Poor Quality HD picture on V3 Box

paulr2006

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Messages
9,556
Reaction score
2,521
Points
1,651
Location
Nottinghamshire
Been on Sky HD since it came out and Sky Q for over two years and no complaints on picture quality via my V1 box. I decided I would like HDR so paid my £50 reluctantly and received my version 3 next day. Very pleased with UHD HDR obviously not quite Blue ray standard but quite good, however the HD channels look awful compared to my previous V1 box, all tv settings are the same but the picture looks so artificial and over saturated especially in terms of contras, it’s a real step backwards!
I have done a full reset, updated firmware bit no improvemen! Has anyone else experienced this with a V3?
 
Hi,
I find the HD picture quality not that good on my V3 box. When I switch to freeview the HD picture is so much crisper and clearer than on sky.
Can’t t believe we have to pay sky extra for HD when the picture is clearly not as good as Freeview.
 
The exact opposite for me. V1 had an awful HD picture, soft and poor contrast like watching through vaseline most of the time. Possibly TV picture settings need to be altered compared to the V1 settings. Can also depend on the channel and the bit rate as well. ITV is great, Channel 4 and the BBC less so.
 
Last edited:
The exact opposite for me. V1 had an awful HD picture, soft and poor contrast like watching through vaseline most of the time. Possibly TV picture settings need to be altered compared to the V1 settings. Can also depend on the channel and the bit rate as well. ITV is great, Channel 4 and the BBC less so.
For us ITV is the worst, almost cartoon like. Our V1 was really good, could never understand why people were saying Q picture was worse than Sky HD. Tried altering contrast and brightness to no avail the thing is the PQ is normally stunning on this tv using stock settings in Pro 1, which is why i have not had it calibrated like my previous tv.
 
A lot can depend on your TV and how much picture processing it does. I didn't switch from a V1 to a V3 but did notice an improvement switching from Sky+HD to a V2 Q box. The overall image was certainly sharper and a bit punchier on the Q box. Switching from a V2 to a V3 didn't show any improvement.
The best overall image quality I find comes from the Freeview HD tuner built in to my Panasonic TV. All the main terrestrial channels in HD look noticeably sharper than their equivalents on Sky Q, either viewed at native 1080i or upscaled to 2160P by the V3 Q box. The Q box image certainly isn't bad - it's very good in fact, but if I switch directly to Freeview HD the difference is clearly apparent, it's subtle but certainly noticeable.
 
I've just had Q re-installed after a 10 month break and it does look very soft and over saturated, compared to my previous VU+ free to air satellite receiver's output. I'm guessing the box they gave me is a V3 (1TB)?! I had the V1 2TB box previously and didn't think that looked bad, in comparison to the VU+ box.
The TV, a Panasonic GZ2000, has the input calibrated for 1080p50 at YCC4:4:4 8 bit, so what the Q box should be outputting, although I will double check this as it could have changed. Very disappointing.

Paul
 
Mine's one of the 32B2XX boxes. Has to be really as it's a 1TB box that allows a 2160p video output.

Paul
 
I can't see any significant difference (and I'm a fussy)
 
My problem was solved by them swapping the box for a V2, slower on the GUI but picture quality back, sound drop outs gone & mini box does not keep disconnecting as it did with the V3 (connected via ethernet). Think it must have been a duff box.
 
Hi, I have an LG 55cx TV and on sky q I find that the hd is poor on some HD channels yet on others it's great. The same with uhd/hdr movies as well, some are fantastic and some are poor picture quality, the blacks on some are almost grey and flicker which is annoying. On the TV apps like Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon the picture quality is stunning and much much much better than on sky q.
 
That's because content on Sky is compressed much more than on Netflix, Disney+ and Prime. Some stuff is less compressed so looks better, but some channels are highly compressed and therefore look terrible. I stopped watching some US dramas on Sky Atlantic because the pixellation and posterisation caused by the compression was too distracting.
 
Why do sky do this though, surely they make enough money to sort out decent content quality for it's customers.
 
Why do sky do this though, surely they make enough money to sort out decent content quality for it's customers.
Bandwidth on the satellite. They simply wouldn't be able to transmit as many channels if they were all at a high bit-rate.
Netflix, Prime, etc are all streaming services and are only restricted by the speed of everyone's broadband, which is much easier to deal with than a big hunk of metal flying around in space.
 
Bandwidth on the satellite. They simply wouldn't be able to transmit as many channels if they were all at a high bit-rate.
Netflix, Prime, etc are all streaming services and are only restricted by the speed of everyone's broadband, which is much easier to deal with than a big hunk of metal flying around in space.
The aggregated bandwidth required at the content deilvery end is also a constraint. It’s not unlimited. Netflix manage amazing picture quality for 15Mb on UHD.
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom