Which HDTV service has the best quality?

[misterjensen]

I've got TWC and the quality on many channels is just not cutting it for me on my 60" Sony SXRD. I know it's not the TV since I have incredible images via my XBOX 360 & PS3. Is the image quality any better on Dish Network, ATT U-Verse, Direct TV or any others? Thanks for your help :)

[Ralph Kramden]

I previously had Directv, and now have Dish Network HD, and Dish is definitely better. I think Directv compresses the signal a lot more.

[Tom Snyder]

TWC still broadcasts their channels below 100 in analog. On a big TV, they look like you're watching TV through wax paper. At some point they'll start sending them in digital, but some of us have been waiting for 8 years, so we're not holding our breath. Both satellite services send all their signals in digital. The compression and the HD "lite" that DirecTV uses are another discussion.

[SRW1000]

Both satellite services reduce the resolution of the majority of HD channels to less-than HD specifications. Digital compression artifacts on the SD and HD channels are also very noticeable on large screen TVs.

I haven't had cable service here, so I can't comment on its quality. I'd love to see FiOS deployed, but that will take many years, if ever.

Scott

[HDefinicktion]

I have worked very closely with a few Verizon employees recently when we got our new 10mbps service installed in my school district. I asked them about the service, and they both said that Wisconsin will never see it. The closest place is in Fort Wayne, Indiana. They mentioned that around 90% of Verizons funding goes into the "Smile", which is the west coast through the south west, Texas through the southeast and up the east coast. Because there is a smaller concentration of population in the middle of the country, they concentrate all their funding in the larger metropolis areas found in the "smile."

Bummer...

[Bebop]

Quality does not varies much between services. They all suck. I would just go with the cheapest provider for the basic needs and rent movies when they come out in HD.

DirecTV just launched their new bird few days ago. The quality will not improve. They will just cramp in more channels.

[JohnRacine]

I watch TV on my 65" Toshiba and my 50" Sony. I have had 4DTV for many years which provides me with a first generation, very high quality signal direct from the Satellites. The audio sounds great on my two surround systems.

While it's true that I don't have as many HD channels as others, the ones that I do receive are perfect with my HDD200 high def decoder. I believe that my subscription rate is well below that of most. For locals, I have a $20 Radio Shack antenna on the roof which pulls in all channels from Milwaukee/Chicago.

If you are looking for the best signal/picture (including audio), and have room for the dish, I'd recommend 4DTV+HDD200. I've never had cable nor the small dish so I can't comment on those.

Good luck...

[SRW1000]

I have worked very closely with a few Verizon employees recently when we got our new 10mbps service installed in my school district. I asked them about the service, and they both said that Wisconsin will never see it. The closest place is in Fort Wayne, Indiana. They mentioned that around 90% of Verizons funding goes into the "Smile", which is the west coast through the south west, Texas through the southeast and up the east coast. Because there is a smaller concentration of population in the middle of the country, they concentrate all their funding in the larger metropolis areas found in the "smile."

Bummer...Thanks for the information. Too bad it's horribly discouraging.

Scott

[Talos4]

DirecTV just launched their new bird few days ago. The quality will not improve. They will just cramp in more channels.

And this statement is based on what? crystal ball, tea leaves, insider info? or just a dislike for D*??

If your're going to make broad statements like "the quality won't improve", please provide a reference point.

Until D-10 is lit up NOBODY KNOWS what the picture will look like.

All NEW HD Channels from D* will be MPEG4 after D-10 is activated in mid September.
Existing HD Channels will migrate to MPEG4 after D-11 goes up and becomes operational 2nd quarter 2008.

If you look at what our local HD channels look like through D* and compare it to OTA you would be hard pressed to tell a difference. BY LOOKING AT IT.

I'm sure it's all "HD-LITE":huh?: on the bit rate monitoring software that many cannot watch TV without.

But that's like telling me you can tell a Nextel cup stock car is going 3 MPH slower at Daytona than it did last year by looking at the stopwatch. Can you do the same standing at your seat. And if they are all going 3 MPH slower than last year could you tell?

If you didn't have the stopwatch, or the software could you really tell the difference just by watching it?

I cannot, maybe I'm getting too old to argue minutiae anymore.

[Bebop]

And this statement is based on what? crystal ball, tea leaves, insider info? or just a dislike for D*??

If your're going to make broad statements like "the quality won't improve", please provide a reference point.

Until D-10 is lit up NOBODY KNOWS what the picture will look like.

All NEW HD Channels from D* will be MPEG4 after D-10 is activated in mid September.
Existing HD Channels will migrate to MPEG4 after D-11 goes up and becomes operational 2nd quarter 2008.

If you look at what our local HD channels look like through D* and compare it to OTA you would be hard pressed to tell a difference. BY LOOKING AT IT.

I'm sure it's all "HD-LITE":huh?: on the bit rate monitoring software that many cannot watch TV without.

But that's like telling me you can tell a Nextel cup stock car is going 3 MPH slower at Daytona than it did last year by looking at the stopwatch. Can you do the same standing at your seat. And if they are all going 3 MPH slower than last year could you tell?

If you didn't have the stopwatch, or the software could you really tell the difference just by watching it?

I cannot, maybe I'm getting too old to argue minutiae anymore.

So, are you seriously think the PQ will improve?

If you don't know the future how do you know I'm wrong? And maybe I do have a crystal ball and tea leaves. It doesn't take much to tick off some people. :)

You can direct your flame {fart} at Gregg for this. Take over Gregg, it's tag team match. :)

http://www.milwaukeehdtv.org/forums/showthread.php?p=38534#post38534


And by the way, I do have DirecTV.

[Bebop]

The link from Gregg's post is broken.

Here is the link: http://tvweek.com/news/2007/03/directv_hd_additions_wont_redu.php

[Talos4]

My apologies to mrjensen for hijacking the thread. This "discussion" is doing him no service and just muddies the waters.

As Tom said above, this is another discussion.

mrjensen, I've been a subscriber of D* for 10 years. Overall I'm happy wth the service.

The PQ of the standard definition (SD) channels I will agree, can be of lesser quality especially on larger displays. I think the same can be said of TWC and DISH. I've seen TWC at many other homes and have not been impressed with their SD PQ either.

Take a 4"x6" photo and try to blow it up to poster size. Looks like junk. Same principle.

I've had my HD display for 3 years, You take the good with the bad. I along with many others are waiting to see what September will bring to D*.

[Bluto]

I cannot personally speak to Dish's quality. But I've had Time Warner, and I have DirecTV. I prefer the picture quality of DirecTV. Your mileage may vary. :)

[Blitzburgh]

I have DirecTV and a 62" Mtis DLP and the picture is stunning PERIOD.

And it will only get better, come Sept 15th DirecTV will be the HD king.

Jump onboard now.

[AndrewP]

But Dish Network is striking back today: 7 new national HD channels will debut Aug. 15, 2007, with more promised in September.
Interesting time:)
TWC is realy getting old:bang:

[Blitzburgh]

Yup. Cable is going to run into bandwidth limitations if haven't already.

DirecTV & Dish are where you want to position yourself for the future.

the sky is the limit no pun intended....lol

[waterhead]

The best picture quality, for the money, is free over-the-air HDTV.

No compression.

No HD-Light.

And best of all:

NO FEES!

[SRW1000]

The best picture quality, for the money, is free over-the-air HDTV.

No compression.

No HD-Light.

And best of all:

NO FEES!Agreed. (Except for the negative effects of multicasting seen on two local stations.)

Scott

[tencom]

With MPEG 4 HDTV bit rate at about 8 to 10 megabits Picture quality, has to suffer. A 1080I video before it"s digitalty compressed has a bit rate of around 1.2 gigabits which means it has been compressed at about 150 to 1 ratio. With that much compression being applied something has to give and it's picture quality. In fact it might also be considered, to be another form of HD-LITE

[AndrewP]

The best picture quality, for the money, is free over-the-air HDTV.

No compression.

No HD-Light.

And best of all:

NO FEES!


When the weather permits;) or local stations skip their weather logos.
Otherwise:bang:
I have at least an option to switch to Chicago OTA.
But when you watch a recorded OTA during the bad weather:o

[Blitzburgh]

The best picture quality, for the money, is free over-the-air HDTV.

No compression.

No HD-Light.

And best of all:

NO FEES!


With DirecTV my MPEG4 HD locals as good as OTA.

[Mark Strube]

Well, getting back to the original question - if we're just talking about picture quality on only the high definition channels (and not the channel selection)... Cable and/or off-the-air is your best bet. Cable is the only provider at the moment that will give you completely untouched feeds as the cable networks (HBO, etc) send them to the different providers. Both Dish Network and DirecTV downsample and compress almost all of their HD channels.

If we're talking channel selection, or predictions of eventual quality down the road- that's a completely separate discussion.

No source, whether it's cable, satellite, or off-the-air, is going to get anywhere near the quality that's possible with HD sources such as game consoles or HD-DVD... not for quite some time at least. Television content is encoded into high definition video on-the-fly, and in some cases due to local affiliates - more than one time; while the great-looking content you're talking about is either rendered in that box by a 3D video card (games) or encoded into very high-bitrate video using multiple encoding passes, so it can more efficiently place bits of data as they're needed by scene (HD-DVD/Blu-Ray).