• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Help me out with HD

E

eggsdannythomas

Guest
Okay, my in-laws bought a kick ass HDTV last weekend and set it up with the Comcast HD cable box. A few weeks ago I set up a buddy's awesome 60" HDTV with Dish Network's HD Box and a OTA antennae.

I have a $5000 budget for a home-theatre, most of that I want to spend on a Pioneer, Panasonic or LG Plasma. I have spec'd out different systems (Dish, Direstv, Comcast, Radio Shack digital tv antennae, etc.), but after watching 2 weekends worth of all the DTV there is I think I might take that $5000 and donate it to African Debt Relief.

Here are my observations:

CBS - other than a few prime time shows, very disapointing. They had Golf on yesterday in HD (I think) but it was in 4:3 with bars on the side.

NBC - Watched a little Auto racing, looked great, I hate how they switch back and forth between aspect ratios when switching to certain cameras.

ABC - The worst, channel 7 shows crap Made for tv movies on their HD channels and alot of their prime time shows like Extreme Makeover Home Edition look like garbage.

As far as 'MAQ's and 'LS's subchannels, what junk! Poor man's weather channel and reruns of the news and 190 north, c'mon.

WGN - Can't deny the sports look great, but those WB shows didn't look that hot.

HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, TNT - look good, but who wants to watch the same old movies and Law & Order re-runs?

FOX Chicago - Forget about it.

THE POSITIVES:

IN-HD and IN-HD2: Awesome picture, okay content. Concerts look great.

WTTW and Discovery HD Theatre: THE BEST non-sports programming, great picture and sound.

Comcast Sports: Sox games are awesome, but the rest of that channel is boring and cannot compete with.......

ESPN HD: Sportscenter, baseball, graffixx package might be the best around.

OKAY SO HERE's WHAT I AM GETTING AT:

All this great equipment and state of the art technology and the content kind of sucks. How long is it gonna take? I'm afraid we are going to be stuck with Standard Definition for a long long time. I don't know about other markets, but Chicago is a hole.

Comcast should be ashamed of themselves. I got rid of cable because their digital tier was a joke, and even with the HD box and a good signal into your house, channels 2-99 are snowy and unwatchable. I cant believe more people dont get sattelite for that reason alone. And with an HDTV you REALLY see how bad and grainy those channels are.

What do you guys think, I really want that Plasma or even a huge LCD rear projection model, but like my wife said, the only reason to get HD is for the sports.

OKAY THESE ARE SIMPLY MY OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS. NOW I TURN TO YOU, THE BRILLIANT POSTERS AND TV FANS ON THIS BOARD.

What do you guys suggest are the best options for someone who IS knowledgable about HD, but dissapointed in what's available? How long do we have to wait? Anything good coming down the pike?

Please Help!!!!
 
Eggs,

> OKAY SO HERE's WHAT I AM GETTING AT:
>
> All this great equipment and state of the art technology and
> the content kind of sucks. How long is it gonna take? I'm
> afraid we are going to be stuck with Standard Definition for
> a long long time. I don't know about other markets, but
> Chicago is a hole.
>
> Comcast should be ashamed of themselves. I got rid of cable
> because their digital tier was a joke, and even with the HD
> box and a good signal into your house, channels 2-99 are
> snowy and unwatchable. I cant believe more people dont get
> sattelite for that reason alone. And with an HDTV you
> REALLY see how bad and grainy those channels are.
>
> What do you guys think, I really want that Plasma or even a
> huge LCD rear projection model, but like my wife said, the
> only reason to get HD is for the sports.
>
> OKAY THESE ARE SIMPLY MY OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS. NOW I
> TURN TO YOU, THE BRILLIANT POSTERS AND TV FANS ON THIS
> BOARD.
>
> What do you guys suggest are the best options for someone
> who IS knowledgable about HD, but dissapointed in what's
> available? How long do we have to wait? Anything good
> coming down the pike?
>
> Please Help!!!!

Despite the ventings of techno-geeks who say that HDTV still isn't
cutting edge...well, the technology isn't, but the adaption of it is.
As a result, commercial TV stations aren't making hardly money from
it. ABC isn't, NBC is off of WeatherPlus (hey, they do better than
Storm Stories and were live throughout hurricane Dennis!), and few people
are donating to PBS HD at the moment.

Up until this year, there weren't many subscibers. Now, as of July 1, all mid-large size TV's MUST have digital tuners...and most TV's sold from next year
on out should be high-def.

All this to say that the audience and demand for HD has been small, so most
programs have been in upconverted SD. But, the costs are crashing, though still high, and so more and more programs will be produced in HD. Also, more
stations will start to broadcast in HD. WCIU will have HD by spring;
The Weather Channel and other channels have sent word that they will roll out
HD in the not-too-distant future, likely in 2006-2007. That's when I think
the BIG HD production push happens, just before analog shutdown.

Granted, the big draws for HD are sports and concerts/live events. THAT
will continue to be more and more in HD. Ditto for movies. A widescreen
DVD being played in department stores is NOT HD! It's better than analog
by a mile, but it still isn't HD.

As for getting HD: HD will ALWAYS be best via over-the-air antenna.
Period. Comcast, satellite TV providers and all others compress the HD
content to some extent. DirecTV has really ticked off subscribers by
doing this. Over-the-air, you get full resolution, without filters
or a middleman for things to go wrong. Barring that, Comcast has more
bandwidth than satellite does...so more channels should be available
than with satellite until DirecTV launches their HD satellites.

Your observations with my comments:

>CBS - other than a few prime time shows, very disapointing. They had
> Golf on yesterday in HD (I think) but it was in 4:3 with bars on the
> side.

When you see the bars, it's upconverted. But CBS, IMO, has the best HD,
with FOX coming darn close and NBC doing a good job. ABC...varies but
sometimes it is not good.

HD cameras are big and bulky right now, and too expensive to risk being
damaged or destroyed in a car wreck. Thus, no in-car HD cams on NASCAR
broadcasts. That's what you saw.

> WTTW and Discovery HD Theatre: THE BEST non-sports programming, great
> picture and sound.

Haven't watched enough Discovery HD to say that's always true, but
when I have seen it, it's great. PBS Milwaukee does a bit better job
with an HD picture, for some reason. But still, it IS awesome!

>ESPN HD: Sportscenter, baseball, graffixx package might be the best
>around.

That's what happens when you have money coming out of your ears. You can
do a phenomenal job!

So, if you like movies, sports and concerts, HD *is* the way to go. If
you like news and weather and don't watch sports, I suggest you call World Vision, or your church, or whatever you go with can use the money to help starving families for now. I'd do that anyway, but it would be unwise to
get HD just for that, even if the shows are in HD.

Gilbert
 
I had a much lower budget for my hdtv. I wasn't able to get anything too large. I had to settle for a 32 inch Panasonic HDTV (CT-HC43) with an external Samsung SIR-T351 hdtv tuner. Total cost for me was about $700.00. Not high end like plasma or anything but does what i want it to do and has a wonderful picture. I use an indoor antenna. (zenith silver sensor) and live about 25 miles west of the city. (westmont/downers grove area). I get all channels except CBS 2 (big loss there. hehe). I do subscribe to directv with tivo. I eventually got a nice speaker system and use optical out. (Logitech Z-680. They where on sale at tigerdirect and where cheap enough. Has DD 5.1 + dts.)

I don't like comcast cable tv. (Internet is whole different thing. I love my 6600/768 cable line.) The channels where fuzzy (analog) and the digital channels looked horrible on my tv. Besides, it was too expensive. I tried out directv. (no hdtv. Wasn't worth all that hassle just for the network feeds.) Got a tivo. Very nice picture but you can still tell it's digital. That's ok since the tivo makes up for that.

These are the channels i get (with my opinions.)
5.1 = NBC (i don't really watch nbc. nothing worth watching but picture looks good.)
5.1 = Nbc Weather. =Eh, it's weather. When i need to see it during a storm, it's always somewhere else but chicago.)

7.1 = I occasionally watch it, good picture
7.2 = Do something with this channel! Anything!
7.3 = weather =Hey, it's still better than 5.2!

9.1 = Wgn. I do watch this occasionally. Non-hd programming still looks pretty good. (always in dolby digital on my reciever. Others when primetime programming)
9.2 = same video, spanish.
9.3 = Bring back music videos!

11.1 = Wttw. Awesome HDTV. I use this channel to show off my tv. Hehe
11.2 = Wttw non-hd main channel

20.1 = Wycc. They at least have a digital channel. Better than nothing!

26.1 = 26 The U! = Ok quality. Better than analog
26.2 = MeTv, I get w/directv but this one looks a little clearer.

32.1 = Fox, Nothing like watching the simpsons and stuff much clearer.

38.1-6 = I know people like this stuff, I don't. Waste..

44.1 = spanish, always very clear. Amazing.

50.1 = Wpwr, very clear, Not bad. Strong signal here.

56.1 = Indiana pbs, strong now, non-hd feed.
56.2 = Another non-hd feed. Slighly adjusted. (not always better.)
56.3 = Supposed to be hd. It is clear, audio is slightly louder. Yet to see hd programming yet though. (i haven't looked either. Might have to.)

60.1 = spanish. Pretty good picture quality.

62.1 = Not the best quality picture but what do you need for commercials 24/7 (well, almost..)

66.1 = Yet another spanish channel. Ok quality.
 
> >CBS - other than a few prime time shows, very disapointing.
> They had
> > Golf on yesterday in HD (I think) but it was in 4:3 with
> bars on the
> > side.
>
> When you see the bars, it's upconverted. But CBS, IMO, has
> the best HD,
> with FOX coming darn close and NBC doing a good job.
> ABC...varies but
> sometimes it is not good.


Not entirely true... I know that some stations, when upconverting, "stretch" 4:3 to 16:9.

More than likely the golf *should* have been in HD but wasn't.

-A<P ID="signature">______________

</P>
 
> Eggs,
>
> > OKAY SO HERE's WHAT I AM GETTING AT:
> >
> > All this great equipment and state of the art technology
> and
> > the content kind of sucks. How long is it gonna take?
> I'm
> > afraid we are going to be stuck with Standard Definition
> for
> > a long long time. I don't know about other markets, but
> > Chicago is a hole.
> >
> > Comcast should be ashamed of themselves. I got rid of
> cable
> > because their digital tier was a joke, and even with the
> HD
> > box and a good signal into your house, channels 2-99 are
> > snowy and unwatchable. I cant believe more people dont
> get
> > sattelite for that reason alone. And with an HDTV you
> > REALLY see how bad and grainy those channels are.
> >
> > What do you guys think, I really want that Plasma or even
> a
> > huge LCD rear projection model, but like my wife said, the
>
> > only reason to get HD is for the sports.
> >
> > OKAY THESE ARE SIMPLY MY OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS. NOW I
>
> > TURN TO YOU, THE BRILLIANT POSTERS AND TV FANS ON THIS
> > BOARD.
> >
> > What do you guys suggest are the best options for someone
> > who IS knowledgable about HD, but dissapointed in what's
> > available? How long do we have to wait? Anything good
> > coming down the pike?
> >
> > Please Help!!!!
>
> Despite the ventings of techno-geeks who say that HDTV still
> isn't
> cutting edge...well, the technology isn't, but the adaption
> of it is.
> As a result, commercial TV stations aren't making hardly
> money from
> it. ABC isn't, NBC is off of WeatherPlus (hey, they do
> better than
> Storm Stories and were live throughout hurricane Dennis!),
> and few people
> are donating to PBS HD at the moment.
>
> Up until this year, there weren't many subscibers. Now, as
> of July 1, all mid-large size TV's MUST have digital
> tuners...and most TV's sold from next year
> on out should be high-def.
>
> All this to say that the audience and demand for HD has been
> small, so most
> programs have been in upconverted SD. But, the costs are
> crashing, though still high, and so more and more programs
> will be produced in HD. Also, more
> stations will start to broadcast in HD. WCIU will have HD by
> spring;
> The Weather Channel and other channels have sent word that
> they will roll out
> HD in the not-too-distant future, likely in 2006-2007.
> That's when I think
> the BIG HD production push happens, just before analog
> shutdown.
>
> Granted, the big draws for HD are sports and concerts/live
> events. THAT
> will continue to be more and more in HD. Ditto for movies. A
> widescreen
> DVD being played in department stores is NOT HD! It's better
> than analog
> by a mile, but it still isn't HD.
>
> As for getting HD: HD will ALWAYS be best via over-the-air
> antenna.
> Period. Comcast, satellite TV providers and all others
> compress the HD
> content to some extent. DirecTV has really ticked off
> subscribers by
> doing this. Over-the-air, you get full resolution, without
> filters
> or a middleman for things to go wrong. Barring that, Comcast
> has more
> bandwidth than satellite does...so more channels should be
> available
> than with satellite until DirecTV launches their HD
> satellites.
>
> Your observations with my comments:
>
> >CBS - other than a few prime time shows, very disapointing.
> They had
> > Golf on yesterday in HD (I think) but it was in 4:3 with
> bars on the
> > side.
>
> When you see the bars, it's upconverted. But CBS, IMO, has
> the best HD,
> with FOX coming darn close and NBC doing a good job.
> ABC...varies but
> sometimes it is not good.
>
> HD cameras are big and bulky right now, and too expensive to
> risk being
> damaged or destroyed in a car wreck. Thus, no in-car HD cams
> on NASCAR
> broadcasts. That's what you saw.
>
> > WTTW and Discovery HD Theatre: THE BEST non-sports
> programming, great
> > picture and sound.
>
> Haven't watched enough Discovery HD to say that's always
> true, but
> when I have seen it, it's great. PBS Milwaukee does a bit
> better job
> with an HD picture, for some reason. But still, it IS
> awesome!
>
> >ESPN HD: Sportscenter, baseball, graffixx package might be
> the best
> >around.
>
> That's what happens when you have money coming out of your
> ears. You can
> do a phenomenal job!
>
> So, if you like movies, sports and concerts, HD *is* the way
> to go. If
> you like news and weather and don't watch sports, I suggest
> you call World Vision, or your church, or whatever you go
> with can use the money to help starving families for now.
> I'd do that anyway, but it would be unwise to
> get HD just for that, even if the shows are in HD.
>
> Gilbert
>
Well, here's my opinion. Don't base your choices on suumer TV schedules. Much less Good HD programming in summer than there will be in the fall. That being said, you have to decide what programming is important to you to decide you your provider should be. I've been a Dish Network subscriber since 1998, but they were late to the game in adding Comcast Sportsnet & that is my #1 required channel. So, this winter I switched the bulk of my service to Comcast. I kept Dish for their HD programming, superstations & Distant Nets that I am Grandfathered for. This way I get both HD Net's & both INHD's, along with ESPNHD, TNTHD, DiscoveryHD, HBOHD, & the 4 major OTA Nets. I also get 17 OTA channels from Chicago & Milwaukee. Sports are by far the best HD programming quality along with nature type shows. Sitcoms and "set" shows are the least IMO. I have a 42" Plasma & a 34" Panasonic tube HD.
 
Thanks to all you guys for the great insight! I guess it's just a matter of waiting for DirecTV to improve their HD operation and spending the $ on a nice antennae!

Thanks for making me optimistic about this wonderful technology again.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom