my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » The Afterlife   » Why does DirecTV standard definition now totally suck?

Author Topic: Why does DirecTV standard definition now totally suck? Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 12-16-2007 10:52 PM                     Is it me, or is the standard definition feed from DirecTV just phenomenally shitty these days? The compression is just too much to handle. I hooked my laptop up to my set and watched some YouTube videos on it and it looked just like the DirecTV feed, or maybe just *slightly* worse. What the hell??? Is DirecTV doing this intentionally to try and improve the wow factor when people compare that to HD DirecTV? Or are the HD stations just taking that much bandwidth that they are having to compress the SD stuff even more? Seriously, a VHS to VHS copy looks far better than the shit I am seeing on my dish. (Sorry, I don't watch enough tv to bother upgrading to HD.)  |  IP: Logged Adam Martin I'm not even gonna point out the irony. Posts: 3686 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 12-16-2007 11:37 PM                     I swear I've heard their commercials claim that the HD service is "uncompressed". Yeah, right.  |  IP: Logged Scott Jentsch Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1061 From: New Berlin, WI, USA Registered: Apr 2003 posted 12-17-2007 11:25 AM                        For me, I think it's a combination of DirecTV compressing the hell out of their SD channels and me getting spoiled by HD. Now, HD on DirecTV still isn't as good as on HD DVD, but it's much better than SD anything, including DVD. As I don't subscribe to any movie channels, and since they give the channels I watch some decent bandwidth, it's acceptable for TV programming. SD on DirecTV is downright painful at times, especially local channels. Good thing for them they never put bitrate meters on their receivers...  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 12-17-2007 12:12 PM                        I dumped DirecTV several years ago for precisely that reason. When I called to cancel, they wanted to know why and when I told the order taker that their channels look like CRAP sometimes due to low bandwidth allocation, she dutifully read from their script: "All our channels feature digital clarity!". I said put it in the comments section of my cancellation that I specifically cancelled due to low bandwidth; your engineers will know exactly what I'm talking about. Supposedly they have more b/w now but it sounds like maybe not. I will say that DirecTV's pay-per-view channels always looked pretty good. This is all pre-HD of course.  |  IP: Logged Paul Linfesty Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1383 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 12-17-2007 01:03 PM                     Which is why I prefer digital cable (SD). At least our local provider uses far less compression on their digital channels, even basic.  |  IP: Logged Paul Mayer Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under! Posts: 3836 From: Albuquerque, NM Registered: Feb 2000 posted 12-17-2007 09:12 PM                        When DirecTV first launched their 'local channels' service in the top 41 markets in 2000 (in response to the FCC's 'must carry' rules), the dedicated transponders were not yet on-orbit (the first bird would be DirecTV4S, a Boeing 601HP launched in 2001). So they bumped up the compression on the transponders they did have available in order to make room for the new feeds, and the visual results were plainly obvious. Several birds (the Boeing 702-based Spaceway series birds for example) equipped with spot antennas dedicated to the local channel service have been orbited since then, and I assumed the compression used on the non-spot transponders would be reduced back to the earlier levels. Sounds like maybe they didn't do that. Even though I worked with DirecTV (my former employer PanAmSat was a sister company to DirecTV, both companies having their origins within the Hughes Aircraft Co Space & Communications Group) I never bought into their service. The pictures just weren't good enough to my eyes. I've always resisted paying for TV and still don't have cable in the house either, though that may change shortly. The roommate/landlord wants to dump the Embarq landline phone/DSL and switch to Cox Cable/high-speed internet/VOIP service. We'll see how that goes.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-18-2007 12:21 AM                     This is somewhat unrelated, but I think still relevant. Our local ABC-TV affiliate in Lawton, KSWO-TV channel 7, is pulling a fast one with the "local" ABC feed it allows DirecTV and Dish Network to rebroadcast. The fast one that they're pulling is they're giving the satellite networks a downsampled version of ABC's HD feed with the sides of the picture lopped off to SD-TV aspect ratio. When watching KSWO's feed on either DirecTV or Dish Network you see KSWO's Channel 7-HD logo being clipped on the right end of the picture. On top of that, the image is squished anamorphic looking. Switching over to the plain over the air old fashioned feed, you actually see MORE image than the cropped/downsampled out of HD image they're providing to the satellite companies! To finish off the "fast one" claim, the folks who own KSWO-TV in Lawton also own Lawton Cablevision. Currently, if you're in Lawton and you want to watch something on ABC in HD, you have to be connected through Lawton Cablevision's digital cable in order to do it. Thankfully, there's not anywhere near enough programming on ABC that I give the first damn about on seeing in HD to really care at all. But the one thing I do communicate to anyone I can is how KSWO and Lawton Cablevision are limiting overall viewers by their blockades. Formerly they wouldn't even allow DirecTV and Dish Network to carry their SDTV signals. Then enough of us local business people talked with each other enough and told KSWO, "we're not paying you as much as you want for TV commercial time because you're not reaching nearly as many viewers as the stations in Wichita Falls that are available in the satellite networks." That woke up KSWO. They need to do that again with their HD feeds. It's either that or congress needs to change that back-asswards rule that only lets certain cable companies rebroadcast main east coast and west coast NY/LA network feeds. Frankly, I'd much rather watch ABC via WABC in New York and KABC in Los Angeles than put up with the B.S. being pulled by KSWO and Lawton Cablevision. [ 12-18-2007, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: Bobby Henderson ]  |  IP: Logged James Westbrook Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1133 From: Lubbock, Texas, Usa Registered: Mar 2006 posted 12-18-2007 03:06 PM                     I had issues with Cox Communications in Lubbock (now Suddenlink) when some of the SD channels in the Digital Tier were "flattened out" to fit the wider-screen tvs. These were 3 X 4 pictures ( 4 X 3?) that were stretched wider. A day or so later, these channels were set back right. There were no settings on my box that I could easily locate to rectify this, and besides is a consumer wanted this option, there should have been a setting on the box to allow this. I never had the HD tier. Now, I'm "Suddenlink: Disconnected", have no satellite service, am getting my signals off the air and average 5 to 10 hours of tv viewing a WEEK. In Feb of 09, I will likely get NO television at all. I do not see this as a problem.  |  IP: Logged Jesse Skeen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1517 From: Sacramento, CA Registered: Aug 2000 posted 12-18-2007 08:05 PM                     It was phenomenally shitty back in 1994- has it actually gotten worse since then? I always thought it was a joke that you had to pay to 'unlock' channels, even the ones that show commercials and infomercials. Whenever I go by a house with a dish on it, I want to knock on their door and ask what the hell they're watching on it. They might as well have a sign up that says "We LIKE paying for TV!" It REALLY cracked me up when they started putting broadcast stations on DirecTV- now you can pay to get a WORSE picture than you'd get for free with a good antenna!  |  IP: Logged Steven J Hart Master Film Handler Posts: 282 From: WALES, ND, USA Registered: Mar 2004 posted 12-18-2007 10:02 PM                        quote: It REALLY cracked me up when they started putting broadcast stations on DirecTV- now you can pay to get a WORSE picture than you'd get for free with a good antenna! With the antenna on the roof of my two story house with a rotor and an RF amplifier, I can pick up 3 SD channels - ABC, PBS, and FOX (when the weather is good). When the FCC pulls the plug on analog VHF broadcasting next year I will be able to pull in 0 channels. I agree that DirecTV and Dish network's quality leaves a lot to be desired, but if I wanna watch television, they are my only options. My home is located 17 miles from the nearest cable system, and I don't expect them to run a line out to me anytime soon! My local phone coop is talking about running fiber out to the rural homes and providing TV sometime in the future, but I'm not holding my breath for that to happen. For now I'm stuck with Dish Network. The HD channels look pretty good most of the time. Steve  |  IP: Logged Evans A Criswell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1579 From: Huntsville, AL, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 12-19-2007 02:42 PM                        Even some of the HD signals I see are compressed to the point they look terrible, but the standard-definition ones are truly awful. A good 4.2 MHz analog composite signal from a normal analog TV broadcast looks superior to most standard-def digital signals if the set has a good comb-filtering mechanism and upsampling capability. Standard definition digital has way too many artifacts (dancing rectangles, extremely noticeable color contours in dim areas of the picture).  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.