 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
OK, so I decide to *finally* get a digital Set Top Box (STB) along with digital cable service after many years of plain ole analog cable. The 'promo' includes free Showtime and The Movie Channel 'til the end of 2003. I thought all my channels would be crisp and clean especially since I'm driving the TV/Monitor via the S-Video port from the back of the Comcast supplied Motorola STB. To my surprise, most of the channels look just as bad as they did on the old analog setup except for a handful of exceptions mostly on a couple premium channels like Showtime or The Movie Channel. A few of these are crystal clear with Dolby Digital 5.1 but the rest look like the same ole analog I've been living with for well over a decade now.Since I don't even plan to keep Showtime or The Movie Channel after the 'promo' period, I think I'm wasting the extra $10/mo for digital cable vs the old analog, AND I have to have their ugly looking STB taking up valuable space in my equipment rack.
Comcast Cable should have a new HDTV Set Top Box and a handful of HDTV channels maybe later this month (August 2003) in the Denver market but given my less than stellar performance with their 'digital cable', I'm thinking I should just make the jump to Satellite.
Any thoughts? Are most channels via Satellite crystal clear or is it similar to digtal cable in that only a handful of premium channels will be exceptionally crisp? Thanks!
Follow Ups:
In this case, I think it defend where you are. For instance, here in Chicago [a major city], digital is a lot crisp than analog and the price is believe it or not the same. And right now, they even have a promo where when you upgrade [which is free] to digital, you only pay less than $30 a month for a year. I guess certain city gets more than the others.BTW, why don't you try one of those $3 filter. It might help.
I have tried it in two markets (North Carolina and NYC). North Carolina only had stereo sound available (DD nonetheless) and a very limited selection (basically HBO only). Upon my return to NYC, I got HDTV which included the networks. I do have a digital front projector so the "digital blocking" which bothers some people is less of a factor. Nonetheless, the service is subject to "hiccoughs" in certain parts of town though not in others. One might presume node congestion, but I will leave such suppositions to Joe Murphy, Jr. who probably has a better handle on why this occurs.At any rate, I cancelled DTV/HDTV and Road Runner (as slow as molasses on a winter's day . . . which further supports the node congestion theory).
For now I am looking at bird in the sky for video and DLS (ugh) for the PC. Of course, NYC's ability to go Digital/HDTV locally was dealt a devastating blow on 9/11. The majors had planned to continue to broadcast from the WTC in analogue and rebuild their somewhat neglected facilities on the Empire State for HDTV. For now, "bunny ears" will not work . . . only network feeds will.
Cheers
I don't find either to be all that special. It's more marketing: digital is perfect, right? There's no distortion with digital, right? Everything will look good, right? Right... And you don't have to hold your CDs by the edges or take care of them, either.Honestly, I thought digital satellite looked like steaming poo the first time I saw it. Very blocky from the compression, differences between the colors is severe, etc. You could tell it was digital just by looking at it. Same thing with digital cable... it was nice having the extra channels, but how many of them were being watched? The simple fact is that the cable companies get the increased bandwidth of cable, then jack them so full of extra signals that they look worse than before. I'm resigned to the fact that the only way we're going to get better pictures is from HD signals being broadcast or shot down the wires properly.
Another problem... Time Warner was pushing their digital cable in the south Atlantic states wiht the guarantee that you'd be able to go back to analog if you didn't like it after the trial period. Guess what happened if you didn't like it? That's right, boys and girls... you were stuck with it... increased price tag and all. Their reason? They were converting to digital completely. This was two or three years ago. Would you believe you can still order basic analog cable from them to this day? Strange...
I've noticed that on dark scenes I get a lot of pixelation and banding. In other words, the transitions between dark and darker are blotchy with bands and blocks instead of a nice smooth transition.I think I'll take this digital set top box back and stay with analog cable until I make the switch to satellite. I hope satellite service is better than digital cable.... it's worth a try.
The other thing that really bugs me is the slow channel changing. With my analog cable I can surf through several channels very quickly. With the digital set top box it takes forever to change channels as each channel takes a second to display. (A second is a very long time when you're used to channel hopping in milli-seconds).
For me, the only benefits to upgrading to digital cable were the digital audio channels (some of which, especially jazz, sound quite good) and the limited "video on demand" functionality. HDTV adds another layer of gorgeous channels, 6 in San Diego via Time Warner at last count. Discovery is especially beautiful.However, picture quality for the rest of the channels is pretty subpar, and is automatically "stretched" from 4:3 to 16:9 by the set-top box.
As for satellite, I couldn't tell you but I'd bet the picture quality is fairly mediocre as well in that it depends on the broadcaster and whether they care about video quality. It appears that only a few, such as HBO etc., really do.
I believe most cable signal quality, whether delivered digitally or not, is still limited by the analogue sources and transmission gear used. I suspect many channels still get converted from a-to-d and back a few times before they get to the viewer depending on the provider.Since switching to digital cable, we no longer have the transmission-related degradation (ghosts, hash, audio noise, etc.) we got with our analog cable service, especially on local channels. But basic image quality isn't really much better. I expect this will remain the case until analog tape is completely replaced by digital media.
At any rate, we have no cable choice but digital to view channels above 99.
I got digital cable when that HBO Special Band of Brothers was on.. Thay had a nice promo..Comcast would NOT give me a digital cable box with a s-video out.
I was not impressed, so I cancelled it right after the miniseries was over.
As far as I am concerned digital cable is a joke. The only problem being that my cable company is the only place to see my hockey team. AND digital cable is the only way that I will be able to get those games in High Def (when I get a HDTV).
Sometimes you get the elevater,
Sometimes you get..... the SHAFT!Good Luck,
Charlie
The Motorola set top box that I got from Comcast for digital cable does include an S-Video out as well as a coaxial and optical out for audio (Dolby 5.1 on some channels).Unfortunately, picture quality via the S-Video out is still the same as what I had with plain ole analog cable that required no box at all. The slightly fuzzy channels are still as fuzzy. The ONLY place I see significant improvement is in a handful of 'premium' channels which I plan to drop anyway after the promo period. Frankly, I was expecting "S-Video Quality" on all my channels.... no such luck so I'm not impressed. I might hang around with Comcast cable just to try out their HDTV offerings hopefully later this month. Otherwies, I see myself with a satellite setup by year's end.
Just to be fair, I've been very pleased with the level of reliability and speed I get from Comcast cable internet access.
I was going to upgrade my Comcast analog to Comcast digital, but based on your comments and others, I'm doubting that it is worthwhile. Are you reasonably certain that satellite will be a higher quality picture? If so, why?Do you think there was no improvement to most of your analog channels because their source material is not of high enough quality, but the premium channels' source material IS of higher quality?
Do you think the digital cable box is essentially a de-scrambler for the premium channels? Or is it actually receiving the channels digitally?
It is my understanding that digital cable is basically the same as regular satellite, the signal is just "hardwired" over cable lines, instead of being transmitted from satellites. I have Direct TV for my premium channels and analog cable for the rest, DSS is better of course, but I had the cable company install a special HQ amplifier upstream from the broadband and CATV connection, which improved my analog signal (and Internet connection speed) greatly. Maybe that could help you.
Satellite TV is really quite easy to install, You can buy a system for almost nothing, get a compass and aim the dish and you're there. I have a second dish on my RV, have gotten pretty good at finding those "birds".
My experince is it depends on the cable company. Some just don't get it. Satellite is generally better than cable. Or for real fun try an outdoor TV antenna with good quality coax downlead. In my mind that is still the best.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
