Dish's HD Picture Quality- Improved or not?

[Spike]

I dumped dish a long time ago. The HD picture quality with Comcast in my area at that time was so much better. I'm glad I did it. But, I do have to admit that I liked the HD channel offerings better on Dish, so I would consider going back to them, IF the quality of their HD picture is greatly improved.

So, I'm interested in your input. Are the MPEG 4 decoders making a substatial difference in picture quality, or is Dish still giving the same empty promises for HD quality, while continuing to deliver HD lite garbage?

 

[tjwgrr]

Giada in MPEG 4 on the Food Network HD looked stunning yesterday......

In all seriousness, IMO compared to when they were using MPEG 2, Dish's HD channels with MPEG 4 deliver a better picture as long as the the original content is high quality.....

 

[riffjim4069]

The DishHD channels run the PQ spectrum: some good, some bad...but you won't experience many instances of "Wow" factor these days. Except for FiOS, DishHD is still the best HD Value on the market. If you're content with your current HD offering from Comcast (they should be implementing more national HD soon) then I would say stay the course until we see what D* and E* have to offer in the next 3-6 months...if you can stand using those horrible Comcast SA and Motorola HD DVRs and the service is less expensive.

 

[Spike]

The DishHD channels run the PQ spectrum: some good, some bad...but you won't experience many instances of "Wow" factor these days. Except for FiOS, DishHD is still the best HD Value on the market. If you're content with your current HD offering from Comcast (they should be implementing more national HD soon) then I would say stay the course until we see what D* and E* have to offer in the next 3-6 months...if you can stand using those horrible Comcast SA and Motorola HD DVRs and the service is less expensive.

Thanks! This was exactly the type of information I was looking for. I will wait and see! See you in 3 to 6 months. Again, thanks!

 

[kstuart]

Frankly, this whole thread is BS.

I've been reading this sort of cr*p for 10 years.

You don't specify what channels you watch.

People write this sort of thing, and then it turns out that they are only watching the locals - in which case someone 2000 miles away not only cannot tell, they also are watching a different local channel.

But even when we are talking about national channels, people are watching entirely different ones.

I watch a lot of Rave-HD and I can absolutely guarantee that the PQ on Dish on Rave-HD is better than any other provider.

( I also think that there has to be tens of thousands of HD viewers out there who would switch to Dish if they knew a channel like Rave-HD (HD recordings of live music 24/7) existed. )

 

[Spike]

Frankly, this whole thread is BS.

I've been reading this sort of cr*p for 10 years.

You don't specify what f*ing channels you watch.

People write this sort of thing, and then it turns out that they are only watching the locals - in which case someone 2000 miles away not only cannot tell, they also are watching a different local channel.

But even when we are talking about national channels, people are watching entirely different ones.

I watch a lot of Rave-HD and I can absolutely guarantee that the PQ on Dish on Rave-HD is better than any other provider.

( I also think that there has to be tens of thousands of HD viewers out there who would switch to Dish if they knew a channel like Rave-HD (HD recordings of live music 24/7) existed. )

ROFLOL... thanks my judge! You're the man! I should have known to check with you first to make sure I met your standards before I dared to post. Might I recommend anger management?

 

[kstuart]

And, of course, still didn't mention which channels he watches.

 

[Sapient]

Shame on you, Spike, for requesting information you wanted instead of information kstuart wanted you to want. What were you thinking, man?

 

[riffjim4069]

To be specific, the VOOM HD channels look softer than they did when you had service Spike...old MonstersHD, FilmFest, and HDNews material I had recorded on an a 942 and 622 look better than the "same show" being broadcast today. Is is bad...no, but is it as good...no!

Except for HD LIL, there were only a handful of other channels (ESPNs, HDNets, HBO, etc.) which I could make direct PQ comparisons between my local Comcast and DishHD. Again, while DishHD offered a pretty picture the Comcast HD channels in my area were just plain better, sharper, and crisper. These differences are noticeable, to various degrees, on my Mits Diamond 57-inch 1080p DLP, Mits Diamond 55-inch rear-projection 1080i CRT, Sony 50-inch GWIV 768p LCD. Additionally, the Comcast HD Locals are indistinguishable from OTA while the two 720p locals (ABC, FOX) look almost as good and the two 1080i locals (CBS, NBC) look just OK. In any case, there are subtle differences in PQ....DishHD is not at all bad, but it is just not as good as Comcast in my specific area.

On a side note, I could tell no difference between Comcast and DishHD on my 30-inch Samsung HDTV.

Having said that, I am back with Dish Network: Comcast services goes out during bad weather while Dish Network is rock-solid even during the worst storms; my Dish Network 622s and EPG are stellar while the Comcast SA8300HD DVR is in the cellar (it is that bad); finally (omitted are a dozen other complaints about Comcast service) Comcast doesn't have extended programming filters for items such as nudity, etc.

Again, if you are happy with your currently Comcast lineup (and HD PQ) and equipment then stay the course until we see what D* and E* have up their sleeves. So far, the MPEG-4 encoders have not "Wow'ed" me. If you gotta have a better HD DVR and VOOM HD...then by all means come back. However, it is my belief that you will be less than impressed with the current DishHD PQ.

That's my opinion and I am sticking to it.

 

[Spike]

Having said that, I am back with Dish Network: Comcast services goes out during bad weather while Dish Network is rock-solid even during the worst storms; my Dish Network 622s and EPG are stellar while the Comcast SA8300HD DVR is in the cellar (it is that bad); finally (omitted are a dozen other complaints about Comcast service) Comcast doesn't have extended programming filters for items such as nudity, etc.

I find the same to be true where I'm at now too. At first we thought it was a wiring problem in the house. We signal tested every outlet, and changed the connectors just to be sure that we covered our bases. Everything was working great, then a storm came. The picture quality took a nose dive.

I have to admit that I really miss Dish's programing lineup. And I'm having to rethink my desire to have the utmost quality as opposed to the best channel line up. One more thing. I've noticed that Directv is really boosting up the HD channel line up.

And you are right. The DVR's are terrible from Comcast. The menu guides, the program search, the guide itself... all of it reminds me of 1970's technology just trying to be hip.

One last thought. Comcast is adding National Geo. HD and A&E HD soon. If I do stay with them I will at least get the benefit of Having NG HD, which is an awesome channel.

 

[Spike]

Shame on you, Spike, for requesting information you wanted instead of information kstuart wanted you to want. What were you thinking, man?

*snickers*

 

[riffjim4069]

There are also a consistency problems with DishHD...sometimes a channel will look great, and then a few days later it will look soft and lack detail. I noticed this even happens on the Dish Demo channel at 61.5. One thing I will say about the DishQuality Engineers...they have always replied to my emails, have made improvements, and been able to explained what was happening.

 

[Spike]

There are also a consistency problems with DishHD...sometimes a channel will look great, and then a few days later it will look soft and lack detail. I noticed this even happens on the Dish Demo channel at 61.5. One thing I will say about the DishQuality Engineers...they have always replied to my emails, have made improvements, and been able to explained what was happening.

As you look back on your conversations with them......Do you think they are tweaking those decoders to work towards a better picture, or are they just trying to figure out how to cram one more station on an overloaded transponder?

 

[riffjim4069]

As you look back on your conversations with them......Do you think they are tweaking those decoders to work towards a better picture, or are they just trying to figure out how to cram one more station on an overloaded transponder?

I have no doubt they would like to provide all HD channels in their native format. Of course, the reality of the situation is they are trying to stuff more sausage into the grinder than the sausage casing can handle. Additionally, the delicate balance between custumer wants and business needs sometimes means that we're going to be fed hot dogs....and we all know what's in a hot dog.

 

[kstuart]

Shame on you, Spike, for requesting information you wanted instead of information kstuart wanted you to want. What were you thinking, man?

I'm sorry, but the question:

Are the MPEG 4 decoders making a substatial difference in picture quality, or is Dish still giving the same empty promises for HD quality, while continuing to deliver HD lite garbage?

is gibberish - the assumptions are false.

Dish doesn't make any promises for HD quality, either true ones or false ones.

"HD-Lite" is a false term describing a situation that doesn't exist, and is based on the false assumptions that a) Digital-HD is not lossey, and b) Pixel Resolution is the only factor of importance.

And, lastly not all the HD channels are using the MPEG-4 decoders.

So, all 3 parts of the "question" are based on false assumptions.

It's all based on a bunch of people with a little tiny bit of technical knowledge and understanding, and then assuming that however they apply that tiny bit must be correct - because they are doing it.

A good example is all the people ten years ago on the Internet spouting "bits are bits", and refusing to believe that any two CD players could sound different - because the one thing they were incapable of grasping is that none of the CD players at the time were actually delivering correct bit streams.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

I'm in general agreement with riffjim. On the national HD channels, I don't get HD locals via E* and I know those can vary from DMA to DMA.

The quality now is better than it was right after a lot of the channels were down-rezzed and over-compressed in 2006. As they always do, they tweak the bandwidth and various PQ parameters over time, to reduce certail digital artifacts, and sometimes worsen others - but usually those that are less obvious to the typical viewer.

The images on VOOM are softer than they were in 2005, but better than they were in early 2006. The MPEG4 channels have more compression artifacts than what we used to see from HBO and HDNET in 2005, but they are better than what we were getting from channels like STARZ HD in mid-2006.

I don't know why some are raving over the PQ of the present MPEG4 channels. I just did comparisons of Star Wars movies from Cinemax HD under MPEG4 vs present quality HBO HD under MPEG2 and thought the HBO recordings were generally better - various compression artifacts such as macroblocking, surface contouring, mosquito noise, etc, were present in both. But to a lesser extent than what I was seeing on several channels last year.

I think many have gotten used to the lower quality PQ and so when it is bumped up a bit, it is now seen as very good HD, when it is still really mediocre for HD.

But on the whole, IMHO, the DishHD is better HD than DishSD is for what standard definition (i.e. DVD quality) could be. So I guess things are better than what they could be (and what I fear they might become).

 

[Smith P.]

I'm sorry, but the question:



is gibberish - the assumptions are false.

Dish doesn't make any promises for HD quality, either true ones or false ones.

"HD-Lite" is a false term describing a situation that doesn't exist, and is based on the false assumptions that a) Digital-HD is not lossey, and b) Pixel Resolution is the only factor of importance.

And, lastly not all the HD channels are using the MPEG-4 decoders.

So, all 3 parts of the "question" are based on false assumptions.

It's all based on a bunch of people with a little tiny bit of technical knowledge and understanding, and then assuming that however they apply that tiny bit must be correct - because they are doing it.

A good example is all the people ten years ago on the Internet spouting "bits are bits", and refusing to believe that any two CD players could sound different - because the one thing they were incapable of grasping is that none of the CD players at the time were actually delivering correct bit streams.

Sorry, but your blind and consistent denial of facts about HD-Lite ( downrez AND bit starving) what posted last couple years [why you did the mockup of the myphical 10 years ?!] your posts come into denial category also, ie Ignore List.
:down

 

[SpenceJT]

I am partial to the PQ of "Namaste Yoga" (every Saturday and Sunday morning on ULTRA HD).

It is without a doubt, some of the best HD demo material that I know of!

 

[abricko]

Giada in SD looks stunning...

Overall the (newer) MPEG4 stuff looks better than the older MPEG4 stuff and a bit better than the bitstarved MPEG2 stuff. But I still maintain that MPEG4 kills color details and causes color saturation to kind of melt together and retain a softer look.

Not terrible but noticeable. Still if it leads to more HD channels/content I'm all for it.

Giada in MPEG 4 on the Food Network HD looked stunning yesterday......

In all seriousness, IMO compared to when they were using MPEG 2, Dish's HD channels with MPEG 4 deliver a better picture as long as the the original content is high quality.....

 

[Tom Bombadil]

I no longer think of DishHD as an HD service. I think of it as a form of ED - Enhanced Definition, a higher standard of ED, that I call ED+. It is much better than SD, and it is nice to have all of these good ED+ channels. But there is not a single channel, outside of maybe the HD demo channel, that I consider to have good quality HD.

I don't feel the term HD-lite is one that can broadly represent the quality of the DishHD channels, as that term has come to be defined as down-rezzed HD. Many of E*s "HD" channels fall short of good quality HD due to compression, even the HD-lite channels are further deteriorated by over-compression.

So I think of it as ED+. Super Definition might be okay too. A standard that is above EDTV, which can be up to 720x576 - or some ED plasmas went up to 852x480, but falls short of True HD in resolution and/or sufficient bandwidth.

As such I think of myself as a Dish ED+ subscriber and have come to accept that I have no way, at present, to subscribe to a true HD service. Although I do get some true HD for free via OTA. Not all OTA channels or programs are good quality, but some are excellent.