DBSTalk Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
21 - 40 of 52 Posts

·
Beer Aficionado
Joined
·
1,683 Posts
gcisko said:
I would never think of doing OTA now and do not really understand why people that have HD locals via the dish would want OTA.
I think that's where the misperception comes in. If the collective on this board is even remotely a representative example of the entire D* community, then most people only have a couple channels of HD locals. I think most DMA's are missing at least one HD local as provided by D*.
 

·
Legend in his own mind...
Joined
·
324 Posts
gcisko said:
I would never think of doing OTA now and do not really understand why people that have HD locals via the dish would want OTA. Since I have both I can say that if there is a quality difference I cannot see it.
It has a lot to do with what you watch. In just my few days of watching MPEG4 via satellite, I'm seeing obvious quality differences. I can watch CSI live upstairs on the OTA tuner and I see none of the macroblocking and codec breaking that I see on my recorded MPEG4.

Record an episode of CSI in HD. Wait til they start using the camera. I swear, every time that flash hits, the screen tries to tear itself in half.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,957 Posts
gcisko said:
I would never think of doing OTA now and do not really understand why people that have HD locals via the dish would want OTA. Since I have both I can say that if there is a quality difference I cannot see it.
While the following has been posted at least 10 times in various threads, let me restate it, so you can "get it" w/r to why OTA is so highly desired in spite of the availability of HD-Locals via Satellite:

1. PQ: it will be a LONG time if ever, that the picture quality of MPEG-4/HD-Locals will compare favorably to OTA-HD. The reasons have been stated over and over and over again. I'm not up to typing them yet again, do an OTA search and you will see the "FACTUAL" reasons why OTA-HD PQ is and will remain superior to ANYTHING D* is likely to deliver to its subscribers for quite some time. It's not a matter for debate....it's a simple matter of science and degree. To any discernable viewer in MOST cases, the differences in PQ are all too obvious. If you are one of the lucky few who cannot see the difference, I'm happy for you, but please don't saddle the rest of us who can see it with an inferior product. I didn't go HD to get HD-Lite (bit-starved HD).

2. Resistance to environmental factors: Precipitation fade is MUCH more of a factor for D* than it is for OTA, unless you are already in a fringe OTA location (and most are not). I have NEVER lost OTA-HD from precip or storms. I have lost D* routinely in any heavy downpour of rain, less so for snow.

3. Sub-channels and PBS: already discussed.

4. HD-Locals via Dish have been "spotty": Lots of people who have MPEG-4/HD-Locals are NOT getting satisfactory performance from same. Pixellation, audio drops outs, failure to record...you name it, it's gone wrong. Some people have done VERY well with MPEG-4. At this point, MPEG-4/HD-Locals via D* is a crap shoot. OTA-HD is not...it works, it's the gold standard of PQ. Again, the issue isn't MPEG-4 per se....it's the implementation, startup problems and hardware issues with MPEG-4 that are the problem.

Hopefully, you "get it", now.:lol:
 

·
You make it, We break it
Joined
·
4,722 Posts
And none of the above is even relevant for those of us who are a long way away from even having them from D*, so OTA is critical for my recording experience. BTW in SD, the PQ on my locals from D* is horrible compared to the OTA PQ - but again I need to record or it doesn't even matter what the PQ is (4 kids). ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,957 Posts
Canis Lupus said:
And none of the above is even relevant for those of us who are a long way away from even having them from D*, so OTA is critical for my recording experience. BTW in SD, the PQ on my locals from D* is horrible compared to the OTA PQ - but again I need to record or it doesn't even matter what the PQ is (4 kids). ;)
Darn! I should have stated that explicitly (recording OTA-HD). I just took it as a part of having OTA-HD enabled in the HR20, but you raise a valid point. I can watch all the OTA-HD I want...I just can't record any of it yet...and since both my wife and I tend to watch a series of favorite programs together (and we are on wildly differing sechedules), the ability to record OTA-HD is a BIG deal for us. If the HR20 didn't state that it was going to support OTA-HD (real soon now), I would never have gotten one.

The OTA jones is hitting pretty hard these days.
 

·
You make it, We break it
Joined
·
4,722 Posts
Yeah and that's the biggest issue for me as well.
Of course you didn't have to state it though, since the thread's about OTA vs. Locals. :)

Still - I read all these threads about PQ with "one vs. the other" and all i can think about is, "Can I please just have one or the other!". I'll take anything at this point. :)

hasan said:
Darn! I should have stated that explicitly (recording OTA-HD). I just took it as a part of having OTA-HD enabled in the HR20, but you raise a valid point. I can watch all the OTA-HD I want...I just can't record any of it yet...and since both my wife and I tend to watch a series of favorite programs together (and we are on wildly differing sechedules), the ability to record OTA-HD is a BIG deal for us. If the HR20 didn't state that it was going to support OTA-HD (real soon now), I would never have gotten one.

The OTA jones is hitting pretty hard these days.
 

·
Beer Aficionado
Joined
·
1,683 Posts
Canis Lupus said:
And none of the above is even relevant for those of us who are a long way away from even having them from D*, so OTA is critical for my recording experience. BTW in SD, the PQ on my locals from D* is horrible compared to the OTA PQ - but again I need to record or it doesn't even matter what the PQ is (4 kids). ;)
Now THAT I find interesting. In SD the PQ on my locals from D* is FAR superior to OTA. FWIW I'm about 20 miles from the towers.
 

·
You make it, We break it
Joined
·
4,722 Posts
Mike Huss said:
Now THAT I find interesting. In SD the PQ on my locals from D* is FAR superior to OTA. FWIW I'm about 20 miles from the towers.
Exactly, although I wouldn't be surprised if the runs from the towers to the uplink are using old cable company runs from 1985 (small market). ;)

I have a straight shot to the mountain top about 18 miles away unidirectional with an antenna on the 3rd floor so it's a clear look. I'm sure it's what the stations are providing to D* that give me poorer PQ. It's likely they're doing the bare minimum required. Plus I'm on a separate dish pointed at the 75 sat, so maybe all those things combined? Who knows?

But my OTA-HD's look stellar so if I can record them that's all I care about anyway. Goodbye SD!
 

·
Legend
Joined
·
219 Posts
I was wondering when the OTA record feature would surface..... For us who only get locals via ota, its extreamly important! PQ is outstanding, we just need the record feature. (I know, its coming)
 

·
New Member
Joined
·
2 Posts
hasan said:
Darn! I should have stated that explicitly (recording OTA-HD). I just took it as a part of having OTA-HD enabled in the HR20, but you raise a valid point. I can watch all the OTA-HD I want...I just can't record any of it yet...and since both my wife and I tend to watch a series of favorite programs together (and we are on wildly differing sechedules), the ability to record OTA-HD is a BIG deal for us. If the HR20 didn't state that it was going to support OTA-HD (real soon now), I would never have gotten one.

The OTA jones is hitting pretty hard these days.
I hear you. I am in an apartment that doesn't accomodate the 5LNB antenna, so I am using an OTA antenna that the installer had on him. It works great, and I get more channels than I would if I were using the HR20 OTA tuner (both baltimore and DC channels and their subchannels), however it sucks that I can't record anything.

Is there any way to continue using the OTA antenna when DirecTV finally gets around to turning on the tuners? I don't want to lose channels, but I may have to in order to be able to DVR. Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,957 Posts
tomwaitsisking said:
I hear you. I am in an apartment that doesn't accomodate the 5LNB antenna, so I am using an OTA antenna that the installer had on him. It works great, and I get more channels than I would if I were using the HR20 OTA tuner (both baltimore and DC channels and their subchannels), however it sucks that I can't record anything.

Is there any way to continue using the OTA antenna when DirecTV finally gets around to turning on the tuners? I don't want to lose channels, but I may have to in order to be able to DVR. Thanks.
Yes, sure. Just put the OTA antenna that you are using now on the HR20 (when OTA is turned on) and you get the best of both worlds...you can watch and record OTA-HD. If you have enough signal, you can split the signal from the antenna to both the HR20 and your TV, giving you another watchable tuner.
 

·
New Member
Joined
·
2 Posts
hasan said:
Yes, sure. Just put the OTA antenna that you are using now on the HR20 (when OTA is turned on) and you get the best of both worlds...you can watch and record OTA-HD. If you have enough signal, you can split the signal from the antenna to both the HR20 and your TV, giving you another watchable tuner.
Cool. Ok, so then why wouldn't everybody use an OTA antenna instead of the D*s OTA tuner? Tks.
 

·
Mentor
Joined
·
44 Posts
Since Louisville is my local DMA, they do not have mpeg4 locals available yet. I can receive all the Louisville OTA channels AND all the Cincinnati OTA channels via my antenna,which even when mpeg4 is available, I won't be able to get Cincy stations.
 

·
Lifetime Achiever
Joined
·
30,092 Posts
tomwaitsisking said:
Cool. Ok, so then why wouldn't everybody use an OTA antenna instead of the D*s OTA tuner? Tks.
I think you mean, why wouldn't everyone use OTA instead of DirecTV supplied signal.

1- The recordings via OTA will take up about 30% more space (you only get ~30 hours of OTA recording, vs 50 hours of MPEG-4 or 200 hours of MPEG-2 SD)

2- Not everyone can receive an OTA signal

3- Some people simply don't want an antenna on their house. I got VERY lucky that I was able to get a quality signal with an attic mounted antenna... as I would be the only house probably in a 10 mile radius with an "antenna" on his roof.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
tomwaitsisking said:
Cool. Ok, so then why wouldn't everybody use an OTA antenna instead of the D*s OTA tuner? Tks.
D* OTA tuner uses your antenna. Once the OTA tuners in the HR-20 are turned on you will be able to connect your antenna to the HR-20 and receive all the cannels you can with it hooked to your tv but they will be recordable on the DVR.

Now where you are saying D*s OTA tuner I think you mean D* HD locals over the sat. The reason that some people don't use an OTA antenna and use the locals over the sat is because they cannot receive the channels using an antenna.
 

·
Godfather
Joined
·
415 Posts
eengert said:
Yes, of course, but that has nothing to do with having an additional OTA tuner. The OP seems to imply that he thinks you would be able to record 3 shows at once if 2 are SAT and 1 is OTA.
I'm not sure how you could infer my statement ("I think you will be able to record 2 shows while watching a third once they're activated") as being able to record 3 shows at once. I only stated you could record 2 shows and be watching another. Is this not the case?

I know the manual erroneously states you will be able to record 3 shows at once. But once OTA is activated, won't we be able to record 2 shows in the background and be watching a separate live TV broadcast at the same time? Or is this box, equipped w/4 tuners, only capable of utilizing 2 of them at a time?
 
21 - 40 of 52 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top