You're busy Sarge, you value your place in the HD PQ police , you've been very busy the last couple days knocking down everyone's good HD. You just can't believe that many of us have very good HD in spite of the bit rate. 
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
mibrnsurg wrote:You're busy Sarge, you value your place in the HD PQ police , you've been very busy the last couple days knocking down everyone's good HD. You just can't believe that many of us have very good HD in spite of the bit rate.
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
Not knocking anyones HD, just speaking my opinion on the matter. There is evidence that the PQ does need to improve if AT&T plans to retain their customers. I think you have mentioned that yourself havent you? I know since my opinion is opposite of yours you have went out of your way to label me the HD PQ police. Kind of funny coming from someone who needs a formula to get a good HD picture, See your quote below:
my HD PQ is very very good. I sit 3x diagonal distance from my 42" Panasonic plasma to qualify anything PQ from me, if anyone sits much closer, I say they are too close and will see many more compression artifacts on Uverse.
CGI wrote:
mibrnsurg wrote:You're busy Sarge, you value your place in the HD PQ police , you've been very busy the last couple days knocking down everyone's good HD. You just can't believe that many of us have very good HD in spite of the bit rate.
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
Not knocking anyones HD, just speaking my opinion on the matter. There is evidence that the PQ does need to improve if AT&T plans to retain their customers. I think you have mentioned that yourself havent you? I know since my opinion is opposite of yours you have went out of your way to label me the HD PQ police. Kind of funny coming from someone who needs a formula to get a good HD picture, See your quote below:
my HD PQ is very very good. I sit 3x diagonal distance from my 42" Panasonic plasma to qualify anything PQ from me, if anyone sits much closer, I say they are too close and will see many more compression artifacts on Uverse.
I absolutely agree w/my distance statement and see a great HD picture, but that's the normal distance I'd sit as my apartment is set-up. I also use 3 different TV picture settings and am not afraid to change them during a program for the best picture.
The first thing I think is the H.264 codec needs to be tweaked for better HD PQ for everybody even before more HD streams, as mine's real good right now under my usual conditions and I also try to mention my 42" Panasonic plasma w/an anti-reflective filter (important for a plasma). Uverse is ideal for this size TV as in my case I see very few compression artifacts. 
Chris
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
xsquid wrote:
My friend I believe quality probably will improve, I overall like uverse with their lineup, features, etc. I take in consideratuon it's still young and I believe it will only get better, I think with time it will leave its competitors behind. Optimistic? Yes, but being a pessimist gets sooo tiring.
I totally agree.
I would have to agree with RCSMG.
If your SD tv is looking better then your Plasma TV, then it's you, not Uverse.
This is a multi-layered topic, and I see both sides oversimplifying. There are naysayers blaming the service (when their config/calibration is wrong), or alternatively evangelists always blaming the config/calibration (when the PQ really does have obvious deficiencies and is far from perfect).
Once you get the signal config and calibration knocked out, there still are HD PQ issues that aren't the fault of the person that are not solvable through but just an aspect of their service. The compression, especially for certain elements (fog, crushed blacks, certain motions) are not as good as cable.
Alternatively, there are parts of the config and calibration that are buggy too (most notably HDMI RGB colorspace negotiation, hdmi handshake is not really a picture quality issue as a picture of a padlock has nothing to do with PQ.)
raytseng wrote:
I would have to agree with RCSMG.
If your SD tv is looking better then your Plasma TV, then it's you, not Uverse.
This is a multi-layered topic, and I see both sides oversimplifying. There are naysayers blaming the service (when their config/calibration is wrong), or alternatively evangelists always blaming the config/calibration (when the PQ really does have obvious deficiencies and is far from perfect).
Once you get the signal config and calibration knocked out, there still are HD PQ issues that aren't the fault of the person that are not solvable through but just an aspect of their service. The compression, especially for certain elements (fog, crushed blacks, certain motions) are not as good as cable.
Alternatively, there are parts of the config and calibration that are buggy too (most notably HDMI RGB colorspace negotiation, hdmi handshake is not really a picture quality issue as a picture of a padlock has nothing to do with PQ.)
No sense arguing with me. I am offering a suggestion that has solved pq issues for a lot of people. If you don't agree with the solution thats fine, life goes on. If you have a better solution then offer it. I like many others here offer help that may or may not solve a problem. If a problem isn't solved after someone follows our suggestions they are free to post those results, and then they will be offered another. And still, life goes on.
No argument here! Even my first line says I agree with you for this particular user.
My point is there is oversimplication on both sides. The particular person you were trying to help definitely falls into the user-error side, and is really offtopic from the original topic of quality AFTER config/setup/calibration has been done.
I think probably you have been replying too much to the people ranting as they cancel their service.
raytseng wrote:
No argument here! Even my first line says I agree with you for this particular user.
My point is there is oversimplication on both sides. The particular person you were trying to help definitely falls into the user-error side, and is really offtopic from the original topic of quality AFTER config/setup/calibration has been done.
I think probably you have been replying too much to the people ranting as they cancel their service.
While in a few cases that statement could be true, someone can always use good information. Whether they are on topic or not, and whether they post about a problem or not. My intent is to offer help nothing more nothing less. Think what you willl but my motivation and actions remain the same. Nuff said.