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

CBS HD on 61.5 now being down converted!!!


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
88 replies to this topic

#51 OFFLINE   voripteth

voripteth

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 216 posts
Joined: Oct 25, 2005

Posted 20 December 2005 - 10:01 AM

I find it interesting some people have seen flashing effects after this change took place. That really sounds like a problem between dish doing their conversion to 720p and a customers receiver either reconverting to 1080i output or having problems processing the converted transport stream.


I'm using a 942 to display in 1080i for my Sony 60" SXRD which displays 1080p.

...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#52 OFFLINE   saweetnesstrev

saweetnesstrev

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 289 posts
Joined: Oct 08, 2005

Posted 20 December 2005 - 11:07 AM

You have to buy CSHD East seperately? Oh i get it ,,, it costs 1.50 dollar more,, Can Cleveland area people get this i have my second dish pointed at 61.5 :)

#53 OFFLINE   bmanner

bmanner

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 27 posts
Joined: Jan 19, 2004

Posted 20 December 2005 - 11:45 AM

I did see some odd graphic glitches this weekend on CBS HD. Every few minutes I would see a screen flash. With careful use of freeze frame I was able to see that it was a video frame shifted to the right about a half screen. Is this an artifact of DISH changing from 1080i to 720p?


I am seeing the same screen flash on CBS HD (East Feed) and it started after the switch to TP17 on 61.5. I have a 6000 receiver. It may be my imagination, but I am also seeing some "jitter" in fast moving objects that I did not see before.

#54 OFFLINE   thxultra

thxultra

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 440 posts
Joined: Feb 01, 2005

Posted 20 December 2005 - 01:55 PM

Are you kidding? Have you ever seen HD on cable?

While it might not be the same on all cable systems, some (especially mine), does a horrific job on HD. They over-compress it and, on top of that, their digital set top (DVR) boxes sometime can't handle recording a HD channel while you are watching another one.

While HD via satellite might never be as good as OTA HD, I hope that it will never be as bad as my local cable company provides.



I find that interesting as hd on comcast in the chicago suburbs is actually very clear. I can't see a difference between it and my off the air.

#55 OFFLINE   hammerdown

hammerdown

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 28 posts
Joined: Jan 20, 2004

Posted 20 December 2005 - 02:52 PM

I don't subscribe to CBS HD from E*, but my local PBS OTA started downcoverting from 1080i to 720p about a year ago. I can see a big difference! I remember PBS shows in 1080i, and repeats of the same shows now in 720p look mushy/soft.

Hammer

#56 OFFLINE   rrfrey

rrfrey

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 8 posts
Joined: Dec 01, 2005

Posted 20 December 2005 - 07:42 PM

My local PBS "HD" is transmitted alongside two SD feeds on the same channel. Because of this apparent channel sharing, I believe the HD is really only getting half bandwidth. It is 1080i but the picture is just awful.

#57 OFFLINE   tnsprin

tnsprin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,129 posts
Joined: Mar 15, 2003

Posted 24 December 2005 - 07:13 AM

Others (on that other site) are now claiming the its not 720p but 1080i LITE. Anyone KNOW?
Ex Dish subscriber
Fios TV subscriber on 3/8/10

#58 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 41,141 posts
  • LocationMichiana
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 24 December 2005 - 10:40 AM

Others (on that other site) are now claiming the its not 720p but 1080i LITE. Anyone KNOW?

Gary hasn't updated his website in a while, he's still got CBS-HD listed as 1920x1080i 16.6mbps

http://home.bigsandy...ll/bitrate.html

I don't understand what is so different about "HD lite" that gets people so worked up. Satellite has been "SD lite" for many years (and getting lighter). Digital HD even uncompressed has it's own set of problems - and there is no way that ANY satellite provider is going to pass the full HD signal on to the consumer. Nobody has the bandwidth.

Some day we will see HD signals in MPEG4 with 7 Mbps video streams. Modified 6000's won't see them (they only do MPEG2) but they will be there. Will they be "HD lite" - by some definition they must be since no satellite carrier will EVER transmit the source signal unmodified. After one has accepted that fact it is all just a matter of degrees.

JL

#59 OFFLINE   robill

robill

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 25 posts
Joined: May 13, 2005

Posted 24 December 2005 - 12:25 PM

I don't understand what is so different about "HD lite" that gets people so worked up. Satellite has been "SD lite" for many years (and getting lighter). Digital HD even uncompressed has it's own set of problems - and there is no way that ANY satellite provider is going to pass the full HD signal on to the consumer. Nobody has the bandwidth.


JL
I don't understand how you can't 'understand'..... Yes, we've put up with satellite SD lite for years, but knowing HD wasn't far away made it bearable. Walking into local stores and getting a chance to see the spectacular video being shown on Dish's own HD Demo channel made the future of TV look very exciting.
Well now that I've bought an HD receiver and TV things seem be going backwards. I've had my system just long enough to know how fantastic HD can look, but unfortunately not all channels look as good as they did a short time ago.
The quality of the video not the quantity is what will get my programming dollar.

#60 OFFLINE   booger

booger

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 192 posts
Joined: Oct 31, 2005

Posted 24 December 2005 - 02:08 PM

I recall seeing an analog HD display MANY years ago at an NAB convention. I have NEVER seen anything come even close since.


Has anyone here been able to compare 4DTV's HD to E*? I hear c-band high def is unbeatable. If so, what are the spec's?

#61 ONLINE   Stewart Vernon

Stewart Vernon

    Excellent Adventurer

  • Moderators
  • 20,307 posts
  • LocationKittrell, NC
Joined: Jan 07, 2005

Posted 24 December 2005 - 02:42 PM

Building upon what JL said...

OTA, if you have a good antenna and local stations broadcasting properly, has always been better than cable or satellite even before digital.

Analog OTA when received properly with strong signal is superior to digital OTA... but now we have digital OTA that carries higher quality signals in many markets (HD) so the digital OTA is higher quality than the analog in those markets.

Cable and Satellites have different degrees of bandwidth problems, carrying 100s of channels to any given market (and satellite carrying thousands in total from their orbital slots) so besides technical issues, there are limits to their quality vs OTA.

Most of the channels we receive via satellite or cable, are not available OTA in any market... so the only way you get them is with satellite or cable.

I wish we could get OTA quality signals from satellite and cable... but I believe this will never happen for the reasons JL mentioned plus more that I'm sure are escaping us at the moment.

I think what will happen, whether we want it or not... is that HD via satellite or cable will by design be better than SD via those same services... but as JL said, it will not be full quality HD in the same way that we don't get SD in full quality today.

Some DVDs aren't as good as others... Superbit DVDs are generally better when I compare them to regular DVDs... but some regular DVDs are pretty good quality too. If they ever settle on an HD-DVD standard, then those should look pretty good, and likely better than we will get over satellite or cable.

I think, unfortunately, this is just the nature of things.

People, after all, have already been sold on "100% digital quality" when nature isn't digital, and any digital picture is by design NOT as clear or detailed as analog reality... so compression and bitrate tweaking is just the next step of acceptance once folks accept "digital quality" over analog.

#62 OFFLINE   hokieengineer

hokieengineer

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 89 posts
Joined: Jul 31, 2004

Posted 24 December 2005 - 08:41 PM

Gary hasn't updated his website in a while, he's still got CBS-HD listed as 1920x1080i 16.6mbps

http://home.bigsandy...ll/bitrate.html

I don't understand what is so different about "HD lite" that gets people so worked up. Satellite has been "SD lite" for many years (and getting lighter). Digital HD even uncompressed has it's own set of problems - and there is no way that ANY satellite provider is going to pass the full HD signal on to the consumer. Nobody has the bandwidth.

Some day we will see HD signals in MPEG4 with 7 Mbps video streams. Modified 6000's won't see them (they only do MPEG2) but they will be there. Will they be "HD lite" - by some definition they must be since no satellite carrier will EVER transmit the source signal unmodified. After one has accepted that fact it is all just a matter of degrees.

JL



Sooo whats your point? Should we not strive for the best possible? We've seen what has been done in the past. So many SD stations jammed onto a TP that it barely looks better than an Internet streaming video. We have a chance here, today, to try and change the course our providers take with regards to HD transmission. Sure, they might not listen, but they might as well.

I would think a moderator on a satellite discussion board would want to rally his members around a cause such as providing a higher quality product. Instead, I see a lot of "well, this is the way it is, oh well" defeatist attitudes.

Please explain to me why HDNet and HDNet movies are transmitted 1920x1080i with a data rate of at least 17Mbit/s? Apparently Mark Cuban did not roll over and play dead to Charlie, and demanded his product be delievered to consumers at a quality that deserves the label "HD".

I would have hoped Voom would have the same attitude Mark has with his product, but so far it does not appear so. Thats where we consumers come in. I want to see more channels delievered at the quality HDNet is sent.

You can take a passive approach to these changes, and just sit back and "wait and see what happens", or you can be active and use the facts we have to persuade Dish that we won't accept these changes to Voom.

As for mpeg4, I will be upset if they try and STILL down-res Voom after cutting the new channels from 11 to 5. So far, all their mpeg4 tests have been 1440x1080 which isn't exactly a promising sign of things to come.

Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree, but I urge anyone reading this who has HD or is thinking about getting HD in the next year to voice your concerns with Dish. A simple email or phone call is all it takes. There is power in numbers, and I thank the ones out there who are putting in the effort.

#63 OFFLINE   Ghostwriter

Ghostwriter

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 204 posts
Joined: Oct 10, 2005

Posted 25 December 2005 - 10:08 AM

Hokie I completely agree with you. Seems like too many people here have the "thank you sir, may I please have another" attitude. Why should I just sit back and let them do what they wish. I purchased an HD TV and I have the 811 to receive HD not some bastardized version and I am not paying an extra $15 to get something similar to a high qualty SD, that is just ridiculous.

In the beginning E* as above and beyond D* and most Digital Cable providers, but that is no longer the case if you ask me. Personally I am about to drop off a $15 a month BOGUS HD charge and heck if they are headed down this road I will just go and get a FREE HD DVR from my local cable provider since their HD quality is probably on par with E* right now.

Personally I will not sit back and take it. I will let my displeasure be known to E*, and JL you should rally the people not take such a passive #%@-kiss approach.

#64 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 41,141 posts
  • LocationMichiana
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 25 December 2005 - 11:34 AM

Sooo whats your point? Should we not strive for the best possible?

Yes. And I believe that E* is working in that direction. They cannot continue doing 1920x1080i ... so they are going to do the best they can with the resources they have.

JL

#65 ONLINE   Stewart Vernon

Stewart Vernon

    Excellent Adventurer

  • Moderators
  • 20,307 posts
  • LocationKittrell, NC
Joined: Jan 07, 2005

Posted 25 December 2005 - 01:59 PM

Hokie I completely agree with you. Seems like too many people here have the "thank you sir, may I please have another" attitude. Why should I just sit back and let them do what they wish. I purchased an HD TV and I have the 811 to receive HD not some bastardized version and I am not paying an extra $15 to get something similar to a high qualty SD, that is just ridiculous.

In the beginning E* as above and beyond D* and most Digital Cable providers, but that is no longer the case if you ask me. Personally I am about to drop off a $15 a month BOGUS HD charge and heck if they are headed down this road I will just go and get a FREE HD DVR from my local cable provider since their HD quality is probably on par with E* right now.

Personally I will not sit back and take it. I will let my displeasure be known to E*, and JL you should rally the people not take such a passive #%@-kiss approach.


I have gone on record many times that people should complain about Dish reducing resolution, bitrates, etc for these HD channels.

HOWEVER... I've also gone on record as saying they should complain correctly!

Many people on "the other site" were posting messages about how they would rather have 720p than a downconverted 1080i... and then when Dish starts giving them CBS in 720p they complain about that too!

If people would have just complained that they didn't want any downconverting, to leave 1920x1080i alone... I would have 100% supported that... but people started going into crazy/incorrect explanations of how 720p was better... and apparently Dish has been listening... so the folks who were rallying and complaining have actually helped Dish prove their HD customers aren't that smart and will settle for less.

That's what makes me mad about all this... the complainers actually proved to Dish that they can get away with what they are doing.

#66 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 41,141 posts
  • LocationMichiana
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 25 December 2005 - 02:37 PM

Agreed. I'm not going to shoot the messengers but it appears they have shot themselves by not having a consistant message.

E* is a business. They will make business decisions. No amount of wild complaining will change their business decisions. The only thing that will change their business decisions is losing or not ganing business. Good complaining might lead them down a better path without losing business, but not the wild stuff.

You want improve PQ on HD? Complain about PQ on HD. Complain in terms that the average CSR can understand. Complain in terms of what you are seeing on your screen and not what you are seeing on any internet forum.

Every once in a while the religious wrong gets on a crusade about one thing or another and some guy leads the march to sign the petition or write/call congress or whatever to get that organizations message across. Most of the time it has little effect because the people taking the messages KNOW that it is an organized effort - and no matter how well written or spoken the plea the message is boiled down to a checkmark on a tally sheet - and then the count is discounted because they know only one side of the issue has been rallied. For all the effort little message gets through.

That is what I can see happening here. E* is getting complaints about PQ being bad because someone on a forum told them PQ is bad. I've read posts from those who (bravely) said "I don't see a difference" and were flamed because they wouldn't just drink the kool aid and believe. E* COULD quite well be discounting the overall message because they are seeing the organization.

Which is a shame ... because there could be valid complaints lost thanks to the crusaders who are trying to drown out everyone else.

JL

#67 OFFLINE   boylehome

boylehome

    Hall Of Fame/Supporter

  • Registered
  • 2,143 posts
Joined: Jul 16, 2004

Posted 25 December 2005 - 02:59 PM

HOWEVER... I've also gone on record as saying they should complain correctly!
..................
That's what makes me mad about all this... the complainers actually proved to Dish that they can get away with what they are doing.

Why not look to the future? Lets just change the standard to 1080p! This way we will have at least 2 months before something better comes along and about two years before we notice the difference.

#68 ONLINE   Stewart Vernon

Stewart Vernon

    Excellent Adventurer

  • Moderators
  • 20,307 posts
  • LocationKittrell, NC
Joined: Jan 07, 2005

Posted 25 December 2005 - 04:20 PM

That is what I can see happening here. E* is getting complaints about PQ being bad because someone on a forum told them PQ is bad. I've read posts from those who (bravely) said "I don't see a difference" and were flamed because they wouldn't just drink the kool aid and believe. E* COULD quite well be discounting the overall message because they are seeing the organization.


The whole "Kool-Aid" thing always makes me think... Aside from the fact that the "original" Kool-Aid drinkers usually being referred to here died from drinking it... and they drank it because a religious leader told them to...

Just who is drinking the Kool-Aid in the forums?

The guy who is "kissing up" to the corporate entity? Or the folks who are jumping on the bandwagon?

I've seen the folks who come in and say they can't tell a difference... and someone else says "yes you can" and then they say "oh yes, I can now"... or the ones who post and say "It looks better to me today" and someone else will say "no it doesn't".. and then they say "oh, you are right it doesn't look better to me".

There's probably lots of flavors of the Kool-Aid to go around!

I know from experience of working at a company that looked at public forums (not a TV/DBS/cable company)... that the company was quite good at ignoring most of what they read on forums as being on the fringe of what their actual customers wanted... and if they got an actual customer calling in saying something that matched something in a popular forum, they would sometimes discount that as being someone who had been "sucked in" to the mob mentality of folks online.

Not saying it is right or wrong... but companies do tend to tune out folks that start pounding them with statements that are identical to things they hear/read from people that don't entirely know what they are saying.

And in the end, we all lose.

Kind of like when I'm watching the news, and I see a reporter interviewing someone who is supporting a cause I support... but the guy sounds like an idiot... sometimes makes me want to switch sides!

#69 OFFLINE   hokieengineer

hokieengineer

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 89 posts
Joined: Jul 31, 2004

Posted 25 December 2005 - 06:04 PM

I have gone on record many times that people should complain about Dish reducing resolution, bitrates, etc for these HD channels.

HOWEVER... I've also gone on record as saying they should complain correctly!

Many people on "the other site" were posting messages about how they would rather have 720p than a downconverted 1080i... and then when Dish starts giving them CBS in 720p they complain about that too!

If people would have just complained that they didn't want any downconverting, to leave 1920x1080i alone... I would have 100% supported that... but people started going into crazy/incorrect explanations of how 720p was better... and apparently Dish has been listening... so the folks who were rallying and complaining have actually helped Dish prove their HD customers aren't that smart and will settle for less.

That's what makes me mad about all this... the complainers actually proved to Dish that they can get away with what they are doing.



I disagree with what you two are saying about the "chorus" and bandwagon effect, and I dont think we're gonna change each other minds, so I'll leave it at that.

Dish was transmitting the NY and LA locals (on the test channels) in 720p before they messed around with voom, and before we complained about any downresing. Whatever plan they had for cbs-e hd was put in place before we said anything, don't try and blame that on us.

#70 ONLINE   Stewart Vernon

Stewart Vernon

    Excellent Adventurer

  • Moderators
  • 20,307 posts
  • LocationKittrell, NC
Joined: Jan 07, 2005

Posted 25 December 2005 - 07:48 PM

Dish was transmitting the NY and LA locals (on the test channels) in 720p before they messed around with voom, and before we complained about any downresing. Whatever plan they had for cbs-e hd was put in place before we said anything, don't try and blame that on us.


CBS and NBC are 1080i. I think WB is 1080i also. ABC and FOX were already 720p. I don't know about UPN since my local station doesn't do any HD for UPN. I *think* my local PBS is 1080i, but I can't tell for sure. I can't see the "test channels" so I don't know what they have ever been... so my statements here just reflect what I get OTA.

The "CBS is now being converted to 720p" thread is a recent thread started long after the Voom complaints started. As far as I was aware, the changes to CBS happened after the complaints about Voom. IF the change to CBS happened prior to the Voom changes, I wonder why no one complained?

#71 OFFLINE   gdarwin

gdarwin

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 61 posts
Joined: Jan 31, 2005

Posted 25 December 2005 - 09:25 PM

IF the change to CBS happened prior to the Voom changes, I wonder why no one complained?


Probably because most don't have true 1080i sets to see the difference. I spent today at my Father-in-law's house and he has a set where I could tell the difference (STB - 942). My next set is going to be a high end HDTV and I want the same quality from Dish....
Louisville, KY
2 - 622
1 - 942
1 - 211

#72 OFFLINE   keenan

keenan

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 557 posts
Joined: Feb 08, 2005

Posted 25 December 2005 - 10:26 PM

I don't know about UPN since my local station doesn't do any HD for UPN. I *think* my local PBS is 1080i, but I can't tell for sure.

Viacom owned UPN stations are 1080i. I believe all PBS stations are also 1080i.

#73 ONLINE   Stewart Vernon

Stewart Vernon

    Excellent Adventurer

  • Moderators
  • 20,307 posts
  • LocationKittrell, NC
Joined: Jan 07, 2005

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:21 AM

Probably because most don't have true 1080i sets to see the difference. I spent today at my Father-in-law's house and he has a set where I could tell the difference (STB - 942). My next set is going to be a high end HDTV and I want the same quality from Dish....


You missed what I was getting at in my reply to the other poster... The people who were complaining about Voom, didn't complain at all about CBS until recently... which implies that CBS was only changed recently OR they didn't notice it.

IF it was changed recently, it may have been in response to their complaints... IT they didn't notice it until recently, then it implies they really aren't as observant and the changes aren't as obvious as they have complained about.

Either way, it ends up being a strike agains their "we won" campaign...

#74 ONLINE   Stewart Vernon

Stewart Vernon

    Excellent Adventurer

  • Moderators
  • 20,307 posts
  • LocationKittrell, NC
Joined: Jan 07, 2005

Posted 26 December 2005 - 01:23 AM

Viacom owned UPN stations are 1080i. I believe all PBS stations are also 1080i.


The only show I was watching last season on UPN was Enterprise... so I haven't watched any UPN at all this season... but I do flip over there from time to time during prime-time programming to see if they are broadcasting any local HD.

I did see one time an episode of Veronica Mars that CBS carried to promote the show, and that was in HD... so I guess it does make sense that UPN shows could be in 1080i if my local station ever decides to do it.

What's weird to me... Both my local WB and UPN are owned by Sinclair... so it seems odd to me that they upgraded their WB to HD but not the UPN when they are both sharing a lot of stuff, including the local news team.

#75 OFFLINE   kb7oeb

kb7oeb

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 631 posts
Joined: Jun 16, 2004

Posted 26 December 2005 - 11:43 AM

My local CBS is still running a full 19Mb to its HD stream so I still have one channel to compare to. To me voom has always looked worse than the other dish stations. I always heard Equator as the best voom but it looked terrible to me. Before they lowered the resolution it pixelated constantly. Now it has a smoother but fuzzier picture. If they are going to compromise picture quality I think they are better off reducing resolution than bit starving 1920x1080.

As networks CBS,NBC,UPN,WB,PBS are 1080i and Fox and ABC are 720p. Fox is unique in that its bitrate is determined by the network and should look the same on every station.




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