Hate the Low Bitrates!

meansizzler

Ex Member
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
7,892
Reaction score
328
Points
1,889
Location
London
Hate the low bitrates on sky channels as well as non sky channels.

Was watching the 100 on E4 yesterday even on a 28" Sony CD with 1366 x 768 Res with sky box outputting at 1080i. Signs of pixilation were defiantly apparent. Even worse on a smaller 1080P display.

I know they want to squeeze as many channels in the same Frequency, but this is just total BS.

Some of the bitrates go as low as 4mbps which is what we use to get for SD Channels, with average birate of 6-8mbps. That is the bitrate DVD's use to be encoded at. H264 is suppose to be better than Mpeg 2, but that does not mean you have to transmit at the same bitrates.

Even with the HEVC trial 4K broadcasts even though HEVC provides better compression they transmit at 35mbps, now if you we got the same bitrate we get for bluray, or at least 20mbps bitrates then i'd be a happy bunny.

It's all about quantity for them instead of quality. Most probably them HEVC broadcast will come down in bitrate to 10 mbps, which defeats the point of increasing the resolution if your going to cripple the bitrate.
 
It's all about quantity for them instead of quality

It always has been... It's nothing new. Unfortunately the average joe doesn't care. Those that do moan but mostly still pay the subs...
 
Unfortunately the average joe doesn't care.

I don't think that's true, maybe they are just blind or admit defeat considering I have seen many arguments from the average joe go on about mp3 being so low quality and go on about flac being superior, surely the picture is more important.

I'd stick with the mp3 for music but prefer higher bitrate video, I cant really notice the difference between lossy and lossless music audio but I can clearly see the difference between low and high bitrate video, i.e between sky hd / Netflix / iplayer hd and a bluray. Surely that's the same for everyone.
 
Those that do moan but mostly still pay the subs...

That's because there is no alternative, sure I can get access to MTV/HBO/Universal from Astra 3B using a valid smart card / cam and even use it on my PC and sat box instead of the skybox which I prefer but I still get the low bitrate video and a non English EPG.

Transmit at 4K H264 @ 20mbps over Sat or IP would be ideal.
 
I have seen many arguments from the average joe go on about mp3 being so low quality and go on about flac being superior, surely the picture is more important.

The average joe I'm talking about has never heard of FLAC and wouldn't know the difference between lossy and lossless codecs. I would actually argue audio quality is more important than picture quality and provides more involvement than picture ever could, but I guess you need the hearing and/or system to do it justice.
 
audio quality is more important than picture quality and provides more involvement than picture ever could

So you one of those who would had a 28" crt tv back in the day with a full blown sound system..:laugh:

So you would rather go back to the dinky 28" CRT with a decent 5.1 system if you had a choice between that and 65" LCD with an elcheapo soundbar
 
Last edited:
So you one of those who would had a 28" crt tv back in the day with a full blown sound system..:laugh:

So you would rather go back to the dinky 28" CRT with a decent 5.1 system if you had a choice between that and 65" LCD with an elcheapo soundbar

Ha, funny you should say that that, I did have a 28" crt with a full surround system and if I had to choose i'd go for better sound over size of TV
 
So you one of those who would had a 28" crt tv back in the day with a full blown sound system..:laugh:

Nah my first system had a 40" RPTV but yes I'd choose sound over video, it's just so much more involving.
 
It's true, the average customer does not give a damn and it's the reason us customers who do care have to put up with the rubbish Sky and ITV give us.

The sports channels used to look brilliant on Sky. Now sky havbe rammed the transponders full and they are terrible at times.

The fact that many people cannott even be bothered to change to the HD channel is also a concern.

And before people say, "why don't you cancel an go elsewhere". Go to who exactly??? I complaint every single month but sadly it needs more than just me.
 
..... us customers who do care have to put up with the rubbish Sky and ITV give us....

As you stated in your last paragraph, you don't have to. Would you be willing to pay more for dedicated "super HD" channels? (You probably do not remember when the best TV we had was 405 lines! :()

The fact that many people cannott even be bothered to change to the HD channel is also a concern.

A concern to who?
 
It's a concern to us who do appreciate HD. Whilst most people continue to not give a toss, those of us who do suffer the consequences. We that care are sadly the minority.
 
Even the SD channels are affected.
I am starting to ask if the extra channels are worth the cost.
 
The fact that many people cannott even be bothered to change to the HD channel is also a concern.
I don't think that many do that - not enough to concern me anyway.
 
I got rid of the HD channels quite a while ago.
The only decent HD stuff is on BBC of Channel 4 anyway.
Sky also send me letters saying it's great how my price is still frozen.
 
Maybe when sky bring out their 4K receivers we can all downscale the image and get a proper HD image lol
 
Maybe when sky bring out their 4K receivers we can all downscale the image and get a proper HD image lol

If and when.......... Where's this extra bandwidth to come from? Sky, as do all other broadcasters, rent bandwidth from Astra. With the current number of satellites up there there is only limited bandwidth for all.
 
The dancing splotches in gradients from 20% - 0 for dark scenes is the worst. Glows around ships and so on you sometimes see ring bands. I find Sky Movies very hard to watch in most evenings. Only Film 4 HD is quite pristine. Usually TCM HD as well.
 
Have to agree on here. Some nights football might as well be in SD on my 55" Sony w905. One game can look good,yet another can look rubbish. I had sky HD at the start and I'm not imagining it when I say the pictures where much better then. Unfortunately as stated here,most just aren't bothered.
 
Oh and as for sky movies,I started watching Thor 2 last weekend on sky movies and gave up after ten minutes. It was like watching a DVD. I even connected up my old box to see if my new 2tb box had a fault,but the picture was the same.I'd take less channels over actual he pictures any day
 
Unfortunately as stated here,most just aren't bothered.

That's democracy for you, the majority rules. If you don't like it, cancel it. Simples.
 
Hmmm that's easier said than done as there is no viable alternative. I want to watch football at home in the highest possible quality which has been deteriorated for years now but there is no legal alternative for live football in what is alleged to be high definition so they have me over a barrel in reality. As for "democracy" sky operate in a dictatorship fashion as they have no real completion and essentially exist in a vacuum. I'm happymto pay the sub's but want what's advertised and that's high definition . it's not like I've bought a cheap TV. Can see broadcast 4k being the same. Starts off great and then the deterioration begins with more channels added. I'm bignon intellectual property theath so wouildnt ever resort to dodgy ways of gettijgn film and sport but I just want what's advertised.
 
OK, serious now. the only viable solution is for everyone with Movies and Sports to cancel their HD subscription, via telephone, stating that they are cancelling due to the poor HD performance. If everyone does that, I am sure you will see an improvement.
 
OK, serious now. the only viable solution is for everyone with Movies and Sports to cancel their HD subscription, via telephone, stating that they are cancelling due to the poor HD performance. If everyone does that, I am sure you will see an improvement.

But hardly anyone will cancel as most people seemingly do not care about picture quality. I'm only with sky as I get a heavy discount.
 
OK, serious now. the only viable solution is for everyone with Movies and Sports to cancel their HD subscription, via telephone, stating that they are cancelling due to the poor HD performance. If everyone does that, I am sure you will see an improvement.

Wish it really worked like that. Those that cancel for poor picture/sound will only be replaced by new customers for those who don't care. Or wouldn't likely even notice.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom