UV compared to Comcast -- first impressions -- common?

blueman_1 · ‎01-17-2010

I've just added UV a few days ago, and am running it parallel to the Comcast (CC) service here in Menlo Park, CA.

Below are my initial impressions/observations and I'd like to know if this is consistent with what others have noticed. Note that all comparisons were made with component video signals on quality cables, and comparing the same program live between the two systems. The display in use is a Panasonic P65V10 plasma. Both STBs (CC and UV) were set to their maximum resolution output. Tests were performed this evening, January 17th.

- UV image quality for HD is less than CC. Notably more compression artifacts.

- On tonight's awards ceremony the wrinkles in Meryl Streep's neck were much clearer on CC, and suffered from visible artifacts on UV.

- On the Simpson's Movie, more compression artifacts were noticed around the inside of the character's eyes.

- On CNN there was a shifting compression patterns in a red-background text box on UV, but solid red w/o shimmer on CC.

- On HISTORY-HD's Ax Men, details were notably clearer on CC than UV

- Occasional image freeze observed on UV on multiple channels (PLDHD and CNNHD)

- On ION-HD (Space Cowboys), there was noticeable audio lag (poor sync) on UV, and none on CC. Observed early in the weekend as well.

- DVR box responds poorly to the remote control. The television responds w/o issue to the same remote, but the UV STB (DVR) frequently misses commands (even with direct aiming from 6ft away), and sometimes executes the incorrect command. Multiple UV remotes have been tried.

- On a personal note, I find the remote control to be ergonomically poor, with the channel/volume controls not well placed as compared with the CC remote. I have large hands, and this user experience could be limited to such people.

Are these initial experiences consistent with what others have observed, and is this what how I should reasonably expect the service to perform?

The DVR functionality and guide are much much nicer than the Comcast offering, but it seems like the price is a reduction in HD image quality and poor IR remote control performance.

Tim

tiggerfan · ‎10-22-2008

The PQ is a long running debate however they were having issues tonight that are unusual so you might give it a few days to review

mibrnsurg · ‎07-15-2008

Sapce Cowboys was okay here in metro Detroit. For your remote problems, rarely occurs on plasmas,

but it is on yours, IR interference. Panasonic warns about it on all plasmas, but most don't see it.

Best way to solve is make sure the DVR/STB is slightly in front of screen in same direction as the TV.

Unluckily I'll say you'll see the worst on Uverse on your 65" Panasonic plasma and I'll see the best on

my 42" Panasonic plasma. That larger TV makes the compression artifacts stand out. You will see

better HD on certain channels/programs on Uverse. One of the worst is the ION local HD channel here.

I had 1 recorded program freeze for a couple seconds, but constant freezing is not normal.

Chris

Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more

datacliff · ‎01-17-2010

If you search there are a lot of complaints about the HD picture quality. The problem is with the low bitrate they are using to re-compress the HD, around 5~7Mbps MPEG4 compared to Comcast's 12~19Mbps MPEG2. MPEG4 is about 1.5 to 2 times more efficient than MPEG2, but an average of 6Mbps is still pretty low and leads to macroblocking and blurring during fast-moving and complex shots. However, it depends on your expectations of what HD should look like, so it's a hotly debated subject on these forums.

If HD is really important to you, consider OTA for the locals or DirecTV. Comcast also over-compresses some their channels, so theoretically it should look about the same as U-verse. It may have to do with MPEG2 encoders being more efficient as it's an older and extensively tested standard.

Message Edited by datacliff on 01-18-2010 10:38 AM

mibrnsurg · ‎07-15-2008

datacliff wrote:

If you search there are a lot of complaints about the HD picture quality. The problem is with the low bitrate they are using to re-compress the HD, around 5~7Mbps MPEG4 compared to Comcast's 12~19Mbps MPEG2. MPEG4 is about 1.5 to 2 times more efficient than MPEG2, but an average of 6Mbps is still pretty low and leads to macroblocking and blurring during fast-moving and complex shots. However, it depends on your expectations of what HD should look like, so it's a hotly debated subject on these forums.

If HD is really important to you, consider OTA for the locals or DirecTV. Comcast also over-compresses some their channels, so theoretically it should look about the same as U-verse. It may have to do with MPEG2 encoders being more efficient as it's an older and extensively tested standard.
Message Edited by datacliff on 01-18-2010 10:38 AM

Not here on my TV, no blurrines or macroblocking during hockey, football, basketbal, Nascar racing,

baseball or any others.

Chris

Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more

datacliff · ‎01-17-2010

mibrnsurg wrote:
datacliff wrote:
If you search there are a lot of complaints about the HD picture quality. The problem is with the low bitrate they are using to re-compress the HD, around 5~7Mbps MPEG4 compared to Comcast's 12~19Mbps MPEG2. MPEG4 is about 1.5 to 2 times more efficient than MPEG2, but an average of 6Mbps is still pretty low and leads to macroblocking and blurring during fast-moving and complex shots. However, it depends on your expectations of what HD should look like, so it's a hotly debated subject on these forums.

If HD is really important to you, consider OTA for the locals or DirecTV. Comcast also over-compresses some their channels, so theoretically it should look about the same as U-verse. It may have to do with MPEG2 encoders being more efficient as it's an older and extensively tested standard.
Message Edited by datacliff on 01-18-2010 10:38 AM
Not here on my TV, no blurrines or macroblocking during hockey, football, basketbal, Nascar racing,
baseball or any others.

Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more

Well, again it depends on your expectations. Compared to SD it would certainly look sharp, but if you were to see the same exact picture on most other providers then they would blow U-verse away.

mibrnsurg · ‎07-15-2008

Chris

Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more

datacliff · ‎01-17-2010

All right, if you're not going to be constructive and address the OP's questions then you should leave this thread. It's a known fact that U-verse's HD quality simply isn't up to par with most of the competition, whether you see it/like it or not.

Message Edited by datacliff on 01-19-2010 12:50 PM

randyl · ‎10-25-2007

datacliff wrote:
All right, if you're not going to be constructive and address the OP's questions then you should leave this thread. It's a known fact that U-verse's HD quality simply isn't up to par with most of the competition, whether you see it/like it or not.
Message Edited by datacliff on 01-19-2010 12:50 PM

back at ya !

randy

TreyMW · ‎09-30-2009

Please keep it courteous and on-topic please folks!

Thanks,

Trey

blueman_1 · ‎01-17-2010

Thank you, folks, for the comments be they constructive or otherwise. Clearly, there is consensus that UV's image quality is below that of some of the other options (such as CC), and it is subjective as to whether or not it makes a differences. Case in point, watching std def on my 20" CRT looks wonderful, but on the 65" plasma the artifacts are clearly visible.

To some of the other points that haven't been commented on, are other users seeing issues with audio lag (sync)? I've not seen that on CC, but with UV I see it ranging from subtle to painful-to-watch.

Also, the issues with the DVR IR remote control seems mighty strange. Yes, I've read the posts about some displays interfering, but truth be told, all of my other IR-based equipment has absolutely zero issues in this regard -- it's only the Motorola DVR box (model 1225, I think) that can't seem to get a proven technology to function. The idea that I should have to adjust the brightness on my television's image so the DVR will see the remote control w/o errors is ridiculous. Maybe that's a good solution for those don't care about picture quality. Has anyone discovered a real solution for this that addresses the problem? Perhaps learned something from Motorola, the people who designed the box?

Tim

randyl · ‎10-25-2007

tim

u have to consider we are all in diff parts of the country and all have diff cable companys etc

here is a thread with a good read > thread

imho u just cant lump uverse and cc in the same boat and say we all see the same things...

its very dependent on distance from vrads and quality of the local cable companys. (brands of tvs etc )

my take

randy

Ps i dont see what u see nor do u see my quality,,,

Message Edited by randyl on 01-19-2010 04:37 PM

bandaidman · ‎01-17-2010

the hd picture i received on my basic comcast package was without any compression artifacts at all. i only received local channels and sports were awesome. both neighbors cable HD pictures are crisp as well

my new u-verse service is plagued by compression artifacts (as well as some pixelation/pauses). i posted in another thread asking about solutions. the service techs have been out twice. one blamed my tv and the other the service itself. both related att can not improve the picture

some channels are fine, watching nfl games and ncaa games in high def can be downright awful.

i have only had u-verse 5 days but am frustrated enough to cancel it. i do like the internet service though

this from a guy who went 20 years without cable

mridan_1 · ‎01-19-2010

My mother just had Uverse tv/phone installed last sat(no internet).Coax from RG to 42" panasonic 1080p plasma,HDMI from Cisco DVR to plasma.When comparing my Directv hd(50" Panny plasma) to Uverse,I have to say Uverse looks pretty darn good I was suprised.I don't notice any macroblocking,or any motion artifacts when I had a football game on.The picture might be a tad soft compared with D* but not much.Just to let everyone know I'm very picky about HD quality,I might drop D* now and order Uverse.Uverse DVR smokes D* DVR,it's alot faster changing channels,and I love the UI.The only probelm with Uverse is you can only get one DVR,you can't pause live tv or record from the other STB's,and with only one hard drive not alot of storage for HD recordings(300gig HD for Uverse DVR?).My stepdaughter lives with us(shes an adult developmentally delayed),and she has her own DVR and has alot of HD programming recorded.If we got Uverse she would no longer be able to pause live tv or setup recordings from her TV.Does anyone know if Uverse will address these issues?Also only two or three hd streams,with D* I could be recording an HD program while watching another HD program,and my step daughter could be doing the same thing.Will Uverse ever have 4 hd streams?

mibrnsurg · ‎07-15-2008

The 3rd HD stream is coming soon and after that only Zoltar the Swami knows as ATT is not offficially

saying anything. Current users solve the no pause, FF, Rew on the STB by recording the program and

then you have the control and delete it at the end.

Chris

Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
YRMV IMHO Simply a U-verse user, nothing more

spd2demun · ‎07-28-2007

mibrnsurg wrote:
The 3rd HD stream is coming soon and after that only Zoltar the Swami knows as ATT is not offficially
saying anything. Current users solve the no pause, FF, Rew on the STB by recording the program and
then you have the control and delete it at the end.

Chris