Is D* using mpeg4 successfully? If so, maybe E* could hire away some of their broadcast engineers... 
Not happy with StarzHD quality
- Thread starter Mark Strube
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 299
- Views 34K
They actually have several mpeg 4 test channels on some of their lesser used satellites . They don't need to release a channel that people really want like Starz hd and Experiment with the picture quality. IT makes this channel useless to me until they fix the panning and scanning problem. I can't take the motion artifacts the way they are because they make me sick to my stomach.
I tried to watch SinCity not good, I have a HD (TS) rip which I play on my snazio, it looks sharp and BEAUTIFUL (not 100% sure of source, I believe a Cable Rip) but I did a comparison, the E* StarzHD version looks soft and you can see the clustering pixels and different levels of detail (artifacts) in the E* version, the HDTS fie I have is sharp and you don't seen any compression artifacts.
It looks like the MPEG4 encoder is doing some kind of *smart blur* to compensate for the lower bitrate / compression level because it's not the traditional pixelation distortion, it's like a strange pattern that's been softened. Bottom line, PQ still looking crappy and the frame rate is still low! BOOO E*!
(Trust me Dfergie, I was almost fooled with SinCity, until I did the comparison, I had the movies playing on both inputs [622 over HDMI and Snazio over Component, i may get crazy and hook up 622 back to component, but i'm sure results are the same!] and the Snazio won by a huge margin! I did a scene by scene comparison, I'd watch 5 minutes of the E* and switch input over and watch the same 5 minutes on the snazio!(
It looks like the MPEG4 encoder is doing some kind of *smart blur* to compensate for the lower bitrate / compression level because it's not the traditional pixelation distortion, it's like a strange pattern that's been softened. Bottom line, PQ still looking crappy and the frame rate is still low! BOOO E*!
(Trust me Dfergie, I was almost fooled with SinCity, until I did the comparison, I had the movies playing on both inputs [622 over HDMI and Snazio over Component, i may get crazy and hook up 622 back to component, but i'm sure results are the same!] and the Snazio won by a huge margin! I did a scene by scene comparison, I'd watch 5 minutes of the E* and switch input over and watch the same 5 minutes on the snazio!(
Last edited:
Mine is by component... watching Armageddon from last night right now... other than a little softness ( if you have D* HD to compare to Starz is still much sharper) not that bad...
Last edited:
I just wanted to add that some people will try to convince others there is no such thing as HD-Lite and, even if there were, we chattel and our inferior equipment won't know the difference. Sorry, but I'm not buying this excuse; my discerning eyes can tell a huge difference.
From a TV viewers perspective, I don't give a rats ass about the underlying modulation, multiplexing, encoding, compression, flux-capacitance, widgets or gidgets...just as long as my sets are being fed a properly formatted and framed 1920x1080i or 1280x720p HD bit stream. Personally, I find StarzHD to be unwatchable much of the time.
Fix StarzHD already!!!
From a TV viewers perspective, I don't give a rats ass about the underlying modulation, multiplexing, encoding, compression, flux-capacitance, widgets or gidgets...just as long as my sets are being fed a properly formatted and framed 1920x1080i or 1280x720p HD bit stream. Personally, I find StarzHD to be unwatchable much of the time.
Fix StarzHD already!!!
riffjim4069 said:I just wanted to add that some people will try to convince others there is no such thing as HD-Lite and, even if there were, we chattel and our inferior equipment won't know the difference. Sorry, but I'm not buying this excuse; my discerning eyes can tell a huge difference.
From a TV viewers perspective, I don't give a rats ass about the underlying modulation, multiplexing, encoding, compression, flux-capacitance, widgets or gidgets...just as long as my sets are being fed a properly formatted and framed 1920x1080i or 1280x720p HD bit stream. Personally, I find StarzHD to be unwatchable much of the time.
Fix StarzHD already!!!
Ditto...well said! :up
riffjim4069 said:From a TV viewers perspective, I don't give a rats ass about the underlying modulation, multiplexing, encoding, compression, flux-capacitance, widgets or gidgets...just as long as my sets are being fed a properly formatted and framed 1920x1080i or 1280x720p HD bit stream. Personally, I find StarzHD to be unwatchable much of the time.
You say you don't care about the tech stuff, but you're obsessed with raw resolution! All that matters is your last sentence- StarzHD is unwatchable.
1440 x 1080i is theoretically BETTER than 1280 x 720p, yet you refuse to accept it as HD...never mind the fact that most HD field equipment tops out at 1440 x 1080i. The problem is NOT the resolution. The problem is what and how that resolution is achieved.
The provider has the power to ruin a 1920 x 1080i picture through overcompression, and they have the power to deliver a beautiful 1440 x 1080i picture.
It's the picture that matters. Do NOT tell DISH that all you expect is for the picture to be "properly formatted and framed." at a certain resolution. I can crush a 1920 x 1080 picture down to a very small bitstream, but you wouldn't want to watch it.
I don't give a rats ass about anything but whether or not the picture looks good, and compression is the most deadly picture killer. This thread proves it! All the VOOM channels are being downrezzed, but the channel with the new compression scheme is the main complaint.
Sure, I'd love to have every channel running 1920 x 1080i at 19mbps, but it's not possible right now. If downrezzing slightly helps them reduce compression, I'm all for it.
I didn't say I don't care about the tech stuff, but I did state, "From a TV viewers perspective..." Seriously, D* and E* can use MPEG-16 if they choose and compress everything in a 512Mb datastream...just as long as the transport mechanisms and decompression algorithms and hardware paint a real HD picture then I'm happy. StarzHD is not making me happy!!!M Sparks said:
Brothers Grimm looked better off 61.5. Scrolling credits at the end were smoother - but not quite there yet.
Yes since I switched to the 61.5 sat today from the 129 sat I have noticed better smoother picture on Starz hd , but then they do a panning shot and its back to jerky video. The credits did look a little better than on 129 now that you mention it. I wonder how much of the video jerkiness I was seeing with the 129 sat, was due to the crappy satellite that is constantly moving and having to fire its thrusters to stay in the same spot over the country?
The picture actually is freezing every 5 frames, holding for 2 frames then repeats. This is might be something to do with keeping the video in sync with the audio?
Regardless, I get dizzy watching this and wish they could figure out how to setup their encoders.
Regardless, I get dizzy watching this and wish they could figure out how to setup their encoders.
I'm getting bloody sick and tired of 129 and it's entirely trashed signal. Does E* have any plans at all, in the near future, of replacing that POS satellite?
HD-Lite is bad enough, but adding LOS every 20-minutes (give or take) is just heaping more insult onto the injury.
I wrote to their ceo address last night, complaining about the 129 sat, LOS and other related issues. I requested a reply...I'm not holding my breath awaiting a reply.
HD-Lite is bad enough, but adding LOS every 20-minutes (give or take) is just heaping more insult onto the injury.
I wrote to their ceo address last night, complaining about the 129 sat, LOS and other related issues. I requested a reply...I'm not holding my breath awaiting a reply.
riffjim4069 said:I didn't say I don't care about the tech stuff, but I did state, "From a TV viewers perspective..." Seriously, D* and E* can use MPEG-16 if they choose and compress everything in a 512Mb datastream...just as long as the transport mechanisms and decompression algorithms and hardware paint a real HD picture then I'm happy. StarzHD is not making me happy!!!
Point well taken- as I said, all that matters is that you (and I) aren't happy.
My issue was simply of your definition of a "real HD picture" based solely on the resolution. I would rather have an excellent 1280 x 1080i picture (which is entirely possible), than a nasty, overcompressed 1920 x 1080i picture.
As I've pointed out many times before (not that most people seem to care), HD Varicams record at only 1280 x 1080i or 960 x 720p. But if you view the original picture before it gets processed/compressed/transmitted/ruined, it would blow away most, if not all, of the "true HD" pictures on DBS. Live sports or studio stuff on HDNET is probably the only thing that would beat it.
Likewise, I'm about to buy a $2000 Sony HD camera as a temporary stopgap, since I don't have the budget to get into serious HD production. It records at 1440 x 1080i- higher than any Varicam, but it won't look as good.
This whole "HD Lite" issue would not be an issue with 95% of the customers if they were doing a good job of it. But they're not.
Back to the topic...anyone notice that Starz HD was listed "Off Air" for most of the late night/early morning yesterday? That's typical for Encore channels- they go down overnight about once a month. But Starz SD had programs listed. I just watched the end of the Ali G movie and it looked pretty good, but now the credits are on and it's still a little jerky. Maybe they took it down to do some work?
Can't...no line of sight. There's a huge hill to my east-north-east about half a mile away. I'd have to put a dish up a 200-ft (at least) pole to "see" over that hill to 61.5...gdarwin said:
