Got SD/HD 2 Days Ago. Very dissappointed In Resolution

[liltommy]

That was me, let me clarify.

I agree with you. But he did say composite vs. HDMI, which is not how most of us describe component cable connection.

Read what he said yourself: "...None of the Sd channels look as good as they did on Dish and I feel the same way as you about the HD. With the old setup I was using component cable only and am now using HDMI and the composite cables. BTW, I've been switching between composite and HDMI and can't tell any difference..."

Clearly he knew the difference between component and composite, yet he compared composite and HDMI on his new TV. It could be a misundestanding, but I like to have him clarify for me, not you.

Lets make sure I'm talking about the right thing.
Composite is the Red,Green,Blue cable for the video only. Component is yellow(video),red and white(audio). Correct?

I hooked up the HDMI from the hr20 to the HDMI on my TV(which is Video 7). I than ran composite cable (R,G,B) from the hr20 to the TV(video 5). I then would switch from Video 5 to 7 comparing the difference.
I saw very little if any improvement in the picture.
The tv is a 50" Sony lcd projection if it matters. I can't remember the exact model.

Sorry to confuse things up for the OP.

Tommy

 

[Indiana627]

Lets make sure I'm talking about the right thing.
Composite is the Red,Green,Blue cable for the video only. Component is yellow(video),red and white(audio). Correct?

You have it exactly backwards. Composite is the yellow (video), red and white (audio). Component is the red, green and blue - all for video. Component is HD capable; composite is not. Some people say component will provide the same HD PQ as HDMI (I do not agree).

 

[liltommy]

Thanks.

You have it exactly backwards. Composite is the yellow (video), red and white (audio). Component is the red, green and blue - all for video. Component is HD capable; composite is not. Some people say component will provide the same HD PQ as HDMI (I do not agree).

Now excuse me as I slink off (embarassed) into a corner and don't open my mouth again until this post is long lost in history.

 

[jacmyoung]

Now excuse me as I slink off (embarassed) into a corner and don't open my mouth again until this post is long lost in history.

No need to. I am still curious why you said D* HD's are much worse than E*'s. What kind of D* HD's were you comparing to E*'s?

On the issue of SD, it may be true but I don't know, I hardly watch SD.

 

[Indiana627]

Now excuse me as I slink off (embarassed) into a corner and don't open my mouth again until this post is long lost in history.

No worries. We all have to learn somehow. The terms are confusing. But...

Let's figure out why you're not getting a good HD picture from D*. I would stick with the HDMI cable to remove the composite/component confusion. What receiver do you have? What particular HD channels have you been testing that you're not impressed with?

 

[slimoli]

I left D* because of the poor picture quality, including HD. HBO and SHO HD, for example, looked much worse than my current cable service (ABB). I heard MPEG4 is better but every time I see a TV set with D* on friends houses I think the quality is still very poor. SD material looks like an old VHS tape sometimes.

You will not see too much difference on a screen up to 60" but on a 73" or FP you will notice the hiper-compression on both SD and HD. No matter what some D* die-hard say, they are still broadcasting HD-LITE and sub-par SD.

Please don't tell me to change cables and check the settings. I have a nice setup and this is my honest opinion. For those who like quantity X quality, D* is the best but I would rather have only 20 HD channels with full bitrate instead of 100 HD-Lite.

 

[aramus8]

I left D* because of the poor picture quality, including HD. HBO and SHO HD, for example, looked much worse than my current cable service (ABB). I heard MPEG4 is better but every time I see a TV set with D* on friends houses I think the quality is still very poor. SD material looks like an old VHS tape sometimes.

You will not see too much difference on a screen up to 60" but on a 73" or FP you will notice the hiper-compression on both SD and HD. No matter what some D* die-hard say, they are still broadcasting HD-LITE and sub-par SD.

Please don't tell me to change cables and check the settings. I have a nice setup and this is my honest opinion. For those who like quantity X quality, D* is the best but I would rather have only 20 HD channels with full bitrate instead of 100 HD-Lite.

I'm sorry, but this is just nonsense. Several of the casinos in town run D* on huge screens that cover a whole stage and there is no indication of any hyper compression, whatever that is. As of yesterday, the picture was pristine on all their screens. I had to spend some time waiting for a restaurant to open so I had plenty of time to examine the picture quality on much larger screens than mine or yours and it was actually amazing even to me and I'm very critical having been involved in broadcasting. It is your TV!!!!

 

[charper1]

Has to be said again; I agree with aramus8 above.

DirecTV, like everyone else's SD is about 99.95% the same PQ, BUT their HD is equal too and in most case BETTER along with having vastly more content.

 

[slimoli]

I'm sorry, but this is just nonsense. Several of the casinos in town run D* on huge screens that cover a whole stage and there is no indication of any hyper compression, whatever that is. As of yesterday, the picture was pristine on all their screens. I had to spend some time waiting for a restaurant to open so I had plenty of time to examine the picture quality on much larger screens than mine or yours and it was actually amazing even to me and I'm very critical having been involved in broadcasting. It is your TV!!!!

It's not my TV, my friend. I have 5 different sets with different sizes. Casinos don't show HBO , SHO, HDNETMovies. Those are the channels I used to watch and they are still MPEG2. As I said, many people say that MPEG4 is a different case but SD is still the same low quality. I am not blind, the same material from cable and D* have a completely different quality on a large screen. The displays on casinos are viewed from a much bigger distance and anything can look good on them. They don't show SD , do they ?

HD-LITE and SD-LITE are still there. Maybe when they change everything to MPEG4 we can agree.

 

[michaelbudney]

I've noticed HDNet and 101HD look much better than HBO. However, I haven't ventured over to the Premium channels enough to get a good comparison.

 

[mpg]

I've tried both, and in my case, I can see the difference, but it's not big enough to buy an HDMI switch, or pull out the DTV every time I want to watch a DVD.

As for the SD not looking as good as with dish... What? I've had both, and I actually think the DTV looks significantly better. I liked my dish interface better, but the HD here is fantastic, as long as you're watching something that's actually in HD (and it's a bitch to tell for sure).

I noticed a big difference in quality when I switched from H20 to HR-21, it appeared to me as if the upconverter program was much better.

I agree with you man I just switched over from Dish. I think direct is a far better product. I do think Dish had better equipment but non the less. With all the billing issues Dish had I'm happy to make the switch.

 

[Paul Wozniak]

Now excuse me as I slink off (embarassed) into a corner and don't open my mouth again until this post is long lost in history.

Don't fret it, this site is here for learning and the exchange of ideas. We all have made statements we wish we hadn't. Feel free to speak your mind.

 

[michaelbudney]

In general I think most HD content is a bit soft because of the original source. Many of the prime time network shows tend to be quite sharp.

An interesting observation I made watching Star Trek Enterprise on HDNet is the interview sequences they do at the end with the cast are almost disturbingly sharp looking compared to the show. The live concerts also tend to be quite sharp looking.

I think a lot of it just has to do with the camera, lighting and editing of the program, even if it is a true HD source.

Still, I haven't seen anything HD content wise that was impressive as the weather maps on Voom's HD News. TWC-HD doesn't come close.