"Down-converting" HDTV Signal.

[Tony Sade]

I have Dish TV HD programming with their HDTV (dual) DVR satellite receiver. For those not familiar with this setup, the receiver connects to two tvs in different location and permits recording and watching different shows on the two tvs. While you can record HD programming on each of the dual recorders in the receiver, you can view HD programming (recorded or live) only on the so-called "nearby TV", the one within arm's length or thereabouts of the receiver. (You can also view SD programming on this set.) Proximity between set (our HD flat panel) and receiver allows you to connect the two with the usual HDMI or other higher gain cables. You can view only SD programming (again, live or recorded) on the remote TV which is connected using pre-existing coax cable. (I don't want to even guess what a 50' HDMI cable would cost, assuming it's made and assuming it would even work with the way the cable is run from the satellite to the TV and receiver, which would require a conversion from the incoming co-ax to a different type of cable.)

I'd like to put a bigger/better TV in the remote location, in part because I exercise in front of that one on a machine that's a good distance away and my eyes, like the rest of me, ain't getting any younger.

Given that the display on this remote TV will always be in SD and that any programs recorded/broadcast in HD would be viewed in what the manual calls a "down-converted" format, what are my options for a new set? Does it make any sense to get a large flat panel. I probably wouldn't bother with a 1080p (although it or a 1080i might make sense for viewing DVDs or BRs if I ever get one of those players). If not, should I just find the cheapest flat panel that will fit the space regardless of HD features?

Am I correct that being down-converted simply means the signal is "coarsened" or degraded from HD to SD quality? Any idea how bad the reduction in picture quality is likely to be? I know I can simply move the HDTV to the remote location to see what the display will look like, but for practical reasons-weight, TV location, propensity to trip and drop things, I'd like to avoid that approach. :)

Let's forget about the cable issue for a moment (Thanks for your responses, Matt & Ken.) The more I think about it and look at the manual, I'm pretty sure the signal is down-coverted at the box and the type of cable isn't going to make a difference. So, I'm most interested in what the likely degradation in picture quality will be and what to do about the TV. Thanks.

Thanks,

[Matt Meiser]

The HDMI cable may not be as bad as you think if you don't pay for someone's brand name:

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240&cs_id=1024002&p_id=2804&seq=1&format=2

Someone else recommended Monoprice here and I'm quite happy with the cables I bought from them.

[Ken Garlock]

Tony, I may be whistling in the wind, but if I understand the problem.....

First a technical correction, a cable or wire is a passive component of your system, it can not produce gain; in fact, it can only reduce or degrade the signal. The trick is to get cables that are low loss, and that is what the HD cables report to do. In your case, you are looking for a "low loss" cable. Not a big deal, but I thought I would mention it.

The simple solution to your question is go to a store that deals in HD TVs and ask to see what a standard definition station looks like on an HD receiver. Assure your self that you are indeed is a local channel in SD. Another option would be to take a standard DVD with you to the store and ask for a demo using your DVD.

I have been a dish network subscriber since the first year they were on the air. When in the future I decide to jump into the HD world, I am just going to order two of their simple minded HD only receivers. I have two vcrs in the house and nether have been used in several years. We don't miss capability so why pay for service.

Everyone had an opinion, and I have mine....

[Neal Clayton]

HDMI, the d meaning digital. it sends 1s and 0s not color information. there will be no picture quality loss over a digital interface, there are lengths at which it will not work, but that will be obvious (dropouts, blocks, etc.)

that said, doesn't your satellite box have a coax out that sends a signal on channel 3 like an old VCR? most do. and those satellite/cable boxes output on all ports simultaneously, so you could have one plugged into the HDMI, one into the coax, and one into the component, and all should work.

if you don't care about the HD feed on the new set, do that, just run a coax line from the box. as for the remote, see if the satellite box has an infrared receiver port on it, if so you can get one and put an infrared receiver near the new TV that can control the sat box. i know dish network has these, they install them that way for people without HDTVs, they did it at my mother's house that way. not sure about directv.

[Tim Morton]

i'm not sure if i understand the question...but if you are asking how a HD picture will look on an CD TV, then the answer it will look MUCH better than an SD picture looks on an HD set:D

[Tony Sade]

i'm not sure if i understand the question...but if you are asking how a HD picture will look on an CD TV, then the answer it will look MUCH better than an SD picture looks on an HD set:D

That's the core of the issue, Tim. Thanks. I just need to figure out how much to spend on an HD TV from which I'll get some, but not all of the HD benefit.

[Pat Germain]

I would recommend going with a good, quality HD TV so you're ready when you do use a HD signal. Don't worry about all the numbers. They're mostly hype. A good 720P set can look better than a 1080i, for example.

You might peruse a local discount club. Sam's and Costco often have great deals on very good HD TVs.

(BTW, if you tell Dish you're going to cancel and switch to their competitor in order to get a free HD box, they'll give you a HD DVR box at no cost if you extend your obligation. ;) )

[Eric DeSilva]

That's the core of the issue, Tim. Thanks. I just need to figure out how much to spend on an HD TV from which I'll get some, but not all of the HD benefit.

You may be hard pressed to find a non-HD set; don't think they are allowed to sell them anymore. I watch SD on an HDTV and it doesn't bother me--some things I want to watch aren't in HD. DirecTV has programming that is non-HD, so judge for yourself if its a watchable experience.

I think the limitation to SD for secondary sets has to do with the DirecTV box, not the length of the HDMI cable, although I'd say 50' is pushing it for HDMI. I think the old spec for DVI was only 5 meters. But, since HDMI is digital, I think you can get repeaters if you need one. Don't think they are necessarily cheap, so you might be better off just getting another DirecTV box.

[David Weiser]

I actually dealt with this problem while connecting the TVs in our house. Correct me if I am wrong, but the box is a Dish Network VIP 622/722? If it is, than I can help you from experience. I would buy a large flat screen TV, doesn't really matter what kind. Just something big and cheap. Now, if you have looked carefully at the back of the receiver, there is no HDMI or Component Video for the second TV. Hence why there is only standard def viewable on the "remote TV". The "downconverted signal" does not look bad at all. I don't think you have much to worry about in terms of signal quality. It's standard definition or nothing.

Now just to worry about your cable issue ;)

How far away is the remote TV and what kind of cable do you have going to it right now?

[Ken Lefkowitz]

As of April 1st, Dish will be using a wireless reciever which will carry the HD signal to your new HD set. There will be no fee or set up fees, but they will likely want a 2 year commitment on top of what you have.

Ken

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Why not just have a seperate reciever per TV? Directv is this way, no limitations on where the HD goes that way. I think it costs $4/month per reciever.

I have a big plasma and a LCD, and the HD vs SD difference is huge. Personally, I would do what it takes to get HD to both sets. I do have to use a dish with a bunch of LNB's, 2 per reciever.

[Frank Hagan]

We were looking at buying a flat panel TV, but I noticed how bad a SD picture is on them at relatives' houses. We have now decided to hold off until our 36" tube TV dies ... we have no desire to spend more monthly on getting HD signals.

When we were thinking of going with a flat panel TV, I did some searching at the AV Forums for reviews of how standard definition looks on various sets. People don't mention SD that often there, but occasionally you get an opinion. CNET.com does include their opinion of how the flat panels handle standard def in the reviews. Sony and Samsung were good in LCDs, and the "lesser brands" like my relatives have, Vizio for one, score lower. So there's a cost/benefit thing going on there .... to get the best standard def picture, you have to go with one of the more expensive sets. And it is still a very poor picture compared to the same signal on a CRT set.

The other option is to check Craig's List for a larger CRT set (if you have the room). They are dirt cheap, even if in good condition. I saw a 36" set like mine for $50 on Craig's List.

[Tony Sade]

I actually dealt with this problem while connecting the TVs in our house. Correct me if I am wrong, but the box is a Dish Network VIP 622/722? If it is, than I can help you from experience. I would buy a large flat screen TV, doesn't really matter what kind. Just something big and cheap. Now, if you have looked carefully at the back of the receiver, there is no HDMI or Component Video for the second TV. Hence why there is only standard def viewable on the "remote TV". The "downconverted signal" does not look bad at all. I don't think you have much to worry about in terms of signal quality. It's standard definition or nothing.

Now just to worry about your cable issue ;)

How far away is the remote TV and what kind of cable do you have going to it right now?

David-You're right about the receiver I have, and the fact that there simply is no way to get an HD signal to the remote TV. Unfortunately, the quality of that signal on an HD TV (I risked moving my HD set down to test it out) is pretty poor. I'm not likely to go the much more expensive set route suggested below, nor am I inclined to get a bigger CRT set--I could barely get the 26" one I have back up on the high shelf that is its home, and would probably kill myself with anything heavier.


As of April 1st, Dish will be using a wireless reciever which will carry the HD signal to your new HD set. There will be no fee or set up fees, but they will likely want a 2 year commitment on top of what you have.

Ken

I can't find anything on the Dish website about a wireless receiver. Where did you see/hear this, Ken? That might be the answer to my problem and might mean a call to Crutchfied to cancel my order for a 36" Toshiba.



We were looking at buying a flat panel TV, but I noticed how bad a SD picture is on them at relatives' houses. We have now decided to hold off until our 36" tube TV dies ... we have no desire to spend more monthly on getting HD signals.

When we were thinking of going with a flat panel TV, I did some searching at the AV Forums for reviews of how standard definition looks on various sets. People don't mention SD that often there, but occasionally you get an opinion. CNET.com does include their opinion of how the flat panels handle standard def in the reviews. Sony and Samsung were good in LCDs, and the "lesser brands" like my relatives have, Vizio for one, score lower. So there's a cost/benefit thing going on there .... to get the best standard def picture, you have to go with one of the more expensive sets. And it is still a very poor picture compared to the same signal on a CRT set.

The other option is to check Craig's List for a larger CRT set (if you have the room). They are dirt cheap, even if in good condition. I saw a 36" set like mine for $50 on Craig's List.

As I stated above, the SD picture I get on my current HD set kinda sucks. I went with a pretty basic 720 set from Toshiba and, unless the wireless thing mentioned above pans out, I guess I'll have to live with the results.

Thanks to all for your responses.

[Frank Hagan]

I can't find anything on the Dish website about a wireless receiver. Where did you see/hear this, Ken? That might be the answer to my problem and might mean a call to Crutchfied to cancel my order for a 36" Toshiba.

As I stated above, the SD picture I get on my current HD set kinda sucks. I went with a pretty basic 720 set from Toshiba and, unless the wireless thing mentioned above pans out, I guess I'll have to live with the results.

Thanks to all for your responses.

If the 36" Toshiba is a flat screen (16:9 aspect ratio), and you're planning to watch standard def signals on it, it will only equal the image size on a 29" 4:3 set. Unless you use the "expand" feature that makes everyone look like they are in a fun house mirror. Or the "zoom" feature that cuts off portions of the image.

A 36" flat screen has about the same size image when displaying 4:3 standard def content as a 29" tube set (the rest of the screen is taken up with black bars). You can see a handy calculator at http://www.cavecreations.com/tv2.cgi for other sizes. You are really upgrading from a 26" to a 29" image size equivalent, and degrading the picture quality in the process.

On the other hand, you can get widescreen DVDs that will use most of the screen real estate, and for some programming like news, who cares that much about the picture quality? You could also try an antenna and pick up local stations in HD for free (if you have reception in your area ... try http://antennaweb.org to see how much you can expect to receive with some of the newer antennas).