MPEG2 to MPEG4 Switch

Piratefan98 said:

I've read a lot about the legacy channels switching this week, and have a question ......

I don't really see a problem with the MPEG2 HD channels. I've got 3 HDTV's (two Panasonic Plasmas and one Samsung LCD), all with H21 receivers and the "legacy" channels .... the ones in the 70's ..... all look very crisp and clear to me. Certainly as crisp and clear as the other national HD's in the 200-300 range.

I'm not exactly sure how they can look/appear much better than they do now, at least on my tv's. Anyone else experience this?

Jeff

Click to expand...

Some of the national HD's in the 200-300 are just remaps of the channels in the 70's, same signal, just a different channel number. And some of the channels in that range aren't much more than upconverted SD. On my display (60" Sony SXRD LCOS), the true HD MEPG4 channels are clearly superior in picture quality to MPEG2.

Piratefan98 said:

I've read a lot about the legacy channels switching this week, and have a question ......

I don't really see a problem with the MPEG2 HD channels. I've got 3 HDTV's (two Panasonic Plasmas and one Samsung LCD), all with H21 receivers and the "legacy" channels .... the ones in the 70's ..... all look very crisp and clear to me. Certainly as crisp and clear as the other national HD's in the 200-300 range.

I'm not exactly sure how they can look/appear much better than they do now, at least on my tv's. Anyone else experience this?

Jeff

Click to expand...

What size are your displays? What's your seating distance?

There are a lot of factors that come into it. The size, resolution and quality of your display. The distance you sit from the display. If it's been calibrated etc. Some of it is also knowing what the compression artifacts look like so you can recognize them as what they are.

My personal opinion on this is ignorance is sometimes bliss. Don't start obsessing about your HD quality unless your really prepared to obsess about it and learn and spend more than you ever thought possible on the stuff.

Personally I can't tell the difference either but I doubt most people would be able to in my situation either. I've got a 37inch 720p lcd tv and sit about 10feet from it cause the couch is on the other wall in the living room. As just an additional factor I don't usually bother to wear my glasses =)

spartanstew said:

What size are your displays? What's your seating distance?

Click to expand...

50" Plasma, at around 12-14'

37" Plasma, at around 8-10'

26" LCD, at almost point blank (next to bed)

All TV's are 720's (50" actually says 768)

Jeff

The only thing that matters is that the quality should not degrade as a result of the switch. "Couldn't be better" isn't something that lasts long in modern consumer electronics circles.

In order to get the full benefit of 720p on a 50" display, you need to sit closer than 10'.

In order to get the full benefit of 720p on a 37" display, you need to sit closer than 7'.

In order to get the full benefit of 720p on a 26" display, you need to sit closer than 4'.

So, I doubt you'll be able to see any difference in MPEG2 vs MPEG4.

I have a 52" Sony LCD and I see a big difference between watching baseball on ESPN and watching it on TBS. Baseball on TBS HD looks so much better. I can't wait for the switch to MPEG4!

I have a 50" Samsung 720p plasma and I can tell quite a difference between the mpeg2 and mpeg4 channels. I sit about 9-10 feet away.

Piratefan98 said:

50" Plasma, at around 12-14'

37" Plasma, at around 8-10'

26" LCD, at almost point blank (next to bed)

All TV's are 720's (50" actually says 768)

Jeff

Click to expand...

Jeff - you're sitting too far away - get closer

I'm 8' from my 60" and sports ROCK!

(HDTV allows you to sit a lot closer than SDTV)

Also, by making the switch they can offer more channels, because MPEG-2 takes up a lot more bandwidth per channel, so even if you don't see a difference (I see huge differences, it just depends on the show) there is a big advantage to them switching...

also mpeg4 takes up less dvr space.

Anyone who has had HD since the time when only HD Net and HD Net Movies were available knows that HD channels can look considerably better.

spartanstew said:

In order to get the full benefit of 720p on a 50" display, you need to sit closer than 10'.

In order to get the full benefit of 720p on a 37" display, you need to sit closer than 7'.

In order to get the full benefit of 720p on a 26" display, you need to sit closer than 4'.

So, I doubt you'll be able to see any difference in MPEG2 vs MPEG4.

Click to expand...

Those distances are based on getting the full benefit of the resolution that 720p offers, and don't have much to do with seeing differences between MPEG2 and MPEG4. The MPEG2-MPEG4 differences can be seen from a lot farther back from those listed distances, so I would say that most people will be able to see a difference between MPEG2 and MPEG4, even at substantially greater distances than those listed above.

Piratefan98 said:

I've read a lot about the legacy channels switching this week, and have a question ......

I don't really see a problem with the MPEG2 HD channels. I've got 3 HDTV's (two Panasonic Plasmas and one Samsung LCD), all with H21 receivers and the "legacy" channels .... the ones in the 70's ..... all look very crisp and clear to me. Certainly as crisp and clear as the other national HD's in the 200-300 range.

I'm not exactly sure how they can look/appear much better than they do now, at least on my tv's. Anyone else experience this?

Jeff

Click to expand...

It's not about quality it's about compression. They can get the same quality with less space and that = more channels with less SATs. Which = less $ for everyone.

Don't believe all of the hype over it looking all that much better. If that's the case it's because DirecTV has been killing the bit rate on the MPEG2's otherwise it should look the same.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4275063.html

Another benefit is that they'll (presumably) be moved to the newer satellites at 99 and/or 103, making it possible for those of us with line-of-sight issues to receive them. And that's a big deal.

gtheel said:

Another benefit is that they'll (presumably) be moved to the newer satellites at 99 and/or 103, making it possible for those of us with line-of-sight issues to receive them. And that's a big deal.

Click to expand...

Yes, I can see that benefit. And I also realize/understand the benefits of MPEG4 requiring less bandwidth than MPEG2, and how MPEG4 recordings won't take up as much space when recording, etc. etc.

My only question pertained to the PQ of MPEG2 vs MPEG4. Because truly, my legacy/MPEG2 channels look about the same as my MPEG4 channels (i.e. Smithsonian, NG, MGM, HistoryHD, locals in HD, etc). All of them look very nice, crisp and clear. It's hard to imagine the MPEG2's taking a leap forward in PQ upon MPEG4 conversion, at least on my setup.

Jeff

Jeff - prepare to be pleasantly surprised.

The DirecTV PQ of WNBC-HD (MPEG-2) today is nowhere close to WCAU-DT (Mpeg-4)

MPEG 4 blows MPEG 2 out of the water on my tv can't wait for ESPN to switch

I just want to point out that MPEG 4 only "blows MPEG 2 out of the water" because of the downrezzing and compression that DirecTV has been employing to fit all those channels on old satellites. MPEG 4 will look better because it will be full resolution and bandwidth.