Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by davewolfs, Aug 29, 2007.
Nope, it's all encrypted.
Was this feed recently encrypted?
How have these figures been determined?
There is also this post, where they have been able to tell.
It was possible to modify past receivers to output the MPEG bitstream. As far as I know, that isn't possible on any of the new receivers that support the new satellites.
The drive contents are obviously encrypted, but are they stored in a way that would let you determine the size of recordings?
Once we know the modulation type and FEC, we can also calculate the average bits. For example, DirecTV would have 14 transponders @ ~61 Mbps with 8PSK modulation at 3/4 FEC. Spread that across 80 channels and you get about 10.6 Mbps each.
Of course, DirecTV would double that capacity with the launch of DirecTV-11 in December.
Reminds me of a story about a busy Father asking his young daughter if she preferred quality time or quantity time. The daughter responded, "I want quality time - and LOTS of it!".
I want quality and lots of it too!! :lol:
You're right...this HD Lite stuff looks so bad it's ridiculous.
I would like to order D*, but I was over at my cousin's the other day watching on his calibrated Bravia and it looked like garbage (to me, obviously others feel differently) on most HD channels. We switched it to DiscoveryHD (which as I understand it runs at full HD resolutions) and it looked as good as my cable does, but all the other HD channels looked much worse.
Seeing as how I don't have D* and am thinking about ordering mainly for ST, I don't have the luxury of just waiting and seeing with my eyes.
Now obviously the resounding response is that no one knows the answer to the OP's question, but that doesn't make your response any less useless or more helpful.
I also can't tell the difference between my OTA hd channels and the MPEG-4 channels,unless I stand directly in front of my plasma.There is slightly more macroblocking compression artifact with the MPEG-4 channels,but not much and I definitely can't see it from my normal viewing distance.I think the new MPEG-4 hd channels will look excellent,IMHO.
Where I live the only options are Charter cable and satellite. I have HD locals through charter and it is no better as far as macroblocking compression artifact problems. Anytime there is fast moving action, I see it on D* and Charter. I know it's not the TV, because DVD/HDDVD looks awesome. Hopefully, MPEG-4 will help. I'm not complaining too much, because it's really my only/best option living in GREENBOW ALABAMA. (Forrest Gump reference).
I would imagine so, but that will only give you the bitrate. It won't tell you anything about the resolution, which is what a lot of people are curious about.
Bitrate != resolution.
The "HD-Lite" complaints are that the HD channels are downrezzed from 1920x1080 to something lower (like 1440x1080, for instence) before they are converted to MPEG2.
MPEG4 is well known for looking "as good" at MPEG2 at a lower bitrate.
For example, an MPEG2 video stream at 10 MB / sec. might look "the same" to the eye as the same video in MPEG4 at 7 MB / sec.
So, by your methods you might be able to learn that a particular channel had an average bit rate of, say, 7 MB / sec. But it would not tell you if the uncompressed input to the MPEG4 conversion was 1920x1080 or 1440x1080, or something else, which is the source of the "HD Lite" complaints.