Picture quality issues

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by JohnFiorino, Dec 5, 2001.

  1. JohnFiorino

    JohnFiorino Auditioning

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    I recently installed an Express VU 3100 receiver and dish (same as Dish networks in the US).I get apx 84% signal strength. It's been cloudy and rainy for the past 2 weeks so I haven't been able to test for more than 84%.

    My cable run is about 60feet of RG6 cable from the dish to the receiver. I'm using a Monster M1000 video cable from the receiver to my Sony Wega xbr200 set.

    I find that the picture quality is poor and can't seem to adjust it properly. I first calibrated the set using the AVIA dvd and it's dead on. But once I switch to the dish the image sucks. It's too dark, too contrasty and way too much red. I have to increase brigtness, adjust the contrast and lower the red. And the image still looks bland and smudgy. It's drop dead gorgeous when watching a DVD.

    I tried switching the video input cable to s-video but that did not help.

    Any ideas?
     
  2. Kevin N

    Kevin N Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Welcome to satellite TV. [​IMG]
     
  3. JohnFiorino

    JohnFiorino Auditioning

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG] What!
    Is the way it is for everyone? I switched from cable for this? :angry:
    Since my cable co has not yet cut me off, I did an A/B test between the satellite connection and cable. The picture on cable, especially on local stations, is perfect. The same station on satellite sucks. I thought satellite was supposed to give you a better picture since it 'supposed' to be digital. This really pisses me off!
     
  4. Dane_D

    Dane_D Extra

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2001
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Great, and I am planning on buying a $800 HD receiver with a $150 dish? How many others have this issue?
     
  5. Rhett_Y

    Rhett_Y Screenwriter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2001
    Messages:
    1,264
    Likes Received:
    3
    I live in the southern California area, we had a storm with high winds and lots of rain about a week ago. I just switched to dish network the week before the storm. (My cable sucked the picture was horrible, the local channels were horrible, and there customer service sucked!)
    So I switched, during the storm I didn't loose any picture quality and I never lost a signal. The picture has been awesome, nice, clean, and sharp! Even during the storm!!!!!
    I don't know what to tell you about what is happing with your system, but I am staying with satellite, until something else comes along! [​IMG]
    Have you tried contacting the dish company to see if they can help you with your problem, you may also want to look into getting a signal amplifier, since you are going about 50feet or more...
    R~
     
  6. JohnFiorino

    JohnFiorino Auditioning

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    I called the CSR here at Bell Express Vu and he suggested I use a 'better' receiver. I now have a Model 3100 that is considered the entry level model. He suggested I either pick up the model 5100 with PVR and ACR or the 6000 HD series. The 5100 and 6000 models are better models.

    According to him on a typical 27" TV and used by Mr. and Mrs. they won't notice the difference and think in fact that they've got an amazing picture. But the instant we move up and actually start paying attention or have higher end HT equipment we'll notice that the picture quality is actually inferior.

    Thing is, I can get a 3100 for $150CAD and the 5100 goes for $550CAD. Quite a difference in price. Don't know if I should swing for it and then realise that the picture still sucks.

    BTW: I got the same answer from other newsgroups and forums. Basically 'digital TV' is not for everyone who wants a perfect picture. DVD quality is not attainable.
     
  7. JohnFiorino

    JohnFiorino Auditioning

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Would a signal amplifier really help? I just don't think the receiver I have can decode any better than it does.
    Don't get me wrong. The picture is very clean and nice. But to anyone who has an incling to what a picture 'should' look like, you'll find that their is a definite difference in quality. Seems to be the general consensous from everyone that's emailed me back.
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Ryan Wright

    Ryan Wright Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2000
    Messages:
    1,875
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  9. LDfan

    LDfan Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 1998
    Messages:
    724
    Likes Received:
    0
    DVD quality is attainable. Watch a PPV movie and you'll see how good the quality can be.

    DirecTV recently launched a new satellite that will handle the local channels so more bandwidth will be opened up. Back in the first few years before the satellite companies started carrying locals the picture quality was very good on all channels, pretty close to laser disc quality.

    Jeff
     
  10. Danny R

    Danny R Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    May 23, 2000
    Messages:
    871
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought satellite was supposed to give you a better picture since it 'supposed' to be digital.

    One of the advantages of digital signals is that they are 100% reproducable, so errors in transmission can be filtered out. Thus it doesn't matter what your signal strength is. If you are able to receive enough information for your receiver to reconstruct the image, your quality will be exactly as its transmitted from the source. This is why satellite systems can have better quality. Your receiver can correct for any errors in transmission. Analog cable often fails here, as interference produces static, etc on your set.

    A good analog signal will always be better than a good digital signal. Colors are inherently analog, as is the mechanics for projecting them on most TVs and monitors. Once you digitalize it, you lose some information. This is why for instance normal photographs look better than digital photographs. Before you get "photographic quality", or enough color depth and resolution to fool the eye, you have to really increase the amount of data.

    And this is why satellite right now is probably providing you a worse signal. They simply don't have the bandwidth, and are compressing the video heavily.

    Come January 1st, Dish will be adding something like 200 channels because of the requirements to carry all locals who request it in cities they already serve. Over the past few weeks I've noticed a significant picture quality drop on many (but not all) channels. This is due to the fact that they seem to be increasing compression in order to make room.

    I would bet that this drop in quality should ease up once the additional satellite is launched and brought online(sometime in january/february).

    Should the merger of Dish and DirecTV occur, picture quality should drastically improve, as the satellites of both services could be combined, greatly improving bandwidth.
     
  11. James Camm

    James Camm Extra

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2000
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    The equip is basically free if you shop around. So cost is not an issue, I love direct tv service no problems at all and I'm using the 4900 old time cheapo rec. Darn people complain about everything, whats next a discussion on why I Love Lucy dosen't look at sharp as CNN, out ,rack him, late.
     

Share This Page