Talk about an onslaught. Within the course of a few weeks we've seen Shaw, Rogers and Comcast all get flamed for purportedly compressing their signals to a point beyond acceptable, and as if that wasn't enough, a recent research report found that video quality issues (shocking, we know) were the primary reason for call-in complaints. All the while, Verizon is taking the chance to toot its own horn and boast about its ability to pass along HD signals sans additional tweakage. So, are you right in the middle of this firestorm? Or are you gleefully looking in from the outside with a gorgeous HD picture on your set? Give us your story below, won't you?

[Image courtesy of Vidiot]

Considering the recent hullabaloo over Comcast and Rogers Cable deciding to (over) compress at least part of their respective HD lineups, Electronic House's latest writeup is particularly timely. It's investigation into HD Lite reveals quite a few tidbits that everyone should know, but often get overlooked in the uproar. Put simply, every high-def channel that gets piped your way is compressed in some form or fashion (that includes you too, Verizon) before it hits the carrier. In other words, just because a signal gets modified before it hits your set doesn't automatically make it HD Lite. Still, there's no doubt that some providers have taken this squeeze too far and compressed signals to the point of noticeability -- that's where the problem emerges. Give the article a read, you'll likely learn a thing or two about nomenclature if all else fails.

It was inevitable, really. No sooner does Comcast and Rogers Cable begin taking heat for over compressing their HD feeds than Verizon pumps out a TV spot trumpeting its ability to deliver "pure, uncompressed high-definition." The ad campaign asserts that its delivery of material is superior to that offered up by traditional cable providers, but the company's media relations director Bobbi Henson did note that the real purpose was to show that "FiOS TV customers are receiving HD that's not compressed by Verizon." She noted in an e-mail statement that "content owners compress their video before sending it to video service providers, but [Verizon] forwards the signal to its customers the way that [they arrive]." You know what they say about bandwidth: if you've got it, flaunt it.

Bad news for Rogers Cable customers -- word on the street has it that your HD feeds may begin to look a little less fantastic in the coming days. According to Digital Home Canada, the carrier has outlined a plan in a technical briefing sent out by Rogers Network Engineering and Operations that will compress part of its high-definition lineup in order to "deliver more HD channels without having to use more bandwidth." As it stands, 15 HD channels are facing the dreaded HD Lite treatment effective April 9th, but curiously, we're not told which HD networks are actually on the docket to be added. Granted, we've yet to see a definitive confirmation, but given that Comcast has recently caught loads of flack for its decision to shove three HD channels on a single 6MHz slot, we suppose an awful trend could be (re)emerging. Keep a critical eye out, Rogers customers -- let us know if anything changes.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

It's not unusual to hear of entire neighborhoods kvetching over lackluster HD quality, but judging by the growing chorus of complaints over at AVSForum, we're beginning to wonder if this issue isn't more widespread. Reportedly, Comcast is squeezing three HD channels onto a 38.8Mbps QAM, which is typically used to handle just two HD channels. One particular user decided to pull screen grabs from shows seen on Comcast and Verizon's FiOS TV, and needless to say, the results were fairly startling. We aren't assuming that the overdone compression is being seen elsewhere, but we are curious to know if your Comcast service has taken a hit in quality. So, is your viewing experience as good as ever? Or have things become slightly less Comcastic of late?

[Thanks, Dave]