What HD channels are available if I purchase a SKYHD box?

McGintyMcGoo

As I now have a HD TV, I'm looking for some HD content. I know that SKY HD is a box you can buy and subscribe to their service BUT I cannot find out what content they will actually broadcast. I know that there is a SkySports1&2 HD and likewise with two of teh movie channels but is that it? The SKY website seems to be deliberately vague on the details.

Have I been conned into buying a HDTV when it may be a few years before I can make full use of it?

Hae searched this forum but cannot find the answer so any help would really be appreciated.

McGintyMcgoo

aidan_walsh

History Channel and Discovery also have HD streams, and Sky One has a HD simulcast. You can also tune into the BBC HD trial in the Other Channels section.

McGintyMcGoo

Cheers Aidan

I continued searching on the net and found this link.

In your opinion, is HD worth subscribing to?

aidan_walsh

Personally - I don't actually have it, I'm just going by what I have seen off the EPG. HD streams show up regardless of whether you have a HD subscription or not.

conax

I continued searching on the net and found this link.

In your opinion, is HD worth subscribing to?[/QUOTE]

Sky HD at its best looks like Sky SD on a good CRT TV with RGB. With a LCD left with " out of the box" settings Sky HD looks marginally better than SD sky but this has more to do with MPEG4 than HD. If you sit more that 10ft away from the screen you would be very pushed to tell the difference between HD and SD, if everybody was honest you would be hard pushed to find even an experienced engineer who could stand back from a SD and HD LCD and bet his wife and kids on which one was which. I really dont think its worth it at the moment.

slave1

sorry man, have to disagree with you there, sky hd into a full hd tv is superb on the hd channels, much better than sd fed to a standard crt, sd channels also improve when fed through the hdmi lead, clarity on hd is amazing, for what its worth I think its well worth it, I've had it since launch and have no intention of letting my sub go, especially when Sky are buying such good programs to broadcast in hd, eg Lost, 24, Prison Break, BBCHD showing Heroes in HD also, don't forget the DD5.1 sound also so its not just the picture

conax

I am not saying there is not an improvement, colours are definitely move vivid and natural but how much of this is down to the codec, interconnects and image transfer method (why do you think your SD looks better connected with the HDMI interconnect ?) but compared side by side with a CRT with SD a SD on LCD and HD on a HD TV or even as you say SD on HDMI and standing back to compare them all at the same time there is not such a difference that you would go WOW. HD is mainly about definition and how much of that is marred by the settings of the TV set and data rates of the provider and the material (upscaled or original).I am not saying either that HD is a White elephant, given enough data rate and good material HD is superb, absolutely stunning.
I can remember back to the transition from Analogue to digital the raves about the improvement in picture quality, now artifacts have replaced noise threshold extension peaks good skin tones have been replaced with pasty reproductions.
HD is definitely the way forward but as to recommend Sky HD with a few channels, fewer still original HD material and marginal improvement in picture quality (which is not entirely down to HD material) I would give it a bit more time before I would recommend Sky HD. Having said all that this is only my opinion.

uncle_sam_ie

I've been loving skyHD since it was installed a few weeks back. The picture and sound is awesome. I think if you have the right set up it can be well worth it.

Mossy Monk

conax wrote:

Sky HD at its best looks like Sky SD on a good CRT TV with RGB.

I am sorry to say this but you are talking ****.

Tony

Mossy Monk wrote:

I am sorry to say this but you are talking ****.

But tell us what you really feel

center15

Mossy Monk wrote:

I am sorry to say this but you are talking ****.

Completly Agree, I had a very good sony CRT 32" and the did look amazing but compared to HD its nothing. I have a new sony 40" LCD and the picture is far superior even on SD viewing.

mustang68

Mossy Monk wrote:

I am sorry to say this but you are talking ****.

Agree with you on that, the difference between HD and SD on a proper setup are like night and day. I have only once seen a TV set up properly with HD in a shop.

conax

Right, so now we have a LCD is better than CRT!
Skin tones are better on LCD than CRT?
Image panning is better on LCD than CRT?
Artifacts are more pronounced on CRT than LCD?
I will give that colour dispersion is better on LCD than CRT and the overall tonal balance is better but…
At the end of the day I feel that when I watch Sky on LCD HD and the same on CRT SD I prefer the more natural quality that the CRT reproduces. Right or wrong that’s my preference.
What are the qualities that you like in the difference between HD and SD? And what are the qualities that you prefer LCD over CRT?
I am not trying to upset anybody here just making a point that in the strive for better picture quality has it all gone in a direction that what we perceive to be better picture actually is a reproduction of the original.

uncle_sam_ie

conax wrote:

Right, so now we have a LCD is better than CRT!
Skin tones are better on LCD than CRT?
Image panning is better on LCD than CRT?
Artifacts are more pronounced on CRT than LCD?
I will give that colour dispersion is better on LCD than CRT and the overall tonal balance is better but…
At the end of the day I feel that when I watch Sky on LCD HD and the same on CRT SD I prefer the more natural quality that the CRT reproduces. Right or wrong that’s my preference.
What are the qualities that you like in the difference between HD and SD? And what are the qualities that you prefer LCD over CRT?
I am not trying to upset anybody here just making a point that in the strive for better picture quality has it all gone in a direction that what we perceive to be better picture actually is a reproduction of the original.

Well, I'm watching skyHD on a plasma 42" PDP 427XD Pioneer and it looks a lot better then on my old 29''Sony CRT.

Tony

HD just looks better, do we really have to get into the nitty gritty?

dc69

conax wrote:

Right, so now we have a LCD is better than CRT!
Skin tones are better on LCD than CRT?
Image panning is better on LCD than CRT?
Artifacts are more pronounced on CRT than LCD?
I will give that colour dispersion is better on LCD than CRT and the overall tonal balance is better but…
At the end of the day I feel that when I watch Sky on LCD HD and the same on CRT SD I prefer the more natural quality that the CRT reproduces. Right or wrong that’s my preference.
What are the qualities that you like in the difference between HD and SD? And what are the qualities that you prefer LCD over CRT?
I am not trying to upset anybody here just making a point that in the strive for better picture quality has it all gone in a direction that what we perceive to be better picture actually is a reproduction of the original.

a flat screen crt television looks a hell of alot better than any lcd television showing sd content,i would love to see a hd crt television showing hd content,i have yet to find a shop showing one,but you can be sure it would be better quality than an hd lcd showing hd content

Mossy Monk

conax wrote:

What are the qualities that you like in the difference between HD and SD?

What are the qualities I like? HD looks better, that's all that matters to me.

mathias

I have had Sky HD since it arrived here , I believe it was installed in the first week it was available , anyway , I love it ,

I have a Panasonic LCD , and it wipes the floor with my previous CRT , which was a Quintrix widescreen ( Panasonic).

Blue planet on BBC HD has been shown to everyone that asks , and not one person who has seen it yet has mistaken for anything other than HD. ( First timers usually go ..Holy S**t ...look at that picture !! or something similar .)
Everyone that Ive shown it too can distinguish any of the HD channels from the SD ones.
As someone else said , its like night and day. You'd have to be damn near blind not to spot it.

The real test is for a football/rugby match showing say ,on RTE ( highest bitrate channel ) and the same thing showing on Sky sports HD or BBC HD , flick between them and the HD shows itself for how good it is , the detail in the crowd , the pitch looks amazing , like you could grab a fistful of grass out of it. Stunning is not too strong a word for it.

Flatscreens are where its at , CRT is dead , but its no loss in my opinion , Whether its LCD or Plasma , they have both superceded anything CRT had to offer in terms of picture quality for both SD and HD. No doubt about it.

They are not all golden boys though , dont expect that Aldi bargain to be up there with the best of them.

Wisesmurf

I've this T.V and Sky HD

You can't even put the quality compared to CRT in the same ballpark!

watty

You are right, a HD CRT is much much better. Not available domestically. HD CRT beats hollow any LCD or Plasma.

For SD transmissions a €400 CRT will beat any LCD or Plasma.

HD of course is "better" than SD, though does a quiz, soap or news program need it?

zilog_jones

I also agree with CRTs being better - I got a new PC last year but I'm still using my 7 year old 27kg 19" Trinitron with it

mathias wrote:

Flatscreens are where its at , CRT is dead , but its no loss in my opinion , Whether its LCD or Plasma , they have both superceded anything CRT had to offer in terms of picture quality for both SD and HD. No doubt about it.

But you are comparing HD LCD and plasma TVs with SD CRT TVs - not really comparible IMO. Unfortunately I have only ever seen one HD CRT on the market here - that Samsung one - and according to reviews it wasn't a particularly good TV in general. There have been more sold in the US but I dunno what they're like.

Sony et al make professional HDTV monitors, but they're usually designed for SDI, not HDMI or DVI, and even with the 14" models you're looking at four-digit price tags for used examples.

peneau

I'll throw my tuppence worth into this mix. I was in the Sony centre and Dixons in Blanchardstown last friday and looking at some of the state of the art sets (particularly in the Sony Centre) in action, I'd have to say that for 2,000 euro for one of the FP's they were a disappointment and in my opinion given the outlay (HD Set, SkyHD etc) in funds required to view HD content at present it's not justified for the end product.

I've a crt set at home Tosh 32ZP48 hooked up to a FTA system (SD) via a sky digibox, and without question the picture quality on the Tosh is far superior than any of the sets I saw in action last friday (HD or SD) and the Tosh didn't require any "tweaking" to make it look better out of the box.

IMO at present when it comes to pictures displayed on a modern Flat Panel Set as opposed to a CRT in the main the CRT images look more natural i.e. how you'd expect them to look, with Flat Panels, I'm not sure the same can be said.

Strasser

McGintyMcGoo wrote:

Cheers Aidan

I continued searching on the net and found this link.

In your opinion, is HD worth subscribing to?

I have had HD for a while now. There is no doubt the picture is better especially the football but the amount of HD content is small and I would say overall its not worth the extra IMO at least not at the moment.