed deals covering 65 total television markets, including 40 in the top 50 designated market areas (DMAs), furthering its reach and increasing partnership opportunities for brands catering to influential boomer and senior demographics. Launch dates for the network's 33 SBG station affiliates will be staggered throughout the summer and completed before the end of September 2014. The full roster of getTV's SBG affiliates is provided below.

"The response for getTV, from both our station partners and the public at large, has been overwhelmingly positive," said Andy Kaplan, president, worldwide networks, SPT. "By gaining such major distributors as Sinclair Broadcast Group, it is evident that the marketplace is supporting our channel, a solid sign that getTV is a vibrant business and consumer proposition."
"We are excited to add getTV to our channel line-up," commented David Amy, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, SBG. "We believe there is audience demand in our markets for such movie classics as those offered by getTV, and we are pleased to fulfill that local need."
getTV presents classic Hollywood films of all genres and is available over free-to-air broadcast TV and through many local cable systems. getTV's schedule includes Academy Award®-winning films, dramas, romances, Westerns, and comedies, with an impressive list of cinematic icons from Frank Sinatra to Shirley Temple.

To find where getTV is locally carried, viewers can consult their cable or pay TV service provider, or visit get.tv for channel numbers in their respective areas.

The Sinclair Broadcast Group owned and operated stations joining getTV's affiliate lineup are listed below:
Market
Station

Minneapolis-St. Paul
WUCW
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...264239131.html
mile_r7 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2162 of 2312 Old 06-24-2014, 05:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 9,812
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Sounds nice, thanks for the tip I wonder how much bitrate WUCW will allocate for it and how it may effect the main CW channel......I like these type of sub channels but also like macroblocking free HD
jjeff is offline  
post #2163 of 2312 Old 06-24-2014, 12:50 PM
Member
 
worachj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 12
New channel swap/mess seems to be in place and as anticipated the TiVo guide data is all screwed up for the new changes. I'll be waiting a day or two before trying to report the new changes/mess to TiVo. That should be fun trying to explain the new changes!

You would hope by now the stations would know how to report changes to the correct sources so that guide information could get corrected, but they seem to be out of touch how some people view their stations.
unclehonkey likes this.

Last edited by worachj; 06-24-2014 at 12:55 PM.
worachj is offline  
post #2164 of 2312 Old 06-24-2014, 02:06 PM
Member
 
worachj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I just got done forcing service connections on my TiVo's S3 & Premiere. No luck in getting updated guide data for the new changes.
worachj is offline  
post #2165 of 2312 Old 06-24-2014, 03:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 9,812
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 90
According to my Sony HDTV: PSIP noted if available
9.1 physical 9, FOX HD, PSIP says FOX HD
9.2 physical 29, FOX HD, PSIP says FOX SD
9.3 physical 29, Movies SD,
9.4 physical 9, Bounce SD
9.9 physical 9, FOX HD, PSIP says FOX HD

29.1 physical 29, MeTV HD, PSIP says WFTC HD
29.2 physical 9, Bounce SD, PSIP says WFTC SD
29.3 physical 29, MeTV HD,
29.4 physical 29, FOX HD,
29.5 physical 29, Movies SD,

Looks like things need to be tweaked........
9.9 is probably a mirror of 9.1 and not actually another sub channel.....and 29.3 a mirror of 29.1???

Last edited by jjeff; 06-24-2014 at 03:58 PM.
jjeff is offline  
post #2166 of 2312 Old 06-24-2014, 04:44 PM
Member
 
worachj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I believe KMSP-HD is now being mirrored on RF9 & RF29.

My TiVo shows the following...

9.1 RF29 KMSP-HD
9.2 RF29 WFTC-HD which is MyTv
9.3 RF29 *Movies
9.4 RF9 Bounce
9.9 RF9 KMSP-HD


Channels 29.1 ..... go away.
worachj is offline  
post #2167 of 2312 Old 06-24-2014, 10:27 PM
AKA
Advanced Member
 
AKA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 517
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post
The stations may be announcing this as an upgrade in picture quality because some subchannels that are currently 480i will be upgraded to 720p. KMSP and WFTC have been carrying their own main feeds in 720p and simulcasting each other's main feed as a subchannel in SD. Now apparently RF29 will have both channels (WFTC and KMSP) in 720p. It's not clear whether WFTC will be on RF9 at all.
That's not an upgrade in PQ. They already exist at that resolution, as you yourself state. Based on what I'm seeing, this is simply making them available to more people via another location on the ATSC spectrum.

And, as PTG notes, it can easily lead to a drop in PQ if not handled with care.
AKA is offline  
post #2168 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 05:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 9,812
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by worachj View Post
I believe KMSP-HD is now being mirrored on RF9 & RF29.

My TiVo shows the following...

9.1 RF29 KMSP-HD
9.2 RF29 WFTC-HD which is MyTv
9.3 RF29 *Movies
9.4 RF9 Bounce
9.9 RF9 KMSP-HD


Channels 29.1 ..... go away.
After a rescan of my Tivo and TVs I get the same.
Ya I wonder how long it will take Tivo/Tribune to figure it out........it's not like something like this wasn't known well in advance, wonder why KMSP/WFTC/FOX wouldn't have notified Tribune before the switch so things could have been as seamless as possible
I don't have cable but I'd hope Comcast would have figured this out and changed ASAP, otherwise cable folk would be out in the cold. Probably not that big of a deal for MyTV or the subs but I'm sure a few would miss FOX.....
jjeff is offline  
post #2169 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 01:50 PM
Member
 
worachj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I recorded 1 hour shows on the new/changed channels to get their new bit rates. I compared KMSP 9.1 & 9.9 by recording the same show at the same time. As expected 9.1 is bit starved compared to 9.9 by almost 35% because of the three channels being broadcasted on RF29. The channels on RF29 are definitely bit starved.

9.1 KMSP RF29 bit rate 8.69 Mbps.
9.2 WFTC RF29 bit rate 8.09 Mbps.
9.3 Movies RF29 bit rate 1.93 Mbps.
9.4 Bounce RF9 bit rate 2.77 Mbps.
9.9 KMSP RF9 bit rate 13.43 Mbps.

So the better channel to watch for KMSP is 9.9 for the higher bit rate.
worachj is offline  
post #2170 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 01:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
primetimeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 3,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by worachj View Post
I recorded 1 hour shows on the new/changed channels to get their new bit rates. I compared KMSP 9.1 & 9.9 by recording the same show at the same time. As expected 9.1 is bit starved compared to 9.9 by almost 35% because of the three channels being broadcasted on RF29. The channels on RF29 are definitely bit starved.

9.1 KMSP RF29 bit rate 8.69 Mbps.
9.2 WFTC RF29 bit rate 8.09 Mbps.
9.3 Movies RF29 bit rate 1.93 Mbps.
9.4 Bounce RF9 bit rate 2.77 Mbps.
9.9 KMSP RF9 bit rate 13.43 Mbps.

So the better channel to watch for KMSP is 9.9 for the higher bit rate.
Thanks for that. Again, what a joke. No one should be able to call a channel HD when it is using less than half of the allotted bandwidth. Even 13.43 for an HD channel is a joke and no wonder their programming always looks soft and the NFL PQ is at the bottom of the list compared to all other channels.

The reality is 9.1 and 9.2 bitrates are now at DVD quality, not HD. And when you factor in the additional pixels in the HD signal the picture will actually be worse during any movement.

Last edited by primetimeguy; 06-25-2014 at 02:09 PM.
primetimeguy is offline  
post #2171 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 04:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 9,812
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Agreed, but if you compare even 9.1 to ABCs 5.1, 9.1 looks pristine
Also it will be interesting to see what happens to 9.1 if or when 9.2 goes to 1080i
Agreed, we're talking DVD bitrate(even same compression as DVDs) but HD resolutions......
jjeff is offline  
post #2172 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 04:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
primetimeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 3,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Ya, forgot about the garbage on ABC. Good thing I don't watch anything on that channel and very little on FOX.
primetimeguy is offline  
post #2173 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 05:09 PM
Member
 
worachj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I submitted a line up change form to TiVo Tuesday night about the new channel changes. I just received an Email from TiVo saying "We have addressed your issue and believe that we have answered your question.", so updated guide data should be coming within the next couple of days.
worachj is offline  
post #2174 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 06:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKA View Post
That's not an upgrade in PQ. They already exist at that resolution, as you yourself state. Based on what I'm seeing, this is simply making them available to more people via another location on the ATSC spectrum.

And, as PTG notes, it can easily lead to a drop in PQ if not handled with care.

Well, for a viewer who is unable to receive RF9 but is able to receive RF29, it would be an upgrade from that viewer's perspective because a subchannel (the KMSP subchannel of RF29) that had only been available in SD is now available in HD. But who knows whether there are any viewers in that situation?
veedon is offline  
post #2175 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 06:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 9,812
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by worachj View Post
I submitted a line up change form to TiVo Tuesday night about the new channel changes. I just received an Email from TiVo saying "We have addressed your issue and believe that we have answered your question.", so updated guide data should be coming within the next couple of days.
Almost missed SYTYCD on FOX tonight It was still in my to-do list, even though the guide for FOX was blank so I thought I was good to go. Luckily I was at my Tivo when it went into record mode but all it started recording was a blank screen Best I can tell is it was looking at the old frequency.......anyway I quickly cancelled the event and manually tuned 9.1(which tuned FOX) and quickly pushed REC to start my recording. With no guide data it was only going to record for 1/2hr so I had to manually pad the recording an extra 1 1/2hr to get the full 2hr program to record. Luckily I didn't have too many other events scheduled for FOX but for those I did I cancelled the recording and setup a manual event. It will be nice once Tribune/Tivo gets it straightened out!
BTW since I had nothing else setup to record I recorded the event on both 9.1 and 9.9. Initial impressions are pretty much the same. I'm going to watch 9.1 first and if I see a scene with excessive macroblocking(think strobes) I'll find the exact same spot on 9.9 and compare the two.
jjeff is offline  
post #2176 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 07:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 9,812
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 90
OK this is odd.....both events looked basically identical to me, neither had much of any macroblocking, although very little strobes were used. When I compaired both recordings(9.1 and 9.9) they were IDENTICAL in size, 2hrs. 11.78GB each. Anyone got an explanation? In comparison a 2hr program on ABC........a tad over 7GBs and looks like it!
jjeff is offline  
post #2177 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 09:20 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by primetimeguy View Post
Thanks for that. Again, what a joke. No one should be able to call a channel HD when it is using less than half of the allotted bandwidth. Even 13.43 for an HD channel is a joke and no wonder their programming always looks soft and the NFL PQ is at the bottom of the list compared to all other channels.

The reality is 9.1 and 9.2 bitrates are now at DVD quality, not HD. And when you factor in the additional pixels in the HD signal the picture will actually be worse during any movement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjeff View Post
OK this is odd.....both events looked basically identical to me, neither had much of any macroblocking, although very little strobes were used. When I compaired both recordings(9.1 and 9.9) they were IDENTICAL in size, 2hrs. 11.78GB each. Anyone got an explanation? In comparison a 2hr program on ABC........a tad over 7GBs and looks like it!

The bit rates are not constant. They are highly variable.

The encoding used for 9.1, 9.2 & 9.3 is the latest in multi-pass, dynamic GOP, with look-ahead statistical multiplexing. The HD rates can vary from as little as 3.5 Mb/s to as much as 13.5 Mb/s. The encoding is highly efficient and uses techniques developed for MPEG 4 but applied to MPEG 2.

This is why you're seeing such low file sizes and the quality is indistinguishable from the higher bit rate source.
Tharkûn is offline  
post #2178 of 2312 Old 06-25-2014, 10:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tharkûn View Post
... multi-pass, dynamic GOP, with look-ahead ....

That characterization makes perfect sense provided that you know that here "GOP" stands for "Group of Pictures".
veedon is offline  
post #2179 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 04:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 9,812
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 90
So given the file sizes of a 2hr program on both 9.1 and 9.9 were the same does that mean they are sending the same signal(and level of compression) to both 9.1 and 9.9?
Also Tharkun specifically omitted the two channels on physical 9(9.4 and 9.9) does this mean they do not use the same high quality compression technique? Given the similar file size I'd have to guess they do....
jjeff is offline  
post #2180 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 05:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
primetimeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 3,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tharkûn View Post
... and the quality is indistinguishable from the higher bit rate source.
I'll hold off on further judgements until there is content that stresses the system like NFL games.
primetimeguy is offline  
post #2181 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 07:39 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjeff View Post
So given the file sizes of a 2hr program on both 9.1 and 9.9 were the same does that mean they are sending the same signal(and level of compression) to both 9.1 and 9.9?
Also Tharkun specifically omitted the two channels on physical 9(9.4 and 9.9) does this mean they do not use the same high quality compression technique? Given the similar file size I'd have to guess they do....
The encoding for 9.4 & 9.9 is different from 9.1, 9.2 & 9.3. But during FOX network programming 9.9 is using similar encoding, which is why you're seeing file sizes that are about the same.
Tharkûn is offline  
post #2182 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 07:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 9,812
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tharkûn View Post
The encoding for 9.4 & 9.9 is different from 9.1, 9.2 & 9.3. But during FOX network programming 9.9 is using similar encoding, which is why you're seeing file sizes that are about the same.
Thanks, that explains things. And refresh my memory if you know, isn't the maximum bitrate for FOX set by FOX? I seem to recall reading that it was and that even if a FOX station was broadcasting with no sub channels that the bitrate wouldn't exceed a certain value. If so does the same thing hold true if a station has many subs(or for example a HD sub) that a local station couldn't go below a certain bitrate without getting into trouble with FOX? A while back 13.5Mb/s was mentioned by you, is this ATSC's maximum effective bitrate or FOX's?
Personally I don't care what the bitrate is, as long as macroblocking isn't easily noticeable as it is on another local HD station.....from what I saw on FOX last night they seem to have gotten things right
jjeff is offline  
post #2183 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 09:46 AM
AKA
Advanced Member
 
AKA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 517
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post
Well, for a viewer who is unable to receive RF9 but is able to receive RF29, it would be an upgrade from that viewer's perspective because a subchannel (the KMSP subchannel of RF29) that had only been available in SD is now available in HD. But who knows whether there are any viewers in that situation?
Yes, an upgrade in accessability of their signal, sure. They're just expanding their reach. Most viewers should notice no difference, and ideally the changes don't degrade PQ. To be fair, that remains to be seen.

To sell it as mainly a PQ improvement is misleading, at best.

Last edited by AKA; 06-26-2014 at 09:52 AM.
AKA is offline  
post #2184 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 10:22 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjeff View Post
Thanks, that explains things. And refresh my memory if you know, isn't the maximum bitrate for FOX set by FOX?
...Personally I don't care what the bitrate is, as long as macroblocking isn't easily noticeable as it is on another local HD station.....from what I saw on FOX last night they seem to have gotten things right
Don't know about maximum bit rates, but enough bandwidth remains for one SD multicast and Mobile TV on RF 9. Ultimately you're right, it's all about picture quality, not bits.
Tharkûn is offline  
post #2185 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 10:34 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKA View Post
Yes, an upgrade in accessability of their signal, sure. They're just expanding their reach. Most viewers should notice no difference, and ideally the changes don't degrade PQ. To be fair, that remains to be seen.

To sell it as mainly a PQ improvement is misleading, at best.
This was in large part about PQ.

Many viewers had difficulty getting RF9 and relied on the SD version of KMSP on RF29 So getting an HD version of KMSP on RF29 is a significant improvement.

Grouping the channels under the single major channel "9" was to make viewing the KMSP and WFTC offerings more convenient for OTA viewers, of which there are a large number in the Twin Cities and surrounding area.
Tharkûn is offline  
post #2186 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 11:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
primetimeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 3,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tharkûn View Post
Don't know about maximum bit rates, but enough bandwidth remains for one SD multicast and Mobile TV on RF 9. Ultimately you're right, it's all about picture quality, not bits.
Max bitrate for ATSC channel is approx 19Mbps. Does FOX still use the splicer system which reduced the HD channel for all affiliates to around 16Mbps? Either way, we are nowhere near those levels locally. HD broadcast has enough issues with blocking with motion using full bandwidth so I don't believe the magic that says you can get away with half that rate.
primetimeguy is offline  
post #2187 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 11:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
primetimeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 3,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tharkûn View Post
This was in large part about PQ.

Many viewers had difficulty getting RF9 and relied on the SD version of KMSP on RF29 So getting an HD version of KMSP on RF29 is a significant improvement.
That's a signal reception issue, not a PQ issue. Agree with the other poster in that it is false advertising. You created a different channel that they can tune to. PQ was not improved on any channel. It's like saying I'm going to improve your DVD quality, here's the Blu-Ray. I didn't improve the DVD, I gave you something different.

What I don't like is this all starts as one subchannel robbing the primary HD signal. Then its more sub channels, then multiple HD channels. It never stops. How about using improvements in technology and compression to give us a better PQ rather than additional channels with poor PQ and they all suffer.

I think many people here would be shocked to see an SD channel with proper bandwidth (not the overly compressed stuff we are stuck with now) compared to HD of today. The difference isn't as big as you would think.

Oh the joys of HD yester-year.
primetimeguy is offline  
post #2188 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 12:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jjeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 9,812
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by primetimeguy View Post
How about using improvements in technology and compression to give us a better PQ rather than additional channels with poor PQ and they all suffer.
Not going to happen with our current HD, they may change to ATSC 3.0(4k) using more efficient compression techniques but there will still be the temptation to over compress things, adding 4k's compression techniques to our current 1080i IMO would be almost as good as going 4k but trying to bitstarve things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by primetimeguy View Post
I think many people here would be shocked to see an SD channel with proper bandwidth (not the overly compressed stuff we are stuck with now) compared to HD of today. The difference isn't as big as you would think.
I agree, a good full bitrate MPEG2 DVD can look quite good, not as good as a good bitrate BD but not bad either. I've never seen a SD channel look nearly as good as a DVD, even though they use a similar resolution and MPEG2 and could look similar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by primetimeguy View Post
Oh the joys of HD yester-year.
I'm sure you remember PBS HD(and no to others, not TPT HD) but I still remember the nature loops and things like Daisy Cooks that had jaw dropping HD (even on the 32" 720p LCD I had at the time), FF a few years and now people have 60-80"+ 1080p screen sizes and compression is more than ever. Yep time to start over with ATSC 3.0, well until they over compress that at which point it'll be time to switch to ATSC 4.0 TV and equipment mfgs. must love it

Last edited by jjeff; 06-26-2014 at 01:04 PM.
jjeff is offline  
post #2189 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 02:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
primetimeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 3,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjeff View Post
Not going to happen with our current HD, they may change to ATSC 3.0(4k) using more efficient compression techniques but there will still be the temptation to over compress things, adding 4k's compression techniques to our current 1080i IMO would be almost as good as going 4k but trying to bitstarve things.
Ya, I agree but was referring to this comment "The encoding is highly efficient and uses techniques developed for MPEG 4 but applied to MPEG 2. "

Do that with the full bandwidth channel and now they have PQ to brag about. It is purely all about money as there are never PQ improvements, only degradations.
primetimeguy is offline  
post #2190 of 2312 Old 06-26-2014, 02:29 PM
AKA
Advanced Member
 
AKA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 517
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjeff View Post
I'm sure you remember PBS HD(and no to others, not TPT HD) but I still remember the nature loops and things like Daisy Cooks that had jaw dropping HD (even on the 32" 720p LCD I had at the time), FF a few years and now people have 60-80"+ 1080p screen sizes and compression is more than ever. Yep time to start over with ATSC 3.0, well until they over compress that at which point it'll be time to switch to ATSC 4.0 TV and equipment mfgs. must love it
I recall those high quality feeds, and have seen the same discussions about sat providers. I think it all boils down to revenue - if a broadcaster/provider can extract more revenue out of their current model, they'll do it - even if it comes at the cost of quality. There is not a lot viewers can do, since even in the case of OTA where broadcasters answer to the public, they're not required to deliver HD in the first place. At least more options exist now for that programming (if network), such as streaming.
AKA is offline  
Reply Local HDTV Info and Reception

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off