What size television?

Discussion in 'Archive' started by -, Oct 24, 2001.

  1. Guest

    <You must have a really crappy cable television company, or you must be like a million miles away from the cable company.>

    I live in the middle of nowhere, of course it's a really really crappy cable tv company!

    <I have Dish Network(recievers connected via S-Video to calibrated televisions) and I also have analog cable and analog cable has a much better picture even vs Dish Network's stronger channels.>

    Analog cable around here looks worse than a piece of thin copper wire as an antenna! Digital is still really bad.

    <I think that many people mistake the lack of dot crawl, ghosting, etc in the Dish Network picture for a high quality>

    It depends on "quality". Personally I find almost any half-decent digital picture more pleasing on my eyes than most (typically noisy) analog pictures. That's why I put DISH above an antenna (cable around here is terrible).

    < high resolution picture. People don't the understand the concept of what a detailed high resolution picture is supposed to look like. Dish Network certainly does NOT have a high resolution>

    YES, It does. Resolution is not quality. Dish is 480x480. DirecTV is 720x480 (same as DVD). Cable/antenna is about 330x525 (but part of that goes to v-sync and stuff making it closer to 330x500 actual picture). VHS is around 240x525 (again closer to an actual of 240x500). As you can see, resolution DOES NOT EQUAL PICTURE QUALITY. Picture quality is also affected in the digital world by compression, and in the analog world by noise.

    < highly detailed picture on ANY standard definition channel PERIOD.>

    Define highly detailed. Compared to VHS or local cable, it certainly IS highly detailed.
  2. Guest

    Im in the same boat as Gummy, when I compare TW analog to E* its like comparing VHS to DVD. TW is my area sucks in so many ways. All the channels are noisy and I can pick up locals better with a cheap *ss pair of rabbit ears better then cable. A few years ago before we got E* we called TW and complained about the terrible PQ on locals (spef. ABC, NBC) They said it do to interference of either an outdoor antenna (did not have one up until 2 years later when we go E*). And the other reason was the biggest BS Iv ever heard, they said it had to do with interference with Lake Erie. Go figure :rolleyes:

  3. Guest

    My local cable company claims ghosting is impossible because of the fact it's a closed system. They also said the noise was a problem with my wiring (not true, it was RG-6 and all good, only went to two TVs and I even tried removing the splitter and doing my main TV only - didn't help at all). This was in a different city, when I moved I went right away to satellite. But it's the same cable co. (AT&T) with a very similar lineup, and all the people I know with cable (lots) - it looks WORSE than cable at my old house. AT&T truly doesn't know how to provide good cable. And it's missing many popular channels.
  4. Guest

    You haven't done enough research on Dish Network. It can broadcast it's standard definition channels at many different resolutions depending on what level of compression is used.
    Here are the different resolutions Dish network can broadcast at.

    Video Resolution
    - 704 pixels x 480 lines x 30 frames/sec
    - 480 pixels x 480 lines x 30 frames/sec
    - 352 pixels x 480 lines x 30 frames/sec
    - 352 pixels x 240 lines x 30 frames/sec

    You can see that Dish Network certainly CAN broadcast at lower than Analog Cable resolution.
    352 pixels is equal to 264 lines of horizontal resolution which is MUCH LOWER than analog cable's 330 lines of horizontal resolution. You also realize that when Dish Network turns the compression up, the percieved resolution is MUCH MUCH lower than the actual resolution. So even if Dish Network is broadcasting at 480x480(which is equal to 360 lines of horizontal resolution), the percieved resolution might only be like 220 lines of horizontal resolution.
    WWOR looks MUCH MUCH MUCH worse than a good THX VHS video tape to me.
    Get a good THX Certified VHS video tape, get a good VCR and use a good ntsc tv with a good 3D Digital Comb Filter and I bet you that at least 99 out of a hundred people will say that the vhs tape looks better than WWOR on Dish Network.
    WWOR on Dish Network migh have a higher than vhs resolution when you test it with a pixel meter, but the percieved resolution of WWOR on Dish Network is about 140 lines of horizontal resolution, while VHS on sp has a percieved resolution of 240 lines of horizontal resolution, and VHS also has an actual resolution of 240 lines of horizontal resolution.
    You see with analog sources the ACTUAL resolution and the percieved resolution is always the same. With digital video the picture can look like garbage if too much compression is used even with the resolution is high. I bet you've never seen a proper analog cable picture in your life. Analog cable does have a MUCH MUCH MUCH more detailed picture than what you currently get on Dish Network.
    Dish Network had about an equally detailed picture as analog cable years ago when Dish Network didn't have local channels. Directv had a MUCH better than analog cable picture back in 1994 when they didn't use tons of compression the way they use now. I have analog cable and Dish Network and I compare them head to head on identical properly calibrated tvs at least once a week so NOBODY is going to convince me that Dish Network(on standard def channels) has a better picture than my analog cable company has. BTW, the myth that Digital video is always better than analog video is JUST THAT A MYTH. Compare a C-Band analog picture to a Dish Network picture of the same channel and your jaw will hit the floor at just how much worse Dish Network's picture really is on its standard definition channels.
    Being Digital doesn't mean anything unless there's very little or no compression being used.
    70mm IMAX film is in the analog domain, a 20kbps Real Video movie is in the digital domain. Which one do you think looks better?
  5. Guest

    I have a Mitsubishi 46" RPTV and Dish. It has been carefully calibrated first by me on things I could do, and then by an "ISF" tech. Prior to any calibrations the movie channels (HBO...) looked pretty good, with only some of the other channels looking good and others looking fair to poor. Since the calibrations not only my self but anyone who comes over cannont get over how good most of the channels look. Sometimes HBO looks very close to watching a DVD. Fox News, MSNBC and others look very good, while some just look good but nothing to write home about. The difference between Dish and our cable company - digital - (Charter) PQ is unbelievable. Dish has a better picture - less pixalization and somehow just clearer. I believe others when they say it used to be better, but I really am pretty happy with the PQ at this time. I believe a merger will only help all of us get what we want - better PQ and more channels.
  6. Guest

    Just because they CAN broadcast low-res does not mean they DO. ALL DISH Network channels are currently broadcast at 480x480

    BTW, how did u get 352 pixels = 264 lines? Pixels IS lines. it's the same.

    Oh, and yes, I comepletely know what you mean by lower "perceived resolution" due to the compression. And no, I have never seen a good analog cable picture. They aren't too common in the middle of nowhere!

    Admin note: Combined 3 posts into one.
  7. Guest

    tampa8, while DISH is certainly a million times better than both my local analog cable and local digital cable, comparing it to DVD is going too far. The DISH picture loses lots of detail in compression.
  8. Guest

    Originally posted by Jack:
    Are u the same Jack from DBS forums? The Jack from DBSForums mentions he's from a rural area, and is very scared of losing supers. Are you talking about UPN 57 from Philadelphia? I get this channel OTA and WB 17. WB17 and FOX 29 look excellent, and all my other Philly stations look very good.

    I have a 27" Sony still, although may get a new TV set. I wonder sometimes why I spend so much on stuff like a TiVo, Showstopper, new Dish receivers, HT setup, DirecTV receiver now, but still have a 27" set. Sometimes I feel I wasted money on stuff like certain equipment and could have bought a bigger TV set.

    PQ, I have DirecTV now, and Dish only for their Dish CD package. DirecTV's PQ is about same as Dish's. Both are acceptable.

    I'm getting a free year of DVD rentals through Blockbuster, so that alone is worth my activation of DirecTV TC.
  9. Guest

    Yes, I am Jack from the DBS forums, but I'm not the Jack you're thinking of.
    If you read all the posts there then you'll notice that there is more than 1 Jack there.
    BTW, I also live in the Philly burbs, and I get WB17 and UPN57 on my analog cable. Enterprise on UPN57 on analog cable looks BEAUTIFUL, but it looks really bad on WSBK and WWOR superstations on Dish.
  10. Guest

    This thread has been quite good because so many have stayed away from mud slinging and given some good honest answers!

    Dish (or Directv) have an immediate advantage here because cable is sooooo horible. With that in mind, I really do find Dish channels overall to be quite good. There are some exceptions, as this weekend for whatever reason the Tampa/Packers game on either of the fox stations I get on Dish were not very good. Other weeks however the picture can be very good on these same channels. HBO is always very good, many times excellent while other channels can be only good. I have a 46" TV and it has been calibrated and the calibration made a difference. While of course "Garbage in - garbage out" still applies, a "Decent picture in now is a better picture out" Using the Svideo connection makes a difference over component, and miles of difference over the old style anntenna type cable hookup. In fact that connection makes a very muddy picture that indeed would be almost unwatchable on some Dish channels. The best indication of the overall good PQ is when neighbors/friends come over and can't say enough about "How good the picture looks." I'm sure it can be even better, but it is better than anything I had before.
  11. Guest

    I'm with you, tampa8. I really wish that we had a cable system here in Denver that could match the quality of some of the others that people have been talking about. Here, Dish looks much better than any of the cable channels, analog or digital. I watch Buffy and Enterprise on WWOR because the picture is watchable, as opposed to watching it on our local KTVD off of cable. Well, except for Enterprise 2 weeks ago that is...

    Oh, and I think you meant to write composite connection as opposed to component connection. Component would be better than svideo if any of the dish receivers other than the 6000 had it.
  12. Guest

    Thanks - composite is just below Svideo. Component would be better still.
  13. Guest

    Composite is "just" below SVideo? Except on extemely high end applications (high end TVs, LCD projectors, people using an external comb filter, etc...) the composite filtering is so lousy that SVideo is light years ahead! Component provides a small increase still (but a massve increase if used for a progressive signal or high res signal as svid can't handle those). RGB (computer connection) is a tiny touch above component.
  14. Guest

    Gummy, i disagree with you conditionally. Composite can be better than svideo if (and only if) the device sending the video signal has a better comb filter than the television. And if the svideo output from that filter bypasses the comb filter. Output from my laserdisc player actually looks better on my television from the composite output than from the svideo output.

    Of course, that's the only way that composite can look better than svideo.
  15. Guest

    You are assuming that all devices with an SVideo output have it due to an internal comb filter. This is the case with LaserDisc, BUT it is not the case with:

    Digital Satellite
    Digital Cable
    SVHS (or any other tape format for that matter)
    Game Console

    As you can see LaserDisc is the exception, not the rule. Perhaps I should have said SVideo is always better ASSUMING using SVideo means there is no comb filter (which it does on anything except LaserDisc or some very unusual applications). Bypassing comb filtering is always better than comb filtering, no matter how good the comb filter is.

Share This Page

spam firewall