H20 PQ Question

[Lynskyn]

I am debating as to whether I should get an H20. I'm in Houston and already get all digital locals via off-air antenna. The only reason I can see to go to the H20 right now is if the picture quality is greatly improved on SD channels. Right now I have a Sony SAT-HD300. I already have the AT9 dish, which I'm going to install anyway.

Have any of you H20 users noticed a great improvement on the SD (or HD) PQ?
Thanks in advance for any feedback.

 

[rad]

No, not really either way. I can say that the OTA signal readings for one of my problem ATSC stations (VHF channel 3) are much improved with the H20. The range of the RF remote is better, the IR is worst and I like having caller ID back again, missed it on my SAT-HD300.

 

[mbetts]

I haven't noticed any improvement in SD quality.

 

[Hogarth]

The only reason I can see to go to the H20 right now is if the picture quality is greatly improved on SD channels.

Why would you expect a new satellite and encoding scheme exclusively for HD have any impact on SD whatsoever?

The exclusive reason to go to the H20 (hell, MPEG4 and Spaceway 1 and 2 at all) is if you either can't or are unwilling to get OTA.

H

 

[Lynskyn]

Why would you expect a new satellite and encoding scheme exclusively for HD have any impact on SD whatsoever?
The exclusive reason to go to the H20 (hell, MPEG4 and Spaceway 1 and 2 at all) is if you either can't or are unwilling to get OTA.
H

I never said I expected a new satellite and encoding scheme exclusively for HD to have an impact on SD. I was asking about the H20 receiver's video processing quality.

 

[Hogarth]

I never said I expected a new satellite and encoding scheme exclusively for HD to have an impact on SD. I was asking about the H20 receiver's video processing quality.

Even the current D* receivers do an excellent job processing SD video.
The problem is that the bitrate of the SD channels, particularly locals, is cranked down to pathetic amounts.

Garbage in, Garbage out.