Electronics Gurus: Is HDTV Here To Stay?

As good as Whack-a-Mole’s long answer was, it’s missing a few things that I spent a lot of time searching and reading to find out.

First, it’s not quite true that HDTV standards will not be changing. It’s true that the basic display standards (1080i, 720p, etc.) won’t be changing, but that’s not all that there is to how the picture gets from the studio to your TV. If things like DVI/HDCP get adopted (which looks likely), then current HDTV tuners could well become useless.

Which leads to the subject of “HDTV-ready”, meaning that the TV itself doesn’t include an HDTV tuner: This is not really a “rip-off”, and could very well be an advantage. True, it means an additional $500 or so outlay if you want to receive true HD signals, but if DVI/HDCP renders current tuners useless, I personally would rather find myself needing to spend another $500 for a new set-top tuner as opposed to needing to spend another $2500 for an entire new TV with integrated tuner.

And speaking of tuners, let’s not lose in the shuffle here that almost all HDTVs come with not one but TWO built-in tuners for the old standard NTSC format. And since, as has been pointed out, the current HDTV fare is pretty minimal, you’re going to be watching a lot of regular TV, even with the best HDTV set, for the next few years at least.

Also not to mention the abundance of inputs of various types that all new TVs have. I live in an area of the country served by a cable company that still uses the antiquated A/B system wherein there are TWO cables coming into the house, an “A” side and a “B” side, with about 40 or so channels on each (as opposed to a single cable capable of carrying 120 or more channels). In addition to that, they have digital cable, requiring a set-top. But with all the inputs on my new TV, I can plug the “A” side into one RF input, the “B” side into the other RF input, and the output from the set-top into one of the component inputs. “So what?” you may be saying; with the digital cable carrying all the channels of both the “A” and “B” sides (plus more), why would you even bother with such a complicated setup? The answer leads to one of HDTVs most overlooked advantages (at least for some of us):

If you’re a PIP junkie like I am, HDTV is a dream. with the wide screen, you get “POP” - Picture Out of Picture - or two equally-sized pictures side-by-side. But this would be useless if the only input I had to the TV was from the cable’s set-top; since the tuner is in there, I’d still only get one channel at a time. But with the “A” and “B” cables on the other inputs, I can have one POP from the set-top, and the other from either the “A” or the “B”, freely tunable through the TV.

Ok, back to true HDTV. One of the basic questions that it took me an inordinate amount of time to find the answer to on the web was, “How do I receive real HDTV?” What I found was: First, you need an HDTV tuner, which for most HDTVs means an additional set-top box. Almost all of these are capable of receiving both over-the-air and from satellite. The latter, of course, means that you also need a satellite dish and a subscription to either DirecTV or Dish Network. Most cable systems – even when they have a digital feed like mine does – do not yet carry HDTV. Always remember that HDTV and digital TV are NOT the same.

Ok, so what if I just want to try over-the-air (OTA)? I live in one of the big markets, and supposedly there are a half a dozen or more stations broadcasting HDTV here all the time. What do I do? The answer is, you use an ordinary TV antenna, indoor or outdoor, and hook that to your set-top HDTV receiver. Yes, the pinnacle of twenty-first century digital television technology is coupled with 1950’s television technology. HDTV OTA is broadcast (mostly) on the UHF spectrum, so you go to Radio Shack and buy a $20 “bow-tie” antenna and hook that to your state-of-the-art HDTV tuner.

Another advantage that HDTV has over standard TV is that, since it’s broadcast digitally, there’s no worry about artifacts from a weak signal. In the BC days (Before Cable), a weak signal meant a fuzzy, ghosty picture. With HDTV/digital, the receiver either gets the zeros and ones or it doesn’t; if it can just barely read the signal, you get the same clear picture as if it was a mile from the broadcast tower.

All that being said, I have not yet taken the plunge myself to buy the HDTV set-top (hey, I’ve only had the TV for two weeks) and see for myself if HDTV is really like looking out a window (which is what most first-hand accounts claim). Partly this is because, being rerun season, there isn’t much on that I really want to see. The other part is that, from my wanderings through the web, it does sound like there’s a great chance that DVI/HDCP will turn current tuners into doorstops.

But lack of HDTV does not make my new 46" widescreen a wasted purchase; even if I never get an HDTV tuner, I’m glad I got the TV. Regular TV looks better, and DVDs (mostly) play in true widescreen, with little letterboxing (as Whack-a-Mole noted). That alone makes the purchase worthwhile.

I’m surprised, with all the mention of DVD progressive scan in this thread, that hardly any mention has been made of DVD’s ability to generate an anamorphic widescreen display on a 16x9 (widescreen) TV.

Even at regular non-HDTV resolution, an anamorphic widescreen display will have a lot higher resolution than a conventional letterboxed widescreen display.

F’rinstance, a movie with a 1.85-to-1 aspect ratio shown in letterbox on a typical NTSC display (with 480 scan lines) will have a vertical resolution of only 345 scan lines. The other 135 scan lines are taken up by the black bars at the top and bottom. But if this same movie is shown in anamorphic widescreen on a 16x9 NTSC TV, the black bars at the top and bottom will be much smaller, and in fact the vertical resolution will be 462 scan lines (with only 18 scan lines devoted to the black bars). A panivision movie with a 2.2-to-1 aspect ratio will fare even better.

And all this will work on a regular NTSC widescreen TV, i.e. at 480i or 480p. It doesn’t have to be an HDTV model.

‘HDTV Ready’ may not even be of use if clowns in Congress like Fritz Hollings ever manage to pass the bills they keep trying to get through.

The push from the content industry right now is to demand that the digital signal for HDTV stay encrypted, right into the display device. That means an HDTV set with only component analog inputs will NOT work any more. It will be illegal to sell a set-top box that decrypts a hi-def data stream and turns it into any sort of analog signal that can be read by a TV or other display device.

I’d hang on to my money if I were you, until the standards shake out and this foolish anti-copy legislation gets resolved. I have a $4,000 projector that may be worthless for HDTV if Congress gets its way.

I have sold quite a few HDTV sets along with the regular analog sets. I sincerely believe that if you are the type of person that will go out and buy, say for instance, a 36" Sony XBR top of the line set for over 1500.00, than you should definantly go to the HDTV set. The average lifespan of most televisions is approximately 10 yrs. This means that a nice television purchased today will most likely be operating well 5-6 yrs from now when the HD technology should be readily available. Personally, if I had laid out that much cash for a top of the line TV and couldn’t take advantage of the newest technology, I would be kicking myself in the ass. HD ready is the way to go today. Don’t fear the talk of the $500 add on box need to receive the High Def signal later. Like most electronics, the price will invariably be lower at the time that you will need one due to the larger volume of sales. I have seen the converter box drop dramatically in price in just the last few years and I can very easily see it coming down to a couple of hundred dollars in the not distant future. Also, if the High Definition signal becomes the standard, the old analog signals will be shut down completely, therefore requiring the purchase of a settop converter to enable you to watch your analog television. Just some things to consider.

Just FYI, you can order the blue filter glasses free from the THX website. Just send them the printed-out form from the site along with an SASE, and they’’ send them to your house in about six weeks.

All right, an opportunity to flaunt my ignorance.

Assume I have a friend who likes to watch some TV once in a while, but is by no means a videophile.
Assume further that this neandertal uses only a rooftop antenna (GASP!)
Assume finally that this person has a 29" trinitron and a 23" TV that are about 5 years old; this guy and his family have no complaints about the picture quality on either of these sets.

So, I - I mean my friend - has no interest in HDTV. I freely admit it is a better picture, but my friend’s current sets are certainly adequate for his family’s viewing needs.

So what does HDTV mean for my friend? Will his sets become obsolete because they are unable to receive HDTV, even if they are capable of continuing to function as they were designed?

Is the industry going to require that my friend spend money to change technology tho he has no desire to do so?

At some point, yes (but it’s not the industry, it’s the FCC; the “industry” would prefer to just continue broadcasting NTSC). The original plan was to phase out analog broadcasting in 2006 (Whack-a-Mole mentioned this above, and I can confirm it’s the same I’ve read). This will almost definitely be pushed back, though. HDTV tuners will start coming down in price, no doubt taking advantage of sophisticated ASICs. Supposedly the price target is $200. These will enable you to receive digital signals on your old set.

However, by the time that happens, you may be ready to replace your old set anyway, because it’s worn out. The replacement would almost definitely be HD compatible.

What is the motivation for this change? Do I recall correctly that the idea was to create a standard, to encourage advancements by US industry? Is the public as a whole clamoring for improved TV reception?

I’m just curious about the history of a regulatory change that woud require a $200 expenditure by every single family.

I was in a Best Buy a couple of months ago, and you could buy a 19" color TV for under $200. That is within the reach of just about all but the poorest households, and will provide them with some minimal degree of information and entertainment. Now, for some reason the decision has been made that everyone should pay at least $200 more for a converter? Seems odd to me.

I just saw a 4:3 aspect ratio HDTV set in a consumer electronics store. It was a raster CRT set, i.e. it had a regular picture tube instead of a plasma or projection display. This set will display “normal” NTSC signals so that they fill the whole screen, and will display widescreen-aspect digital TV signals (including HDTV) in some kind of a letterboxed format.

One thing bugged me, though: Nowhere in the advertising or manual for this set did it list what resolution it was capable of displaying. For all I know, if I feed it a 1080i or 720p signal, it will render it with a paltry 480 scan lines.

How do you tell the resolution capabilities of a particular “HDTV” set you’re looking at?

“How do you tell the resolution capabilities of a particular “HDTV” set you’re looking at?”

Ask the salesperson?

handy:

Every salesperson I asked was totally clueless. If the set didn’t have its resolution printed on the little feature list next to the price tag (as some plasma displays did), the salespeople simply didn’t know. Heck, the owner’s manual for the set I’m looking at didn’t even say how many scan lines it would display when faced with a 1080i signal!

Is there a way to tell?

A couple of things:

  1. If any of you are in the DFW, TX area and want to see what you can get right now, just let me know. I’ll be more than happy to have you over.
  2. It is extremely difficult with words to give someone an idea of just how much improvement HD makes, especially in certain types of shows.

I’ve followed this thread for a bit and noticed that the technical part of the discussion has mainly be around the resolution or detail level that is added. That is just one part, but there are two other things that are as important or nearly so.

Color accuracy: To understand some of this, you have to understand the history of traditional color tv. The NTSC color standard everyone in the US is used to is horrible. It has some big limitations in it. This is because the standard they picked was to be compatible with the old B&W standard. Even on the best NTSC set, reds are especially messed up. When you see the colors correctly the first time on TV, it seems like something is wrong with the set, you are so used to seeing the colors incorrectly.

Brightness/contrast - This is so much improved, it is hard to know where to start. Low light scenes in a movie are just like they were in the theater. You can actually still see the details in the shadows.

Between these two, here are a few examples that just jump out as being “right” for the first time on TV when you see it. Sunsets/sunrises, wow, they are bright and the red/orange colors are just right. Neon signs look like… well… neon signs. They can film outdoor scenes at night in a city with ambient light and it looks just like you are watching through a window.

Lets talk about sports for a second. In a movie, if some detail is important, they can make sure the camera is in the right spot to capture it. In sports, hey, you get what you get. With the added detail, many many many times you can follow the action so much better it is rediculous. Hockey is simply transformed by it. On a regular broadcast, you can’t spot all the little dirty man to man manuevers going on. You can’t see why penalties are called many times, but now you can. It is as clear as day.

What this media does for travel and documentary shows… You just have to see it for yourself.

It is getting where I have a significant amount of HD content available.

Over DirectTV I get HDnet, HBO, and Showtime… pretty much HD all the time.

Over the Air, I get ABC, NBC, CBS, WB, Fox and PBS digitally with a higher and higher fraction of the time in HD all the time.

Beside the movies and stuff on HBO and Showtime, here is a partial list of prime time network shows that are being broadcast today in HD. (I can get all of these)

The District
CSI (Crime Scene Investigation)
Drew Carrey
The Agency
The Young and the Restless (Daytime)
Tonight Show with Jay Leno
My Wife and Kids
According to Jim
Jag
The Gaurdian
Judging Amy
Queen of Hearts
Yes Dear
Everybody Loves Raymond
Becker

Pay Channel Series:
Queer as Folk
Street Time
Odyssey 5
Stargate SG-1

scotth:

So … what resolution is your HDTV TV-set capable of displaying?
(Oh, and while we’re on the subject – a salesperson at The Good Guys tried to convince me that an HDTV set that was incapable of displaying the full 1920-by-1080 resolution really wasn’t such a bad thing, because, he said, most HDTV boradcasts today are at less than 1920-by-1080 resolution. Is this true?)

Yep, that’s true. For instance, FOX is only going to broadcast their shows in 480p, which is the resolution of DVD.

There are a number of ‘standard’ resolutions for HDTV: 480p, 720p, and 1080i. ‘p’ stands for ‘progressive’ scan, and ‘i’ stands for ‘interlaced’.

720p is a common resolution for HDTV shows, and it’s phenomenal. I’d make sure the HDTV set I bought could resolve at least this resolution.

Okay, then, Sam Stone, how do I make sure a given HDTV set can resolve at least 720p? (And please don’t ask me to ask the salesperson – they’re clueless!)

My set runs 1080i 100% of the time that I am watching “TV”. My receiver upconverts everything to 1080.

My list of shows from before and the broadcast resolution:

The District - 1080i
CSI (Crime Scene Investigation) - 1080i
Drew Carrey - 720p
The Agency - 1080i
The Young and the Restless (Daytime) - 1080i
Tonight Show with Jay Leno 1080i (This recently went up from 720p)
My Wife and Kids - 720p
According to Jim - 720p
Jag - 1080i
The Gaurdian - 1080i
Judging Amy - 1080i
Queen of Hearts - 1080i
Yes Dear - 1080i
Everybody Loves Raymond - 1080i
Becker - 1080i

Looks like 1080 is pretty prevelant today.

BTW, none of the plasma or similar panel TV’s or any of the DLP based projection units can do 1080 yet. I suspect DLP chips capable of 1080 will be available soon though.

My highly unscientific answer, if you are going to do greater than about 55 inches of display, be sure to get 1080. Below about 45 inches, 720 is about all you can see unless you are very close, in the middle is just marginal improvement going to 1080. I can tell the difference on my set. But even 720 gets all the color accuracy and better brightness and contrast. It is so much better than even DVD quality that it isn’t even a contest.

Dollar for dollar, (IMHO) CRT based rear projection is the way to go. Almost all of them will do 1080, and rear projection looks ALOT better than it did just a couple of years ago.

My set is 65 inches and is very viewable even in bright light. Also, the off center viewing angle is nearly the same as a direct view CRT now.

Most of the TV’s will list 1080i prominently in the specs if they can do it. If they only do 720p, they tend to just say HDTV (like all the flat panel and DLP based units).

One note on Sam’s p and i explantation.

He is correct completely, but that doesn’t tell the whole picture.

Current NTSC is 480i. A complete frame comes 15 times a second. A half frame 30 times a second.

720p does a complete frame 60 times second (4 times faster than ntsc)

1080i does a complete frame 30 times a second, a half frame 60 times a second (still twice as many frames a second as ntsc)

I’d heard that NTSC displays a complete frame 30 times a second, and a half frame (or “field”, as it’s called) 60 times a second.

Maybe I goofed that one up.