Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

Picture quality of other services


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#21 ONLINE   lparsons21

lparsons21

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 3,383 posts
  • LocationHerrin, IL
Joined: Mar 04, 2006

Posted 15 June 2012 - 10:32 AM

Maybe to you, but not to me. Several "Dish" folks at satguys finally bit the bullet and swapped last year, and the majority all commented the HD was better. Also, I did note that youd see it more on a larger screen. On a 65" plasma, it wasn't hard at all. And the OP's question was:

Is Dish picture quality as good in HD?

Simple answer: No.


Note that I didn't say that some can see the difference, I can also. The point is that it is only slightly different to most, and that has been reported here and at satguys.

At one time, I had both D* and E* hd service at my home, both connected to the same TV via the same AVR. The TV at that time was a 61" JVC HD-iLA rear projector. The difference was slight enough that I really didn't notice when I was on one or the other for almost every channel.

Now I have a 55" Panasonic plasma and had Dish on it, and in the last year changed to Direct. The difference was miniscule on that set from 8' away. I realize that is very subjective, but frankly in many conversations with friends and relatives that have one or the other, no one ever complains about the quality of the picture and some of them are like me and have switched at times.

So yes, the picture on D* is better, how much is the question from a subjective viewing.

Lloyd
Receiver : Dish Hopper w/Sling & Super Joey
HDTV : Mitsi WD-73742 73" 3D DLP
Surround: Denon AVR-2113ci 7.1 Setup

 


...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#22 OFFLINE   billsharpe

billsharpe

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,307 posts
  • LocationSouthern California
Joined: Jan 25, 2007

Posted 15 June 2012 - 12:04 PM

I couldn't notice any difference in HD picture quality between DirecTV and FiOS on my 40-inch Sony. But the SD picture on Turner Classic Movies is much better on FiOS than DirecTV.

About the only other SD channel I watch is BBC World News, which looks great on FiOS but isn't carried, AFAIK, on DirecTV at all.
Bill

Family room: Sony Bravia KDL-40SL130
Living room: Sceptre 32 inch

#23 OFFLINE   Athenian

Athenian

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 126 posts
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 16 June 2012 - 10:15 AM

This is something that's been talked about before, but I don't think recently. I have been with Direct since 1999. Due to ever increasing pricing I have started thinking of leaving for the first time ever, basically to save money and to get more HD, which Direct doesn't seem to want to give us (National channels).


I'm not familiar with the channel issues you mention but it's not hard to get price concessions. Research the ads you've been seeing to determine the going rates for competitors then call DirecTV and say that you want to cancel. You'll be routed to "retention" where they will definitely make a deal. You don't have to take whatever it is on the spot; just tell them you'll think about it and whatever was offered will be in the notes when you call back.

We were with DirecTV for nine years when we had a series of bad experiences that made us vulnerable to AT&T U-Verse marketing and we ended up switching. The picture quality for SD content, which was all we had when we switched, was much better on AT&T.

After 14 months of U-Verse annoyances, we returned to DirecTV. In the interim, we had upgraded our televisions and we immediately appreciated the superior HD quality.

Our specific complaints about U-Verse included:
  • Unacceptably poor guide data - recordings were cut off due to inaccurate times in the guide, errors in desciptions, etc.
  • Zero Technical support - the tech support representatives don't know anything beyond what is in the user documentation -- less actually. They don't know the software and their only answer to everything is to replace the DVR. Since they don't actually know the system, they can't even recognize a software bug and have no idea how to report one when.
  • Frequent freezing
  • Four stream limitation caused problems sometimes
  • Extra billing for 3D content - there's not much 3D content available so why the extra charge?
We really liked the built-in/no extra charge MRV capability but we much prefer the TiVo interface and we returned to DirecTV as soon as the THR22 became available.

Edited by Athenian, 16 June 2012 - 10:51 AM.


#24 OFFLINE   txfeinbergs

txfeinbergs

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 134 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 16 June 2012 - 11:19 AM

I was in a AT&T store the other day upgrading my cell phone and had to wait since it was busy. They had two HD TVs on the wall with Uverse playing, and I was shocked by how soft the picture looked. Previous to that I had been considering switching because I swear I get an advertisement from them every single day in the mail usually hocking a $400 to $500 money back offer.

After seeing that though, I am very happy with my DirecTV service. I figured the AT&T store would have had a pristine picture since they would have "cheated" by not actually usuing the typical Uverse data rate, but apparently they were being fully honest in what it could do. I suggest you go look at the picture as well in one of their AT&T stores before making a rash decision to save a few bucks.

And yes, it really just amounts to a few bucks for much better service (and more channels) if you are diligent and harass DirecTV every 6 months or so to get the latest promotions added to your account). (and before someone brings this up, I asked the CSR about getting too greedy and asking for promotions too often when calling a few days ago about my expired 24 month free-HD despite receiving the email saying I was still getting it). She said that I had nothing to worry about because it is due to fraudulent service or accounts in bad standing that triggers that. FYI, I got yet another credit for 6 months for the free HD although it isn't called that in the system).

My credits are:

06/09 07/08 PREMIER Save on HBO for 6 Mos -5.00 Credit

06/09 07/08 PREMIER Save on MAX for 6 Months -5.00 Credit

06/09 07/08 PREMIER Save $5/6 Mos on STARZ -5.00 Credit

06/09 07/08 PREMIER Save $5/6 Mos on SHOWTIME -5.00 Credit

06/09 07/08 PREMIER $10 Off SPORTS for 6 Mos -10.00 Credit

06/09 07/08 Auto-Bill Pay / Paperless Billing -10.00 Credit

This brings my bill down to $120 or so a month for the Premier package.

Note, I also have 3 receivers, and whole house DVR setup included in the $120.

Edited by txfeinbergs, 16 June 2012 - 11:23 AM.
Adding additional details.


#25 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,986 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 16 June 2012 - 12:07 PM

I was in a AT&T store the other day upgrading my cell phone and had to wait since it was busy. They had two HD TVs on the wall with Uverse playing, and I was shocked by how soft the picture looked.

Since I've seen it in my home, on my own equipment, and the right settings, "I suspect" the store didn't have theirs setup right.
"Softness" was not how my picture looked compared to my DirecTV.
A.K.A VOS

#26 OFFLINE   Mr_A1

Mr_A1

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 213 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2007

Posted 16 June 2012 - 01:01 PM

I also had U Tv service for awhile and it was okay except for the nightmare of the signal constantly dropping because they had my line crossed with another customer which would drop both our signals. It took me over 6 months of complaining before I finally got a tech to listen to me and get a line tech to fix the issue. The picture quality of the SD channels was okay but the HD just was not up to par with the macro blocking. Beyond the PQ, the sound quality was even worse since you only got 5.1 audio on HD channels and there is a major bug in their software which only like certain AV receivers to keep from having audio dropouts like ever 3-5 seconds on 5.1 channels which to my knowledge they never fixed.
I, like VOS, am only like 500 feet from the VRAD and get between 58-62,000 Kbps on my line; but have 24 Mbps down / 3 Mbps up internet service with the 250 min Voice which has been rock solid.

Setup:
HR24-100(CE 0x096B) direct connected from Slimline-3SWM Dish & Ethernet Connected Internet.

Connection: HR24 -HDMI-> Yamaha YSP-3000 -HDMI-> Samsung C7100 3D-LED TV.


#27 OFFLINE   txfeinbergs

txfeinbergs

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 134 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 16 June 2012 - 02:33 PM

Since I've seen it in my home, on my own equipment, and the right settings, "I suspect" the store didn't have theirs setup right.
"Softness" was not how my picture looked compared to my DirecTV.


Yet you said it yourself up above. U-who only uses 66% of the bit rate of DirecTV. If we are comparing MPEG 4 to MPEG 4, you are losing a third of your data. There is no way you are going to get the same picture quality with a third less data. For me, it is all about having the best picture possible.

#28 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,986 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 16 June 2012 - 04:21 PM

Yet you said it yourself up above. U-who only uses 66% of the bit rate of DirecTV. If we are comparing MPEG 4 to MPEG 4, you are losing a third of your data. There is no way you are going to get the same picture quality with a third less data. For me, it is all about having the best picture possible.

"And yet" I think they do it with fewer frames, since that was the main problem I saw comparing the two services.
MPEG-4's "weakness" is when it needs a high/peak bit-rate, This seems to be where U-who drops frames.

You said you checked it out in the store while you were waiting.
I checked it out in my home for a couple of weeks.
A.K.A VOS

#29 OFFLINE   txfeinbergs

txfeinbergs

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 134 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 16 June 2012 - 08:16 PM

"And yet" I think they do it with fewer frames, since that was the main problem I saw comparing the two services.
MPEG-4's "weakness" is when it needs a high/peak bit-rate, This seems to be where U-who drops frames.

You said you checked it out in the store while you were waiting.
I checked it out in my home for a couple of weeks.


Fair enough, but I saw what I saw. A better apples to apples comparison would be to test it out in my home like you did, but I see absolutely no reason to even do that. Whether it is dropped frames, lower resolution, or macroblocking, that 33% reduced data rate has to come out somewhere and I really don't see how you can argue against that.

Now if Verizon FIOS was offered in my area, I would drop Directv and my cable internet provider in a heartbeat - but I am stuck with U-Verse (even though Verizon actually wired all the main streets for FIOS which is interesting - they never took it the last step and started offering it). I am thinking there was some money exchanged between AT&T and Verizon.

Edited by txfeinbergs, 16 June 2012 - 08:18 PM.
Correction


#30 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,986 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 16 June 2012 - 08:42 PM

Fair enough, but I saw what I saw. A better apples to apples comparison would be to test it out in my home like you did, but I see absolutely no reason to even do that. Whether it is dropped frames, lower resolution, or macroblocking, that 33% reduced data rate has to come out somewhere and I really don't see how you can argue against that.

Believe me, I'm not arguing against that, or promoting U-who.
I'm only trying to put out some real "facts" about it, to offset some internet rumors.
Clarity of all things, wasn't a problem, which I thought it would have been before watching it.
The number of channels you can record/watch could be a problem for more than one viewer.
The "hick-ups" of the connection become much more noticeable when your TV is displaying a wait icon, or that it's lost network connection.

"And then" there is a user interface that I'm not sure even it's mother could love.
For example:
There were over 600 channels in the guide, so they give you the option to select what you want for a custom/favorite guide. No big deal, but guess what happens when you press the guide button? Might think your custom guide would show, but nope it's the full guide. To get to your custom guide you have to use the menu button and then arrow around/down to select it each time you want it.
The remote has a skip/slip button. Great, but guess what? it is a single press [no stacking commands] AND is only 15 sec for each.
This means to get through a 5 min commercial break is TWENTY press, wait, press, wait.....
I'm not one to throw a fit, but found myself fighting to not throw the damn remote at my TV on many occasions.

Now what you may have seen in the store was their limited resolution selection.
There are only four options:
480,
480 wide,
720,
1080.
The first is 4:3, while the second is 16:9, which may have been what your were watching.
Since HD comes in both 720 & 1080, without always going into the menu and changing it, half of the HD channels are going to be converted unless you only have a 720p display.

Edited by veryoldschool, 16 June 2012 - 08:56 PM.

A.K.A VOS

#31 OFFLINE   am7crew

am7crew

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 267 posts
Joined: Jun 05, 2009

Posted 16 June 2012 - 09:29 PM

Ive had Uverse for over a years now and although the PQ isnt as good as Directv (even though it seems to me D* has increased compression lately) its still worth trying. My TV service has never gone out or had any stuttering/issues. All my TVs are hooked up with ethernet and having the boat of HD channels are nice plus real ondemand. Its worth a shot for a free 30 day trial. I actually like the interface compared to D* being able to browse the guide and get a preview of whats playing on a another channel comes in handy.

#32 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,986 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 16 June 2012 - 09:53 PM

I actually like the interface compared to D* being able to browse the guide and get a preview of whats playing on a another channel comes in handy.

That was something sort of nice, but "for me" it sure didn't overcome the other issues.
Their channel lineup also isn't the easiest either.
All HD starts a 1000, and have the same numbers as the SD [so 4 is 1004 in HD], but you need a spreadsheet to sort through which are HD and SD and which are only SD. There is no "hide SD or HD" duplicates and they aren't next to each other in the guide, which meant in the month that I had it I never did find out which were SD only verse which were SD & HD.
As for "real" on demand, I have to wait maybe 1 min for DirecTV HD to start watching without running out of buffer.
A.K.A VOS

#33 OFFLINE   domingos35

domingos35

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 536 posts
Joined: Jan 11, 2006

Posted 16 June 2012 - 10:55 PM

theres absolutly no diference between directv's and dish's HD. NONE

#34 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,986 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 16 June 2012 - 11:15 PM

theres absolutly no diference between directv's and dish's HD. NONE

There is, but whether it's noticeable is to a viewer is the real question, or variable.
1920 x 1080 isn't the same as 1440 x 1080, but [again] if you can't see a difference, then it doesn't exist "to you".
A.K.A VOS




Protected By... spam firewall...And...