HD Channel Stupidity

[Hi Ho]

I have a Dish Network HD DVR and I am very happy with it so far. The HD content available from Dish far surpasses that available from cable. My beef is not with Dish, however, it's with certain HD channels.

TBS has an "HD" channel. I put HD in quotation marks because I have yet to see anything more than baseball and Frank TV actually broadcast in HD. Everything else is not HD even though they claim it is in the program guide. Now, that's not the worst part. Not everything is filmed in HD. I guess they can't get their hands on the HD master for every show they run. That is sort of understandable. What is NOT understandable is the fact that they stretch everything! The Office is a great example of the incompetent knuckleheads over at TBS "HD". The Office, which is filmed in 16:9 HD and broadcast as such on NBC, is shown on the TBS "HD" channel with the letterbox bars (top/bottom) still there! To top it off, they stretch it! What the hell? There is no way to undo the damage. Virtually everything on the TBS "HD" channel is broadcast that way! Why????? It makes no sense and it boggles my mind.

Another example is a show on the History Channel called Shockwave. The first episode I saw looked great. It was broadcast in a normal 16:9 aspect ratio. Every episode since then has been just like The Office on TBS with the bars on the top/bottom and stretched.

How hard is it to AT THE VERY LEAST crop off the letterbox bars so the content on the "HD" channels properly fits a wide screen TV???? Seriously, what idiots are in charge of this?

This has nothing to do with Dish or any other sat or cable company. It's the content provider. They really need to get some competent people to manage their HD content.

Discovery and it's affiliates at least do a little better. They partially zoom 4:3 content so that a small amount of the top/bottom is lost but they do not stretch it at all.

 

[Halon451]

I have a Dish Network HD DVR and I am very happy with it so far. The HD content available from Dish far surpasses that available from cable. My beef is not with Dish, however, it's with certain HD channels.

TBS has an "HD" channel. I put HD in quotation marks because I have yet to see anything more than baseball and Frank TV actually broadcast in HD. Everything else is not HD even though they claim it is in the program guide. Now, that's not the worst part. Not everything is filmed in HD. I guess they can't get their hands on the HD master for every show they run. That is sort of understandable. What is NOT understandable is the fact that they stretch everything! The Office is a great example of the incompetent knuckleheads over at TBS "HD". The Office, which is filmed in 16:9 HD and broadcast as such on NBC, is shown on the TBS "HD" channel with the letterbox bars (top/bottom) still there! To top it off, they stretch it! What the hell? There is no way to undo the damage. Virtually everything on the TBS "HD" channel is broadcast that way! Why????? It makes no sense and it boggles my mind.

Another example is a show on the History Channel called Shockwave. The first episode I saw looked great. It was broadcast in a normal 16:9 aspect ratio. Every episode since then has been just like The Office on TBS with the bars on the top/bottom and stretched.

How hard is it to AT THE VERY LEAST crop off the letterbox bars so the content on the "HD" channels properly fits a wide screen TV???? Seriously, what idiots are in charge of this?

This has nothing to do with Dish or any other sat or cable company. It's the content provider. They really need to get some competent people to manage their HD content.

Discovery and it's affiliates at least do a little better. They partially zoom 4:3 content so that a small amount of the top/bottom is lost but they do not stretch it at all.

I don't think there is any short answer to your question - all I can say is that from having worked briefly with a company that built television stations (among other things), that the entire industry right now is in such a state of flux, that it may still be a while yet before all this gets sorted out. Many cable companies, and satellite providers are racing ahead of the pack by advertising "HD" content, as a means of drawing in more customers, but in effect they're doing exactly what you describe - letterboxing original 4:3 content and slapping an "HD" suffix onto the channel.

It's even so crazy that the original network letterboxes its own content to make it visible on 4:3 screens, broadcasts it to your local provider, who slaps another letterbox into the format and sends it your way.

It's crazy right now. We're in the midst of the great transformation between old analog 4:3 to digital 16:9. The content you see delivered, of course comes from so many different locations, is compiled by the network (first), then delivered to the satellite (or cable) provider, along with every other network, who compiles this stuff, and rebroadcasts it to the customer (you).

I think the biggest problem is that we have not yet reached an industry standard. Not every show is being filmed in 16:9, so these issues are going to persist - and not every network and/or provider is utilizing the same scaling criteria - and like I said, jumping way ahead of the curve to try to lure in more customers who are enticed only by the catchphrase "High Definition", but who for the most part, don't even know what that truly means.

Eventually all of this will sort itself out, and your HDTV will be doing the job it was meant to do. It's no secret, obviously that the world is discarding the old analog formats and going digital and HD. The industry will be standardized, just as it came to be during the analog revolution, and you'll be fine.

 

[Warpdrv]

Good Rant Hi Ho... I also have DishHD, and am extremely happy with the PQ, and service. I agree with you on those HD content scenarios... but as you said, its not your providers fault.

Thanks Halon for the info on the state of flux that we are in right now...

 

[supervij]

I have the same problem up here in Toronto. GlobalHD, which has some great shows on (like Heroes, House, My Name is Earl), rarely shows them in HD. They seem to always get the SD feed. It's an absolute waste of time watching/recording anything on there.

A&E HD is also a bit strange. They do occasionally broadcast shows in HD (The Sopranos, for one), but whenever they broadcast SD shows -- and there are waaay too many of them -- they stretch them to fit the 16:9 screen! Fortunately, my TV has an aspect mode that will squeeze that stretched picture back to its 4:3 ratio, but a lot of TVs don't have that aspect mode, so they're out of luck. It's not as bad as what you describe with TBS HD, but it's annoying nonetheless.

I stand by my original assessment from a year and a half ago: HD is simply not ready for prime-time. (I don't mean literally 8 pm to 11 pm, of course!) However, until all the HD networks are broadcasting 100% during that 7 pm to 11 pm, I maintain that it just ain't ready. Thank the Maker for channels like HDNet (although we up here get HDNet Canada, whose programming sucks big time compared to HDNet), who show HD content 100% of the time. Love 'em!

cheers,
supervij

 

[Halon451]

All of these are reasons why I haven't yet jumped on the bandwagon and gone to purchase an HDTV flat panel like the rest of the world. For now, my 32" JVC tube (which thankfully does accept component inputs and I can use my digital cable HD box at 480i), is perfectly fine.

There are many television stations out there that have yet to be upgraded to digital format, let alone HD. That was part of my job, rebuilding stations and upgrading their system to include HD content. So now, stations that have been retrofitted are multibroadcasting both HD and SD content, because things are still evolving on the consumer end as well, and if they go fully HD, then they lose those customers who have yet to upgrade to a set that will accept HD content.

That is why it is taking a while. A typical job like this would last approximately 3-6 months, depending, and sometimes much longer. Now, mulitiply that by the number of stations in the country, and the fact that there are very few firms out there that specialize in rebuilding and retrofitting these stations, you start to get the idea of why it's such a mess. That's not even taking into account the different world standards, whether it is NTSC, PAL, SECAM, but that doesn't involve HD standards as much as it does regional electrical standards (voltage, frequency), differences in scan rates, etc.

Make no mistake - this is a major overhaul of the industry, and for what it's worth, it's not seamless obviously as you both have noted, but it's getting there. This is probably similar, if not even more revolutionary, then the conversion from black and white to color television.

 

[Hi Ho]

Do you, by chance, have any insight on why a media giant like ABC News still doesn't have an HD broadcast?

Back on subject, my main problem is the fact that some of the HD stations stretch HD content. Why on earth do they feel this is necesarry?

 

[Haoleb]

HDTNT is one of the most useless channels in my HD lineup. Nothing but that biatch kira sedgewick walking into the screen with her flashlight adverstsing for the closer some stupid show I would never care to watch. PQ sucks also.

I have HD through the cable company so I only get a couple of HD channels I find worth watching. HD net movies, Mojo, Discovery HD theater, National Geographic HD and HD net. All the rest are rubbish. Golf HD, Espn HD, HDtnt. Rubbish! Absolute rubbish!

 

[cmusic]

Do you, by chance, have any insight on why a media giant like ABC News still doesn't have an HD broadcast?

Same with CBS news also. The national news programs are mostly watched by the older demographic (people above 50 years old) that on the most part don't own HDTVs or pay for HD cable or satellite service.

Back on subject, my main problem is the fact that some of the HD stations stretch HD content. Why on earth do they feel this is necesarry?

I work for a local telephone/ISP/cable company that is doing FTTH service to about 3500 customers. I get most of the customer service calls about HDTV since I know a lot about it (even though I work in engineering). I get calls almost every week from customers that have bought new widescreen HDTVs that are upset that the they have black bars on the sides when watching non HD filmed programs on HD channels. Truth is most of the buying public is not informed enough about HD to understand. I've have many of our basic cable customers think that just buying a HDTV will make everything they watch HD.
The networks that stretch the picture is just trying to satisfy customer demand that thinks the entire screen must be filled. Then you have the customers that complain about the things on the screen looking "fat". At least the Discovery networks zoom in a little bit to keep the stretching to a minimum.

 

[Halon451]

The networks that stretch the picture is just trying to satisfy customer demand that thinks the entire screen must be filled. Then you have the customers that complain about the things on the screen looking "fat". At least the Discovery networks zoom in a little bit to keep the stretching to a minimum.

Exactly. This ties in with what I was saying. The industry, and the networks in particular are attempting to satisfy customer demand for HD by stretching the image so that it better fills a 16:9 screen. And I don't have much experience with the big broadcasters like ABC, or NBC, and the like. Much of my work has been with the local affiliate stations, who re-broadcast the signals from the major networks.

 

[aberkowitz]

HDTNT is one of the most useless channels in my HD lineup. Nothing but that biatch kira sedgewick walking into the screen with her flashlight adverstsing for the closer some stupid show I would never care to watch. PQ sucks also.

I have HD through the cable company so I only get a couple of HD channels I find worth watching. HD net movies, Mojo, Discovery HD theater, National Geographic HD and HD net. All the rest are rubbish. Golf HD, Espn HD, HDtnt. Rubbish! Absolute rubbish!

I was going to say that HDTNT does have some sports broadcasts in HD (NBA, Nascar, & Golf) that look amazing, but then I saw your comment about ESPN HD .

My biggest problems with the HD channels tend to be with the calibration of the sound levels. With my cable provider (Time Warner) about half of the HD channels are calibrated at a very loud level, so whenever I switch back and forth between the two of the (e.g. CBS & ESPN) I'm either straining to hear or getting blown out of my living room. I checked to see if the same problem existed on SD channels and it doesn't. Anybody know why?

 

[Halon451]

Improper audio mixing at the point of origin.

 

[markw]

This reminds me of the early days of color TV and FM stereo.

Even though the transmitters were capable of them, mono or B & W sources still came through as mono or B & W.

 

[supervij]

Exactly. This ties in with what I was saying. The industry, and the networks in particular are attempting to satisfy customer demand for HD by stretching the image so that it better fills a 16:9 screen. And I don't have much experience with the big broadcasters like ABC, or NBC, and the like. Much of my work has been with the local affiliate stations, who re-broadcast the signals from the major networks.

Up here in The Great White North, I just recently saw a commercial that warmed my heart. It was from Rogers, one of the big cable companies here. It featured a guy showing off his brand new HDTV: "Yessir, 52 inches of high definition goodness!" he exclaims. His friend says, "That's not HD." Cut to a shot of the television, showing a hockey game (what else? we're Canadian!) and it's an SD picture, stretched out to fill the 16:9 screen. "Look," the friend points out, "the players are all fat!" The HDTV owner replies, "No, they're just . . . short." And the advert goes on to show the difference between stretched-out SD and true HD pictures. This is one commercial I hope they do overplay; it would go toward educating a lot of people.

cheers,
supervij

 

[cmusic]

My biggest problems with the HD channels tend to be with the calibration of the sound levels. With my cable provider (Time Warner) about half of the HD channels are calibrated at a very loud level, so whenever I switch back and forth between the two of the (e.g. CBS & ESPN) I'm either straining to hear or getting blown out of my living room. I checked to see if the same problem existed on SD channels and it doesn't. Anybody know why?

Dolby Digital 5.1 is the audio standard for HDTV. Although many broadcasts are not 5.1 they still use the Dolby Digital format. All of Dolby's sound formats are lower in volume and use less dynamic compression to give a wider dynamic range (the difference between the quietest sound and the loudest sound). Even though the normal volume level is lower, the wider dynamic range allows for more "headroom" to produce more realistic dynamic sounds like explosions,guns firing, bands playing, ect...

Regular SD channels only play stereo or mono sounds that can be compressed to be overall louder but also overall less dynamic sounding. They have more dynamic compression (making the quiet sounds louder) so that overall they sound louder.

My mom and dad don't like to watch HD channels (even though they have two HDTVs and subscribe to digital HD cable) because of the lower sound volume. My dad thinks that turning the volume past half way on the TV's sound bar graphic is too loud no matter what the actual decible level is.

 

[aberkowitz]

Interesting... most HD channels are lower, however CBS is so ridiculously loud that my receiver DB level is 20-30% lower than almost every other channel. It really sucks on Sunday because I like to switch back and forth between Fox & CBS for football...

Really funny about your parents... my grandfather could never get an HDTV because he can barely hear the TV anymore with the volume bar at 150%

 

[Hi Ho]

I get calls almost every week from customers that have bought new widescreen HDTVs that are upset that the they have black bars on the sides when watching non HD filmed programs on HD channels. Truth is most of the buying public is not informed enough about HD to understand.

Oh, I know all about that. I install TVs and home theater equipment for a living. I spend all day explaining that and I get the point when it comes to standard 4:3 content. However, when it comes to letterboxed 16:9 content that is simply rediculous! They aren't getting rid of bars. The top/bottom bars are still there.

Here is an example. HERE is a screenshot of a show called Shockwave on the History Channel. That was the first episode. It aired in full HD 16:9 format. HERE is what all subsequent episodes have looked like. The picture is blurry and it's hard to see the borders of the screen but you can use the pause bar as a reference. Why would anyone that is worried about black bars think that was OK?