NTL digital or Sky digital for better LCD picture?

Scruff

Have basic ntl anaolgue hooked up to my 32" lcd tv and am not impressed at all and am thinking of moving to either NTL digital or sky digital if they will give a better picture.
Which is the better?
Seen ntl digital on a mate across the road's lcd but he had it piped through his pc so that may have effected the quality.
Another mate has sky + on his 37" and it looks great.

Mossy Monk

people say Sky Digital

The tax man

Sky digital would give a better picture.
LCD's and analogue don't go well together.

rebel.ranter

I had Chorus (now NTL) a few years back. I now have SKY, no comparison in quality of picture. SKY wins hands down. When you add to that the nice TV Guide system & SKY+ functionality I can't see why you would choose anything else.
I have not seen the new new SKY HD properly (except in showrooms) so there's that to factor in too.

Mossy Monk

Sky HD although nice to look at is too expensive atm imo

LFC5Times

Do you people that have Sky Digital(like myself) also have just the basic NTL cable for the other tvs in the house and just so you still have Setanta or UTV ?

Or what you hav ?

watty

There is also a huge variation in resolution and quality of the LCD TVs. This dramatically affects the viewed quality. While many HD Ready LCDs do not actually have enough resolution to view HD properly, all give a much better picture with ordinary TV (NTL or aerial or non-HD Sky) than an ordinary LCD TV.

Indeed via a PC is the worst way to watch TV.

UTV is free on satellite or Sky without a subscription. Two mix Packs + Setanta may be cheaper or more expensive depending on which NTL package you have.

Freddie59

LFC5Times wrote:

Do you people that have Sky Digital(like myself) also have just the basic NTL cable for the other tvs in the house and just so you still have Setanta or UTV ?

Or what you hav ?

A relation bought a 42" Plasma the other day. He has NTL (full package), Sky (FTA channels), and, obviously, NTL analogue. Having looked at all services on the Plasma, there was little or no difference between Sky services available and NTL, and even the NTL analogue looked good.

However, what people forget is that there is a viewing distance to screen size ratio. Rule of thumb is 3 times the screen size = optimum distance. So a 42" weighs in around 10 and a half feet. Picture quality up close can look very poor, even from satellite. Where it really collpases is when titles or graphics are displayed. Obviously HD would be different.

I have a 17" Philips LCD in a bedroom and up close picture quality is debatable, but 6 to 8 feet away it looks very good. Also, remember that an LCD may not necessarily show the same picture quality as you were used to on an analogue CRT - if the signal is slightly weak the CRT will probably reproduce it faithfully - but the LCD will not. Just one to watch for. Saw it happen with an LG in a Pub where I know the landlord. The LG needed a direct feed with a good level of signal on it.

I watched the Tech doing the repair and the difference was astonishing. He demonstrated before and after, and even CRT vs LCD. But whatever you choose, be careful. It's a minefield. I don't know how everyone else here rates LCDs/Plasmas, but my top three from a quality perspective are:

1. Panasonic Viera (streets ahead of anything else, but priced accordingly).

2. Philips.

3. LG.

Some of the cheaper brands offer a really inferior picture quality. A quick peruse around your local TV shop will reveal this. I was in one the other day which was distributing Sky News exclusively from satellite. The difference between the different brands was staggering. They're quite expensive, so do your research before parting with the hard-earned dosh!

daywalker

Freddie59 wrote:

Some of the cheaper brands offer a really inferior picture quality. A quick peruse around your local TV shop will reveal this. I was in one the other day which was distributing Sky News exclusively from satellite. The difference between the different brands was staggering. They're quite expensive, so do your research before parting with the hard-earned dosh!

I will say thought that from what i have seen of TV shops, they use an analog distribution system to share the signal between all the TV's and sometimes the signal coming through those systems can vary widely this can be due to the poor quality if the cabling used and possibly poor tuning, then if you had the option of plugging Sky or a good quality DVD player directly into the TV's you would probably be better able to get a good comparison.

Freddie59

daywalker wrote:

I will say thought that from what i have seen of TV shops, they use an analog distribution system to share the signal between all the TV's and sometimes the signal coming through those systems can vary widely this can be due to the poor quality if the cabling used and possibly poor tuning, then if you had the option of plugging Sky or a good quality DVD player directly into the TV's you would probably be better able to get a good comparison.

Were it that simple!:D I've seen them all - analgue, DVD, etc. I've seen video (from DVD and Sky) routed through a video distributor connected to a bank of LCDs and Plasma (the same as plugging them directly into the TV). Again the difference is staggering.;)