Baird Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I tried again and it loaded up fine I only have Nero 4 and I am not sure it supports mkv files as it not letting me add them.Diesel, thank you for the recommendation. I don't watch a lot of files, so it's probably not worth me buying anything else. I would like to work on the burning the mkv (HD) files to a DVD which will play in the Pana, I will muck around with DVDFlick and give it a go. It just takes hours to encode it! Not even sure if it's worth it, as the same content is available on .avi but just in SD. Thank you IMO SD is very watchable and HD just doesn't seem worth the angst at this stage. Of course HD is better but..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 IMO SD is very watchable and HD just doesn't seem worth the angst at this stage. Of course HD is better but..... That was a reasonable approach when the main SD service and the HD service were simulcast. Now they're completely different programming, except on SBS. It's become a content issue as well as a quality issue. Of course, squeezing in the extra SD services has seen the bit rate for HD fall across the board and as a consequence, so has its picture quality as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baird Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 That was a reasonable approach when the main SD service and the HD service were simulcast. Now they're completely different programming, except on SBS.It's become a content issue as well as a quality issue. Of course, squeezing in the extra SD services has seen the bit rate for HD fall across the board and as a consequence, so has its picture quality as well. I suppose that underscores my point about HD being not exactly "worth the detour" as they say in the Michelin Guide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I suppose that underscores my point about HD being not exactly "worth the detour" as they say in the Michelin Guide. I'm not sure how. At least, that wasn't my intention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaurora Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 (edited) That's exactly what I am thinking!! I can see that the quality is nice when I am watching it on the computer, but I have been watching them in SD for the past however many years and I have been totally satisfied with the quality. I have converted these two mkv into an iso using DVDFlick, so I may as well see how it is and I'll guage the quality from there Edited February 3, 2011 by aaurora Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortlived Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Has anyone had any problems getting Viera functions with particular hdmi cables? The hdmi connects a Pana TV and DVR, both support Viera. One hdmi cable bought cheap on eBay about 2 years ago works fine, eg when I turn on the DVR the TV automatically switches to the right hdmi input. I just bought a hadmi v1.4 (28awg Ekin) on eBay which works except for the Viera functions. I tried a third cable (which was labeled v1.3b) I took off another system also would not support Viera. I put the original cable back (the cheapest loking of the cables, plastic sheath and plastic moulded ends) and it supports the Viera functions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baird Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I'm not sure how. At least, that wasn't my intention Well if the bit rate on HD is dropping then surely if one records it in SD to and plays back in SD then not that much difference would be noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Well if the bit rate on HD is dropping then surely if one records it in SD to and plays back in SD then not that much difference would be noticed. My post was mostly about the fact that that used to be an argument for not bothering with HD, but now the HD programming on all broadcasters except SBS is different from their main SD service. Having HD is now at least as much about access to content as it is about the picture quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baird Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 My post was mostly about the fact that that used to be an argument for not bothering with HD, but now the HD programming on all broadcasters except SBS is different from their main SD service. Having HD is now at least as much about access to content as it is about the picture quality. Oh I see, well yes I would certainly not be without an HD signal but if by recording it one has to then watch it in SD then that is ok with me at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Oh I see, well yes I would certainly not be without an HD signal but if by recording it one has to then watch it in SD then that is ok with me at least. aaurora 's question was about the resolution of the material, not about the resolution of the screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaurora Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Just following up re HDvsSD, I watched the HD recorded version (using DVDFlick to make it into a DVD) and there is a difference, but to be completely honest it's not *too* much different - I am just as happy watching them in SD .avi although I can see a sharper quality on the HD, but with that it sometimes looks a bit too sharp if you understand what I mean? I am not a huge TV buff so honestly for someone like me it doesn't really matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diesel Posted February 5, 2011 Author Share Posted February 5, 2011 Was the SD recording being upscaled by the player to the TV? That makes a difference. IMO upscaling usually does a fair enough job for there to be little difference with our bit-constrained FTA HD content and SD content - bluray is in another league though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaurora Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I have no idea I just watch my shows, enjoy it, and that's about all I know!! Sorry I have another issue though if anyone can help? The 380 can't receive SBS. I rang panasonic and they sent out a little aerial thing to plug into the unit, and it's still not picking it up although it did pick up another crappy, obscure local channel that I never watch. So it picked up *something* just not SBS. I remember reading about this somewhere, but not sure on how to fix it. I tried manually tuning but it just says 'searching' and that's it. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOBMax Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 (edited) aaurora writes: I have no idea I just watch my shows, enjoy it, and that's about all I know!! Sorry I have another issue though if anyone can help? The 380 can't receive SBS. Hi, depending where you are: Local Broadcast community channel, then SBS, have the weakest signal, next channel 7. Am at my brothers house various reception problems. Called in Antenna tech. who found 6 dodgy connections, one on antenna itself, 3 at 1 connection, Power booster that was not required, because all it needed was a 2 way splitter. His $1,000 meter proved the difference. New connections, new cable and existing Antenna $165.00 Instead of ****Antenna service $75-00 call out fee $295-00 for Hi-gain Antenna plus $30-00 per connection cable and splitter. http://www.dtvforum.info/style_images/1/fo...icons/icon1.gif l] Edited February 9, 2011 by GOBMax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 ...Hi, depending where you are: Local Broadcast community channel, then SBS, have the weakest signal, next channel 7. ... SBS often has the most powerful digital transmitters at any site. In Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane and Canberra the SBS transmitters have four times the power (200kW vs 50kW) as the other networks' transmitters at their respective main transmitter sites (i.e. SBS can transmit with the same power as all the other networks put together). In Darwin and Hobart, SBS's transmitters have the same power rating as the other networks. From the ACMA Radio and Television Broadcasting Stations Book, section 9 Television by Area Served. Where do you get your information that SBS typically has less power than the other networks? Certainly where you are, SBS has the most powerful transmitter of all the digital broadcasters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat_Mc_Crotch Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I'm tossing up between buying the dmr-xw380 or dmr-xw480. Can I ask: * do these devices play .avi (divx) directly of USB media? * how much are both of these units going for at the mo? My brother in law apparently purchased a dmr-xw480 for $500 from The Good Guys last month... Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOBMax Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 SBS often has the most powerful digital transmitters at any site. In Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane and Canberra the SBS transmitters have four times the power (200kW vs 50kW) as the other networks' transmitters at their respective main transmitter sites. As with all Radio/TV/Phone Transmissions it depends where you are and what equipment you have. Where I'm at SBS has the 2nd worst signal. Tech showed me his readings at various points, Line of sight and other variables ie: movement of Antenna in Storms etc. Just wanted to share, as I'm relatively experienced with Cable connections, but health problems do not allow me to do what I used to do. Am living at Brothers House his attitude is that Antenna was not that old,(Installed1994). Antenna OK connections 17 years old an rusted out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 SBS often has the most powerful digital transmitters at any site. In Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane and Canberra the SBS transmitters have four times the power (200kW vs 50kW) as the other networks' transmitters at their respective main transmitter sites. As with all Radio/TV/Phone Transmissions it depends where you are and what equipment you have. Where I'm at SBS has the 2nd worst signal. ... Yes, where you are, possibly you do have the second worst reception from SBS. But you appeared to me to be making a statement about signal strength being generally poor on SBS. All the factors you cite are part of the equation, but so is transmitter power Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOBMax Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) Yes, where you are, possibly you do have the second worst reception from SBS. But you appeared to me to be making a statement about signal strength being generally poor on SBS. All the factors you cite are part of the equation, but so is transmitter power My comment is in regard to other factors, besides Equipment Shortfalls. And meant to provide alternative solution. My current SBS is brilliant from being, OK-. Tuner= Main Frequency 858.625 MHz GUARD internal 1/8 Signal Strength 92% Signal Quality 99% Problems with Line of Site has compounded my problems. Edited February 10, 2011 by GOBMax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Yes, where you are, possibly you do have the second worst reception from SBS. But you appeared to me to be making a statement about signal strength being generally poor on SBS. All the factors you cite are part of the equation, but so is transmitter power My comment is in regard to other factors, besides Equipment Shortfalls. And meant to provide alternative solution. My current SBS is brilliant from being, OK-. Tuner= Main Frequency 858.625 MHz GUARD internal 1/8 Signal Strength 92% Signal Quality 99% Problems with Line of Site has compounded my problems. I'm not sure what's being compared with what here. Do you mean that the quality has gone from "OK-", meaning "so-so" to good? The signal strength and quality you quote should give you quite good reception. BTW the Guard Interval is a broadcast parameter, like the Code Rate. It affects signal quality, but it's not a measure of it, and only the broadcaster has control over it. And it's line of sight, not site. As electromagnet frequencies go up and the wavelength goes down, the behaviour of the waves with respect to obstacles becomes more like the way light propagates. Hence, if you can see the transmitter from your antenna, you have "line of sight". It does have something to do with the sites of the antennas, but the obstructions in between can be just as important, and that's not how the term originates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaurora Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 The antenna is 3 years old and SBS worked perfectly on the previous HDD (it was LG). I will google and see if anyone else has had the same issues. It can't pick up SBS at all, even on the TV now as the HDD box is plugged into the antenna (i think this is how it works?) and the tv goes through the box. I have no idea :S Will ring pana again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 The antenna is 3 years old and SBS worked perfectly on the previous HDD (it was LG). I will google and see if anyone else has had the same issues. It can't pick up SBS at all, even on the TV now as the HDD box is plugged into the antenna (i think this is how it works?) and the tv goes through the box. I have no idea :S Will ring pana again. "HDD", "HDD box"? Do you mean a digital Set Top Box with HDD to make it a PVR? I'm not sure where you are (location is often important in reception issues), but in most metropolitan areas SBS is the only network broadcast in UHF. All the other networks broadcast on VHF. This has two consequences: The antenna is in two parts, one for VHF and one for UHF. The two parts are normally connected by a short length of 300ohm flat cable, and the feed is often taken from the VHF end. If the cable is damaged, or its terminals corroded, this can affect only one of the two parts of the antenna. If this short cable is cut or compromised through corrosion, you can lose UHF but not VHF signal. In metropolitan areas this often means losing SBS and possibly also community broadcasters, but the other networks on VHF still have good reception. UHF signals are higher frequency and hence shorted wavelength than VHF. That makes them more susceptible to line-of-sight obstruction by nearby buildings, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dons1972 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Hi All, First time user. I hope I'm not going over old ground but I haven't found this mentioned anywhere else. I recently bought a Panasonic XW480 ($689 at JB) and so far I'm very happy with everything I've asked of it. But the other night a rather strange thing happened. As a test I recorded the AFL on channels 10 and ONE. Plus I watched ONE directly through the tv. My interest lay in seeing if there would be any picture quality difference. BUT I was suprised when I played back the recorded ONE game that 20 minutes in, the commentator's audio disappeared and only the umpires, ground noise remained. Did I accidently push a wrong audio button? Panasonic support said they'd never heard of such a thing. Anyway hope someone can help. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baird Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Hi All,First time user. I hope I'm not going over old ground but I haven't found this mentioned anywhere else. I recently bought a Panasonic XW480 ($689 at JB) and so far I'm very happy with everything I've asked of it. But the other night a rather strange thing happened. As a test I recorded the AFL on channels 10 and ONE. Plus I watched ONE directly through the tv. My interest lay in seeing if there would be any picture quality difference. BUT I was suprised when I played back the recorded ONE game that 20 minutes in, the commentator's audio disappeared and only the umpires, ground noise remained. Did I accidently push a wrong audio button? Panasonic support said they'd never heard of such a thing. Anyway hope someone can help. Cheers. My guess would be that it's the TV station's glitch & nothing to do with the 480. I mean how would the 480 know how to only record some of the audio? I'd love to know if anyone's got any other ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Could be something to do with 5.1 audio not being downmixed to stereo. Don't know why the 5.1 would kick in 20 minutes into the program, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts