not as sharp
- Thread starter lowepc
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 44
- Views 5K
The VOOM STB uses the same Broadcom MPEG-2 decoder in many Motorola and SA cable boxes. A number of DirecTV receivers also use the same series decoder. VOOM also uses a DVI transmitter from Silicon Image -- the same SI parts are also used in cable and DirecTV STBs. The Broadcom decoder has a number settings that can be tweaked / configured differently by the hardware vendor. There are almost certainly some differences / variations in the firmware on each box that cause differences in the picture you see.
I definatly agree with the original poster. Voom rocks but it is softer then when I had Comcast hD.
And my Off air NBC feed when in HD is the best channel clarity and sharpness wise vs the Voom content channels.
And my Off air NBC feed when in HD is the best channel clarity and sharpness wise vs the Voom content channels.
We have few guys on this forum who throw rocks on you should you dare to say that Voom's HD PQ is inferior to some other DBS or cable TV providers. It happened to me few times but now they are not as laud as before maybe because more and more people see the difference.
And I have to say it again: Dish’s 811 produces much better HD picture than Voom's receiver.
I emailed Voom support and asked specifically about that and his response was that cinema 10 channels are broadcasted in 720p while all others (Voom's exclusive) are in 1080i. According to the support guy, those cinema channels are in 720p because "...the resolution of any program is dependant on the originating format of the programming itself..."?! That is complete bs as we all know that all films have much higher resolution then any modern HD standard. That cannot be reason why cinema 10 channels are in 720p unless if their source for those channels are standard DVDs. Honestly, I cannot see much difference (if any) between progressive scan DVDs and their cinema 10 channels.
The problem is not just with cinema channels. All other HD channels are inferior to DHDT, ESPN or HDNet, for example. Some will say that HDNet is on higher level then others but if they all use 1080i cameras the difference should not be that big.
I do not know what the problem is but if Voom wants to keep current customers (and get new ones) they will have to improve PQ. I really like Voom for their HD commitment but their PQ has to be equal to other DBS or cable TV companies. Otherwise, DVD-like exclusive channels will not attract too many people.
And I have to say it again: Dish’s 811 produces much better HD picture than Voom's receiver.
I emailed Voom support and asked specifically about that and his response was that cinema 10 channels are broadcasted in 720p while all others (Voom's exclusive) are in 1080i. According to the support guy, those cinema channels are in 720p because "...the resolution of any program is dependant on the originating format of the programming itself..."?! That is complete bs as we all know that all films have much higher resolution then any modern HD standard. That cannot be reason why cinema 10 channels are in 720p unless if their source for those channels are standard DVDs. Honestly, I cannot see much difference (if any) between progressive scan DVDs and their cinema 10 channels.
The problem is not just with cinema channels. All other HD channels are inferior to DHDT, ESPN or HDNet, for example. Some will say that HDNet is on higher level then others but if they all use 1080i cameras the difference should not be that big.
I do not know what the problem is but if Voom wants to keep current customers (and get new ones) they will have to improve PQ. I really like Voom for their HD commitment but their PQ has to be equal to other DBS or cable TV companies. Otherwise, DVD-like exclusive channels will not attract too many people.
Conjuror said:
The cinema 10 channels have lost their resolution because the movies are converted from 35 mm film to 1080i (a high quality product) and then the signal is temporarily converted to 720p for transmission.(this induces signal quality loss). Any time you convert from 1080i to 720p you lose resolution or vica versa. Then if you have a 1080i set you are probably converting that already converted 720p signal back to 1080i. (guess what? more signal quality loss) I agree the resolution you end up with isnt much better than DVD, maybe 540p or something on that order. The resolution should return when they are broadcast the original 1080i product again. Of course those with 720p sets normally do not see the quality of the majority of HD broadcasts since besides espn and abc, most of the world is broadcasting 1080i and their sets convert to 720p and they see an inferior picture anyway.(a converted 1080i to 720p). Maybe thats why, since the majority of OTA is 1080i, I am just not seeing the difference
Until this week I have never seen anyone complain about decreased resolution OTA. I will hook up my huges e86, but I havent noticed a difference since using the voom moto.
Im not sure what world you are living in to make such a ridiculous statement. With HDnet on D* the only thing that compared to it was CBS in HD OTA at about 17-18 mbs. There is no channel to compare to it on any platform. Maybe INHD on an uncompressed cable service. Isnt HDNet using HDcam? DO you actually think one could compare espnhd to hdnet? there is no comparison. ESPNHD (720p)hockey for example is laughable compared to a hockey game on HDnet. Discovery channel(1080i) on D* looks "upconverted SD like" compared to HDNet. HDnet is the holy Grail of picture quality. And the only network I know of that demands a high bitrate for its channel from the sat providers. There is a huge difference in PQ do to an increased bitrate and HDnet's superior cameras.Conjuror said:
All other channels are inferior to espnhd on D*? are you smoking crack? ESPNHD on D* doesnt hold a candle to HBOHD east or WOrldsport.
If those DVD players are using the same chips and decoders the PQ should be the same.barth2k said:
I watched LOTR - Return of the King this week on my progressive DVD player. Boy, was I surprised? I do not know how can anyone say that the HD channels on V* are no better than DVD progressive scan. Gee, I really do not want to see the DVD again since it locked colors and details compared to any of cinema 10 movies. The cinema 10 movies are old and some showed grain due to the imperfection of the master but they show details and clarity that the DVD of the same movie would not show. Sorry to say but progressive DVD cannot stand side by side with the movies I have seen in HD on V* whether through their propietary channels or their premium channels.
PQ a sinking ship... 720 cinema 10. Everybody seems to forget what V* engineer have said about cinema 10 being in 720p. They are working on the encoder and will go back to 1080i. Yes I want to go back to how they were originally but right now they are not.
Regarding STB:
I am trying to see if there is a way to measure the black levels coming out of DVI of the V* box. But I have yet to see patterns that would allow to do this. Instead of speculating about all of this, let's get some data to see what the box is outputting through dvi or component.
Regarding STB:
I am trying to see if there is a way to measure the black levels coming out of DVI of the V* box. But I have yet to see patterns that would allow to do this. Instead of speculating about all of this, let's get some data to see what the box is outputting through dvi or component.
Agreed-Pq is not as sharp as D*-just had my set calibrated earlier this week and D* HD pq and SD pq STILL look sharper-Just the way I, and apparently others, see it-sorry, but I can't claim Voom has "the best hd picture available" as a recent Voom commercial I saw has done-not just yet-C'mon Voom enough already with the "encoder" excuse-FLIP THE SWITCH ALREADY!!!Conjuror said:
vurbano said:
This is an old arguement that will alwasy continue. I believe that 1080I and 720 each have advantages but 1080I is not superior. Now 1080P will be the standard to shoot for. ABC and FOX are right. Sports on 1080I is like watching a strobe. Until 1080P is out, I'll take 720 anytme.
FOX doesnt do HD yet. AS far as ABC goes they convert to 1080i here. Then there is ESPNHD ugh. But this isnt a debate as to which format is superior. The facts are that most networks are 1080i and if its converted by your stb, your set or whatever to 720p you will lose resolution. The same with converting 720p to 1080i. Therefore if you want to see the most channels at the highest quality you need a 1080i set and a 1080i signal. Yes if you recieve 720p for ABC, ESPNHD and FOgutter said:
eventually) and have a 720p set you will get a good HD picture, but only on 3 channels. But 1080i will suffer on your set, and that is the majority of the programming, hence the "watching sports in 1080i is like a strobe" statement. GO get a 1080i set and enjoy the other 99% of HD out there. LMAO
Forgive me if I'm about skeptical on Fox Sports HD assumptions. Fox Sports director said HD is worthless, and they're too busy creating "3-D" TV, which will really bring the room together in your home on a lunar colony. I'm not taking shots at 720p, but at the credibilty of Fox on HD.
Thats not quite what he said but I think they will go HD despite that idiot FOX executive. The same one that wanted spiderman2 on the bases. LMAO.cyuhnke said:
I thought the "lunar colony" comment made it clear I had my tongue in my cheek. I applaud Fox for helping affiliates out. My local Fox is already upconverting the signal to 720p. Fox will be in DD 5.1, none of that srs circle crap. I think Fox might well be the most HD friendly network this fall, although CBS is tough to beat.
Still, David Hall's (or Hill) comments were a little scary considering he's privy to Rupert's personal opinions. Fox also has insisted over the past 2 years that 480p widescreen was just as good ad HD. And there's no denying Newscorp owned DirecTV's foot-dragging on HD.
I don't know the exact specs, but is 1080p even a possibility in the next 7 years? I'm not planning on dropping another $2,000 on a set anytime soon, and would feel a bit betrayed if my set became obsolete in 3 years.
Still, David Hall's (or Hill) comments were a little scary considering he's privy to Rupert's personal opinions. Fox also has insisted over the past 2 years that 480p widescreen was just as good ad HD. And there's no denying Newscorp owned DirecTV's foot-dragging on HD.
I don't know the exact specs, but is 1080p even a possibility in the next 7 years? I'm not planning on dropping another $2,000 on a set anytime soon, and would feel a bit betrayed if my set became obsolete in 3 years.
vurbano wrote:
> LMAO... LMAO... LMAO... <
With as much time as you spend doing this, I'm surprised you have any left.
> if you ... have a 720p set you will get a good HD picture, but only on 3 channels. But 1080i will suffer on your set, and that is the majority of the programming, hence the "watching sports in 1080i is like a strobe" statement. GO get a 1080i set and enjoy the other 99% of HD out there. <
Are you implying that you think the strobing that people observe on interlaced source video is somehow a result of converting them to 720p displays? Your comment seemed to indicate that displaying 1080i on a 1080i display would eliminate this. I can assure you, it does not. The only way to get rid of motion artifacts due to interlacing, is to get rid of interlacing. I.e., 720p or 1080p.
The cool thing about 1080i is that it will be possible to record in 1080p and use 1080i as the transfer mechanism, reconstructing 1080p at the display. It will be a while though before 1080p displays become economically reasonable.
- Tim
> LMAO... LMAO... LMAO... <
With as much time as you spend doing this, I'm surprised you have any left.
> if you ... have a 720p set you will get a good HD picture, but only on 3 channels. But 1080i will suffer on your set, and that is the majority of the programming, hence the "watching sports in 1080i is like a strobe" statement. GO get a 1080i set and enjoy the other 99% of HD out there. <
Are you implying that you think the strobing that people observe on interlaced source video is somehow a result of converting them to 720p displays? Your comment seemed to indicate that displaying 1080i on a 1080i display would eliminate this. I can assure you, it does not. The only way to get rid of motion artifacts due to interlacing, is to get rid of interlacing. I.e., 720p or 1080p.
The cool thing about 1080i is that it will be possible to record in 1080p and use 1080i as the transfer mechanism, reconstructing 1080p at the display. It will be a while though before 1080p displays become economically reasonable.
- Tim
Similar threads
- Locked
