Is onboard tuner image different than cable image of the same channel?

[brassplyer]

If I'm using the onboard tuner on my HDTV for OTA reception, does the image differ from the image I'd get from a cable provider?

[orsetto]

It depends on the cable provider (and the signal quality your local stations supply to them) vs your OTA reception. Sometimes OTA is better, sometimes the cable is better. Most cable companies are now messing with their "boxless" cheaper service (the kind where you plug the cable wire into your TV and still use the TV tuner instead of an outboard decoder box). Some TV tuners can have issues with the screwy frequency games. If you opt for the decoder box with HDMI connections, you'll get more reliable predictable tuning performance, but then you're stuck using the box to select channels.

Cable service can vary from neighborhood to neighborhood, even between homes on the same block. If you are concerned about this, you should probably ask friends, neighbors and relatives in your area if they have cable, then go look at their service quality. Most towns have a monopoly situation with just a single cable provider, if you're lucky you might have the additional option of FiOS which can be better or worse, again depending on your area. Satellite systems might also be an alternative, but there are tradeoffs with that as well.

There is no definitive broad answer: you would need to compare actual hookups in your specific neighborhood and judge for yourself.

[nic2k4]

Of course, OTA signal has the highest bandwidth (when they don't wreck it with a bunch of side channels) compared to cable. They both use a frequency range that falls between 50MHz and 1GHz; well, OTA is more like 174MHz to 806MHz less a couple frequencies. The point is that cable has to spread all those stations across that limited range, thus each channels has less bandwidth. Higher bandwidth allows higher bitrate, up to 19 Mbps. Keep in mind that DVD can go up to 20 Mbps. Then there's fiber, in theory it has so much bandwidth that everything on it could be true HD 1080p with 20 Mbps (OTA can only do up to 1080i or 720p, not HDTV in either case).

[Brad]

Keep in mind that DVD can go up to 20 Mbps. Then there's fiber, in theory it has so much bandwidth that everything on it could be true HD 1080p with 20 Mbps (OTA can only do up to 1080i or 720p, not HDTV in either case).

?!

[turk690]

Keep in mind that DVD can go up to 20 Mbps.

Only up to 10Mbps, dear.

[nic2k4]

Correct, got confused with capturing uncompressed AVI.

[jman98]

(OTA can only do up to 1080i or 720p, not HDTV in either case).

Most of us here would regard 1080i and 720p both as high definition. What exactly do you call it? That's all the US digital TV spec allows for currently. Granted this was due to badly underestimating the technology required to display 1080p and how quickly it would become practical, but it's what we have.

[KBeee]

To tell the truth I can't really consider 1080 as HD. HighER Definition maybe, but HD? I look on it much like the old CRT FST TV's (FlattER Squarer Screen) - not flat, but better than what had gone before. Untill the res can match 35mm film, I'll always consider it just an upgrade over what had gone before. Sales people disagree of course.

[smrpix]

I can't really consider 1080 as HD.

1080 and 720 are HD according to EBU and SMPTE specifications. Whether they match the demands of your exquisite eyesight is irrelevant. I'm sure you can appreciate that this stuff is tricky enough to discuss without you making up your own language.

[usually_quiet]

Of course, OTA signal has the highest bandwidth (when they don't wreck it with a bunch of side channels) compared to cable. They both use a frequency range that falls between 50MHz and 1GHz; well, OTA is more like 174MHz to 806MHz less a couple frequencies. The point is that cable has to spread all those stations across that limited range, thus each channels has less bandwidth. Higher bandwidth allows higher bitrate, up to 19 Mbps. Keep in mind that DVD can go up to 20 Mbps. Then there's fiber, in theory it has so much bandwidth that everything on it could be true HD 1080p with 20 Mbps (OTA can only do up to 1080i or 720p, not HDTV in either case).

Maybe if you had cable or didn't despise it quite so much as a delivery system, you would be better informed on this subject. It isn't as quite bad as you say. Digital cable TV systems have hundreds of virtual channels, many of which are SD, but typically have at least 125 physical channels available to use for them, and sometimes more. QAM uses a 6 MHz bandwidth per channel just like ATSC, but ATSC signals have more error correction built-in due to the need to compensate for greater transmission losses. QAM can carry about twice the data (38.47 Mbit/s @256QAM per 6 MHz channel) because QAM provides less error correction. So, it is possible to fit 2 HD channels into the same bandwidth that one ATSC HD channel uses and maintain about the same quality.