In news that is sure to instill anger among Canadian high definition television lovers, Digital Home Canada has learned that effective April 9th, Rogers Cable will begin compressing the high definition (HD) television signals it sends out to its Rogers Personal TV customers. (http://www.digitalhome.ca/content/view/2426/206/)

It's bad to hear about this, but it's good to hear about statistical multiplexing being used by Rogers. Apparently in testing, people could rarely see the difference due to the 3 vs 2 channels.

It'll be interesting to see how much we do notice and it certainly won't be as bad as simply splitting the QAM in three with no "shaping".

Advantages? More recording room on your PVR, but that's something I'd gladly give up for more bandwidth.

Can't wait for Rogers to free up some bandwidth by shifting a few analogue channels into the digital tier, and for them to use SDV (switched digital video) discussed elsewhere in the forum.

Wow, there goes one advantage cable (Rogers) had over Bell and StarChoice.

Thank goodness for OTA!

If there is quite a bit of difference in picture quality, can we complain long and hard enough for them to do something? If the difference is barely noticeable, and if it gives us in the Atlantic, all of the HD channels we are missing compared to Ontario, then by all means, I won't mind. But that is a big IF.

In news that is sure to instill anger among Canadian high definition television lovers ... indeed, it sure makes me want to exercise my right of free speech! Horrible move from Rogers. Are they even allowed to compress OTA signals?

I guess it depends on whether they do a good job or not. My advice to folks interested is to record some shows before and after April 9th for comparison.

Well doesn't that make my day. :(

Looking at the channel list, I really don't see any problem with compressing some of those signals since they either offer very little HD. There are a couple though that actually quite good.

Discovery and HDNet are the ones I will be most curious about. I sense a phone call/letter in my future.

Frankly, why not CTV and GLobal since all their programming is on ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX?

I can't believe they are compressing PBS which show some gorgeous programming worthy of HD

Not much to do but cry. :( :(

Basically all the channels I watch.

# HD National Geographic
# HD Mpix
# HD Discovery
# HD MORE
# HD TMN
# HDNET

Curious, is Rogers going to inform their customers of this? Or just do it and hope the masses dont notice?

I suspect the latter.

Frankly, why not CTV and GLobal since all their programming is on ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX?I'd much prefer that they compressed the American station, than the Canadian ones. With the amount of problems I've had with pictures on the American channels, and those new super-sized logos advertising programming, I much prefer watching shows on local channels than foreign ones.

But PBS and HDNet - what are these folks thinking?

This is really bad news. I just subbed to Rogers to get away from problems caused by this type of compression. :confused:

BTW. I see the difference. It's no so much due to picture quality but other issues such as video and audio dropouts or otherwise unreliable signals. Hopefully, Rogers will do better.

I'm already typing my letter in my head.

"Dear Rogers, now that you are compressing my HD signals, I would like to start compressing the amount of money I pay you."

You get the idea.

PBS Buffalo is already very low bitrates (probably around 13 Mbps) due to 720P and multi-casting. So, if you're happy with that signal, then you should be happy with what Rogers will do.

This is not a good sign, especially if it is as bad as what people using Comcast in the US are posting in AVS.

The PQ is horrendous in some shots especially with a lot of movement... if they do this for an extended period they will loose a lot of customer especially on the movie side to the BluRay market

If it is only a temporary thing until they can free up room from the analog channels and/or switch to switched video networking then ok, but otherwise this is not good.

... why not CTV and GLobal ...
As far as I am concerned, they could compress them out of existence. ;)

I didn't read the whole article, but anyone know if they will be doing this in Ontario only or everywhere?

PBS Buffalo is already very low bitrates (probably around 13 Mbps)
This type of signal can be put three to a QAM. Services like PBS that often transmit Widescreen instead of HD are also good for adaptive compression. The problem arises when all three channels on a QAM hit maximum HD bit rates. That's when you see macroblocking, video or audio dropouts or receiver hardware and firmware limitations rear their ugly head. It's not nice. :o

It will be interesting to see if CBC insists that they do not alter the signal they are sending to Rogers. I've read on other forum threads that their signal to ExpressVu is left untouched. I believe they(CBC) would have both legs to stand on.