HD vs. HDlite

[gutter]

Conner...I can understand your feelings. For me the content falls dramatically when the detail is not there. I loose interest. That is why the only SD I watch is CNN and MSNBC

 

[normang]

I sometimes think that everyone is getting way to nit-picky.. go watch some analog cable for a while on anything and then say that your HD in any fashion is the pits..

 

[Grandpa J]

I posted this elsewhere too, so if you have seen it sorry but ...

On top of the 1 box limit and all the price increases Dish is downgrading the HD signal too. If you are not now getting/seeing the full rezz HD signals on a professionally tuned set you might think you will be happy with the downrezzed HD signal, but you are missing the true PQ value of the HD set you spent all that money on. I hate to use analogies but it's like getting a new high end car that has 8 cylinders but gas is going to only 4 cylinders. The car works but not as well as it was designed.

Yes, it just my take on this downrezz problem. As a retired producer & studio exec I and others spent lots of time & money to get the best possible picture to the public (even on less than great shows) so I am upset when theaters and broadcasters downgrade our work be it bad projection equipment or HD Lite. Our name is on screen and the public should see our product as it was designed to be seen. That was the hope with full HD be it via DVDHD/Blue Ray or broadcast. We also knew that it would be viewed on SD 4:3 sets until full digital conversion, so we framed for HD 16:9 while "protecting for SD", but our work was designed for full HD standard and that's not what seems to be happening.

Just venting!

 

[Blackbeard]

This is my first post. I have been trying to make sense of all the posts discussing HD Lite over the last few weeks and frankly, they just make me mad. The guys who want quantity over quality make me mad and the guys that truly care about quality make me mad because they remind me how good it could really be. Don't take offense because I will try and focus that anger toward the providers (whose fault it really is!) but what the hell happened to the HD Revolution. When in the history of the world have we regressed in technology. I love Hi-Def. It's like crack! Actually, it's better than crack. If I was a crackhead I would be sitting in an empty living room with no possessions except a HDTV streaming original programming in True HD. Everyone needs to remember that first time they saw HD. Remember being awed, torn away from reality like a kid in a candy store. If you don't remember that feeling, then you are wasting your time following this forum. I for one think that HDTV is like beer. Do you want a Natural Light or do you want a nice English Stout. If you want the better beer you have to pay the premium price. Everyone needs to focus their wrath on the HD Lite issue instead of how much everything is going to cost. Because whether you are paying $99 to upgrade or $1000 to upgrade all you're really paying for is crap. True HD only!!!

 

[vurbano]

HDlite looks like ass period, PBS HD OTA should be benchmark for all providers.

Not in my area. PBS has 3 SD subchannels. LOL

 

[Sarang]

I could not agree more. Don't get me wrong..I don't like that the quality of the HD VOOM channels has been intentially lowered. But I noticed a BIG difference in the quality of the channels when VOOM died.
But the question is: Just what better options do HD users have? Be it "true" HD or not, E* still has more and varied content than any other option.
Those of you who plan to jump ship over the change, I understand. But there's an old saying: Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. I'm honestly more interested in CONTENT than I am in a super-high detail picture. YES, I remember how crystal-clear the detail was on the old VOOM channels. I'm hoping it will return. Til then, I'll stick with the service that offers the most channels at the best price. Right now, that appears to be E*.

And WTF is all this HD content? VOOM has a 2 hour or maybe slightly longer programming loop from what I've heard, people have bitched about InHD, Universal HD is for Sports fans from what one guy told me, ESPN2 and ESPN HD upconvert some programming so WHERE is Dish great for content right now. If you want HD HD BEG VOOM or some other HD channel that will be offered on Dish to carry some Korean and Japanese programming dubbed or subbed or both, see SAP, to supplement the lack of produced AMERICAN HD content available right now, see not enough to cover the channels on the sheer # VOOM provides. If this is done you'll see a LOT more regular HD on VOOM or another channel at least. I myself wouldn't mind seeing some Korean Drama's, music videos and concerts broadcast in HD as well as Anime in HD since NO Cable or Satellite provider has been giving Anime fans here Anime in the native format it's been produced in lately.

 

[gutter]

As a retired producer & studio exec I and others spent lots of time & money to get the best possible picture to the public (even on less than great shows) so I am upset when theaters and broadcasters downgrade our work be it bad projection equipment or HD Lite. Our name is on screen and the public should see our product as it was designed to be seen. That was the hope with full HD be it via DVDHD/Blue Ray or broadcast. We also knew that it would be viewed on SD 4:3 sets until full digital conversion, so we framed for HD 16:9 while "protecting for SD", but our work was designed for full HD standard and that's not what seems to be happening.

Just venting!

I am also a retired producer and anytime I went into a studio or post Production house...the first thing I asked was when all the monitors were last calibrated. I would go crazy if a tech would say "dont' pay attention to this monitor...look at that one." That is why I am so strongly against the HDLITE issue. Producers, directors and programmers work hard to put out a quality signal and that exact signal with all the original information should be relayed to the end user as it was intended. After all, we are the one's paying for it.

I don't understand customers who think we should be quiet and just be happy with what DISH or any distributer provides us. We are the customers We pay for the programming and their salary. Since when does the distributor come first and the end user or customer come last? That is not marketing...and I know marketing.

 

[gdarwin]

I sometimes think that everyone is getting way to nit-picky.. go watch some analog cable for a while on anything and then say that your HD in any fashion is the pits..

No nit-pikin' here... Analog is on the way out. We are fighting for true HD.

 

[normang]

No nit-pikin' here... Analog is on the way out. We are fighting for true HD.

Yes, and your probably going to lose and have no where to go either.. Its real simple to say I want True HD and just completely overlook reality.. Like the fact that most people don't even have a HD set that displays "True HD" at 1900x1080.

Or the fact that those HD streams at those bit rates would easily overwhelm the current capacity of the system, which is why they are going to MPEG4 and while we may not like it, limiting the data rate of the stream to provide you with more HD programming.

So which is it, given limitations, do you want 10 glorious HD channels full stream, or do you want 25 channels of good HD, but nit-picked because its not quite as sharp as it might look at full bandwidth? I know some would say less channels, but I think more programming would win in a poll..

The other factor is, how much more would you be willing to pay monthly for Dish or anyone to be able to launch enough hardware (assuming that the FCC would left them) to provide full bandwidth HD for all they plan to do? Another 5-10-20-25% More? I think the cost factor is near saturation now.

I think its high time for a reality check, sure higher bit rates look better.. But its not happening now if ever if you want more channels, local HD, etc.

 

[gdarwin]

So which is it, given limitations, do you want 10 glorious HD channels full stream, or do you want 25 channels of good HD, but nit-picked because its not quite as sharp as it might look at full bandwidth? I know some would say less channels, but I think more programming would win in a poll..

I have a problem with "good HD" which we have been calling HD-LITE.. I can tell the difference on my 50".

Polls here and on AVS have stated Quality over Quantity....

If Dish follows through with thier word that we will see QUALITY return after MPEG4 is emplimented I don't have a problem. Again let's see what happens...

 

[normang]

I have a problem with "good HD" which we have been calling HD-LITE.. I can tell the difference on my 50".

Polls here and on AVS have stated Quality over Quantity....

If Dish follows through with thier word that we will see QUALITY return after MPEG4 is emplimented I don't have a problem. Again let's see what happens...

Yes, I know one can see a difference, I don't dispute that, it does depend on what your comparing to. However if the playing field is level, ie everyone winds up doing something similiar to extend programming, then the arguement becomes mute because your all watching the same level of quality.

And AVS, here and online in general I think generates a unique opinion, and not one readily shared everywhere, I still think more people would prefer more programming options over a little more resolution in their HD picture..

And as I've said, there are limitations, and right now I think what you see is what you are going to get to meet the need. Perhaps as more bandwidth become available, it will change, but I doubt it, because more bandwidth at lower bit rates will go to providing more HD locals to compete with cable.. and new customers that have never seen HD will think it looks just great over whatever they were watching before with rare exceptions..

 

[ripnbigc]

Hey there,
I was so excited about the new receiver deal. I've been an 811 owner for a couple years and love the HD pak and OTA. Haven't seen the HD lite channels. I was ready to do the switch to the 622, especially for the DVR features. But now I don't know. Is E* going to downrez everything?

 

[RocketMan]

In days of old, when VoOm was gold, my HDVirgin visitors would often halt mid-sentence to exclaim, "Wow, that is an AMAZING picture!" It's the kind of experience that makes people think about purchasing a new set. Fast forward two years and I still hear that phrase, but only if I'm tuned to PBS-HD OTA. Two years later in technology, and the picture is no longer amazing? We're going in the wrong direction! HDlite is not amazing. The most affordable HDTV sets are CRT's, with 1920x1080i the rule. All of those owners will be easily able to see the difference. If I'd paid $4000 for a 1080p set, I'd REALLY be pissed if most of the HD offerings were HDlite.

Another beef is that the promise was 10 of the VoOm 21 in May '05, and the rest by first quarter '06. That isn't the offering, is it? Doesn't make me want to listen to DISH tales of the future. All we need now is an SBC/ATT acquisition to drop the rate of progress to glacial.

 

[gutter]

In days of old, when VoOm was gold, my HDVirgin visitors would often halt mid-sentence to exclaim, "Wow, that is an AMAZING picture!" It's the kind of experience that makes people think about purchasing a new set. Fast forward two years and I still hear that phrase, but only if I'm tuned to PBS-HD OTA. Two years later in technology, and the picture is no longer amazing? We're going in the wrong direction! HDlite is not amazing. The most affordable HDTV sets are CRT's, with 1920x1080i the rule. All of those owners will be easily able to see the difference. If I'd paid $4000 for a 1080p set, I'd REALLY be pissed if most of the HD offerings were HDlite.
Another beef is that the promise was 10 of the VoOm 21 in May '05, and the rest by first quarter '06. That isn't the offering, is it? Doesn't make me want to listen to DISH tales of the future. All we need now is an SBC/ATT acquisition to drop the rate of progress to glacial.

You said it very well and your SBC/ATT insight is scary.