Dish HDTV picture quality?

[Loves2Watch]

Originally Posted by nittfan

Thank you VideoMonster for the useful information. I do, of course understand that with a larger screen the image is stretched. I guess the SD broadcasts were meant for that small box t.v. that is becoming a relic. Anyway, my biggest issue is the diminished picture quality on my smaller (42") 2007 Panasonic which is located in the same place as it always was - the only difference is it is now hooked up to a VIP 612 receiver/DVR. When it was hooked up to an old (600?) SD receiver/DVR I had a beautiful picture. Now that it is capable of playing SD and HD, only the HD looks good; SD looks like crap! In both instances (with the old SD receiver and now with my new 612 receiver) the picture still had to be stretched to fit my 42" screen, right? But now with the only difference in this t.v. being the HD receiver, the picture is much, much worse when I try to view SD channels. Maybe I am in a small minority of people who bought a very good HDTV set but did not immediately upgrade to HD programing? My square box t.v. died, so I saved up and bought myself a widescreen, HDTV. I continued to view SD broadcast on an plasma that is/was HDTV capable, and I thought it looked pretty darn sharp! I did not rush into HD programming because I was not too thrilled with the limited channel line-up. So, then my old receiver started having issues, and I thought well maybe it's time to upgrade to an HD receiver/programming. Now I know why so many posters use the tag "how can anyone watch SD" - because once you switch out to an HD receiver your SD pictures are worse. This is a fact in my house .............. I am not imagining this. My 3 year old, SD Dish Network receiver/DVR delivered a picture with such beautiful clarity that most people asked us if we had HD. Now, on that same 42" t.v. (with HDMI cables and proper calibration) the SD programs are almost unbearable to watch .............. blurry, soft edges, and blotchy skin on facial close-ups! The only change here was the receiver!

Our 50" plasma has even worse SD picture quality, and I do understand that part of this is the size of the screen and the viewing distance. But, the signal strength needs improved (from the mouth of the Dish tech, not me). I am encouraged to know that there are indeed more HD channels coming soon, and my locals will be HD in February. In the meantime, I will try to make sure that both the sat box and t.v. are not set to 1080i; not sure how to do this on the t.v., but I will try.

To Oljim - I do not know why there is so much mis-information out there regarding the satellites and the "proper" hook-ups of the dish(es) themselves. I do know that the 2nd Dish tech told me he was a supervisor who works directly for DISH, and he covers a large service area; that was why he could not guarantee that he would be the one to come back. I suspect that the first installation guy, however nice he was, is either a "sub-contractor" for DISH or has not done installations for long. The second Dish guy told me that the 3rd satellite that was locked in - the 119 satellite - was not used much anymore for HD. Maybe he meant for the maximum amount of channels for the "platinum" package .............? Who knows. I do know that he showed me that the signal strength was low. I do know that the dish that they replaced my Dish 500 with is noticeably smaller and he put it on an extender rod. This in itself was puzzling to me, because we live in a very rural area and have a totally clear "line of site" in the sky.

I, like the rest of you, will be clamouring for more HD channels!

Thank you again.

Bonnie

If you are getting your locals from Dish they will be the same after Feb. The analog cutoff has nothing to do with cable and/or satellite providers.

Also note. In Feb the analog stations will be turned off and the majority of locals received via an antenna will be digital not necessarily HD, just digital. It is NOT a HD switch.

[jim5506]

SD locals through satellite will be poorer picture quality because they compress the hell out of the digital stream to cram as many channels on a TP as they can - result - crappy picture, and it is not getting better.

[nittfan]

So, whats a body to do ..........................?

[nittfan]

Are the "national feeds" for ABC, CBS, NBC, etc. HD from Dish Network. I was pretty certain the Dish tech guy told me my locals were going to be HD beginning in February. And, yes I know that the analogs are going off the air and digital signals will be in there place; they have been hammering the airways around here about converter boxes. I know that digital and HD are not the same, and several of our locals are already digital.

Bonnie

[Loves2Watch]

Originally Posted by nittfan

Are the "national feeds" for ABC, CBS, NBC, etc. HD from Dish Network. I was pretty certain the Dish tech guy told me my locals were going to be HD beginning in February. And, yes I know that the analogs are going off the air and digital signals will be in there place; they have been hammering the airways around here about converter boxes. I know that digital and HD are not the same, and several of our locals are already digital.

Bonnie

It depends on your particular market. The only way to know for sure is to contact Dish. Since they don't offer HD locals in my market, I use an antena which works very well, in fact better then what Dish could provide.

[bigbeer]

The big 4 networks have been digital for years. Most of the lower wattage locals aren't. Whether it's HD or not is more of a show-to-show issue per network. I personally cannot understand why NBC doesn't put 'Deal or No Deal' on in HD. There's some potentially high quality HD content on that show, if you know what I mean.

[highdefjeff]

Originally Posted by nittfan

Thanks for the link highdefjeff; it looks very informative! Like I said, I am new at this HDTV stuff, and I am not of the younger, "techie" generation. Prior to my purchasing the newest plasma I did get calibration specs from several on line sites, primarily plasmabuyingguide. I used these guidelines to configured the brightness, sharpness, color, and tint according to their recommendations. {If generalized recommendations were good to use, there wouldn't be any need for calibrationists. Ambient light is needed to get things right. Even the included additional settings (movie, sports, etc) aren't correct though offer some improvement over "Vivid" or "Dynamic".} We usually view on "standard" picture mode and our main viewing seats are approx. 4.5 to a little over 5 feet from the 50" t.v. {First, the minimum suggested viewing distance for a 50" TV is just over 6 feet. Second, take a look at the complexions of the people on the screen. Do the men's lips look red? Do the people look sunburned, or are you easily able to distinguish the differences in skin color, nationality, etc.? Can you see the "fair skinned" redhead vs. the tanned model and ethnic individual? If you have accurate skin tones (men's lips should NOT be red and there shouldn't be a "sunburn" look) then your color calibration will be correct and can be called "done". Also check the Food channels-good closeups on food, and food like complexion, either looks right or not. I also like to check the channels that provide nature as the subject. We know what "outside" looks like for good comparison, also. To check these, avoid commercials, compare multiple HD channels and don't adjust for the single "worst" channel. Always make a small correction and then surf the channels again. There will always be a channel or two that still has too much red push-all content is not the same. GENERALLY, the contrast should be between 50 and 60, sharpness should be mid-scale to completely off, color is the cause of the red and is usually reduced by several "clicks" from center scale, and I usually need to increase tint just a little to bring the skin tones into true color. I have used the Spyder Pro calibration equipment, but I always had to "tweak" out some red afterwards, anyway. I have also witnessed "professionally" calibrated TVs in some upscale showrooms and, unfortunately, they all looked different and no better than other places. I no longer use anything but my eye.

Regarding the dish/receiver installation, we did have another (much more knowledgeable installation tech from DISH network) come to the house yesterday. He was able to determine within a minute or so that the installation was done improperly. He said the guy who switched out our dish 500 itself had one of the wrong satellites for HD locked in. Here's what happened to the best of my understanding. When the original installation guy came he admitted to having problems with the installation - "the signals are bouncing all over the place". He told me he "originally was going to install two dishes, but because of the roof line and the way you had your existing dish mounted I didn't think you would want me to mess with your roof. I decided to go with one". The real determing factor though, I believe, is the fact that he was actually finishing up on the roof by flashlite in the dark, in a light rain and temps around 38F. I personally think he only had so much time to get the job done, he knew this, and he went with what would get him finished sooner and get him home to dinner.

The tech who showed up on Friday said that the original installation guy "probably should have installed two Dish 500's". He said the current configuration is a small dish that is currently tuned to satellite 61.5 for high def instead of satellite 119. He told me that the (current) small dish is not able to pull in all of the high def stations by itself, and that the first guy should have known that satellite 61.5 is the "older satellite" and "we usually don't use that one anymore". He attributed this to be the reason we weren't getting all the HD channels and the less than great picture. They are sending yet another person next Tues to install either two Dish 500's or a seperate piece of equipment that will handle the problem. I do not know what this other piece of equipment is. Anyway, during his diagnostics he showed me the signal strength was either missing for some channels or weak (in the 40's to 60's) for the HD channels. He said this was responsible for the pixeling and fuzzy picture. {He was correct.}

What I still do not understand is why this (pixeling or total loss of picture and then "reaquiring satellites") would happen on just the one t.v. We started running the two t.v.'s at once on the same exact channels for diagnostic purposes and on occasion just the one t.v. would cut out. (We can easily see the other t.v. in an adjacent room). {Do both TVs run off the 612? How are they connected?}

Also, could someone please tell me why with my new VIP612 receivers I have to choose "stretch" or "partial zoom" to view SD channels full screen? Is it because these new receivers are really designed with a preference or whatever for HD? My old SD receiver (600?) displayed a crystal clear, full screen picture on my 42", 720p plasma. {The older SD receivers could only output one type of material that was scaled for one type of TV. If you were to change your settings to 480 and connect with RCA cables, you might find the same situation, but you'd lose the good stuff. The newer HD equipment now takes into account that there are several formats that are being broadcast. To be able to view them accurately often requires a format change.} After I originally set the format I never had to set it again; it just always displayed full screen. Now SD channels are far from sharp because if I want to watch a clear picture I have to have it set on standard format with the very distracting gray bars on the sides; to me it is not an acceptable or enjoyable way to view a program! {You just must choose to accept sidebars and clearer picture or full screen and distorted picture. }

So far with my experience I would have to say that our prior SD programming on a very good quality plasma display was preferable. At least I had all of our channels in excellent quality. Now I have HD channels (but not enough of them to make it "worth it") that are sharp and clear but at the expense or compromise of viewing poor quality SD. Of course the premiums are in HD but this just makes the monthly cost exorbinant. DISH has offered me the "platinum" HD programming free for 3 months due to their errors in installation and the fact that I have been missing programming for almost a month. But, this is just to get me "hooked" so I continue on with the more expensive platinum package. I am sure that they are aware that customers do not want to watch the poor quality SD channels once they have experienced HD. I can't be the only one ................!

My "locals" are supposed to go HD next month I believe and this will be great. And, I understand that within the next month or so there are going to be more channels available in HD ................ is this correct? This was my main reason for NOT going HD sooner; not enough programming that I would find worth viewing to off-set the costs. And, I did NOT know that my SD channels would be much worse with these new receivers.

Thanks to anyone who responds, and I will give you an progress report on the dish setup itself if anyone is interested.

Bonnie

Most of your answers are above. Do you have an OTA antenna hooked up?

[highdefjeff]

Just came across this today:

"Our initial research indicates that for each display type viewing quality improves with bit rate. {Bit rate is affected by signal strength and quality. Highdef Jeff} And the rate of improvement grows for more advanced displays and larger screens," Bocko said. In repeated testing, a "just-noticeable difference" in viewing quality, measured in "luma" (a representation of a video image signal brightness) increases as the data transmission rate increases, he added." {Data transmission rate is also influenced by signal strength/quality. Slow data causes can be as simple as a poorly installed cable connector with a braid strand touching or near the needle. Highdef Jeff} http://www.videsignline.com/showArti...59&cid=NL_vidl

In a world where an estimated 18% (7.2 million) HDTV owners "think" they are watching HDTV (when in reality they are watching SDTV unaware) we have barely seen the tip of the iceberg of confusion and picture quality.
http://www.leichtmanresearch.com/pre...08release.html

When over seven million households haven't even grasped that they aren't watching HDTV, discussions of picture quality are in their infancy. They are heavily leaning to connections, providers, settings, and calibration. Any one of these mentioned items can/will produce a higher quality picture and satisfy the average user.

But some of those with a discerning eye who are watching HDTV know what they are looking for and aren't seeing it. They want to know why their HDTV doesn't have the clarity that they expect even after doing their research. They are using the right cables, the appropriate settings on their TVs and receivers, calibrating their TVs and when all is said and done, they wonder why there still isn't the clarity they were seeking.

Many posters who know little or nothing of this new technology, come to the conclusion that the only thing lacking in their system is signal strength. When they ask about it, they are shot down by nearly everyone, especially by anyone in the satellite industry. We've believed the broad generalization of the digital picture "all-or-nothing" (which is mostly true) as LAW instead of a general overview "sold" to the public to expound the greatness of digital systems.

Because of the greatest digital myth, "Digital picture is all-or-nothing" and "Digital picture is perfect and doesn't vary" the picture quality discussions move to the subject of compression. Compression does make some variations in content, but it is mistakenly blamed for poor picture quality because there seems nothing else to blame. At a loss to explain a still compromised digital picture, compression is cursed as the "bad guy" and thrown around as the catch-all for anyone still not satisfied by their picture quality. Unfortunately, taking frustrations out on providers because of their compression rates, may give you a direction to vent, but does nothing for your picture.

The bottom line is this:
If you've done everything else and your picture still looks poor, maximize the signal. If the signal IS maximized according to the point of the dish, check connections and cables for breaks, damage, tightness, and make sure that your system is grounded CORRECTLY.

[nittfan]

High Jeff. Thanks so much for all the time and effort you put into this reply. To answer a few of your questions:

What I still do not understand is why this (pixeling or total loss of picture and then "reaquiring satellites") would happen on just the one t.v. We started running the two t.v.'s at once on the same exact channels for diagnostic purposes and on occasion just the one t.v. would cut out. (We can easily see the other t.v. in an adjacent room).

{Do both TVs run off the 612? How are they connected? -

I have 2 separate VIP612 receivers. I wanted to have the ability to run HD on both t.v.'s at the same time if I wanted to. So, there is a separate receiver for each t.v.

{The older SD receivers could only output one type of material that was scaled for one type of TV. If you were to change your settings to 480 and connect with RCA cables, you might find the same situation, but you'd lose the good stuff. The newer HD equipment now takes into account that there are several formats that are being broadcast. To be able to view them accurately often requires a format change.}

This is what I was wondering - I figured the old receivers were designed for only one type of format (SD). But what "they" don't tell you is that the newer generation receivers do a crappy job of displaying SD. The old ones did quite a good job; in fact my former SD picture on my HD capable t.v. looked much better than my brother's supposed HD broadcast with cox.net. He does not have the "discerning eye" you talk about.

{The older SD receivers could only output one type of material that was scaled for one type of TV. If you were to change your settings to 480 and connect with RCA cables, you might find the same situation, but you'd lose the good stuff. The newer HD equipment now takes into account that there are several formats that are being broadcast. To be able to view them accurately often requires a format change.}

My 2007 Panasonic is a 780p I believe. It ran off of the Dish Network (3 year old) SD receiver. It had a great picture! So, now if I want to be totally anal about this, if I want to I can also hook up RCA cables and whenever I want to view SD I can view it by choosing the RCA hook-up but then I must change my settings each time back to 780p? Whew!!!!!!!!!

Do you have an OTA antenna hooked up?

Yes, we have the antenna and the wiring; it just has not been hooked up for a few years. We live in a quite rural area and it is over 40 miles from where my locals are broadcast from - thru mountains, etc. So, we never had a very good OTA signal, esp. with windy or snowy conditions. I have this bizarre TERK, rabbit ear, indoor antenna thing that I run another old t.v. off. It has to be "zoned in" for each particular local and really does not do a great job. I am thinking of going back to national feeds for the major networks, and then I can use this TERK or our rooftop antenna for our local news reports.

We had to cancel the DISH installation correction yet again. We live in the NE, their is still snow on our roof, and the next few days they are predicting temps. in the single digits and less! Can't expect the DISH person to kill him/herself!

Thank you again.

Bonnie

[highdefjeff]

Thank you for the additional information!

The answer as to why one pixilates and not the other, has a couple of possibilities. May I have some more info, please?

A comparison of the signal strengths on the two units (same channel like you did, but instead of looking at the picture for comparison, compare the signal strengths) will provide crucial information about your system. Let me know how much the two differ. Since the SD is your largest concern with its blurry, blotchy picture, what is your signal strength on satellite 119, transponder 11, for both units? What is your signal strength for 110, transponder 11, for both?

Since you are using two "identical" units, their signal meters should read very similar signal strengths. (This does not hold true for unlike receivers.) It is premature to develop any conclusions without this information.

Possible causes and a troubleshooting exercise:

Cable quality - specifically, the cables and connections to the one that malfunctions (You do mention that you replaced a three year old receiver, so your installation is at least 3 years old, right? I suspect poor cables or connectors in addition to possible low signal.)

Receiver sensitivity or defect - while they are identical units, there will always be a slight difference in the signal quality meters. The amount of difference may provide some insight...I'll go ahead and say that it is unlikely that your unit is defective. The amount of "problem" you describe suggests low signal strength and/or quality.

To check whether it is a cable problem or a receiver problem, switch the places of the units. If the problem follows the receiver, it is a receiver problem. If the problem stays in the same room, it is a cable or connection problem.

In regards to your comment, "But what "they" don't tell you is that the newer generation receivers do a crappy job of displaying SD." Not true. This is another HDTV myth. Yup. Read all you want and you will hear people saying the same thing everywhere.

Here is the truth:

Newer generation digital receivers and televisions do such a great job of displaying the input signal for SD (or HD) picture, that everything that is out of adjustment shows up clearly as compromised picture. They very accurately display the digital picture according to the signal quality (garbage-in, garbage-out) and the quality of the television's calibration. Every piece of technology that needs a consistent result is calibrated. A simple scale for determining weight is a good example. Electronic or not, scales must be calibrated to weigh accurately. If the scale is not "zero-ed" or balanced without any weight on it first, then your resulting measurement will be off. Calibration of the scale insures accurate results. HDTVs also need to be properly calibrated. With HDTV though, the result is not so easily checked as with a measure of weight. Weight is an absolute quantity, where picture quality is not so easily defined.

The unfortunate part of it all is the amount of user input and knowledge that is required to get the proper results out of this new high-tech equipment. It is truly beyond the average user to maximize their own systems.

I have only encountered 2 (yes just 2) systems that were "maxed" in regards to connections, settings, signal strength, etc. - and both of them still exclaimed "WOW" after a little calibration.

Many people tell me that "Oh, the picture is fine" when I ask for the TV's remote to access the user settings. They are fearful that I might mess things up. I ask them to bear with me just a little while and if they don't like what they see, I'll put it back the way it was...

I've NEVER been asked to undo the changes, always get a "WOW" or similar exclamation, and then they ask me to "do that" to their other TV(s), or send me to a friend or relative.

[nittfan]

Hello again Jeff. My newer t.v. has not done the pixeling lately, nor has it lost the signal altogether. I think it may have been the weather (snow & sleet) that caused it on those two occasions, plus the fact that the DISH tech said I had a weak signal somewhere. I just thought it odd for it to happen on just one t.v.

Regarding your question:

A comparison of the signal strengths on the two units (same channel like you did, but instead of looking at the picture for comparison, compare the signal strengths) will provide crucial information about your system. Let me know how much the two differ. Since the SD is your largest concern with its blurry, blotchy picture, what is your signal strength on satellite 119, transponder 11, for both units? What is your signal strength for 110, transponder 11, for both?

I don't know how to get to the transponder #'s you ask for. I know how to get to the screen with the satellite #'s, and they just all show green. At the top of this screen it says "good". When the (2nd) DISH tech came last week he only tested the t.v. that I told him had the poorest picture, and the one that was occasionally cutting out; after he did his analysis on this receiver he didn't bother with the other t.v. and receiver. Anyway, maybe this is all a waste of time until I we finally can get a DISH tech up on the roof again, as he definitely said our installation was done incorrectly and that was responsible in large part, to our poor SD reception. We had to cancel due to snow/ice on the roof and bitter cold!

Also, regarding your question about cables, the actual wiring coming into the house from the dish is years old; we have been DISH network subscribers for at least 7 years and to my knowledge these are "original equipment". This IS, in fact the wiring that goes to the t.v. (larger one - 50") which I feel has the poorer picture quallity. The cables from the 612 receivers to the t.v.'s are brand new on both t.v.'s and are HDMI cables. What is an LNBF(?) and do they switch these out when they install a new dish or receiver or could I have one of those that is 7-8 years old too?!

Regarding your statement:

Newer generation digital receivers and televisions do such a great job of displaying the input signal for SD (or HD) picture, that everything that is out of adjustment shows up clearly as compromised picture. They very accurately display the digital picture according to the signal quality (garbage-in, garbage-out) and the quality of the television's calibration.

This gives me hope that I will receive excellent SD picture quality when this is all said and done. As I have mentioned many times in this thread the OLD receiver with the same t.v. had beautiful SD. I was afraid that maybe the newer generation HD receiver had a definite bias for HD only and I would have to just get used to nasty SD picture quality.

One other thing: You had asked me previously about viewing distance and I told you I thought maybe about 5 feet - actually my chair is located at 9 feet, dead center, and where my husband sits is 7.5 feet and approx. 30 deg. angle.

Thank you again.

Bonnie