1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DirecTV National HD Listing/Maps Discussion Thread (Technical - Not Anticipation)

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by Sixto, May 29, 2012.

  1. Jun 5, 2012 #81 of 653
    dexware

    dexware Mentor

    41
    0
    Mar 16, 2012
    Dish's 8PSK 21500 2/3 modulation gives them around 40-41 megabits of transport.
     
  2. Jun 5, 2012 #82 of 653
    TBoneit

    TBoneit Hall Of Fame

    2,294
    7
    Jul 27, 2006
    It was my impression that the MPEG4 decoding is all done in hardware. That the older MPEG2 was also decoded in hardware.

    These DVRS used by either service do not have the CPU power to decode in software. I have a I3 based computer that can barely handle 1080i.

    The Processors in the DVRs only have to handle things like the timers, Remote keypress, and the guide (DVR content) and then hand it off to the proper hardware to do the actual functions.
     
  3. Jun 5, 2012 #83 of 653
    Alan Gordon

    Alan Gordon Chancellor

    9,094
    100
    Jun 7, 2004
    Dawson, Georgia
    +1

    AMC HD does not look bad to me. Could it look better? Sure... but that goes for all the channels...

    The anemic bandwidth given to the networks might mean that they could be easier to fit in, but they still take up space.

    ~Alan
     
  4. Jun 5, 2012 #84 of 653
    Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
  5. Jun 5, 2012 #85 of 653
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,345
    578
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    AMC looks softer than most other HD broadcasts. Can all be better? Sure.

    Right now on NBC, which usually has a very good HD broadcast, the picture is extremely soft- as they're showing a feed from the UK- some Jubilee stuff- obviously very compressed somewhere along the line, though it is their own feed.
     
  6. Jun 5, 2012 #86 of 653
    Alan Gordon

    Alan Gordon Chancellor

    9,094
    100
    Jun 7, 2004
    Dawson, Georgia
    AMC's airings of "Mad Men" and "The Walking Dead" look very soft compared to the Blu-ray versions... which is to be expected of any program, but especially so when one is dealing with a show that features a good amount of "grain" in the film stock, or noise in the digital capture. The Blu-ray's higher compression is able to render it more accurately...

    However, "Hell On Wheels" which appeared to be shot digitally and had pretty much zero noise, looked amazing on DirecTV.

    It all depends on the content.

    ~Alan
     
  7. Jun 5, 2012 #87 of 653
    Alan Gordon

    Alan Gordon Chancellor

    9,094
    100
    Jun 7, 2004
    Dawson, Georgia
    :(

    ~Alan
     
  8. Jun 5, 2012 #88 of 653
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,989
    180
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    DTV is USING 8PSK for many Ka transponders.
     
  9. Jun 5, 2012 #89 of 653
    cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,462
    66
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
    I honestly thought it was just QPSK. Any reason why there are more details on sathint and lynsat for Dish Network vs DirecTV?

    I read that Dish Network uses "turbo coded FEC" which helps with efficiency. I don't think you can get away with that on Ka considering the different power and rain fade margins.

    How wide is a Dish Network transponder vs DirecTV? They are getting 8 and sometimes 10 HD in one Tp.
     
  10. Jun 5, 2012 #90 of 653
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,345
    578
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Most movies or shows that are broadcast look soft compared to Blu-ray!

    But my comparison is AMC vs. most other 1080i broadcasts. I maintain that AMC is soft due to compression, bit-starving, whatever you wish to call it.

    Content quality: Essential! And, as you say, variable. You can ruin a beautifully filmed movie by bit-starving or poor compression, but you can't make a badly filmed piece look great by putting it on Blu-ray or broadcasting it at high rates.
     
  11. Jun 5, 2012 #91 of 653
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,989
    180
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    Not that important - just stick with final bitrate, that is the metric to count channels and its individual bitrate [I wouldn't use the word "bandwidth") after statmux encoders.

    We had a few posts asking about DTV 8PSK a few times, and I gave the answer a few times. How you missed that ? ;)
     
  12. Jun 5, 2012 #92 of 653
    cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,462
    66
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
    Honestly there's so many acronyms I may of read something too quickly and easily mistaken QPSK for 8PSK (read fast it's only one character different). So yeah anything could of happened!

    Perhaps it was 16PSK that was determined that at least for direct to home would be out of this question.
     
  13. Jun 5, 2012 #93 of 653
    Alan Gordon

    Alan Gordon Chancellor

    9,094
    100
    Jun 7, 2004
    Dawson, Georgia
    Absolutely...

    I only watch original content on AMC, so the only other places I've been able to compare content is from Blu-ray. MM and TWD comparisons fare badly because of the styles of the individual shows. HOW had some AMAZING scenic shots on AMC-HD last year, which tells me that AMC-HD CAN look great... but it depends on the content.

    I'm not arguing that a higher bit-rate can't improve the picture, I'm simply stating that AMC-HD (as it is) can be capable of great PQ if the content isn't too challenging.

    ~Alan
     
  14. Jun 5, 2012 #94 of 653
    cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,462
    66
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
  15. Jun 5, 2012 #95 of 653
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,989
    180
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    I did post real bitrates - measured, not calculated.
     
  16. Jun 5, 2012 #96 of 653
    Racer88

    Racer88 Icon

    802
    1
    Sep 12, 2006
    So now the question is, how much of the 25% gain in channel capacity brought about by the new encoding techologies applies to these numbers. Something like 12.5% reduction in overhead(FEC, etc.) and 12.5% increase in overall throughput? More of one less of the other?

    Is that somewhat in neighborhood of how it works?
     
  17. Jun 5, 2012 #97 of 653
    Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
    I thought the 44 national HD transponders (D10/D11/D12) were QPSK 2/3 39 Mbps.

    P, you agree?
     
  18. Jun 5, 2012 #98 of 653
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,989
    180
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    Umm, no - these are a mix of many different combinations. And changing sometimes.
     
  19. Jun 5, 2012 #99 of 653
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,989
    180
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    And again - these numbers are BITRATE, mux bitrate.
     
  20. Jun 5, 2012 #100 of 653
    Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
    Hmmm, I'm just talking about the 14 on D10, 14 on D11, and 16 on D12. You thinking they are not all the same (QPSK 2/3)?
     

Share This Page