Sat HD Locals vrs OTA HD Locals?

Status
Please reply by conversation.

Dovetails

SatelliteGuys Family
Original poster
Jan 19, 2008
38
0
New to the forum here.

I would like to upgrade my system to include a HD DVR & HD package. Currently I'm bringing my HD locals in OTA via a dedicated HD antennae. My question is .... is there any difference between the picture quality of OTA HD local signals vrs. getting the HD locals via Sat.? I quess I'm wondering if there is any additional compression involved with getting them from the sat. :confused:

Although I get great HD OTA now, I would just as soon bring it in via sat. (for simplicity) but, I don't want to take a step backwards in pic quality :)
 
New to the forum here.

I would like to upgrade my system to include a HD DVR & HD package. Currently I'm bringing my HD locals in OTA via a dedicated HD antennae. My question is .... is there any difference between the picture quality of OTA HD local signals vrs. getting the HD locals via Sat.? I quess I'm wondering if there is any additional compression involved with getting them from the sat. :confused:

Although I get great HD OTA now, I would just as soon bring it in via sat. (for simplicity) but, I don't want to take a step backwards in pic quality :)

There is some difference, but for the most part, it is minimal. Most people wouldn't see much of a difference, and if they did, wouldn't care. Technically the ota signal is better, but the Directv hd locals are very good on their own.
 
Local markets can very greatly. Impossible to say from one to the other. In some cases the difference can be noticable. In others it isnt. On average, I would say what you get from D* would be comparable, if not SLIGHTLY less, to what you get OTA
 
OTA will probably use more space on your DVR.

OTOH, D* isn't going to carry your sub-channels and doesn't yet carry PBS in HD in most markets. So, there's a big advantage to having OTA locals if you can stand the lost space on your DVR.
 
All of these are accurate, it's just something you'll have to find out for your particular situation.

I didn't see where your at, but if your in a Snow area and occasionally lose your signal due to it, I would KEEP the OTA antenna as you will always have the OTA available while the dish may get knocked out in the occasions I mentioned.

I use my OTA all the time, works great and it's free ...
You can always turn on the Sat locals and see what you think and turn them off if you don't like it, but I think you'll see they are vary close.

Jimbo
 
Seems to me I used to see a slight difference between my OTA and Sat locals with OTA being just a bit better. Lately they're so close in quality that I can't tell any difference. Like Jimbo I do use my OTA a lot, particularly on the few questionable weather days we have here in sunny San Antonio though my Slimline seems to hang in there better than my old 3LNB unless there's a major electrical storm or frog drowning downpour.
 
Keep OTA just for the subchannels, here in the Dallas area I can pick up 4 weather sub channels none are broadcast on D* or E*. Never mind the other programming on the subs.
 
Thanks folks for all your responses!! All good advice and I think I will go ahead and plan on keepimg both options hooked up and available ;)
 
I was an OTA nut, but recently got a HR22 (100 hours mpeg4 and no OTA tuner) and have gone full sat hd. At first, you notice a slight diff, but now I dont even care, especially since we have PBS and CW in our area.

Because I travel, I like knowing I have 100 hours of recording space and dont have to worry with an ext hdd.
 
OTA is not compressed whereas everything on DTV is. You are going to get a better feed from OTA as its the best possible source you can get. However, signal glitches can occur so this statement is completely dependent on your reception.
 
Status
Please reply by conversation.
***

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts