Any time they showed the fans waving the white towels, all I could see was a sea of red and white blocks.

It isn't HD, and I'm calling Shawdy again this week to tell them that.

jfplay: There's no question some have it worse than others. As a result, it's a little condescending to conclude that anyone not complaining just isn't looking or paying attention. Some might actually have decent picture.

FWIW, I've noticed more macroblocking in the last few months than we did before. Used to be just on logo sweeps and the like. Not happy with that change. Still, I haven't had anywhere near as bad as Mozza. Or merve04 (who is in Edmonton too, so it's not solely a city by city thing).

Anyway, just trying to say we should avoid denigrating those that are happy with their HDTV.

I can recognize macroblocking when I see it and I'm not saying I don't get it from time to time. Its rare and usally when the camera pans very quickly.

I was under the impression that Telus only offered digital tv not HD.

As already mentioned, very select areas. From what I understand, the package basically allows no more than the following:
- a single HD channel
- a single SD channel
- DSL Internet (can't recall the download speed)

Constraint is the bandwidth of a phone line, so that's not per receiver. Still, quite astounding they can even manage that over a phone line really.

Considering the method, they don't need to squeeze 3 per QAM or anything. Consequently, channel quality could be better than Shaw. All depends on how they receive the broadcast, and probably on how good they can make your Internet connection (as we know with DSL, it's all based on distance...).

Obviously that also means that watching one HD channel and recording another HD channel is only possible if Telus houses the recordings for you.

I'd be curious what delay, if any, there is when changing channels. Is it better than VOD with Shaw?

Bottom line though, picture quality may be better than Shaw. Competition is a good thing!

I'm guessing that Nanook is lucky and that for some reason, his area is getting trouble-free service. Although it is not a 'new' area of the city, it might just be he is lucky enough to be on a node that isn't affected by the issues the rest of us are. I don't know how else to explain it since I have proof of the problems at both North and South ends of the city in homes that are less than 5 years old (you would assume the cabling in the new areas is up to snuff).
Just to add to the North/South thing in Calgary, I live downtown in Cowtown and my HD has been terrible since before Christmas. No change since then - severe macroblocking on most HD stations.

jfplay: There's no question some have it worse than others. As a result, it's a little condescending to conclude that anyone not complaining just isn't looking or paying attention. Some might actually have decent picture.

FWIW, I've noticed more macroblocking in the last few months than we did before. Used to be just on logo sweeps and the like. Not happy with that change. Still, I haven't had anywhere near as bad as Mozza. Or merve04 (who is in Edmonton too, so it's not solely a city by city thing).

Anyway, just trying to say we should avoid denigrating those that are happy with their HDTV.
I didn't mean Nanuck in partcicular, the question was posed about why more people in general don't complain...it's because the population at large doesn't pay that close attention or doesn't have the knowledge base to know they're getting a subpar signal.

Look at that study from a few months ago that reported 65% of people that had HD sets weren't subscribing to HD service...and they still thought that crappy stretched 4:3 image they were getting was HD!

Here's how awful TSN has been for me in the last couple of weeks.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v405/jfplay/Firstround003.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v405/jfplay/Firstround001.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v405/jfplay/Firstround010.jpg

The last two pics are SLOW FREAKING MOTION!!!!

Maybe my DVR needs to be reset. :mad:

Found this little article from Audioholics yesterday talking the similar problem that US viewers are having from their providers:

http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/comcast-compresses-hd-no-one-shocked

Note on those three pictures above: the two hockey ones show exactly the type of quality I'm getting on ALL of my HD channels. Note the consistent blocking. On a perfectly static image (say, a frozen picture or "talking heads"), the image quality is impeccable. As soon as any sort of movement or colour change or scene change takes place, I get blocking like above.

Pay attention to the first image (of an identified Philly Flyers player and the fans). The TSN info bar looks like it's fine, but the picture is f-ed up. Shaw uses that as "proof" that it's a source issue.

Watching HD at a co-workers house last weekend who subcribes to BEV, there was little to no macroblocking during any hockey game. TSN info bar excuse = Shawdy excuse.

I'm getting a tech to come out next week to witness.

Pay attention to the first image (of an identified Philly Flyers player and the fans). The TSN info bar looks like it's fine, but the picture is f-ed up. Shaw uses that as "proof" that it's a source issue.

TSN info bar excuse = Shawdy excuse.I'm glad you didn't fall for their "proof" of it being a source issue. That's just the way MPEG-2 compression works... if part of an image is relatively static, it will stay cleaner even while motion around it gets blocky. That is true of the original source compression AND of any extra compression added by Shaw, so that proves nothing.

Note on those three pictures above: the two hockey ones show exactly the type of quality I'm getting on ALL of my HD channels. Note the consistent blocking. On a perfectly static image (say, a frozen picture or "talking heads"), the image quality is impeccable. As soon as any sort of movement or colour change or scene change takes place, I get blocking like above.

Pay attention to the first image (of an identified Philly Flyers player and the fans). The TSN info bar looks like it's fine, but the picture is f-ed up. Shaw uses that as "proof" that it's a source issue.

Watching HD at a co-workers house last weekend who subcribes to BEV, there was little to no macroblocking during any hockey game. TSN info bar excuse = Shawdy excuse.

I'm getting a tech to come out next week to witness.
Good luck with that. Maybe your tech will tell you your quality is the worst he's ever seen, promise to look into it and then not do a thing.

Not that that's happened to me or anything :)

I'm emailing Shawdy right now, and I'm including links to these images as "proof" their signal is flawed.

I sent in some images and they said it was a signal issue and wanted to send a tech out. It is frusterating when they refuse to acknowledge a problem.

I'm emailing Shawdy right now, and I'm including links to these images as "proof" their signal is flawed.
I'm sure it's just my TV...both of them.

why would they acknowledge it? For the vast majority of consumers 'hd lite' is good enough, so it makes more business sense to compress everything as much as possible and provide more channels and deal with the small amount of people that complain about quality as needed.

In the US it's the same thing, hd-lite everywhere but on FIOS, but it's not like FIOS is available everywhere anyways.

Discovery HD is running "Earth - The Power of the Planet". Some months ago, I downloaded this in h.264. Er - the downloaded file looks way better than the HD cable version. The cable picture macroblocks far too much.

I realize that Shaw is adding channels this week and may have some startup issues.

Aside from the issues listed above, has anyone else noticed a decrease in PQ since the new HD channels have been added? I'm not talking about macro blocking/pixellation, I'm talking about picture not being as vivid/clear/etc. as it was. Prior to the new channels, TSN's Sportscentre PQ was awesome. Last night it was far less than awesome. Is there a way to tell what format Shaw is transmitting channels, IE. in 720p or 1080i? I'm just wondering if they are pulling BEV's trick of not transmitting channels in the same format that the source is transmitted (IE. if the source is 1080i, instead of transmitting it in 1080i, they are now transmitting in 720p)?

I'm glad you didn't fall for their "proof" of it being a source issue. That's just the way MPEG-2 compression works... if part of an image is relatively static, it will stay cleaner even while motion around it gets blocky. That is true of the original source compression AND of any extra compression added by Shaw, so that proves nothing.
I dont buy that its a Mpeg-2 limitation. Yes Mpeg-2 wasnt exactly designed for HD unless you got a huge pipe to feed the data,, but I'm back with Bell and its Day\Night difference between Bell and Shaw HD and Bell is using Mpeg-2 just like Shaw. I am excited to say what Mpeg-4 will be,, i know its a couple more years,, but its worth the wait in this case.

Aside from the issues listed above, has anyone else noticed a decrease in PQ since the new HD channels have been added? I'm not talking about macro blocking/pixellation, I'm talking about picture not being as vivid/clear/etc. as it was. Prior to the new channels, TSN's Sportscentre PQ was awesome. Last night it was far less than awesome. Is there a way to tell what format Shaw is transmitting channels, IE. in 720p or 1080i? I'm just wondering if they are pulling BEV's trick of not transmitting channels in the same format that the source is transmitted (IE. if the source is 1080i, instead of transmitting it in 1080i, they are now transmitting in 720p)?
I thought the exact same thing.

Discovery looks much more washed out than normal.

Shaw took big turn today all my SD channels are macroblocking and poor quality and pixelating at times. They are really compressing and limiting the bandwith the heck out of the SD ones now too bad!
I had talk to Shaw they are trying to squeeze more channnels in. Many cutsomers are not happy about the perfomance of there system.

Vancouver