Comcast sucks (again) (NDC)
- From: Mark Scalise <markscalise@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 07:42:09 -0700 (PDT)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080421/ap_on_hi_te/compressed_hd;_ylt=Ai1lm_30OpH7O2rVjYwmx.gDW7oF
HD enthusiasts crying foul over cable TV's crunched signals By CHRIS
WILLIAMS, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 52 minutes ago
In Brent Swanson's basement home theater, there should be nothing drab
about "Battlestar Galactica." He's got a high-end projector that beams
the picture onto a wall painted like a silver screen, and speakers
loom in the corners, flanking two big subwoofers.
Yet when he tuned in Sci Fi HD for a recent episode filmed in high
definition, the image was soft and the darkest parts broke up into
large blocks with no definition. Explosions, he said, were just dull.
"It kind of looked like they took the standard definition and just
blew it up," said Swanson, a 33-year-old graphic designer and
videographer who subscribes to Comcast Corp.'s TV service. "I couldn't
really tell if what I was seeing was really better than what I saw on
regular television."
As cable TV companies pack ever more HD channels into limited
bandwidth, some owners of pricey plasma, projector and LCD TVs are
complaining that they're not getting the high-def quality they paid
for. They blame the increased signal compression being used to squeeze
three digital HD signals into the bandwidth of one analog station.
The problem is viewers want more HD channels at a time when many cable
and satellite providers are at the limits of their capacity, said Jim
Willcox, a technology editor for Consumer Reports magazine.
"They have to figure out a way to deliver more HD content through
their distribution networks," he said.
Compressing the signal is cheaper than costly infrastructure upgrades
to increase capacity. Satellite TV providers — including DirecTV Group
Inc. and Dish Network Corp. — also have the option of launching
satellites to boost the number of HD channels on their systems.
While information is nearly always lost when signals are compressed
and then uncompressed, the process can theoretically be made
unnoticeable to eyes and ears — and Comcast says it should be.
But some viewers say they can see it. Willcox said complaints about
compression have been showing up on Web forums, including the AV
Science Forum, a site for serious audio visual enthusiasts.
"It's not exclusively Comcast, although Comcast, being the largest
cable provider, is probably the largest target," he said.
Derek Harrar, a Comcast senior vice president in charge of video, said
the company recently began using new technology on some channels to
compress three HD channels into the bandwidth of one analog station.
Other channels continue to get the previous 2-to-1 compression.
In a posting on the AV Science Forum, Ken Fowler of Arlington, Va.,
compared Comcast signals with those on Verizon Communications Inc.'s
all-fiber-optic network, which doesn't have the same capacity
limitations. Fowler found the higher-compressed HD stations, including
Sci Fi, Animal Planet, the Discovery Channel, the Food Network and
A&E, fared particularly poorly.
He analyzed the signals by recording them on a digital recorder, then
transferring them to a personal computer for analysis. He found there
was much less data, measured in bit rates, flowing to some channels
than others.
For example, Discovery's bit rate was 14.16 megabits per second on
Verizon's FiOS system but only 10.43 Mbps on Comcast; A&E HD was 18.66
Mbps on FiOS compared with 14.48 Mbps on Comcast. The FiOS system
didn't offer Sci Fi HD, which Fowler's testing showed at 12.59 Mbps on
Comcast.
He found the signals from the major networks and ESPN weren't getting
the increased compression.
In an interview, Fowler said he reran his analysis about two weeks ago
and found "basically the same thing."
Philadelphia-based Comcast wouldn't identify specific signals that are
3-to-1 compressed, and a Sci Fi channel spokeswoman referred questions
back to Comcast.
Harrar said the company works to make sure any new compression
technology is invisible to consumers, but Comcast is "constantly
monitoring our network and making adjustments" for best picture
quality. The company has been rolling out the new compression
technology at different times around the country.
In fact, postings on the AV Science Forum from early April suggest the
Comcast network has improved in some places.
And there are other reasons a high-definition picture can appear
subpar: The source image might not have been recorded in HD, or the
television's settings, the viewing angle and even the ambient lighting
in the room could be the cause.
New York-based Time Warner Cable Inc. has avoided many of the
criticisms aimed at Comcast, although the companies are
technologically similar and face the same capacity limits.
Time Warner spokesman Alex Dudley attributed it to his company's
testing procedures. He said that before Time Warner rolls out new
technology that may affect image quality, it sets up two identical
televisions in a lab, one with the old signal and one with the new.
Technicians make adjustments until the pictures can't be told apart.
"The testers are our engineers who we call 'golden eyes,' who have a
proven track record of picking up subtle differences in picture
quality," he said.
Verizon's FiOS doesn't compress the signal once it receives it, and
Willcox said it's considered the picture quality "benchmark." However,
Verizon said the system is growing but is now available only in parts
of 17 states and has just over a million subscribers — compared with
more than 24 million for Comcast.
He said two possible solutions are on the horizon, an improved version
of compression, called MPEG-4, and something called "switched digital
video."
Comcast and Time Warner Cable have introduced switched video on a
trial basis across their networks. In concept, it's like on-demand
videos. The company sends only the channels the viewer is watching,
instead of all the channels at once.
But switched video has its own issues, including possible slower
channel switching times and compatibility problems with digital video
recorders.
Willcox said cable providers can't afford to ignore quality
complaints. Many customers are already picky about quality after
paying $800 to $3,500 for an average-size, HD-ready LCD television.
Swanson, the "Battlestar Galactica" fan, is sticking with Comcast for
now.
"It hasn't gotten bad enough for me to consider changing," he said.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: RMGD: I Know it has alaways had problems, but jeez
- Next by Date: Re: US Festival Google Group
- Previous by thread: What is with all this advertising on this newsgroup?
- Next by thread: 10/10/82
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
