Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Long story short, I connect the starhub HD box using all the 3 connections available and interestingly, to me, there were no discernable differences between the 3. Granted that the composite cable is of ‘better’ quality (Canare LV77S), I would have thought the component connection and the HDMI (both brandless type) would be noticeably better.

 

I have tried switching between 576i, 576p, 720p and 1080i on the HD box and the results are the same.

 

Note : I did NOT subscribe to HD Plus.

 

???

Posted

Long story short, I connect the starhub HD box using all the 3 connections available and interestingly, to me, there were no discernable differences between the 3. Granted that the composite cable is of ‘better’ quality (Canare LV77S), I would have thought the component connection and the HDMI (both brandless type) would be noticeably better.

 

I have tried switching between 576i, 576p, 720p and 1080i on the HD box and the results are the same.

 

Note : I did NOT subscribe to HD Plus.

 

???

 

You need to be watching HD content (ch 301 & 302) to see the diff...and it is very obvious. For me, I switch to 576p for STB and 1080i for HD.

Posted

Long story short, I connect the starhub HD box using all the 3 connections available and interestingly, to me, there were no discernable differences between the 3. Granted that the composite cable is of ‘better’ quality (Canare LV77S), I would have thought the component connection and the HDMI (both brandless type) would be noticeably better.

 

I have tried switching between 576i, 576p, 720p and 1080i on the HD box and the results are the same.

 

Note : I did NOT subscribe to HD Plus.

 

???

I'm not surprised if the comparison is made on LCD. Is yours a LCD?

Posted

There are actually two questions here.

 

1) Why is there no discernable difference between composite, component and HDMI

2) Why is there no discernable difference between 576i, 576p, 720p and 1080i

 

Its easier to answer question 2 first.

 

a) The TV's de-interlacer/scaler is identical in capability to the Starhub box

b) The TV's resolution is so low (e.g., 852x480 Plasma) that upscaling to 720p or 1080i makes no difference

 

For question 1. There is typically a difference between composite and even S-video, let alone component and HDMI. Its usually visible as softer edges on objects. It could be that TV is an odd LCD resolution like 1366x768 and has such a poor de-interlacer and scaler that is ruining the picture sent via HDMI. Say at 1080i, the TV has to de-interlace and scale down. At 720p and 576p, it has to scale up and the scaling is so bad that it looks no better than the composite signal. As lwm99 said, some LCDs are like this, which is why there are so many complaints about watching broacast TV, when the set was sold on the basis of DVD or HD output in the store. It could also be a small TV, where you don't notice the difference.

 

In my case, HDMI input from the SCV box (didn't try component) is clearly better than composite not just in terms of more clearly defined edges to objects, but also the colours are deeper.

 

Posted

My tv is the pioneer PDP427. In fact, based on the same settings, I find the colour a little nicer on the composite compared to the HDMI. However I can tune the colour on the HDMI input to be the same as the composite.

 

Maybe i am just not so sensitive to the differences/improvements...  ???

Posted

For me I find that hdmi connection to normal tv progs has better pq than connection via component

 

Same here!!

 

Maybe scoobydoo put on sunglasses!!! ;D ;D

Posted

Could be that the 427 has such a good video processor that it is indistinguisable from the SCV box digital connection. This would also require the SCV box to have a very good D/A converter as well since any of the digital channels woiuld have to come in digital, be converted to analog go to the TV and then be converted back to digital.

 

Most of the SCV channels are analog anyway, so there is some processing within the box. I would be surprised if any of the digital (but not HD) channels were the same because one presumes that they come in digitally and are sent to the TV minimally processed via HDMI. However, if they go out composite, they have to be processed.

Posted

I did a careful comparison between HDMI at 1080i and composite video tonight. The difference is most visible in Chinese subtitles, where the shadow is clearly defined on HDMI and signficantly less so on composite. Also the distortions to the picture around the characters is more with composite. Looking closely on the HDMI connection you can see the digital edges on the round english characters like "o", while on composite, they are smooth as you cannot see the resolution. I think the big difference will probably come if you look at the test pattern after midnight.

Posted

i got a Q for the TS ...

so did you notice the PQ from the HD stb is better than that of the digital stb ? (like most of us do)

 

as for not subscribing to HD channels ...

there is a grace period for viewing of all channels regardless of whether you subscribed to them or not (barring Demand TV of cos)

you shld give CHs 301 & 302 now ... and report back your findings relative to your initial post

Posted

I don't know if the composite out from the HD STB is better than the Digital STB, but the HDMI output is definitely better. Frankly I find the Discovery and NGC HD so spectacular, it is clearly worth $15 a month. Recent content has been excellent. I'm even rewatching the old shows I watched on SD like the Martial Arts series, Crusades etc. Given the all channel viewing now, I looked at HBO and Cinemax and the quality is so awful compared to DVD when scaled up to 60", the sound is so flat, and they are 4:3. I can't really imagine why anyone would pay for such blur images and lousy sound when DVDs are available. It was OK when we had 21" TVs with tiny speakers, but now...... I feel like I'm looking through a window to the past ;D

Posted

I don't know if the composite out from the HD STB is better than the Digital STB, but the HDMI output is definitely better. Frankly I find the Discovery and NGC HD so spectacular, it is clearly worth $15 a month. Recent content has been excellent. I'm even rewatching the old shows I watched on SD like the Martial Arts series, Crusades etc.

 

agreed ... HD is a head-turner

but IMHO, $15 per month is just not worth it atm

not enuff contents to sustain nor justify the sub

seriously, SH needs to buck up, and more importantly i really hope they dun start sitting on their Ss by just having these 2 HD channels and hoping that all is truly well and good

 

 

I looked at HBO and Cinemax and the quality is so awful compared to DVD when scaled up to 60", the sound is so flat, and they are 4:3. I can't really imagine why anyone would pay for such blur images and lousy sound when DVDs are available. It was OK when we had 21" TVs with tiny speakers, but now...... I feel like I'm looking through a window to the past ;D

 

well lol, they didnt had 60" users of HD TV/projector back then

if and when eventually blu-ray / HD DVD pricies starts to fall ...

we'd be saying the same thing abt ppl who still buy and rent SD DVDs :D

Posted

agreed ... HD is a head-turner

but IMHO, $15 per month is just not worth it atm

not enuff contents to sustain nor justify the sub

seriously, SH needs to buck up, and more importantly i really hope they dun start sitting on their Ss by just having these 2 HD channels and hoping that all is truly well and good

 

True...2 channel is not enough. Hoping they would bring in SkySports HD for next season EPL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top