# HR34 Error 47 (was CCK Weak Connectivity)



## jimlenz

I have 5 boxes, one of them being a HR34. When the installer put in the cck yesterday along with my whole house connection, decas on each receiver and swim 16, he connected it to my receiver that is closest to my router. Unfortunately, it is not in the same room as my router. I then set it up to connect wirelessly with my router. I noticed today that my TV that is farthest away from the router is having connectivity issues. It is able to connect to cinema but is very slow and does show an error when I run the test. Note that this is my hr34 box. 

My questions are:

1. Did the installer put the cck in the best place? 
2. Is there anyway to connect the cck via ethernet so that it will run better on all receivers?

I sure hope I am understanding the technology correctly on this. Thanks for your help.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

If you have a wireless CCK, it does have an ethernet port.
If you reset it [to turn off the wireless part] by finding the recessed "button" that needs a paperclip, you can then connect it to your router with a cable.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> If you have a wireless CCK, it does have an ethernet port.
> If you reset it [to turn off the wireless part] by finding the recessed "button" that needs a paperclip, you can then connect it to your router with a cable.


I understand that I can connect the cck to my router but then how does it connect to my D box? I don't have a box that is close and I assume would have to hard wire it? I used to have a box in my office where the router is but took that out.

I was under the impression for my install I would have a broadband deca connected to my router, but nothing was done with my router. Can this be done with no D box near my router?

Any other options out there on connection of the CCK? If I can't connect the CCK directly to the router where a D box is does it matter which D box the CCK is connected too?

Unfortunately, I am confused here and not sure exactly what all this means. Thanks for all your help.

Jim


----------



## dennisj00

There are 3 options for connecting the DECA cloud to your router for internet access.

1. A 'Broadband' CCK. . . basically a DECA adapter in 'Black Box' format with it's own power cube. Requires a coax to a swim splitter and an ethernet connection to your router or switch.

2. A DECA adapter used as a CCK. Requires a PI(power inserter) and coax to a swim splitter and ethernet to your router or switch. These were often used before 1 and 3 became widely available.

3. A Wireless CCK . . . can be a wireless 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz connection to your router or AP. The wireless parameters are input through the Network settings of a H or HR.

It has a coax input for connection to a swim splitter, a second coax connection to feed through to a H/HR , if desired. It also has an ethernet connection which can be used to feed a H/HR ethernet or if the wireless isn't used, can be used to connect to your router or switch.


----------



## Diana C

Before you move anything around, I'm not sure that you problem is caused by wireless connectivity. The connectivity issue you describe (poor download performance by the furthest receiver) will not be fixed by improving the CCK connection. The CCK is a bridge that connects the coaxial network to your home network. All receivers on the DECA (coaxial) share the same connection to your router (currently the wireless link through the CCK). If the CCK was the source of the problem, it would be evident at ALL receivers. If you convert to a wired connection for the CCK you will very likely still have the problem at the HR34.

I suspect your actual problem is low signal on the DECA network to the most distant receiver. Are you having any playback problems over MRV from the HR24? Can you check your coax stats (press 'Guide' and 'right arrow' *on the front panel of the HR34 *to bring up the relevant menu) and post the numbers?


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> It is able to connect to cinema but is very slow and *does show an error when I run the test*. Note that this is my hr34 box.





Titan25 said:


> I'm not sure that you problem is caused by wireless connectivity.
> Can you check your coax stats (press 'Guide' and 'right arrow' *on the front panel of the HR34 *to bring up the relevant menu) and post the numbers?


Titan has brought up a good point/question.

Maybe the best thing to do is to start with what this error message is.


----------



## jimlenz

I am attaching the error message along with the coax stats you requested. Note that the only box that is showing this error is the HR34 and is farthest away. There are a couple other receivers on a different floor, also pretty far away but not showing the error. 

Thanks for your help.


Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

What is/was also important to have seen was the first screen/test.
In the matrix, node 1 has poor/failing numbers.
Your second photo calls out the master bedroom, which may be node 1.
The missing screen/test would show which one was node 1, AND more importantly what the loss from the HR34 to node 1 is.

Here's what is needed next, though not exactly from the same model:


----------



## LoweBoy

Is there a published doc to explain how to read the results from this testing? I would like to go through my system at every box and see where my weak points are.


----------



## veryoldschool

LoweBoy said:


> Is there a published doc to explain how to read the results from this testing? I would like to go through my system at every box and see where my weak points are.


Look at the DECA networking pdf here: http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=200024


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> What is/was also important to have seen was the first screen/test.
> In the matrix, node 1 has poor/failing numbers.
> Your second photo calls out the master bedroom, which may be node 1.
> The missing screen/test would show which one was node 1, AND more importantly what the loss from the HR34 to node 1 is.
> 
> Here's what is needed next, though not exactly from the same model:


Sorry about that, here is the missing screen.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Sorry about that, here is the missing screen.


"Houston, we have a problem"

It's time for you to post your system layout [drawing] as detailed as you can.

That screen shows high loss, so it's time to see where it's coming from.
"Normally" [as in when the system is setup right] the receivers will have the 771 error before this networking error.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> "Houston, we have a problem"
> 
> It's time for you to post your system layout [drawing] as detailed as you can.
> 
> That screen shows high loss, so it's time to see where it's coming from.
> "Normally" [as in when the system is setup right] the receivers will have the 771 error before this networking error.
> 
> Here's one "in work" from another member:
> 
> View attachment 27797


I will work on this today and post when I can.

I did have 771b errors and had the D installer back out yesterday to fix it. He did not have the lines split out right and now the 771 errors are gone.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I will work on this today and post when I can.
> 
> I did have 771b errors and had the D installer back out yesterday to fix it.* He did not have the lines split out right *and now the 771 errors are gone.


"Right now" I don't think he has them right still. He seems to have merely addressed the SWiM issue, but not the DECA.


----------



## jimlenz

I am attaching a number of photos and diagram of my system for your perusal. 

1. Picture of slimline dish
2. Picture of connections from dish on outside
3. splitters on outside connecting dish to inside
4. Diagram of my setup
5. Another diagram but in landscape.

I am not 100% positive on which box is connected to each green splitter. All I know is that there are 3 connections coming out of each splitter. I was told by the installer that he put the hr34 and one other box on one and the other three on the other. 

There are decas connected to 4 of the hr20's and hr22 but none to the hr34. My WCCK is connected to an hr20 on the mid level of my house. 

If you need any additional information to analyze this, please let me know.

Thanks.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

This isn't the whole picture, if I follow your layout.
Not quite sure what is going on at the gutter, but from there it looks like the four coax run down to the ground blocks.
Now what happens from here?
They should be running to the SWiM-16, and then this is where things get important.
Take a few photos of the SWiM-16, and the splitters coming off the two outputs.


----------



## LoweBoy

veryoldschool said:


> "Houston, we have a problem"
> 
> It's time for you to post your system layout [drawing] as detailed as you can.
> 
> That screen shows high loss, so it's time to see where it's coming from.
> "Normally" [as in when the system is setup right] the receivers will have the 771 error before this networking error.


What numbers are we looking for? According to the doc it says above a 50 on HR24 or above H25 is above a 40. What in his shows that there is a problem?


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> This isn't the whole picture, if I follow your layout.
> Not quite sure what is going on at the gutter, but from there it looks like the four coax run down to the ground blocks.
> Now what happens from here?
> They should be running to the SWiM-16, and then this is where things get important.
> Take a few photos of the SWiM-16, and the splitters coming off the two outputs.


Here are some more pictures.

1. Another picture of gutter area
2. 2 cables going down wall.
3. Connection on house
4. 4 wires going into house
5. 4 wires from house are connected to the 4 slots on top of swim 16
6. The 3 cables on left side of swim 16 (see previous pictures) are connected into the 2 green splitters and 1 power adapter.

The splitters have 3 connections to each. Still not sure exactly why there are 3 connections to each as I only have 5 boxes.

Hope this helps, if you need something else, let me know.


----------



## veryoldschool

LoweBoy said:


> What numbers are we looking for? According to the doc it says above a 50 on HR24 or above H25 is above a 40. What in his shows that there is a problem?


The two things are:
1) the MESH rates for node 1 are too low, thus causing the error message.
2) the Levels show 57, which is too high.
The MESH rates drop off when the levels are too low [high loss readings].


----------



## LoweBoy

veryoldschool said:


> The two things are:
> 1) the MESH rates for node 1 are too low, thus causing the error message.
> 2) the Levels show 57, which is too high.
> The MESH rates drop off when the levels are too low [high loss readings].


Gotcha, I was looking at yours and not his on the second post.:nono: My bad.


----------



## veryoldschool

LoweBoy said:


> Gotcha, I was looking at yours and not his on the second post.:nono: My bad.


"yeah", like I would post crappy results on my setup [even if I had them :lol:]


----------



## LoweBoy

veryoldschool said:


> "yeah", like I would post crappy results on my setup [even if I had them :lol:]


I have mine with some questionable results but I don't have any issues. I am going to get a 4 way and remove a 8 way to see if it corrects some of my issues. I also live in a house that was built in mid 80's so it has some older RG6. 
I network off of couple of my nodes to stream Netflix .


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> The two things are:
> 1) the MESH rates for node 1 are too low, thus causing the error message.
> 2) the Levels show 57, which is too high.
> The MESH rates drop off when the levels are too low [high loss readings].


Based on everything I have posted, do you have any suggestions on what I can do to fix this? Thanks

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

LoweBoy said:


> I have mine with some questionable results but I don't have any issues. I am going to get a 4 way and remove a 8 way to see if it corrects some of my issues. I also live in a house that was built in mid 80's so it has some older RG6.
> I network off of couple of my nodes to stream Netflix .


Changing from 8-ways to 4-ways changes the DECA loss [for the green labeled splitters] from -14 to -11 dB.


----------



## LoweBoy

Sorry to high jack your thread. I noticed the other thread poped up right after this one. 

Which way does the HR34 go? 40 or 50 for too much?


----------



## veryoldschool

LoweBoy said:


> Sorry to high jack your thread. I noticed the other thread poped up right after this one.
> 
> Which way does the HR34 go? 40 or 50 for too much?


This will all get standardized in up coming software, but "for now" if the PHY levels are *-*xx, they are the lower limits, and if they don't have the minus sign, they are the upper limits.


----------



## jimlenz

"LoweBoy" said:


> Sorry to high jack your thread. I noticed the other thread poped up right after this one.
> 
> Which way does the HR34 go? 40 or 50 for too much?


I am not sure what you mean here?


----------



## jimlenz

"veryoldschool" said:


> Changing from 8-ways to 4-ways changes the DECA loss [for the green labeled splitters] from -14 to -11 dB.


Is this something I should do or is there a better option to better my system?


----------



## LoweBoy

I was asking VOS. None of what I asked really pertained to your specific issues. I was looking for the limits of the coax testing.


----------



## jimlenz

"LoweBoy" said:


> I was asking VOS. None of what I asked really pertained to your specific issues. I was looking for the limits of the coax testing.


Thanks. Just at a loss on what to do. Not sure if my setup is correct or not. If it is finding out how to increase performance. Thanks


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Is this something I should do or is there a better option to better my system?





jimlenz said:


> Thanks. Just at a loss on what to do. Not sure if my setup is correct or not. If it is finding out how to increase performance. Thanks


I'm currently waiting to see more of your setup, because I can suggest what changes you should make. Yes changing over to 4-ways looks like something that will help, but if this only changes your 57 to 54, you still aren't in a range that I would be happy with.


----------



## jimlenz

"veryoldschool" said:


> I'm currently waiting to see more of your setup, because I can suggest what changes you should make. Yes changing over to 4-ways looks like something that will help, but if this only changes your 57 to 54, you still aren't in a range that I would be happy with.


What else in my setup do you need to see? I posted a number of additional pictures earlier and hoped that was enough.

If that is not the case let me know what else I need to provide and will do it. Thanks.


----------



## jimlenz

"jimlenz" said:


> What else in my setup do you need to see? I posted a number of additional pictures earlier and hoped that was enough.
> 
> If that is not the case let me know what else I need to provide and will do it. Thanks.


I am referring to my 12:24 post with additional pics and detail


----------



## Davenlr

jimlenz said:


> Here are some more pictures.
> 
> The splitters have 3 connections to each. Still not sure exactly why there are 3 connections to each as I only have 5 boxes.
> 
> Hope this helps, if you need something else, let me know.


I couldnt tell from the size of the picture, but what are the three coax cables just hanging unconnected for? And looking at the splitters, do they have terminating caps on them or are they just open coax connectors? Cant really see that well.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Here are some more pictures.
> 
> 1. Another picture of gutter area
> 2. 2 cables going down wall.
> 3. Connection on house
> 4. 4 wires going into house
> 5. 4 wires from house are connected to the 4 slots on top of swim 16
> 6. The 3 cables on left side of swim 16 (see previous pictures) are connected into the 2 green splitters and 1 power adapter.
> 
> The splitters have 3 connections to each. Still not sure exactly why there are 3 connections to each as I only have 5 boxes.
> 
> Hope this helps, if you need something else, let me know.


For "some reason" [we both posted at the same minute] I didn't see these were posted until now. :shrug:

I see two things that could be "improved":
1) there are way too many open ports on those splitters. All used ports should have terminations on them.
2) you have no need/use for 8-way splitters, so changing to a 2-way on one side and a 4-way on the other will improve your loss.
Since you have "5 boxes", you should have five coax runs from the splitters, which it looks like you have.
How is your CCK currently connected? Is there another splitter connected to it?


----------



## jimlenz

"Davenlr" said:


> I couldnt tell from the size of the picture, but what are the three coax cables just hanging unconnected for? And looking at the splitters, do they have terminating caps on them or are they just open coax connectors? Cant really see that well.


There are 4 cables not connected. I have 2 other rooms that are cabled but do not have boxes. They were originally connected to my zinwell 16 but the tech disconnected as they are not being used.

On the 2 8 way splitters, the 5 empty slots do not have anything covering them. Is this what you are referring to? Thanks.


----------



## Davenlr

jimlenz said:


> On the 2 8 way splitters, the 5 empty slots do not have anything covering them. Is this what you are referring to? Thanks.


Yes. Every unused connector on the splitter(s) need a 75 ohm terminating resistor screwed onto them.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> For "some reason" [we both posted at the same minute] I didn't see these were posted until now. :shrug:
> 
> I see two things that could be "improved":
> 1) there are way too many open ports on those splitters. All used ports should have terminations on them.
> 2) you have no need/use for 8-way splitters, so changing to a 2-way on one side and a 4-way on the other will improve your loss.
> Since you have "5 boxes", you should have five coax runs from the splitters, which it looks like you have.
> How is your CCK currently connected? Is there another splitter connected to it?


To respond to your comments.

1. It seems like the tech should have put terminating resistor onto each empty port. Where do I purchase these?

2. There are 6 cables connected, 3 on each side. I am not sure what the 6th is for as I only have 5 boxes. What kind of 2 and 4 way connectors should I get? If I get a 2 and 4, and since there are 3 on each now, how do I know which 1 cable to move to the 4 when I purchase it?

The CCK is connected wirelessly to my hr20 in my house. There are 2 cabled connections from the hr20 to the WCCK.

Thanks again for all your help, I really appreciate it.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> To respond to your comments.
> 
> 1. It seems like the tech should have put terminating resistor onto each empty port. Where do I purchase these?
> 
> 2. There are 6 cables connected, 3 on each side. I am not sure what the 6th is for as I only have 5 boxes. What kind of 2 and 4 way connectors should I get? If I get a 2 and 4, and since there are 3 on each now, how do I know which 1 cable to move to the 4 when I purchase it?
> 
> *The CCK is connected wirelessly to my hr20 in my house. There are 2 cabled connections from the hr20 to the WCCK. *
> 
> Thanks again for all your help, I really appreciate it.
> 
> Jim


Not quite sure what you mean by this "but" you shouldn't be connecting the CCK wirelessly to your HR20 [at all] and I hope that the count at the splitters, is five coax to receivers, and one to the CCK.
Terminators can be bought most places that have this [home depot/lowes, radioshack, etc.]
The green labeled splitters are a bit harder to find. Solid Signal is one place, but your "tech" should be providing them.
From what "I can figure" [through the internet] changing over to a 2-way on one leg with the HR34 and another receiver [DVR] and a 4-way on the other leg, for the CCK and the rest of your receivers, is the best option and will drop your loss down to within range. I'd expect high forties to low fifties, after making these changes.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> Not quite sure what you mean by this "but" I'd now guess that the count at the splitters, is five coax to receivers, and one to the CCK.
> Terminators can be bought most places that have this [home depot/lowes, radioshack, etc.]
> The green labeled splitters are a bit harder to find. Solid Signal is one place, but your "tech" should be providing them.
> From what "I can figure" [through the internet] changing over to a 2-way on one leg with the HR34 and another receiver [DVR] and a 4-way on the other leg, for the CCK and the rest of your receivers, is the best option and will drop your loss down to within range. I'd expect high forties to low fifties, after making these changes.


I did find the 2 way and 4 way splitters at Solid Signal which I can purchase. I am not real skilled at this but how do I figure out which boxes are on each one. I assume, if I turn on all the tv's, disconnect one and whatever tv goes out, that is that one? Probably should figure out a way to label them for future reference.

If I do this, I will not need any terminating caps. If I used two 4 ways would that make much difference? The reason I ask is that I may be adding another receiver in the near future? Not sure at this point when, but that may happen.

Thanks again.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I did find the 2 way and 4 way splitters at Solid Signal which I can purchase. I am not real skilled at this but how do I figure out which boxes are on each one. I assume, if I turn on all the tv's, disconnect one and whatever tv goes out, that is that one? Probably should figure out a way to label them for future reference.
> 
> If I do this, I will not need any terminating caps. If I used two 4 ways would that make much difference? The reason I ask is that I may be adding another receiver in the near future? Not sure at this point when, but that may happen.
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> Jim


Think you answered your own question "lots of running around" :lol:
As to "maybe" adding another receiver, there are at least a couple of ways to do this.
Since your current loss is so high, I would first want to address this.
Does your CCK have two coax ports?
If so, then it can be configured in a pass through mode, so it doesn't require a coax for itself, but can be inline with a receiver. I'm currently doing this with mine.
If it doesn't have two, then it isn't a wireless CCK, but if/when you need to add another receiver, I would use a second 2-way splitter and connect it to the 2-way splitter you may get now. I'd still keep the HR34 on the first splitter, run another receiver & CCK off the second splitter. This way, the HR34 has the least loss, the double splitter is no more than a 4-way, but this would only effect the receiver connected to it, and all the others on the "other side" wouldn't be affected at all.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> Think you answered your own question "lots of running around" :lol:
> As to "maybe" adding another receiver, there are at least a couple of ways to do this.
> Since your current loss is so high, I would first want to address this.
> Does your CCK have two coax ports?
> If so, then it can be configured in a pass through mode, so it doesn't require a coax for itself, but can be inline with a receiver. I'm currently doing this with mine.
> If it doesn't have two, then it isn't a wireless CCK, but if/when you need to add another receiver, I would use a second 2-way splitter and connect it to the 2-way splitter you may get now. I'd still keep the HR34 on the first splitter, run another receiver & CCK off the second splitter. This way, the HR34 has the least loss, the double splitter is no more than a 4-way, but this would only effect the receiver connected to it, and all the others on the "other side" wouldn't be affected at all.


I looked at the CCK and there are two ports and two wires connected to the back. One is thicker and one is thinner. The thinner one is connected to the deca. The other end of the deca has a coax going into the receiver and then an ethernet going from the deca into the receiver also.

Another thing that may be a problem is that the other coax that connects into the deca goes into my surge protector. There are a total of 4 coax going into my surge protector, not sure what they all are.

This is an hr20-700. Is this connected properly with the deca and cck?

Is there a diagram how the hr20-700 with deca and cck should be connected? I am wondering if this is done incorrectly?

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I looked at the CCK and there are two ports and two wires connected to the back. One is thicker and one is thinner. The thinner one is connected to the deca. The other end of the deca has a coax going into the receiver and then an ethernet going from the deca into the receiver also.
> 
> Another thing that may be a problem is that the other coax that connects into the deca goes into *my surge protector*. There are a total of 4 coax going into my surge protector, not sure what they all are.
> 
> This is an hr20-700. * Is this connected properly with the deca and cck? *
> 
> Is there a diagram how the hr20-700 with deca and cck should be connected? I am wondering if this is done incorrectly?
> 
> Jim


So don't connect any of the DirecTV coax through a surge protector.
At the HR20, it isn't connected "as well as" it could. It needs to have a filter between the DECA and the HR20, but "better yet" it should have its own white DECA, and not be sharing the CCK.
Now this brings up: why or where does the sixth coax go from the splitters?

This is how the CCK & HR20-700 should look:


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> So don't connect any of the DirecTV coax through a surge protector.
> At the HR20, it isn't connected "as well as" it could. It needs to have a filter between the DECA and the HR20, but "better yet" it should have its own white DECA, and not be sharing the CCK.
> Now this brings up: why or where does the sixth coax go from the splitters?
> 
> This is how the CCK & HR20-700 should look:


Good question, isn't it. I guess I can take them out one by one and see if it has any effect on the boxes? That would be one way. Any other thoughts?

On getting the hr20-700 connected properly with the deca and cck. I will disconnect everything from the surge protector but how do you suggest I get this connected properly? I don't have a white deca or filter? I also noticed on the white deca that the link button is amber with the other two green. Not sure what that means.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I also noticed on the white deca that the link button is amber with the other two green. Not sure what that means.


I do and it ain't good.
You really need to sort out all of this cabling.
The amber cLink LED is because you have reduced RF performance on the DECA. This can come from: too much noise, and/or too low a signal level.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> I do and it ain't good.
> You really need to sort out all of this cabling.
> The amber cLink LED is because you have reduced RF performance on the DECA. This can come from: too much noise, and/or too low a signal level.


I went through and disconnected all 6 of the coax connected into the splitters. When I removed 5 of them, I received a 771 error, which means that cord went to that box. The 6th one didn't do that to any box. However, with the 6th one disconnected, I ran info and test and received an error that swim was not available because there is not enough tuners. I connected the 6th one back in and we are back to normal. So, I still don't understand what the 6th one is for? It did not disconnect the cck either.

On the cck, the light is mostly green but on occasion it goes to amber.

Not sure what to do at this point? I will get the 2 way and 4 way but when I separate the 5 boxes as you state below, the 6th one, which splitter should it go on? I assume, the one with the 3 other boxes? Since there are 8 connections now, there are 3 on each. If I go to 2 and 4, one has to go off the one where there will be two. Confused yet?

Anyway, I am confused. Thoughts?


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I went through and disconnected all 6 of the coax connected into the splitters. When I removed 5 of them, I received a 771 error, which means that cord went to that box. The 6th one didn't do that to any box. * However, with the 6th one disconnected, I ran info and test and received an error that swim was not available because there is not enough tuners. I connected the 6th one back in and we are back to normal.* So, I still don't understand what the 6th one is for? It did not disconnect the cck either.
> 
> On the cck, the light is mostly green but on occasion it goes to amber.
> 
> Not sure what to do at this point? I will get the 2 way and 4 way but when I separate the 5 boxes as you state below, the 6th one, which splitter should it go on? I assume, the one with the 3 other boxes? Since there are 8 connections now, there are 3 on each. If I go to 2 and 4, one has to go off the one where there will be two. Confused yet?
> 
> Anyway, I am confused. Thoughts?


There is something fishy here.
At first I expected it to have been from the PI, but checking your photo, shows you're using the PWR connector for the PI.
Disconnecting any of the coax, should have given you what you saw on the first five, or nothing at all. There is nothing that can be connected to a splitter that enables tuners, and if not connected disables them.
The PI is the closest thing, but if it was disconnected 771a messages will show.
I would like to see this repeated and more info for exactly what this message is.


----------



## veryoldschool

How about some more photos of the cables at the splitters?

It kind of looks like the PI is connected to the one on the right, which then brings up the question of what's connected to the SWiM-16's middle connector?


----------



## jimlenz

I unplugged the 6th coax and ran info and test on all 5 receivers. I did not receive the error regarding swim not aviailable due to not enough connections. However, what I did was reset one of the dvr's and it would not connect. When it go to step 2, it was searching for signal. When I plugged the 6th one in, it was able to connect, no problem.

I took a few more pictures for you. The power inverter is connected to the 'middle' outlet on the swim 16, not to either of the splitters. I did follow the coax to make sure where it was connected.

Disregard all the non-connected wires. Is there something I should be doing with these? Caps or just leave as is. 

Talk about confusing. I do know that when I disconnected the other 5 coax cables from the splitters, one of the boxes did not work properly, it was giving the 771 error. 

Anyway, I did order the new splitters from solid signal, should get them later in the week and will install. 

Let me know if you have any other thoughts.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I unplugged the 6th coax and ran info and test on all 5 receivers. I did not receive the error regarding swim not aviailable due to not enough connections. However, what I did was reset one of the dvr's and it would not connect. When it go to step 2, it was searching for signal. When I plugged the 6th one in, it was able to connect, no problem.
> 
> I took a few more pictures for you. The power inverter is connected to the 'middle' outlet on the swim 16, not to either of the splitters. I did follow the coax to make sure where it was connected.
> 
> Disregard all the non-connected wires. Is there something I should be doing with these? Caps or just leave as is.
> 
> Talk about confusing. I do know that when I disconnected the other 5 coax cables from the splitters, one of the boxes did not work properly, it was giving the 771 error.
> 
> Anyway, I did order the new splitters from solid signal, should get them later in the week and will install.
> 
> Let me know if you have any other thoughts.


Sorry, but there still must be a mix up here.
The two shots of the SWiM-16 & splitters look identical to what was posted before and they look to even have the same labels.

The PI on the right sure looks like it run to the first port on the splitter on the right.
If this is what is going on, then this makes sense: "However, what I did was reset one of the dvr's and it would not connect. When it go to step 2, it was searching for signal. When I plugged the 6th one in, it was able to connect, no problem."
You must be running the PI through this "sixth" coax.

If in doubt, pull the power cord on the PI and then check your receivers.
Even with this sixth coax connected "I bet" you'll what happens with it removed.


----------



## veryoldschool

Just so we're on the same page here:










And the SWiM to splitter coax must be connected to the single port on the side of the 8-way splitters, which is on the top in this:


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> Sorry, but there still must be a mix up here.
> The two shots of the SWiM-16 & splitters look identical to what was posted before and they look to even have the same labels.
> 
> The PI on the right sure looks like it run to the first port on the splitter on the right.
> If this is what is going on, then this makes sense: "However, what I did was reset one of the dvr's and it would not connect. When it go to step 2, it was searching for signal. When I plugged the 6th one in, it was able to connect, no problem."
> You must be running the PI through this "sixth" coax.
> 
> If in doubt, pull the power cord on the PI and then check your receivers.
> Even with this sixth coax connected "I bet" you'll what happens with it removed.


No, these are all different pictures, look at the time stamp on them. Similar, yes, I wasn't sure what else you wanted pictures of. I must have misunderstood what exactly you wanted me to take additional pictures of. I will take more, just let me know.

I did take one more today, which is easier to see the PI and where it is connected. It is connected to the middle one on the left, just as your drawing in the post shows.

So you know, I did pull the power cord on the PI the other day when Directv wanted me to reset it and then reset all of the receivers. That is prior to the tech coming out and figuring out he had too many lines on each splitter.

Still, cannot figure out what the 6th one is for.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

Thanks, that shot makes it clear.
[again] there is no cable that if removed from the output of a splitter, will do anything more than cause one receiver to lose signal, as happened with your five coax.

Let also add the wildcard here of having none of the open ports terminated. 
This is such a no no that I have no experience troubleshooting this type of setup, and "might be" why the sixth coax is acting like it has.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> Thanks, that shot makes it clear.
> [again] there is no cable that if removed from the output of a splitter, will do anything more than cause one receiver to lose signal, as happened with your five coax.
> 
> Let also add the wildcard here of having none of the open ports terminated.
> This is such a no no that I have no experience troubleshooting this type of setup, and "might be" why the sixth coax is acting like it has.


To answer your first question, correct. all the 6th does is cause the 2nd tuner to cause problems on the boxes but does not shut off the box.

Let me install the 2 way and 4 way later this week and see what happens to the setup. I also ordered terminators but not sure I will need them now. I will connect the 5 and leave the 6th out and see what happens. If it doesn't work right then I will connect the 6th one to the 4 way.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> To answer your first question, correct. all the 6th does is cause the 2nd tuner to cause problems on the boxes but does not shut off the box.
> 
> Let me install the 2 way and 4 way later this week and see what happens to the setup. I also ordered terminators but not sure I will need them now. I will connect the 5 and leave the 6th out and see what happens. If it doesn't work right then I will connect the 6th one to the 4 way.


For the cost [a couple of bucks] of terminators, it would be worth [to me] removing the sixth coax and terminating all open ports.
The open ports cause both the SWiM & DECA signals to bounce/reflect back into the system. Terminations [loads really] stop this.
A long coax with nothing on the other end, can effect the bouncing.

SWiM & DECA gets fairly complex running through a SWiM-16, and it would be interesting to run your original tests, on a properly terminated system.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> For the cost [a couple of bucks] of terminators, it would be worth [to me] removing the sixth coax and terminating all open ports.
> The open ports cause both the SWiM & DECA signals to bounce/reflect back into the system. Terminations [loads really] stop this.
> A long coax with nothing on the other end, can effect the bouncing.
> 
> SWiM & DECA gets fairly complex running through a SWiM-16, and it would be interesting to run your original tests, on a properly terminated system.


I did order some terminators and will install them when received and rerun the tests and post. I will then remove the 6th one and see what happens and report back.

Is there anything with the coax's that were disconnected that I need to be concerned about? Since they are not connected at the other end, it shouldn't be a problem, but figured I would ask.

I believe I get them Thursday so will do this Thursday night. Should get the new splitters then also.

Thanks again for all your assistance. I really do appreciate it.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I did order some terminators and will install them when received and rerun the tests and post. I will then remove the 6th one and see what happens and report back.
> 
> Is there anything with the coax's that were disconnected that I need to be concerned about? Since they are not connected at the other end, it shouldn't be a problem, but figured I would ask.
> 
> I believe I get them Thursday so will do this Thursday night. Should get the new splitters then also.
> 
> Thanks again for all your assistance. I really do appreciate it.


What tests and in what order, I'll leave up to you, but "my interest" is in your current setup, with the sixth coax removed and terminations installed.
This is a fairly common install, so the results will be informative/helpful.
As for the disconnected coax, there isn't much to do/worry about, with them.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> What tests and in what order, I'll leave up to you, but "my interest" is in your current setup, with the sixth coax removed and terminations installed.
> This is a fairly common install, so the results will be informative/helpful.
> As for the disconnected coax, there isn't much to do/worry about, with them.


That will be the first test I do and will post results. I will then deal with the splitters and retest.

Also, I disconnected the wcck and other wires from the surge protector and verified that the wcck is setup exactly like the picture you posted yesterday. I also verified this is how it is shown to be setup in the manual. Though, based on your comments, there seems to be a better way. Do you have a diagram of how you are suggesting it be setup?


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> That will be the first test I do and will post results. I will then deal with the splitters and retest.
> 
> Also, I disconnected the wcck and other wires from the surge protector and verified that the wcck is setup exactly like the picture you posted yesterday. I also verified this is how it is shown to be setup in the manual. Though, based on your comments, there seems to be a better way. Do you have a diagram of how you are suggesting it be setup?


The picture I posted, where your receiver has a white DECA, and the CCK is connected using its two connectors, might be your best choice. I use mine this way and what it does is not add anymore loss to the SAT signals.
You could do the same thing by connecting it to the main splitter, using a "spare" coax.
Since you're thinking about adding another receiver, it would be worth not using another port on the splitter for "just' the CCK.


----------



## jimlenz

Attached are four pictures of the coax stats on my HR34. The first two are without the 75ohm transistors on the 10 open ports on the 2 splitters. 

The final two pictures are with the 75ohm transistors installed. I really do not see any difference with these installed. 

I do not have the splitters yet, will get those tomorrow so will see what the test is like when those are installed. 

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

"Resistors" not transistors are used in the terminations.
In the matrix of PHY Mesh, it looks like the nodes have changed from your earlier picture, but the values are about the same.

Changing the splitters will drop some of the loss, and these "should improve", but there may need to be some more work, as even low fifties just aren't that good, "but" should improve your Mesh.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> "Resistors" not transistors are used in the terminations.
> In the matrix of PHY Mesh, it looks like the nodes have changed from your earlier picture, but the values are about the same.
> 
> Changing the splitters will drop some of the loss, and these "should improve", but there may need to be some more work, as even low fifties just aren't that good, "but" should improve your Mesh.


Yes, you are correct, my error.

If the splitters don't do anything, what is the next step.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Yes, you are correct, my error.
> 
> If the splitters don't do anything, what is the next step.
> 
> Jim


The splitter "will do" something, but your next step will be "if they don't do enough", which then shifts to finding where the loss is coming from and trying to make changes for less of it.

While I know doing a "fancy layout" isn't very easy, if/when we get to this point, you'll need to guesstimate from each splitter, how long each coax is.

"Oh yeah" what about that mysterious "sixth coax"????

Have you removed it terminated the port and not had tuner errors???


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> The splitter "will do" something, but your next step will be "if they don't do enough", which then shifts to finding where the loss is coming from and trying to make changes for less of it.
> 
> While I know doing a "fancy layout" isn't very easy, if/when we get to this point, you'll need to guesstimate from each splitter, how long each coax is.
> 
> "Oh yeah" what about that mysterious "sixth coax"????
> 
> Have you removed it terminated the port and not had tuner errors???


Going to work on the sixth coax when the kids go to bed. Should have an update in a couple hours.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Going to work on the sixth coax when the kids go to bed. Should have an update in a couple hours.
> 
> Jim


I'm kind of expecting the terminations to "cure" that problem, while I didn't have much hope for the loss/mesh problems.

Also the DECA networking pdf here has been changed/updated in hopes of helping to understand: http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=200024


----------



## Shades228

I have only read this page and VoS is much smarter than I am when it comes to the RF stuff but the only question I have is why does it look like you have a jumper cable with a ton of spool?


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> I'm kind of expecting the terminations to "cure" that problem, while I didn't have much hope for the loss/mesh problems.
> 
> Also the DECA networking pdf here has been changed/updated in hopes of helping to understand: http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=200024


Interesting development. I took the sixth unknown coax off but did not have a terminator for it. Still, I reset a couple boxes and ran system test with the only problems being the 48-190 home network interference error on the two upstairs boxes. The HR34 which has had this before and a hr20 that didnt before.

What is interesting is that the numbers are higher with 60's when I took the 6th coax out. Maybe you can better decipher the numbers. I will go out and by a resistor tomorrow and see if it makes a difference.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Interesting development. I took the sixth unknown coax off but did not have a terminator for it. Still, I reset a couple boxes and ran system test with the only problems being the 48-190 home network interference error on the two upstairs boxes. The HR34 which has had this before and a hr20 that didnt before.
> 
> *What is interesting is that the numbers are higher with 60's* when I took the 6th coax out. Maybe you can better decipher the numbers. I will go out and by a resistor tomorrow and see if it makes a difference.
> 
> Jim


I think what you're seeing is that "the numbers" do vary between tests.
This weekend I did some further testing for the pdf updating, and noticed the loss between two nodes increased by 3 dB, but the cabling hadn't changed "one bit" :lol:
Mid to high fifties, can read high fifties to low sixties just as easy.
Now if these readings were being taken by calibrated test equipment, I'd be "*****ing like hell", but instead I'm happy DirecTV engineering has given us what they have to get "some idea" of the status of our systems. 

With all the open ports, the SWiM signals were reflecting back and forth, which seems "reasonable" for the odd reaction to the "sixth coax". By terminating what you have, even with not all terminated [it seems] the signals have stabilized enough so the SWiM/receivers are no longer giving you the "very strange" error about tuners not being available.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> I think what you're seeing is that "the numbers" do vary between tests.
> This weekend I did some further testing for the pdf updating, and noticed the loss between two nodes increased by 3 dB, but the cabling hadn't changed "one bit" :lol:
> Mid to high fifties, can read high fifties to low sixties just as easy.
> Now if these readings were being taken by calibrated test equipment, I'd be "*****ing like hell", but instead I'm happy DirecTV engineering has given us what they have to get "some idea" of the status of our systems.
> 
> With all the open ports, the SWiM signals were reflecting back and forth, which seems "reasonable" for the odd reaction to the "sixth coax". By terminating what you have, even with not all terminated [it seems] the signals have stabilized enough so the SWiM/receivers are no longer giving you the "very strange" error about tuners not being available.


Tomorrow I will have the 2 way and 4 way splitters and will install them and all will be terminated. I will update you then.

I would still like to get the network issue taken care of.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Tomorrow I will have the 2 way and 4 way splitters and will install them and all will be terminated. I will update you then.
> 
> *I would still like to get the network issue taken care of. *
> 
> Jim


"And here I thought" that was the point of this endeavor. :lol:
Your installer hasn't done you any favors, so there has been some cleanup needed along the way.


----------



## krazyrs

with the wireless CCK we've had issues where just the small coax run that comes in the kit just needs to be replaced with RG-6

dunno if that's the problem for your network though.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> "And here I thought" that was the point of this endeavor. :lol:
> Your installer hasn't done you any favors, so there has been some cleanup needed along the way.


Ok, I'm back and I think you are going to be shocked by the results. I installed the 2 way and 4 way with the 5 coax. No 771 issues.

Attached are the screen shots for the coax stats. The levels are significantly reduced.

Note that when I ran the test on the hr34, I continue to get the Network interference error on both of the upstairs tv's

I think the phy levels are back where they should be? Now, back to the original post, what is the next step on the wcck?

Thanks

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Ok, I'm back and I think you are going to be shocked by the results. I installed the 2 way and 4 way with the 5 coax. No 771 issues.
> 
> Attached are the screen shots for the coax stats. The levels are significantly reduced.
> 
> Note that when I ran the test on the hr34, I continue to get the Network interference error on both of the upstairs tv's
> 
> I think the phy levels are back where they should be? Now, back to the original post, what is the next step on the wcck?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jim


Node 2 still has a problem. Which receiver/location is Node 2?


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> Node 2 still has a problem. Which receiver/location is Node 2?


How do I know which receiver/location is node 2?


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> How do I know which receiver/location is node 2?


The first screen calls out:
node 2 Master bedroom HMC N/A
^
It may now be a good idea to run this test from other locations.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> The first screen calls out:
> node 2 Master bedroom HMC N/A
> ^
> It may now be a good idea to run this test from other locations.


Yes, that is my hr34 and where I am having the network interference problem. If I remember correctly it will not measure the device you are doing the test from?

How can I run the test from other boxes? It is my understanding that my hr20 and hr20 will not do this, only the hr34.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Yes, that is my hr34 and where I am having the network interference problem. If I remember correctly it will not measure the device you are doing the test from?
> 
> How can I run the test from other boxes? It is my understanding that my hr20 and hr20 will not do this, only the hr34.


"Right", and I forgot all your others have white DECAs.
Check "their" LEDs and make sure the cLink is solid green.
Next it to move the HR34 to another port off the 2-way and repeat the tests.
The last step would be to move it to the other SWiM output [which may mean moving/disconnecting others] and run the test from there.

What I'm trying to get you to do is:
check the coax that the HR34 is using now, then check the HR34 "itself" by testing on the other side, where you already have good readings.
It is so much easier when this test can be run on more than one receiver.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> "Right", and I forgot all your others have white DECAs.
> Check "their" LEDs and make sure the cLink is solid green.
> Next it to move the HR34 to another port off the 2-way and repeat the tests.
> The last step would be to move it to the other SWiM output [which may mean moving/disconnecting others] and run the test from there.
> 
> What I'm trying to get you to do is:
> check the coax that the HR34 is using now, then check the HR34 "itself" by testing on the other side, where you already have good readings.
> It is so much easier when this test can be run on more than one receiver.


Okay, I checked the 3 boxes with white decas and the link is green.

I switched the hr34 and hr20 on the 2 way and here is the results.

If you need me to move the hr34 and hr20 to the other side and switch the other 3 boxes to this side, I can do that next. If needed. Of course wouldn't it be easier to switch the one coax that is connected to the swim on each instead of each of the connectors?

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Okay, I checked the 3 boxes with white decas and the link is green.
> 
> I switched the hr34 and hr20 on the 2 way and here is the results.
> 
> If you need me to move the hr34 and hr20 to the other side and switch the other 3 boxes to this side, I can do that next. If needed. Of course wouldn't it be easier to switch the one coax that is connected to the swim on each instead of each of the connectors?
> 
> Jim


So Node 2 is still the problem with Phy Mesh below 220.
"Hopefully" this test was done by moving the receiver and not the coax. If so then this isn't a bad coax drop.
Next is to move it [not the coax at the splitter] to the other side [yeah PITA] so you can connect it to a "known good" splitter/coax group.
If only the node 2 has these low numbers, then since the HR34 is reporting good numbers between all the other nodes, it looks like the HR34 is what is having the problem.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> So Node 2 is still the problem with Phy Mesh below 220.
> "Hopefully" this test was done by moving the receiver and not the coax. If so then this isn't a bad coax drop.
> Next is to move it [not the coax at the splitter] to the other side [yeah PITA] so you can connect it to a "known good" splitter/coax group.
> If only the node 2 has these low numbers, then since the HR34 is reporting good numbers between all the other nodes, it looks like the HR34 is what is having the problem.


I misunderstood you, I only moved the coax. If you want me to move the receiver, I will do that now. I assume, I will switch it with the one that is on the same splitter? Do you want me to do this first before I move to the other side.

Jim


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> So Node 2 is still the problem with Phy Mesh below 220.
> "Hopefully" this test was done by moving the receiver and not the coax. If so then this isn't a bad coax drop.
> Next is to move it [not the coax at the splitter] to the other side [yeah PITA] so you can connect it to a "known good" splitter/coax group.
> If only the node 2 has these low numbers, then since the HR34 is reporting good numbers between all the other nodes, it looks like the HR34 is what is having the problem.


Okay, I think I got this right. I switched the hr34 and hr20 that were on the same 2 way splitter. Here are the results.


----------



## veryoldschool

I think you're having problems with the coax on this leg of the SWiM.
Here are your latest tests, where you started with only node 2 having problems [bottom], and then with the swap of locations, you now have node 0 and node 2 with problems [top]:


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> I think you're having problems with the coax on this leg of the SWiM.
> Here are your latest tests, where you started with only node 2 having problems [bottom], and then with the swap of locations, you now have node 0 and node 2 with problems [top]:


Guess I am not sure what to do at this point. I know that the two boxes that are on this splitter are the farthest away from the swim16, so there is more coax run. Also, this is the oldest coax in the house, though only 8 years old. The runs for the other splitter, which include my living room and 2 boxes in the basement, were put in 3 years ago. Not sure if this makes a difference.

Any suggestions at this point?


----------



## jimlenz

jimlenz said:


> Guess I am not sure what to do at this point. I know that the two boxes that are on this splitter are the farthest away from the swim16, so there is more coax run. Also, this is the oldest coax in the house, though only 8 years old. The runs for the other splitter, which include my living room and 2 boxes in the basement, were put in 3 years ago. Not sure if this makes a difference.
> 
> Any suggestions at this point?


One other thing. If it is a coax problem, how do you know if it is in the run from the wall to the splitter or from the box to the wall or both? Is there any other tests for this?

By having these issues on the node, is that what is causing the network interference problem?


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> One other thing. If it is a coax problem, how do you know if it is in the run from the wall to the splitter or from the box to the wall or both? Is there any other tests for this?
> 
> By having these issues on the node, is that what is causing the network interference problem?


One of the things here is that by working with these two coax, you've caused another one to have this problem.
It sounds like you may have wall plates, so check every connection, at the splitter, at and behind the wall plates and the coax between the wall and the receivers. You may find this is all coming from loose connectors. These don't have to be "tight", but "snug" where with a 7/16 wrench, you feel the connectors "bottom out" as the mate and you don't need to go any tighter.
"Old cable" may not be the problem, but poor connectors on the coax can be.
Also the barrel in the wall plate might be it too.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> One of the things here is that by working with these two coax, you've caused another one to have this problem.
> It sounds like you may have wall plates, so check every connection, at the splitter, at and behind the wall plates and the coax between the wall and the receivers. You may find this is all coming from loose connectors. These don't have to be "tight", but "snug" where with a 7/16 wrench, you feel the connectors "bottom out" as the mate and you don't need to go any tighter.
> "Old cable" may not be the problem, but poor connectors on the coax can be.
> Also the barrel in the wall plate might be it too.


Yes, I do have wall plates in both of the rooms. I did check the connections to the wall and to the boxes and they are tight. Should I open up the wall plate to ensure connections are tight in there?

Any reason to replace the coax from box to wall?


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Yes, I do have wall plates in both of the rooms. I did check the connections to the wall and to the boxes and they are tight. Should I open up the wall plate to ensure connections are tight in there?
> 
> Any reason to replace the coax from box to wall?


There can always be "a reason", but one of them was good before you played with it today, so I'd hold off for now and keep looking checking, like behind the wall plates.

These longer coax are offset by using only a 2-way, verses the 4-way on the other side. This is about equal to 50' of coax, so it doesn't [yet] sound like a problem, and your losses aren't enough to show it to be. The Phy Mesh is looking at the quality of the signal, and noise degrades this, so snugging everything is a good start. Next would be changing connectors because they're worn out, and starting with the ones in the wall plates.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> There can always be "a reason", but one of them was good before you played with it today, so I'd hold off for now and keep looking checking, like behind the wall plates.
> 
> These longer coax are offset by using only a 2-way, verses the 4-way on the other side. This is about equal to 50' of coax, so it doesn't [yet] sound like a problem, and your losses aren't enough to show it to be. The Phy Mesh is looking at the quality of the signal, and noise degrades this, so snugging everything is a good start. Next would be changing connectors because they're worn out, and starting with the ones in the wall plates.


I looked behind the wall plates in both rooms on this 2 way and everything was tight, cabling looked good.

I ran the test again but looks no different.

I can go buy coax tomorrow for the runs from the box to the wall plate, if you think that is something I should do.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I looked behind the wall plates in both rooms on this 2 way and everything was tight, cabling looked good.
> 
> I ran the test again but looks no different.
> 
> I can go buy coax tomorrow for the runs from the box to the wall plate, if you think that is something I should do.


So these results now match your first results of today [plus 1]

Before going out and buying cable.

Move the HR34 over to the other side of the SWiM and run the tests from there.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> So these results now match your first results of today [plus 1]
> 
> Before going out and buying cable.
> 
> Move the HR34 over to the other side of the SWiM and run the tests from there.


If I move the hr34 over to the other side, physically move the unit, not just move the coax, correct? Do i need to reconnect the other box back with the hr 34 was? I did that on the last test but wanted to save me some time.


----------



## jimlenz

I had a thought, not necessarily related to moving the hr34 but with the wcck. 

My router is in my office. I used to have a directv box in here so it is wired from here to where the swim was. There are 4 extra cables down there, 2 of them were for this room while 2 others were for another room. 

is there anyway to connect the cck to my router and connect coax to the wall to the cck? Of course, then I would have to find the right connection of the 4 and connect that to the 4 way, which has one slot left?

Just a thought.


----------



## veryoldschool

For the moment, let's just focus on moving the HR34 "physically" to the other side.
The point of this is to connect it where the cables have reported being good.

If we wander too much, we won't get this narrowed down, and we've already had a side step when the second node acted up.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> For the moment, let's just focus on moving the HR34 "physically" to the other side.
> The point of this is to connect it where the cables have reported being good.
> 
> If we wander too much, we won't get this narrowed down, and we've already had a side step when the second node acted up.


I will work on this in the morning. going to be a pain as I have to balance this out right. Do i really have to move 3 boxes? If I move the 34 on to the 4 way, I can only have 1 other box on there which means I have to move 2 off of their. I only have a 2 way on the other side. Can i just disconnect 2 on the 4 way and put the hr34 there or do I need to move all the boxes?


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> For the moment, let's just focus on moving the HR34 "physically" to the other side.
> The point of this is to connect it where the cables have reported being good.
> 
> If we wander too much, we won't get this narrowed down, and we've already had a side step when the second node acted up.


Okay, I decided to just do this tonight so I can get it done. I physically moved the hr34 to where my hr20-100 on the 4 way was located. Here are the tests.

Not sure if they are good or bad.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Okay, I decided to just do this tonight so I can get it done. I physically moved the hr34 to where my hr20-100 on the 4 way was located. Here are the tests.
> 
> Not sure if they are good or bad.
> 
> Jim


Those look good enough to pass the system test.


----------



## Shades228

Have you tried moving all of the HD DVR's go on the 1x4 and then have the HR34 without a splitter?


----------



## veryoldschool

Shades228 said:


> Have you tried moving all of the HD DVR's go on the 1x4 and then have the HR34 without a splitter?


"Right now" it does look like the coax on the side that the HR34 was at first [with the 2-way] "needs some help".


----------



## Shades228

veryoldschool said:


> "Right now" it does look like the coax on the side that the HR34 was at first [with the 2-way] "needs some help".


Seeing all those wires that are using coax joiners I'm wondering if the cable to the HR34 is a solid cable or if there's a joiner in there as well.


----------



## veryoldschool

For those following this,
The initial problem was a system test error.
The first thing to check are the Phy Levels, which showed high loss.
The was addressed by changing splitters with smaller splitters.

With the Phy Levels within range, the Phy Mesh still had some low numbers, which still trigger the system test error.

Low Mesh rates with levels within range come from a low signal to noise ratio.

"Noise" can come from damaged, worn out, connectors, barrels, coax, etc.

There is also a change coming to the test itself as seen here where the HR34 is connected exactly the same:


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> For those following this,
> The initial problem was a system test error.
> The first thing to check are the Phy Levels, which showed high loss.
> The was addressed by changing splitters with smaller splitters.
> 
> With the Phy Levels within range, the Phy Mesh still had some low numbers, which still trigger the system test error.
> 
> Low Mesh rates with levels within range come from a low signal to noise ratio.
> 
> "Noise" can come from damaged, worn out, connectors, barrels, coax, etc.
> 
> There is also a change coming to the test itself as seen here where the HR34 is connected exactly the same:


I continue to work on replacing the barrels and jumpers around the house but did so in my living room, which is connected to the 4 way splitter. When I took off the barrel, the wire was just hanging there. I had a couple other connectors so I searched for the one that worked for this receiver, replaced the barrel and jumper and got this receiver working again.

When I ran the coax stats, the mesh rates increased. I may not be seeing this right so I leave it up to you.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I continue to work on replacing the barrels and jumpers around the house but did so in my living room, which is connected to the 4 way splitter. When I took off the barrel, the wire was just hanging there. I had a couple other connectors so I searched for the one that worked for this receiver, replaced the barrel and jumper and got this receiver working again.


 This work is showing improvements.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> This work is showing improvements.


Went to check out another receiver, on the 4 way and found that the coax was connected through the surge protector. I took that out and connected it properly.

Also, I did notice something different about the way this was connected. Not only is there a deca but there is a red connector. Deca and red connector going to splitter into the wall. This is an hr20-700.

Any reason why this is like this?

Jim


----------



## Shades228

jimlenz said:


> Went to check out another receiver, on the 4 way and found that the coax was connected through the surge protector. I took that out and connected it properly.
> 
> Also, I did notice something different about the way this was connected. Not only is there a deca but there is a red connector. Deca and red connector going to splitter into the wall. This is an hr20-700.
> 
> Any reason why this is like this?
> 
> Jim


This looks like a DECA that was setup for internet connection before the new ones came out. Is there a PI connected to this DECA?


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Went to check out another receiver, on the 4 way and found that the coax was connected through the surge protector. I took that out and connected it properly.
> 
> Also, I did notice something different about the way this was connected. Not only is there a deca but there is a red connector. Deca and red connector going to splitter into the wall. This is an hr20-700.
> 
> Any reason why this is like this?
> 
> Jim


This looks like the installer mixed up your HR20-700 with a HR20-100.

Your setup should look like this:










The coax going to the left should connect directly to your wall plate


----------



## jimlenz

Yes I think he did. I disconnected all this and connected the deca correct and everything works fine.

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Yes I think he did. I disconnected all this and connected the deca correct and everything works fine.
> 
> Jim


Maybe time to run "the tests" again.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> Maybe time to run "the tests" again.


I checked on the connection in the final room connected to the 4 way. Once again, I had it connected through the apc unit. I disconnected and connected the coax directly. There is no barrel here as the wire is under my stairs and goes direct to the swim.

With respect to connecting through the surge protector, is the rule of thumb always?

Here are the updated tests. Looks like the numbers on node 1 went down. Wonder why that would be. They are down quite a bit from the last test.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I checked on the connection in the final room connected to the 4 way. Once again, I had it connected through the apc unit. I disconnected and connected the coax directly. There is no barrel here as the wire is under my stairs and goes direct to the swim.
> 
> With respect to connecting through the surge protector, is the rule of thumb always?
> 
> Here are the updated tests. Looks like the numbers on node 1 went down. Wonder why that would be. They are down quite a bit from the last test.


"Rule of thumb" never run a coax for DirecTV through a surge protector.
You got good losses now, and a Phy Mesh matrix that points to issues with the HR34.
You've gone well beyond what you should have for your cabling, and the losses show improvements from your work.

The HR34 should fail a system test with error 47 [again].
EVERY Phy Mesh number is great from any other node, "AND" to the HR34.
The low numbers only come from the HR34 to anything else.
IF THERE is was a cabling problem, then the other nodes back to the HR34 would also have low numbers.









If you read down the column on the left and compare the row across the top.
"1 to 2" is 217 [bad]
"2 to 1" is 243 [good]
or
1 to 5 is 222 [poor]
but 5 to 1 is 252 [great]

"If the cable was bad", both of these would be low numbers.
Run a system test to check for error.
You can retest this in say 12 hours, then if "this test" the same, roll back to the old software, re-run the system test and if it reports error 47, call DirecTV and plan to have this HR34 replaced.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> "Rule of thumb" never run a coax for DirecTV through a surge protector.
> You got good losses now, and a Phy Mesh matrix that points to issues with the HR34.
> You've gone well beyond what you should have for your cabling, and the losses show improvements from your work.
> 
> The HR34 should fail a system test with error 47 [again].
> EVERY Phy Mesh number is great from any other node, "AND" to the HR34.
> The low numbers only come from the HR34 to anything else.
> IF THERE is was a cabling problem, then the other nodes back to the HR34 would also have low numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you read down the column on the left and compare the row across the top.
> "1 to 2" is 217 [bad]
> "2 to 1" is 243 [good]
> or
> 1 to 5 is 222 [poor]
> but 5 to 1 is 252 [great]
> 
> "If the cable was bad", both of these would be low numbers.
> Run a system test to check for error.
> You can retest this in say 12 hours, then if "this test" the same, roll back to the old software, re-run the system test and if it reports error 47, call DirecTV and plan to have this HR34 replaced.


Ran system test, no errors. I will re-rerun tomorrow and see what happens. Mesh numbers are all between 210 and 225. Everything else is around 250 or so.

Be back tomorrow.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Ran system test, no errors. I will re-rerun tomorrow and see what happens. Mesh numbers are all between 210 and 225. Everything else is around 250 or so.
> 
> Be back tomorrow.


"Normally" 220 and below trigger the system error.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> "Normally" 220 and below trigger the system error.


Ran the test this morning, 208-227 with no errors. Everything else in the 250 range. I will run again tonight, if same scores, will roll back software and run the test again. Will report later tonight.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> "Normally" 220 and below trigger the system error.


I had one other thought. Maybe we can check other hr34's to see if they are also running low on the test? It could be the unit, software or something else? Just a thought.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I had one other thought. Maybe we can check other hr34's to see if they are also running low on the test? It could be the unit, software or something else? Just a thought.


I've got reports from two other HR34s that don't show this, so I'm leaning more and more to this one having a problem, but haven't determined how bad/important it is right now.

Here's another HR34 [node 3], with similar levels:


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> I've got reports from two other HR34s that don't show this, so I'm leaning more and more to this one having a problem, but haven't determined how bad/important it is right now.
> 
> Here's another HR34 [node 3], with similar levels:


Just did another test, all levels between 211-228.

Note that I received the 48-190 error, network interference problem.

Jim


----------



## jimlenz

VOS

The directv tech was out today and spent 2 hours at the house doing a number of things. 

1. He put the two 8 way splitters back to the swim. He said that the system needs these and I should not be using the 2 and 4 ways.

2. He disconnected the wireless CCK and connected the broadband deca to my router directly. Once he did this the errors did not occur on the hr34 and the mesh levels were in the 250's. 

3. Realigned the dish as the 103 even had low values.

4. Replaced the grounding block and redid the outside connections. Apparently, these were not to code. He got rid of the 2 ways and put all cables on a 4 way.

The HR34 works great with no errors and no errors on any other receiver. 

The only problem I have now is with my nomad and directv2pc. For some reason the status light keeps going bronze after about 5 minutes of being on. I have to reset and then it is able to see the units. Spent 45 minutes on with case management. Couldn't figure out the problem.

As for directv2pc, it is not seeing any receivers. Haven't spent much time on this but will work on this. 

Anyway, here is the update on the 48-190 error. Would appreciate your thoughts. 

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> VOS
> 
> The directv tech was out today and spent 2 hours at the house doing a number of things.
> 
> 1. He put the two 8 way splitters back to the swim. He said that the system needs these and I should not be using the 2 and 4 ways.
> 
> 2. He disconnected the wireless CCK and connected the broadband deca to my router directly. Once he did this the errors did not occur on the hr34 and the mesh levels were in the 250's.
> 
> 3. Realigned the dish as the 103 even had low values.
> 
> 4. Replaced the grounding block and redid the outside connections. Apparently, these were not to code. He got rid of the 2 ways and put all cables on a 4 way.
> 
> The HR34 works great with no errors and no errors on any other receiver.
> 
> The only problem I have now is with my nomad and directv2pc. For some reason the status light keeps going bronze after about 5 minutes of being on. I have to reset and then it is able to see the units. Spent 45 minutes on with case management. Couldn't figure out the problem.
> 
> As for directv2pc, it is not seeing any receivers. Haven't spent much time on this but will work on this.
> 
> Anyway, here is the update on the 48-190 error. Would appreciate your thoughts.
> 
> Jim



He clearly didn't know what he was talking about. Too bad he doesn't know that much about splitters.
Changing from a wireless to a hardwired BB DECA, shouldn't have made any difference. If you still have the wireless you could try it at this location and see if anything changes. The HR34 was the only thing reading low, which the change of BB DECA shouldn't have had any effect on.
peaking the dish had nothing to do with your error.
Nor was this house keeping at the ground blocks. Both of these are good to have been done, but had zero impact on what the problem was.
Nomad & DirecTV2PC "may" be a router problem, which resetting the router could help with.

What are the losses listed on the DECA test?
Do any of the connectors look to have been changed at the splitters?


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> He clearly didn't know what he was talking about. Too bad he doesn't know that much about splitters.
> Changing from a wireless to a hardwired BB DECA, shouldn't have made any difference. If you still have the wireless you could try it at this location and see if anything changes. The HR34 was the only thing reading low, which the change of BB DECA shouldn't have had any effect on.
> peaking the dish had nothing to do with your error.
> Nor was this house keeping at the ground blocks. Both of these are good to have been done, but had zero impact on what the problem was.
> Nomad & DirecTV2PC "may" be a router problem, which resetting the router could help with.
> 
> What are the losses listed on the DECA test?
> Do any of the connectors look to have been changed at the splitters?


No losses at all on the deca test, all looks well. The only connectors that were changed was back to the 8 ways. Also connected the bbdeca into the 4 way.

Tried to reset of router for the nomad and directv2pc....just figuring I am never going to get everything set right.

He took the wcck with him, so I cannot test.

Thanks

Jim


----------



## Shades228

Unfortunately tech's live by the "so and so told me" mentality when it comes to things outside of the training guidelines. I had to explain to my tech when he did the install that 8 way splitters were not as effecient as a 2 way or 4 way. He chose to argue with me for awhile and I eventually said to do it my way or I'd get someone else to complete it how I wanted it. He kept talking about how one tech used a tool and measured the signals and there weren't any changes. This is just one area where people don't follow the installation standards and use "field knowledge" that is wrong.


----------



## veryoldschool

"You know they haven't paid attention to the training when" [they don't have a clue of the material]:









Notice the source at the bottom.


----------



## jimlenz

I know this is not specifically on task with this thread but it did arise out of the fix, so I will ask the question.

First, I will say that I do plan to put the 2 way and 4 way splitter back on. Wasn't going to fight with the tech.

He installed the broadband deca into my router and then into my wall. I used to have a receiver in this room. If I decided to put a receiver back in this room, how would I connect the broadband deca. For example, I get a HR24, will i have to have a separate line going to the swim or can i run it off the same line as the bbdeca? The reason I ask is that I dont have an extra line in this room. Is this possible? Is it something I should even consider?

Thanks

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> I know this is not specifically on task with this thread but it did arise out of the fix, so I will ask the question.
> 
> First, I will say that I do plan to put the 2 way and 4 way splitter back on. Wasn't going to fight with the tech.
> 
> He installed the broadband deca into my router and then into my wall. I used to have a receiver in this room. If I decided to put a receiver back in this room, how would I connect the broadband deca. For example, I get a HR24, will i have to have a separate line going to the swim or can i run it off the same line as the bbdeca? The reason I ask is that I dont have an extra line in this room. Is this possible? Is it something I should even consider?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jim


You'll need to use a 2-way splitter between the wall and the receiver & DECA.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> You'll need to use a 2-way splitter between the wall and the receiver & DECA.


Okay so coax in wall to 2 way, then one cable to the receiver and then the other to the broadband deca?

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Okay so coax in wall to 2 way, then one cable to the receiver and then the other to the broadband deca?
> 
> Jim


Yep, and using a smaller splitter back at the SWiM, would mean your levels wouldn't be impacted as much too.


----------



## jimlenz

On the splitter when the tech was out he said that the wnc 4 way green splitter should not be used. Is this splitter an issue? I bought it from solid signal, it did not say wnc on the picture but that is what I got. Thanks.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> On the splitter when the tech was out he said that the wnc 4 way green splitter should not be used. Is this splitter an issue? I bought it from solid signal, it did not say wnc on the picture but that is what I got. Thanks.


The tech doesn't seem to know all that much.
If it has a green label, then it's fine. WNC is a second supplier is all.


----------



## jimlenz

veryoldschool said:


> The tech doesn't seem to know all that much.
> If it has a green label, then it's fine. WNC is a second supplier is all.


I went ahead and changed teh splitters back today. The first two graphics are with the 8 ways and the second two are with the 2 and 4 ways. You will note that the phy levels on node 0 went from 53 to 36 going to the 2 and 4 way splitters. It looks like the phy levels are better which is good, going from 53 to 35. As I understand anything in the 50's is bad? The mesh levels look pretty similar and seem to be fine.

Can you tell a difference between the two and are the results with the smaller splitters better?

Jim


----------



## veryoldschool

One of the level photos is too blurry to see anything.
What is important are the Mesh and not the levels "until" you have problems with Mesh.
Your Mesh look good.


----------



## jimlenz

Very good. Now that I look at it, it is blurry. The phy level on node 1 went from 53 to 42 with the change in splitters. All other phy levels show 36 on both pictures.


----------



## veryoldschool

jimlenz said:


> Very good. Now that I look at it, it is blurry. *The phy level on node 1 went from 53 to 42* with the change in splitters. All other phy levels show 36 on both pictures.


So you gained almost 10 dB more "headroom".


----------

