There is another thread discussing the PQ on last nights Ott-Pit game. It was NOT HD (it was widescreen SD). You could easily see the difference during the intermissions when they were broadcasting from the studio. I watched half the game on a Rogers and half on BEV. It was exactly the same (poor) quality.

Like so many things to do with Rogers, it has likely been delayed.

Indeed.

However, the reason that I started monitoring so quick is that your article gave an Apr 9 date for the start of this compression and there is nothing in post 115 that speaks to a confirmed delay in the start.

Now, like I said above, unless this was only for Ontario, they are not compressing things yet.

I will continue to watch the file sizes for the next few weeks and as soon as I see something change, I will report it back here.

However, the reason that I started monitoring so quick is that your article gave an Apr 9 date for the start of this compression and there is nothing in post 115 that speaks to a confirmed delay in the start.Well that's a normal thing to do. That way, if a lot of complaints are generated, then you can ignore any of the people who have complained before compression is actually started.

I do something similiar when running a well pumping test. We tell everyone we are going to start pumping a couple of days before we actually do. Then all the complaints we receive about neighbours' wells being dry before we actually start, can be ignored, and we don't have to follow-up with the Ministry of the Environment on them.

However, the reason that I started monitoring so quick is that your article gave an Apr 9 date for the start of this compression

And April 9th was the date given but again, like in life, often things get delayed. The note from Rogers was a note from Network Ops so the fact that it has been pushed back could be for arcane technical reasons or maybe our story got them thinking maybe they should do a bit more testing just in case!

or maybe our story got them thinking maybe they should do a bit more testing just in case!

We can hope!!!

Power to the people!!!

:p

I hope Rogers is planning on compression as a temporary measure, until SDV is here.Interestingly, there was a comment in today's Globe and Mail that "Rogers said yesterday that it will offer the two (SuperChannel) HD channels once it introduces switch-digital technology that opens up more space" (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080410.wrsuper10/BNStory/Technology/home). No timeframe though.

Well that's good news to me but if it is at the expense of a noticeable PQ decrease on HDNet and Discovery HD then I won't be happy.

I find it quite amusing that (some) people talk about the PQ on a hockey game that is not HD and on a channel that is not scheduled to be affected by the compression.

Indeed.

I looked at my face in the mirror just now and it was all blocky! They must have started compressing the mirror's reflection. Damn that Rogers!

Some people may have missed the channel list, I nearly did but then recalled there was a list of affected channels earlier in the thread.

Dont mess with hockey is the theme but a lack of HD trucks, or unwillingness to rent more is the problem and not this Rogers compression issue.

Okay Acadian, you're seeing compression artifacts even though they haven't started the compression yet. That's pretty impressive!


I never said i saw compression artifacts. Stop being so sensitive. I said i disagree with you and i meant in you saying "people seeing what they want to see". I added to the conversation saying I ALSO saw it. The OTT vs PIT game was transmitted on a HD channel, same one as the SJ vs CAL game. The PIT-OTT game was poor quality (which my dad who knows nothing about HD also noticed). I also stated, i doubt it has anything to do with the whole compression thing and that it was probably the source, but i didn't compare.

Good lord man, then why are you posting in this thread which is about Rogers compressing signals?

For the same reason you said "people see what they want to see"...

You just told the guy and i said no man, i saw it too. At least the guy (or few of them) know they aren't the only ones who saw a crappy HD feed last night and it wasn't all their imagination, as some would believe.

Anyway, delete my posts, do whatever you want man, it's your site.

Cheers!

So glad I ran into this thread, as I was contemplating switching over from BEV to Rogers.
Anyway, I could only skim read a few pages but it seems to me that Rogers has not yet began to compress the signal, right? Although some are stating the opposite!
Well, if they are, or will be doing this, it is too bad.... now they are no better than BEV, *C,

I am sorry to hear that guys.... truly sorry.

Paul

Paul, the update:

Network Operations at Rogers says it will begin compressing using statistical multiplexing
The Original date to begin muxing on selected channels was April 9th
As of April 10th, Compression has NOT yet begun for unknown reasons

Perhaps they had someone more professional than the average tech at Rogers come in to do a before-after comparison of picture quality before letting it go live and were told that there really is a noticeable difference...

Confession, I worked for a while at Rogers long ago.

I was told Network Operations never got anything done on time. I suspect this will happen soon.

As 57 mentioned (post 118) there is a way to check how many HD signals are using the same QAM.
For SA or Pace STBs see http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?p=729349#post729349

If it is 2 HD per QAM then it probably isn't being re-compressed. If it is 3 HD per QAM then Rogers has started the additional compression on those HD stations.

que3jxp, you're on a Motorola STB so you'll need to use the power-off/Enter method to get to the diagnostics section.

que3jxp, you're on a Motorola STB so you'll need to use the power-off/Enter method to get to the diagnostics section.

Ya, 57 and I went through this a couple years ago when I was noticing different sizes of HD recordings. That time, it turned out simply to be the case that some shows are not as high a quality from the originating station.

Very few of the HD channels in NB were set with 3 on one QAM. I have a spreadsheet at home that I made from the results.

That time, it turned out simply to be the case that some shows are not as high a quality from the originating station.

Actually, having read the wiki on StatMultiplexing an hour ago, it is these kinds of situations that could be taken advantage of. Automatic reallocation of bandwidth from a feed that does not need it to one that does.

If anything, these kinds of, shall we say, "load balancing" should allow for 3 HD on one QAM in a way that will not kill quality much, if at all (Perceptably).

My concern is if aggressive compression is added to coax the three HD feeds on the one QAM.