# New TV without upgrading D* equipment



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

I do not really want to switch our DirectTV standard equipment at this time as it seems pretty solid and things on the HD end appear to not be really ready for my prime time yet as far as HDMI problems etc. [We like our Directivo best when it is not in the mail -- we have had no down time yet and would like to keep it that way.]

We do need to replace our only TV and plan on getting an HDTV set that will continue to work down the road for us but would like to use it without changing to the HD version of our current Directivo setup at this time.

My question is: will the picture I get on a new HDTV TV set be as good or better than what we have gotten on our old non-HDTV CRT projection TV? [One salesman had me concerned that my picture on a new HDTV may not be nearly as good due to the 480i output of my current D* equipment and how the new TVs will handle it.  -- I am probably going to stick with the CRT technology as it seems to be very dependable technology; not requiring down time or service calls for over a decade at a time].

I assume someone in the Tivo community must have tried this, but could not find anyone posting about this scenario. I appologize if this has been discussed before. If you have upgraded your TV but not your Directivo equipment, please let me know if your picture is grainy or just as good or better than it was on your previous SD TV?

TIA,

Mike


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

In all honest it will look worse....

and here is why:

1) You are probably going to go to a LARGER screen then you have before. This is a similar affect when you take a picture and blow it up.... it can only look so good, and technology can only blend things so much. If there is not enough information in the video image, the larger it gets, the worse it is going to look. Note: Technology built into newer TV's try to offset this as best they can, but they can only go so far. 

2) Newer technology in the TV's tend to show you EVERYTHING the signal sends up. So you will start to see the compression and macro blockin in the images.

3) You will probably be getting a widescreen TV... That will make the pictures looked stretched (unless you go into reverse letterbox mode), and that will take some time to get used to.

BUT... with those said... The image is still going to look "okay" provided you are not sitting on top of the TV.... I run my SD- DTivo through my 50" plasma... after a few weeks, i have gotten used to it.... But I do try to watch as much as possible via the HD-DTivo (HR10-250)


----------



## kepper (Nov 28, 2003)

mike48 said:


> If you have upgraded your TV but not your Directivo equipment, please let me know if your picture is grainy or just as good or better than it was on your previous SD TV?
> 
> TIA,
> 
> Mike


Hi Mike,

I got a 32" Sharp Aquos in early December and used it with an D* R-10 for a couple of weeks before my HR 10-250 arrived. I also was concerned that the picture quality of SD broadcasts from D* would look lousy on my HD set.

They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder... so take the following comments as my own opinion; others may disagree. In short, I thought the picture quality from the R-10 was acceptable on my HDTV. In some ways it was a little better than on the CRT it replaced, in other ways it wasn't quite as good. I think the colors were more vibrant and crisper on the HDTV. I think that D*'s compression artifacts were more apparent. And the 4X3 sidebars were a PITA.

I installed an antenna before my HR 10-250 arrived, and watched some off the air analog signals on my HDTV. The artifacts were gone, but I got some ghosting, some static and occasionally some snow in the picture, so I switched back to the standard D* signal, because overall it was better. (My set doesn't have an ATSC tuner, so I couldn't get the digital channels OTA.)

My verdict? Watching SD from my R-10 was OK on my HDTV. It certainly wasn't nearly as bad as I feared, but it also didn't do justice to the capabilities of the TV set. Not bad, but not GREAT.

Kevin

P.S. I have had a HR 10-250 for a couple of weeks and it rocks! It is hooked up to my TV through HDMI and I've had no problems. I also use an outside antenna for OTA reception through the HR 10-250. No problems so far, I love it.


----------



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

Thanks for the info. So it sounds like the picture will actually be worse than what I am getting now from all that I have heard so far. Kind of depressing to buy a new TV and get a worse picture than before. 



kepper said:


> I also use an outside antenna for OTA reception through the HR 10-250. No problems so far, I love it.


I am not really familiar with any of the OTA issues with D* equipment. It sounds like from what you have said (your TV does not have a tuner for OTA) that your HT10-250 takes care of the tuning of OTA locals. Can you also schedule these programs to be recorded with a season pass or is recording OTA stuff a completely different procedure than non-OTA? If so, I assume there is likely much "hokieness" involved.


----------



## hoopsrgreat (Jan 2, 2005)

I had a 60" Mits rear projection non HD tv. Th epicture was good using my SD tivo. I replaced that with a 61" Samsung 1080P HD tv. The picture is not as good for standard def tv IMO. The picture is far bhetter with any HD content, but SD basketball on the nba league pass is not so hot.

DVDs are better.

Almost all primetime content is HD now from OTA where I live.

Just keep in mind, in 2006 we will hopefully be seeing HD DVD or Blue Ray in high volumes. Keep our fingers crossed.


----------



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

I will be interested to see how the wife reacts to me telling her the new TV I am planning on buying won't look so great. (When we first started using DVDs, she didn't like the black horizontal bars and wanted to continue to get movies on Tape so we didn't "have that problem" -- I am sure she will have a hard time to getting used to vertical bars on a new TV.

I guess another option I should consider is to replace my 52" CRT PTV with a 27" SD CRT we have in storage and postpone the HD TV until we feel D* is out of beta mode.


----------



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

ebonovic said:


> In all honest it will look worse....
> 
> and here is why:
> 
> 1) You are probably going to go to a LARGER screen then you have before. This is a similar affect when you take a picture and blow it up.... it can only look so good, and technology can only blend things so much. If there is not enough information in the video image, the larger it gets, the worse it is going to look. Note: Technology built into newer TV's try to offset this as best they can, but they can only go so far.


I will be getting about the same size screen; about 50-52" (however it will now, of course, be a widescreen).


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

When you get a new HD Ready TV, make sure you turn down the brightness, contrast and sharpness settings. These are set at the factory way too high and cause the picture to look worse. Why are they set so high? So that when on display in a store they tend to "pop" out.

Also, tell the wife that having the black horizontal bars is a good thing. Because you see more of the show as the directors wanted, in widescreen.

And if she doesn't like the horizontal bars, wait until she sees the pillar box bars when watching 4:3 content on a widescren 16:9 display.


----------



## kepper (Nov 28, 2003)

mike48 said:


> I am not really familiar with any of the OTA issues with D* equipment. It sounds like from what you have said (your TV does not have a tuner for OTA) that your HT10-250 takes care of the tuning of OTA locals. Can you also schedule these programs to be recorded with a season pass or is recording OTA stuff a completely different procedure than non-OTA? If so, I assume there is likely much "hokieness" involved.


No "hokieness" at all. The HR 10-250 has four tuners, two satellite and two for ATSC OTA signals. You connect an antenna to the HR 10-250 and it does a scan to see which OTA channels you can receive; it then downloads guide data for those channels and they show up just like any other channel in your channel list. The satellite channels have are designated (SAT) in the guides, and the OTA channels are designated (ANT). You can go into channel settings and select only those channels you want to see in the guide. The OTA signal is passed through to your HDTV if you have selected that channel to watch.

Season passes, wishlists, etc. work with the satellite channels and the OTA channels. Since the picture quality from the OTA channels can be significantly better than those from D*, I normally choose to record shows from the OTA channels. Since I live in the Los Angeles area, I get the same locals from the D* HD network feed that I get OTA. The OTAs look somewhat better because they don't have compression artifacts.

Kevin


----------



## goony (Nov 20, 2003)

mike48 said:


> (When we first started using DVDs, she didn't like the black horizontal bars and wanted to continue to get movies on Tape so we didn't "have that problem"


My wife had the same complaint with DVDs or broadcast letterbox movies, but if it's a movie she really likes (read: chick flick) then there will be no squawking. I once asked her (at the end of the movie) about the letterboxing on the DVD she rented and she had to admit she didn't even notice it!


----------



## flmgrip (Nov 26, 2003)

hoopsrgreat said:


> Almost all primetime content is HD now from OTA where I live.


please don't mislead anyone here. OTA channels transmit HD all the time but a good 80-90% of that is in 4:3 format...

JimSpence is right. turn DOWN SHARPNESS. to the lowest setting.

i can't recommend CRT, but if you want to go that way that's fine. either way it will not look worse than before unless you talk yourself into it. some will look differnet like the stretch modes, but you will get used to it.

also get the HD tivo or HD receiver. you won't regred it. keep your existingtivo as a backup, but HDMI issues are not that bad anymore and there are plenty of customers out there without problems. on these forums you mostly read about the bad stuff...

get a new set and enjoy it


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

flmgrip said:


> please don't mislead anyone here. OTA channels transmit HD all the time but a good 80-90% of that is in 4:3 format...


6 nights a week (Exclude Saturday, since there are very few series on)... 3 hours each night, 4 main networks (CBS/NBC/ABC/FOX)
18x4 = 72 hours;

Let's see... 
All 3 CSIs are in HD 16:9 
All 3 Law and Orders are in HD 16:9 
E-Ring 1 Hour
Criminal Minds
Lost
Ghost Whispers
ER
Close to Home
Cold Case
Alias
Commander and Chief
Bones
24
Desperate Housewifes
Surface 
Las Vegas
Medium

That would account for 21 of that 72 hour window.
That would be just under 30% of the primetime window, and that is just the 1hr shows. Shall we continue with the 30 minute shows (which basically anything new in the last 2 years is done in HD and at 16:9)....

Your are looking at least 50% of the primetime window is in HD and at 16:9
This is before you account for Late Evening (Jay Leno), Specials (Awards shows), sports.... And those programs on the WB and UPN that are done in HD 16:9...

And that is just the OTA broadcasts....
We could continue to list the series shows on HBO-HD, SHOW-HD; Discovery-HD, and the replays that are on UPD-HD (such as BSG)...


----------



## flmgrip (Nov 26, 2003)

earl

you are saying 30%-40% i am saying 10%-20%

some of the shows you are naming are not even on air, alias and 24 come in mind. i am too bored by this to look any further into your math.

yes primetime the % might be higher, but why only look at tv-shows ? what about news, commercials, real-tv and informative shows ? HBO, SHO and discovery are prime channels (HD-package) UPD-HD i have no idea what that is sorry.

but look at 24/7 broadcast's, news, mid-day shows, reality-tv... don't see HD there. switch to ESPN-HD, chances are it's not HD (and that is a PRIME $$ channel)

late evening it's only jay leno and the other dude (letterman ?)

it's not all that fantastic, it's not all HD... but before you think i am a HD hater, D* hater or complainer, look at the post i did link to.

hey i am on your side, but don't make someone belief that it is all HD, because it is not. and to look at 3hrs out of 24... that's not even 10%... get real. but i love HD anyway, especially disc-HD


----------



## ntwrkd (Oct 18, 2003)

I just bought a 42" Panasonic Plasma TH-42PD50U EDTV (not HDTV). I have it hooked up to my Philips SD DSR-704 via S-Video. The EDTV upconverts the 480i (interlaced analog signal) to 480p (progressive scan). Some channels look pixelated and or blurry and some channels look GREAT! I believe that the major factor at play here is the amount of compression being applied to some feeds and any attempts made to "clean up" a bad feed from a network or channel provider. Channels like Discovery, HBO, ESPN,etc. (real cable channels that don't broadcast OTA) are ALWAYS consistantly better on the plasma than when viewed on my old analog Sony Vega 25" CRT (which has a great picture but is not capable of displaying 480p). I have all the settings tweaked to minimize the effects from a "bad" broadcast stream. 
Bottom line: 
I'll still take the plasma over the old CRT anyday! It's brighter, has more vivid colors and a more enjoyable viewing experience overall. Since I watch mostly ESPN, Discovery, HBO, Starz and other (cable only ) channels most of the time, I am extremely happy with SD programming as I think HD is too pricey for the amount of channels being provided at this time. Maybe in another 5 years or so, we won't have to worry about SD anymore because the hardware and the amount of channels provided will be a better value.


----------



## Blurayfan (Oct 6, 2003)

flmgrip said:


> some of the shows you are naming are not even on air, alias and 24 come in mind. i am too bored by this to look any further into your math.


Alias has been on air since September, only off for Holidays. 24 returns in January.


flmgrip said:


> hey i am on your side, but don't make someone belief that it is all HD, because it is not. and to look at 3hrs out of 24... that's not even 10%... get real. but i love HD anyway, especially disc-HD


It's more than 10%, 3 hours of 24 is 1/8 or 12.5% of 24.


----------



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

flmgrip said:


> also get the HD tivo or HD receiver. you won't regred it. keep your existingtivo as a backup, but HDMI issues are not that bad anymore and there are plenty of customers out there without problems. on these forums you mostly read about the bad stuff...
> 
> get a new set and enjoy it


Thanks for the encouragement. Is there much of a hassle switching to an old backup Directivo that has been out of service for some time?


----------



## KDE (Dec 22, 2005)

Does the HR 10-250 require a landline?

Right now we are using the R10 with no phone line (connected initially through the neighbors line) and just skip past the DTV notice. As a sidebar we are also in the process of buying a new HDTV (Pioneer Elite 50" plasma or Dell 50" plasma) -- any comments? We like the models without the speakers attached...


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

flmgrip said:


> earl
> 
> you are saying 30%-40% i am saying 10%-20%
> 
> ...


Sorry... late night, and I was having a "bad" forum evening on other forums...

What I was trying to point out is that over the past 2 years, there has been a significant leap forward in programs that in HD and are 16:9 (some one else pointed out about Alias and 24)...

UPD-HD (sorry about that... bad accronym... Universal Pictures HD not sure why I threw the extra D in there)...

But there is at least 1 hour a night on ever channel that is in HD (normally the 9pm CST time slot) if not more....

Commercials are probably going to be the last thing to convert to HD... but who really cares about Commercials... 

My local ABC affiliate does broadcast in HD 16:9 evening news, but what we get extra.... Blank desk space, as they still need to keep the two ancors in the center of the picture... Nice, but not a big deal either...

Since got my HDTV two years ago... there is SO much more to what in HD then before, and if it wasn't for BattleStar Galatica being replayed on UHD... I would can the HD package for a while...


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

KDE said:


> Does the HR 10-250 require a landline?
> 
> Right now we are using the R10 with no phone line (connected initially through the neighbors line) and just skip past the DTV notice. As a sidebar we are also in the process of buying a new HDTV (Pioneer Elite 50" plasma or Dell 50" plasma) -- any comments? We like the models without the speakers attached...


It requires it in the same sense your R10 does... For the setup process, and that is it.

Take a look at www.avsforum.com for information regarding your Plasma purchase. (IMHO stay far away from the Dell). I own the commercial version of the Pioneer Elite (at least the one from two years ago) and love it.

Do some looking around... You may be able to save your self a TON of $$$ by going with a commercial version Plasma, and adding a video card to it. I ended up saving nearly $5k when I purchased mine (vs going with the Elite, and it basically is the same TV)


----------



## rick31621 (Jun 20, 2004)

Interested in Plasma look at Panasonic.
Interested in LCD look at Sony.


----------



## flmgrip (Nov 26, 2003)

DVDKingdom said:


> Alias has been on air since September, only off for Holidays. 24 returns in January.
> 
> It's more than 10%, 3 hours of 24 is 1/8 or 12.5% of 24.


oh brother....


----------



## flmgrip (Nov 26, 2003)

ebonovic said:


> Sorry... late night, and I was having a "bad" forum evening on other forums...
> 
> What I was trying to point out is that over the past 2 years, there has been a significant leap forward in programs that in HD and are 16:9 (some one else pointed out about Alias and 24)...
> 
> ...


yes you are absolutely right. and it is a great improvement compared to a few years ago. i just wanted to clarify your post which made it sound that everything is true HD... just don't want anyone be disappointed when they see black bars on the sides (or ESPN bars) and think their receiver is broken...


----------



## rlj5242 (Dec 20, 2000)

mike48 said:


> Thanks for the encouragement. Is there much of a hassle switching to an old backup Directivo that has been out of service for some time?


 Why take it out of service? I use my GXCEBOT to record a lot of my SD shows and my HR10-250 for my HD shows. Both are connected to my Mitsu 55" HD in the living room and my Panasonic projector in the theater room.

-Robert


----------



## flmgrip (Nov 26, 2003)

mike48 said:


> Thanks for the encouragement. Is there much of a hassle switching to an old backup Directivo that has been out of service for some time?


no just plug it in, call D* and activate that receiver with the serial number and card number (of that receiver) i don't think you could just move the HD card over...


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

flmgrip said:


> yes you are absolutely right. and it is a great improvement compared to a few years ago. i just wanted to clarify your post which made it sound that everything is true HD... just don't want anyone be disappointed when they see black bars on the sides (or ESPN bars) and think their receiver is broken...


IMHO... ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD are a boarderline waste of space. They have a marginal amount of shows in HD (take sportscenter and it's clones out and goes way down).... At least the few live sporting events they do show in HD are pretty darn good.

Still not sure why they introduced ESPN2-HD when they haven't even come close to filling up ESPN-HD.... Oh well...


----------



## john-duncan-yoyo (Oct 13, 2004)

ebonovic said:


> Still not sure why they introduced ESPN2-HD when they haven't even come close to filling up ESPN-HD.... Oh well...


Perhaps It is for those times when they want to show two live HD events.


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

flmgrip said:


> please don't mislead anyone here. OTA channels transmit HD all the time but a good 80-90% of that is in 4:3 format...


Sorry, but this is misinformation. In my area I have 4 stations transmitting a digital signal. Only two of them have any HD content, ABC and PBS. The other ones are definitely not 4:3 HD. And yes, sometimes the HD stations are broadcasting 4:3 content within their 16:9 picture, but the quality is still SD.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

I guess a lot of it simply relies on where you are in the country.... and what market.

The "deadline" is to broadcast digitally.... it has nothing to do with what is broadcasted on the digital signal... 

For the record: The information I posted above, was based on the OTA Locals available in the Chicago area.


----------



## hoopsrgreat (Jan 2, 2005)

Since I started the whole thing about locals in my area being mostly HD, ill clarify what I was thinking.

First off, I get locals from the Sacramento area. When talking about my locals, im not talking about naything other than primetime. I work in the day, and dont watch tv at all during the day. Locals IN MY AREA are mostly in HD. What percent..... I dont have a clue, lets just take my words of "MOST" meaning more than not is in HD.
MOST shows on between 8-10 are in HD from my OTA locals.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

ebonovic said:


> Sorry... late night, and I was having a "bad" forum evening on other forums...
> 
> What I was trying to point out is that over the past 2 years, there has been a significant leap forward in programs that in HD and are 16:9 (some one else pointed out about Alias and 24)...
> 
> ...


The question that I have for all HD viewers, how much of the "HD Content" was actually filmed in HD or is just up converted SD content. This is something that the New York Times tech writer was pointing out. If you can't see the pimples or holes on the actor or actress faces, then it is likely up converted SD content and not actual HD content.

But qualifying the difference for most HD viewers would be had to do. Next time you view those "HD shows", look closely at the picture. It is a well know fact that actor or actress are upset that true HD Content shows too much of their facial flaws and that makeup artists are having a hard time covering over the flaws.

BTW, who cares about the NFL football players! They might actually welcome the display of their scars.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

tbeckner said:


> The question that I have for all HD viewers, how much of the "HD Content" was actually filmed in HD or is just up converted SD content. This is something that the New York Times tech writer was pointing out. If you can't see the pimples or holes on the actor or actress faces, then it is likely up converted SD content and not actual HD content.
> 
> But qualifying the difference for most HD viewers would be had to do. Next time you view those "HD shows", look closely at the picture. It is a well know fact that actor or actress are upset that true HD Content shows too much of their facial flaws and that makeup artists are having a hard time covering over the flaws.
> 
> BTW, who cares about the NFL football players! They might actually welcome the display of their scars.


True... not much of it is filmed in HD... And basically tells me... dang... SD really sucked... As the upconverts look pretty dang good... And I can't wait to start seeing things that are filmed in HD..


----------



## flmgrip (Nov 26, 2003)

JimSpence said:


> Sorry, but this is misinformation. In my area I have 4 stations transmitting a digital signal. Only two of them have any HD content, ABC and PBS. The other ones are definitely not 4:3 HD. And yes, sometimes the HD stations are broadcasting 4:3 content within their 16:9 picture, but the quality is still SD.


oh man, some people are really nit-picking here just to throw in a word... who cares if it's 8,10 or 12% ?

Jim, there is nothing like 4:3 HD. either it is 16:9 and that will be an HD signal in that resolution or it is 4:3 and it is not true HD resolution. IN MY area, all four locals are BROADCASTING a signal 24/7 on their HD-channels, BUT 80-90% of the times it is 4:3 format which would make it not HD.

hoopsrgreat, a good amount of shows between 8-10 are HD... but that is a small amount of the entire day (wich is not in HD)

tbeckner and ebonovic, any tv-show (bones, csi etc...) that is shot on FILM can be transmitted in HD, even if it was shot five years ago. we started "protecting" for a HD a long time ago, but often gave up it until very recently. so if you would see a show from five years ago shot on FILM, you would be able to see true HD quality, but just with some equipment, lights and crew in the frame once in a while.
any movie shot on FILM can be transmitted in HD even if it was shot 20 years ago.
any TV broadcast, such as reality tv, news and live shows CAN NOT be broadcast in HD unless they use true HD cameras which are not widely available yet and therefore expensive. and at this point it is more expensive to shot (video) HD than it is film. unless you roll a LOT of material.

"It is a well know fact that actor or actress are upset that true HD Content shows too much of their facial flaws and that makeup artists are having a hard time covering over the flaws"

is it really ?? that is more like a rumor, gossip and hollywood talk. definitely not a fact.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

Thanks filmgrip..... I did know that Film can be remasterd up to HD...

Just didn't translate it into the discussion.... 

But again, if what I am not seeing today is the full potential of HD (which I know it isn't)...
Gosh SD really really really, stinks in comparison to what will be...


----------



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

The TV I am now interested in is a Hitachi 51" CRT PTV [51F710A]. It has one HDMI input.

Down the road, I will have my D* box hooked up to HDMI. Will I be sorry I don't have a 2nd HDMI for DVD input? or are the component/composite inputs pretty acceptable for DVD?


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

Yes component is fine for DVD...

But in time you will find that some audio/video recievers will have built in HDMI switching...


----------



## flmgrip (Nov 26, 2003)

mike you can always buy a splitter, depending on you needs it won't be more than $200.- or so. don't buy a tv because of the inputs, buy it because you like the picture, size and style.

ebonovic, your statement is to complicated for me (or i had one too many beers) do you like HD as it is today or not ? i just watched bones today and i was just blown away...


----------



## rick31621 (Jun 20, 2004)

Consider the Sony 51" KP-51WS520 before you purchase the Hitachi if you are going CRT RP.


----------



## beanpoppa (Jan 7, 2004)

I wouldn't say the picture would be worse for an HDTV CRT. It may even look better. If you get a larger TV, then certain poor quality items, such as compression artifacts, will be more noticeable. However, a CRT display doesn't have to upconvert the SDTV signal since it doesn't have the native resolution issues that a fixed pixel display has.

If you were getting an LCD (direct-view or projection), DLP, or plasma, then yes. I would say that an SDTV image would look worse.

I have a 36" HDTV CRT, and a 40" EDTV plasma. SD looks good on both of them, but certainly better on the CRT. The CRT looks as good, if not slightly better than my old 32" CRT, and the plasma generally looks slightly worse (false contouring, macroblocking)



mike48 said:


> Thanks for the info. So it sounds like the picture will actually be worse than what I am getting now from all that I have heard so far. Kind of depressing to buy a new TV and get a worse picture than before.
> 
> I am not really familiar with any of the OTA issues with D* equipment. It sounds like from what you have said (your TV does not have a tuner for OTA) that your HT10-250 takes care of the tuning of OTA locals. Can you also schedule these programs to be recorded with a season pass or is recording OTA stuff a completely different procedure than non-OTA? If so, I assume there is likely much "hokieness" involved.


----------



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

rick31621 said:


> Consider the Sony 51" KP-51WS520 before you purchase the Hitachi if you are going CRT RP.


Thanks Rick. I will be checking that out.


----------



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

I believe I heard that the D* SD equipment outputs a 480i "signal" for all channels. Is this the same output one would get for an SD channel when using D* HD boxes OR would the output be more "HD like" for these same channels when using the HD box?


----------



## rlj5242 (Dec 20, 2000)

mike48 said:


> I believe I heard that the D* SD equipment outputs a 480i "signal" for all channels.


 Correct.



mike48 said:


> Is this the same output one would get for an SD channel when using D* HD boxes OR would the output be more "HD like" for these same channels when using the HD box?


 I've used both a Hughes E-86 and an HR10-250 HDTV receiver. SD pictures on both look just like the SD picture coming from my older Series 1 DirecTivo. The HD receivers don't magically add information to the already overcompressed SD signal. You will get much better results by calibrating your HDTV to get the best picture possible.

-Robert


----------



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

rick31621 said:


> Consider the Sony 51" KP-51WS520 before you purchase the Hitachi if you are going CRT RP.


The model Sony currently has on their website for 51" CRT PTV is KDP-51WS655; I assume this is most likely their current offering for this type/size TV.

Our TV repair guy had rated Hitachi ahead of Sony, I believe for failure/repair history among other things; but did have them both at the top of his list.

It looks very nice. Thanks.


----------



## mike48 (Jul 18, 2003)

Well I guess the best way to answer how will my D* SD PVR output look on my HD TV is to take your equipment to the store and plug it in and see before you buy. That is what I did today (at Sears) and the picture looks good to me.


----------



## rlj5242 (Dec 20, 2000)

mike48 said:


> Well I guess the best way to answer how will my D* SD PVR output look on my HD TV is to take your equipment to the store and plug it in and see before you buy. That is what I did today (at Sears) and the picture looks good to me.


 That will only give you an approximate indication of how it will look. 99% of HDTV displays are not properly calibrated. Take the time to adjust the settings of your TV and you will get a decent SD picture and a great HD picture.

-Robert


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

mike48 said:


> The TV I am now interested in is a Hitachi 51" CRT PTV [51F710A]. It has one HDMI input.
> 
> Down the road, I will have my D* box hooked up to HDMI. Will I be sorry I don't have a 2nd HDMI for DVD input? or are the component/composite inputs pretty acceptable for DVD?


Just found this thread. Did you get the 51 inch? I got the 57 a few months ago (it's probably 500 bucks cheaper by now lol) and found it's great for SD viewing, a paramount concern of mine. It has exactly the same size 4:3 pic as my old 46 inch hitachi and the picture is better than the old tv. Of course HD is great but I dont need to get into that.

oh and I've found the SD pumped up to 1080 from the HDtivo looks better than at 480. I dont know the technology of it all, just that it does look better..period.


----------

