Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Picture Quality

Options
  • 15-06-2011 7:54am
    #1
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭


    Hi

    I bought a new tv - Samsung 6100D - and on some channels the picture quality isn't great and looks a little pixellated.

    I currently have the bog standard UPC box and I am using a Scart cable to connect to the TV.

    If I change the cable to a HDMI cable (if UPC box has a port) will the picture quality improve?
    Also, if I were to upgrade to the HD box from UPC would this also improve picture quality or am I stuck with poor quality until every channels starts broadcasting in HD?

    Thanks


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,014 ✭✭✭elderlemon


    Far as I know the standard UPC box doesn't have HDMI so you would need to get the HD box. The PQ on the HD box (even non HD channels) is great on some channels (like rte) and crappy on others (like UTV).



    Ballyman wrote: »
    Hi

    I bought a new tv - Samsung 6100D - and on some channels the picture quality isn't great and looks a little pixellated.

    I currently have the bog standard UPC box and I am using a Scart cable to connect to the TV.

    If I change the cable to a HDMI cable (if UPC box has a port) will the picture quality improve?
    Also, if I were to upgrade to the HD box from UPC would this also improve picture quality or am I stuck with poor quality until every channels starts broadcasting in HD?

    Thanks


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭celticbest


    elderlemon wrote: »
    Far as I know the standard UPC box doesn't have HDMI so you would need to get the HD box. The PQ on the HD box (even non HD channels) is great on some channels (like rte) and crappy on others (like UTV).

    I have a new Standard UPC box in my kitchen & it has a HDMI connection....

    Picture quality is good but it is only a 26" screen, I 'm not sure how much of an improvement it would have on a bigger screen but I sure there would be some.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 38 shanemhoban


    i presume your using the standard scart lead supplied by upc? if you buy a really good scart cable (will cost about €50 brand is monster) it will make a huge difference


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,431 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    i presume your using the standard scart lead supplied by upc? if you buy a really good scart cable (will cost about €50 brand is monster) it will make a huge difference

    I doubt that will apply in all cases. You might have strong magnetic interference where you live so you need a cable with additional shielding.

    I have the 'standard' SCART cable supplied by UPC and there's no way the picture quality could be improved by changing the cable, it's frankly almost as good as HD on some channels. On some soaps I can see the pores on people's faces and facial hair, a Monster cable costing 50 euros ain't going to improve on that.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Ballyman


    Yea, thats what is annoying me, some channels are excellent (RTE1 for example) but others are very very poor (attheraces)

    I was hoping that a HD box would upscale the signal better and along with a HDMI cable it would improve more.

    So am I right in saying that it's pretty much as good as I can expect until all of them transmit in HD?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,431 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    Ballyman wrote: »
    I was hoping that a HD box would upscale the signal better and along with a HDMI cable it would improve more.

    I don't think the HD box upscales anything. As far as I am aware the SD channel signal is the same whether the box is SD or HD. The HD box uses a HDMI cable which is digital so you may notice some improvement.
    Ballyman wrote: »
    So am I right in saying that it's pretty much as good as I can expect until all of them transmit in HD?

    Probably, unless someone who has recently upgraded from SD to HD can say that they noticed an improvement in the non-HD channels.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 38 shanemhoban


    coylemj wrote: »
    I doubt that will apply in all cases. You might have strong magnetic interference where you live so you need a cable with additional shielding.

    I have the 'standard' SCART cable supplied by UPC and there's no way the picture quality could be improved by changing the cable, it's frankly almost as good as HD on some channels. On some soaps I can see the pores on people's faces and facial hair, a Monster cable costing 50 euros ain't going to improve on that.

    coylemj ur wrong, heres a review on a monster cable, i was using the standard upc cable and it was awful because of the amount of signal loss, switched to one of these and it made a huge difference especially on sports with fast moving images, u'll pick one of these up for approx €50

    "The 350SC from Monster Cable is a high performance Scart cable that ensures optimal transmission of video signals and analogue audio.

    The 350 CS from Monster Cable is 2 m long and allows you to connect your DVD player to a plasma or LCD screen equipped with a scart socket.

    Its aluminium shielding reduces electromagnetic interference and radio frequencies, and provides the optimum image quality, no matter what the viewing conditions.

    In addition, this scart cable features gold-plated connectors that won't rust."


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Gold plating is a gimmick. Gold is not even a good conductor and it can corrode if the connector in the TV doesn't match, I've seen it happen myself.

    About the picture quality, if the box is running in RGB mode then what you're seeing is probably the ridiculously low bit rates used by UPC. Not much else you can do I'm afraid.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Ballyman


    If this is the case then what is the point of a HD tv? From a tv point of view rather than games and blu ray.
    I mean they were HD ready for years and now they are all HD but the picture quality is still ****e!


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    SD channels are just that, SD. 720x576 rather than the 1920x1080 for HD. So it has to be upscaled to fit a HD screen, otherwise you'd have a small centre image with a large black border around it. With UPC, the bit rate is so low that the upscaling amplifies and exaggerates MPEG artifacts that would normally not be as visible on a CRT.

    Picture quality will only improve on HD channels with HD programming. SD programming on a HD channel will still look better though, as the channel has been allocated a higher bit rate to work with, and the broadcaster's gear is better at upscaling than your average STB or TV.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,431 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    coylemj ur wrong, heres a review on a monster cable, i was using the standard upc cable and it was awful because of the amount of signal loss, switched to one of these and it made a huge difference especially on sports with fast moving images, u'll pick one of these up for approx €50

    "The 350SC from Monster Cable is a high performance Scart cable that ensures optimal transmission of video signals and analogue audio.

    The 350 CS from Monster Cable is 2 m long and allows you to connect your DVD player to a plasma or LCD screen equipped with a scart socket.

    Its aluminium shielding reduces electromagnetic interference and radio frequencies, and provides the optimum image quality, no matter what the viewing conditions.

    In addition, this scart cable features gold-plated connectors that won't rust."

    I'm sorry but what you're quoting is advertising, not a 'review'. Are you seriously telling me that what Monster say about their own cables should be accepted by me as an objective and independent assessment of the efficacy of their products?

    I've already said (and the OP is in the same boat) that my picture quality is superb for a lot of stations so there is no way that a different SCART cable will improve things.

    You may have a problem with magnetic interference in which case a SCART cable with better shielding will make a difference, in my case it won't.

    Can I also point out that Monster have been caught out on more than one occasion at consumer shows showing off the 'improvement' in picture and audio quality achieved by their cables, only for the claims to be blown apart when the setup was shown to be rigged and completely fraudulent.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,431 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    coylemj wrote: »
    Can I also point out that Monster have been caught out on more than one occasion at consumer shows showing off the 'improvement' in picture and audio quality achieved by their cables, only for the claims to be blown apart when the setup was shown to be rigged and completely fraudulent.

    Here you go .....

    http://www.theguruguys.com/news/xmas-buyers-beware-expensive-audio-video-cables

    A few weeks ago I was in a Circuit City and they had a display setup with two identical flat screen monitors. A sign in the middle read:

    ‘SEE THE DIFFERENCE MONSTER VIDEO CABLES MAKE!’

    The sign had an arrow pointing to the left monitor and the description stated: ‘Generic Composite Video Cables’. Another arrow pointed to the right stating ‘High Quality Monster Component Video Cables’.

    At first glane you would notice the ‘Generic Cables’ produced a very dark and blurry picture. The ‘Monster Cable’ monitor looked sharp, bright and clear. What a difference the Monster brand cables are making, right?

    Wrong, this display is very deceptive. First, the ‘generic’ cables are connected via the composite video method. Aside from RF (the old screw in type) this is the worst way to connect video into a TV. The Monster cables were connected via component video which is one of the higher quality methods. The sign did state “Composite” and “Component” but most consumers would not notice and even if they did they would not know the difference in connection types. If this display wanted to be more honest it should have read “See the difference connecting your TV with COMPONENT video cables make vs COMPOSITE video cables”. I would love to have the chance to use the ‘generic cables’ and connect them to the COMPONENT out into the TV. I would bet that the customers, muchless the sales associates, wouldn’t notice a difference between the ‘Monster’ cables and the ‘Generic’ cables. The ‘generic’ cables in their display could be found at the dollar store next door, the Monster cables were around $112.00.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,431 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    You Just Can't Use The Words "Monster Cable" And "Value" In The Same Sentence

    http://www.futuremusic.com/news/august2007/audio_video_cable_pricing.html

    The Internet has been a disruptive force to many entrenched industries and market segments in its brief history. So, it was only a matter of time before it focused its eye on the audio and video cable industry. Ever wonder why salespersons push cables so ardently at music and electronic stores? Unknown to many, audio or video cables have the largest profit margins. Using the "don't you want the best quality" pitch, a savvy salesperson can rack up hundreds of dollars of pure profit on cables alone when a customer buys a television, stereo, or mixer.

    The one company that has capitalized on this phenomenon better than any is Monster Cable. With their overbuilt, and extremely overpriced cables, they have leveraged the paranoia of poor transmission quality for massive growth. However, thanks to the Internet and a new breed of manufacturers, the jig is up for Monster and overpriced cables in general.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭cast_iron


    Karsini wrote: »
    Gold plating is a gimmick. Gold is not even a good conductor and it can corrode if the connector in the TV doesn't match, I've seen it happen myself.

    About the picture quality, if the box is running in RGB mode then what you're seeing is probably the ridiculously low bit rates used by UPC. Not much else you can do I'm afraid.
    That's the reality of it really.

    There's a concerted effort going on to reduce bit-rates on SD channels so people will be more encouraged to go for HD.

    Some Tvs will show the low bit rate better than others...there's too many variables to put it down to a simple things like a scart cable.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,235 ✭✭✭lucernarian


    That strategy would make more sense if it was only applied to channels that were also available in HD.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭snappieT


    They clearly have the bandwidth available, given the broadband speeds they're providing to individual customers. I'm sure it's a separate frequency band, but I doubt there's very much stopping them from increasing the bitrate on their transmissions to bring those artifacts down, barring perhaps the shite hardware they have in some of their older decoders.


Advertisement