How much better is HDTV?

[126coupe]

I finally moved into the 21st century and bought a Sony 46" LCD. The cable guying is bringing the box so I can have HDTV.
Will I notice a conciderable difference?

[David]

YES!!!

[cstreit]

To some degree on regular channels, on HD channels you'll be vlown away. I'll still watch mediocre programs just because they're HD>

[masraum]

One thing. The cable guy will probably provide a cable for component inputs. In my experience that didn't work for crap. I got a better picture from a regular coax cable. I think you'll definitely want a HDMI cable, but don't pay the ridiculous prices that most retail stores charge. You can get the cables at a decent price on the web. Do a search her for a thread on the cables. It has a web page for a place that sells cables that run <$50 instead of the cables that you'd see at retail stores for >$100. I've read some reviews where the signal was tested via equipment and also subjectively and you can't generally tell the difference between a $30 cable and a $130 cable.

[red-beard]

Yes.

SDTV=480i - 640x480=30720 pixels,
but, only 1/2 are updated each pass - Effective 153600 pixels
EDTV=480p -640x480=30720 pixels - updated each pass
HDTV=720p - 1280x720=921600 pixels - updated each pass
HDTV=1080i - 1920x1080=2073600
but, only 1/2 are updated each pass - Effective 1036800 pixels
SHDTV=1080p - 1920x1080=2073600- - updated each pass

I bought 1080i CRT televisions 2 years ago. They are significantly better than SDTV. Everytime I see 720p, it looks too grainy to me. I'm waiting for 1080p for my next TV

[Halm]

Originally posted by Minkoff
Will I notice a conciderable difference?

Does Tarzan use leaves?

[89911]

Hopefully you will not notice it TOO much. Some sets provide really bad normal broadcast pictures, to the point that you really feel like you sacrificing something when watching them. All I watch is HD anymore, and it has become the "norm". We just need every channel to be HD.

[austin552]

I hear 150 HD channels this comming year.
HD is so good I don't want to watch anything else.

[skipdup]

Yes!

And, good cables make a big difference too. But, like stated above, shop for good prices.

- Skip

[mikester]

PRoblem is I have a TIVO which doesn't support HD. So while I have an HD TV passing through the TIVO would make it suck.

PLus with Direct TV I would have to buy the HD receiver ($99). If I switch to TWC though I can get an HD-DVR and pay about the same for my monthly charge (plus maybe get a discount on my internet which is through them).

I should do that...

[skipdup]

Mikester- I'm loven my HD TiVo with DirecTV.

In-laws have TWC, and prefer the DTV w/TiVo they have at the other home.

- Skip

[Porsche-O-Phile]

How much does it cost these days? I sorta' doubt it'd be worth it, but I'm kind of surprised by the responses here that are so overwhelmingly positive.

Personally I think paying thousands of dollars to rot my brain is kind of retarded, but if it REALLY is that good, I'll look into it. I finally ditched my old rabbit-ears television and got satellite with Tivo about three years ago (yes, I'd used rabbit ears up to that point) and although I complain bitterly about having to pay 60-odd dollars a month for 100 channels of largely worthless, commercial-riddled pap, it does have its moments. If the price were to go up even a little (say, $75) I'd ditch the service though. I don't watch THAT much, but for the money I pay I'd say it's juuuuuuust about worth it, plus the wife watches it and seems to enjoy it, so I hold my nose and pay it.

[Grady Clay]

Yes and YES

I bought two in early November. Conservative ol’ me started small. I bought a Sony 26” KDL26S2000 (measures13”vertical) for our bedroom. As expected, it appears smaller than the Mitsubishi 32” tube it replaced – we just put it closer.

The second is a Magnavox 15” 15MF605T (measures 9” vertical) for my desk.

The reason the vertical measurement of the image is critical is because that defines the image in the various formats. The two TVs format the image differently. The Sony in “normal” mode limits the width to about 17” while in HD it is 22.5”. The little Magnavox always fills the (12” wide) screen. I don’t like this as it slightly distorts “normal” images.

The difference between my conventional TV (Comcast digital cable) and HD is remarkable. Both new TVs are 1080p resolution. The little Magnavox appears better resolution and the Sony brighter. Both have <6 ms refresh so my lame ol’ eyes can’t detect any delay smearing. (Interestingly, we went to a theater movie recently. My eyes noticed the difference between the 24 frames/sec and TVs 30 frames/sec.)

All of the larger TVs currently have the exact same resolution, they are just larger. The single reason for a larger TV is to allow greater viewing distance. This, in turn, allows more people to view it. As you can see, it depends on your use.

The industry will go through the progression of higher and higher resolution (just like computers with speed, & memory tp use current programming features.). The issue is only current programming will usually take advantage of HD. It is the source material.

I would compare the difference I experienced to HD as similar to between a regular 35 mm movie and a 70 mm or IMAX! Just not at that resolution – yet. Our newest Sony 36” tube has suddenly become poor quality picture but it will do for a while.

I started seriously looking in September. The first thing I found is the sales people had no clue. I then talked to the high-end professionals who install custom systems, some techs, the net and friends. The technology is in a high level of flux and most sales people aren’t keeping up.

My basic constraints were to buy two inexpensive TVs that fit my needs and weren’t necessarily “future expandable.” The current cable and satellite systems deliver 1080p at the highest. These fit that requirement and may last many years. If the technology changes dramatically, no big deal. They will get relegated to lower-level service (by the sink, etc.)

Once I roughly knew what I wanted, I shopped seven local stores. The difficulty is (by design) everyone features different product. I shopped the two TVs and a DVD/VHS with specifications. The best product/price I got from Best Buy. The 26” Sony at $810, the 15” Magnavox for $182 and a LG RC199H DVD/VHS for $128. (They may have raised the other prices to get the Sony down but I don’t care. It was the total price. Another key is I live in 3.2% tax, “free delivery” avoided the 8.x% tax of the store location. They also had some “deal” with the cable company.) Squeak.

The cable company (Comcast) exchanged the boxes (3) for free and even provided all the connecting cables including a few extra. The HD service is $15/mo more expensive – I’m now approaching $100/mo, damn. The next issue is to get the Comcast remotes properly working in each application – it just takes my time.

One thing I discovered is the largest profit center are the cables and accessories. There are $4 HDMI cables for sale at $55 in stores. Planning and shopping pays off.

Speaking of wiring, I now have 3-wire composite (old stuff), 5-wire component, HDMI and RF coax (I seem to have skipped S-video). It seems to me that there will always be some combination of the various standards. Given the choice, I used the latest and didn’t worry about the rest.

The cable in my house tests OK for signal strength and leakage. We have three boxes but after my latest modification, five locations. Fortunately my old 3500 sf ‘60s ranch is easy to re-wire. I’m going to install new regular cable and wired Ethernet. I’ll also re-do the telephone (DSL) to the same outlets. In all this I have found several knowledgeable kids who would like to moonlight. I think I can keep it under $1K.

The reason for replacing the cable is to simply get new cable (it has a life) and to eliminate the poor 20+ year ago installation (metal clamps crimping the cable). Another is to eliminate unnecessary connections – every one introduces SWR increase (bad).

Everyone should have your house (just like your Porsche) with a wiring diagram.


To sum things up:
I am very impressed and satisfied with changing to HDTV.
It takes (unfortunately) significant effort.
It is absolutely worth “doing it right”, even if smaller keeps it within your budget. Bigger is not necessarily better.

Best,
Grady

[89911]

In this overpriced time we live in, TV is one of the cheapest forms of entertainment there is. The DVR has changed everything about how I watch it, to the point I'd rather watch it recorded and remove commercials. I then watch it when I want to. I'd say I watch less TV but more programs that I want. I can watch SNL in 45min, (35 if the musical artist sucks).

[Jandrews]

Ok, since the DirectTV / Tivo question already came up, I'll hijack a little if Minkoff doesn't mind...

What do I need to actually get HD? I have a 55" Mitsubishi HD Medallion 1080 rear projection TV. I have a three line satellite dish with a Hughes Tivo DVR. Do I just need an HD DVR? Where do I get that? Is there only one for DirectTV? Do I have to pay DirectTV more to get the HD signals? How many HD channels does DirectTV offer?

Thanks,

JA

[Grady Clay]

John,

You should already have HDTV with your system. HDTV HD-DVR is very expensive and not in my plan in the short term. The technology needs to mature and the prices come down.

Regular DVDs show great on a HDTV 1080 system. I have being enjoying Grand Prix and Le Mans DVDs as never before. I have been studying them frame-by-frame.


You are correct about TEVO. I opted against that. One of my (Comcast) cable boxes includes digital recording (I think in HDTV 1080). I’ll report as I learn to use it.

The TEVO feature I like is to remove commercials. I suspect there will be software available to do that with our computers.

The BIG PICTURE issue with commercials is what will pay for the programming? I see only three ways; commercials, public funding (PBS) or access fees. I personally dislike commercials interrupting the creative programming. Even PBS has had to go that direction. I’m willing to pay a fee but that shouldn’t be for everyone. In general, commercials allow anyone to receive the programming at no monetary cost. I’m for universal accessibility. The alternative is to not have that creative programming. Sorta PBS issue.

Best,
Grady

[Halm]

JA, with DTV, you need an HD receiver and HD service. All channels between 70 and 79 are HD, plus some other ones.

[Jandrews]

Ahhh...precisely why I was confused. Grady seems to indicate that I "already have" HDTV. Halm says I need an HD receiver and HD service.

What is an HD receiver? Is my Hughes DirectTV DVR a receiver? I think it must be, because it is the only piece of equipment I have.

So do I need to ditch the Hughes and get an HD receiver? If so, then do I need to get a separate DVR?

Geez...almighty. So dang complicated even for the basic question of how do you get HDTV? This is one of those things that is hurting companies because of the complexities. I would get HDTV and pay for it if I only knew how!!

JA

[Halm]

My best guess is "YES" you need a new receiver / DVR. And to get that, DTV will upgrade yoyr package to HDTV.

We have a Panasonic EDTV (only 480P) with a HDTV feed and I have to tell you. . . It is night and day from any standard defination broadcast. As others have said, if it isn't HDTV, I don't watch it.

[Noah930]

Porsche-o-phile:

I was pretty skeptical, too. I don't watch much TV. Can't count one show I watch regularly. Don't have anything other than basic cable. No way would I spend a thousand bucks (or even several hundred) on a TV.

But then my father-in-law bought an HDTV a couple weeks ago. WOW! The sporting events are incredible. It feels like you're there at the stadium. That's on events televised on HDTV, though. For those channels that are not, I might actually say that the picture quality is a tiny bit worse than a "regular" TV. Not by a big amount, but more of from a really critical standpoint.

Personally, I'm still not watching enough TV to make it worth my while to upgrade to an HD unit, yet. But, yes, the HD picture quality is outstanding.