4DTV Subscription-Based C Band HD Discussion

[4DTV HD]

While I have a DSR500 and a BEV6100 I rarely watch them due to poor picture quality on SD as well as HD programming. My choice in order of preference:

HD DVB/ C Band - Typically broadcast at 30 Ms/s or higher.

4DTV / C Band - Typically broadcast at 19 Ms/s.

ATSC/OTA

I find it interesting that people will spend a bundle on their HT gear but cheap out on the reception side.

Also, unless people complain to Starchoice or Bell their pictures will not improve. Their American counterparts (LSDs) are doing the same thing. Turn the compression up until people complain then back off a little appears to be their policy.

[hugh]

I find it interesting that people will spend a bundle on their HT gear but cheap out on the reception side.

Or perhaps they're simply being pragmatic.

[Hairball]

OR are unaware of other options. I have an old C band dish, now that you have enlightened me I may research this further.

[stampeder]

Originally Posted by hugh

Or perhaps they're simply being pragmatic.

When some of the people I know drop megawads of Visa and Mastercard credit on their top end HTs I don't think pragmatism is at work...

I agree with his essential point that its absurd for those who go for a top end, spare-little-expense HT installation to rely so heavily on such a performance bottleneck at the top of the pyramid, right where the HD broadcast signal is input.

Of course all of this is dependent on whether they have room for a big dish, or even if they knew of the alternatives to the crappy HD from most CATV providers and from BEV and *C DTH systems.

[stampeder]

Originally Posted by 4DTV HD

While I have a DSR500 and a BEV6100 I rarely watch them due to poor picture quality on SD as well as HD programming. My choice in order of preference:

HD DVB/ C Band - Typically broadcast at 30 Ms/s or higher.

4DTV / C Band - Typically broadcast at 19 Ms/s.

ATSC/OTA

I'll bet a lot of it has to do with a weird mindset I've seen recently that the things you've mentioned are somehow "old fashioned" and "ugly" so they cannot be any good! Feh!

[Arthur Dent]

Originally Posted by 4DTV HD

HD DVB/ C Band - Typically broadcast at 30 Ms/s or higher.
4DTV / C Band - Typically broadcast at 19 Ms/s.
ATSC/OTA

Unfortunately the first two options are useless. Last time I checked, there were only 2 DVB HD stations available to the public (unscrambled) - PBS HD on Ku and CBS HD on C band. I watch the Ku PBS HD and although it's just a bit better than BEV, it's not worth buying even just the small Ku Dish to get it. And I think even the biggest HD enthusiast wouldn't install a 3 meter BUD to get CBS HD, which, btw, may disappear (get scrambled) any moment.
4DTV offers a few more HD channels that are paid, but still nothing like the BEV HD lineup.
OTA - no such thing here. And even when CTV ands CBS set up transmitters, it's still only 2 network channels.

In short, the sources you mention can in no way substitute DBS, regardless of price, equipment, logistic etc. and the argument about spending priorities is just irrelevant. If I wanted to just enjoy beautiful high quality picture with random content I would be looking out of the window. For free.

[4DTV HD]

Originally Posted by Arthur Dent

Unfortunately the first two options are useless. Last time I checked, there were only 2 DVB HD stations available to the public (unscrambled) - PBS HD on Ku and CBS HD on C band. I watch the Ku PBS HD and although it's just a bit better than BEV, it's not worth buying even just the small Ku Dish to get it. And I think even the biggest HD enthusiast wouldn't install a 3 meter BUD to get CBS HD, which, btw, may disappear (get scrambled) any moment.
4DTV offers a few more HD channels that are paid, but still nothing like the BEV HD lineup.
OTA - no such thing here. And even when CTV ands CBS set up transmitters, it's still only 2 network channels.

In short, the sources you mention can in no way substitute DBS, regardless of price, equipment, logistic etc. and the argument about spending priorities is just irrelevant. If I wanted to just enjoy beautiful high quality picture with random content I would be looking out of the window. For free.

DVB HD - I agree the Ku PBS feed is not that good so I don't watch it. I use it for the network feeds that are available and the near nightly sports backhauls and special events.

4DTV HD - How about 5 Movie Channels, a better version of PBS and the real Discovery Home Theater?

I think my sources easily beat the offerings of DBS or Cable.

What bothers me most is what the DBSs and Cable have done to the picture quality and consumers just blindly accepting it.

[stampeder]

Originally Posted by 4DTV HD

What bothers me most is what the DBSs and Cable have done to the picture quality and consumers just blindly accepting it.

I think that's it in a nutshell. If there was some way to show people the difference they'd flip! Hopefully as more OTA possibilities come up, people will see just that.

[4DTV HD]

Originally Posted by Hairball

OR are unaware of other options. I have an old C band dish, now that you have enlightened me I may research this further.

All you need now is:
DSR920 or DSR 922 4DTV &
HDD200 or HDD201 High Definition Decoder

[stampeder]

Originally Posted by 4DTV HD

All you need now is:
DSR920 or DSR 922 4DTV &
HDD200 or HDD201 High Definition Decoder

Hmmmm... I wonder if dad still has his old C band BUD out behind his barn... maybe I'll try this too!

[JohnnyG]

Originally Posted by 4DTV HD

What bothers me most is what the DBSs and Cable have done to the picture quality and consumers just blindly accepting it.

That's really a non-sequitur considering these feeds were never really intended for viewing by the public.

It's like saying we are just "blindly accepting" audio CDs when there's a master tape out there, or watching a movie on DVD when we could be watching the 70mm original film.

[stampeder]

JohnnyG, as a calibrator you know that the majority of consumers generally have little or no prior knowledge of what their shiny new HDTV is supposed to perform like at its best so they just go along with what they get because they don't know any better. Even highly compressed HD is superior to SD, of course, so they're happy. What 4DTV_HD has said implies that the people who should know better don't, and after all that's what the wonderful DHC site is here for.

if we're comparing BEV or *C HD with his preferred solutions, he mentioned the U.S. (where OTA is a fact of life) and how people have complained effectively to their DTH providers after seeing the differences. The consumers had been told that they were at the leading edge of a great TV revolution in picture and audio quality, yet what they were getting was really not so breathtaking once they saw better. Given that the entry cost of HDTV is still above average, consumers felt ripped off.

This kind of thing is going to be interesting in our country because for approximately 70% of the Canadian population there are now OTA opportunities to see better HD and when that happens people are going to get (even more)? p|$$ed at BEV and *C because the beautiful new HDTV they bought for several thousand dollars is having its performance throttled by the signal providers.

Wait till they start to hear about the OTA phenomenon...

[JohnnyG]

My "beef" (if you can call it that) certainly isn't with presenting this as a valid option...it's with the derision of those that don't follow the same path. I'm not "blindly accepting" anything. I have chosen cable because it offers a combination of choice, convenience, and quality that I find acceptable. There's always something better out there, but it comes at a price.

[AndrewM]

I have to agree with JohnnyG,

OTA is not an option for everyone. I know for me, the cost and time involved to even try and get some channels OTA is at this point, prohibitive. And generally, fairly ugly in terms of tall masts etc...I along with JohnnyG know that there is better out there, but until it's easily accessible and cost-effective, there will be some people who just can't do it.

If I am mistaken on my assumptions of OTA for my area then please correct me.

~Andrew

[57]

Originally Posted by AndrewM

If I am mistaken on my assumptions of OTA for my area then please correct me.

Area? You may wish to put your location in your profile.

As discussed in another thread, I also don't see a need for OTA for myself, even though I'm in an area where I could "play with the option".