No Scart, No Sky?

Discussion in 'Sky Digital TV Forum' started by xabi, Feb 24, 2005.

  1. xabi

    xabi
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Have rang to subscribe to Sky and the engineer(?) due this weekend. However, the TV is not the newest (10 years old) and has no scart connection. Sky staff told me this would not be a problem but how much of a difference will this make to the quality of viewing, for example?
    Beginning to have second thoughts on paying £41 per month for bad picture quality and other potential problems. Any advice will be appreciated (apart from 'buy an new TV').
     
  2. Merritt

    Merritt
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2003
    Messages:
    280
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Ratings:
    +3
    Hi there...

    The picture quality will still be better than it is with a normal analogue aerial - especially if you have a reasonably large screen. If you had a newer TV with RGB scart inputs, the picture quality would be better but its not worth worrying about if you're not disappointed with your existing coax/analog connection.


    Cheers

    Steve
     
  3. DRGL

    DRGL
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    752
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Shropshire,UK
    Ratings:
    +2
    What TV is it?? Most TV's 10 years old had SCART,if not it may have a composite input which you could use. RF will be fine though.
     
  4. xabi

    xabi
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Steve - Many thanks. The picture is fine as we have a booster, so any improvement would be a bonus.

    DRGL - It's a Sony Trintron we bought in New Zealand in 91 (so 14 years old to more accurate). Has a decent size screen for its age and has served us well but just the two connections at the back plus ariel socket.

    Again, thanks for getting touch. Much appreciated.
     
  5. derbyjj

    derbyjj
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Messages:
    238
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Rainhill
    Ratings:
    +19
    Sky picture is only transmitted in digital so its as only as good as the original source. Ive got my sky connected by aerial and scart. My aerial is good quality and in truth the aerial picture is as good as sky . In fact on some of the syk digital multiplexes the bit rate compression is so high that the sky picture is unwatchable Ive got a 3 year old widescreen tosshie so i now it is not the tv. Movies though are great the tv has a dolby digital decoder giving 5.1 stereo. If you have hifi in the same room consider connecting the sky box to it via phono leads the sound should be a lot better. I wouldn't upgrade your tele until sky high definition comes along in about 3 yrs.
    BIg BIG HINT insist on a pace box from the engineer Ive got an amstrad sky+ and its CRAP
     
  6. Roohster

    Roohster
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Messages:
    4,716
    Products Owned:
    7
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Derbyshire
    Ratings:
    +5,821
    What are the tho connections at the back besides the aerial socket?
    You may well have a composite input, in which case it wil be a big improvement on using the RF (aerial) input.
     
  7. Merritt

    Merritt
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2003
    Messages:
    280
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Ratings:
    +3
    Sorry Derbyjj, I disagree!! The UHF aerial connection is extremely unlikely to be as good as a digital sky source connected via RGB.. If you can't see a difference, I doubt you've got the sky box set up correctly.

    As for some of the sky digital pictures being unwatchable - I have a 42" panny plasma (which would make the problem a lot worse) and Ive not found a channel thats 'unwatchable' (or even 'bad') due to the compression....

    Steve
     
  8. Nick_UK

    Nick_UK
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,748
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Ratings:
    +272
    Quite so ! Derbyjj, if you think your TV looks as good from the aerial as it does from Sky, then I wouldn't bother going for HDTV at all !
     
  9. rasb0

    rasb0
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    251
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Bolton
    Ratings:
    +4
    Shouldn't have to wait that long. Sky have announced (What Satellite & Digital Mag - Feb 05) they will begin broadcasting football games in Hi-Def later this year in pubs and clubs. It should be available to the general consumer sometime in 2006. I beleive the major roll out will be the 2006 World Cup, which will be broadcast in Hi-def.
    The BBC aim to broadcast footie within 2 years and be broadcasting everything else by 2010.
     
  10. DRGL

    DRGL
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    752
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Shropshire,UK
    Ratings:
    +2
    sorry,but speaking as an ex Sky engineer if your picture is as good with RF as it is with SCART then either your TV is very poor or the SCART is NOT RGB but prob. composite. RGB is 10 times better than RF!!! It's all very well waiting for high deff. but if you wait for that then i bet something new will be "coming soon"!!
     
  11. derbyjj

    derbyjj
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Messages:
    238
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Rainhill
    Ratings:
    +19
    Nothing wrong with the tv(as DVD source is pin sharp),the scart is a thor cable and the box is set for RGB. As I said movies are generally great but I think the real issue is the quality of the amstrad decoder and software. Signal strength and quality show as 100% yet it is heavily blocked in solid colours and when viewing Premier league Football and motor racing in which there is a lot of dynamic change in the picture the picture looks like its got that fuzzy effect used in police video shows. Could be the tv as its must be doing somme sort of digtal processing as it has trick sizing wide(16:9) 4:3 cinema etc and freeze frame.
    My point was that if XABI is happy with his picture then dont spend hundreds of pounds on a new tv expecting a much better picture viewing experience. My tv cost 1300and sky make money selling the amstad sky+ box at 149 I'm sure the electronics in the tv are worth more than 10% off its actual cost.
    Until B&O or loewe start making dvb decoders the quality will always be made to a price not to the best the standard can deliver
     
  12. derbyjj

    derbyjj
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Messages:
    238
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Rainhill
    Ratings:
    +19
    Nothing wrong with the tv(as DVD source is pin sharp),the scart is a thor cable and the box is set for RGB. As I said movies are generally great but I think the real issue is the quality of the amstrad decoder and software. Signal strength and quality show as 100% yet it is heavily blocked in solid colours and when viewing Premier league Football and motor racing in which there is a lot of dynamic change in the picture the picture looks like its got that fuzzy effect used in police video shows. Could be the tv as its must be doing somme sort of digtal processing as it has trick sizing wide(16:9) 4:3 cinema etc and freeze frame.
    My point was that if XABI is happy with his picture then dont spend hundreds of pounds on a new tv expecting a much better picture viewing experience. My tv cost 1300and sky make money selling the amstad sky+ box at 149 I'm sure the electronics in the tv are worth more than 10% off its actual cost.
    Until B&O or loewe start making dvb decoders the quality will always be made to a price not to the best the standard can deliver
     
  13. mjn

    mjn
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2001
    Messages:
    24,624
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Herts, England
    Ratings:
    +13,455
    Got to agree with Derbyjj here. ITV2, BBC1 and Sky1 have terrible compresssion!! Just watch match of the day to see the evidence.

    A good aerial will give a better picture in some cases!
     
  14. derbyjj

    derbyjj
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Messages:
    238
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Rainhill
    Ratings:
    +19
    Thanks mjn for backing up my point. Sky should publish a public list of thier muxes and the compression rates in use. Fuzzy snowy pictues on analogue where an inherant problem of that system. The simple truth with digital compression and transmission means no signal no picture. Pixellation is simply the result of insufficent information in the bit stream to render a sufficently defined picture. it could just be the error correction in the decoder but it is more certain to be the compression applied
     
  15. szhjcn

    szhjcn
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I use my Sky+ 160 box using the RF2 connector and a TV eye. This is because I've located the Sky Box in my Electrical room with the aim of being able to distribute this around the house easily (one day I'll get round to this). This will include distribution to a Dedicated Cinema room where I'll hookup the audio separately (using the Digital output) and use a better method for the Video as this will go to my current DLP Projector. I'm happy with the picture quality even though I have to use a UK Video recorder as my Tuner (TV Tuner is not compatible with the Audio Frequency used in the UK).

    This will get upgraded on day to use S-Video or RGB and separate Audio cabling, but for now I'm happy with this solution. One advantage of this is I'll never hear any noise from the Sky+ box as it's located out of Harms way. Still looking for the prefect solution for the Audio/Video distribution and the multiroom audio etc... The technology is there but products are not quite there yet, ideally 1394b (latest Firewire spec) would be the perfect A/V distrbution method.

    Plan to upgrade Projector to a HDMI compatible one, shame the Sky+ box does not offer this or a DVI output (which is supported by HDMI).
     
  16. Nick_UK

    Nick_UK
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2004
    Messages:
    9,748
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Ratings:
    +272
    Sky plays absolutely no part in the mutliplexing and uploading of BBC channels - this is done by the engineering arm of the BBC, which (with government approval) is being sold off to Siemens for £2bn. Sky merely includes the BBC schedules on the EPG. The BBC use fixed compression rates for their channels, whilst Sky channels use variable compression.

    I think that some people with plasma screens turn the sharpness control up too high, which is why they think that pictures from RF sources are better than from RGB/s-video.
     

Share This Page

Loading...