Standard low def TV broadcasting

[drummerman]

I find it odd that whilst most folks have owned HD Tv's for many years, many have had 4k sets for almost as long and some now have 8k displays they still broadcast in low definition 720 x 576.

Does anyone actually still use an ancient tv with that native resolution?

Using LP's as the audio equivalent I get why folks still use them even if it's mostly irrational. It can sound good but costs a fair bit to do so.

No such accolades for SD broadcasting. It just looks crxxx and I usually don't watch anything in that format because of it.

2019. Surely HD should be the absolute minimum these days.

 

[Bob McC]

I best most over 75s are not sure what they are watching.

 

[matt j]

I find it odd that whilst most folks have owned HD Tv's for many years, many have had 4k sets for almost as long and some now have 8k displays they still broadcast in low definition 720 x 576.

Does anyone actually still use an ancient tv with that native resolution?

Using LP's as the audio equivalent I get why folks still use them even if it's mostly irrational. It can sound good but costs a fair bit to do so.

No such accolades for SD broadcasting. It just looks crxxx and I usually don't watch anything in that format because of it.

2019. Surely HD should be the absolute minimum these days.

Even worse are the people with HD TVs that don't even use the HD channels of whatever they're watching. You need to see how bad crap-def looks on a 65" 4K OLED, my eyes bleed every time I visit my old man and he has the TV on. £ks worth of TV and all he watches is potato vision.

 

[narabdela]

As always, it depends how it’s done. We have a three year old Panasonic LCD full HD set, on which SD broadcasts look awful.

We also have a ten year old Panasonic 720p Plasma set on which SD broadcasts look superb.

Go figger.

 

[Paulicus]

Plasma Panasonic 720p here. Nowt wrong with our picture quality, and it'll be staying until it packs up.

 

[Yank]

I best most over 75s are not sure what they are watching.

Heck, they can't even set the proper aspect ratio on their TV, everything looks like a 4:3 image stretched to 16:9. And if they're actually watching 16:9 content, it'll have letterbox bars on the top and bottom and still be stretched.

 

[misterdog]

2019. Surely HD should be the absolute minimum these days.

If only life were so simple, or black and white if you pardon the pun.

https://www.techspot.com/article/1113-4k-monitor-see-difference/

If you have perfect eyesight and sit close to a good monitor maybe some can see the difference .

Yes Vinyl costs a shit load more to get a good system Vs digital but once you have heard it there is no turning back. Go figure.

Though some say the pinnacle of audio is MP3 streamed across from their phone.

 

[MikeMA]

I'm really not that bothered. I can barely tell the difference on our small TV

 

[MikeMA]

I best most over 75s are not sure what they are watching.

And a lot of under 75s too, I wouldn't mind betting. And do they actually care?

 

[clivem2]

1 32" SD, 1 32" HD and 1 65" HD

As with audio the quality of the original recording is vital but not everything. SD can be fine or terrible. Same with HD. The most dramatic difference is with the Amazon 4k stick into the 65" HD set....HDR processing I believe making the difference.

 

[Bob McC]

Heck, they can't even set the proper aspect ratio on their TV, everything looks like a 4:3 image stretched to 16:9. And if they're actually watching 16:9 content, it'll have letterbox bars on the top and bottom and still be stretched.

With volume and colour set at 11...

 

[stevec67]

Some people don't know or care. .y mother listens to a transistor radio and thinks it's as good as a hifi, same for TV. I've not turned a TV on since Sunday, so much the better.

 

[herb]

SKY are offering to swap my SD box for a new HD one free of charge. They sent me a letter months ago about closing all of the SD Sports channels. I am still thinking about it but only watch cricket these days and I am also worried that my DVD player might be a casualty - not acceptable at all. SD Sports channels are still working at present and are good enough for me, with a smallish TV.

 

[Nic Robinson]

... we also have a ten year old Panasonic 720p Plasma set on which SD broadcasts look superb.

Plasma Panasonic 720p here. Nowt wrong with our picture quality, and it'll be staying until it packs up.

Same here. It's brilliant. No desire to upgrade and SD looks just fine.

 

[drummerman]

Same here. It's brilliant. No desire to upgrade and SD looks just fine.

 

[drummerman]

A lot of love (or familiarity ...?) here for SD.

Don't quite get it but hey ... each to their own.

 

[Mullardman]

Our 'main' telly is a five or six year old Panny 39" Viera 6 or summat. The difference between HD and SD is noticeable, but not really worth losing sleep over.

ISTM that some TV pics are now so 'real' that they are unreal.

 

[Derek Wright]

BBC regional TV News and programs are only broadcast on SD, they claim they cannot afford the bandwidth to have HD channels for each region. So for some people it will be too much hassle to change the channel to get local neews.

 

[davidsrsb]

Far too much of the content is ancient US shows obviously recorded in NTSC and via a low quality tape system, SD would be a big step up in resolution for this.
The limitation is that broadcast NTSC limits I to 1.3 MHz and Q to just 0.4 MHz, Q is green to cyan, where the eye is less sensitive, but still shows badly at time, giving smeared colours.

 

[cutting42]

Far too much of the content is ancient US shows obviously recorded in NTSC and via a low quality tape system, SD would be a big step up in resolution for this.
The limitation is that broadcast NTSC limits I to 1.3 MHz and Q to just 0.4 MHz, Q is green to cyan, where the eye is less sensitive, but still shows badly at time, giving smeared colours.

That is where it gets its name from NTSC. Never the same colour.