[esayre]

I am a big Minnesota Wild fan. Most of the games are shown on Fox Sports North and a local channel.

Over the summer I got a HD set. Neither of the channels are in HD, I know, but the quality of picture seems worse.

So, I guess I'm wondering how much does DirecTV compress the RSNs and why is that my OTA reception of the local channel is so much better than the signal I get from D*?

I know some of it could be the signal that D* receives from the local channel.

What solutions are there? Nag D*? Anything else?

 

[manny1]

I am a big Minnesota Wild fan. Most of the games are shown on Fox Sports North and a local channel.

Over the summer I got a HD set. Neither of the channels are in HD, I know, but the quality of picture seems worse.

So, I guess I'm wondering how much does DirecTV compress the RSNs and why is that my OTA reception of the local channel is so much better than the signal I get from D*?

I know some of it could be the signal that D* receives from the local channel.

What solutions are there? Nag D*? Anything else?

A lot has to do with how the signal from FSN is being "backhauled" to LA for rebroadcast and spotbeaming back into the market. Most of the majors are either fiber linked to the network providing the bulk carriage or linked by bulk satellite transport back. For some of the minor (read lower rated) players, it's as simple as picking up an analog terrestrial signal from a broadcaster or line feed from a cable operator and routing whatever, however. Bottom line, how it is picked up and transported back to LA has much to do with the result at the STB. Hope that helps some.

 

[carl6]

The other factor is that you now have a higher resolution tv. SD that looked just fine on an SD set does not look as "fine" on an HD set. It is important to adjust your various settings to optimize the picture. Most HD sets have the ability to set different video settings for each of the inputs so you can tweak them to optimize that particular feed.

Carl

 

[esayre]

The other factor is that you now have a higher resolution tv. SD that looked just fine on an SD set does not look as "fine" on an HD set. It is important to adjust your various settings to optimize the picture. Most HD sets have the ability to set different video settings for each of the inputs so you can tweak them to optimize that particular feed.

Carl

Thanks Carl - I'll look into doing that.

 

[bwaldron]

The other factor is that you now have a higher resolution tv. SD that looked just fine on an SD set does not look as "fine" on an HD set. It is important to adjust your various settings to optimize the picture. Most HD sets have the ability to set different video settings for each of the inputs so you can tweak them to optimize that particular feed.

Carl

A high-quality SD feed can look very good on an HD set.

However, DirecTV's SD feeds are generally pretty awful -- especially the various regional sports channels. All the tweaking in the world won't make them look very good on a modern HD display.

 

[gator22]

Could also be the receiver. My Samsung 360 just died and D* sent me an H20 to replace it. The SD picture is much better on the H20 than the 360.

 

[esayre]

Could also be the receiver. My Samsung 360 just died and D* sent me an H20 to replace it. The SD picture is much better on the H20 than the 360.

How is that possible? It's the same signal, right?

 

[Radio Enginerd]

How is that possible? It's the same signal, right?

I've seen a bunch of posts on the HR20 forums about the SD picture quality looking MUCH better on the H20 and HR20. Yes, it is the same SD signal but the image processor in the receiver is better resulting in a better picture.

 

[carl6]

I believe that there have also been a lot of positive comments about the SD picture quality from the R15. Mine provide excellent SD PQ.

Not all receivers/tuners perform the same with regard to producing a picture.

Carl