What do you think about HD quality in 2011?

What are your thoughts on High Definition picture quality?

  • It has stayed the same compared to years past.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • It has gotten worse over the years.

    Votes: 6 75.0%
  • It has gotten better over the years.

    Votes: 2 25.0%
  • I don't watch HD.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters


I have not cared for the quality from Comcast for their HD. I can't comment on satellite as I haven't had satellite since 2002 (before they had HD available). For OTA, that dependson whoich stations we talk about for Chicago. WBBM-TV (CBS), WFLD (Fox), WPWR-TV (MNT) & WGBO-DT (Univision) have the best quality, since they have no subchannels (WPWR-TV does set aside some bandwidth for Mobile TV). WMAQ-TV (NBC), WTTW (PBS), WYCC (PBS), WCIU (Ind), & WCPX (Ion) have subchannels & while the HD may not necessarily suffer, the subchannels however do (especially on WTTW, WCPX, & especially WCIU, due to WCIU having too many subchannels). WLS-TV (ABC) & WYIN (PBS) have dual HD channels & for WLS-TV, Livewell Network especially suffers from lack of bandwidth for HD. WYIN for now is still simulcasting the main channel on 56.2 & 56.4, & 56.3 being Lakeshore Kids (locally programmed PBS Kids Go channel), plus 56.1 & 56.2 being HD. WYIN wants to add a 3rd HD channel once the technology improves (they need to figure out what they're gonna program on the other channels first should the Indiana Channel never get off the ground, & get rid of the simulcasts)


Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
OTA only:
I think some broadcasters (engineers) are actually figuring out how to get the most out of their HD and subchannels, and equipment is improving too. Yea, most SD subs are of poor quality. I think those who broadcast 720p, with just one sub, have some of the best quality HD. I can't speak to single HD channels with no subs because I have none here.

Cable and satellite:
I only get to see this when visiting relatives or friends. Quality is decreasing as they try to cram more HD channels into the same pipe.

Improving - but I don't expect HD from the net. I'm happy if I get a really nice, smooth SD picture - it's better than crappy HD.


Staff member
I think that on the studio end it has gotten better for many stations. I know that we have substantially improved a lot of things since the channels first went HD. Also the last SD primetime holdout on the big 4 (amazing race) has gone hd this season.

On the transmission and distribution end I think it has gotten worse in some cases and better in others. Cable operators are crushing analog and fine tuning bitrates. But bigger than that is that now hd is mainstream and we have gotten accustomed to the bad quality we had before. It doesn't make you go "wow" anymore. OTA stations are adding subs but removing others. Some have definitely taken a hit but others are just fine or even better than before.

Internet is adding more HD and some even in 1080p which is good.


Staff member
I haven't had an HDTV long enough to know if HD is getting better or worse. What I do know is that when KKTV moved from channel 10 to channel 49 the picture quality of their dot 2 subchannel (MyKKTV) went from great to really, really bad. The sad thing is they run great syndicated programming on it including a fair amount from Discovery. KUSA moved Universal Sports from KUSA 9 to KTVD 20 and it made all the difference in the world. KBDI has improved the picture quality on Megahertz Worldview, but since they only run SD on any of their channels they have lots of bandwidth to play with.
Last edited:


Moderator of DTV Latino
well i will give my opinion about the HD well in Chile the HD using H 264 is ok, i have seen some shows in HD some, not many because the shows that broadcast in HD just are bad quality programms in the content, well the quality of HD in the channels is ok, already can watch some video artifacts too sometimes, ie in a show where appeared smoke can see some artifacts because the silhouette of the person that is looks like artificial in the video , also in fast motion actions like an suit with brilliant things looks macroblocks in the suit when is in motion and some artifacts of that type.

the Chilean television only broadcast the HD shows like the news, except the reports that are with bars, some special shows like festivals and shows in evening for teens that have high rating.

of anyway can be seen the difference between HD and SD by the fine details and colors .

the HD quality is about the bitrate of video that determine how clear or sharp is the image , less compression, more details, more compression less details and video artifacts, ours channels are working in simulcast and the bitrates are between 7-9Mbps and still appearing video artifacts and many forums in Chile said that with MPEG 4 H 264 was the best, really i do not believed that were the best.

question i have read years ago that is being developed a ATSC system but with MPEG4 AVCHD codec, that is right ? i do not remember where i read that

best regards
Last edited:

Similar threads