<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/17/19 6:07 PM, James Abernathy
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CANFv2EkDTd87LWbFtJATYCVSQNkDuNWaW2oBdrtDsQTraUi1dw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="auto">
<div><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Sun, Feb 17, 2019, 5:57 PM Devin
Heitmueller <<a
href="mailto:dheitmueller@kernellabs.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">dheitmueller@kernellabs.com</a>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">> You
mentioned the HVR-2250. I threw that card away because it
could not receive my local PBS station. my HDHR Connect
and Quatro can receive that station at ~50%. My new WinTV
Quad PCIe receives that station at 83%.<br>
<br>
I would encourage you to be very careful throwing around
these numbers<br>
as they are not an apples-to-apples comparison. Each
demodulator chip<br>
exposes it's SNR and signal level in a different format,
so the scales<br>
are largely arbitrary (and each of the three products you
mentioned<br>
have different demodulator chips). Knowing that 50% is
worse than 80%<br>
is useful for a particular card, but don't think 80% on
one product is<br>
the same as 80% on a different product if they have
different<br>
demodulator chips.<br>
<br>
I'm not doubting the empirical results you've observed
(i.e. that<br>
newer devices are performing better than your older
generation<br>
products) - just the comparison of the actual numbers.<br>
<br>
(speaking as someone who has worked on various ATSC
demodulator<br>
drivers in the Linux kernel).<br>
<br>
Devin<br>
<br>
==<br>
Devin J. Heitmueller - Kernel Labs<br>
<a href="http://www.kernellabs.com" rel="noreferrer
noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.kernellabs.com</a><br>
___________________________________<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I would not disagree with you. My point is with
my antenna setup the HVR2250 could not scan the PBS station.
The HDHR Quatro could receive the station with occasional
break ups. The WinTV is rock solid. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Jim A</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I had a situation with my reception recently that made me do a
revamp of my antenna situation. I had 2 antennas pointing in
different directions and combined before making the long run from
the attic to the splitter in the data distribution box. My
previous setup was for use with HDHR tuners. <br>
</p>
<p>Now with the WinTV QuadHD PCIe card I removed the weaker of the
two antennas and the combiner. The main antenna is a Clearstream
4MAX without a distribution amplifier. I set the antenna 45
degrees off of both main signal sources, about half-way between
them. I used the HDHR signal strength to peak the signal, but when
I scanned with mythtv-setup I had achieved 91% on the weak PBS
station 30 miles away and 100% on all other channels. <br>
</p>
<p>I know these signal values don't mean much except 100 is better
than 90 is better than 50. <br>
</p>
<p>What I conclude is the WinTV-QuadHD PCIe card is the best tuner
I've tested. Much better than even the latest HDHR Quatro. A big
issue for me is the network problems are completely removed. I had
to completely isolate the HDHR tuners on one gigabit switch alone
with the Mythtv backend to fix some of the issues, but that didn't
fix them all. So now the network is only for FE client activity
which will have no impact on recording even if we are streaming
multiple UHD 4K Prime or Netflix.</p>
<p>Jim A</p>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>