Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion' started by HarperVision, Jul 29, 2016.
The 1080i on this channel was crystal clear as it used to be before the transition.
I've seen terrible Comcast as well as Dish and D* on friends 4K newer equipment. Friends with older equipment don't seem to have the issues. I have a 64" 1080P Plasma and my Comcast looks better than most every ones 4K equipment with anything. I don't use any of the premiums but I have streamed some NBC Sports in an attempt to compare and I'm fine with what I've got. I actually cancelled an already paid for OLED 4K since most viewing is cable or easily streamed in appropriate resolutions.
randian - mentioned F1 Spa qualifying and I believe there were transmission issues from the feed. I didn't watch the T&FWC.
If you spend your time looking for issues I doubt you enjoy the content!
Is there different "head-end" delivery policies throughout the country or is everyone supposedly getting the "lesser quality"?
Without this Forum (and looking at my TVs resolution) I would not have known that my Comcast picture has gone to 720P on most channels (ABC FOX and ESPN have always been on 720P) and I have a 1080P 80" HDTV and sit 10' from that TV. I guess your own eyesight may play a roll in your ability to notice 1080i or 720P or how much compression is being done. My BD player sends out a 1080P/24 at 30Mb/s, my DVD gives a picture at about 1.8Mb/s. I get about 12Mbps on CBS and 14.6 Mbps on ABC, but the way I can tell that is from Kmttg as I don't notice that difference myself. Some less watched Comcast channels are down to 4 Mbps IE. The Americans, on FXHD.
It really depends on what you watch. If you watch mostly talking heads with very little motion, the drop in quality is barely noticeable. It's a lot more noticeable on scenes with a lot of action. Unlike previously though were the picture would pixelate horribly, the new compression scheme applies some kind of blur filter prior to compression so you end up with a picture lacking details. This is very easy to see when watching something with a fast pan left or right. You get people missing faces.
That explains the smeared faces I'm seeing.
Good point, I will watch for that.
For those of us with a 4K set, it can look pretty bad, since the TV has to upscale the signal to native 4K....when that signal is overcompressed garbage, the 4K set makes it look even worse. Problem is it doesn't have to look like this. A crisp 1080p stream from Hulu or HBO Go will display fine.
For me, even the local channels that are still 1080i are compresssed to the point that a Hulu stream looks 10x better on my set.
I have the same experience. The identical Comcast video that almost looks like SD on my 65" 4K set is sharply detailed on my 55" HD set w/Darbee processing.
I'm watching on an LG 65C7 OLED. I've been streaming Hunted (this show's failure to get a second season was criminal) using the built-in Amazon app and it looks way better than anything my TiVo has been recording. Amazon 4k streaming content (I recommend Racing Is Everything) looks great too.
Even though we have Comcast, we subscribe to Hulu with no commercials just to get as many shows as possible in a decent quality. No doubt 4K content is going to look great, but with the crap signal we get from Comcast we've tried to move as much as possible to streaming.
Just checking in to say that my Comcast in the Seattle/Western Washington area still looks terrible. The quality of these super-compressed 720p channels is on par with an SD 480p DVD as it appears on my 1080p TV, if not worse. Sad that in 2017 my HD cable image quality is markedly worse than it was in 2006. All the 1080p content from streaming services looks markedly better than anything on Comcast (it was once the opposite).
Is there an endgame to this? Are they at some point going to either switch to IPTV, or use this regained bandwidth to increase quality? I'm guessing no since probably 90% of their customers don't care or notice.
When I first put up antennas for OTA, I immediately noticed how much better the TV shows looked than they did on Comcast.
There is almost no chance whatsoever that Comcast will do the latter, but they are definitely transitioning their video programming to IPTV. The only real question IMHO is the timing and how they will handle the legacy equipment (impacting on us TiVo users). The one thing you can be sure of is that they will do whatever they believe will best feed their bottom line--and catering to videophiles is unlikely to enter into that picture (double entendre intended).
Well IPTV would be great. RF is the dark ages at this point. In theory authentication becomes just as easy as with any streaming service (assuming they don't deliberately lock it out of third party hardware), and quality will automatically be better than the crap they broadcast.
I switched back to D* after several years with Comcast due to the poor PQ. The motion blur was unacceptable, and even closeups were a horror show. I would say that the locals are still slightly better on Comcast (they hadn't been ultracompressed yet, last I checked), but the other channels are much better on D*. Streaming looks best of all, but on demand streaming through either Comcast or D* is just OK. I would switch back if I could get a good IPTV product, but if Comcast is going to force a cloud DVR I doubt that it would be equivalent to Tivo (ff commercials, no expiration dates).
And trick play (jump forwards/backwards, FF, REW, etc) will be laggy as heck just like it is with other streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon Prime.
There's no guarantee that quality will be better, since the picture quality of On Demand and Roku streaming looks just as bad as it does over RF broadcast.
At some point though Comcast will have to increase the quality as currently streaming services like YouTube TV, Hulu, etc look much better than Comcast.
Comcast does not re-compress locals, DirecTV does in order to get them into MPEG-4. So locals generally won't be as good on DirecTV, although they can be if DirecTV gets a direct fiber feed that bypasses the MPEG-2 OTA encoding. Comcast's cable channel quality is utterly pathetic, however, as they lack enough bandwidth, stat muxing, and variable field encoding (not sure if that's the right term, but encoding based on what part of the picture on the screen is being encoded).
Or maybe they'd rather just be an ISP and not pay for TV content, and then run a mafia-style racket like they did with Netflix to the streaming providers so that instead of paying in one way and out another, they get paid in both ways.
Just curious then as to why my locals look so bad compared to something like Hulu? I have a 4K set and even though the Comcast locals have the higher bitrate and are still 1080i, they don’t look anywhere as good as Hulu. They are soft.
Cable channels are just garbage. Every time i view hbo I laugh a little at how bad the picture is.
Comcast wants to be everything. They already one NBC Universal and news came out yesterday that they are negotiating to buy 20th Century Fox. At the rate things are going Comcast will be able to just degrade the channel quality at the source so it looks the same everywhere.