View Full Version : MPEG4 simulcast of MPEG2 HDTV channels?
Geekzilla
09-07-07, 12:39 AM
Has anyone heard of plans to have a duplicate MPEG4 feed of the MPEG2 HDTV channels? For example, it'd be ideal to have channel 70 remain MPEG2 HBO-HD, then have the MPEG4 feed redirected to 501. This would keep things constant for the older hi def equipment, and allow us with new equipment to take advantage of the presumably superior picture quality and smaller file sizes. They certainly should have the bandwidth and carriage agreements to facilitate this.
litzdog911
09-07-07, 12:58 AM
It's likely this will happen, but nothing has been announced. Your proposal seems possible. Hopefully we'll know in a couple of weeks.
SWORDFISH
09-07-07, 01:40 AM
Has anyone heard of plans to have a duplicate MPEG4 feed of the MPEG2 HDTV channels? For example, it'd be ideal to have channel 70 remain MPEG2 HBO-HD, then have the MPEG4 feed redirected to 501. This would keep things constant for the older hi def equipment, and allow us with new equipment to take advantage of the presumably superior picture quality and smaller file sizes. They certainly should have the bandwidth and carriage agreements to facilitate this.
It appears that it will be done that way.
This list provided by a CSR and posted at tvpredictions.com shows duplicate channels for ESPN,HBO etc.
(Sorry I don't have enough posts to include the URL)
Here is a list of HD channels that DIRECTV will likely add this month, according to the company's Customer Service department:
A&E 265
Big Ten Network HD 220
Cartoon Network 296
Cinemax HD East 512
Cinemax HD West 514
CNN HD 202
Discovery HD Theater 76
ESPN HD 72, 206
ESPN2 HD 73, 209
Food Network HD 231-1
FSN New York HD 624
The Golf Channel HD (shared with Versus HD) 604
HBO HD East 70, 509, 501
HBO HD West 504
HDNet 79
HDNet Movies 78
HGTV-HD 229-1
The History Channel HD *269
Madison Square Garden HD *621
MHD (HD only) 332
The Movie Channel HD 544
NFL Network HD 212
National Geographic Channel HD 276
Showtime HD 71, 543, 537
Showtime HD West 540
Smithsonian Channel HD (HD only) 267
Starz Comedy HD 519
Starz HD East 520
Starz Edge HD 522
Starz Kids & Family HD 518
Starz HD West 521
TBS in HD 247
TNT HD 75, 245
Universal HD 74
Versus HD (shared with The Golf Channel HD)*604
The Weather Channel HD 362
SF
There are too many subscribers out there using the MPEG2 feeds and who are not interested in HD to change the existing scheme in the foreseeable future.
--- CHAS
RoundRockJohn
09-07-07, 08:21 AM
That seems like a lot of bandwidth to keep around for legacy purposes.
I'd imagine some smart people at DirecTV are doing the math of replacing receiver cost vs acquiring more bandwidth.
dvrblogger
09-07-07, 08:38 AM
That seems like a lot of bandwidth to keep around for legacy purposes.
I'd imagine some smart people at DirecTV are doing the math of replacing receiver cost vs acquiring more bandwidth.
D* could just create virtual channels in the guide with or without simulcasting so we wont know until they launch or announce it.
lwilli201
09-07-07, 08:42 AM
Moving or simalcasting all the MPEG2 channels to MPEG4 at 99 and 103 would help the LOS problems when installing for new subs. The bad thing is that there are alot of SD LIL on 119. Seems like we are regularly seeing post about people that have the 110/119 LOS problem. D* has probably lost many potential subs because of this problem. IMHO
Herdfan
09-07-07, 08:47 AM
allow us with new equipment to take advantage of the presumably superior picture quality
I would think the last thing D* would want is customers to have the ability to compare and contrast their down-rezzed, over- compressed MPEG-2 that they have been touting as the best PQ available to a new full bandwidth MPEG-4 feed.
That being said, they might very well mirror the numbers to the future numbering scheme.
Herdfan
09-07-07, 08:50 AM
Moving or simalcasting all the MPEG2 channels to MPEG4 at 99 and 103 would help the LOS problems when installing for new subs. The bad thing is that there are alot of SD LIL on 119. Seems like we are regularly seeing post about people that have the 110/119 LOS problem. D* has probably lost many potential subs because of this problem. IMHO
Part of the LOS problem is that you need a signal from the 119 to peak the tilt of the dish. No 119, no ability to peak the tilt. So what it takes is a patient installer who is willing to spend the time needed to lock in a signal for the 99/103.
lwilli201
09-07-07, 08:55 AM
Part of the LOS problem is that you need a signal from the 119 to peak the tilt of the dish. No 119, no ability to peak the tilt. So what it takes is a patient installer who is willing to spend the time needed to lock in a signal for the 99/103.
Poor excuse for loosing customers.
Geekzilla
09-07-07, 10:18 AM
I would think the last thing D* would want is customers to have the ability to compare and contrast their down-rezzed, over- compressed MPEG-2 that they have been touting as the best PQ available to a new full bandwidth MPEG-4 feed.
That being said, they might very well mirror the numbers to the future numbering scheme.
That's a really good point which I hadn't thought of. I guess I'll probably have to set my season passes to the west coast feeds of HBO & SHO then.
tkrandall
09-07-07, 04:05 PM
I live in Georgia and would love to not need either 110 or 119 for HD or any other programming. Everything on 99/101/103 and I am a happy camper. Trees in this area oftern make the 110 and 119 birds difficult to use. I barely get one over a (growing) tree and the other in a gap between two trees. I cannot imagine what viewing angles are like up the east coast.
Jeremy W
09-07-07, 04:08 PM
I would think the last thing D* would want is customers to have the ability to compare and contrast their down-rezzed, over- compressed MPEG-2 that they have been touting as the best PQ available to a new full bandwidth MPEG-4 feed.
Customers in NY and LA can already do this with their HD locals. So DirecTV is not against these comparisons.
Thaedron
09-07-07, 04:12 PM
That seems like a lot of bandwidth to keep around for legacy purposes.
The speculation has been that they will have both live for a while and then eventually drop the MPEG2 variant. And it's not really "wasting" bandwidth if they don't have enough channels to fill up D10s capacity.
Alan Gordon
09-07-07, 04:28 PM
I would think the last thing D* would want is customers to have the ability to compare and contrast their down-rezzed, over- compressed MPEG-2 that they have been touting as the best PQ available to a new full bandwidth MPEG-4 feed.
That being said, they might very well mirror the numbers to the future numbering scheme.
Jeremy W already brought up a VERY good point (80s), not to mention that Geekzilla also brought up the point that a consumer could notice with the MPEG4 West Coast feeds of HBO and Showtime vs. the East Coast MPEG2 versions.
However, if DirecTV WANTED to, they could simply turn off all the HD channels in the 70s/80s to MPEG4 capable receivers (H20/HR20/H21/HR21)...
~Alan
Alan Gordon
09-07-07, 04:30 PM
The speculation has been that they will have both live for a while and then eventually drop the MPEG2 variant. And it's not really "wasting" bandwidth if they don't have enough channels to fill up D10s capacity.
Yes, I expect the HD-DNS to be some of the first to go... and the special channels in the 90s will probably be next (after ST is over next year).
~Alan
Alan Gordon
09-07-07, 04:31 PM
There are too many subscribers out there using the MPEG2 feeds and who are not interested in HD to change the existing scheme in the foreseeable future.
If they're not interested in HD, then I don't see why they'd care...
~Alan
If they're not interested in HD, then I don't see why they'd care...
~Alan
They probably wouldn't care so long as D* sent someone out with a new MPEG4 set top box that connects to the end of the wire coming from an 18 inch dish and their bill doesn't increase as a result. I would welcome any change for the better with my SD channels coming to my 'legacy' 18 inch dish. Right now, with MPEG2, 100% digital quality means 100% of the channels look equally poor.
Did you ever notice how many legacy dishes are out there?
--- CHAS
Alan Gordon
09-07-07, 05:03 PM
Did you ever notice how many legacy dishes are out there?
Yes, but the original poster was asking about simulcasting the MPEG2 HD channels in MPEG4... which would take nothing away from the MPEG2 only HD customers, and have nothing to do with MPEG2 SD customers...
~Alan
Yes, but the original poster was asking about simulcasting the MPEG2 HD channels in MPEG4... which would take nothing away from the MPEG2 only HD customers, and have nothing to do with MPEG2 SD customers...
~Alan
OK. Sorry, I misread the original post thinking it referred to both SD and HD MPEG2 channels.
--- CHAS
I hope they mirror the channels too. I am on the East Coast, and 119 is LOW in the sky. There is not a single place on my property that can hit 119, even with a separate dish. I ordered and am installing a Slimline dish myself cause the installer said no way. I should be able to get from 99 to 110 (getting 101 to 110 now with 3lnb).
The_Geyser
09-07-07, 08:09 PM
Please, D*, do this! I can not get 110 or 119 because of trees.
I would think the last thing D* would want is customers to have the ability to compare and contrast their down-rezzed, over- compressed MPEG-2 that they have been touting as the best PQ available to a new full bandwidth MPEG-4 feed.Don't forget, they allow us to do that now with the network locals in the 80's. /steve
Has anyone heard of plans to have a duplicate MPEG4 feed of the MPEG2 HDTV channels? For example, it'd be ideal to have channel 70 remain MPEG2 HBO-HD, then have the MPEG4 feed redirected to 501. This would keep things constant for the older hi def equipment, and allow us with new equipment to take advantage of the presumably superior picture quality and smaller file sizes. They certainly should have the bandwidth and carriage agreements to facilitate this.They could also make them "twins". Right now we have some SD/HD twins. Maybe we'll have HD/HD twins until the MPEG-2 HDs are phased out? /s
Herdfan
09-07-07, 08:26 PM
Don't forget, they allow us to do that now with the network locals in the 80's. /steve
True. But we don't know what kind of bandwidth they are giving those channels either.
True. But we don't know what kind of bandwidth they are giving those channels either.Ya, I'm not sure. I get all three versions of the HD locals. OTA, MPEG-2 and MPEG-4. OTA's and MPEG-4's are virtually identical, except for trickplay smoothness. MPEG-2's are noticeably 'soft' by comparison... at least here in NY. /steve
vBulletin® v3.7.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.