# HR10 vs HR20 Picture Quality



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

Has anyone with both units done any controlled viewing tests? Would love to hear your comments. TIA. /steve


----------



## litzdog911 (Oct 18, 2002)

I recorded the HDNet 10-minute test patterns on both my HR10 and HR20 DVRs. Both are connected to my Sony KV40XBR800 HDTV via component video connections. To my eyes, the HR20 produces a _slightly _ better picture, with just a bit more resolution than the HR10.

In viewing normal programs, though, they're both essentially the same.


----------



## Indiana627 (Jan 24, 2003)

I just got my HR10 - what is the HDNet test pattern you referred to? Thanks.


----------



## litzdog911 (Oct 18, 2002)

Every Tuesday morning HDNet broadcasts a short 10-minute sequence of video test patterns. Check their Web site for the schedule. It should be in your HR10 Guide under "HDNet Test Patterns" if you search to setup a recording.


----------



## litzdog911 (Oct 18, 2002)

Oh, and you can find more technical information about how to use the various video test patterns in the "Video Calibration Forum" at http://www.avsforum.com.


----------



## RunnerFL (May 10, 2005)

I've done some slight comparisons between my HR10 and HR20. They are both hooked up to a Toshiba 57h94 via Component inputs and I can do a side by side comparision using the "Picture On Picture" feature. 

When it comes to SD the HR20 wins out hands down. There's a huge difference between the two on SD both 480i and 480p look so much better on the HR20.

With 720p I really can't tell a difference between the 2 at all.

1080i I'd have to give the edge to the HR20. It seems sharper than the HR10 when in 1080i.

Also, I know you didn't ask but, I can even tell a slight audio difference between the 2. I'm running both off the Optical out to a Kenwood VR-7080 and to me it sounds like the HR20 has better audio both DD and Non-Digital.


----------



## JoeSchueller (Jun 16, 2004)

If you read the DBSTalk Forums, Earl has mentioned a slightly better picture over HDMI. I'm pretty happy with my HR10's PQ. I think the difference between a good, full resolution HD signal OTA vs. compressed over the SAT is likely to produce a much bigger quality difference than HR10 vs HR20


----------



## RunnerFL (May 10, 2005)

JoeSchueller said:


> If you read the DBSTalk Forums, Earl has mentioned a slightly better picture over HDMI. I'm pretty happy with my HR10's PQ. I think the difference between a good, full resolution HD signal OTA vs. compressed over the SAT is likely to produce a much bigger quality difference than HR10 vs HR20


Yeah, you can't exactly compare OTA to MPEG4. I was comparing MPEG2 HD to MPEG2 HD.


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

Thanks for the feedback, guys.

If I may summarize what's been said so far, it sounds like from a PQ standpoint, the HR20 may have a better de-interlacer and that MPEG4 has less compression artifacts, but I get the impression that for mostly high def viewing, we're not talking about a "night and day" difference, especially if one watches a lot of OTA HD?

In other words, nothing that would make someone want to dump his/her HR-10 in favor of an HR-20, now that the speed issues are apparently fixed?

/steve


----------



## JoeSchueller (Jun 16, 2004)

Well, if you can't get OTA reliably, then MPEG4 HD Locals are a huge deal.

There will be a small community of people who will look at things like PIG (program in guide), the mini-guide, CallerID (without hacking), native pass-thru, and ability to better use D*'s "interactive" channels as positives and weigh them against the HR10. If you read my postings in the dbstalk forum, you'll find that I was pretty anti-HR10 until they announced 6.3. 

However, the ability to "enhance" the TiVo codebase to enable things like MRV, HMO, TiVoWeb, TiVoServer, etc will probably keep most techies firmly entrenched in the HR10 camp until D* starts rolling out features in MPEG-4 exclusively. If they elect to push SundayTicket exclusively into MPEG-4 or if they launch significant new national HD in MPEG-4 next year, you may see a lot of HR10's on eBay.


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

JoeSchueller said:


> If they elect to push SundayTicket exclusively into MPEG-4 or if they launch significant new national HD in MPEG-4 next year, you may see a lot of HR10's on eBay.


Points well-taken. MPEG-4 programming changes will probably drive the conversion to HR-20's more than anything.

As nice as they are, I can live without the HR-20 enhanced guide and Caller ID notification, but like others, I'm very disappointed that native-passthrough didn't make it into 6.3, especially since it was reportedly touted as a feature on the prototype 6.2 HR-10 that was seen at a past consumer electronics show. Sigh.

/steve


----------



## RunnerFL (May 10, 2005)

sluciani said:


> In other words, nothing that would make someone want to dump his/her HR-10 in favor of an HR-20, now that the speed issues are apparently fixed?
> 
> /steve


Sure, there are plenty of reasons why I dumped one of my HR10's for an HR20.

1. Native Passthru
2. You can still watch Live TV or a recording while in any menu.
3. Menus aren't "cartoony" and geared towards a 4 year old.
4. HR20 has a screen saver when in pause.
5. A Nicer looking caller ID [My HR10 is hacked to have it but it's ugly]
6. Mini Guide
7. Bookmarks

Just to name a few...


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

All nice features to have, I agree. I was just eliminating (in my mind) PQ as the motivating reason to switch.

/steve


----------



## JoeSchueller (Jun 16, 2004)

I'd add a theoretical one... 

The OTA tuner is rumored to be better from a hardware point of view. Of course, it is disabled by software right now, so that can not be confirmed.


----------



## RunnerFL (May 10, 2005)

sluciani said:


> All nice features to have, I agree. I was just eliminating (in my mind) PQ as the motivating reason to switch.
> 
> /steve


If you watch a lot of SD channels like Sci-Fi, Food, etc then PQ would be a good reason to switch.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

RunnerFL said:


> ...When it comes to SD the HR20 wins out hands down. There's a huge difference between the two on SD both 480i and 480p look so much better on the HR20.
> 
> With 720p I really can't tell a difference between the 2 at all.
> 
> 1080i I'd have to give the edge to the HR20. It seems sharper than the HR10 when in 1080i...


NP could be the reason for this. Not having NP blocks some capabilities of 1080p sets, and moves some of the rescaling, deinterlacing, etc., to the STB (for all sets), which is some cases may not be as good at doing these tasks as a particular display is. So it really depends then on how well, or how much better or worse, a particular set can perform these tasks, meaning YMMV.

It would make sense that 720p is not perceived as better, because the HR10 does not futz with 720p too much, while it does mess with 1080 content (or even 720p content at 1080i output), especially 1080p/24 content delivered as 1080i.

The same thing probably applies to 480i, which is what all SD content from typical sat channels is.

For whatever reason, any time I set my HR10's to 480i I have to crank down the blacks to compensate. 480p, 720p, and 1080i don't seem to have that issue.

But as some have speculated, the difference is certainly not "night and day", at least not in my case (I have them sitting side-by-side connected to a Sony KDS-60XS955). I actually see no difference in PQ.

But even if I did, I would never trade up for a tiny slice of PQ while trading way,way, down in functionality. The HR20 is horrid. I can't wait for it's HR10 replacement to arrive. If you are grasping at a reason to validate moving to an HR20, PQ just ain't it.


----------



## videojanitor (Dec 21, 2001)

TyroneShoes said:


> For whatever reason, any time I set my HR10's to 480i I have to crank down the blacks to compensate. 480p, 720p, and 1080i don't seem to have that issue.


I noticed that too (hard to miss!). Just curious, are you looking at the composite output? I've found, at least on my two machines, that the blacks don't go up on the S-Video out. Which is good, because that's what I use for dubbing out to DVD, etc.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

No, component on one and HDMI on the other. Both seem to show the same problem. I use S out on both to DVDR, and while blacks don't seem elevated there, there is really no way to compare them to other output formats (720, etc) seeing as how those formats are incompatible.


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> No, component on one and HDMI on the other. Both seem to show the same problem. I use S out on both to DVDR, and while blacks don't seem elevated there, there is really no way to compare them to other output formats (720, etc) seeing as how those formats are incompatible.


It's not a bug, it's a design decision, I think. I believe 480i is set at standard NTSC black (7.5 IRE), and all other inputs set to standard digital black (0 IRE). The 7.5 IRE may be there for backwards compatibility with older CRT-based displays.

Your side-by-side comparision of the HR10 and HR20 SD PQ was reassuring, because I don't think the HR10 SD quality is bad at all, and I was very surprised that the HR20 was better. I find 480p best... the HR10 de-interlacer seems to do a marginally better job than my display's de-interlacer on SD material.

Perhaps RunnerFl was comparing his HR20 SD to HR10 480i, with the "weaker" blacks.

/steve


----------



## WinstonSmith (Feb 1, 2004)

Very dumb question here, I'm sure, but what the heck is native passthrough?


----------



## majones (Sep 6, 2001)

WinstonSmith said:


> Very dumb question here, I'm sure, but what the heck is native passthrough?


Native passthrough is when the device (DVR in this case) passes through to the HDTV the signal at the resolution the source broadcasts it.


----------



## Chuck_IV (Jan 1, 2002)

RunnerFL said:


> Sure, there are plenty of reasons why I dumped one of my HR10's for an HR20.
> 
> 1. Native Passthru
> 2. You can still watch Live TV or a recording while in any menu.
> ...


The better PQ makes me wanna get one, but the one thing that is stopping me is, from what I read, there is a lack of a 2nd recording buffer. So if you are watching one program and swap tuners, to the other, there isn't a buffer to go back on and see what you missed(unless you are actually recording the show). If this is the case, this is HUGE for me, as that's how I view many simultaneous sporting events and regular shows. I watch one, then on commercial, flip to the other one and rewind to see what I missed.


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

Chuck_IV said:


> The better PQ makes me wanna get one, but the one thing that is stopping me is, from what I read, there is a lack of a 2nd recording buffer. So if you are watching one program and swap tuners, to the other, there isn't a buffer to go back on and see what you missed(unless you are actually recording the show). If this is the case, this is HUGE for me, as that's how I view many simultaneous sporting events and regular shows. I watch one, then on commercial, flip to the other one and rewind to see what I missed.


Same for me. Dual buffers is a biggie.

And better SD quality may be caibration or setting dependent. Tyrone sees no difference in SD PQ between the HR10 and HR20, both connected to his display.

Native passthrough would be nice, but not a reason for me to switch at this time either.

I'm loving the speed increase with 6.3. I've got about 40 active season's passes (45 total), and setting up recordings is now as quick as if I had only 1 SP under the 3.15f s/w.

/steve


----------



## RunnerFL (May 10, 2005)

Chuck_IV said:


> The better PQ makes me wanna get one, but the one thing that is stopping me is, from what I read, there is a lack of a 2nd recording buffer. So if you are watching one program and swap tuners, to the other, there isn't a buffer to go back on and see what you missed(unless you are actually recording the show). If this is the case, this is HUGE for me, as that's how I view many simultaneous sporting events and regular shows. I watch one, then on commercial, flip to the other one and rewind to see what I missed.


So just set both to record and flip between recordings, problem solved.


----------



## RonP (Oct 16, 2003)

litzdog911 said:


> Every Tuesday morning HDNet broadcasts a short 10-minute sequence of video test patterns. Check their Web site for the schedule. It should be in your HR10 Guide under "HDNet Test Patterns" if you search to setup a recording.


FYI. It's no longer listed in the guide or via search - although I could swear it was last week. It is listed on the HDNet website for Tuesday, 9/26, at 3:50am PT (6:50am ET) right after a 50 minute Charlie's Angels. My guide shows Angels running the full 60 minutes. I just set up a manual recording to see who's right.


----------



## CDTV (Apr 4, 2004)

So are the OTA (ATSC?) tuners enabled now? A BB rep told me the new ones (blue box, not green) have the ant tuners enabled...
Also, if it's not too OT - is the ethernet port workin'? -i.e. can U network 2 boxes to each other & get shows from the other?


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

RunnerFL said:


> So just set both to record and flip between recordings, problem solved.


I've seen this response before, along with "buy a 2nd unit." Unfortunately, recording 2 football games at a time just doesn't work well for me, and isn't the answer.

Hopefully D* will see the error in their ways and just cut that 90 minute single buffer in half, but I doubt it will be anytime soon.

Until that time, thank goodness the HR10 option is still available to us (altho it's becoming less of one).


----------



## bkdtv (Jan 9, 2003)

> If I may summarize what's been said so far, it sounds like from a PQ standpoint, the HR20 may have a better de-interlacer and that MPEG4 has less compression artifacts, but I get the impression that for mostly high def viewing, we're not talking about a "night and day" difference, especially if one watches a lot of OTA HD?


Actually, the HR10 and HR20 use the same Broadcom BCM7038 processor / video solution which handles all the deinterlacing, scaling, and playback functions. The HR20 adds more memory and a separate MPEG-4 decoding chip (BCM7411), but that's only used on locals for now.

Any differences in PQ between the HR10 and HR20 probably relate to firmware settings and the HDMI transmitter.


----------



## rcbray (Mar 31, 2004)

RonP said:


> FYI. It's no longer listed in the guide or via search - although I could swear it was last week. It is listed on the HDNet website for Tuesday, 9/26, at 3:50am PT (6:50am ET) right after a 50 minute Charlie's Angels. My guide shows Angels running the full 60 minutes. I just set up a manual recording to see who's right.


For some reason it normally doesn't appear in the guide until a day or two before it runs.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

CDTV said:


> So are the OTA (ATSC?) tuners enabled now? A BB rep told me the new ones (blue box, not green) have the ant tuners enabled...
> Also, if it's not too OT - is the ethernet port workin'? -i.e. can U network 2 boxes to each other & get shows from the other?


No, OTA is not enabled yet... hopefully by the end of October

Ethernet Port should be enabled later this year, for Intel ViiV connectivity... but not for MRV


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

sluciani said:


> It's not a bug, it's a design decision, I think. I believe 480i is set at standard NTSC black (7.5 IRE), and all other inputs set to standard digital black (0 IRE). The 7.5 IRE may be there for backwards compatibility with older CRT-based displays.
> 
> Your side-by-side comparision of the HR10 and HR20 SD PQ was reassuring, because I don't think the HR10 SD quality is bad at all...


I don't recall anyone referring to this as a "bug" (except in the AVS DVDR forums) but I think you are exactly right about that. Pedestal for US NTSC is 7.5, while for Japan it is 0 IRE. I just wish there was a preference setting on the HR10 so that I wouldn't have to adjust blacks on the display every time I go to 480i.

To my eye, good SD looks just fine on the HR10, while crappy SD looks, well, crappy. GIGO.


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> I just wish there was a preference setting on the HR10 so that I wouldn't have to adjust blacks on the display every time I go to 480i.


I believe 480i over HDMI is 0 IRE, so I guess you're connected via component. Why not use 480p instead of 480i? The de-interlacer in the HR10 isn't bad at all, IMHO.

/steve


----------



## spdntckt (Oct 3, 2004)

Has anyone compared the MPEG2 HD content to MPEG4 HD content? I am actually more concerned that overal picture quality will go down significantly due to MPEG4 conversion than anything else.. To date I have found that MPEG2 OTA to be the best, with MPEG2 D* being pretty decent.. but all the MPEG4's i have seen to date (comcast, etc) have been very noticably worse quality. I guess this makes sense given the data rate most use is roughly 50%...


----------



## eplus12 (Sep 28, 2006)

In response to the discussion regarding the 2 tuner "pause" buffer. I spoke with DTV rep about this today and they told me they are trying to add that feature in a software upgrade soon, but TIVO has a copyright on that specific feature. Only TIVO can have 2 tuner buffer. 

The HR10 takes me like 5 minutes to record a program, and the HR20 takes 1/2 a second. I think I can live with hitting record, 1/2 second later hitting previous channel and watching the program there and then flipping back. You can stop recording and delete the recording with one button in 1/2 second as well (unlike the HR10 where you have to hit stop, wait a minute, then go to menu and delete it out of your list). The speed on the HR20 is amazing!


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

eplus12 said:


> In response to the discussion regarding the 2 tuner "pause" buffer. I spoke with DTV rep about this today and they told me they are trying to add that feature in a software upgrade soon, but TIVO has a copyright on that specific feature. Only TIVO can have 2 tuner buffer.


First part TRUE... 2nd part FALSE

DirecTV is working on introducing Dual Buffers to the HR20 (and eventually the R15).
TiVo, Inc. does not have a patent on Dual Buffering


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

spdntckt said:


> Has anyone compared the MPEG2 HD content to MPEG4 HD content? I am actually more concerned that overal picture quality will go down significantly due to MPEG4 conversion than anything else.. To date I have found that MPEG2 OTA to be the best, with MPEG2 D* being pretty decent.. but all the MPEG4's i have seen to date (comcast, etc) have been very noticably worse quality. I guess this makes sense given the data rate most use is roughly 50%...


When I had the H20 still connected:

And this was for CHICAGO locals

MPEG-2 OTA was marginally better then MPEG-4 Locals
Then comparing them to the MPEG-2 HD from NY..... MPEG-4 looked better.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

TyroneShoes said:


> To my eye, good SD looks just fine on the HR10, while crappy SD looks, well, crappy. GIGO.


Then how can the HR20 take the same SD-GarbageIn and make it look less-like Garbage Out?

The SD-SciFI channel is pretty darn good on the HR20's, while on the DTivos... well we know how it looks.


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

eplus12 said:


> The HR10 takes me like 5 minutes to record a program, and the HR20 takes 1/2 a second. I think I can live with hitting record, 1/2 second later hitting previous channel and watching the program there and then flipping back. You can stop recording and delete the recording with one button in 1/2 second as well (unlike the HR10 where you have to hit stop, wait a minute, then go to menu and delete it out of your list). The speed on the HR20 is amazing!


 

5 minutes to record a program? Huh?

If you're talking about the length of time it takes after pressing the red record button while watching live TV, try doing a "Clear program information and To Do List," and the HR10 will once again become responsive.

Sounds like you've got a little housecleaning to do.

As far as the time it takes to delete a recording from the HR10 ...why do you have to "hit stop, and then wait a minute" before going through the delete process?

I simply hit the left arrow, and this brings up the "Delete this recording now" prompt....


----------



## JoeSchueller (Jun 16, 2004)

Housecleaning?!?! Are you kidding me? This is not a Windows box with a memory leak that we're supposed to deal with by rebooting. That's total crapola. This is supposed to be a reliable consumer electronics device. It is plainly shameful that this would be the case. 

It takes me well over 5 minutes to set a recording and about as long to change any setting regarding Season Passes. This is unacceptable and there should not be any user-initiated workaround, it should be systemic and far more elegant than what TiVo has left us in v3.5 on the HR10. Here's to hoping 6.3 brings performance into an acceptable range.


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

JoeSchueller said:


> Housecleaning?!?! Are you kidding me? This is not a Windows box with a memory leak that we're supposed to deal with by rebooting. That's total crapola. This is supposed to be a reliable consumer electronics device. It is plainly shameful that this would be the case.
> 
> It takes me well over 5 minutes to set a recording and about as long to change any setting regarding Season Passes. This is unacceptable and there should not be any user-initiated workaround, it should be systemic and far more elegant than what TiVo has left us in v3.5 on the HR10. Here's to hoping 6.3 brings performance into an acceptable range.


Sheesh...calm down.

It's not 'total crappola.' Purge the unit of all the excess every now and then, and it works like it did when you first got it. Simple as that.

If _you_ don't wanna do it, then you're stuck w/a slow unit. Your decision. I could care less.


----------



## JoeSchueller (Jun 16, 2004)

Well, that opinion certainly goes in the opposite direction of your username 

I do maintain that it is shameful that this is necessary. This isn't a device that should require that kind of "care and feeding." If it does, than TiVo/D* should have automated it. Why should we tolerate "all the excess"?

I'm also upset that if another DVR required this, we'd hear the outrage of the TiVo nation crying out how no one other than TiVo can develop a "rock solid dependable" DVR platform. 

I'm stuck w/ a slow unit because some combination of D* and/or TiVo have been sitting on 6.3 for far too long now. Somewhere along the way from 3.x to 6.x, TiVo got significantly smarter about their scheduling architecture to allow for a faster guide and more responsive UI (which the HR20 has out of the box).


----------



## NYHeel (Oct 7, 2003)

I use the Directv Mpeg-2 New York locals. Has anyone done a side by side comparison on the Directv Mpeg 4 locals to Directv (non-OTA) Mpeg 2 locals. I'm not too impressed with Directv HD PQ as a whole and I thought maybe the HR20 would help. I'd probably even get one were it not for that ridiculous 2 year commitment. Does anyone know of a way to get an HR20 at a reasonable cost without a commitment?


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

NYHeel said:


> . Does anyone know of a way to get an HR20 at a reasonable cost without a commitment?


You can get them for free, or $800.... but the activation of the unit will ALWAYS incure 2 year commitment... unless you can sweet talk the rentention department.


----------



## Playdoh (Jul 13, 2006)

JoeSchueller said:


> ...This is not a Windows box with a memory leak that we're supposed to deal with by rebooting.


Nope, it's a Linux box with a memory leak


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

JoeSchueller said:


> Well, that opinion certainly goes in the opposite direction of your username


Actually, I created this username _because_ of the incredible amount of incessant whiners who were posting on this board at the time ....waaa-waaa! It was in their honor that it was bourne... 



> I'm also upset that if another DVR required this, we'd hear the outrage of the TiVo nation crying out how no one other than TiVo can develop a "rock solid dependable" DVR platform.


Huh.

Who woulda thought you'd find people here on the _TiVo Community Forum_ with that kinda mentality? I mean ...what are the odds? 



> I'm stuck w/ a slow unit because some combination of D* and/or TiVo have been sitting on 6.3 for far too long now. Somewhere along the way from 3.x to 6.x, TiVo got significantly smarter about their scheduling architecture to allow for a faster guide and more responsive UI (which the HR20 has out of the box).


You're not 'stuck.' Sell your HR10 ...or swap for the 'much mo better' HR20 and be done with it ...problem solved.

In the meantime, even though it's "shameful" that's it's necessary to hafta "Clear program info and To Do List" to get your unit so that it operates like it did when you first got it ...have you _tried_ it? We did this months ago, and the unit is _still_ performing very much like the day we purchased it.

Or would you rather continue to be unhappy with the current performance on principle?


----------



## JoeSchueller (Jun 16, 2004)

It's a forum... definitely principle!


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

JoeSchueller said:


> It's a forum... definitely principle!


  :up:


----------



## eplus12 (Sep 28, 2006)

Sir_whinealot said:


> 5 minutes to record a program? Huh?
> 
> If you're talking about the length of time it takes after pressing the red record button while watching live TV, try doing a "Clear program information and To Do List," and the HR10 will once again become responsive.
> 
> ...


I will try what you suggested, but from day one the HR-10 software was sluggish compared to the speed of the HR20. The biggest thing I missed about the TIVO unit beofre HD HR10 were the folders!! The HR20 has folders to sort recorded items! I save 20 to 30 of the same programs for my son!


----------



## eplus12 (Sep 28, 2006)

I was told by DTV that the HR-10 is MPEG 2 and will not be supported after early 2007. If this is true, will everyone need to move to the HR-20 MPEG 4 units?


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

eplus12 said:


> I will try what you suggested, but from day one the HR-10 software was sluggish compared to the speed of the HR20. The biggest thing I missed about the TIVO unit beofre HD HR10 were the folders!! The HR20 has folders to sort recorded items! I save 20 to 30 of the same programs for my son!


I can fully understand that ...my kids have the NP list awash with _many_ of the same programs and it's truly a mess.

And 6.3 has apparently started up again, so you should have your folders (along w/increased menu and function speed) very soon.

Remember that a "clear program info and To Do List" will wipe out your Season Passes, and you'll hafta repopulate the list ...so write them down first.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

eplus12 said:


> I was told by DTV that the HR-10 is MPEG 2 and will not be supported after early 2007. If this is true, will everyone need to move to the HR-20 MPEG 4 units?


Yes... basically... The exact date hasn't been set, but DirecTV is migrating all SAT based HD programming to MPEG-4

You can expect some of it to be converted by the end of MPEG-4 (or at least all the new ones to be in MPEG-4)... but it won't be soon after the end of 2007 when the total conversion would be flipped.

This does not effect your SD channels or your OTA...
Just HD channels that are transmitted via SAT


----------



## Randyox (Jun 28, 2002)

I have 3 Directv Tivo's in my home. I just got a Mitsubishi 3000 projector (and I love it!) and am now considering getting the HR20 so I can get Hi Def. I am really struggling with this decision. I am leaning toward going with Dish because it has more HD channels. I called Directv and spoke with retention and they say they can send me the HR20 and they will waive the install fee and give me a $250 credit with 4 months of HD for free. Is this a good deal? Dish is offering me basically the same thing... The rep at retention told me that they are coming out with 150 new HD channels in 2007. I've been with Directv for almost 12 years and have been through all the promises and missed deadlines so I don't know what to believe. At any rate...any input would be appreciated...


----------



## eplus12 (Sep 28, 2006)

150 new HD channels?? Wow that would be amazing. They would have to fill the entire sky with satellites.


----------



## Randyox (Jun 28, 2002)

Exactly! When I asked him to clarify 150 channels he said that that is what they will have the capacity to deliver. I told him that they may have the "potential" to do it but having the potential and actually doing it are two different things. Again, Directv has promised a lot of things and more times than not, we have had to play the "wait and see game". At least the DishNetwork has more HD channnels at this point...


----------



## eplus12 (Sep 28, 2006)

The reason Dish has more channels is because they bought the bankrupt VOOM company (all HD satellite provider). The extra channels are very niche as well. For example, Monsters (horror), Kung Fu, etc. I do like that they have Starz HD, and National Geographic HD.


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

ebonovic said:


> The SD-SciFI channel is pretty darn good on the HR20's, while on the DTivos... well we know how it looks.


If both units use the same Broadcom MPEG2 decoding and de-interlacing chipset as previously reported, then you would expect quality to be the same on both. I just checked, and the SCiFi channel on my HR10 looks better than most and definitely no worse than the other SD channels I receive.

/steve


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

sluciani said:


> I just checked, and the SCiFi channel on my HR10 looks better than most and definitely no worse than the other SD channels I receive.
> 
> /steve


+1. Smeek too ...



Worst looking channel for me would hafta be USA ...SciFi is actually pretty dang impressive for SD.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

sluciani said:


> I believe 480i over HDMI is 0 IRE, so I guess you're connected via component. Why not use 480p instead of 480i? The de-interlacer in the HR10 isn't bad at all, IMHO.
> 
> /steve


Not sure why you would believe that (the 0 IRE thing), but I use 480i for only one thing, which is DVDR dubs. 480p is not a choice. And I am connected by S-video for that. I agree that the deinterlacer in the HR10 is pretty good, which is why I use 720p output (it's better than the one in my Sony).


----------



## kbohip (Dec 30, 2003)

RunnerFL said:


> Sure, there are plenty of reasons why I dumped one of my HR10's for an HR20.
> 
> 1. Native Passthru
> 2. You can still watch Live TV or a recording while in any menu.
> ...


The HR20 has a screen saver while in pause? That's a HUGE deal for me! I Have a RPTV that my wife always pauses the Tivo on and leaves the room. I'm always worried about burn-in so a screensaver would be a Godsend. Nothing else on that list appeals to me at all though. You left out the free space indicator which is really nice to have too.


----------



## bidger (Mar 30, 2001)

kbohip said:


> You left out the free space indicator which is really nice to have too.


Yup. How long have we been asking TiVo for that? It's especially crucial now when you're recording HD.


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> Not sure why you would believe that (the 0 IRE thing)


When I was connected via HDMI, blacks appeared the same to me at all four resolutions. This makes sense to me because if 7.5 IRE at 480i was only there for legacy CRT support, the HR10's designers most likely assumed HDMI would only be connected to a digital display, so they used digital black settings across the board.



> but I use 480i for only one thing, which is DVDR dubs. 480p is not a choice. And I am connected by S-video for that. I agree that the deinterlacer in the HR10 is pretty good, which is why I use 720p output (it's better than the one in my Sony).


If I watch SD at 720p, I lose my ability to use the panoramic stretch mode on my PDP, which only work for 480i/480p source material.

/steve


----------

