Community Forum

HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Regular Visitor

HD Quality is is very poor for sports

I was previously watching HDTV with an over-the-air antenna. I have recently upgraded my cable package to the X1 double play with the sports package. Watching sports (football) is a travesty. 

 

The compression seems to make the players and crowd super blocky to the point where it lookes like 480p. Only when the camera is zoomed to a single person on the field does the HD look high quality. CBS and Fox are horrible, and the local college sports stations are even worse.

 

I have the resolution on the box set to 1080p but that does not equal a great picture. I had a better picture quality at 720p from my over-the-air antenna. I'm really disappointed with cable.

 

Maybe I shoud go to satellite for better picture quality? or Sling?

Regular Contributor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Welcome to the over-compression club.  Try DirecTV or stay OTA for less compression. That's essentially your choice if you are in the markets that are over-compressed, as I am.

Regular Visitor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


MrScott1 wrote:

Welcome to the over-compression club.  Try DirecTV or stay OTA for less compression. That's essentially your choice if you are in the markets that are over-compressed, as I am.


So apparently it's something that everyone has to deal with huh? I thought it was a setting on my tv that I needed to change. But I have made every possible change.

 

I would have loved to have stayed OTA but the one station I need for Sunday games doesn't come in. So I'm forced to pay. I live in an apartment where I can't mount a satellite dish. 

 

Does satellite have lower compression in general or is DirecTV better than Dish in that area?

Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Actually,

No it is not something that everyone has to deal with. There so many variables here.

TV settings.

TV processing capabilities.
HDMI cable quality.
AV receiver quality.
AV receiver settings.
X1 box settings (limited as they are).
Realistic expectations and comparisons to other sources (no, X1 is not going to look as good as Blu-ray).

I am not a wealthy guy but I recently stumbled across some good deals. I have an 65" LG OLED (best TV ever made), a brand new and top of the line Marantz AV receiver and high end Audioquest cables. I have a pretty good idea of how to adjust the settings on a TV.

I have compared X1's picture quality to other sources including OTA many times.

My conclusions:

1. X1's picture quality is not nearly as bad as people think it is. I just watched the Steelers/Redskins game and the picture quality was actually quite good. I am now watching the 49er's/Rams game and the picture quality is a step down. Obviously this is a broadcast issue.

2. I have compared X1 to "Over the Air" countless times. The picture quality is extremely close and at times has slightly favored Comcast. I attribute this to the video processing qualities of my TV and AV receiver.

3. Many people complaining about X1's picture quality don't really understand how their TV settings work.

4. What many people are seeing as poor picture from Comcast is actually poor video processing in their TVs or AV receivers. My mid line 3 year old Panasonic plasma shows garbage, noise and artifacts that my new LG OLED does not show. My LG OLED obviously has much better video processing capabilities. 

I am not trying to defend Comcast here. I understand that people should not have to buy a top of the line TV and AV receiver to get great picture quality. But I also think that people who are pointing their fingers at Comcast about poor picture quality may need to point their fingers elsewhere.

I wish people who are complaining about X1's picture quality could see what Game of Thrones looks like on my LG OLED...




thebugster1 wrote:

MrScott1 wrote:

Welcome to the over-compression club.  Try DirecTV or stay OTA for less compression. That's essentially your choice if you are in the markets that are over-compressed, as I am.


So apparently it's something that everyone has to deal with huh? I thought it was a setting on my tv that I needed to change. But I have made every possible change.

 

I would have loved to have stayed OTA but the one station I need for Sunday games doesn't come in. So I'm forced to pay. I live in an apartment where I can't mount a satellite dish. 

 

Does satellite have lower compression in general or is DirecTV better than Dish in that area?






 

New Poster

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Used to be with Uverse with my Sony 4K (65") until I switched to Xfinity this week. Notwithstanding any other variables, just by swapping out from Uverse to Xfinity gadgets, I can absolutely attest that I am getting lower quality picture across all channels. Trying out different available resolutions didn't help much. That's just comparing apple to apple. I want to believe I made the right decision to switch - faster internet and lower monthly bill - but inferior picture quality isn't just acceptable.

Silver Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


New2Xfinity2016 wrote:

Used to be with Uverse with my Sony 4K (65") until I switched to Xfinity this week. Notwithstanding any other variables, just by swapping out from Uverse to Xfinity gadgets, I can absolutely attest that I am getting lower quality picture across all channels. Trying out different available resolutions didn't help much. That's just comparing apple to apple. I want to believe I made the right decision to switch - faster internet and lower monthly bill - but inferior picture quality isn't just acceptable.


You wouldn't happen to live in an apartment?  Many X1 apartment customers have issues with X1.

I am not a Comcast Employee.
I am just a customer, volunteering my time to help other customers here in the Forums.
Was your question answered? Mark the post as best answer!
Regular Contributor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


RickGr4 wrote:

Actually,

No it is not something that everyone has to deal with. There so many variables here.

TV settings.

TV processing capabilities.
HDMI cable quality.
AV receiver quality.
AV receiver settings.
X1 box settings (limited as they are).

No, your HDMI cable quality will have zero impact. It either works or it doesn't.

AV receiver quality - no, especially if it is just acting as a pass-through.

X1 box settings, definately yes.

TV settings and abilities - yes, it can impact picture quality, but compression noise is generally recognizable as its own entity. You've seen other posters up here showing comparison pics. Face it, Comcast is overcompressing in certain markets, as much as you don't want that to be true.

 

OP - I can only attest to DirecTV, they had a fantastic picture. My parents have Dish, but I have not watched enough of it to tell you if its' quality holds up.

Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


MrScott1 wrote:

RickGr4 wrote:

Actually,

No it is not something that everyone has to deal with. There so many variables here.

TV settings.

TV processing capabilities.
HDMI cable quality.
AV receiver quality.
AV receiver settings.
X1 box settings (limited as they are).

Mr Scott,

Sorry but is time to correct you. First of all, I have been designing, selling, installing and troubleshooting high AV gear for almost 40 years. I can assure you there is a serious connection between HDMI circuitry and HDMI related lightning damage. I have seen it countless times. Call any AV repair shop if you don't believe me. They will confirm. Funny but I just gave away a $1,000 Yamaha AV receiver. Why did I give it away? Because it was connected to a DirecTV sat box and lightning blew out the HDMI board.

No, your HDMI cable quality will have zero impact. It either works or it doesn't. Sorry. This is a common misconception. High end HDMI cables can make minor picture improvements and even greater audio improvements. I have seen it on my own gear and in demonstrations.

AV receiver quality - no, especially if it is just acting as a pass-through. Sorry but not true. Especially if the receivers internal scaler is being used.

X1 box settings, definately yes.

TV settings and abilities - yes, it can impact picture quality, but compression noise is generally recognizable as its own entity. I agree. However I firmly believe that a vast majority of posters on this issue really don't understand how to adjust their TVs and that each input can retain it's own picture settings. I've seen it countless times. You've seen other posters up here showing comparison pics. Actually I haven't. Most pictures did not render on my end. Face it, Comcast is overcompressing in certain markets, as much as you don't want that to be true. Possibly. But things look pretty good at my house in the Twin Cities... Oh wait, the fact that Comcast just went over my signals with a fine tooth comb may help with this.

Mr Scott you appear to have strong opinions and I respect that. But I also value accurate information and I believe a few of your posts have been less than accurate.

 

OP - I can only attest to DirecTV, they had a fantastic picture. My parents have Dish, but I have not watched enough of it to tell you if its' quality holds up. I have said this many times. It is no secret that DirecTV has better picture quality than Comcast.


 

Regular Contributor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


RickGr4 wrote:

MrScott1 wrote:

RickGr4 wrote:

Actually,

No it is not something that everyone has to deal with. There so many variables here.

TV settings.

TV processing capabilities.
HDMI cable quality.
AV receiver quality.
AV receiver settings.
X1 box settings (limited as they are).

Mr Scott,

Sorry but is time to correct you. First of all, I have been designing, selling, installing and troubleshooting high AV gear for almost 40 years. I can assure you there is a serious connection between HDMI circuitry and HDMI related lightning damage. I have seen it countless times. Call any AV repair shop if you don't believe me. They will confirm. Funny but I just gave away a $1,000 Yamaha AV receiver. Why did I give it away? Because it was connected to a DirecTV sat box and lightning blew out the HDMI board.

No, your HDMI cable quality will have zero impact. It either works or it doesn't. Sorry. This is a common misconception. High end HDMI cables can make minor picture improvements and even greater audio improvements. I have seen it on my own gear and in demonstrations.

AV receiver quality - no, especially if it is just acting as a pass-through. Sorry but not true. Especially if the receivers internal scaler is being used.

X1 box settings, definately yes.

TV settings and abilities - yes, it can impact picture quality, but compression noise is generally recognizable as its own entity. I agree. However I firmly believe that a vast majority of posters on this issue really don't understand how to adjust their TVs and that each input can retain it's own picture settings. I've seen it countless times. You've seen other posters up here showing comparison pics. Actually I haven't. Most pictures did not render on my end. Face it, Comcast is overcompressing in certain markets, as much as you don't want that to be true. Possibly. But things look pretty good at my house in the Twin Cities... Oh wait, the fact that Comcast just went over my signals with a fine tooth comb may help with this.

Mr Scott you appear to have strong opinions and I respect that. But I also value accurate information and I believe a few of your posts have been less than accurate.

 

OP - I can only attest to DirecTV, they had a fantastic picture. My parents have Dish, but I have not watched enough of it to tell you if its' quality holds up. I have said this many times. It is no secret that DirecTV has better picture quality than Comcast.


 


You are subscribing to some very bad misperceptions. HDMI cable: http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/are-expensive-hdmi-cables-worth-buying/ Does not make a difference, it is you that has been less than accurate.

 

AV equipment - my caveat was using it as a pass through. Nobody is going to use a scaler in their AV receiver. Most don't even have scalers. If it is merely passing through an HDMI signal, it will make zero difference.

 

I just noticed you claim to have been selling AV equipment for 40 years. You have a conflict of interest to convince people to buy "higher end" equipment and accessories when in fact, the differences are neglibible to none in a lot of cases.

Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

We will need to agree to disagree. I have seen countless examples of improvements made by premium HDMI cables. Better color saturation. Lower noise. Less artifacts....

I really don't care what one particular review says. Every one their own ax to grind. I try not to take other people's word on these types of things. I experience it for myself.
Regular Contributor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


RickGr4 wrote:
We will need to agree to disagree. I have seen countless examples of improvements made by premium HDMI cables. Better color saturation. Lower noise. Less artifacts....


This statement violates the very laws of physics, there is no need to huckster people up here. That was not a link to a review, it was a link to research.

Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Well my X1 picture quality roughly matches OTA and I have seen it actually look ever so slightly better. I know why...

The debate on the "physics" of cables vs real world performance has been going on for decades. Open minded purists and enthusiasts with hands on experience know the truth...
Regular Visitor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


RobertWy wrote:

New2Xfinity2016 wrote:

Used to be with Uverse with my Sony 4K (65") until I switched to Xfinity this week. Notwithstanding any other variables, just by swapping out from Uverse to Xfinity gadgets, I can absolutely attest that I am getting lower quality picture across all channels. Trying out different available resolutions didn't help much. That's just comparing apple to apple. I want to believe I made the right decision to switch - faster internet and lower monthly bill - but inferior picture quality isn't just acceptable.


You wouldn't happen to live in an apartment?  Many X1 apartment customers have issues with X1.


I do live in an apartment. I never thought about that making a difference. That's too bad if that really is the issue. I guess that means the signal quality is being split up between all or a portion of the units.

Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

X1 boxes require extremely good signals both incoming and outgoing. Apartments seem to struggle with X1 boxes because the wiring can be old and split many times. Also many different people may have worked on the wiring over the years.

But just to be clear here, if there were something really wrong your signals you would see noticeable "pixeling" or your X1 box would be freezing and or rebooting.

If you have concerns about X1's picture quality the best way to test it is to compare Comcast's picture quality to an HD antenna on the same program. I have done this comparison many times. Here in the Twin Cities area I have found Comcast's picture quality to be extremely close to the over the air broadcast. Other members of this forum disagree with me.

I have a brand new and calibrated LG OLED which many people believe is the best TV ever made. I also have two Panasonic plasma TVs. I would like to think I have a good reference point to judge picture quality.

I thought the picture quality of last Monday's Steelers game was very good. However the game that followed was noticeably worse. The difference was clearly the broadcast.

Personally, I think Comcast in many cases is being blamed unfairly on the issue of picture quality. I think 90% of what people are identifying as poor picture quality is either the broadcast itself or settings of the TV set. The guy that just calibrated my TV thought my Comcast picture quality looked very good.



thebugster1 wrote:

RobertWy wrote:

New2Xfinity2016 wrote:

Used to be with Uverse with my Sony 4K (65") until I switched to Xfinity this week. Notwithstanding any other variables, just by swapping out from Uverse to Xfinity gadgets, I can absolutely attest that I am getting lower quality picture across all channels. Trying out different available resolutions didn't help much. That's just comparing apple to apple. I want to believe I made the right decision to switch - faster internet and lower monthly bill - but inferior picture quality isn't just acceptable.


You wouldn't happen to live in an apartment?  Many X1 apartment customers have issues with X1.


I do live in an apartment. I never thought about that making a difference. That's too bad if that really is the issue. I guess that means the signal quality is being split up between all or a portion of the units.




New Poster

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

I had X1 on my brand new 4k TV and it looked great.  We dropped Comcast for a month and tried Verizon Fios and it was horrendous.  So we switched back to Comcast.  But now the picture doesn't look as good.  I had a tech come out and look at it and he said it's fine.  But I can clearly see the picture is noticeably much worse.  I showed him a recording and he said "Well that's because you recorded it in SD, not HD."   When I showed him it was recorded in HD, he said it looked fine to him.  It's all I can see when I watch TV now.  I've tried everything and nothing fixes it.

Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

I think you need to be more specific about what you are seeing. Maybe you could post pictures.



One1ron wrote:

I had X1 on my brand new 4k TV and it looked great.  We dropped Comcast for a month and tried Verizon Fios and it was horrendous.  So we switched back to Comcast.  But now the picture doesn't look as good.  I had a tech come out and look at it and he said it's fine.  But I can clearly see the picture is noticeably much worse.  I showed him a recording and he said "Well that's because you recorded it in SD, not HD."   When I showed him it was recorded in HD, he said it looked fine to him.  It's all I can see when I watch TV now.  I've tried everything and nothing fixes it.




 

New Poster

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

The first thing is that I have to leave the X1 on 720p because 1080p things become very pixelated.  Also, there is motion blur with almost any movement, no matter how insignificant.  This tends to be worse as images get darker. 

 

 

But even if I leave the box on 720p, I still get motion blur.  And when I watch shows that are very dark (light scenes at night) I can see all types of pixelation throughout the blackness.  Now I know Blu Rays are higher quality, but they show up looking good so it would seem that it's not a setting on the TV that is off.  At least, that would be my thought.

 

Everything just used to look so crisp, but now everything just seems to be a little bit duller.  I'm really at a loss of what to even try to do to make it better.

Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

We can't see what you are seeing. That is why I suggested that you be more specific and possibly post pictures.

If you are seeing a big difference between 720p and 1080i then something is fishy. Most people can't see any difference.

I suggest that you contact Comcast and have them send a tech out.
New Poster

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

I get you can't see what I'm seeing.  But I tried taking pictures and videos and it just doesn't show up well on a my iPhone camera.  That's why I was just trying to describe it. 

 

There is definitely a huge difference between 720p and 1080i and 1080p.  In 1080i when things move fast, the picture will show a faint interlaced grid around edges of pictures on the screen. 

Contributor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

One1ron - If you search around here you'll find several discussions about what Comcast is doing to their picture quality wit their new 'upgrade' to 720p plans.  And by 'upgrade' I mean 'downgrade'!

 

You may have more than one problem but if your area has implemented the 'downgrade' to 720p your picture quality will drop.  How much of drop depends on your sensitivity and your display but it will without a doubt go down once they switch you to all 720p.

 

I made the switch to Comcast because the price was right and with a 2 year deal I could get fast Internet and plenty of TV.  I had been with DirecTV for years and was just tired of paying the price...  I only had Comcast for 3 weeks because of the drastic drop in quality with Comcast.  EVERYTHING has motion blur and horrible picture quality especially in darker programming.  The problem isn't only that they are throwing out half the pixels of 1080i programming by downgrading to 720p but that they are over-compressing to cram more channels into their systems.  Bottom line is I couldn't live with the drop in quality so I went back to DirecTV.

 

For those the 3 weeks I had Comcast I could easily compare Over-The-Air, DirecTV and Comcast just by moving the HDMI cable from one box to the next.  Comcast picture quality in my area (Salt Lake City) is much lower than either DirecTV or OTA.

 

There are some here that will say its your display and/or settings etc. and while it's true that your display can make it even worse there is no way for any display, no matter how great it is or how well its calibrated, to 'undo' the mush of over-compression or to 'put-back' the picture detail they throw out going from 1080i to 720p.  It just can't happen!  Once the picture is mushed up and the detail is thrown out you can't get it back.

 

 

 

 

Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

As I just suggested, if I were in your shoes I would have Comcast send a tech out.



One1ron wrote:

I get you can't see what I'm seeing.  But I tried taking pictures and videos and it just doesn't show up well on a my iPhone camera.  That's why I was just trying to describe it. 

 

There is definitely a huge difference between 720p and 1080i and 1080p.  In 1080i when things move fast, the picture will show a faint interlaced grid around edges of pictures on the screen. 


 

New Poster

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Yeah, I guess that's what I'll have to do.  Although, the guy just came out 2 weeks ago and told me everything looked fine to him.

Contributor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Probably worth taking a look here:  http://forums.xfinity.com/t5/X1/Picture-Quality-Poor-for-all-programming-Live-TV-On-Demand-DVR/m-p/2...

 

You can see if you've been switched over to MPEG4 and 720p or not.

 

Sounds like it could be that when you were happy with the picture quality you were on an old school system using MPEG2 and 1080i for a lot of the channels and higher bandwidth.  

 

It's possible that while you were trying out the other provider Comcast 'downgraded' your area to MPEG4 and bitstarved 720p.  It really does make a big difference.

 

It's probably worth having them come out and take a look but like you said - you just did that and they'll likely say the same thing.  Looks good to them....

 

Best of luck

Frequent Visitor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

First off, I have to say that these boards seem useless but for some reason I continue coming back hoping someone has a solution to the comcast hd quality issue.<br><br>The picture quality during sports are what really make me mental with my x1. You can't read the names on the jerseys, you can't see player's faces. The graphics are fuzzy and sometimes unreadable. <br><br>I can deal with all of the other channels because I can just turn on my roku and watch basically everything else in 1080p or higher. So I'm paying $200+ per month for about 6 channels and my internet.<br><br>Recently I finally had time to have a comcast tech come out. I showed him that there is little to no difference between the SD channels and HD (besides the letter boxing that occurred on SD). He seemed puzzled, but could only tell me that everything checked out fine and that someone would have to check the feed from the hub (which has caused me total loss of signal on multiple occasions). Of course no one got back to me and I got my bill with the $50 b.s. service fee today (that I'll have to argue with some dude from India about for an hour at some point this week, cuz I'm not paying that).<br><br>And to the guys that will respond to this that it's the cables, or it's my tv settings, or that I'm expecting too much...just believe me that it is not any of those things.<br><br>And I don't have the best tv in the world, but it's pretty good. 2016 vizio p series 65" that I felt had the best picture after returning an suhd (and it was cheaper).<br><br>Unfortunately satellite dishes don't work well at my house, and there is no other option where I live besides comcast or a dish. So I just have to deal with a terrible picture and pay my $200 a month for a handful of channels.
Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Not sure how you can expect to find a solution simply because we can't see what you are seeing.

Comcast's picture quality seems to vary across markets (mine seems to be pretty good) and Comcast is in process of making big changes that may further reduce picture quality.

Sorry but there really is no way for us to help you other than making sure your connections and settings are correct.
New Poster

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

"...and Comcast is in process of making big changes that may further reduce picture quality."

 

 

 

Why would they make big changes to make quality worse? 

Silver Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


One1ron wrote:

"...and Comcast is in process of making big changes that may further reduce picture quality."

 

 

 

Why would they make big changes to make quality worse? 


I don't think Comcast said that.  All my channels are now 720p/60 and I don't see any "reduction" of picture quality.

I am not a Comcast Employee.
I am just a customer, volunteering my time to help other customers here in the Forums.
Was your question answered? Mark the post as best answer!
Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Please read the thread you posted in. The changes Comcast is making are discussed in this thread.
Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Please Robert,

Of course Comcast would never say that. However many knowledgeable forum members who have experienced the 720p "change" are reporting a downgrade in picture quality. You must not be reading the same things I am...

Robert please remember that some of us have better TVs than you do and some of us have better situations to judge picture quality.
Expert

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

The 1080i being interlaced and only 30 "images" per second created from 60 partial temporally different images is inferior but was well-suited for CRT technology. With the virtual elimination of CRT technology from consumer TV, it is time to fully convert to non-interlaced format. 


I am not a Comcast Employee.
I am just a customer, volunteering my time to help other customers here in the Forums.
We ask that you post publicly so people with similar questions may benefit from the conversation.

Was your question answered? Mark the post as best answer!
Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Rusty,

Please reread the comment I just made to Robert. The comment applies to you as well.

Also, please stop pimping the change to 720p as an upgrade. You are making yourself look foolish. No matter how anybody packages this "change" it is a downgrade considering 1080p is widely available, 4K is here and 8K is out there.

Seriously, I have just about had it with the small handful of forum members who support this downgrade... Comcast's picture quality is already questionable and there is no chance that changing to 720p will help.

I have had more than one Comcast employee tell me this downgrade is happening to allow bandwidth for 1gb internet. I would prefer to at least have a choice in this...



Rustyben wrote:
The 1080i being interlaced and only 30 "images" per second created from 60 partial temporally different images is inferior but was well-suited for CRT technology. With the virtual elimination of CRT technology from consumer TV, it is time to fully convert to non-interlaced format. 




Expert

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


RickGr4 wrote:

Rusty,

Please reread the comment I just made to Robert. The comment applies to you as well.

Also, please stop pimping the change to 720p as an upgrade. You are making yourself look foolish. No matter how anybody packages this "change" it is a downgrade considering 1080p is widely available, 4K is here and 8K is out there.

Seriously, I have just about had it with the small handful of forum members who support this downgrade... Comcast's picture quality is already questionable and there is no chance that changing to 720p will help.

I have had more than one Comcast employee tell me this downgrade is happening to allow bandwidth for 1gb internet. I would prefer to at least have a choice in this...



Rustyben wrote:
The 1080i being interlaced and only 30 "images" per second created from 60 partial temporally different images is inferior but was well-suited for CRT technology. With the virtual elimination of CRT technology from consumer TV, it is time to fully convert to non-interlaced format. 

in order of quality of image is 1080p  720p60 1080i 



I am not a Comcast Employee.
I am just a customer, volunteering my time to help other customers here in the Forums.
We ask that you post publicly so people with similar questions may benefit from the conversation.

Was your question answered? Mark the post as best answer!
Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

You don't know that for sure. Stop speculating and prove it.

Oh wait, your main TV is small and made by a "value" brand yet people who own reference caliber TV sets are supposed to believe your input?

I think not.



Rustyben wrote:

RickGr4 wrote:

Rusty,

Please reread the comment I just made to Robert. The comment applies to you as well.

Also, please stop pimping the change to 720p as an upgrade. You are making yourself look foolish. No matter how anybody packages this "change" it is a downgrade considering 1080p is widely available, 4K is here and 8K is out there.

Seriously, I have just about had it with the small handful of forum members who support this downgrade... Comcast's picture quality is already questionable and there is no chance that changing to 720p will help.

I have had more than one Comcast employee tell me this downgrade is happening to allow bandwidth for 1gb internet. I would prefer to at least have a choice in this...



Rustyben wrote:
The 1080i being interlaced and only 30 "images" per second created from 60 partial temporally different images is inferior but was well-suited for CRT technology. With the virtual elimination of CRT technology from consumer TV, it is time to fully convert to non-interlaced format. 

in order of quality of image is 1080p  720p60 1080i 







 



Expert

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

rick, simply search google and read the technical information available. I can't teach you how interlace works and therefore it would be hard for you to conceive that 1080i(30) is more like a murky 540p like image with a lot of math and guesstimating done by encoding software to create the image you see as 1080i.



I am not a Comcast Employee.
I am just a customer, volunteering my time to help other customers here in the Forums.
We ask that you post publicly so people with similar questions may benefit from the conversation.

Was your question answered? Mark the post as best answer!
Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

My previous comments stand. I understand interlacing.&nbsp;
You seem to be forgetting the members of this forum (who own much better AV gear than you do) who have reported the "change" to 720p is a significant downgrade.

Once again, you are missing the point. Why isn't Comcast going to at least 1080p? Oh wait, I already answered that. 1GB internet speeds are more important to them.

Sorry Rusty but some of us can read through your technobabble...




Rustyben wrote:

rick, simply search google and read the technical information available. I can't teach you how interlace works and therefore it would be hard for you to conceive that 1080i(30) is more like a murky 540p like image with a lot of math and guesstimating done by encoding software to create the image you see as 1080i.
Expert

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


RickGr4 wrote:

My previous comments stand. I understand interlacing. 

You seem to be forgetting the members of this forum (who own much better AV gear than you do) who have reported the "change" to 720p is a significant downgrade.

Once again, you are missing the point. Why isn't Comcast going to at least 1080p? Oh wait, I already answered that. 1B internet speeds are more important to them.

Sorry Rusty but some of us can read through your technobabble...



Rustyben wrote:

rick, simply search google and read the technical information available. I can't teach you how interlace works and therefore it would be hard for you to conceive that 1080i(30) is more like a murky 540p like image with a lot of math and guesstimating done by encoding software to create the image you see as 1080i.


The off-the-air airr broadcasters nor cable networks provide 1080p. 



I am not a Comcast Employee.
I am just a customer, volunteering my time to help other customers here in the Forums.
We ask that you post publicly so people with similar questions may benefit from the conversation.

Was your question answered? Mark the post as best answer!
Silver Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


RickGr4 wrote:
Please Robert,

Of course Comcast would never say that. However many knowledgeable forum members who have experienced the 720p "change" are reporting a downgrade in picture quality. You must not be reading the same things I am...

Robert please remember that some of us have better TVs than you do and some of us have better situations to judge picture quality.

http://forums.xfinity.com/t5/X1/Degraded-Cable-Broadcast-Resolution-on-New-OLED-LG-TV-65-quot/m-p/28...

I am not a Comcast Employee.
I am just a customer, volunteering my time to help other customers here in the Forums.
Was your question answered? Mark the post as best answer!
Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Yes Rusty I am aware of that as I am sure most members of the forum are but once again that isn't the point.

Comcast should be taking this opportunity to move forward and take steps "future proof" themselves. The only future proofing they are doing here is freeing up bandwidth for 1GB internet.

HOWEVER we have seen this from Comcast before: one step forward, two steps back.
Contributor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


Rustyben wrote:

rick, simply search google and read the technical information available. I can't teach you how interlace works and therefore it would be hard for you to conceive that 1080i(30) is more like a murky 540p like image with a lot of math and guesstimating done by encoding software to create the image you see as 1080i.


1080i is more like a murky 540p?  That could not be further from the truth.  May want to try google yourself or even better take an HONEST look for yourself.

 

I'm not sure why you are so stuck on hatred for 1080i but no matter what your twisted view of it is there is double the number of pixel detail in 1080i or 720p.  No guesstimating involved.  720p throws out half the pixels.  Check your facts.

 

To make it even worse Comcast, in the areas they have completed their 'upgrade' in, is cranking up the compression of their new downgraded 720p so much that it makes it much worse than 720p could be.  Easy to see when you compare ESPN on DirecTV with ESPN on Comcast.  Night and day difference and they are both 720p.

 

It is absolutely true that 'progressive' is better than 'interlaced' if everything else is equal but when you throw out half the picture information to get 'progressive' the picture detail is lost.  For example 1080p is better than 1080i.

 

Bottom line is that just about anyone with half decent equipment and screen size will see the obvious downgrade that Comcast's new bit-starved 720p is a mess and a big step down compared to what it used to be on Comcast and what it still is with OTA and DirecTV.

Silver Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


RickGr4 wrote:
Please Robert,

Of course Comcast would never say that. However many knowledgeable forum members who have experienced the 720p "change" are reporting a downgrade in picture quality. You must not be reading the same things I am...

Robert please remember that some of us have better TVs than you do and some of us have better situations to judge picture quality.

Shouldn't we be comparing apples to apples?

If you have a better TV than I do, then you may have a better picture than me, if we are using the same source (X1 to X1) and the same a/v receiver or no receiver.

 

My feeling is that if I compare my Vizio 32" LED TV with no a/v receiver and connected to an X1 DVR set to 1080p, its picture quality might be less than my Samsung 60" LED connected to my Onky receiver and my X1 DVR connected to the Onkyo.  

 

Or it might just be because my Samsung has a better upconverter than my Vizio.

 

In any case, comparing the two is not comparing apples to apples. 

I am not a Comcast Employee.
I am just a customer, volunteering my time to help other customers here in the Forums.
Was your question answered? Mark the post as best answer!
Gold Problem Solver

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

Robert,

I think you bring up some very good points here. Maybe more than you know. You are right about apples to apples.

In my opinion, any comparision is invalid unless a "reference point" has been established. In this forum that would be nearly impossible because everyone owns different combinations of AV gear. Also, it would seems very few people know how to properly adjust a TV set which makes things much more difficult.

Soooo how do we establish a "reference point". At first glance that sounds simple. But it probably isn't. Different Comcast markets, AV receivers, HDMI cables, viewing distances, TV settings and other associated equipment all bring in variables. Even X1 boxes are a variable. I FIRMLY believe my Arris V3 DVR has slightly better picture quality than my Samsung XG2s do.

That being said, I have been associated with designing, selling, installing and troubleshooting AV gear for almost 40 years. Here is how I currently "grade" TV sets:

1. LG OLED. Probably the best TV sets made to date. Plenty of documentation to support this belief. The value of good 4k upscaling and "infinite blacks" cannot be underestimated.
2. Panasonic VT and ZT series plasma TVs. Probably the best 1080p TV sets ever made. If these TV sets were 4k they might still be the best. Long discontinued but still awesome.
3. Samsung KS8000, KS8500, KS9000, KS9500 and KS9800. Personally I can't stand LCD/LED TV sets but these sets are very good. The Samsung KS8000 might be the best "deal" out there right now in higher end TV sets.
4.The brand new Sony Z series. Early reports suggest these sets might be the first true challenge to LG OLED.
5. Late model Pioneer Kuro plasma. These were the best TV sets made for some time. There were not beaten until the Panasonic VT and ZT sets arrived (which were designed in part by former Pioneer Kuro engineers). Long discontinued but will still beat most of today's TV LCD/LED sets.

Beyond this list, I think everything else is second place or worse. Most LCD/LED TV sets are comical. I have no interest in choosing between IPS or VA panel technology. Currently I think there are no "reference caliber" TVs below 55 inch because all currently respected TV manufacturers are putting their best technology in TV sets 55" and above. Those of you that have 32" Vizio's and 40" Sharps or Samsungs are badly mistaken if you think you can see what I see on my calibrated 65" LG OLED which I watch from nine feet away or my calibrated 55" Panny plasma that I view from eight to 11 feet away.

At this point I think the only way this situation could be improved would be for Comcast to change the X1 forum so we could all see which city we live in and provide "signature boxes" so we could list the equipment we use to watch X1 on... I have a feeling that would clarify a great many things including the abiity to exclude the opinions of forum members who watch X1 on 32" Vizio's but are claiming to be "experts".




RobertWy wrote:


RickGr4 wrote:
Please Robert,

Of course Comcast would never say that. However many knowledgeable forum members who have experienced the 720p "change" are reporting a downgrade in picture quality. You must not be reading the same things I am...

Robert please remember that some of us have better TVs than you do and some of us have better situations to judge picture quality.

Shouldn't we be comparing apples to apples?


If you have a better TV than I do, then you may have a better picture than me, if we are using the same source (X1 to X1) and the same a/v receiver or no receiver.
&nbsp;
My feeling is that if I compare my Vizio 32" LED TV with no a/v receiver and connected to an X1 DVR set to 1080p, its picture quality might be less than my Samsung 60" LED connected to my Onky receiver and my X1 DVR connected to the Onkyo. &nbsp;
&nbsp;
Or it might just be because my Samsung has a better upconverter than my Vizio.
&nbsp;
In any case, comparing the two is not comparing apples to apples.&nbsp;

New Poster

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports

So I'm late to the game but recently "upgraded" to X1 because my wife found out we could essentially get home sercurity for free.

 

The compression is awful.  I tried using a bad word but Comcast literally threw it back LOL.

 

I went from breathtaking HD to pixelation on any slight movement, and basically everthing that is in the background of the picture.  They blow up the sharpness of colors (and whites to fluorescents) to compensate I think, but then the blacks disappear.  Almost zero contrast.  And yes we've sat and tried to tune the TVs (all 4) for hours.

 

The pixelation makes me want to vomit.  Football is the worst.  Had three techs out, they all say the signal and equipment is fine.

 

This is the worse thing I ever let happen, and they can't get me the old boxes back that apparently had MPEG2 compression software versus the new software which allows a gazillion channels.  Which all look awful. This literally happened within two hours.

 

I'm literally looking on EBAY for boxes similar to what I had.

 

My market has no FIOS, nor any good solutions for internet.

Expert

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


brianmarquis wrote:

So I'm late to the game but recently "upgraded" to X1 because my wife found out we could essentially get home sercurity for free.

 

The compression is awful.  I tried using a bad word but Comcast literally threw it back LOL.

 

I went from breathtaking HD to pixelation on any slight movement, and basically everthing that is in the background of the picture.  They blow up the sharpness of colors (and whites to fluorescents) to compensate I think, but then the blacks disappear.  Almost zero contrast.  And yes we've sat and tried to tune the TVs (all 4) for hours.

 

The pixelation makes me want to vomit.  Football is the worst.  Had three techs out, they all say the signal and equipment is fine.

 

This is the worse thing I ever let happen, and they can't get me the old boxes back that apparently had MPEG2 compression software versus the new software which allows a gazillion channels.  Which all look awful. This literally happened within two hours.

 

I'm literally looking on EBAY for boxes similar to what I had.

 

My market has no FIOS, nor any good solutions for internet.


what you described is classic bad signal (low power or high noise level or both). Call 800-Comcast and let the representative run their tests. A home visit may be necessary to determine the actual problem and fix it. 



I am not a Comcast Employee.
I am just a customer, volunteering my time to help other customers here in the Forums.
We ask that you post publicly so people with similar questions may benefit from the conversation.

Was your question answered? Mark the post as best answer!
Regular Contributor

Re: HD Quality is is very poor for sports


brianmarquis wrote:

So I'm late to the game but recently "upgraded" to X1 because my wife found out we could essentially get home sercurity for free.

 

The compression is awful.  I tried using a bad word but Comcast literally threw it back LOL.

 

I went from breathtaking HD to pixelation on any slight movement, and basically everthing that is in the background of the picture.  They blow up the sharpness of colors (and whites to fluorescents) to compensate I think, but then the blacks disappear.  Almost zero contrast.  And yes we've sat and tried to tune the TVs (all 4) for hours.

 

The pixelation makes me want to vomit.  Football is the worst.  Had three techs out, they all say the signal and equipment is fine.

 

This is the worse thing I ever let happen, and they can't get me the old boxes back that apparently had MPEG2 compression software versus the new software which allows a gazillion channels.  Which all look awful. This literally happened within two hours.

 

I'm literally looking on EBAY for boxes similar to what I had.

 

My market has no FIOS, nor any good solutions for internet.


One can go to DirecTV, or put up an antenna to get away from Comcast's degraded signal. This football season we are watching a lot from out antenna source.

Expert
Moved:

HD Quality is is very poor for sports

language filter bypass. multiple cross posts of same message.