picture quality - Page 3 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums

mickk · 2009-02-23, 04:39 PM

i think the only way you will notice a piture quality improvment is if your using an old 2700/4100 IRD to somthing current. i even notice a little improment from going from a 2700 to a 3100

nicohockey9 · 2009-02-23, 05:12 PM

That really sucks we wont see an improvement on the American Superstations. Those are the station that need the most improvement!!

nicohockey9 · 2009-02-24, 05:09 PM

I was talking strictly HD though, are the HD American Superstations also on the 91 satelite?

Pinza · 2009-02-24, 05:12 PM

As of right now there are no HD channels on 91.

ScaryBob · 2009-02-24, 05:24 PM

Perceived picture quality depends a lot on the display. With a 92xx and a 768p 32" TV at 6' Bell HD looks fine. Even most of the SD channels look Ok. However, if I look at Bell HD, close up, on my 1080p computer monitor (connected with component), the defects virtually jump out. The picture looks like garbage on most HD channels. I imagine that anyone with a large 1080p HDTV will experience the same. Opinions on Bell HD will vary with display, channels watched and also the current Bell technical configuration. I've seen some channels go from good, to awful, to OK as Bell had technical issues and implemented technology changes.

dosborne · 2009-02-25, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mickk

i think the only way you will notice a piture quality improvment is if your using an old 2700/4100 IRD to somthing current. i even notice a little improment from going from a 2700 to a 3100

I'm not sure that I would agree (although I can't disagree with the part where you say it is your perception

).

First, the 4100 is newer than the 3100. Second, I sincerely doubt there is any noticable difference in the quality of the SD output from any of the receiver models, even going back to the old 3000's (or older) compared to the new ones. It is a digital picture, although I would concede it is possible the analog output components may be infereior, but I'd like to see an actual quality comparison.

As for HD, personally I'm very happy with the PQ of most HD channels displayed on my Sharp Aquos 52" via a 9200 receiver.

mickk · 2009-02-25, 02:28 PM

Quote:

the 4100 is newer than the 3100

oh yea 4100 is newer. i think i was refurring more to the 4000. i think it was the 4000 i know bell years ago had another old IRD in the 400 series that was availible around the same time as the 2700

nicohockey9 · 2009-02-25, 04:30 PM

So my question is, are any of the "HD" American Superstations going to be converted to 8PSK?

scrooloose · 2009-02-25, 04:46 PM

You convert a transponder to 8PSK, not the individual channels. Presumably all the transponders that carry HD content will be converted eventually.

-Mike

shingdaz · 2009-03-01, 08:03 PM

I've noticed that when monitoring the PQ threads here with Bell signals... people have the same consistency of complaining when the signals suck> and then when the signals appear OK.

This leads me to conclude that: Bells SD/HD signals are all over the map!> They're not consistent and are actually archaic in terms of functionallity...it's pretty piss poor to provide people a service that flucuautes in quality like the weather?!!>

The past few days I've noticed my SD channels are sharp and have wonderfull clarity> But in a few days I'll be saying they arn't that good.

I think we should contact Bell regarding these inconsistent annomoly's and complain to them as to why they are happening and why no one is even bothering to fix them!!

If the picture quality has the potential to be near perfect> then why should I pay for the services when the picture quality is degraded?

That would be like investing in an exotic automobile and have it perform perfectly on occassion, then disruptivly. Why invest?

rsambuca · 2009-03-01, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shingdaz

...
If the picture quality has the potential to be near perfect> then why should I pay for the services when the picture quality is degraded?

That would be like investing in an exotic automobile and have it perform perfectly on occassion, then disruptivly. Why invest?

Because Bell has decided that for their business model, having the most channels is more important than having the highest A/V quality. We are all free to explore other options if we are unsatisfied.

dosborne · 2009-03-02, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shingdaz

This leads me to conclude that: Bells SD/HD signals are all over the map!> They're not consistent and are actually archaic in terms of functionallity...it's pretty {deleted} to provide people a service that flucuautes in quality like the weather?!!>

I doubt Bell is playing with the SD quality at all.

As for HD, before making accusations, I'd suggest you ensure it is a Bell issue and not a source issue. I personally am quite happy with both SD and HD from Bell at the present time. I find it much improved from last fall.

KSPSlice · 2009-03-02, 08:53 AM

Approximately one month ago I upgraded my receiver for HD. I read through the comments regarding the picture quality of HD on Bell before upgrading which had me concerned somewhat. However, I am very pleased with the picture quality. Very happy with my choice.

haystack · 2009-03-02, 09:08 AM

Give it some time for the novelty to wear off, you too will see Bells "The Most HD" .

shingdaz · 2009-03-02, 05:28 PM

Don't get me wrong, I can tolerate the business model of freeing up bandwidth for extra channels> But it either works or it doesn't. There should be no in between.

As for my source equipment, it works flawlessy, the only explanation I can think of is the broadcaster utilizing overly compressed or poorer quality content that Bell passes onto us. Therefore the change occurs when a specific program is broadcast on the same channel.

2009-02-25, 04:46 PM	#39
scrooloose Veteran Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Grimsby, Ont. Posts: 3,117	You convert a transponder to 8PSK, not the individual channels. Presumably all the transponders that carry HD content will be converted eventually. -Mike __________________ Pioneer PRO-110FD \| Pioneer VSX-92TXH \| BELL 9242 \| Panasonic DMP-BD35 \| XBOX 360 \|WD TV Live Hub

2009-03-01, 08:03 PM	#40
shingdaz Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 34	Picture quality inconsistent: Near perfect one day> then back to macro blocking I've noticed that when monitoring the PQ threads here with Bell signals... people have the same consistency of complaining when the signals suck> and then when the signals appear OK. This leads me to conclude that: Bells SD/HD signals are all over the map!> They're not consistent and are actually archaic in terms of functionallity...it's pretty piss poor to provide people a service that flucuautes in quality like the weather?!!> The past few days I've noticed my SD channels are sharp and have wonderfull clarity> But in a few days I'll be saying they arn't that good. I think we should contact Bell regarding these inconsistent annomoly's and complain to them as to why they are happening and why no one is even bothering to fix them!! If the picture quality has the potential to be near perfect> then why should I pay for the services when the picture quality is degraded? That would be like investing in an exotic automobile and have it perform perfectly on occassion, then disruptivly. Why invest?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

2009-02-23, 04:39 PM	#31
mickk Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 517	i think the only way you will notice a piture quality improvment is if your using an old 2700/4100 IRD to somthing current. i even notice a little improment from going from a 2700 to a 3100

2009-02-23, 05:12 PM	#32
nicohockey9 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Montreal, QC, Canada Posts: 574	That really sucks we wont see an improvement on the American Superstations. Those are the station that need the most improvement!!

2009-02-24, 05:09 PM	#33
nicohockey9 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Montreal, QC, Canada Posts: 574	I was talking strictly HD though, are the HD American Superstations also on the 91 satelite?

2009-02-24, 05:12 PM	#34
Pinza Veteran Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: GTA Posts: 8,583	As of right now there are no HD channels on 91.

2009-02-24, 05:24 PM	#35
ScaryBob Veteran Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: The Dandelion City Posts: 7,133	Perceived picture quality depends a lot on the display. With a 92xx and a 768p 32" TV at 6' Bell HD looks fine. Even most of the SD channels look Ok. However, if I look at Bell HD, close up, on my 1080p computer monitor (connected with component), the defects virtually jump out. The picture looks like garbage on most HD channels. I imagine that anyone with a large 1080p HDTV will experience the same. Opinions on Bell HD will vary with display, channels watched and also the current Bell technical configuration. I've seen some channels go from good, to awful, to OK as Bell had technical issues and implemented technology changes.

2009-02-25, 04:30 PM	#38
nicohockey9 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Montreal, QC, Canada Posts: 574	So my question is, are any of the "HD" American Superstations going to be converted to 8PSK?

2009-03-02, 08:53 AM	#43
KSPSlice Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 152	Approximately one month ago I upgraded my receiver for HD. I read through the comments regarding the picture quality of HD on Bell before upgrading which had me concerned somewhat. However, I am very pleased with the picture quality. Very happy with my choice.

2009-03-02, 09:08 AM	#44
haystack Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,113	Give it some time for the novelty to wear off, you too will see Bells "The Most HD" .

2009-03-02, 05:28 PM	#45
shingdaz Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 34	Don't get me wrong, I can tolerate the business model of freeing up bandwidth for extra channels> But it either works or it doesn't. There should be no in between. As for my source equipment, it works flawlessy, the only explanation I can think of is the broadcaster utilizing overly compressed or poorer quality content that Bell passes onto us. Therefore the change occurs when a specific program is broadcast on the same channel.