About To Buy An HD LCD TV

[ptimmerm]

I will be purchasing a new HD LCD TV in the very near future. Currently I have an SD setup with two DirectTivo receiver's in the house. The one that will be hooked up to the new TV is a S2 type Phillips box. i am new to all of this and so i have what might be a basic question.

What benefit would I get to upgrading my receiver/service to HD? FYI, I am looking at HR10-250 HD DirecTivo's on EBAY. I am not overly impressed with the channels overed in the HD package from DTV and my locals are not HD as of yet. my understanding is that my TV will "upgrade" the incoming signal regardless. Given that, I have no doubt that my existing signal will come across much better on the new TV. Also, it is my undetstanding that any signal that is not HD, even if it comes through an HD receiver/dvr, will display just as it would with my existing hardware. Basically, if the signal coming in is not HD, the receiver/dvr end does nothing special for me. Is this correct?

Also, if I upgrade to the HD receiver/DTV package, will I still be able to use my other DirectTivo unit (S1 type) which is not connected to an HD capable TV?

Just curious where the "bang for my buck" would be if I were to upgrade my receivers right now.

TIA

Paul

[rlj5242]

my understanding is that my TV will "upgrade" the incoming signal regardless. Given that, I have no doubt that my existing signal will come across much better on the new TV. You are sadly mistaken. An HD television has a much better resolution than a regular television and will display each and every flaw in the overly compress DirecTV transmission.

Also, it is my undetstanding that any signal that is not HD, even if it comes through an HD receiver/dvr, will display just as it would with my existing hardware. Basically, if the signal coming in is not HD, the receiver/dvr end does nothing special for me. Is this correct? Correct. There is very little difference between the picture quality on my GXCEBOT and my HR10-250 when viewing an SD channel. The minor difference can be attributed to the HR10-250 being connected to the TV via component video cables while the GXCEBOT is connected via a composite video cable.

Also, if I upgrade to the HD receiver/DTV package, will I still be able to use my other DirectTivo unit (S1 type) which is not connected to an HD capable TV? Absolutely. Nothing about your S1 will change.

Just curious where the "bang for my buck" would be if I were to upgrade my receivers right now. Without the HD package or your locals in HD you get no benefit.

Are you sure they aren't broadcasting a digital signal? Unless you live in BFE, then you should be able to get a digital signal.

-Robert

[ptimmerm]

You are sadly mistaken. An HD television has a much better resolution than a regular television and will display each and every flaw in the overly compress DirecTV transmission.

Correct. There is very little difference between the picture quality on my GXCEBOT and my HR10-250 when viewing an SD channel. The minor difference can be attributed to the HR10-250 being connected to the TV via component video cables while the GXCEBOT is connected via a composite video cable.

Absolutely. Nothing about your S1 will change.

Without the HD package or your locals in HD you get no benefit.

Are you sure they aren't broadcasting a digital signal? Unless you live in BFE, then you should be able to get a digital signal.

-Robert
Maybe I mis-spoke regarding the singal being upgraded. So, are you saying that any DTV SD signal, regardless of whether or not I have it coming through an HD receiver will look "bad" on my HD LCD TV?

I think the locals broadcast a digital signal. There is a difference between digital and HD though, or am I wrong? If they broadcast a digital signal will I see a difference in the output?

Given the limited number of HD channels currently available, I am jsut trying to decide if i need to upgrade my receivers. Why spend the money if everything is still going to "look about the same".

You have me worried though with the comment about seeing all the flaws. Can you clarify? I understand the difference in resolutions, but just want to be sure the SD output ot the new TV will not be crappy.

Paul

[rifleman69]

Maybe I mis-spoke regarding the singal being upgraded. So, are you saying that any DTV SD signal, regardless of whether or not I have it coming through an HD receiver will look "bad" on my HD LCD TV?




Yep, regular tv looks crappy on a new HDTV...it shows just how bad the non-HD signal was for all of these years.

[ptimmerm]

Yep, regular tv looks crappy on a new HDTV...it shows just how bad the non-HD signal was for all of these years.

Uhhhh OK..... then why would anyone buy a new HDTV like the one I am looking at given that the majority of signal out there is still non-hd?

Paul

[ptimmerm]

I think i just answered my own question. Even though the new HDTV will display at 720p, I can still modify the resolution back to 480. Sound right?

[stivovance]

SD content on the HR10 will look slightly better because of upconversion. Leave it on 720/1080i whatever your tv can handle. The SD on the HD set does take some getting used to. I run an SD and an HD tivo on my HD set. Adjusting the video settings is key as well to making the SD look more viewable.

[ptimmerm]

What about running from my existing non-HD Phillips TIVO? The upconversion ocurrs at the TV, correct? If so, I should still be OK?

[stivovance]

Depending on the tv, it tries to upconvert, but usually it looks pretty bad. You really do start to see the flaws of the picture when you do that. I got my HD tv first, couldn't live with watching all of my content via SD, so I got an HR10-250 the next day.

Before that, I had a CRT set and the SD content looked pretty awesome. I was amazed at how bad it looked on an HD set. I'm using S-video and have tweaked the video settings to minimize the flaws. You can still see them if you are really paying attention, but I recommend giving it a week or so. As I said, I watch SD and HD content via an SD and HD tivo, so I flip back and forth almost every day and the SD content doesn't look as horrible as it did in the beginning. It just took some getting used to.

[ptimmerm]

The fact that the DTV signal is digital anyways also has to help the matter I would assume.

[Bitz69]

Yep, regular tv looks crappy on a new HDTV...it shows just how bad the non-HD signal was for all of these years.


I'd have to disagree, my SD's dont look crappy on my HDTV, I hear they do on alot of TV's but my experience has been the opposite. My Locals Through D* look better on my HDTV then they do on my 27inch Zenith. Please don't generalize :D

[rlj5242]

My Locals Through D* look better on my HDTV then they do on my 27inch Zenith. Please don't generalize :D Go check out the HDTV Hardware and HDTV Programming sections at AVS. It has been a common theme for years. "I just got an HDTV but now my SD picture looks awful. What can I do?". As far as I know, you are the only person who has said they look better.

I think the locals broadcast a digital signal. There is a difference between digital and HD though, or am I wrong? If they broadcast a digital signal will I see a difference in the output? You should. SD OTA programming looks better than SD via satellite.

Given the limited number of HD channels currently available, I am jsut trying to decide if i need to upgrade my receivers. What channels/shows do you watch? The majority of my season passes are for HD programming.

You have me worried though with the comment about seeing all the flaws. Can you clarify? Take a picture with a camera phone and one with a nice 8 megapixel SLR. Both look pretty good on your computer monitor when they are small. Same with a small TV. Zoom in. This is the equivalent of watching on a larger TV. The picture artifacts start to appear on the lower resolution picture. We're not trying to scare you out of getting an HDTV. We're just trying to lower your expectations. The upconversion can't magically add picture data that was lost during the compression. Is the picture completely unwatchable? Far from it. I was SD programming on my 55" HDTV all of the time.

I think i just answered my own question. Even though the new HDTV will display at 720p, I can still modify the resolution back to 480. Sound right? LCD screens have a fixed resolution. The circuitry inside will scale the picture to fit.

The fact that the DTV signal is digital anyways also has to help the matter I would assume. MP3 and SACD are both digital audio formats. Which would you rather listen to on a high end stereo?

Again, what shows/channels do you watch? Where do you live? Right now we are just answering general questions with general answers. Not everyone has had the same experience as us and you might be one of the exceptions. If you can give us details, we can better help you.

-Robert

[rifleman69]

I'd have to disagree, my SD's dont look crappy on my HDTV, I hear they do on alot of TV's but my experience has been the opposite. My Locals Through D* look better on my HDTV then they do on my 27inch Zenith. Please don't generalize :D


Is this with or without your corrective lenses on? it just takes some getting used to.

I'm surprised at how little non-HD stuff I watch these days besides the news.

[rifleman69]

Uhhhh OK..... then why would anyone buy a new HDTV like the one I am looking at given that the majority of signal out there is still non-hd?

Paul


People only watch tv on their tv's? What are those little circular things called again, DVD's? I know plenty of people who 90% just watch DVD's on their HDTV's. Everyone's tv habits are different.

[bwaldron]

Uhhhh OK..... then why would anyone buy a new HDTV like the one I am looking at given that the majority of signal out there is still non-hd?

The majority of the channels are SD, yes. However, in the case of our household, the majority of what we watch is actually HD (lots of it OTA)....main exceptions are news and sports (games that aren't available in HD).

If you purchase an HDTV with a good scaler/de-interlacer, you'll get decent-to-good quality SD. I'd recommend viewing SD stuff in native 4:3 aspect ratio rather than any stretch mode. Depending upon the size and quality of the CRT you are replacing, however, you aren't likely to see improvement in SD and may well see some degradation. This is especially true with the overcompressed DirecTV channels.

An HDTV is a great upgrade when you're watching HD sources, or even when you're watching DVD's. If the bulk of what you currently or plan to watch is SD, you might want to hold off for a bit. HDTV prices will continue to fall and HD offerings via DirecTV will increase at some point next year. Only you can decide. But don't drop a lot of money on an HDTV with the expectation that your SD picture is likely to improve.

[dougwx12]

My $0.02 - If you never see HD on your new TV, chances are you'll think SD looks "fine". But if you look at an HD channel, then switch to SD, you'll be disappointed if your main viewing is all SD.

Purists might say you have to have HD with an new HDTV, but if you don't know the difference, and SD looks fine to you, then SD looks fine (just bigger.) It's all relative.

[bwaldron]

My $0.02 - If you never see HD on your new TV, chances are you'll think SD looks "fine". But if you look at an HD channel, then switch to SD, you'll be disappointed if your main viewing is all SD.

Purists might say you have to have HD with an new HDTV, but if you don't know the difference, and SD looks fine to you, then SD looks fine (just bigger.) It's all relative.

Yes, there's a lot of truth to that. On the other hand, a significant amount of DirecTV's SD programming -- especially sports -- fails to look "fine" to a reasonably discerning viewer even on a large CRT.

High-quality SD material can look very good on an HDTV. The highly compressed D* SD can often look quite poor on any larger display.

[stivovance]

Yes, there's a lot of truth to that. On the other hand, a significant amount of DirecTV's SD programming -- especially sports -- fails to look "fine" to a reasonably discerning viewer even on a large CRT.

High-quality SD material can look very good on an HDTV. The highly compressed D* SD can often look quite poor on any larger display.

That's the boat I was in. Had a crt and the SD programming looked just fine. Every so often would noticed the compressed signal, especially on say Scifi. Then, got the HD tv and noticed the compression on all the channels. I couldn't take it, so I got the HD display. So I fall under the category of never seeing HD content on my tv prior to getting my HR10-250. After the bit of tweaking and adjustment period, I watch SD and HD content and don't really have a problem with it anymore. I didn't even upgrade to a massive display either, went from a 36" crt to a 37" lcd and noticed it right away.

My suggestion is take your tivo with you to whatever store you are going to buy the tv from and hook it up and play with it there (make sure you adjust the picture quality as well) but that would be the best scenario I can think of for you to make the best descision possible.

[TyroneShoes]

SD content on the HR10 will look slightly better because of upconversion...
That is a very misleading statement.

SD may look better on a particular newer bigger display (but usually it doesn't) than is does on an older, smaller display, but upconversion is never ever the reason, because upconversion has no ability to either improve resolution or reduce artifacting. Typically, it does just the opposite. There can be reasons why SD on a new TV looks better, such as fewer scanning lines or a truer color gamut or better contrast ratio, but upconversion always has zero to do with why it might look better, even in the few rare cases where it does.

Artifacts are typically always increased with upconversion. Possibly not noticeably, but upconversion can never have fewer artifacts that the original. And perceived resolution is usually worse for two reasons:

1. You are sitting closer to a larger screen. That means that SD which was marginally fuzzy becomes perceptually more so.

2. CRTs have a "flaw" that actually makes resolution appear to be sharper than it really is, by enhancing the edges of images slightly. While technically a flaw, this has the effect of increasing perceived sharpness. Pump those same images into any non-CRT, which does not have that "flaw" and does a much truer job of reproducing the picture, and that level of enhancement we have known for decades is actually missed. Larger sets can show you the other flaws and artifacts already in the picture a lot clearer, too.

[stivovance]

That is a very misleading statement.

SD may look better on a particular newer bigger display (but usually it doesn't) than is does on an older, smaller display, but upconversion is never ever the reason, because upconversion has no ability to either improve resolution or reduce artifacting. Typically, it does just the opposite. There can be reasons why SD on a new TV looks better, such as fewer scanning lines or a truer color gamut or better contrast ratio, but upconversion always has zero to do with why it might look better, even in the few rare cases where it does.

Artifacts are typically always increased with upconversion. Possibly not noticeably, but upconversion can never have fewer artifacts that the original. And perceived resolution is usually worse for two reasons:

1. You are sitting closer to a larger screen. That means that SD which was marginally fuzzy becomes perceptually more so.

2. CRTs have a "flaw" that actually makes resolution appear to be sharper than it really is, by enhancing the edges of images slightly. While technically a flaw, this has the effect of increasing perceived sharpness. Pump those same images into any non-CRT, which does not have that "flaw" and does a much truer job of reproducing the picture, and that level of enhancement we have known for decades is actually missed. Larger sets can show you the other flaws and artifacts already in the picture a lot clearer, too.

That's great, but from a non tv industry person, I've watched sd shows on my hr10 and on my dsr704 and they look better via the HR10. I also know others that have experienced the same. Now whether or not upconversion plays any part in that, I guess I was wrong in that statement, that's just what I have come to understand.

Now, I'm not saying your are incorrect in your statement. You work in tv, and you know more about it than I do, and I do enjoy reading your posts and bringing your knowledge to the table, just telling what mine and others experience has been with sd content on these boxes.

[m17_jeff]

So bottom line... For some one with a R10 on an new HDTV is it worth it to upgrade to the HD package?

[stivovance]

For an HR10, it varies on what you want to watch. The HD package offers a little bit for everyone. I'd say Universal HD and HDnet are the 2 best followed by Discovery HD. If you have an R10 (standard def) then no.

I believe this offer is open to anyone, you can get 4 months of the HD package for free. I received a post card the other day advertising this. A good way to try it out without having to pay for something you feel isn't worth it.

When I first got the HD package, I found myself watching stuff I normally wouldn't have, just because it was in HD. Some forest in China documentary for example. After a while, the thrill wore off and I cancelled it.

[coachO]

Now to add another wrinkle to the mostly subjective discussion. I have been watching a few blu-ray DVDs on my HDTV and now I think HD programming from D* and OTA looks poor.

I am going to decline to ever watch the future 1440P sets that are already being discussed or maybe not :)