Man, I wish I fought harder for them to give me a 1000.4 instead of a 1000.2.
But who knows, maybe we'll all get it sometime. HD on 72.7 seems to be at 8 channels per TP, same as (or more) than elsewhere.
Did DISH recently improved HD quality
- Thread starter cloudy
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 27
- Views 4K
Man, I wish I fought harder for them to give me a 1000.4 instead of a 1000.2.
But who knows, maybe we'll all get it sometime. HD on 72.7 seems to be at 8 channels per TP, same as (or more) than elsewhere.
Yea but the transponders are ran in a hire bit rate mode (my understanding) so they have more bandwidth available per transponder than what they do on western arch. That could explain why we are seeing full res w/ higher bitrates. I hope dish keeps it this way and with the extra bandwidth at 61.5 that is coming in the future, they are in a great position for EA customers. WA customers wont see the improvements until mpeg4 swap out begins sometime this summer/fall.
As far as I could find both 72.7 and 129 are running 8PSK 21500 2/3FEC, essentially identical data per TP.
Maybe new encoders being tested on 72.7 and compared against 129?
Maybe new encoders being tested on 72.7 and compared against 129?
This isn't analog, so the answer is no. A 1440x1080 channel will take up the same space as a 1920x1080 channel if they are encoded at the same data rate. Limited bandwidth was the reason Dish started resizing the picture anyway. Reducing the size of the encoded picture allowed them to more efficiently encode their channels while using a low bitrate. If they have more bandwidth available, I see no reason why they wouldn't use it and bumpin the bitrate and resolution would be wonderful. I noticed Retroplex looked very good when I upgraded for one night to see it.
This is exacty my thought. E11, Ciel 2 and Nimiq 5 are all very new, and should be able to run the same modulation. Especially E11, which is the most powerful of the bunch.mike123abc said:
if they are testing new encoders perhaps they are able to handle a full 1920 just as efficienty as 1440?? Wishful thinking but you never know.
let's not forget the only reason dish went to 1440 in the first place was because their new mpeg4 encoders were much more efficient with 1440.
let's not forget the only reason dish went to 1440 in the first place was because their new mpeg4 encoders were much more efficient with 1440.
I've always been on 129, and I Just think it's been noticeably better in the past couple weeks. And that's on a 1080i 10 year old HDTV with Component hook up.
