tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

[digicon]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

Dr.HD F15 Is discontinued
there Is a new Dr.HD D15
anyone compared both F15 and D15 regarding tuner sensitivity

The same Tuner in both models F15 & D15

[sasho123]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

I own all those mentioned plus have had others in the past and the Technomate 5402 beats every other receiver hands down. List as follows for tuner sensitivity.

1. TM5402HD & Dr HD F15
2. VU-Uno ( Only came good in thast few weeks due to FPGA 4.5 Upgrade )
3. Technomate TM500s ( Sharp Tuner )
4. Blade BM7000s
5. SkyBox F3 & M3 ( slightly better due to again Sharp Tuner )
6. DM800se
7. DM500HD
8. VU Duo
9. VU Solo
10. Gigablue 800se


I could add a few others but the list being 1 the best to 10 worst

Dr.HD F15 Is discontinued
there Is a new Dr.HD D15
anyone compared both F15 and D15 regarding tuner sensitivity

[rizwan]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

There must be a tuner sensitivity mentioned with the specification of STB, or , it mentioned there, that you can grab these specific sat in your region. When there is some competition in this specific field, then companies try to make much better tuners

[kalpikos]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

Each image can show graphically greater or lesser signal quality, but the real strength and signal of quality remains the same.

You are absolutely right

Many times I've seen better or lower signal in different images,
even between different skins.

As you say, the real signal you take is the same each time.
Also, may you have wrong strength of your signal during the day.
I mean, is very known that satellite signal is better at some hours of the day than the others.

This very easy may confuse someone who is testing different images or skins during the day.

[skytec]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

I disagree with you my friend
How can the image give to a receiver the ability to have better signal?
I think that this is hardware job.
There are tuners with better sensitivity and the difference can be seen only in critical reception.
But, keep in mind that there are tuners much more sensitive and they usually used for feed hunting.

Each image can show graphically greater or lesser signal quality, but the real strength and signal of quality remains the same.

[gianni253]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

I also believe that image loaded cannot affect signal quality.
If a given tuner driver has no bugs and is working properly, a "better" tuner driver cannot improve signal quality.

[Clark197]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

I disagree with you my friend
How can the image give to a receiver the ability to have better signal?
I think that this is hardware job.
There are tuners with better sensitivity and the difference can be seen only in critical reception.
But, keep in mind that there are tuners much more sensitive and they usually used for feed hunting.

i don't know how the team of specialists build images. But because
they make many changes on the user interface, i imagine that we
can see some functionals differences but no qualities differences.

To see qualities differences you need to connect the receiver with some
test equipment and i don't thing that #parsonline# had some at home.

[rizwan]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

One question: the tuner sensitivity could affect the picture quality of an receiver?

Only on very weak signals, when you experience the glitches

[BlueIsMyColor]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

One question: the tuner sensitivity could affect the picture quality of an receiver?

[kalpikos]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

ofcourse sensitivity of receivers depend to image. some image receive signals better than others but according my experience hd receivers commonly have weaker tuner that i dont know why while old receivers have stronger.

I disagree with you my friend
How can the image give to a receiver the ability to have better signal?
I think that this is hardware job.
There are tuners with better sensitivity and the difference can be seen only in critical reception.
But, keep in mind that there are tuners much more sensitive and they usually used for feed hunting.

[kostis]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

hi guys

indeed, image has nothing to do with tuner sensitivity - and true: not every tuner is very sensitive - other things are important, such as dish size, dish alignment, and (but less): cables, connectors, distances, splitters, ...

True but if you got unlucky and get a fault with cables, connectors, or splitters then for a few money that they cost you may loose a lot of time on dish alignment.

[pat3]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

i recommend to try different channels on different polarisations instead of one channel to get a better statement

[parsonline]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

when i check with starsat in same models with diffrent image i saw some image have receive signals better that i think its related to writing image

[sideralgr]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

do you have any experience about tuner sensitivity of receivers. best way to test it is on near freezing limit-very weak signals. if you receive a signal with some freezing than attach the same cable to second receiver. if you receive same channel without any freezes than sensitivity of second receiver is better. if it doesnt even lock on signal it is worse.


i am especialy wondering the tuner sensitivity of gigablue 800se-vu solo-vu uno-dm500hd -dm800se or any other linux based receivers.

or is possible that the both tested receivers to have low sesibility

[pan1300]

Re: tuner sensitivity of satellite receivers.

hi guys

indeed, image has nothing to do with tuner sensitivity - and true: not every tuner is very sensitive - other things are important, such as dish size, dish alignment, and (but less): cables, connectors, distances, splitters, ...