Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

1 - 20 of 897 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
i have the 6100 receiver and i was just wondering if the picture quality on the newer receivers are better or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
they're all the same.

happy friday, mates! don't rush buying the lastest receivers from bell now. BEV controls the bitrate at their data center. The only things you can do are hdmi & svideo. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
Although I don't have a 6100, I just had my 6000 replaced with a 9241 due to the 6000 no longer being able to receive channels starting in April and the HD between the 6000 and 9241 is the same over component. With the exception of the brightness, I can't tell a difference in the quality but the picture from the 9241 is definitely darker. I'm not sure why that is. It's just as sharp but darker.
The SD performance between the 2 is an entirely difference story. The SD on the 9241 is horrible, it's very soft and depending on the channel/show actually blurry. I called Bell and complained about this but they said there is nothing that can be done, it's how the receiver is designed. I'm not sure if that's true but not much I can do. I would be curious to see if Bell's current entry level SD receiver produces the same quality of SD I am used to seeing from my 6000 or if all of the new receivers produce such an aweful SD image.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,080 Posts
@ BrystonUser: So BEV acknowledges there's an issue with their box?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,007 Posts
I have just changed out 4 x 6000's for Bell supplied 6141's and the customer and I noticed no difference between picture quality or brightness. 2 TV's were connected with Component and 2 using HDMI.

I believe BrystonUser has a defective box.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
I just replaced a 6000 with a 6141 (before the announcement naturally), anyway, on my old fashioned RPTV, I don't notice much difference on the HD channels but the SD quality is much improved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
79 Posts
I'm not sure if this is the right forum for a picture quality comparison but as a long time Rogers customer I've been intrigued by the push that Bell is making to "reclaim" customers for their bundles. They've been pretty aggressive on price and claims of superiority in TV offerings. I went to a Bell store to see their equipment. I have to admit that their HD PVR seems a lot better than my SA8300 in terms of program guide, channel locks, parental controls and the ability to customize the guide. Be that as it may, I couldn't help but notice that the HD picture quality didn't seem as good as Rogers.

The problem is that I'm watching on a 1080p Sharp Aquos at home (I realize everyone is broadcasting in 1080i and 720p) but the Bell stores are using Samsung HD TV's. I wasn't sure if the lower picture quality was due to their display TV's or compression.

Have any of you done side-by-side comparisons of Rogers HD vs Bell HD with the same program source? How is Bell's compression vs Rogers?

The Bell features and hardware seem so much better than Rogers but I'm uncertain on picture quality. Any thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,131 Posts
Picture quality on the 9200s and 9242s is excellent, especially the SD upscaling. Not sure why the 9241 would be any worse. The 6141 was reported to be very good, compared to the 6000, when it was released as well. The 6000 is noticeably softer than the 9200/9241 with HD and the 6000 has an abysmal SD upscaler in comparison. However, most of BTV's signals will look soft on a big screen due to their aggressive compression. Their is no way they will look as good as blu-ray, for example. They are typically closer to standard DVD but a few are better, with good HD material. SD will never look as good as a decent HD signal but a good scaler will keep it from looking worse than it needs to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Not exactly Rogers but I have Comcast here in Nashville. I have "Survivor" on at the moment and my local Cable is definitely the better of the two. Not a huge difference but noticeable on a side by side comparison if I switch between the two.

My receiver is a 9242
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
79 Posts
That's interesting. Thanks for your responses. I agree with the "softer" look of BTV. I generally only watch HD channels anyway but the cable signal certainly looked sharper. I'm not a techie but perhaps with a bigger pipeline the cable signal isn't as compressed. The 9241 software looked significantly more advanced than the 80's style program guide on the SA8300.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
56,567 Posts
Please be aware of the following:

BTV sends all signals out as 720P. This tends to be a bit softer than 1080i.

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=76129 Formats.

The BTV STB needs to be set up properly. It defaults to 480P (I've been to lots of homes where people watch 480P) Make sure you change it to 720P, as this is likely to provide you with the best picture. You can try 1080i if you like. I believe this is in the Setup Menu under HDTV.

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=87543 On Upconversion
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,113 Posts
If bell HD TV gets any softer they will melt. The SD picture from the free preview of 630 Movie time is better than the HD. :(
If it does not get better by April 1 it is not wort the discount to stick with them.
At one time Bell was better, not now. Rogers is way better HD, anyone that seen both lately can attest to that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
510 Posts
If bell HD TV gets any softer they will melt. The SD picture from the free preview of 630 Movie time is better than the HD.
I really do not understand this at all. I have 4 HD TV's and this would not be true on any of them, even a little 19" TV. I will say that the picture quality on some of the networks is not up to standards, but most of the channels have very good quality (TSN, Discovery, Oasis, HDNet, etc.). The picture quality of channel 630 is very good for SD, but nowhere near the PQ of the HD channels.

Am I missing something here?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,113 Posts
I think the only thing missing is the comparison to Rogers. I'm getting Compression artifacts on more and more Bell HD Channels to the point that it will be hard to stay with Bell if its not fixed in April, even at a discount. When I first came to Expressvu there was no comparison it was way better than Rogers. This most HD war is killing them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
510 Posts
I guess that is what confuses me ... I don't experience this at all. Very strange. I am not doubting what you are saying, but I don't know why some experience it and some don't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
I think some don't realize how "soft" Bell really is until they can compare it to something else side by side. When I'm watching my Bell 9242 I don't notice how soft it is really until I flip over to my Starchoice 530. Then I go whoa:eek: as Bell looked pretty "good" I thought until I compare the two. A great example is watching Leno or Conan where its really noticeable. I really hope when they start to switch over in April it improves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
They are using SD equipment for the English feed. It seems anytime there are 3 games on CBC in the same day the afternoon game will be braodcast in SD. At least this has been the norm this season.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,307 Posts
Bell is definitely soft in the PQ department. I was at FS the other day and they had Shaw digital on one of the displays and did a double take when I saw how much better HDNET looked on Shaw vs Bell. I've already seen how good it looks on Star Choice. Too bad Shaw won't set up cable in our little Hamlet even though the main pipeline runs right next to it on the highway on it's way to the base. I wouldn't mind a cable/internet package. It would be cheaper than a separate wireless ISP and satellite provider. Any word on when SC's new PVR is coming out yet?
 
1 - 20 of 897 Posts
Top