Mon Apr 7, 2008 5:22PM EDT
See Comments (18)
High-definition television provides a crystal clear viewing experience, free from artifacts and with noticeably better quality than standard-definition television... right? Not so fast. Turns out Comcast and other providers of so-called high-def TV are intentionally compressing the video stream on many of their channels, sometimes by as much as 38 percent, degrading image quality along the way. Why? Supposedly, it frees up bandwidth so the operators can pack in even more channels.
The news is the result of independent research from a user at AVS Forums, probably the best-known meeting ground for audio and video enthusiasts. Here, that user provides a wealth of examples and empirical data outlining the issue, complete with screenshots of what channels look like with standard compression and with Comcast's extra squeeze. Some of the channels don't look much different, but a few examples are particularly egregious, such as the 34.2 percent added compression applied to MHD, seen above in a "before and after" shot. (Note that this level of pixelization will be less apparent in a moving image than a still frame, bit some of the examples are so horrible they'd be obvious to even a casual passerby.) Some commenters have noted that the compression is so bad they thought something was wrong with their equipment.
Comcast isn't the only one pulling these stunts. DirecTV has been sued over a similar issue in the past, and DISH has also engaged in such "HD Lite" tactics as well, namely by dropping the overall resolution of its broadcasts to save on bandwidth. In fact, DirecTV actually sued Comcast when Comcast tried to call out DirecTV's lower-resolution HD in its advertisements. That suit was settled late last year. Now maybe it's time for DirecTV to launch an ad campaign of its own...
Comcast has yet to issue a response regarding this issue.
LINK: AVS Forum
via Consumerist
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
This is why I have Verizon FiOS. Fiber Optic all the way to your home. The picture quality is amazing on every channel. Even the non-HD channels are watchable on an HD set, and they are the only ones that are noticeably lower in quality (as one would expect).
Its a good thing we just switched to FiOS. There are still a little hiccups with the system (such as the DVR that can "Broadcast to any receiver in the house" even though it wont work with HD boxes), but its worth it.
As soon as FiOS is avaliable to me, I am all over it. You would think it would be living in the LA area. Common Verizon! You can do it!
I've looked at FiOS recently. Promising but I wish the price wasn't so high.
Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 Posted by rogueist on Thu Sep 3, 2009 8:49PM EDT Report Abuse
Yep, I noticed that while I was at my mom's place... My off the air HD images were better than her Comcast HD channels - and that is saying something, considering that the off the air HD channels are partially a mix of SD with HD graphic overlays, 480p images centered in 720p letterboxes, 720p images running in 1080i overlay packages, and much more - overall not much actual HD content there, or the image quality they are broadcasting at does not match what you are viewing. BUT it is improving - I am seeing more content that matches the broadcast signal.