External HDTV Receiver Question

[edtyct]

No. You need a component, DVI, or HDMI connection.

[s dog]

No. You need a component, DVI, or HDMI connection.

Do they make over the air hd receivers that have component out puts, Im thinking about doing the same thing with my toshiba hd tv which only has component and hdmi hookups for the hd And i was wandering how much do these receivers cost ,dish wants $200.00 for a hd receiver installed and $10.00 a month for the hd package but it only has a few channels that are hd and besides most of the stuff i watch is on local cbs and fox, also where do you buy these things, thank you

[edtyct]

Yes, the OTA HD receivers have component outputs. Samsung, Motorola, and others sell OTA receivers for about $250. OTAs can also double as DirecTV, Dish, or cable receivers (LG's, for one). DirecTV's, for example, doesn't cost more, but you pay for programming. Any electronics store, such as Best Buy or Circuit City, carries a few. You can also find them online or at more dedicated A/V stores like Tweeter. DirecTV and Dish have picked up some of VOOM's HD channels, and each apparently has other plans to increase programming. Comcast cable offers about 15 to 20 HD stations. For someone like me, that's more than enough, if you can stomach the company. I'll resist making political comments about the various providers.

Ed

[nightflier]

No. You need a component, DVI, or HDMI connection.

OK, so here's the crux of the problem. The HDTV box (an RCA unit) will only output HDTV via the VGA out (I bought an AA 9A60 adapter). But I have become quite fond of watching TV w/o commercials, particularly the basic channels. I use a Panasonic PVR to time-slip and then the CM button to zip past the commercials.

It seems to me that the end result is that there is currently no way to record HDTV. If so, I've got a good mind to sit the whole HDTV fad out. Even most of the cable programs that claim to be HDTV and digital (whatever that means), are being crammed with commercials. It's the whole reason I bought a PVR in the first place. I'd gladly replace it, but there isn't a single unit out there that has component video in (or DVI/HDMI, for that matter). It's not just that commercial interruptions are irritating, they actually cause ADD, hyperactivity, and a host of other behavior problems in children and I'll be damned if I'm going to screw up my kids like that.

If there is one sure way to make HDTV go the way of SACD/DVD-A, it's to keep honest people from recording....

[edtyct]

Boy, I hear you. When my daughter watches TV, 95% of the time, it's PBS. On those rare occasions when we let her watch something on a commercial network, the difference is jarring, at least for me. The crass come-ons that kids get from advertisers is beyond tolerance. Since the network stations that are on HD simply duplicate any children's programs that are also on SD, the commercials persist on them. (I don't believe that any of the kids' digital "cable" stations, like Nickoledeon, Noggin, Disney, etc. are in HD yet.) The difference between digital broadcasts and HD broadcasts is the difference between the 480 format and the 1080i/720p format. To remind you of your logical syllogisms, All digital is not HD, even though all HD is digital.

I take it that you object to commercials not just for your kids' sake but your own as well. Otherwise, you could let them watch their accustomed commercial programs as they usually do via the Panasonic, while you suffered through the HD stations with the commercials intact. I personally confess no great love of DirecTV, but if you want to avoid commericals but still watch HD, you do have the option of getting DirecTV's HD DVR receiver, along with the appropriate dish, which does in fact allow you to record HD via an embedded hard drive and thus skip through commecials. You could also move to cable and rent an HD DVR from them.

The industry treatment, or non-treatment, of SACD/DVD-A, is deplorable. But I like them regardless of their lack of recording opportunities and their analog cabling. What I don't like is their status as afterthoughts within the recording industry and all that it implies. In any event, HD video does permit recording. My library of Deadwood recordings testifies to it. Honestly, even if I couldn't record HD, I'd still be an adovocate of it, and my daughter would watch primarily stations without commercials (in our case, PBS, HBO, and various On Demand offerings). Good luck in your quest. Sorry that it isn't working for you yet.

Ed

[nightflier]

In any event, HD video does permit recording. My library of Deadwood recordings testifies to it.

Ed,

How are you recording HD? Are you using DirectTV's PVR? So I take it that not being able to find a recorder has nothing to do with some kind of copyright nonsense that Panasonic is doggedly trying to stick to. If that's the case, there should be a market for HD recorders in the near future...

I also don't care for monthly subsription fees, hence the reason I bought the Panasonic, but I'm not married to the brand, so if there's something else out there that you recommend, I'm all ears. I've heard that Mac laptops can do this using the firewire link, but that's a bit expensive just to record HD.

[edtyct]

I record on a hard drive that is embedded in my Motorola cable receiver. The prohibition against HD recording concerns stand-alone components like your Panasonic, which might produce contraband disks of HD broadcasts that would make you millions on the international market. The hard drive ones don't run that risk, since the broadcasters themselves can control what you record and what you can do with it. Any recording that can be done via a hard drive on a computer is about to get much more difficult, as encryption and HDCP are about to be brought to bear more stringently on it. All such digital devices sold on the market are to be HDCP-equipped by July. Barring strategies that are beyond me (and many are), you'll need a reputable STB of some kind to record HD. Mine costs $15.00 a month, along with my programming.

Ed

[nightflier]

Mine costs $15.00 a month, along with my programming.

Seriously, though, what if DirectTV decides they don't want you to skip commercials anymore? Or what if they start selecting which programs they will allow you to record for later viewing? Or ultimately, they decide what you should watch...

Personally, I hope that the broadcasters fall flat on their faces with this big-brother crap and that there will always be ways around it. The airwaves (i.e. all the broadcast channels) aren't there to be owned by miscreants who will charge us for access at every flick of the switch. All such schemes have failed in the past, often violently.

I'm not trying to break the law, here. I am only exercising my right to order a burger w/o the advertising pickle. Just as I don't want to buy a whole album just to enjoy one hit song, or just as I want to be able to buy a hybrid sedan instead of gas hog SUV, I want to enjoy my programming w/o being force-fed constant interruptions from Zocor, Masengil, and that pop-pseudo-news-crap about wacko Jacko. If I'm watching a movie, I should be able to watch it w/o interruptions. If not, I should have the right to buy another one that doesn't have interruptions. I heard that they will start "product-testing" movie theater commercial intermissions and including those on DVD's too. It wasn't too long ago that there were no Ford commercials at the movies....

I for one, will fight this with my pocket book for as long as I can. I also believe that I'm not alone in my dismay about this. Sooner or later this overcommercialization will reach a boiling point and something is going to snap. The corporate fat cats should realize that worker productivity is way down, not because of pay (everyone is making more than ever before), but because there is no entertainment outside of work that offers a true respite. Everything that was once fun has become laborious. If I didn't have children who remind me of the more important things in life, I would be one miserable employee just a few lattes shy of going postal.

Philosophers through the ages have warned us that societies have to provide some mechanism of meaningful escape for the workers. When it doesn't, something usually snaps.

[edtyct]

Nightflier,

Sounds like you're turning into a good candidate for Marxism (no, not communism, as we've known it, which is just capitalism by the state instead of the bourgeoisie). I agree totally about the utter tastelessness and decadence of commercialism and about the government favoring corporate America over traditional citizenship (but that's what our government does nowadays). It is a disgrace, but the whole notion of what constitutes "rights" is immensely tricky. You only have a "right" to buy one song rather than an album if that song is made available by itself (or if you have another way, legal or illegal, of procuring it). You do have the right to buy a hybrid car rather than an SUV, because both are offered. But you don't have the innate "right" to watch a TV show without its sponsor intruding on it, unless that opportunity is presented to you somehow, because that TV show exists only because of the sponsors' money. HBO and other noncommercial outlets exist as an alternative because people are willing to pay for them.

Every coroporate entity has a categorical imperative to increase its revenue in this culture. Corporations by their very nature, like sharks, are amoral. It's up to us, and our government, to make sure that no business or other parochial interest swallows up everything in its path. I happen to believe that our government is failing us in that regard, largely because it is more allied with corporate concerns than the good of society as a whole.

If we're going to watch shows and movies, somehow they have to be delivered to us. The current system is wearing out its welcome, but it isn't going to change any time soon. Commercials aren't going to stop. To me, rather than looking for a better escape from reality, we ought to be making reality something that doesn't require escape. If pulling your purse strings tighter helps to maintain your integrity and improve your life, more power to you. It probably wouldn't hurt us to watch less TV and buy fewer films and records. But the people that you end up penalizing might not be the ones that you intended (why should record company executives make more money than artists? why should Exxon have profits of over $20 billion at a time when most of us are feeling the crunch of a so-called gas crisis?). Besides, one man's commercial-ridden horror story is another man's escape for the evening. To me, not enjoying what we create is like cutting off our noses to spite our faces. Our quarrel isn't with the creative people who entertain us, and sometimes even enlighten us; it's with the means of production, to borrow a phrase. It's better to find a way to keep the good things that we have without constantly having to associate them with less decorous ones. In some ways, culture is subject to inertia; it won't be completely overhauled. It's not always going to go your way or mine. But in other ways, it is subject to improvement that would meet with most people's approval. Political, social, and economic environments aren't totally etched in stone. I'd certainly hate to think, as Pangloss said, to his own folly in Candide, that this is the best of all possible worlds. If the best we can do is think of ways to escape from it, it might as well be.

Okay, I'm off the soapbox and into the showers.

Ed