Originally Posted by arxaw
I have a kworld. The tuner is unbelievably good for weak signals (I'm getting stations from 40-70+ miles away with rabbit ear loop antenna), and HD picture quality is pretty good. But SD PQ is awful, and that's viewing on a 19" computer monitor. I can't help but believe clickchiq is right regarding the picture quality of the ZAT vs the kworld.
Originally Posted by clickchiq
Using an amplified antenna, I thought the HD pic quality on the Centronics was a little better than the KWorld ('didn't watch SD channels). Not THAT much better, so i don't think it's worth upgrading if pic quality is your only concern. I opted for the Centronics because of the Dolby Digital capability. If you have a higher end audio setup, then definitely upgrade.
Can you comment on the tunner reception capability? Are you getting more channels or better quality reception compared to the kworld. As Arxaw mentioned, the kworld is very good for weak signals.
I'm also more concerned about HD pic. I don't watch much SD, but it's a nice option to browse if there's nothing good in HD. I'm pretty satisfied with the pic. quality of kworld, but an improvement even a little is still an improvement.
My audio setup is a fairly decent (5.1, not HTIB). I typically turn them on when watching BD movies. So the Dolby Digital capability in the Centronics is definitely a plus.