SD quality on 4x3 TV

[jasonrn2000]

Hi again. I've been noticing that the picture quality of the SD channels are seeming compressed (don't no how else to describe it) I have a sony 32 Wega 4x3 TV hooked to TV1 of the 722k via component. The 722 is set to 480i (highest my TV supports). My locals are in HD, as are some of the movie stations. Those look crystal clear on the old SD set. Being that they are downgraded to SD anyway, shouldn't the SD stations look similar? There is a huge difference now. I was shocked by the difference on the SD set. The more I watch the HD channels, the worse the SD ones look.

Oh, some channels are worse than others.

Jason

[Mertzen]

The more I watch the HD channels, the worse the SD ones look.

That's life in the HD era. Once you go HD you really can't go back.

Remember, even a downrezed 1080i will look way better then a 480i.

[BattleZone]

The standard def format in the US, NTSC, has a max theoretical resolution of 720x480, though most analog TVs can't display that high. Both Dish and DirecTV have lowered the digital resolution of their SD channels. IIRC, Dish's are 544x480, while DirecTVs are 480x480. Not ideal, but acceptable to most folks and often much better than the local cable company's analog signal.

But if you have an HD channel that you're watching on an SDTV, you're getting the full 720x480 resolution, and you're getting it from an even higher-quality source (720p or 1080i), so, sure, it's going to look better.

Down-rezzing is necessary to allow more channels per transponder. If the sat companies left the resolution at 720x480, they'd have to eliminate 10-12% of their SD channels. And before you suggest that they eliminate the shopping or religious channels (the most commonly-voiced "answer"), know that the shopping channels *pay* to be on, lowing your bill, and that the religious channels help fulfill the FCC-required quota of "public service" channels that each sat must carry, so eliminating either of those isn't an option.

Besides, at this point, all focus going forward will be on HD channels. At some point in the future, MPEG2/SD-only sat receivers will be eliminated and all of the bandwidth on 101 will be converted into MPEG4 and mostly HD. Folks who still have SDTVs will simply have the sat receiver down-convert for them just as you're doing today.

The problem is that everyone has a few channels that are important to them, but if you asked 50 different people which channels those were, you'd get 40+ different answers. Thus the sat companies have to offer a wide variety of channels

[jasonrn2000]

Makes sense guys, thanks. Now I have to decide if its worth upgrading to an HD package even though I don't have an HD set... Yet.

[Mertzen]

Besides, at this point, all focus going forward will be on HD channels. At some point in the future, MPEG2/SD-only sat receivers will be eliminated and all of the bandwidth on 101 will be converted into MPEG4 and mostly HD.

Make that, at some point in the distant future. Boatloads of MPEG2 SD boxes still get installed.

[jorossian]

I just started with dish this month. When I set up my order over the phone the CSR said they are trying to send out only HD equipment even if the customer doesn't currently have an HDTV just because ultimately it's easier than having to replace the box in the future should they upgrade tv's. I was even told that they no longer had single tuner SD receivers to lease as they're being phased out. Therefore I have one HD receiver for my SD tv in the bedroom. It's only 2 bucks more per month and it's true that the difference in picture quality of the downscaled HD channel to the SD output is hugely better than the standard SD feed on the same TV.

[jasonrn2000]

When I set up my order over the phone the CSR said they are trying to send out only HD equipment even if the customer doesn't currently have an HDTV just because ultimately it's easier than having to replace the box in the future should they upgrade tv's.

I was also told that because I'm in the "Eastern Arc" (don't know what that means) I wiould get the 722, no matter what package I ordered with DVR, even though I don't have an HD TV.

and it's true that the difference in picture quality of the downscaled HD channel to the SD output is hugely better than the standard SD feed on the same TV.

I still can't believe the difference. It is actually annoying me. Most of my SD channels look very "compressed". I can see digital artifacts all over. I actually thought something was wrong, which is why I started this post, but the HD channels come in fine, and occasionally a SD channel looks good. It must be the 522x480 being put on the 32" set, though my video clips from my point and shoot camera are 640x480 and look way better.

I may downgrade from the Gold to the Silver and get HD. Back to comparing channels...

[DavidRobert]

I was in a similar problem. I liked my 32" Sony Tube set as all the channels looked good.
Last month - I bought a Sony 46Z5100 because it had s-video input and new Bravia3 engine. I am happy with the SD PQ as I still have a basic Dish SD receiver. I am pleased with the SD PQ of this set. The TCM and westerns channels look good, except for very old western movies that look bad on a tube set. In looking at the HBO movies for example, the SD images are very good.

OTA HD is very nice but the programming choices are poor.

In due time I will upgrade to Dish HD. If you have any questions, drop me a direct email. I hope this helps.