# 921 Current consensus?



## jpetersohn (Apr 6, 2005)

I have a serious case of HD DVR lust. But I'm a little leery shelling out $700 for a 942 with the looming changes (MPEG4) on the horizon. I don't trust Dish to provide a reasonable upgrade path. That doesn't seem to be there strong suit.

So I'm considering my options. A used, if reasonably priced, 921 might be suitable as an interim measure. But from what I've heard, the 921 seems to be a horror story.

I was hoping that the members of this forum could give me an idea on what the current consensus (limitations, bugs?) at this time (April 2005) is. Past threads are not really a good indication since they may discuss problems that might be fixed at this point -- or people have just given up on it.

I presently have a TiVO wired to a 311 via S-Video. The PQ isn't so hot, plus it doesn't do HD. I'm aware of such limitations as no name based recording in the 921, but I could live with that if the price is right (basically a hard disk based tape machine.)

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Mark Lamutt (Mar 24, 2002)

some good, mostly frustration. That sums it up better than just about anything else. If I were you, I'd go with the 942. But that's just me, after having used both for some time. Dish has been good at offering upgrade paths in the past. Doesn't mean that they will this time as well, but they have set precedent. Read part 1 of my 942 review for examples.


----------



## tm22721 (Nov 8, 2002)

Always go with Dish's 'giveaway' DVR that way you can just throw it away when you get frustrated.

Unless you like being screwed.


----------



## jergenf (Mar 31, 2005)

I've had my 921 for five months (just 1 month before there was talk about mpeg4) and find it to be reliable for the most part. Some quirks do arise from time to time but rebooting the box seems to make it behave again. I paid $999 for the 921 with 34 inch HD CRT monitor which I feel was a great deal (especially since I was willing to pay $999 just for the DVR prior to that offer). 
Overall I'm glad that I have HD, OTA digitals, dual tuners, tivo function and recording HD/SD capability.


----------



## jpetersohn (Apr 6, 2005)

tm22721 said:


> Always go with Dish's 'giveaway' DVR that way you can just throw it away when you get frustrated.
> 
> Unless you like being screwed.


I wish I could, but AFAIK they don't have a giveaway HD recorder.


----------



## LindaT (Dec 16, 2004)

I have recently upgraded to the 921 after giving serious consideration to the 942 and reading all the boards and postings. I just couldn't justify double the cost. The NBR was not that much of a concern for me and the much talked about upgrade to MPEG-4 when it comes out, I'll think about it then. I have not experienced any of the problems being posted (thank the HD Gods, knock on wood, jump up and down and pat my head, rub my tummy all simultaneously) with the 921. It has worked out well for me. Beautiful picture after playing around with the settings (which can be frustrating) and calling for support more than once.


----------



## TowJumper (Sep 19, 2003)

I recently (last Sunday) finally cancelled Dish after 10 years due to the short comings of the 921. We have a couple plasmas and I got tired of resetting the box after it got stuck in stretch mode. This is a serious problem for those of us that change the modes, but probably not a big deal to non-plasma and lcd owners.

Amazingly, when I called to cancel, Dish told me that it was MY 921 and that all the 'other' 921 were working perfectly. Soooo, I would not expect much for the 921 in the future since it is, well, "perfect". FWIW they asked what it would take to keep a "long time customer" and when I asked for a 942, they told me those were "retail-only" boxes. So ten years and $100+ a month got me nowhere with them in trying to address the wasted money on a 921.

I would pickup the 942 over the 921 any freaking day. But then again, some people like to punch themselves in the nuts repeatedly, only you can answer what you prefer.

Good Luck.


----------



## Paradox-sj (Dec 15, 2004)

There have been a few 942's going for 600.00 on ebay....thats just 70-100 dollars more than a new 921....


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

Most likely, in three or more months, E* will offer the 942 like they have with the 921. Could they also drop the price of the 942 like they did with the 921?


----------



## ClaudeR (Dec 7, 2003)

As Mark said, go with the 942. The OTA tuner SUX on the 921. Also, the 921 is FRIGGING NOISY. I HAVE TO SHOUT TO TALK OVER IT (Even though it is in a utility closet). Of course, I don't know how noisy the 942 is, but it couldn't be any worse.


----------



## jpetersohn (Apr 6, 2005)

ClaudeR said:


> As Mark said, go with the 942. The OTA tuner SUX on the 921. Also, the 921 is FRIGGING NOISY. I HAVE TO SHOUT TO TALK OVER IT (Even though it is in a utility closet). Of course, I don't know how noisy the 942 is, but it couldn't be any worse.


How does the OTA tuner compare to the 811? I have an 811 and I get all the locals without a problem. Will a 921 do the same?


----------



## Jon Spackman (Feb 7, 2005)

Try it buy one (921) at costco worst case return it.

Jon


----------



## rstaples (Sep 17, 2004)

ClaudeR said:


> As Mark said, go with the 942. The OTA tuner SUX on the 921. Also, the 921 is FRIGGING NOISY. I HAVE TO SHOUT TO TALK OVER IT (Even though it is in a utility closet). Of course, I don't know how noisy the 942 is, but it couldn't be any worse.


I too am more than a bit disgruntled at the unfinished qualities of the 921 but fair is fair. Unless your 921 is 5 to 10 times louder that EITHER of the two 921 receivers I have had then your statement is a gross exaggeration! My 921 is in a cabinet behind a glass door and I can state unequivocally that it is totally quieted when the door is closed! Yes, it IS louder than the 5xx series that I have heard but placed inside any cabinet should satisfy anyone.
Making an absurd statement about having to shout over the 921 just serves to negate the credibility of your posts.

Richard


----------



## jpetersohn (Apr 6, 2005)

j5races said:


> Try it buy one (921) at costco worst case return it.
> 
> Jon


What are they going for at Costco? My nearest Costco is 30 miles away and it would have to be good enough of a deal to warrant the $45 membership fee.

Thanks.


----------



## Paradox-sj (Dec 15, 2004)

jpetersohn said:


> What are they going for at Costco? My nearest Costco is 30 miles away and it would have to be good enough of a deal to warrant the $45 membership fee.
> 
> Thanks.


489.00+Tax with the ability to return at any point for any reason.


----------



## JAXDAVE (Jun 2, 2004)

I have been with Dish Network since '98. I have a 721 and a 921. The lack of support that Dish has shown for it's HD customers is amazing. I spend over a $100/month on programming and have purchased 2 of the most expensive receivers they have ever produced and they still treat me as if I was a new customer walking in off the street. They seem to refuse to (or don't have the ability to) fix the ongoing issues with the 921. I spent $1000 on it, 4 months later they cut the price in half. They have given up on adding any new HD programming until they move to MPEG 4, at that point all existing HD recievers will be useless. Meanwhile, they add everything from a chinese governement channel to a dozen new shopping channels because they don't want to add any new channels that they might actually cost them money to provide. 
Clearly HD is not their primary business model from this point forward. They are making more money from their foreign language customers who will shell out $300-$400/year for a specialty channel in their language.
Sorry about the rant. Bottom line... I will be switching to DirecTV and HD Tivo as soon as they get their new satellite up and start providing Local HD channels. DirecTV seems to have a much stronger commitment to HD than Dish. Yes, their programming is more expensive, but I am more than willing to pay for more HD channels if they are available, Dish doesn't seem to understand that. Not to mention that all of the people I know with HD TIVO are extremely happy with it.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

jpetersohn said:


> How does the OTA tuner compare to the 811? I have an 811 and I get all the locals without a problem. Will a 921 do the same?


I have both and 811 and 921 hooked to the same antenna and preamp. They both get the same channels. The 921 strength is a lot higher than my 811 but I believe that is just a matter of calculation within the box and not an indication that the 921 get a stronger signal.


----------



## Mark Lamutt (Mar 24, 2002)

JAXDAVE said:


> I will be switching to DirecTV and HD Tivo as soon as they get their new satellite up and start providing Local HD channels. DirecTV seems to have a much stronger commitment to HD than Dish. Yes, their programming is more expensive, but I am more than willing to pay for more HD channels if they are available, Dish doesn't seem to understand that. Not to mention that all of the people I know with HD TIVO are extremely happy with it.


You'll be switching from one doorstop to another one...good move there...

The HD Tivo is just as upgradable to MPEG4 as the 921 is...which is NOT. And Directv has already said that their new HD channels will be just as MPEG4 as Dish's new HD channels.


----------



## jsanders (Jan 21, 2004)

Mark Lamutt said:


> You'll be switching from one doorstop to another one...good move there...
> 
> The HD Tivo is just as upgradable to MPEG4 as the 921 is...which is NOT. And Directv has already said that their new HD channels will be just as MPEG4 as Dish's new HD channels.


Hey Mark, you forgot to add that this is the last HDTivo that D* will make. The next box ain't gonna use Tivo software. It is going to be like playing roulette with that next box. It might be good, and it might be a nightmare!


----------



## jpetersohn (Apr 6, 2005)

JAXDAVE said:


> Clearly HD is not their primary business model from this point forward. They are making more money from their foreign language customers who will shell out $300-$400/year for a specialty channel in their language.


Perhaps so, but DirecTV is also famous for serving HD-lite.


----------



## BarryO (Dec 16, 2003)

jpetersohn said:


> How does the OTA tuner compare to the 811? I have an 811 and I get all the locals without a problem. Will a 921 do the same?


The 921 has the same OTA demodulator as the Model 6000 (mine does anyway, it was one of the first, right after the fixed the notorious "blue line" hardware bug). The 811 uses a newer design from Broadcom. Whether the 811 works better than the 921 for you depends on local conditions.


----------



## jpetersohn (Apr 6, 2005)

Well, after more thought on this, I'm going to hold out for a month or so and get a 942 (lease if they offer it by then) or buy.


----------



## jpetersohn (Apr 6, 2005)

Yay! I'm getting a 942 on Tuesday. I called up Dish, and because this account is still new (within 30 days), they agreed to upgrade my 811 to a 942 for the $250 fee that they had originally offered when I signed up with Dish.

Thanks Dish!


----------



## bluegreg (May 10, 2004)

junk. total junk.


----------



## DonLandis (Dec 17, 2003)

jsanders said:


> Hey Mark, you forgot to add that this is the last HDTivo that D* will make. The next box ain't gonna use Tivo software. It is going to be like playing roulette with that next box. It might be good, and it might be a nightmare!


DirecTV doesn't make the TIVO's. But it is true that the HDTIVO(HR1--250) is the last one that will have exclusivity with D*. What D* has said is that the next HD DVR offered may not be a TIVO built system but may be one from another licensee as TIVO will no longer have exclusivity to make all D* DVR's. However, TIVO may continue to make DVR's including an MPEG4 capable unit if it so chooses. The same D* rep told me that going forward, you will have the choice of a number of make HD DVR's but it is likely that IF TIVO has one you will have to pay a monthly "TIVO" charge as we do today. The others won't have a "Tivo" charge and may be used without any monthly fee. Bottom line... If you want a TIVO DVR it will cost you more than if you go with another brand that may work but not offer certain highly regarded features that come with the TIVO.

IMO, comparing my TIVO with the only other DVR receiver I have (921), the TIVO is well worth the small TIVO surcharge. E* has always said they modeled their DVR charge pricing after TIVO's practice. It would be nice if E* could model their DVR performance after TIVO as well.


----------



## rstaples (Sep 17, 2004)

DonLandis said:


> DirecTV doesn't make the TIVO's. (SNIP)
> IMO, comparing my TIVO with the only other DVR receiver I have (921), the TIVO is well worth the small TIVO surcharge. E* has always said they modeled their DVR charge pricing after TIVO's practice. It would be nice if E* could model their DVR performance after TIVO as well.


Well, you could buy a TIVO and go with Direct TV. However, it is important to emphasize here that Direct TV was found to have reduced their transmission from the full 1,920x1,080 HD resolution to more of an ED like level. This is according to a Direct TV forum like this one that discus such things. It was found out because TIVO is able, somehow, to allow you to see this information and subscribers reported it to the forum. 
This has also been reprinted in one of the magazines that test HD products out now as I just read it at the newsstand. I do not recall which magazine as I glanced through several.

As to how much this affects the signal, it is said that it makes it much softer. Go to http://www.cnet.com/4520-7874_1-5137915-1.html for an example of the difference between ED and HD and see if this is what you really want. Personally, I believe that HD picture quality is paramount so I will wait to see what Dish offers.


----------



## Rob Glasser (Feb 22, 2005)

Don't waste your time with a 921, unless you have the Costco return policy. It is by far the worst DVR receiver I have every used or seen. I am to the point where I have to do daily, if not multiple times a day, front panel resets to fix annoying quirks like stuck stretch mode, stuck menus, slow guides, you name it. I've had it miss multiple recordings, something I've never had happen on my 501 or 721. Guide information for locals is sometimes missing. The OTA receiver is sub par. A station I can get solid and fine with an LG HD OTA box bounces up and down with the 921 (luckily it's PBS a station I don't watch a whole lot, but frustrating when I do want to watch). Anyways, I'm just using it as a temporary solution until I find out what, if anything, dish is going to do for existing users and the 942, or until Direct TV gets competitive on their HD DVR line-up. There is also the possibility of Comcast and the 6412, but it seems even more unreliable than the 921 right now, not to mention even less hard drive space.


----------



## DonLandis (Dec 17, 2003)

_"Well, you could buy a TIVO and go with Direct TV. However, it is important to emphasize here that Direct TV was found to have reduced their transmission from the full 1,920x1,080 HD resolution to more of an ED like level. ..."_

Richard-

No, I don't think that is worth emphasizing. I've heard it too and think it is all a bunch of emotional mis-informed rubbish! especiall if one feels it is isolated to a DirecTV plot to dumb down HDTV. How silly!

Your statement about resolution is fundamentally flawed since allowing transmissions of full bandwidth content in a protected capacity to deliver the additional resolution between 1440 and 1920 is a waste considering that most, nearly all, monitors today do not display pixel detail beyond 1200 in the horizontal mode. The video format of 720P is restricted to 1280 horizontal pixels. Most of the HDNet and Discovery direct to video HD process is HDCAM which tops out at 1440 as restricted by the recording format. PLUS, I have personally measured the transmissions of Echostar on their best channels in HD and with equipment that is built to display bandwidth, verified certain channels such as ShowtimeHD and TNT HD were delivering no more than 11.5- 12.5 Mbps. When measured on D* channels it ran about the same for Showtime HD. I also had these data collection readings verified by a person who is an RF engineer in the satellite business. I can't mention any more detail on this due to non-disclosure agreement but it is true, bandwidth limitations are not only with D*, E* does not send out full ATSC spec bandwidth on all channels either.
Additionally, while at one time, several years ago HBO did have in their contract that DirecTV was not permitted to restrict their signal, but I do not know if this has been changed recently since it is a well documented fact that much of the content in film to Video and other programming does not contain much detail in the upper region between HDCAM resolution and Panasonic D5 for 1080i.

While I would like to cry for the best possible quality in picture detail such as 1080i x 1920, I respect the laws of physics. I understand that there is no point in delivering such a signal that is incapable of being displayed to that level of resolution anyway. Plus, the image presentation of a progressive scan image for digital pixel based displays is actually superior in the totality since digital displays work best with progressive images. CRT's and analog image generators work best with interlaced images. Until such time as the ATSC specs are changed and allows for 1080-60P with 1920 pixels horizontal and we are able to purchase such digital displays at affordable pricings there is no point in transmitting such high resolution transfers. It is far better to transmit and distribute HDCAM resolution range and have far more content available than be a spoiled child emotional soapbox for 1920 h pixels. 
Now you mention ED resolution. Do you even know what that is? It is beyond NTSC 480i x230 H pixels but less, much less than HDTV. It is 480P with up to 720H pixels. If you believe that DirecTV is sending out ED (480P at 720 H pixels) then lets get the FCC on the bandwagon as well as the FTC for false advertising. Both DirecTV and E* would not be falsifying their signals like that. MY guess is that you really don't have anything else better to complain about so you jump on this emotional giberish about DirecTV dumbing down a 1920 Pixel spec to save bandwidth. 
Tell me you watch HDTV with a Sony G90 on a 35 inch screen as speced by Sony to achieve full 1920 pixel resolution for a 1080i signal and I might consider you have a valid complaint. But even if you do that, D* doesn't build it's entire transmission design around those few with a 1920 spec system. Reality check is that, as I already stated, the state of the art and installed base of high end HDTV's are 1080i x 1440 and 720P x 1280.
In summary- 1920 is a pipe dream! Never had it and it will be a long time before we will in anything regulated under ATSC!

AS for your comment that this manifests itself as "softer" image. Yes, in MPEG2 this is what happens with resolution reduction. But don't confuse a softer look in an image when it is just likely that the content was shot that way using soft effects lenses to hide various details such as skin flaws. Most, nearly all CBS productions use soft focus specs in the film production. Frankly, there is just no detail there anyway. Most movies are shot with mattebox and soft difusing lens filters so that reduces image detail (resolution) as well. Please understand that in production, there are so many ways the image is manipulated, and a hundred times as many in digital video that it is impossible for you, a rank amateur, to make a claim that one isolated setting is what you are witnessing. I work in the business and have lots of production experience and I, mostly, don't know what was done to make an image as soft as it is at times that I see on these channels. Some of the details I stated above, I do know because I asked the people involved in the production what they did to achieve the image I saw.


----------



## GaryK (Jul 9, 2002)

Mark Lamutt said:


> You'll be switching from one doorstop to another one...good move there...
> 
> The HD Tivo is just as upgradable to MPEG4 as the 921 is...which is NOT. And Directv has already said that their new HD channels will be just as MPEG4 as Dish's new HD channels.


Mark,
I agree with what you are saying, BUT, I am really getting frustrated with Dish's ability to write software. I has DirectTV and TIVO and jumped to Dish a number of years ago. TIVO software was 1000% better quality than anything that Dish has produced! I was an early user of the 721 and went through all of their bugs. Then I added the 921 to my my house. The 921 has a lot of issues. What really annoyed me is many 721 enhancements and bug fixes never made it to the 921!
Now the 942 is following the same pattern. Can't zoom HD, etc. I like Dish, but I wish they would get the receivers from someone who knows how to write software. I am in charge of IT in my company and have developed my own ERP system. I would be extremely embarrassed to put out inconsistent poor quality software like they do. I really don't want to leave them, but they certainly make it hard to remain loyal.


----------



## yaesumofo (Apr 22, 2005)

ClaudeR said:


> As Mark said, go with the 942. The OTA tuner SUX on the 921. Also, the 921 is FRIGGING NOISY. I HAVE TO SHOUT TO TALK OVER IT (Even though it is in a utility closet). Of course, I don't know how noisy the 942 is, but it couldn't be any worse.


If the OTA receiver on the 921 sux I would like to see one that is good.
My 921 receives ALL the Los Angeles HD OTA channels from a small RS antenna which is split (at the antenna) between an 81 and a 921. I live near LAX ( a known RF Hell) I do have line of sight to mt Wilson though. All signals are over 100. While on the 811 they register between 80 and 90. Weird how these 2 receivers have a different way of showing signal strength.

Anyway, Just what is it about the 921's OTA receiver that "SUX"?

In fact the 921 OTA digital receiver receives more channels than my 811 (USDT is displayed on the 921 but not the 811) my 921 channel maps KCOP-DT correctly which the 811 does not.

The Fan on the 921 is noticeable but it is no deal breaker.
As much as it bugs me when the receiver gets aspect ratio stuck, I find hat the 921 does what it is supposed to do as a OTA receiver, SAT receiver, HD and standard definition off air recorder. The 921 is a pretty cool piece of gear. Yes it is not perfect . It is pretty damn cool though.

I say if you are worried if it is going to work for you buy it at costco. if it is no good for you just take if back.
Yaesumofo


----------



## rstaples (Sep 17, 2004)

DonLandis said:


> _" Richard-
> No, I don't think that is worth emphasizing. I've heard it too and think it is all a bunch of emotional mis-informed rubbish! especiall if one feels it is isolated to a DirecTV plot to dumb name-calling. How silly!..."_


_

Relax Don,

I was just sharing some information that I had seen from multiple sources. If you had better information you know you really could have written your message without the condescension and name-calling. Let me show you how below in a corrected reformat of your message:

Richard, 
In my professional opinion I do not think this is of any real concern to us and I will explain why. Transmissions of full bandwidth content in a protected capacity to deliver the additional resolution between 1440 and 1920 is wasted if you consider that nearly all monitors today do not display pixel detail beyond 1200 in the horizontal mode. In any case, the video format of 720P is restricted to 1280 horizontal pixels. Most of the HDNet and Discovery direct to video HD process is HDCAM, which tops out at 1440 as restricted by the recording format. 
I have personally measured the transmissions of Echostar on their best channels in HD with equipment that is built to display bandwidth, and have verified that certain channels such as ShowtimeHD and TNT HD were delivering no more than 11.5- 12.5 Mbps. When I measured D* channels, it ran about the same for Showtime HD. (Question: What about the others Don? Were they also low?)

I also had these data collection readings verified by a person who is an RF engineer in the satellite business. I can't mention any more detail on this due to non-disclosure agreement but it is true, bandwidth limitations are not only with D*, E* does not send out full ATSC spec bandwidth on all channels either.
At one time, several years ago HBO did have in their contract that DirecTV was not permitted to restrict their signal. I do not know if this has been changed recently but it is a well documented fact (Question: Where can a lay person find this information?) that much of the content in film to Video and other programming does not contain much detail in the upper region between HDCAM resolution and Panasonic D5 for 1080i.

While I would like to have the best possible quality in picture detail such as 1080i x 1920, I do not believe that there is any point in delivering such a signal that is incapable of being displayed to that level of resolution at this time. Plus, the image presentation of a progressive scan image for digital pixel based displays is actually superior in the totality since digital displays work best with progressive images. CRT's and analog image generators work best with interlaced images. (Comment: Do not forget motion as it pertains to progressive Don)

Until such time as the ATSC specs are changed and allow for 1080-60P with 1920 pixels horizontal and we are able to purchase such digital displays at affordable pricing, there is no point in transmitting such high-resolution transfers. It is far better to transmit and distribute HDCAM resolution range that would 
allow more bandwidth for content.

I left out your emotional rant including the flattering terms like "spoiled child emotional soapbox", "you really don't have anything else better to complain about", "mis-informed rubbish", and "how silly".

As you can see, I believe I was able to keep the information you wished me to have without getting angry OR personal! I say we let bygones be bygones.

Your dear friend,

Richard_


----------



## ClaudeR (Dec 7, 2003)

yaesumofo said:


> Anyway, Just what is it about the 921's OTA receiver that "SUX"?
> 
> The Fan on the 921 is noticeable but it is no deal breaker.
> The 921 is a pretty cool piece of gear. Yes it is not perfect . It is pretty damn cool though.
> Yaesumofo


I do like the 921 very much, but IF I could be a new customer again, I would definitely go the 942 route, and recommend it for others.

I live about 23 miles from the xmitter with a directional yagi. I have over 100 signal, but there are occassional dropouts. Usually happens about once anytime I want to watch a show. This seems to be a problem with OTA timers. I never record OTA because of the ZSR potentials. I fear the house-of-cards scenario.

It is too noisy for a sleeping environment. If you live near an airport, or in a city, you probably won't notice it, but I enjoy silence (at least I did before the 921 showed up).


----------

