How's the PQ?

[santiclaws]

I asked this question in the general satellite forum, but it does not appear to have that much traffic, so I thought I'd gather some more opinions.

I used to have Dish, but for the last three years or so I've had TWC cable, and generally been much happier with the PQ.

The main reason I left Dish was that I found the PQ to be atrocious - very noticeably overcompressed on a 47" screen, which drove me up the wall. I heard much the same complaint from DTV owners. Now, with my cable company lagging dramatically behind Dish and DTV with respect to choice of HD channels, I'm beginning to give some thought to going back to satellite. But I do not want to go back to the same lousy overcompressed picture.

So the question is, in the last three years or so, has the PQ gotten better, worse, or stayed the same?

 

[MikeD-C05]

IT depends on your perspective. If you are coming from Cable and you like the pq , you are going to be disappointed in the sd quality of most of DISH & DIrectv's sd channels. IF you have not been exposed to many hd channels than DISH HD will be a step up in pq & 39 different hd channels. As to Directv's hd , you will have to wait till they actually launch some hd channels to compare. What they have now is in hd lite: 1280x 1080. The exception is Discovery HD that is in full hd.

 

[mdicki01]

Well that explains why Discovery hd looks so much better. HDNET looks great 2

 

[Jimbo]

IT depends on your perspective. If you are coming from Cable and you like the pq , you are going to be disappointed in the sd quality of most of DISH & DIrectv's sd channels. IF you have not been exposed to many hd channels than DISH HD will be a step up in pq & 39 different hd channels. As to Directv's hd , you will have to wait till they actually launch some hd channels to compare. What they have now is in hd lite: 1280x 1080. The exception is Discovery HD that is in full hd.

I think that HD Net is also.

Jimbo