That is the question. Inspired by the responses on this poll. 
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=627772
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=627772
Quantity or Quality in Your HD channels?
- Thread starter Sean Mota
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 42
- Views 4K
Since I paid $4000 for a HD TV then I want the best posible picture. I would rather have 19 Great HD channels than 50 HD Lite channels. If it's not true HD then why bother.
competetion brings quantity
quantity brings down quality
quality is what sets them apart
average joe join or depart
quantity brings down quality
quality is what sets them apart
average joe join or depart
It depends on the network which way I would vote. Would be nice if a lot of the standard definition channels were upconverted to HD Light.
20% believe that quantity HD Lite is preferable than Full HD quality. Even the small population of HDTV owners at this point cannot agree on this issue. What will happen when J6P starts buying HDTVs?
mike the question is about HD channels. We are not talking about a middle ground between SD and HD. If the channel is availblae at native Full HD, would you be ok if your providers downrize the HD signal to HD LITE to save bandwith and therefore put more of these channels on your HDTV.
Quality AND quantity. Picking one without the other is a compromise regardless of how unrealistic it seems.
Of course we all want Quality.. But I rate Quantity (Variety) right up there as an equal. So its impossible to vote for me. And to further complicate the issue, D* HD lite is easily worse than E* HD lite on my display. I just cant see this whole issue being one of Black vs. White. Too many shades of gray. Try viewing my local CBS-HD channel, pure 1920x1080i bliss, but bitrate hindered by not 1, but 2 video subchannels hogging up 3mbps each!
Just FYI that I voted for quality. I just wanted to state what we all really want with HD not what we have to accept. Once you draw a line in the sand and say, "Ok, I will accept this", you weaken your voice. If there are 30 HD channels available out there, I want the ability (choice) to have all 30 and all in full-rez. If it takes a year or two to get the bandwidth necessary, fine, but the pressure to get there should never stop.cwalter428 said:
So maybe I'm the only brave person out here to admit it. But I want quantity but with quality programming. i want something i will pay for. I also have let Dish now as I just cancelled Voom because the quality was so low (in terms of programming - repeats don't do it for me, and Kung fu ???? What's all that about ), NOT because it's not HD full rez.
I also am someone, that spent less than $2k on my 42 inch plasma HD equipment, so the full rez issue is less important to me.
As a counter point. 7 years ago, I spent, more than than 2k on a 36" Sony regular TV, so i think you have to factor in the people now having access without spending 3K+. HD lite is good enough for me. Now you can all have a shot at me
Joe (Jeff) public
), NOT because it's not HD full rez. I also am someone, that spent less than $2k on my 42 inch plasma HD equipment, so the full rez issue is less important to me.
As a counter point. 7 years ago, I spent, more than than 2k on a 36" Sony regular TV, so i think you have to factor in the people now having access without spending 3K+. HD lite is good enough for me. Now you can all have a shot at me
Joe (Jeff) public
