Voom's PQ vs. HDNet Movies

[motorcycle_rider]

I keep seeing the same arguements about Voom and other providers. On one hand I see complaining about PQ and the STB and that Voom has to Improve. I do agree with this. On the otherside I see people saying Voom has a plan with there exclusives, that they will and do have the most HD available. And there STB is new so they need time to work with it. This brings up only one thought to me. Voom is a new company I will give them that and there are start up hiccups with any business. On the other hand if you really think about it the have one advantage that they seem to have not used. They can see what mistakes that D* and E* have made. To me they are not taking advantage of this information and are following the same if not a worse path during there growing period. Now Voom has to wake up and realize that quantity is not a substitute for quality. Kill the Exclusives or reduce them and bring up the quality.

Well I am pretty tired and reading back thru this I seem to be rambling so I will let it go for now. But I am seriously considering going back to cable or somewhere else. Any one wanna buy a Voom STB ohh wait thats the other problem they are worthless once you buy them cause they are not available to be activated by a second party.

Have a nice night.

 

[Sean Mota]

Just one more example about HD Transfer. If you have HDnet, right now they are playing Temptation. This is a 2003 movie but the HD tranfer is very grainy and very poor. So if it is all based on bitrates and HDnet have it then HDnet standard tonight is not at all up to par. Please watch this HD transfer and tell me if you see great PQ. This is just a poor transfer playing on HDnet. Does it mean that the PQ is bad on HDnet, no. It just means that the HD Transfer is poor. So much for PQ on HDnet for the duration of this movie.

 

[Sean Mota]

My standard is HDNET, CBSHD OTA, ABC HD OTA, NBCHD OTA, UPNHD OTA, upcoming foxhd OTA. ANd guess what? Voom cannot match the PQ of any of them. They must improve. Lets not dismiss Conjuror to quickly on this. I dont know about you exactly but I am sure when you bought your HD sets you didnt buy them to watch an average HD picture. If a service like D* can come up with everything but the Voom exclusives and offer a higher bitrate you would stay?

Vurbano watch HDnet right now and tell me if you would base your PQ on the Temptation 2003 movie playing on HDnet right now.

 

[Conjuror]

Just one more example about HD Transfer. If you have HDnet, right now they are playing Temptation. This is a 2003 movie but the HD tranfer is very grainy and very poor. So if it is all based on bitrates and HDnet have it then HDnet standard tonight is not at all up to par. Please watch this HD transfer and tell me if you see great PQ. This is just a poor transfer playing on HDnet. Does it mean that the PQ is bad on HDnet, no. It just means that the HD Transfer is poor. So much for PQ on HDnet for the duration of this movie.

I saw it, it was horrible. It was like Voom cinemas (most of the time) . Another bad example on HDNet Movies is "The Endless Summer II" but you don't see that too often on HDNet. Most of the time their PQ is stunning. I came home for a lunch today and watched "Mackenna's Gold", a 1969 movie. It was great, great, great. I couldn't believe my own eyes that 1969 movie can look that good. If there were no poor special effects I would say the movie was produced in 2010, you know what I mean.
Yeah, not everything is up to bit rates only but Voom's seem to be a little too low for mpeg2.

 

[Sean Mota]

The only problem I have with choosing HDnet at the standard is that Vurbano and others seem to think that D* or E* give all their HD channels (HBO-HD, TNT-HD, etc) the same bitrate as HDnet. HDnet is a channel by itself and let's leave it at that. Whatever Mark or whomever decided to put it in their contract to give the most bitrates did the right thing.

E*, D* or V* cannot give the same birates to the other HD channels because of space restriction. You also have the case that when the source is bad, it does not matter what bitrates you put out there, the same garbage will still be garbage. So garbage in garbage out seems to apply here.

People I have wasted too much time on this topic. If you feel that the PQ is as bad as you may put it to be and if you think it is as good as SD quality or DVD quality (and you decide to ignore the source of the program), well not much I can do to explain to you what you are looking at. No more words from on this issue; there are issues with VOOM but not as bad as comparing their channels to SD or DVD quality. Well, if you feel this way then Vote with your pocket and do whatever is best for you. I would do the same but I'll be evaluating everything before I make it to be as drastic as some of you make it to be.

 

[Sean Mota]

I agree Darrel! ANd if Seans posts are right, that better PQ is not in Vooms business plan, then when D* has 37-21 = 16 HD channels I and I think many others wont be in Vooms business plan either. Once D* has the mainstream HD channels, without superior PQ there is no reason to stick around

Im not just talking, if Wm9 does not improve the picture ..see ya. Voom exclusives will NOT keep voom alive IMO. Who was the genuis that decided on 12 mbps avg? They could look incredible at 14-15 mbps. Its really sad

Maybe one more post to answer more clearly to Vurbano what I mean....and this will be the last...

I did not say that VOOM or any other provider won't. I said that given the history of every dbs provider or cable they won't. If you think D* will give every channel the same bitrate as HDnet you are not correct. You even make sound like they do right now when they don't. Please make the distinction. There's one HDnet. Only one. No one else except for INHD I have seen to look, to my eye, as good. Not HBO, not showtime, not Discovery on any DBS provider. You get what you get right now in all three with no difference.

 

[wasch_24]

The problem with HDTV and PQ is that there are no standards. No standard resolution i.e. 1080i or 720p. No standrard amount of bandwidth dedicated. No standard for transfers/conversions. No standard for HD equipment calibration. There are just no standards. Every "HD" program looks different from the other, whether it is the same channel or not. No matter what "HD" is always better than SD.

 

[ChetK]

Sean,

Nobody here is debating the film transfer fact. If it's a bad transfer, obviously, it won't look good in HD no matter what channel it's on.

Now, having said that, I will always go back to my original argument:

It's all about the bandwidth!!!

More bandwidth means less macroblocking and less pixel-shifting (to see what I mean, look at the background of a scene when the camera is not moving. The background items will seem to be moving although they are not moving.) This is not just a few channels on Voom. It's ALL of them. Every single HD channel. I'm even willing to say that Voom's BEST HD channel isn't as good as Dish Network's WORST HD channel (Excluding TNTHD - which is an upconverted channel for the most part).

"Oh...Well...We're not comparing apples to apples." I don't care one single bit about that insulting EXCUSE. I can see compression! I can tell which fruit has mold on the surface and which one does not.

Also note: I am referring to the HD channels only! If I wanted better quality SD channels, I wouldn't have bought a rear projection HDTV.

One last note: I do not blame Motorola's receiver/harware for poor picture quality. I have done A/B comparisons of NBC's, ABC's, CBS's and FOX's (MLB All-Star Game) OTA HD and, other than the micro-stuttering, the Motorola receiver looked just as good as my HDTV's built-in receiver (Mits WS-55511).

I don't blame Motorola for Voom's low bandwidth. I blame Voom executives that insist on the number of HD channels that they use exclusively to attract new subscribers. Hey, it's working for them isn't it?

Now, let's talk about WM9 and Mpeg-4: Folks, this will look better than what we have now. However, better compression schemes are NOT a replacement for more bandwidth. If Voom would look better with WM9 or Mpeg-4, imagine how much better it would look with WM9/Mpeg-4 AND more bandwidth! THAT'S the kind of quality I want to see. And THAT'S the kind of quality we should ALL demand. !protest !protest !protest

Here's a great place to demand it:
"Which Feature is More Important for you to receive?" Thread

 

[andrzej]

...
It's all about the bandwidth!!!
...

Chet,
we are all (including Voom decision makers) in agreement that more bandwith means better PQ. The real issue is that there are no service providers that cater to videophiles such as yourself. The overall amount of bandwith that D* or E* has dedicated to HD is significantly less than what Voom is providing. Sure, for many videophiles Voom is spreading this bandwith too thinly (per channel). But, I can guarantee you that for many users, especially those that are just making the transition from SD to HD world, the Voom's HD PQ is just fine. I think that Voom has made a business decision that is probably sound business-wise even thought it can frustrate a few videophiles. I doubt that Voom is going to reduce the number of HD channels to add 2 or 3 Mbps to the remaining channels that you or Vurbano or me consider worthy. I hope that the new compression scheme will improve the PQ. Until then I am postponing purchasing a new pj and Stewart's 110" screen.

 

[ChetK]

You know what? You're probably right, andrzej. That's why, when HD-DVDs come out, my Voom subscription will be VERY minimal at best. I might even switch back over to Dish Network just for HBOHD and the HDPack.

 

[DarrellP]

I hope that the new compression scheme will improve the PQ. Until then I am postponing purchasing a new pj and Stewart's 110" screen.

And just this weekend, I was considering downsizing from 110" to 90". I backed down the hallway to make my screen appear smaller and the PQ vastly improved, eliminating the irratating video noise and softness. But then I switch back to Dish and say NAHHHH, it's just fine the way it is. Either Dish gets more HD (ROFLMAO) or Voom ups the bandwidth.... Hmm, which will come first? Probably icewater in Hell.

 

[riffjim4069]

One last note: I do not blame Motorola's receiver/harware for poor picture quality. I have done A/B comparisons of NBC's, ABC's, CBS's and FOX's (MLB All-Star Game) OTA HD and, other than the micro-stuttering, the Motorola receiver looked just as good as my HDTV's built-in receiver (Mits WS-55511).

I too have conducted numberous comparisons between the Voom STB and the internal tuner on my Mits. Time and again there were no discernable differences between the two sources.

I don't blame Motorola for Voom's low bandwidth. I blame Voom executives that insist on the number of HD channels that they use exclusively to attract new subscribers. Hey, it's working for them isn't it?

I do not blame Voom for their business model of bringing lots of HD and selected SD channels to the masses: "Not just the most HDTV. The best TV." However, I will not be happy if PQ doesn't improve post WM9/MPEG4 and after acquiring additional transponders. At some point later this year their business model needs to be adjusted: "The Most HDTV. The Highest Quality HDTV. The best TV experience."

"Is it live or is it Rave HD?"

In its present state Voom PQ is pretty good and certainly provides the most HD for the buck. Personally, I will gladly accept current PQ just as long as we have Voom's promise to add bandwidth and increase PQ as soon as possible. I wish Voom would keep us better informed.

 

[Dvlos]

I think some people over-criticise the issue, but maybe they've been on Voom longer and are far more frustrated. What I want is enough bandwidth in my HD channels so that the backgrounds and solid colors aren't so freaking compressed you can see the mosaic squares forming as the algorithm tries to group an entire red curtain into 2-3 forms of red. I don't want to see any squares or mosquito noise. I don't care if thats 13 mbps, or 20... I just don't want it my eyes get drawn to it and I start losing the enjoyment I have watching whatever it was that I am watching.

That same mosaic effect does NOT happen with OTA channels in HD, now I don't know what mbps they are transmitting but I want Voom to literall kick Dish and DirectTv in the chin with good quality AND good quantity. RIght now Voom only offers the later.

 

[barth2k]

Chet,
we are all (including Voom decision makers) in agreement that more bandwith means better PQ. The real issue is that there are no service providers that cater to videophiles such as yourself. The overall amount of bandwith that D* or E* has dedicated to HD is significantly less than what Voom is providing. Sure, for many videophiles Voom is spreading this bandwith too thinly (per channel). But, I can guarantee you that for many users, especially those that are just making the transition from SD to HD world, the Voom's HD PQ is just fine. I think that Voom has made a business decision that is probably sound business-wise even thought it can frustrate a few videophiles. I doubt that Voom is going to reduce the number of HD channels to add 2 or 3 Mbps to the remaining channels that you or Vurbano or me consider worthy. I hope that the new compression scheme will improve the PQ. Until then I am postponing purchasing a new pj and Stewart's 110" screen.

that about sums it all. Voom is like Microsoft. Apple's (or rather, Steve Job's) credo is "insanely great software". MS' is "good enough sofwtare". Voom is just good enough for HD newbies and the vast majority who don't really have a better choice (there are some lucky few with a cable co. that gives them both many channels and high bandwidth). My disappointment with Voom is since they started from scratch and were dedicated to HD, they could've done it RIGHT, chosen quality over quantity, but didn't.

 

[Dvlos]

they could've done it RIGHT, chosen quality over quantity, but didn't.

It's a marketing thing, and someone already talked about "videophiles". There are SO many people with HD sets and don't even WATCH HD content, maybe some get HD OTA that's it. How is Voom going to offer a sat service and say:

"Hi we are Vooom, we have 30 HD channels and we offer them at 25 MBPS!!! Oh yeah we have 10 Standard Channels, join us"

Voom got off the ground with a small number of channels, now that they have more subscribers and are growing they lease another Sat. and will upgrade their compression scheme, hopefully offer more channels as they become available and improve PQ.

IMO the PlusPacks are dissappointing compared with cable, I mean if you subscribe to Cinemax with either Comcast or Brighthouse you have like 12 Cinemax Channels as opposed to Vooms 6 or 7 for $14! I trust these things will change with TIME... in all honesty it's the Voom "HD Newbies" that will outnumber the Voom videophiles 10 to 1, and that's who Voom wants right now to make some money, so they can improve their stuff and get more people to switch over. I think some people forget that Voom's trying to be a successfull business as well as offer the most HD.

 

[ChetK]

I think some people forget that Voom's trying to be a successfull business as well as offer the most HD.

Dvlos, we haven't forgotten, but you have to realize that Voom has a 25% attrition right now. If 25% of the people that sign up, leave (due to PQ or whatever), most likely will not come back for quite some time. If PQ was better, I bet that 25% would be less: Therefore, a better for the bottom line.

I don't want all of the additional SD channels that come with the network(s) you mentioned (the PlusPacks). If I had it my way, we wouldn't even get the SD channels that we do. I'd gladly pay $15 for HBOHD if they took the bandwidth that they use for HBO2East, HBO2West, HBOEast, HBO West, HBO Family, HBO Comedy, and HBO Signature, cancelled those channels, and used their bandwidth towards the HBOHD channel. Same goes for ShowtimeHD, StarzHD, and Cinemax HD. I know this will never happen since it's all about getting a contract with those programming providers, but it would be nice for us HD consumers.

One other note: I absolutely, positively, 100%, HATE being labeled as a "videofile"! News flash: Everybody who buys into HDTV's is a "videofile" or else they wouldn't have bought HD. It should be every consumer’s responsibility to push for better quality video and audio. Or else why even bother?

Imagine you're the artist/film maker. Why would you want people to see your art/film with macroblocking, pixelshifting and compression edge enhancement? That has got to be really frustrating for them.

 

[DarrellP]

One other note: I absolutely, positively, 100%, HATE being labeled as a "videofile"!

I hear you Chet. People think because I have a projector that I am a videophile or loaded with money, but my pj cost less than a good 57" RPTV. That's what most people don't understand, plus I built my own screen for about $40. For less than $2k, I have a kick ass HD viewing system and all I ask is that I have the pristine picture from Voom that I get from other sources.

Last night, The Grid gave me hope, the PQ from Voom was rock solid, video noise free and had the WOW factor on my 110" screen. Before people jump up and scream "It's a new transfer made specifically for HDTV", let me stop you there. Voom has issues with bandwidth, Period. Just watch EquatorHD, that channel is still riddled with mosquito noise, though it is better than before, it suffers with a softer image. All the channels look "good", but that's not what we demand from the "Premier" HD delivery system, we demand Excellence as they advertise.

Voom does not have a crisp, ultra clear picture like they advertise, they are close, but no cigar. If it weren't for people like myself, chet, vurbano and others pushing Voom to correct their picture, do you think they would do it on their own? I doubt it. It would probably continue to slide down as they pushed the envelope like Dish did and totally ruin the viewing experience. It takes a few squeaky wheels to get the grease, so all you viewers out there who don't like our complaining, stop reading these forums and sit back and enjoy the better picture you are getting today thanks to us "squeakers".

 

[Dvlos]

Imagine you're the artist/film maker. Why would you want people to see your art/film with macroblocking, pixelshifting and compression edge enhancement? That has got to be really frustrating for them.

You may hate it, but it's EXACTLY what you are, until the majority of the people push for the same thing and care about it passionately then you (more like the collective US) will be considered the obsessed over this.

My in-laws have DirectTV, and a a 55" HDTV, they didn't care about HD until they saw me with Voom. Now they want Voom, but they don't worry about it day and day out, it's not on the forefront. If they can't see the Olympics in HD they won't curse the sky and light their chest on fire as I will if I can't see some freaking soccer and track and field on HD.

The ratio of people actually using their TVs to watch HD content is lower than the amount of people that have HD sets. In other words while there may be 12 million people with HDTVs ... only 5 million are actually watching TELEVISED HD content, the rest mainly have it hooked up to a progressive scan DVD. It's not about being rich and having tons of money, I consider myself a audiophile and now a videophile, I seriously enjoy the heck out of my home theatre. I spend time tweaking my TV, my surround system, everything. I invested money to have good quality cables for my system etc... I have friends that have their surround systems hooked up with RCA cables for crying out loud... the mainstream crowd just DOESN'T know all the ins and outs of HD and Home Theatre setups.

I do hear you, and I want excellent Picture Quality, what I feel is (even though I could be wrong) is that Wilt, and others at Voom KNOW their PQ isn't pristine. Especially with people posting about it on the internet, but they can't very well slap a satellite package with 50 channels and 25mbps per channel bandwidth. Us videophile-freaks will get it, and love it.. WOW 50 HD channels and all with super high PQ?!!? YAY!

From a sheer marketing point of view though, the average person would look at that sales information and say "Only 50 channels, what a piece of sh*t!" and walk away... I am 100% convinced of this. If I were Voom, I'd put the wheels in place for a smooth transition to the new codecs, once they are in place produce a pristine picture for it's subs., and start running a new Voom ad during the intermissions about how Voom's upgraded bandwidth or whatever so that all it's current subs will melt with joy. In the meantime they continue to add more channels...eventually as public awareness grows about HDTV and what it means and how to correctly implement it, I think quality and what people will demand from HD stations will change and improve.

Understand that I am not complaining about the complaining it's warranted, what I was saying is that unfortunately, all 22,000+ subs aren't complaining in unison, the average HD novice would have no idea what all the fuss is about and I THINK, Voom is counting on that to build a subscriber base until they can upgrade their service and hopefully lure in more subs.

Voom has 21 exclusive commercial free HD channels, who else has that? No one? We know that there are a few of those EXCLUSIVES channels are relatively low budget productions used only as a placeholder so that Voom can advertise 21 Channels! It's a number game they are playing, but as time goes on they need to keep upgrading and adding to their system.

For one, I thought I knew about HD, until I actually GOT HD, then I realized how ignorant I still am about all the nuances, however I think that with time people will take more time to push their TVs to their limit. You have no idea how many people think their HDTV sets and cable access HDTV is the ultimate experience, just in my experience I have gone to people's homes that have uncalibrated TVs, and I mean like seriously grossly out of calibration sets and they think THE PICTURE LOOKS GOOD!!!!

 

[wasch_24]

That's friggin' hilarious

...If they can't see the Olympics in HD they won't curse the sky and light their chest on fire as I will if I can't see some freaking soccer and track and field on HD.

I had to wait until I could stop laughing at this line to read the rest of the post. :haha :haha :haha :haha :haha :haha

 

[DemisE]

It seems like alot of you are arguing about bandwidth and encoding. Yet another very important feature to everyones arguments is what TV you are viewing said HD on. Also everyone is making their decisions with human eyes which are connected to a body that is by default going to have bias weither they think so or not.