or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Recorders › 2014 list of consumer available DVR's
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2014 list of consumer available DVR's - Page 5

post #121 of 472
JH,

I have the VRX and have read extensively about the IVIEW and other DVRs on the AVS forum. PALDVR should be raised as the GOLD standard compared to these other units. While it has issues they are nothing compared the issues and lack of feature and or functionality these other DVRS have.

For me it is amazing that these companies come to market with such poorly designed and useable DVRS.

All they have to do is clone a PALDVR make a few improvements and they will have a bonafide winner.
post #122 of 472
Greetings,

Since my DTVPal died recently, I didn’t have much choice but to buy a Tivo Premiere to continue to get OTA programming.

I got the Tivo Premiere. I didn’t want to go wireless so I also got the Netgear 100 Powerline for the required connection to Tivo. But I was having trouble with it dropping the connection. So I replaced it with the Netgear 500. So far, so good, with the Powerline.

I have spent many hours trying to educate myself on how to use the Tivo. It has been a challenge but I feel more comfortable with it now. At first, I found that the 'TV Pwr', 'Zoom', 'Vol', and 'Mute' didn't do anything. But I figured out that they can be programmed and it worked for all except the ‘Zoom’. Not sure why yet. There is no CC button on the remote; you have to go through too many menus to turn it off/on. You can go to the Info button and it seems to be a somewhat quicker way to turn off/on the CC. There is no ‘Off’ for the Premiere. You can put it on ‘Standby’ if going away for a while just to save a bit of power.

The biggest negative is that the tuner is really weak. There is a big difference between the TV's tuner and the Tivo's tuner. Lots of drops of the signal when viewing through the Premiere.

One other thing that is driving me a bit nuts.... When I want, say, channel 4.1 and only push the '4' on the remote, it goes to '4', not '4.1'. Other channels will go to the digital channel with just the single number; like '9' does go to '9.1'. Tivo tech people said they know about it but they blame it on the channel or something like that.

After trying to reposition my existing antenna to no avail, I purchased a Mohu Sky antenna ($169.99). Just got it in yesterday and I put it up in the peak of my attic, pointing in the direction of the TV stations. So far, I can see an improvement. Most of the channels are between 61 and 71 in signal strength. The good thing is that I don’t see any signal drops as I had with my previous Radio Shack antenna.

I sent my DTVPal to get repaired as a backup. The Tivo is nice but it has a bit of a learning curves to get through. I was about to throw it out the window until I finally found a way to get the tv guide to appear as a matrix (like the DTVPal does).

And I think I will be going for the lifetime subscription. I got a 4-year warranty with BestBuy for only $25.

Gary
post #123 of 472
Thread Starter 
Quote:
You can put it on ‘Standby’ if going away for a while just to save a bit of power.
Can you measure the wattage between the two states? With the older models, the difference is almost nothing.
Quote:
The biggest negative is that the tuner is really weak. There is a big difference between the TV's tuner and the Tivo's tuner. Lots of drops of the signal when viewing through the Premiere.
That is a well known shortfall of the current series. The consensus is the tuners has a problem handling multipath.
Quote:
Tivo tech people said they know about it but they blame it on the channel or something like that.
Yea, sure. rolleyes.gif

Did you ever consider getting one used on eBay for around the cost of just the lifetime sub?
post #124 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by goddi1 View Post

The biggest negative is that the tuner is really weak. There is a big difference between the TV's tuner and the Tivo's tuner. Lots of drops of the signal when viewing through the Premiere.

This could also be due to the fact the the Tivo is internally splitting your antenna connection for it's internal tuners. Your TV only has one tuner. If the Tivo has two tuners your signal will be reduced by a little bit more than half (3dB+). This could be the difference you are seeing in reception.

As you are doing an antenna with stronger gain or inserting a pre-amplifier in-line may help with your signal strength situation.
post #125 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by goddi1 View Post

Greetings,

Since my DTVPal died recently, I didn’t have much choice but to buy a Tivo Premiere to continue to get OTA programming.

I got the Tivo Premiere. I didn’t want to go wireless so I also got the Netgear 100 Powerline for the required connection to Tivo. But I was having trouble with it dropping the connection. So I replaced it with the Netgear 500. So far, so good, with the Powerline.

I have spent many hours trying to educate myself on how to use the Tivo. It has been a challenge but I feel more comfortable with it now. At first, I found that the 'TV Pwr', 'Zoom', 'Vol', and 'Mute' didn't do anything. But I figured out that they can be programmed and it worked for all except the ‘Zoom’. Not sure why yet. There is no CC button on the remote; you have to go through too many menus to turn it off/on. You can go to the Info button and it seems to be a somewhat quicker way to turn off/on the CC. There is no ‘Off’ for the Premiere. You can put it on ‘Standby’ if going away for a while just to save a bit of power.

The biggest negative is that the tuner is really weak. There is a big difference between the TV's tuner and the Tivo's tuner. Lots of drops of the signal when viewing through the Premiere.

One other thing that is driving me a bit nuts.... When I want, say, channel 4.1 and only push the '4' on the remote, it goes to '4', not '4.1'. Other channels will go to the digital channel with just the single number; like '9' does go to '9.1'. Tivo tech people said they know about it but they blame it on the channel or something like that.

After trying to reposition my existing antenna to no avail, I purchased a Mohu Sky antenna ($169.99). Just got it in yesterday and I put it up in the peak of my attic, pointing in the direction of the TV stations. So far, I can see an improvement. Most of the channels are between 61 and 71 in signal strength. The good thing is that I don’t see any signal drops as I had with my previous Radio Shack antenna.

I sent my DTVPal to get repaired as a backup. The Tivo is nice but it has a bit of a learning curves to get through. I was about to throw it out the window until I finally found a way to get the tv guide to appear as a matrix (like the DTVPal does).

And I think I will be going for the lifetime subscription. I got a 4-year warranty with BestBuy for only $25.

Gary
The zoom only works with SD channels, not HD.
I agree it would be nice to have a CC button but using the info button it takes me <5 seconds and <5 key pushes to toggle the CC.
I don't believe standby decreases power usage, while I don't like wasting power when it comes to my Tivo I just ignore it, it's generally recording anyway and I like the fact that if I turn my TV on I have the last half hours buffer to search back on if I want.
I went with lifetime from day 1 and haven't regretted it for the last 4+ years. I also upsized my HDD to 1TB after the first week and even then during the winter my HDD gets 3/4 full and during the Olympics it was running 99% full eek.gif I don't know how I'd ever have gotten by with the stock drive.
BTW any further questions/comments should go in this Tivo thread, this one is really just a comparison thread for the various DVRs smile.gif
post #126 of 472
Zoom works for HD content when the Tivo is set for a 4:3 aspect ratio. Zoom works for SD content when the TiVo is set for a 16:9 aspect ratio.
post #127 of 472
Thread Starter 
Quote:
This could also be due to the fact the the Tivo is internally splitting your antenna connection for it's internal tuners.
Nothing to do with the problem. The predecessors have two inputs also. Besides if you are feeding both CATV & OTA, there is no basis for the argument. Many other tuners have dual inputs and don't suffer.
I have seen many reports of the problem and the most logical response was the inability to handle certain multipath problems. The 648 0r the 652 are the best choices for OTA. One thing they do excel in is the tuners.
post #128 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by goddi1 View Post

Greetings,

Since my DTVPal died recently, I didn’t have much choice but to buy a Tivo Premiere to continue to get OTA programming.

I got the Tivo Premiere. I didn’t want to go wireless so I also got the Netgear 100 Powerline for the required connection to Tivo. But I was having trouble with it dropping the connection. So I replaced it with the Netgear 500. So far, so good, with the Powerline.

I have spent many hours trying to educate myself on how to use the Tivo. It has been a challenge but I feel more comfortable with it now. At first, I found that the 'TV Pwr', 'Zoom', 'Vol', and 'Mute' didn't do anything. But I figured out that they can be programmed and it worked for all except the ‘Zoom’. Not sure why yet. There is no CC button on the remote; you have to go through too many menus to turn it off/on. You can go to the Info button and it seems to be a somewhat quicker way to turn off/on the CC. There is no ‘Off’ for the Premiere. You can put it on ‘Standby’ if going away for a while just to save a bit of power.

The biggest negative is that the tuner is really weak. There is a big difference between the TV's tuner and the Tivo's tuner. Lots of drops of the signal when viewing through the Premiere.

One other thing that is driving me a bit nuts.... When I want, say, channel 4.1 and only push the '4' on the remote, it goes to '4', not '4.1'. Other channels will go to the digital channel with just the single number; like '9' does go to '9.1'. Tivo tech people said they know about it but they blame it on the channel or something like that.

After trying to reposition my existing antenna to no avail, I purchased a Mohu Sky antenna ($169.99). Just got it in yesterday and I put it up in the peak of my attic, pointing in the direction of the TV stations. So far, I can see an improvement. Most of the channels are between 61 and 71 in signal strength. The good thing is that I don’t see any signal drops as I had with my previous Radio Shack antenna.

I sent my DTVPal to get repaired as a backup. The Tivo is nice but it has a bit of a learning curves to get through. I was about to throw it out the window until I finally found a way to get the tv guide to appear as a matrix (like the DTVPal does).

And I think I will be going for the lifetime subscription. I got a 4-year warranty with BestBuy for only $25.

Gary


Unless you are in a very strong signal situation (Close to the transmitters) putting an antenna in the attic is NOT the best way to go. You lose a lot of signal in the attic.
post #129 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

Nothing to do with the problem. The predecessors have two inputs also. Besides if you are feeding both CATV & OTA, there is no basis for the argument. Many other tuners have dual inputs and don't suffer.
I have seen many reports of the problem and the most logical response was the inability to handle certain multipath problems. The 648 0r the 652 are the best choices for OTA. One thing they do excel in is the tuners.

Actually YOU are wrong on this. Unless signal strength is way more than marginal, splitting will cause loss. Especially when I read he is using and attic antenna. I know from first hand experience that splitting can mean the difference between getting a picture or not. Especially with an attic antenna.
post #130 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by LenL View Post

Unless signal strength is way more than marginal, splitting will cause loss.
Are you ruling out the possibility that the TiVo has a powered internal splitter?
post #131 of 472
Kelson,

No not ruling anything out. Just stating the obvious. If you have weak signal to begin with and you split it you will have reception issues. There is only so much amplification can do with a problem signal. I have lots and lots of practical l experience with attics, signal amplifiers and such.
post #132 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by goddi1 View Post

Greetings,

...I got the Tivo Premiere....

...The biggest negative is that the tuner is really weak. There is a big difference between the TV's tuner and the Tivo's tuner. Lots of drops of the signal when viewing through the Premiere...

...After trying to reposition my existing antenna to no avail, I purchased a Mohu Sky antenna ($169.99). Just got it in yesterday and I put it up in the peak of my attic, pointing in the direction of the TV stations. So far, I can see an improvement. Most of the channels are between 61 and 71 in signal strength. The good thing is that I don’t see any signal drops as I had with my previous Radio Shack antenna...

...The Tivo is nice but it has a bit of a learning curves to get through. I was about to throw it out the window until I finally found a way to get the tv guide to appear as a matrix (like the DTVPal does)...

Gary

TiVo Premiere's OTA tuner is the weakest of the hi-def TiVo line. IMHO, it's 'adequate' while TiVo's S3 is 'more than adequate'. HD is Mr. In-between.

A viewer's location is by far the most important factor for determining OTA reception. Mohu's Sky appears interesting, but I've been able to get decent reception of 8 or 9 OTA stations using Terk's indoor HDTVa pointing through a single wood and plaster wall directly toward a transmitting site approx. 55± miles away. The transmitting antennas are at approximately 1900 ft. elevation while I'm at approx. 200 ft. The mountain is visible from my location during the winter through a few tree branches as there's mostly sea level water in-between.

I've got two HDTVa's side by side (less than $40 each on eBay), one connected to S3 the other to Premiere. The S3 receives 8 stations, the Premiere 7. The difference is a local station (w/ two SD subchannels) transmitting from another closer mountain not directly in LOS of the more distant mountain. Fiddling with the highly directional HDTVa's can increase off-axis signal strength, but (for me) the hassle isn't worth it. Signal strengths range from around 90 down to the 50s; the S3 generally getting 5(±) higher than Premiere.

HDTVa from here is the simplest and cheapest indoor antenna currently available but it only works from the front of the house; from the back it receives only 2 stations as the signal path goes through 3 walls.

Don't know what to say about TiVo's 2 EPG formats except they both deliver the goods. As with everything, YMMV!
Edited by fallingwater - 4/17/13 at 7:56am
post #133 of 472
I just searched ebay for Terk HDTV and came up with 100+ listings.

There are a lot of HDTVi (non-amplified) antennas listed as well as other antenna items.

The best deal available right now that I saw was for an HDTVa 'Brand New - Opened Box' for $36.89 on sale today only. It isn't the best antenna there is but it's good and simple and cheap. Search on eBay for Terk HDTVa Indoor Amplified High-Definition Antenna for Off-Air HDTV Reception if interested.
post #134 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by LenL View Post

Actually YOU are wrong on this. Unless signal strength is way more than marginal, splitting will cause loss. Especially when I read he is using and attic antenna. I know from first hand experience that splitting can mean the difference between getting a picture or not. Especially with an attic antenna.

Using a preamp at the antenna will avoid this issue.

I use a preamp with my two square shooter antennas. I can split the signal several times. My Premieres could tune in the same channels as my S3 boxes. They were both rock solid even with a low signal.
post #135 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by fallingwater View Post

A viewer's location is by far the most important factor for determining OTA reception.

 

That and antenna placement. I have used every TiVo since the DirecTV model and I found the Premiere to work virtually identical to the others. I know at some point TiVo changed the scale on the Signal Strength screen so you can't simply compare numbers.

 

My antenna is installed in the attic above the garage (ranch in some what of a dip) and at times I would have to re-aim it.. as I believe the wind shifted it a bit. After screwing it down I still had an occasion issue with one channel... a few times in several months tops. One day I raised the antenna roughly two feet and it has been golden ever since. Not one issue in years.

post #136 of 472
EVERYTHING is important when you are dealing with antenna reception:

* Your location
* The location of the transmission tower(s)
* The weather conditions
* The channels that you are trying to receive
* The type of antenna(s) that you choose
* The aiming of the antenna(s)
* The height of the antenna(s)
* The type and length of cable
* The number of splitters in-line
* Whether you are using a preamp or not
* The quality of the tuner(s) in your equipment

With signals that are 'on the edge' one change such as adding another splitter can make a difference between reliable and unreliable reception for certain channels regardless of which device or tuner you are using. If you add an additional tuner which is splitting the signal, you are losing 50%+ of the signal strength than you had prior.
post #137 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by fallingwater View Post

A viewer's location is by far the most important factor for determining OTA reception.

That and antenna placement...
...I know at some point TiVo changed the scale on the Signal Strength screen so you can't simply compare numbers...

Yes. Performance, not numbers, is the way to select an antenna.

Quote:
My antenna is installed in the attic above the garage (ranch in some what of a dip) and at times I would have to re-aim it.. as I believe the wind shifted it a bit. After screwing it down I still had an occasion issue with one channel... a few times in several months tops. One day I raised the antenna roughly two feet and it has been golden ever since. Not one issue in years.

The slightest differences can result in major performance changes. Antenna selection and placement are as much art as science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by andydrew View Post

EVERYTHING is important...

True, but everything isn't of the same importance in every situation. Find a combination of factors that works and use it.
post #138 of 472
Thanks!, videobruce for your “DVR Comparison Chart”. I really like those detailed spreadsheet-type comparisons - they really cut-to-the-chase. However, I was surprised, no.....SHOCKED! that it didn’t include ANY references to picture quality (PQ). I’m a PQ freak, not a “features” motivated buyer and I had hoped there would have been some rows of data pertaining to PQ.

Of course, I’m actually at a loss to say what PQ data I want because as a digital technology newbie, I’m still confused as to exactly what ARE the main factors that determine digital PQ, mainly from a recording/dubbing standpoint.

In the old days of analog VCRs (both VHS & Beta), I understood everything that influenced PQ, backwards and forwards because I sold consumer video products for 6 years and REALLY got into all things video from a user’s standpoint.

Now I feel like I’m only a shell of my former self and really need some help in understanding some digital things. The purpose of this post is that I’m finally jumping into the digital recording world and want to buy my first DVR / PVR soon, like this week (or) next week! I want PQ to be the main factor that determines which one I buy. For the past full week, I’ve been reading as much info as I can on DVRs, but I still don’t know, for sure, which one records the best PQ.

I’ve read where the “bit rate” seems to be important (and) I know from my VCR days that the more ‘space’ the video data occupies, generally, the better the PQ of the recording. And as always, it’s a given that the video source material is a big factor in determining the quality of your recordings. I just feel that there are probably several other PQ factors in the digital world that I don’t know about.

Here’s what I need help with:

(1) Can someone list the main factors (specs) of hardware / software, from most important to least important, that determine overall picture quality when RECORDING / ripping video.


(2) videobruce mentioned that a DVR Comparison Chart in the “old thread” had 200+ rows. Would this old chart give me the PQ data that hopefully someone gave as answers to my question (1) above ? Would the PQ data be current and relevant ?.....and IF so, how can I get to that old chart ?


(3) Do the high definition (HD) DVRs ONLY record in HD (or) do they also record in standard definition (SD), if fed an SD signal ?


(4) Which final recording / dub will have the best overall PQ :

an SD, analog (or) digital video program recorded in HD by an HD DVR (or)

an SD, analog (or) digital video program recorded in SD by an SD DVR


I asked questions (3) and (4) because it just so happens that my only immediate need is to record a handful of old 1950’s TV shows that are only being broadcast in digital SD. I also have a LOT of SD, analog TV shows I need to digitize and transfer to my computer. Therefore, I really don’t need an HD DVR just yet, so, I would consider an SD DVR, especially if it could actually do the job better than an HD DVR, given the SD video I’ll be recording.

Thanks in advance for your answers.
post #139 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by seasearyder View Post

Can someone list the main factors (specs) of hardware / software, from most important to least important, that determine overall picture quality when RECORDING / ripping video.
As far as digital TV is concerned, modern DVR's capture the digital transport stream as it is broadcast and do no processing of the signal. So the PQ is identical to the as-broadcast PQ.
post #140 of 472
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Actually YOU are wrong on this. Unless signal strength is way more than marginal, splitting will cause loss.
You misunderstood. I didn't say splitting won't make a difference, I said tuners (DVR or TV's) that are dual design as TiVo, Sony, ePvision etc. perform as well as devices with only a single tuner. The internal splitting does not reduce performance (if designed correctly).

External splitting to to different devices is another animal which this subject was not about. Please don't take that out of context. wink.gif

.
post #141 of 472
Thread Starter 
seasearyder;
Thanks for the thanks.
Quote:
I was surprised, no.....SHOCKED! that it didn't include ANY references to picture quality (PQ)
As Kelson stated, all DVR's (that I know of) record exactly as delivered. They don't reduce quality.
Have said that, this doesn't mean that the downstream processing of the actual output signal will be as good. One example of that is the VRX from ePVision. While it isn't across the board, lower bitrate transmissions will cause false contouring on those recordings, where the same recording played back on a PC will not show this.
Quote:
Of course, I’m actually at a loss to say what PQ data I want because as a digital technology newbie, I’m still confused as to exactly what ARE the main factors that determine digital PQ, mainly from a recording/dubbing standpoint.
In one word: compression. Or lack of. There is no free lunch. Digital material, namely video takes up a HUGE amount of space, hence the needed to compress. It doesn't stop there, satellite and CATV companies usually go further and compress more to fit 10 lbs of **** into a 1 lb bag.
Quote:
do they also record in standard definition (SD), if fed an SD signal ?
Again, they record what is transmitted as it is transmitted. No better, no worse.
Quote:
I would consider an SD DVR, especially if it could actually do the job better than an HD DVR, given the SD video I’ll be recording.
You might want to take a look at the Magnavox/Funai DVD/DVR in the DVR recorders sub forum. Being only a DVD recorder, it is only SD which is why it wasn't included here.

.
post #142 of 472
Thread Starter 
There is one more point; Networks, I believe have reduced bit rates to allow lower cost leased lines and satellite feeds for their programming. PBS is a good example. Eight or so years ago, they didn't just have more and better programming, it surely look far better that it does now. Of course, federal funding cuts, due to past selfish priorities from a few years ago were mostly the blame, as I will bet their distribution feeds bandwidth was reduced.

I can tell you Canadian stations looks better than American stations viewing the same program. wink.gif
post #143 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post


I can tell you Canadian stations looks better than American stations viewing the same program. wink.gif

That could be because Canadian stations aren't allowed sub-channels, while most American stations have them.

As far as PBS (and other US networks) is concerned, I think the sub-channel situation is what has affected their pq. My local station main channel broadcasts @ 1080i and has two 480i subs. When I look at the size of the recordings through Media Center, the main channel recordings are about half the size of my local The CW station recordings. It too is at 1080i, but has no sub-channels. The difference in pq is very noticeable. Arrow and Supernatural look much better than what is shown on Masterpiece or Nova. Which really is too bad.
post #144 of 472
Thread Starter 
Quote:
That could be because Canadian stations aren't allowed sub-channels, while most American stations have them.
Partly true. One Canadian station does have a sub channel, but it is only a duplicate of their main channel, which is a waste.
Quote:
As far as PBS (and other US networks) is concerned, I think the sub-channel situation is what has affected their pq.
Agreed, but I believe that isn't the only reason. Wasting bandwidth for a duplicate of their main channel is ridiculous. That was fine 8 or 10 years ago, but not now. The comparison I was referring to was between stations with no sub channels.
post #145 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhufnagel View Post

As far as PBS (and other US networks) is concerned, I think the sub-channel situation is what has affected their pq.
I agree. The allowable ATSC channel bandwidth is 19.2Mbps. In the Philadelphia market, CBS used to allocate nearly all that to their 1080i broadcast and it looked really amazing -- especially football games. They have now introduced a garbage SD sub-channel and have robbed bandwidth from the HD broadcast to pay for it. All the main stations in Philly (except ABC) have a single HD primary channel they broadcast at 14-17Mbps. In Jan 2012, ABC elevated one of their garbage sub-channels (LiveWell) to be a second HD channel. That dropped the bitrate of the main ABC HD channel to 8Mbps to pay for it -- ABC looks pretty poor in comparison to the other channels.

I know others have differing opinions, but I have seen nothing worth my viewing time on any of these sub-channels. Having a DVR means always having more HD content available to watch than there is time. As far as I'm concerned, sub-channels are a waste of bandwidth that could be better applied to the HD transmission and I simply eliminate them from the DVR's channel lineup.
post #146 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

Wasting bandwidth for a duplicate of their main channel is ridiculous. That was fine 8 or 10 years ago, but not now.
Why was it fine then?  Seems to me that it never made sense.  Any tuner that can understand an SD ATSC signal can understand an HD ATSC signal (even if it has to downconvert to SD for its attached display), and if I'm wrong about that, how do most stations with HD channels get away with offering them only in HD?

In the Chicago market there still are three OTA stations with an SD channel whose only fare is a simulcast of an HD channel.
post #147 of 472
Thread Starter 
You do you know the original purpose was compatibility with existing 4x3 SD TV's as in CRTs? It wasn't a ''tuner' issue but a display issue. But, that was then and it isn't necessary anymore.
Since PBS was mentioned, I was told by station engineer of the local affiliate it was a PBS requirement to provide a SD sub channel of their main channel. Is this true?
post #148 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

You do you know the original purpose was compatibility with existing 4x3 SD TV's as in CRTs? It wasn't a ''tuner' issue but a display issue. But, that was then and it isn't necessary anymore.
Thank you for explaining.  I never had any experience nor knowledge of ATSC until 2007, and this is the first I've seen anyone mention it in the parts of AVS Forum I've frequented since joining here in 2008.  Within my experience as a latecomer, I've never encountered, nor heard of, an ATSC receiving device for an SD display that couldn't downrez HD to SD.
Quote:
Since PBS was mentioned, I was told by station engineer of the local affiliate it was a PBS requirement to provide a SD sub channel of their main channel. Is this true?
All three PBS stations in the Chicago market used to, but only one [WYCC] still does.  If it's a requirement, WTTW and WYIN are getting away with not doing it any more.
post #149 of 472
Thread Starter 
Quote:
I've never encountered, nor heard of, an ATSC receiving device for an SD display that couldn't downrez HD to SD.
That isn't it. The concern is the aspect ratio, not the resolution. Broadcasters were concerned about people with CRT's watching a 16x9 image with black bars above and below the active video. It was done for convenience and the fear of loosing viewers due to lack of understanding.
Quote:
If it's a requirement, WTTW and WYIN are getting away with not doing it any more.
I don't believe it ever was.


Posts 3 & 4 updated.
.
post #150 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

The concern is the aspect ratio, not the resolution. Broadcasters were concerned about people with CRT's watching a 16x9 image with black bars above and below the active video. It was done for convenience and the fear of losing viewers due to lack of understanding.
Thank you for explaining further.  Of course, I think that their logic is faulty, but on AVS Forum that would be preaching to the choir.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Recorders
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Recorders › 2014 list of consumer available DVR's