[mkerdman]

Someone here at AVS pointed out that if you still have a dish pointed at 148 degrees, that HBOHD and SHOHD are being mirrored there with only two channels per transponder and not the three per transponder that is being stacked at 110 degrees.


They may also not be re-encoding or doing any other undesirable digital

techniques to the HBOHD and SHOHD signal at the 148 satellite.


For this reason I have taken to recording HBOHD 9440 and SHOHD 9430 off the 148 satellite.


I have not made a comparative analysis, but, it seems like a good bet if you

live west of the Mississippi and have a 148 dish installed.

 

[Wizziwig]

Quote:

Originally posted by mkerdman Someone here at AVS pointed out that if you still have a dish pointed at 148 degrees, that HBOHD and SHOHD are being mirrored there with only two channels per transponder and not the three per transponder that is being stacked at 110 degrees. They may also not be re-encoding or doing any other undesirable digital techniques to the HBOHD and SHOHD signal at the 148 satellite. For this reason I have taken to recording HBOHD 9440 and SHOHD 9430 off the 148 satellite. I have not made a comparative analysis, but, it seems like a good bet if you live west of the Mississippi and have a 148 dish installed.

It's very easy to verify if you're actually getting the original HBO feed again. HBO is sending out a stream with a sequence header bitrate of 14.2 Mbps. When Dish recompresses the signal, they change the bitrate to 17 Mbps. So just open the file in HDTVtoMpeg2, TSReader, etc.. and see for yourself. Let us know what you find out... it will save me from climbing on the roof for nothing.


Thanks.


-Mark

 

[mkerdman]

Quote:

Originally posted by Wizziwig It's very easy to verify if you're actually getting the original HBO feed again. HBO is sending out a stream with a sequence header bitrate of 14.2 Mbps. When Dish recompresses the signal, they change the bitrate to 17 Mbps. So just open the file in HDTVtoMpeg2, TSReader, etc.. and see for yourself. Let us know what you find out... it will save me from climbing on the roof for nothing. Thanks. -Mark

Will do.

 

[dahester]

I'm in the same boat as Mark. I'll repoint a dish if it's confirmed to be worth the effort. Thanks.

-Dylan

 

[mkerdman]

Quote:

Originally posted by HDHTPC HBO & SHO on 148 are encoded similarly to the way they are on 110. All 4 instances report 18 mbit in the sequence header, but the actual datarates are closer to 9 mbit/sec.

Are you finding no measurable or perceptable advantage in recording HBOHD and/or SHOHD from 148 as opposed to 110?

 

[HDHTPC]

HBO-HD and SHO-HD are re-encoded on both 148 and 110


The quality on 148 is ~slightly~ better than from 110


110 HBO-HD header=17mbit actual=~8mbit

148 HBO-HD header=18mbit actual=~9mbit

110 SHO-HD header=18mbit actual=~9mbit

148 SHO-HD header=18mbit actual=~12mbit

 

[dahester]

How about the grey blocks? Are they present on the 148 feed? That may be the most noticeable artifact from Dish's re-encoding on 110.

 

[stjr]

I am confused about the bit rate as it relates to my recordings from E*. Even if the actual bit rate is between 8-12 mbps, I am generally not able to compress my recordings from E* with my tape archiving software. I interpret this phenomenon to the fact that there are very few null packets in the streams that I am recording.


It it's true that there are very few null packets in the E* transmissions, where is the data coming from that makes up the difference between the 8-12mbps transmitted and the 19.2mbps that is need for constant bit rate TS files, and why can't I compress that data. I used to be able to compress my recordings from the Dish 5000 modulator at least 20%.

 

[Wizziwig]

Quote:

Originally posted by stjr I am confused about the bit rate as it relates to my recordings from E*. Even if the actual bit rate is between 8-12 mbps, I am generally not able to compress my recordings from E* with my tape archiving software. I interpret this phenomenon to the fact that there are very few null packets in the streams that I am recording. It it's true that there are very few null packets in the E* transmissions, where is the data coming from that makes up the difference between the 8-12mbps transmitted and the 19.2mbps that is need for constant bit rate TS files, and why can't I compress that data. I used to be able to compress my recordings from the Dish 5000 modulator at least 20%.

Dish has been re-encoding the original 14.2 Mbps feed from HBO/SHO since July or so. During re-encoding they sometimes end up using more bits than the original (while actually decreasing picture quality). I saw spikes up to 17 Mbps on the re-encode. Maybe that explains why you're seeing less file compression. I think it all depends on what else is happening on the other 2 channels on the transponder. In any case, it's really stupid of Dish to keep doing this at the 148 location since there's only 2 channels per transponder. It also makes no sense at 110 since they have added no new HD channels since the Olympics ended. Oh well... I'm sticking to cable until they turn on 5C.

 

[stjr]

Quote:

Originally posted by Wizziwig Dish has been re-encoding the original 14.2 Mbps feed from HBO/SHO since July or so. During re-encoding they sometimes end up using more bits than the original (while actually decreasing picture quality).

Based upon my observations, E* (or some other person/device) is always adding non-null packets that clog up my tapes. Even on 2.35:1 aspect ratio films with black borders, I get virtually no compression on E*.


Contrast this with D*, where I typically get compression in the 40% to 100% range on recordings, due in part I assume to having three high-def channels per transponder (HD-Lite). Prior to the HD-Lite configuration, I would typically get between 5% to 20% compression on my recordings from D*.