HD or not HD, DT is the question!

[ThomasRz]

No. You have fallen victim to E* claptrap about "HD Locals" which has been perpetuated by people here who should (and often do) know better. There is no such thing as "HD Locals." There are the analog (NTSC) feeds (what most people get in a LIL package) and several (larger markets) digital (ATSC) feeds. It is these digital feeds that people keep referring to as "HD" although there is no guarantee of any high definition programming and in reality it is probably less than half of the content. The digital feed of some stations is limited to SD (standard definition) and thus you will never get their programming in HD (even the network portion) unless and until they upgrade. Digital televisions that are capable of HD resolution can do tricks to non-HD programming that improve it and make you think it is HD if you are like me and find the differences inconsequential. People should be more accurate/precise - properly using the terms NTSC, SDTV and HDTV would go along way to ending the confusion. For some reason folks just glom onto the HD moniker whether it fits the situation or not.

St. Louis HD Locals were installed Tuesday. There are a number of issues regarding HD and the 622 but for here I will confine it to locals. I have not had time to play around with the TV so this is prelimilary. I watch network TV, movies and some sports so the main reason for wanting HD was network TV. I thought all network HD would be in 16:9 format but apperantly not. Less then half what I recieve fills my 42" TV. Most is 4:3 and is annoying I don't like stretch and zoom cuts off too much. There Is some problems with pixalation but the installer did not even know that St. Louis locals were available and I'm not real comfortable that the install is correct. All the local channels are listed twice in the Guide even when it is set for "All HD" so I don't know what that is all about. Also they are listed in the five digit number format even though I changed the setting that is supposed to control that. I've read a lot about formats on this site and heard various things. Once and for all isn't all network TV in HD and shouldn't it be in 16:9 format. Thanks

 

[garys]

To bfreeman: Not all network broadcasts are in HD. Try pulling up your local listings on titantv.com/ They give a great listing for which shows are HD and which are not.

 

[Kirby Baker]

No. You have fallen victim to E* claptrap about "HD Locals" which has been perpetuated by people here who should (and often do) know better. There is no such thing as "HD Locals." There are the analog (NTSC) feeds (what most people get in a LIL package) and several (larger markets) digital (ATSC) feeds. It is these digital feeds that people keep referring to as "HD" although there is no guarantee of any high definition programming and in reality it is probably less than half of the content. The digital feed of some stations is limited to SD (standard definition) and thus you will never get their programming in HD (even the network portion) unless and until they upgrade. Digital televisions that are capable of HD resolution can do tricks to non-HD programming that improve it and make you think it is HD if you are like me and find the differences inconsequential. People should be more accurate/precise - properly using the terms NTSC, SDTV and HDTV would go along way to ending the confusion. For some reason folks just glom onto the HD moniker whether it fits the situation or not.

 

[Hall]

People assume "digital = HD". It's become so ingrained in so many people, I don't think it can be turned around now....

 

[Kirby Baker]

It's hardly Echostar's fault though...

 

[bhelms]

...There is no such thing as "HD Locals."...

What do you mean by "no HD locals"? That's certainly true in my DMA where none are currently carried by E* (or D* for that matter) as LiL. But in other markets where there are E* HD LiLs, they are certainly much more than the SD digital content! True that the source has to be HD from the network and/or station (often not the case through much of the viewing day), and the current MPEG-4 renditions leave a lot to be desired such that the result is "HD Lite" or worse as compared to the OTA equivalent, but it is still "HD" and significantly different from SD, or am I missing something here...?

 

[BFG]

HD or not HD, DT is the question!

Umm... good for you...

 

[Hall]

bhelms: Yes, you're missing something.... There's no such thing as "HD broadcasting". If you pick up your locals via OTA, they're digital. Is the 6 o'clock news HD ?? Probably not... Is "Judge Judy" in HD ?? Again, probably not. Digital stations can broadcast HD programming though.

Don't worry though, right or wrong, so many people have bastardized the terms that everyone else knows what is meant.

 

[ThomasRz]

It's hardly Echostar's fault though...

It is to the extent the exacerbate the problem by intentionally using the confusion to market a product. They put "HD" upfront and relegate the explanation (aka the truth) as an afterthought. They even manage to contradict themselves on the same web page. I agree this problem did not originate with E* and I think more responsibility attaches to knowledgeable people (such as the stars on this board) who don't care about the unwashed masses who will be misled and disappointed by this verbal chicanery.

 

[mdonnelly]

Stop being anal. We know what they mean.

 

[Kirby Baker]

And your point has been made in MANY threads. Enough already, geez...

 

[dail24]

Stop being anal. We know what they mean.

AMEN!

 

[bhelms]

bhelms: Yes, you're missing something.... There's no such thing as "HD broadcasting". If you pick up your locals via OTA, they're digital. Is the 6 o'clock news HD ?? Probably not... Is "Judge Judy" in HD ?? Again, probably not. Digital stations can broadcast HD programming though.

Don't worry though, right or wrong, so many people have bastardized the terms that everyone else knows what is meant.

Are we splitting hairs over the resolution here? I get a very excellent HD PBS broadcast OTA (WPSU, 15.1, not sure if it's "full HD" per the definitions), so I think you're wrong on that! When the conditions are right I can also receive ABC HD on 23.1 (WATM). E* carries that same ABC channel LiL and it's in SD only (on 7465 in my case). If the program content from the network at the time is HD there is a marked difference in the PQ bewteen the OTA signal and 7465 and the HD version is 16:9. (When that channel is broadcasting SD then it's 4:3 and much worse PQ, about equal to E*'s.) In the case of WPSU, the HD channel they are b'casting on 15.1 is NOT the same as the "main" SD program on 15.2, which is the same SD program as E* is carrying on 7469.

There are indeed OTA "HD" broadcasts and, yes, they are part of the overall digital programming available OTA. If your point is that they don't b'cast HD 24/7, then I agree with you. In primetime when I do any watching my schedule allows, that PBS 15.1 program is always "full" HD. I'm guessing most of the primetime ABC programs on WATM are as well...

PS - I still also receive some NTSC locals OTA on my TVs, so the equation that OTA locals=digital is not completely true, tho' my 622 can't receive them...

 

[Mr Tony]

Stop being anal. We know what they mean.

I agree

 

[ThomasRz]

I will stipulate that you two know exactly what is being said. I am not concerned about you. I am concerned about some little old lady who is ripped off because of the semantic gymnastics that are being employed.

I agree

 

[mdonnelly]

I will stipulate that you two know exactly what is being said. I am not concerned about you. I am concerned about some little old lady who is ripped off because of the semantic gymnastics that are being employed.

Okay, we've beat this horse to death. Let's move on.

 

[garys]

Definately Over Analizing.

 

[BFG]

Closed.

don't spam the forums with this anymore please.