Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Quality vs Content


shinner

Without hesitation, I would  

18 members have voted

  1. 1. Without hesitation, I would

    • Local SD: I needs my announcers
    • HD: why is this even a question?


Recommended Posts

Ok, you're getting ready to watch your game...you bring up the onscreen guide and see it's available on 2 stations. The first is in HD but it's the other teams broadcast. The second is your teams broadcast but it's in SD.

Which one do you watch? Do you go for the superior picture of the opponent's HD feed or Is the idea of not being able to hear your home team's announcers enough to make you suffer with a horrible SD picture?

(btw - in this scenario you also don't have the option of listening to the local audio via am, fm, internet or other audio device.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rosinski - I'll take SD and close my eyes a lot of the time.

Mixon - I'd listen to another team unless it was Atlanta.

This was my wife's choice last night. Braves broadcast in SD, Mets in HD. I would suffer through the Mets broadcast but she watched the SD Braves team. Luckily I never am put in that spot with Red Sox/Yankees because if it's on YES, it's on NESN...and NESN has one of the best HD pictures I've seen.

weird scenario IMO. I have the choice of HD and SD, but both are the same other than picture quality. announcers, commercials, everything

Not weird at all for me....if we were talking about a "local" team, I probably would have the choice of HD or SD by the local network....but that isn't the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being new to the HD world I would probably go for the HD for the majority of the game switching over to the SD for replays of a really great play by my team.

I always check my HD channels for something to watch before checking the SD, and have been that way ever since I got it hooked up.

My wife can't tell the diff between SD and HD... I think the vagina affects the brain.

mine WAS the same way. she would DVR or watch stuff on the SD stations when it was on the HD station. I finally made her sit down, and look at the difference as I went back and forth from channel 9(fox SD) to 920(fox HD) several times. I had to do it during something she was interested in for her to really see it. Now she never makes the mistake of recording the SD if HD is available. Discovery and NatGeo are also great channels for doing this same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mine WAS the same way. she would DVR or watch stuff on the SD stations when it was on the HD station. I finally made her sit down, and look at the difference as I went back and forth from channel 9(fox SD) to 920(fox HD) several times. I had to do it during something she was interested in for her to really see it. Now she never makes the mistake of recording the SD if HD is available. Discovery and NatGeo are also great channels for doing this same thing.

:lol:

I haven't bothered to try and explain it to mine... she also records everything in SD which is fine with me because it takes a lot less space on the DVR and leaves more for me to use. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure which is worse...

I got home yesterday and found my wife comparing two custom calibration setting trying to decide if the magenta setting in one was better than the other.

Your situation is way worse... mine has no inclination to do anything like that... and I'm glad she doesn't, the TV would be screwed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don't think Dave touches the defense. That might be a mark against him but definitely a huge red flag for evero. He refuses to run anything other than soft zone and when you don't get pressure that's an awful scheme
    • You don't have to convince me. I think not picking up the option should absolutely be firmly on the table but I just do not see Tepper and Morgan doing that for previously stated reasons. Therefore I'm not going to bother entertaining the notion. Just hoping we actually get real viable competition. If that doesn't happen at the minimum then my perception of that is complete and utter professional malpractice.
    • It was absolutely a catch, and I can’t believe how many folks were stating, before the NFL’s apology, that the overturn was the right call.  The ultimate question in this case is this: can a player complete a catch with only one hand? Of course, we all know the answer to that question, and it is an emphatic “Yes.” T-Mac maintained complete control with one hand (believe it was the right) while the other came off when the ball hit the ground. The ball was in the same position in the one hand (watch T-Mac’s fingers in relation to the NFL shield on the ball) after touching the ground as it was when it first went to the ground. Going back to the question above, if one hand can establish control, then there was no need for the other to stay on the ball, so long as the ball doesn’t move in that one hand that stays on it   It blew my mind that they overturned this in the first place. This should not be a “We got it wrong on the replay because there wasn’t clear and convincing evidence.” This should have been, “That was absolutely a catch.”
×
×
  • Create New...