# SWM & SWM Splitters



## tekie99 (Sep 14, 2006)

Earl asked that I post this info in the forums.. but this is a website with swm directv approved splitters and also SWM-8 modules.

This is a link to the SWM 4-way splitter:
https://www.techtoolsupply.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2039

SWM-8
https://www.techtoolsupply.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2038


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

tekie99 said:


> Earl asked that I post this info in the forums.. but this is a website with swm directv approved splitters and also SWM-8 modules.
> 
> This is a link to the SWM 4-way splitter:
> https://www.techtoolsupply.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2039
> ...


Thank you for posting the links.

However, I don't think the splitters have been "approved" by DirecTV.
They may meet the specifications, and have been tested by the company...

But I think it was a little "wording magic" that makes it appear it was approved by DirecTV.


----------



## stephenC (Jul 18, 2007)

Does anyone know the price point of the SWMSlimline dish? I know it's not available yet, but I just wonder if it will be a better bargain than buying a SWM8.

TIA


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

stephenC said:


> Does anyone know the price point of the SWMSlimline dish? I know it's not available yet, but I just wonder if it will be a better bargain than buying a SWM8.
> 
> TIA


No idea at this point


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

the approved splitters start with "sws". for example "sws2", "sws4", or "sws8"
i have plenty of them if needed, along with swm8's for WAY less money.


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Thank you for posting the links.
> 
> However, I don't think the splitters have been "approved" by DirecTV.
> They may meet the specifications, and have been tested by the company...
> ...


Yes, and the SWM should not need anything special in the way of a splitter. The frequency band used by the SWM8 tops out at just below 2Ghz so any power-passing splitter operating from 2Mhz to 2-2.3Ghz should work fine.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

texasbrit said:


> Yes, and the SWM should not need anything special in the way of a splitter. The frequency band used by the SWM8 tops out at just below 2Ghz so any power-passing splitter operating from 2Mhz to 2-2.3Ghz should work fine.


that is correct, but all of the sws splitters have power passing on one leg so that the power inserter can be installed after the splitter. i know there are alot of other splitters out there that can be bought with one leg power pass, but the directv sws splitters are about the same price.


----------



## 1948GG (Aug 4, 2007)

dave29 said:


> that is correct, but all of the sws splitters have power passing on one leg so that the power inserter can be installed after the splitter. i know there are alot of other splitters out there that can be bought with one leg power pass, but the directv sws splitters are about the same price.


The power-passing port is key; it really does allow one LOTS of flexibility in the layout, especially when retrofitting installations (aka 'hybrid' installs with partial runs off a multiswitch, and some runs off the SWM8).


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

tekie99 said:


> Earl asked that I post this info in the forums.. but this is a website with swm directv approved splitters and also SWM-8 modules.
> 
> This is a link to the SWM 4-way splitter:
> https://www.techtoolsupply.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2039
> ...


Ouch, $384.99 w/ PI. That's a bit higher than I expected. I imagine the SWMLine dish will have a reasonable price point for the average customer.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

There is a lot of incorrect information being posted on forums about the SWM-8 unit and what constitutes a compatible splitter. It always amazes me how some people make up answers if they don't know the correct ones. I will be the first to tell you I by no means know everything about these units. Fortunately I have several contacts with both the engineering side and manufacturing side of the STS splitters. 

There are currently 2 splitters for the SWM-8 that have been DTV approved; the STS-2 and STS-4. The STS-8 is still problematic and not yet approved. There are plenty of non approved high frequency splitters available that will appear to initially work, however, when upcoming features become available, you will need to have the DTV approved splitters to be able to use them.


----------



## Michael D'Angelo (Oct 21, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> There is a lot of incorrect information being posted on forums about the SWM-8 unit and what constitutes a compatible splitter. It always amazes me how some people make up answers if they don't know the correct ones; just so they appear to know everything. I will be the first to tell you I by no means know everything about these units. Fortunately I have several contacts with both the engineering side and manufacturing side of the STS splitters.
> 
> There are currently 2 splitters for the SWM-8 that have been DTV approved; the STS-2 and STS-4. The STS-8 is still problematic and not yet approved. There are plenty of non approved high frequency splitters available that will appear to initially work, however, when upcoming features become available, you will need to have the DTV approved splitters to be able to use them.


Welcome to DBSTalk

What features would they be?

The splitters that I have been using for about 9 months now with my SWM and a few other member here are using has not caused one problem so far so I am wondering what problems you think they will cause.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

BMoreRavens said:


> Welcome to DBSTalk
> 
> What features would they be?
> 
> The splitters that I have been using for about 9 months now with my SWM and a few other member here are using has not caused one problem so far so I am wondering what problems you think they will cause.


I don't think their will be problems with your splitters; as long as the receiver can communicate with the SWM-8, it will probably work indefinitely. But upcoming features require the communication between receivers, that is where a special splitter is required.

There are rumors of DVR's being able to view shows from a DVR in another room.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

BMoreRavens said:


> Welcome to DBSTalk
> 
> What features would they be?
> 
> The splitters that I have been using for about 9 months now with my SWM and a few other member here are using has not caused one problem so far so I am wondering what problems you think they will cause.


Yep..
wondering where you are getting your info from? I've been in the SWM testing from the 1st tests and they have never said anything about an "approved splitter brand".. just the 2200mz requirement...


----------



## tekie99 (Sep 14, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> I don't think their will be problems with your splitters; as long as the receiver can communicate with the SWM-8, it will probably work indefinitely. But upcoming features require the communication between receivers, that is where a special splitter is required.
> 
> There are rumors of DVR's being able to view shows from a DVR in another room.


The rumors of being able to view shows from another dvr also went along with the requirement of having your DVR networked.. never anything regarding special switches. Makes no sense to even say that because how many directv customers have SWM's and STS-2's or 4's...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

tekie99 said:


> The rumors of being able to view shows from another dvr also went along with the requirement of having your DVR networked.. never anything regarding special switches. Makes no sense to even say that because how many directv customers have SWM's and STS-2's or 4's...


To take this a step further: think about what it would take for DVRs to "send" programing out the SAT feed. While a 2.5 MHz control signal is one thing, programing [at any reasonable speed] would be a nightmare.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

I realized as I hit the submit button of my original post that the majority of you have already drank the koolaid and were going to cast me off as not knowing what I'm talking about. In all fairness, it was my first post. I normally do not post in forums for this reason. I could have talked to the head of engineering at DTV and within a couple replies be assumed to not know what I'm talking about. I work for a company that requires tech support of the equipment we sell. I do in fact talk to the engineers and manufacturers of many different satellite distribution components, and do know what I'm talking about. When I don't know something, I will call the people who do know, not make up answers.

My post was for people new to the SWM-8 unit looking for info, not for the guys who have it already figured out and working.


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

What is special or what specs about the STS splitters make them unigue. I have been using plain Philips brand (9SDW5010GN/17) which has power passing on both legs at 5-2300 w/ my SWM-5 without any problems since last summer.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

swim-man8,

:welcome_s to the forum. I don't think anyone was questioning your knowledge of the SWM-8. It is very unlikely that the feature you spoke of - "There are rumors of DVR's being able to view shows from a DVR in another room" - has anything to do with the type of multiswitch. This feature (called MRV or Mult-Room Viewing) would rely on home networking from what I can tell.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

Doug Brott said:


> swim-man8,
> 
> :welcome_s to the forum. I don't think anyone was questioning your knowledge of the SWM-8. It is very unlikely that the feature you spoke of - "There are rumors of DVR's being able to view shows from a DVR in another room" - has anything to do with the type of multiswitch. This feature (called MRV or Mult-Room Viewing) would rely on home networking from what I can tell.


Thanks Doug. I feel like I've been here forever. I have been reading posts here forever but because of my fragile male ego have not posted


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

swim-man8
:welcome_s 

You very well may have contacts that are telling you things and thats great. However, we you start to call out others as kool-aid drinkers, well, ones credibility tends to go down the drain.


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

swim-man8 said:


> Thanks Doug. I feel like I've been here forever. I have been reading posts here forever but because of my fragile male ego have not posted


That's pretty funny. :lol:


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

RobertE said:


> swim-man8
> :welcome_s
> 
> You very well may have contacts that are telling you things and thats great. However, we you start to call out others as kool-aid drinkers, well, ones credibility tends to go down the drain.


I'm not calling everyone koolaid drinkers - only the ones that have drank it.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

swim-man8 said:


> ....
> 
> There are currently 2 splitters for the SWM-8 that have been DTV approved; the STS-2 and STS-4. The STS-8 is still problematic and not yet approved. There are plenty of non approved high frequency splitters available that will appear to initially work, however, when upcoming features become available, you will need to have the DTV approved splitters to be able to use them.


Let me add my welcome to DBSTalk!

Can you provide us with the relevant specs that make the STS-2, STS-4, and STS-8 "special" compared with the splitters that many of us have been using? Also, where's a good source for those splitters?


----------



## Rockaway1836 (Sep 26, 2007)

Radio Enginerd said:


> Ouch, $384.99 w/ PI. That's a bit higher than I expected. I imagine the SWMLine dish will have a reasonable price point for the average customer.


They are a bit less at Solid Signal

http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?main_cat=02&CAT=&PROD=SWM-8


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

HDTVsportsfan said:


> What is special or what specs about the STS splitters make them unigue. I have been using plain Philips brand (9SDW5010GN/17) which has power passing on both legs at 5-2300 w/ my SWM-5 without any problems since last summer.


I do not know the specifics of why the STS splitter differs from an ordinary splitter. My guess is that the isolation between ports has different circuitry. I don't know for sure though. I will call and see if I can get more in depth specs for you on the STS.


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

Rockaway1836 said:


> They are a bit less at Solid Signal
> 
> http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?main_cat=02&CAT=&PROD=SWM-8


Dave29 is selling the swm and pi shipped to you for $300.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> I'm not calling everyone koolaid drinkers - only the ones that have drank it.


That would be the "true believers" and most of us here try to deal in facts/specs.
The best way to get your point across would be to post the "data" so all of us will either learn something or be able to debate the issue.


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

swim-man8 said:


> I do not know the specifics of why the STS splitter differs from an ordinary splitter. My guess is that the isolation between ports has different circuitry. I don't know for sure though. I will call and see if I can get more in depth specs for you on the STS.


Thanks. It would be much appreciated.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

litzdog911 said:


> Let me add my welcome to DBSTalk!
> 
> Can you provide us with the relevant specs that make the STS-2, STS-4, and STS-8 "special" compared with the splitters that many of us have been using? Also, where's a good source for those splitters?


Thanks litzdog

Here are some sources for the STS:

http://www.weaknees.com/swm-directv.php

http://www.techtoolsupply.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2039

I'm sure they will become available at more places as the SWM units become more popular.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> That would be the "true believers" and most of us here try to deal in facts/specs.
> The best way to get your point across would be to post the "data" so all of us will either learn something or be able to debate the issue.


Ok - you guys are really making me feel bad for the koolaid comment.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> Thanks litzdog
> 
> Here are some sources for the STS:
> http://www.weaknees.com/swm-directv.php
> ...


From this link: the splitters are rated down to 2 MHz for the SWM control signal [Skywalker is only 5 MHz but passes the 2.5 MHz signal fine] AND had the power passing ports color coded as the SWM/PI do [red].


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> Ok - you guys are really making me feel bad for the koolaid comment.


Sure :lol:

But your next link has info that "we" can point to and "see", so you're not "all bad" [we're just a "tough crowd" here]. :lol:


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

One thing I noticed about the STS splitters show at Weeknees is the way the ports are positioned. If you use one of these outside, all your cables will be comming off of the splitter perpendicular to the wall of the house. Add in your drip loops and your going to have a nice big wad of cables sticking out from the side of your house. Granted, the side of your house is going to look like poo if your running 8 lines to the splitter anyway, but those are going to make a bad case worse.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

I can't say that I'm fond of the positioning of the ports either.


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

I don't see any reason that these splitters would be special, or that any bidirectional splitter with power passing on one leg (optional depending PI placement) should be less effective.

I would imagine that if MRV were possible via SWM instead of over your home network, that it would be a preferable solution. We do know that the SWM has an additional communications channel, and that the bandwidth assigned per SWM channel is significantly greater than a single transponders worth. 

Still, all that would require is a bidirectional splitter, which most are. Of course, DirecTV likes to only allow certain things as "approved" for little reason. Most recently PPC EX6XL connectors became the only approved compression fitting.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Rockaway1836 said:


> They are a bit less at Solid Signal
> 
> http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?main_cat=02&CAT=&PROD=SWM-8


Looks like Solid Signal has entered the game under $300 ...

Interesting thread this is ... be VERY interesting if there actually is any truth to the MRV over SWM reference ...


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

there is nothing special about the sws and sts splitters beside they only pass power on one leg and that the sws are approved by directv.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

Sixto said:


> Looks like Solid Signal has entered the game under $300 ...
> 
> Interesting thread this is ... be VERY interesting if there actually is any truth to the MRV over SWM reference ...


with shipping its roughly 305 from them


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

swim-man8 said:


> There is a lot of incorrect information being posted on forums about the SWM-8 unit and what constitutes a compatible splitter. It always amazes me how some people make up answers if they don't know the correct ones. I will be the first to tell you I by no means know everything about these units. Fortunately I have several contacts with both the engineering side and manufacturing side of the STS splitters.
> 
> There are currently 2 splitters for the SWM-8 that have been DTV approved; the STS-2 and STS-4. The STS-8 is still problematic and not yet approved. There are plenty of non approved high frequency splitters available that will appear to initially work, however, when upcoming features become available, you will need to have the DTV approved splitters to be able to use them.


actually if you want to get technical; its the sws splitters that are approved and directv branded, not the sts


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

I apologize that I don't have the specifics on the difference, yet. 

Here is the limited info I have been given on the STS splitters. There are 2 different companies involved with the engineering of the SWM-8 and STS splitters. The reason why? There was something so complicated about the STS splitters that the SWM-8 developers could not figure it out. It took a 2nd engineering company getting involved to figure out a resolution. If the STS splitters are the same as all other high frequency splitters, why would DTV have to have a new, 2nd company engineer it? Why wouldn't DTV pick a splitter already available instead of paying a LOT of money to have a new one engineered?


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

you need to get your facts striaght before you post incorrect information(like you stated that posters were doing in your first post) sts splitters are made by holland and are branded by holland. SWS splitters are the ones that are approved an branded by directv, and by the way there are 3 approved splitters: the sws2, sws4, and sws8. also, i cant see something so complicated that NAS(the swm manufacturer) could not build a splitter for directv. if another company built it im sure it was because that NAS was way too busy producing swm8's


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

swim-man8 said:


> I apologize that I don't have the specifics on the difference, yet.
> 
> Here is the limited info I have been given on the STS splitters. There are 2 different companies involved with the engineering of the SWM-8 and STS splitters. The reason why? There was something so complicated about the STS splitters that the SWM-8 developers could not figure it out. It took a 2nd engineering company getting involved to figure out a resolution. If the STS splitters are the same as all other high frequency splitters, why would DTV have to have a new, 2nd company engineer it? Why wouldn't DTV pick a splitter already available instead of paying a LOT of money to have a new one engineered?


Let us know when you have some solid facts. What you've written here really does not make much sense.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

Sixto said:


> Looks like Solid Signal has entered the game under $300 ...
> 
> Interesting thread this is ... be VERY interesting if there actually is any truth to the MRV over SWM reference ...


Here are some other Resources for the SWM-8:

Summit Source $389.99 - http://www.summitsource.com/advanced_search_result.php?keywords=swm&x=0&y=0

Solid Signal 295.99 - http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?main_cat=02&CAT=&PROD=SWM-8

Techtoolsupply $299.99 - http://www.techtoolsupply.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2038

Vince Outlet $299.99 - http://www.vinceoutlet.com/products.asp?stid=5236&cat=Electronics&product_id=170205719918

Weaknees $379 (Free Shipping) - http://www.weaknees.com/swm-directv.php

I know Solid Signal and Tech Tool are good places to buy - the others may be too, but have not bought from them before.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

dave29 said:


> you need to get your facts striaght before you post incorrect information(like you stated that posters were doing in your first post) sts splitters are made by holland and are branded by holland. SWS splitters are the ones that are approved an branded by directv, and by the way there are 3 approved splitters: the sws2, sws4, and sws8. also, i cant see something so complicated that NAS(the swm manufacturer) could not build a splitter for directv. if another company built it im sure it was because that NAS was way too busy producing swm8's


You are right Dave - I should not have posted & this is the exact reason why.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

litzdog911 said:


> Let us know when you have some solid facts. What you've written here really does not make much sense.


you took the words right out of my mouth!!


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

swim-man8 said:


> Here are some other Resources for the SWM-8 ...


but dave29 is preferred!


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

Sixto said:


> but dave29 is preferred!


 thanks buddy


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

SDizzle said:


> Dave29 is selling the swm and pi shipped to you for $300.


check out our other swm thread, i just updated the swm price info


----------



## azarby (Dec 15, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> I do not know the specifics of why the STS splitter differs from an ordinary splitter. My guess is that the isolation between ports has different circuitry. I don't know for sure though. I will call and see if I can get more in depth specs for you on the STS.


Since all 4 outputs will always have the same signal as the input, isolation is the least of the things to be concerned about. I would want to know things like insertoin loss, bandwidth, frequency range and last but not least, pass through current capability.

Bob


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Welcome to the forums, swim-man8! :welcome_s

Your observations are noted. I do know there are communications paths that are bi-directional in between the SWM and the receivers, some future features might require more capabilities than the off the shelf splitters might supply. Especially on the PI side of things.

I know one of the design goals was to use everyday, normal splitters as much as possible so re-work would not be necessary. That said, not all design goals are always met. 

So we'll keep an eye on things.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

It is interesting that multiple sites are stating the following:

"At the end of the single wire a STS-2, STS-4, or STS-8 splitter is required (not included) to distribute the signal to as many as 4 DVRs or 8 HD receivers! Please Note the STS series of splitters are specially designed for the SWM-8; you must have an STS-2, STS-4, or STS-8."​
Wonder if we're in for a nice surprise some day 

Or maybe this is just a pre-caution for 2300Mhz splitters ... but it does say *must* ... we'll see ...


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

I can't see anything that would require the use of any specific splitter. You just need a splitter that is:

Power-passing on at least one leg (and you don't even need that when the power inserter is between the splitter and the SWM).

Capable of passing all the DirecTV signals. That is usually thought of as up to 2.3Ghz but the SWM frequencies top out at 1.9Ghz anyway.

Capable of passing the 2.3Mhz channel that the receivers use to communicate with the SWM.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

texasbrit said:


> Capable of passing the* 2.3Mhz* channel that the receivers use to communicate with the SWM.


Typo or correction to what I read some where else?


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

I have seen 2.3 MHz referenced several times. I don't know if it is the 9th channel or something additional. Does anyone with a SWM have a spectrum analyzer? 

Are the splitters actually directional couplers or (as I suspect) just series resistors tied to the input port (with inductors used for power-passing)? I would expect directional couplers to be somewhat larger in size.


----------



## K4SMX (May 19, 2007)

FYI: From doctor j's post on this subject.....


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> Typo or correction to what I read some where else?


Yes, I meant 2.3MHz. The SWM8 has ten "channels". Eight carry the transponders selected by the receivers. One carries common data (including I believe the guide data) and then another, down at 2.3MHz, is used for the signalling between the receivers and the SWM.
Some splitters (and diplexers, if you are carrying OTA on the SWM cable) don't pass 2.3Mhz correctly.

And apparently there is no SWM11 (info from Earl).


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

From my personal experience and use with SWM8, I had trouble when using regular splitters that had a 950 MHz top end. I have had no problems at all using splitters that are rated from 5 MHz to 2.5 GHz. None are the specific model(s) mentioned in this thread.

Carl


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

carl6 said:


> From my personal experience and use with SWM8, I had trouble when using regular splitters that had a 950 MHz top end. I have had no problems at all using splitters that are rated from 5 MHz to 2.5 GHz. None are the specific model(s) mentioned in this thread.
> 
> Carl


Me too. As I said, the SWM frequencies top out at 1.9Ghz. Most devices rated to 5Mhz at the bottom end seem to have no problem passing the 2.3Mhz signalling channel. The two splitters I am using with my SWM are ones I just had lying around. Both are rated 5-2300 Mhz


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

texasbrit said:


> Yes, I meant 2.3MHz.


Thank you, it wasn't really questioning as much as verifying so "I now know".


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

never ever considered any MRV/SWM connection. never came up in any thread anywhere. be interesting to see how this plays out and if any truth to it.

might explain the 102Mhz per channel but just a total guess.

would be really cool if they started rolling out SWMLine and if all you needed to get 4 HR2x's to do MRV was just to add a 4-way splitter.

again, just speculating based on the words in this thread.

it does make the mind wander.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Sixto said:


> never ever considered any MRV/SWM connection. never came up in any thread anywhere. be interesting to see how this plays out and if any truth to it.
> 
> might explain the 102Mhz per channel but just a total guess.
> 
> ...


The hardware requirements alone to do this is giving me a headache.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Sixto said:


> never ever considered any MRV/SWM connection. never came up in any thread anywhere. be interesting to see how this plays out and if any truth to it.
> 
> might explain the 102Mhz per channel but just a total guess.
> 
> ...


but would be a disaster for the millions with regular multiswitches... imagine the calls to get upgraded if it was required :eek2:
not to mention if you had more than 4 dvrs.. they wouldn't fit on one SWM and you would end up picking and choosing which could work with which..


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

houskamp said:


> but would be a disaster for the millions with regular multiswitches... imagine the calls to get upgraded if it was required :eek2:
> not to mention if you had more than 4 dvrs.. they wouldn't fit on one SWM and you would end up picking and choosing which could work with which..


Oh yeah, totally agree.

Was just thinking that maybe there would be a "steaming" MRV thru SWM and a "DOD-style" MRV thru ethernet.

Again, just hypothetically assuming there's any truth to the SWM/MRV connection mentioned above, which we've never seen any reference to previously.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Sixto said:


> Oh yeah, totally agree.
> 
> Was just thinking that maybe there would be a "steaming" MRV thru SWM and a "DOD-style" MRV thru ethernet.
> 
> Again, just hypothetically assuming there's any truth to the SWM/MRV connection mentioned above, which we've never seen any reference to previously.


Back to my hardware problems:
So you're going to modulate the program back to RF, then send it out a receiving input, where the SWM will now control where it goes [again needing to input on it's output].
Right now the only thing going out the input is: DC voltage, a 22 kHz tone, and a 2.3 MHz control signal.
Does anybody start to see why this is HIGHLY unlikely?


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> Back to my hardware problems:
> So you're going to modulate the program back to RF, then send it out a receiving input, where the SWM will now control where it goes [again needing to input on it's output].
> Right now the only thing going out the input is: DC voltage, a 22 kHz tone, and a 2.3 MHz control signal.
> Does anybody start to see why this is HIGHLY unlikely?


you got me convinced! 

And ... man, all the baseball games in HD look stunning today ... D10 is doing a great job with MLB for 2008!


----------



## drx792 (Feb 28, 2007)

in addition to the stores online telling people they require an sts splitter for SWMs they also fail to mention that the D12 receiver is SWM compatible along with the R16. Someone should fill them in.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

drx792 said:


> in addition to the stores online telling people they require an sts splitter for SWMs they also fail to mention that the D12 receiver is SWM compatible along with the R16. *Someone should fill them in*.


Or they all could just come here. :lol:


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

drx792 said:


> in addition to the stores online telling people they require an sts splitter for SWMs they also fail to mention that the D12 receiver is SWM compatible along with the R16. Someone should fill them in.


yeah, some of them dont even list the h20 and hr20. i bet their technical support is outstanding


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

For those of you in here who DO NOT know everything about the SWM-8 and would like to know how the STS splitters are different, PM me and I'll get you the spec sheet.

For those of you in here who DO know everything, keep up the great work carrying the SWM-8 Tech Support world on your shoulders!


----------



## azarby (Dec 15, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> For those of you in here who DO NOT know everything about the SWM-8 and would like to know how the STS splitters are different, PM me and I'll get you the spec sheet.
> 
> For those of you in here who DO know everything, keep up the great work carrying the SWM-8 Tech Support world on your shoulders!


Why not scan it and attach it to one of your posts for all to see?

bob


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Anybody uncover the hidden secret yet?


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

I know nothing.  :lol:


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

Knowledge is power. The issue is if you share that knowledge, then it's power increases. Please if someone has some real facts about the STS splitters, share them. Please don't hide behind a "PM me and then I'll share" If it is for real, take it to Kinko's have them scan it and put in in a PDF then post it for all to see.

"Show Us the Money!" Until then, I call "Shenanigans!"


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

jwd45244 said:


> Knowledge is power. *The issue is if you share that knowledge, then it's power increases.* Please if someone has some real facts about the STS splitters, share them. Please don't hide behind a "PM me and then I'll share" If it is for real, take it to Kinko's have them scan it and put in in a PDF then post it for all to see.
> 
> "Show Us the Money!" Until then, I call "Shenanigans!"


Now fairly negligible on the power front ...


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

that guy has no idea what he is talking about!!! secret splitters!rolling


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

Sorry it has taken me a few days to reply; I only get to use a computer once a week when I'm on good behavior and the doctor lets me. The good part is I have a lot of free time in the hospital to think up many ways to waste my, and everyone else's time... Special designed splitters for SWM's - OMG I am so clever! Ha-Ha Ho-Ho Hee-Hee!


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

well if you know something that we dont, why dont you post it? we would like to know. as of right now, thats all you have done is wasted peoples time posting things that dont make sense.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

dave29 said:


> well if you know something that we dont, why dont you post it? we would like to know. as of right now, thats all you have done is wasted peoples time posting things that dont make sense.


Or... one of you "Retired Engineers" could put a Spec-An on an STS splitter and check the Isolation Loss Between Outputs at the 2-50MHz range. Then, you aren't just going on some crazy information given by some guy that is labeled to know nothing. I don't think there is any info I could post that would convince the lemmings.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

there is something wrong with you!! if you know so much, post it!!!


----------



## Rakul (Sep 3, 2007)

swim-man8 said:


> Or... one of you "Retired Engineers" could put a Spec-An on an STS splitter and check the Isolation Loss Between Outputs at the 2-50MHz range. Then, you aren't just going on some crazy information given by some guy that is labeled to know nothing. I don't think there is any info I could post that would convince the lemmings.


I doubt this is true for 99% of the board, however that same 99% will not buy into this "your all wrong but I'm not going to give you the information" type posting.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> Or... one of you "Retired Engineers" could put a Spec-An on an STS splitter and check the Isolation Loss Between Outputs at the 2-50MHz range. Then, you aren't just going on some crazy information given by some guy that is labeled to know nothing. I don't think there is any info I could post that would convince the lemmings.


This is just wrong on so many levels.
"the Isolation Loss Between Outputs "??  Do you mean the isolation between ports or the insertion loss of the port? 

In the 2-50 MHz range there is one signal 2.3 MHz, which is the control communication between receivers and SWM.

"I don't think there is any info I could post that would convince the lemmings".

So far you haven't posted much to convince or prove to anybody anything,
Right now all I've seen is some very misguided info about SWM.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

dave29 said:


> there is something wrong with you!! if you know so much, post it!!!


I hear my family telling the doctor that all the time.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> This is just wrong on so many levels.
> "the Isolation Loss Between Outputs "??  Do you mean the isolation between ports or the insertion loss of the port?
> 
> In the 2-50 MHz range there is one signal 2.3 MHz, which is the control communication between receivers and SWM.
> ...


This will all start making sense to you in about 4 weeks.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> This will all start making sense to you in about 4 weeks.


As others have posted, sharing information and helping others are the foundations of this forum.
Why don't you step up to the plate and post it?


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

swim-man8 said:


> This will all start making sense to you in about 4 weeks.


swim-man8:
Please stop being so secretive with this information. I was all set to thank you for the private message you sent with a link to this information. But the link you provided did not work. Please post the information here.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

swim-man8 said:


> This will all start making sense to you in about 4 weeks.


Most members here are very interested in anything new that may improve the DirecTV experience.

If you were kind enough to post something credible, as to the possible "special" uses for the STS splitters/SWM-8 then this will be a fruitful and productive conversation.

Any other claims without any factual info may be considered just someone who created an ID to toy with the rest of us (who actually care and take this stuff seriously).

If you provide something credible, the tone will change quickly.

Now, if there's some NDA, or some other reason why you can't provide details then it may be better to just not post.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Been back-and-forth with the swim-man ...

In his defense, it does seem interesting that the Solid Signal web-site does say "*Please Note the STS series of splitters are specially designed for the SWM-8; you must have an STS-2, STS-4, or STS-8*".

http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=SWM-8​The swim-man seems to believe that the statement is true.

And yep, no one has proven anything, but it certainly smells like there might be something to this. Solid Signal is a fairly high profile DirecTV distributor and they didn't invent that statement out of the blue. It came from somewhere.

Yes, some of the scenarios discussed above may sound far out, but the question remains of why "*you must have an STS-2, STS-4, or STS-8*".

Either the web-site is invalid or swim-man might be on to something.

Also, go to the Weeknees site:

http://www.weaknees.com/pdf/dual-swm-switches.pdf​Why is the splitter from the dish to the SWM-8 just a "high frequency splitter", but the splitter that connects to the receiver must be "DirecTV approved"? Good question.

Smells like there might be more to this story ... maybe not ... but there sure seems to be some bits of evidence ...

We'll see ...


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> In the 2-50 MHz range there is one signal 2.3 MHz, which is the control communication between receivers and SWM.


Is that what the "5 - 40 (Return Path) - CMTS return path must use 33-40 MHz band" for?


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

It is more likely that it is simply the only one DirecTV chooses to approve, and there may be a kickback occurring that goes directly into someones pocket. 

I'll restate my example from earlier. Just recently the PPC EX6XL compression connector became the only approved connector for DirecTV installs. This connector is better than some due to the way it seals, but for all intents and purposes it provides the exact same connection that any other RG6 coaxial F connector would. There is no functional difference, yet it is the only one that is "approved."


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

Sixto said:


> Been back-and-forth with the swim-man ...
> 
> In his defense, it does seem interesting that the Solid Signal web-site does say "*Please Note the STS series of splitters are specially designed for the SWM-8; you must have an STS-2, STS-4, or STS-8*".
> 
> ...


as far as i am concerned, that is just a marketing scheme to sell these higher priced "approved" splitters by saying that you "must" use them. the only thing that is really different about them as far as i can tell is that they are single power pass and the power pass leg and the input leg have a red insert. and they go down to 2mhz, instead of 5mhz.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Teronzhul said:


> It is more likely that it is simply the only one DirecTV chooses to approve, and there may be a kickback occurring that goes directly into someones pocket.
> 
> I'll restate my example from earlier. Just recently the PPC EX6XL compression connector became the only approved connector for DirecTV installs. This connector is better than some due to the way it seals, but for all intents and purposes it provides the exact same connection that any other RG6 coaxial F connector would. There is no functional difference, yet it is the only one that is "approved."


Then why have the splitter between the dish and the SWM-8 any "high frequency splitter" but the splitter from the SWM-8 to the receiver "DirecTV approved"?

Does raise some curious thoughts ...


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

Sixto said:


> Then why have the splitter between the dish and the SWM-8 any "high frequency splitter" but the splitter from the SWM-8 to the receiver "DirecTV approved"?
> 
> Does raise some curious thoughts ...


maybe it just has something to do with the single power pass leg, so you can hook the power inserter up to that leg. that splitter is pretty idiot proof, with the red inserts and all


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Sixto said:


> Is that what the "5 - 40 (Return Path) - CMTS return path must use 33-40 MHz band" for?


"So far" [besides the nice red center power passing connectors] all "I see" is that "approved" splitters are rated down to 2 MHz. As posted, there is a 2.3 MHz control signal sent from the receiver to the SWM for it to send the correct transponder to the receiver.
Return paths can be anything below [or even above] 50 MHz. 20 MHz is what I've worked on and had with my last cable modem.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

the other words on all the sites is "Please Note the STS series of splitters are specially designed for the SWM-8" ...

yep, maybe it's marketing hype ... but geez, it's does say "*specially designed for the SWM-8*" ... it's blatant lie if it's marketing hype ...


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

"This splitter is designed for use with the SWM-8 Stacker (not included). An STS splitter is *required* for distribution of the SWM-8's stacked signal to the receivers."


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Sixto said:


> "This splitter is designed for use with the SWM-8 Stacker (not included). An STS splitter is required for distribution of the SWM-8's stacked signal to the receivers."


Have you ever been in the engineering group and seen what the marketing group has done with your pet project? :lol: or is it :eek2: and :nono2: :nono:


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> Have you ever been in the engineering group and seen what the marketing group has done with your pet project? :lol: or is it :eek2: and :nono2: :nono:


vos, yep, hear ya ...

who knows, maybe that red center is what was specially designed!


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Sixto said:


> vos, yep, hear ya ...
> 
> who knows, maybe that red center is what was specially designed!


thats all it takes to make the statement true


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Sixto said:


> vos, yep, hear ya ...
> 
> who knows, maybe that red center is what was specially designed!


Don't get me going on: the clear, white, blue, & pink centers of barrels and there "new and improved" frequency ratings.


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

Sixto said:


> Been back-and-forth with the swim-man ...
> 
> In his defense, it does seem interesting that the Solid Signal web-site does say "*Please Note the STS series of splitters are specially designed for the SWM-8; you must have an STS-2, STS-4, or STS-8*".
> 
> http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=SWM-8​


The fascinating thing is that Solid Signal is not selling STS-2, 4, and 8s they are selling SWS-2, 4, and 8 Different beasties made by different people. The SWS splitters are made by NAS (National Antenna Systems). Guess who makes the SWM-8? Answer: NAS

The SWS splitters are "DirecTV Approved" not the STSs

BTW, I have contacted Solid Signal asking about this reference to STS splitters and asking if it should read SWS. I suspect it is a typo.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> Don't get me going on: the clear, white, blue, & pink centers of barrels and there "new and improved" frequency ratings.


The early SWM PIs had a red center.. it was done with a sharpie :lol:


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

Lets say, hypothetically, that what I am saying is true, and the splitters are special. 

Typically on a normal splitter the Isolation Loss between its outputs is 20db or more (Loss from one output to another output). Lets say, hypothetically, that on the STS splitter the Isolation Loss Between Outputs is 5dB, but only in the 2-50MHz range. Why would the splitters be designed that way if their were no plans to have the receivers communicating with each other? The Receiver communicates with the SWM Output to Input, not Output to Output.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

Sixto said:


> "This splitter is designed for use with the SWM-8 Stacker (not included). An STS splitter is *required* for distribution of the SWM-8's stacked signal to the receivers."


im not using the sts or sws type splitters on one of my swm8's, and it works fine. dont let the swim man brainwash you sixto its just marketing hype so people buy the high priced splitters


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

jwd45244 said:


> The fascinating things is that Solid Signal is not selling STS-2, 4, and 8s they are selling SWS-2, 4, and 8 Different beasties made by different people the SWS splitters are made by NAS (National Antenna Systems). Guess who makes the SWM-8? Answer: NAS
> 
> The SWS splitters are "DirecTV Approved" not the STSs


i tried to tell swim man that earlier in this thread, he just dont get it


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

houskamp said:


> The early SWM PIs had a red center.. it was done with a sharpie :lol:


was that before or after you burned up a hr20:lol:


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

"Isolation Loss" 
It is "Isolation" which isn't to be confused with insertion loss or return loss.


----------



## SSpectre (Feb 23, 2008)

My SWM came with the SWS-4. The DirecTV logo is on the back. I don't see any difference between it and any other splitter.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

SSpectre said:


> My SWM came with the SWS-4. The DirecTV logo is on the back. I don't see any difference between it and any other splitter.


just the 2mhz and the red inserts:lol:


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

dave29 said:


> im not using the sts or sws type splitters on one of my swm8's, and it works fine. dont let the swim man brainwash you sixto its just marketing hype so people buy the high priced splitters


I'm using PV23-402 2-Way Splitters (4 single-side power passing splitters) from the dish to the SWM-8; and PV23-302 2-Way Splitters (both-side power passing) from the SWM-8 to the receivers ... works great!

The debate here is whether these "magic splitters" provide any technical capability that DirecTV will exploit at some time or that provides some benefit that we're not aware of ... just some fun debate!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

These soon will be made by Monster cables, so we all should wait till then. :lol:


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

i know sixto, this thread has been pretty amusing!!!


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> "Isolation Loss"
> It is "Isolation" which isn't to be confused with insertion loss or return loss.


Lets say you connected a 14MHz Signal @ 30dB on the output of your normal 2 way splitter. If you connected your signal meter to the other output, you would read approx 10dB (20 dB Loss).

Now you connect a 14MHz Signal @ 30dB on the output of a 2 way STS splitter. If you connect your signal meter to the other output, you would read approx. 25dB (5dB Loss)


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

!rolling



veryoldschool said:


> These soon will be made by Monster cables, so we all should wait till then. :lol:


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

jwd45244 said:


> The fascinating thing is that Solid Signal is not selling STS-2, 4, and 8s they are selling SWS-2, 4, and 8 Different beasties made by different people. The SWS splitters are made by NAS (National Antenna Systems). Guess who makes the SWM-8? Answer: NAS


Yes, was looking at that.

Solid signal does not sell the STS-2. Only the SWS-2 (made by NAS).

Who's knows. maybe this theory won't survive the night! (some will say you killed it days ago!).


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> Lets say you connected a 14MHz Signal @ 30dB on the output of your normal 2 way splitter. If you connected your signal meter to the other output, you would read approx 10dB (20 dB Loss).
> 
> Now you connect a 14MHz Signal @ 30dB on the output of a 2 way STS splitter. If you connect your signal meter to the other output, you would read approx. 25dB (5dB Loss)


By the nature of Isolation, loss is desired [hence isolation "loss" is redundant].


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

Sixto - I give up... PM me if you have any other questions.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

you havent showed us any proof. post some links or documents


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dave29 said:


> you havent showed us any proof. post some links or documents


WHERE'S THE BEEF?


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

dave29 said:


> you havent showed us any proof. post some links or documents


I have nothing to prove Dave. Just trying to get everyone to look beyond your "it works, don't need one of dem' dare' STS splitters" mentality.

Those of you involved in engineering and Manufacturing may understand why I can't spell it out for you - for the rest of you - to bad.


----------



## SSpectre (Feb 23, 2008)

swim-man8 said:


> I have nothing to prove Dave. Just trying to get everyone to look beyond your "it works, don't need one of dem' dare' STS splitters" mentality.
> 
> Those of you involved in engineering and Manufacturing may understand why I can't spell it out for you - for the rest of you - to bad.


:sleeping:

Can we close this thread? It contains no credible information.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

i agree, lock this thing up!!


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> I have nothing to prove Dave. Just trying to get everyone to look beyond your "it works, don't need one of dem' dare' STS splitters" mentality.
> 
> Those of you involved in engineering and Manufacturing may understand why I can't spell it out for you - for the rest of you - to bad.


The problem is that Solid Signal is not selling the STS splitters. They are selling the SWS splitters. 
The SWS are approved by DirecTV. The STS splitters are not. 
The SWS splitters are made by the same people that make the SWM-8 (NAS). The STS spliters are made by iHolland.

I suspect that the text on the Solid Signal web page about the SWM-8 is a typo and I have contacted them about it.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

swim-man8 said:


> I have nothing to prove Dave. Just trying to get everyone to look beyond your "it works, don't need one of dem' dare' STS splitters" mentality.
> 
> Those of you involved in engineering and Manufacturing may understand why I can't spell it out for you - for the rest of you - to bad.


:nono2: i have nothing else to say to this guy


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

jwd45244 said:


> The problem is that Solid Signal is not selling the STS splitters. They are selling the SWS splitters.
> The SWS are approved by DirecTV. The STS splitters are not.
> The SWS splitters are made by the same people that make the SWM-8 (NAS). The STS spliters are made by iHolland.
> 
> I suspect that the text on the Solid Signal web page about the SWM-8 is a typo and I have contacted them about it.


its a lost cause jim, i have been telling this guy that for days,


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

SSpectre said:


> :sleeping:
> 
> Can we close this thread? It contains no credible information.


It would be good for me - I keep coming back to this forum like I have to defend my honor.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dave29 said:


> i agree, lock this thing up!!


This doesn't rise to the level of needing to be closed [locked].
If we just stop posting, it will fade off to page two and beyond.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

SSpectre said:


> :sleeping:
> 
> Can we close this thread? It contains no credible information.


When we know the answer to "Please Note the STS series of splitters are specially designed for the SWM-8; you must have an STS-2, STS-4, or STS-8." then we'll be done.
A. Marketing Hype

B. Typo

C. Real Technical Reason - They were developed to a higher standard that DirecTV desires

D. Real Technical Reason - That can/may be exploited for MRV

E. None of the Above​
Some day we'll look back and have the answer.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> It would be good for me - I keep coming back to this forum like I have to defend my honor.


The simplest way would be to post some FACTS.


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> The simplest way would be to post some FACTS.


Facts stand on their own. No need to defend one's honor if one has facts. DBSTalk is filled with people who believed one thing and when the facts showed differently, they were more than happy to admit they were wrong.

One of the "classic" examples is one that VOS and I were a part.

We were on opposite sides of the debate about diplexing OTA with the new HD channels. A group of us was convinced it would work and VOS and many others were equally convinced that it would not. It was a friendly debate. No one had to defend their honor.

It turns I that if you put the BBC before the combining diplexer it would work and VOS and the others admitted as such.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

i would be the first to admit that i was wrong(EDIT) learning more , but i just like to see facts brought to the table, not malarky


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

somewhat interesting ... didn't realize it ... this thread was not started by the swim-man ... be interesting to understand what "specifications" are being referred to ...


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

The other interesting thing is that Solid Signal has the SWS-4 for $8.99 and the price for the STS-4 in the very first post is $14.99.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

jwd45244 said:


> Facts stand on their own. No need to defend one's honor if one has facts. DBSTalk is filled with people who believed one thing and when the facts showed differently, they were more than happy to admit they were wrong.
> 
> One of the "classic" examples is one that VOS and I were a part.
> 
> ...


Please re-read the posts on Page 5 - they may not be the facts as you normally see them, but it is all I can offer. I am not being secretive, and I regret my guns-a-blazin' know it all attitude of my original post. I do not have a PDF, GIF, or JPG to post - nor do I have an interview with an engineer, VP, or CEO. If someone here has a spectrum analyzer, email me your address and I will buy you an STS splitter and you can see for yourself.

If you don't understand my posts on page 5, please rather than dismissing it, PM me and I'll explain it better.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

jwd45244 said:


> Facts stand on their own. No need to defend one's honor if one has facts. DBSTalk is filled with people who believed one thing and when the facts showed differently, they were more than happy to admit they were wrong.


I'm not even sure it's admitting "wrong", just learning more. The more info spread around, the more everyone gains [knows].
"Egos" should be left behind [IMO] as you log in.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> If you don't understand my posts on page 5, please rather than dismissing it, PM me and I'll explain it better.


Since page numbers will vary with user settings [this page is #4 for me] Please post your post number that you are referring to [upper right this is #135].


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I'm not even sure it's admitting "wrong", just learning more. The more info spread around, the more everyone gains [knows].
> "Egos" should be left behind [IMO] as you log in.


i agree, i think that i will change my above post:sure:


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

Sorry Post 102 and 112


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> Sorry Post 102 and 112


There isn't much to understand. What you seem to be eluding to is that receivers will [could] start to communicate with each other.
Since the SWM is by no means "mainstream" I'm not sure how much DirecTV would invest in "special" features for it as opposed to the "main group" and using the network connection.


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> There isn't much to understand. What you seem to be eluding to is that receivers will [could] start to communicate with each other.
> Since the SWM is by no means "mainstream" I'm not sure how much DirecTV would invest in "special" features for it as opposed to the "main group" and using the network connection.


I don't have any facts on DTV or there plans, only speculation. I do however know that the STS splitters are designed to allow the receivers to communicate with each other. Can you think of any other advantages to the receivers communicating with each other?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> I don't have any facts on DTV or there plans, only speculation. I do however know that the STS splitters are designed to allow the receivers to communicate with each other. Can you think of any other advantages to the receivers communicating with each other?


Multi-room-viewing is all and if it "only" comes with a SWM system, there are going to be some very PO'd customers.
[Again] I'm not even sure the receivers are capable of sending out this much data through there SAT input, since it would require some significant hardware.


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

A long promised feature has been the ability for receivers to share a single phone connection for PPV. I assumed that should intra-receiver communication be available via swm, that this would be the first feature enabled. D* wants us to order as much PPV as possible after all.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Teronzhul said:


> A long promised feature has been the ability for receivers to share a single phone connection for PPV. I assumed that should intra-receiver communication be available via swm, that this would be the first feature enabled. D* wants us to order as much PPV as possible after all.


This would seem more feasible, but PPV can now be ordered over the network connection so???


----------



## swim-man8 (Mar 30, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> Multi-room-viewing is all and if it "only" comes with a SWM system, there are going to be some very PO'd customers.
> [Again] I'm not even sure the receivers are capable of sending out this much data through there SAT input, since it would require some significant hardware.


I agree; but that could be said about DVR's and HD receivers; with new technology always comes upset customers.

This technology may not even work with existing receivers, DTV may have a new receiver on the horizon with the MRV ability.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

swim-man8 said:


> DTV may have a new receiver on the horizon with the MRV ability.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

swim-man8 said:


> I agree; but that could be said about DVR's and HD receivers; with new technology always comes upset customers.
> 
> This technology may not even work with existing receivers, DTV may have a new receiver on the horizon with the MRV ability.


That "horizon" is some distance away.


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> This would seem more feasible, but PPV can now be ordered over the network connection so???


Or a single network connection.

The point being that in many installations phone lines are difficult at best to get connected, especially to 4 or more receivers. The same could be said for network connections, as I'm sure the majority of households don't have ethernet lines run to their home entertainment center.

Communication via swm would allow all the receivers on an account to use a single phone/internet connection to order ppv.


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

Ok, DirecTV have some things up their sleeves. But lots of it is out in the open. SWM multi-switches are part of the picture. One of the more interesting things that is coming is MFH3. MFH2 uses SWM and standard coax to distribute content. MFH3 uses Ethernet and IP. There are also some new things coming with the SWM being part of the LNB (this is very near-term). There is a new dish in the works that does not look at the 110 or 119 satellites. All of these things are being discussed in the Cutting Edge forum (except MFH3 with is mentioned in the MDU sub forum of the installation sub-forum). These are all real. No maybes no could bes.

If the STS splitters have some special function in them that the SWS splitters don't, tell us. DirecTV would be telling their MDU installers to use them. They are not. They are saying to use the SWS splitters. If there is something there, help us to understand. We want to learn.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Teronzhul said:


> Or a single network connection.
> 
> The point being that in many installations phone lines are difficult at best to get connected, especially to 4 or more receivers. The same could be said for network connections, as I'm sure the majority of households don't have ethernet lines run to their home entertainment center.
> 
> Communication via swm would allow all the receivers on an account to use a single phone/internet connection to order ppv.


Actualy Cat5 is becoming much more common as many other A/V devices use it.. think gaming systems, DVD players, newer A/V recievers even use them for updated firmware.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Teronzhul said:


> Or a single network connection.
> 
> The point being that in many installations phone lines are difficult at best to get connected, especially to 4 or more receivers. The same could be said for network connections, as I'm sure the majority of households don't have ethernet lines run to their home entertainment center.
> 
> Communication via swm would allow all the receivers on an account to use a single phone/internet connection to order ppv.


DirecTV seems to be "pushing" the home network [through AC lines].
I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying [as I have no superior knowledge of what DirecTV is planning].
PPV can be ordered through the website which then activates it for every receiver on the account, where as the phone line works for only "that receiver". I could see DirecTV having the receivers "talk" to each other so the PPV is either limited to the first viewing or even charged for each [since it's "pay per view" and not rent me for x time].


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

houskamp said:


> Actualy Cat5 is becoming much more common as many other A/V devices use it.. think gaming systems, DVD players, newer A/V recievers even use them for updated firmware.


I don't disagree with this, but once again it typcially comes down to a single location. Bluray/HD-DVD players are typically only in a single location. The remaining receivers would be at a loss just as they are now.

Many devices that have internet connectivity are also shipping with wifi onboard. The PS3 and Wii both have 802.11g and I would assume many more such devices will come this way. I doubt DirecTV will be coming out with receivers that have wifi any time soon. It wouldn't surprise me if the next HR2X did come with wifi, but since the 21s just came out, I assume (hope) we'll be seeing the SWMline first.



veryoldschool said:


> DirecTV seems to be "pushing" the home network [through AC lines].
> I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying [as I have no superior knowledge of what DirecTV is planning].
> PPV can be ordered through the website which then activates it for every receiver on the account, where as the phone line works for only "that receiver". I could see DirecTV having the receivers "talk" to each other so the PPV is either limited to the first viewing or even charged for each [since it's "pay per view" and not rent me for x time].


DirecTV wants the PPV ordering process to be as easy as possible, and that means from the remote. They don't want to lose a single sale from someone who thinks "oh, ordering it online is too much trouble, I'll just watch something else."


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

Teronzhul said:


> Or a single network connection.
> 
> The point being that in many installations phone lines are difficult at best to get connected, especially to 4 or more receivers. The same could be said for network connections, as I'm sure the majority of households don't have ethernet lines run to their home entertainment center.
> 
> Communication via swm would allow all the receivers on an account to use a single phone/internet connection to order ppv.


Both of my HR20s have a network connection. I use Powerline adapters They use my home AC for connectivity.


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

Ok, the point I'm trying to get across here is that the average DBStalk user, is not your average DirecTV customer. I'm in peoples houses every day, and the number who have physical internet connections available for their satellite receiver is miniscule.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

jwd45244 said:


> Ok, DirecTV have some things up their sleeves. But lots of it is out in the open. SWM multi-switches are part of the picture. One of the more interesting things that is coming is MFH3. MFH2 uses SWM and standard coax to distribute content. MFH3 uses Ethernet and IP. There are also some new things coming with the SWM being part of the LNB (this is very near-term). There is a new dish in the works that does not look at the 110 or 119 satellites. All of these things are being discussed in the Cutting Edge forum (except MFH3 with is mentioned in the MDU sub forum of the installation sub-forum). These are all real. No maybes no could bes.
> 
> If the STS splitters have some special function in them that the SWS splitters don't, tell us. DirecTV would be telling their MDU installers to use them. They are not. They are saying to use the SWS splitters. If there is something there, help us to understand. We want to learn.


although i am quite a bit skeptical to the "secret features" i would very much like to see something come out of this, i just wish there was some proof


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Teronzhul said:


> Ok, the point I'm trying to get across here is that the average DBStalk user, is not your average DirecTV customer. I'm in peoples houses every day, and the number who have physical internet connections available for their satellite receiver is miniscule.


Your "point" [view] is well taken [maybe even respected :lol: ], but the number of people like this that would have SWM, well .........


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dave29 said:


> although i am quite a bit skeptical to the "secret features" i would very much like to see something come out of this, i just wish there was some proof


There you go using that five letter word again.


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

proof:lol:


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Teronzhul said:


> Ok, the point I'm trying to get across here is that the average DBStalk user, is not your average DirecTV customer. I'm in peoples houses every day, and the number who have physical internet connections available for their satellite receiver is miniscule.


If you did a survey of the average American home with less then 4 DVR's, and you asked if they'd rather install one box (a SWM-8) and get MRV. Or they need to network all of their receivers. The answer may be SWM-8. Or better yet, a SWMLine and you get full MRV. That would be an easy choice.

Now, I agree with vos and others, doing bi-directional thru the SWM port of a H2x or HR2x receiver is complex, but the option would be desired by many if it was possible.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Sixto said:


> If you did a survey of the average American home with less then 4 DVR's, and you asked if they'd rather install one box (a SWM-8) and get MRV. Or they need to network all of their receivers. The answer may be SWM-8. Or better yet, a SWMLine and you get full MRV. That would be an easy choice.
> 
> Now, I agree with vos and others, doing bi-directional thru the SWM port of a H2x or HR2x receiver is complex, but the option would be desired by many if it was possible.


But if you ask directv if they would rather go out and rewire every house or sell you a network adapter.....


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

houskamp said:


> But if you ask directv if they would rather go out and rewire every house or sell you a network adapter.....


I'm not so sure ... the house is already fully wired for TV ... may not be any network wire at all ... or if a network, there may be zero wiring to any DVR location ...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Sixto said:


> I'm not so sure ... the house is already fully wired for TV ... may not be any network wire at all ... or if a network, there may be zero wiring to any DVR location ...


Let's see....
A SWM8 is $300. a SWM dish must be more.
The powerline network is ??? [$150?]
hum.. which way would make more sense [or is it cents]?


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> Your "point" [view] is well taken [maybe even respected :lol: ], but the number of people like this that would have SWM, well .........


But that is just it, SWM is coming, and it won't just be for the people with 4 HD-DVRs. It ultimately will become the standard for installation via the SWMline3. Every installation WILL have access to this, at some point in the future.

DirecTV can't ever know the exact situation regarding an individual account holders network status, internet access speeds, or if they even have a POTS phone line. They do know that every account going forward will have an SWM in some form, and I'm sure they realized this before they laid down any final specifications for the SWM tech. It is the only thing they have complete control over.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> Let's see....
> A SWM8 is $300. a SWM dish must be more.
> The powerline network is ???
> hum.. which way would make more sense [or is it cents]?


add to that:
SWM8 300$ plus install.......... directv's bill
powerline adapters 50$ (?).... customers bill


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Teronzhul said:


> But that is just it, SWM is coming, and it won't just be for the people with 4 HD-DVRs. It ultimately will become the standard for installation via the SWMline3. Every installation WILL have access to this, at some point in the future.
> 
> DirecTV can't ever know the exact situation regarding an individual account holders network status, internet access speeds, or if they even have a POTS phone line. They do know that every account going forward will have an SWM in some form, and I'm sure they realized this before they laid down any final specifications for the SWM tech. It is the only thing they have complete control over.


Valid points, but:
#1 everybody needs to move to HD [or at least new] receivers.
#2 this would be a very "long view" [which won't make it impossible]


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

Right now and SWM is $300. They will come down in price like every other tech advancement. DirecTV didn't design the SWM for today, since obviously the WB68 can do everything that the SWM can (short of diplexing) that is necessary for TV viewing... today. In time I'm sure the SWMline LNB will drop in manufacturing costs to be similar to that of the 4 port multiswitch in the LNB today. We aren't adding hardware, we're just replacing.


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

I can't type fast enough to keep up with VOS, but yeah, I choose to be optimistic.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

Teronzhul said:


> I can't type fast enough to keep up with VOS, ....


Nobody can!


----------



## Wildblue (Mar 20, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> These soon will be made by Monster cables


... if Noel Lee gets his way, won't EVERYTHING be made by M*? (so I had my M* breakfast this morning on M* dishes, got in my M* car with M* stereo system, drove down the M* highway, stopped at a M* coffee shop, then went to my office in the M* building # 5142. After the obligatory half hour Noel Lee homage worship session, I started my work... hey, we all need to earn our M* money, right?)


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

Solid Signal has agreed that the page http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=SWM-8 describing the SWM-8 needing the STS-2 4 or 8 was incorrect and has updated it to read SWS 2, 4 and 8.


----------



## jtm1631 (May 18, 2007)

Sorry to post this here but I am trying to figure out how to configure my set-up.

I currently have two hr20's and an older hr10-250 Tivo unit. The hr20's only have a single directv line run so no dual tuner capability, although one of the hr20's also has an ota line.

The hr10-250 has two directv lines and an ota line.

I want to add the SWM but I am not sure I understand how to combine the OTA signal and than what is needed to split the OTA off at the HR20's.

Also, how do I still handle the 3 lines needed for the hr10-250 once the SWM is added to the picture?

Any help would be appreciated.

JTM


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

jtm1631 said:


> Sorry to post this here but I am trying to figure out how to configure my set-up.
> 
> I currently have two hr20's and an older hr10-250 Tivo unit. The hr20's only have a single directv line run so no dual tuner capability, although one of the hr20's also has an ota line.
> 
> ...


The SWM8 has an OTA input, so diplexing it out at the HR20 [for each] and the SWM8 has three legacy ports to feed your HR10-250. You will need to split the OTA to the SWM8 & to your HR10-250.
If you don't need OTA for both HR20s, then just split it to your one HR20 & HR10-250.


----------



## jtm1631 (May 18, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> The SWM8 has an OTA input, so diplexing it out at the HR20 [for each] and the SWM8 has three legacy ports to feed your HR10-250. You will need to split the OTA to the SWM8 & to your HR10-250.
> If you don't need OTA for both HR20s, then just split it to your one HR20 & HR10-250.


Got it. I'll use the legacy ports to feed the HR10-250, leave the OTA alone and just not have OTA on the second hr20 and gain dual tuners from the SWM on both hr20's.

Thanks for the help. I'm off to order what I need.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

jtm1631 said:


> Got it. I'll use the legacy ports to feed the HR10-250, leave the OTA alone and just not have OTA on the second hr20 and gain dual tuners from the SWM on both hr20's.
> 
> Thanks for the help. I'm off to order what I need.


Best price for them here: http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=114457


----------



## jtm1631 (May 18, 2007)

Sorry, another question.

Do I need diplexers before going into the hr20's if I am not running the OTA through?

I didn't think I did but some of the wiring charts show diplexers.

Thanks,

JT


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

jtm1631 said:


> Sorry, another question.
> 
> Do I need diplexers before going into the hr20's if I am not running the OTA through?
> 
> ...


Nope, you only need them to get the OTA out of the cable.


----------



## jtm1631 (May 18, 2007)

Saw that the diplexer was used only when combining an OTA signal, thanks.

One last question (he said in his best Columbo voice) about grounding.

Currently my lines come from the dish into the house where they are grounded just prior to going into my WB68 multiswitch.

Will this grounding be enough for the SWM or do I need to add a second ground at the SWM? I will try to add a picture to show what I currently have.

Edited to add image. 









So, can I use the existing ground in place, move the grounding wire to the SWM or add a second ground to the SWM?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

The SWM has a ground point also, so another jumper to it and you're set.


----------



## tpbrady (Sep 1, 2004)

I suspect that the only requirement for the splitter going to the SWM from the receivers deals with current handling ability. If you are powering the SWM through the power input port and also serving IRDs on the same port, you will run into a problem with current handling capability with most HF splitters. The SWM is powered by 36VDC at I think 1.5 amps. We saw the same thing with power insertion on DPP44 switches when used with standard diplexers. We had to buy special diplexers to handle the current load on port 1 of the DPP44 switch where the power is inserted.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

tpbrady said:


> I suspect that the only requirement for the splitter going to the SWM from the receivers deals with current handling ability. If you are powering the SWM through the power input port and also serving IRDs on the same port, you will run into a problem with current handling capability with most HF splitters. The SWM is powered by 36VDC at I think 1.5 amps. We saw the same thing with power insertion on DPP44 switches when used with standard diplexers. We had to buy special diplexers to handle the current load on port 1 of the DPP44 switch where the power is inserted.


A good reason to put any splitters downstream of the power inserter.


----------



## jmr21 (May 30, 2007)

What's the maximum distance between the dish and the SWM8? In my situation it would be about 85'. Would this work?

Mike


----------



## Michael D'Angelo (Oct 21, 2006)

jmr21 said:


> What's the maximum distance between the dish and the SWM8? In my situation it would be about 85'. Would this work?
> 
> Mike


DIRECTV recommends no more than 40' but I know a few of us have about 60' to 70' without a problem.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

Might this be related to the magical splitters?

http://www.primenewswire.com/newsroom/news.html?d=141936


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

Sixto said:


> Might this be related to the magical splitters?
> 
> http://www.primenewswire.com/newsroom/news.html?d=141936


Actually, this probably has more to with MRV and being able to see see content recorded on an HR2x on a PC.


----------



## Sixto (Nov 18, 2005)

jwd45244 said:


> Actually, this probably has more to with MRV and being able to see see content recorded on an HR2x on a PC.


Yep, this thread had been referring to MRV.

Jeremy W has also since my post started a separate thread: http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=128300

All discussion better there ...


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

I apologize if this has already been discussed, but haven't read through the whole thread yet.

If I want to hook up 4 HR2x's to a SWM-8, I assume I will suffer less signal loss using both SWM-1 (via the power converter) and SWM-2, each connected to a 1x2 splitter? Instead of SWM-1 (via the converter) to a 1x4 splitter?

Any pros or cons to either approach? TIA. /steve


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Steve said:


> I apologize if this has already been discussed, but haven't read through the whole thread yet.
> 
> If I want to hook up 4 HRsx's to a SWM-8, I assume I will suffer less signal loss using both SWM-1 (via the power converter) and SWM-2, each connected to a 1x2 splitter? Instead of SWM-1 (via the converter) to a 1x4 splitter?
> 
> Any pros or cons to either approach? TIA. /steve


I haven't seen any difference in levels even with an eight way split..


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

houskamp said:


> I haven't seen any difference in levels even with an eight way split..


Thanks, *hk*. So I can go with an SWM-8 and a single 1x4 to four HR2x's. The 1x4 would be connected to the IRD output of the power converter (which is connected to the SWM1 port).

Am I correct in thinking that with this configuration, I would NOT need a power passing splitter? /steve


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Steve said:


> Thanks, *hk*. So I can go with an SWM-8 and a single 1x4 to four HR2x's. The 1x4 would be connected to the IRD output of the power converter (which is connected to the SWM1 port).
> 
> Am I correct in thinking that with this configuration, I would NOT need a power passing splitter? /steve


correct..


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

houskamp said:


> I haven't seen any difference in levels even with an eight way split..


If you're looking at the receivers signal meter function, I would assume that it parallels that of the normal sat meters. These show essentially error corrected output, and regardless of distance will show the same number until it is no longer usable. Typically for those, it is irrelevant as the voltage loss should become a factor prior to signal attenuation, but for the SWM it may be different since the power inserter could be placed far upstream of a receiver.

Voltage becomes a non-issue and further distances could be traversed. I don't have an SWM, nor a meter capable of measuring the raw signal amplitude at a given point, but it would reason that there is an internal split in the swm5/8 for the two outputs, and that two 2 way splitters being fed from each output would result in smaller losses than splitting a single output 4 ways.

Now, does any of that matter? Probably not, unless you are pushing the SWM to its limits, or beyond 250+ feet I would imagine. I would assume for most people a 4 way split would be simpler and preferable to two way splits. Circumstances would be extreme to need the alternative.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

IIRC the SWM's are spec'd for up to 8 way split..


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

houskamp said:


> IIRC the SWM's are spec'd for up to 8 way split..


I wasn't implying otherwise. As I said, there is no reason under normal circumstances for there to be any issue with the output of a single SWM port. I was referring to the potential of using both ports in an unusual scenario to eek out all possible power.

I haven't cracked one open yet, but I would imagine they're using a simple internal split for the two ports. Using both would yield greater signal strength (not necessarily signal quality) over distance than using a single port split more times.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Teronzhul said:


> I wasn't implying otherwise. As I said, there is no reason under normal circumstances for there to be any issue with the output of a single SWM port. I was referring to the potential of using both ports in an unusual scenario to eek out all possible power.
> 
> I haven't cracked one open yet, but I would imagine they're using a simple internal split for the two ports. Using both would yield greater signal strength (not necessarily signal quality) over distance than using a single port split more times.


would expect that it is just a simple split inside.. just that it doesn't seem to effect final signal strength to the recievers.. almost like it's recieved and then resent to recievers.. doesn't effect rainfade or anything..
P.S. I have run 8 way split to house lines and then a 2 way to a pair of HR20-700s with no loss at all...


----------



## Teronzhul (Sep 21, 2006)

I've decided to use MSPaint to illustrate my nearly irrelevant point. 

Signal Quality /= Signal Strength

The receiver is showing you only a signal quality measurement, and as long as its tuner gets enough signal to resolve something, the quality measurement should remain consistent along the length of the cable. Signal strength however, will degrade over distance. The amount of loss over a given distance will vary based on center conductor size and the frequency of the signal but it will always get weaker the further it goes. 

Eventually it will reach a point on the line where the satellite tuner can no longer resolve anything, and your reading of 95% will abruptly become 0%. With legacy systems, the DC voltage drop is typically a problem before signal attenuation, but that shouldn't be the case with an SWM. 

A two way, four way, or eight way split shouldn't reduce signal quality, but would propel you closer to the threshold with a loss of signal strength. Basically it just means you can't have as long runs with lots of splits. 

I made a pretty (pretty ugly) picture with my guesses as to what splits could do to an SWM signal. Distances are relative to estimation, and would of course vary based on cable type used etc.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Teronzhul said:


> I've decided to use MSPaint to illustrate my nearly irrelevant point.
> 
> Signal Quality /= Signal Strength
> 
> ...


Yes I see your point but (not knowing exactly how it works) I don't see any actual sat loss.. even with the 8way+2way split I never loose sat lock in anything but a realy bad downpour.. same conditions as I saw with the regular old wire from dish to reciever..


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

Teronzhul said:


> The receiver is showing you only a signal quality measurement, and as long as its tuner gets enough signal to resolve something, the quality measurement should remain consistent along the length of the cable. Signal strength however, will degrade over distance.


It is my understanding that what the signal meters in the receivers show is a measurement based on bit error rate. Forward error correction will overcome bit errors resulting in the display of a "perfect" picture until the error rate surpasses the ability of the forward error correction to compensate. However, the signal measurement appears to be taken prior to the forward error correction being applied.

Thus, it is possible to see varying "signal strengths" while still having a fully corrected picture.

However, signal strength (attenuation between dish and receiver) is one of many factors/variables that can result in an increase in bit error rate, and eventually the loss of the corrected data stream and loss of picture.

Splitting results in an approximate reduction of 3db, or half the signal level, for each split. Certainly the more splits, the greater the signal loss. That would be reflected in a measurable change in "signal strength" if it in fact results in a higher bit error rate. It would not show a change in "signal strength" if it did not result in a higher bit error rate.

Carl


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

carl6 said:


> Splitting results in an approximate reduction of 3db, or half the signal level, for each split.


That was my thinking when I asked my original question. Normally, a 2-way splitter introduces less insertion loss than a 4-way splitter, so if you assume SWM-1 and SWM-2 present the same initial signal level, you'd think a 2-way splitter attached to each would provide four less attenuated ouputs than a 1x4 attached to one of them.

I guess the variable is the output of SWM-1 when connected to the Power Inserter. E.g., is it possible the output from a single port of a 1x4 splitter connected to IRD may be stronger than the output of a single port of a 1x2 connected to SWM-2? /steve


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

carl6 said:


> Splitting results in an approximate reduction of 3db, or *half *the signal level, for each split.


3db is not half the signal level. It cannot be. I have a Holland Electronic STS-4 4-way splitter downstream of my PI. The run to 4 different drops. 3 of the 4 drops go to my HR20s and my HR21. The 4th goes to a room where I have another splitter. One leg does to an H20 and one to a D12.

All of my signal levels on all of the transponders I am supposed to be seeing are in the 90s The lowest is a 91. Many are 99 or 100.

Also I have a set of diplexers at the end of each leg to split out OTA. Diplexers reduce the output, too. So if 3dB is half the output I would not see any signal at all..


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

jwd45244 said:


> 3db is not half the signal level. It cannot be. I have a Holland Electronic STS-4 4-way splitter downstream of my PI. The run to 4 different drops. 3 of the 4 drops go to my HR20s and my HR21. The 4th goes to a room where I have another splitter. One leg does to an H20 and one to a D12.
> 
> All of my signal levels on all of the transponders I am supposed to be seeing are in the 90s The lowest is a 91. Many are 99 or 100.
> 
> Also I have a set of diplexers at the end of each leg to split out OTA. Diplexers reduce the output, too. So if 3dB is half the output I would not see any signal at all..


3db is definitely half the signal strength, that's how the db system works. Every two-way split you make gives you 50% of the signal on each leg of the split - if it didn't you would somehow be creating energy from nothing (actually it is slightly less than 50% on each leg, because of losses in the splitter). You are confusing signal strength with signal quality measured by bit error rate - see Carl6's post. You can reduce the signal level without necessarily increasing the bit error rate, and even if the bit error rate increase the forward error correction will overcome many of the bit errors in a digital signal. That's why digital TV is normally either good or missing - as the signal degrades you get good reception until the error rate exceeds the ability of the error correction circuitry to correct the errors, then reception collapses completely, as compared with analog where the picture will degrade as the signal weakens.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

One-half power *is* -3 dB (-3.0103 dB, actually). Take Carl6's (and my) word for it. This does not mean that a 90 level would drop to 45 when going through a splitter, since the "signal strength" is not a linear indication of level, but is related to bit error rate.

If your received signal level were marginal, you would definitely see a noticeable effect when running through a splitter, but with sufficient signal it will have no visible effect.


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

jwd45244 said:


> 3db is not half the signal level. It cannot be. I have a Holland Electronic STS-4 4-way splitter downstream of my PI. The run to 4 different drops. 3 of the 4 drops go to my HR20s and my HR21. The 4th goes to a room where I have another splitter. One leg does to an H20 and one to a D12.
> 
> All of my signal levels on all of the transponders I am supposed to be seeing are in the 90s The lowest is a 91. Many are 99 or 100.
> 
> Also I have a set of diplexers at the end of each leg to split out OTA. Diplexers reduce the output, too. So if 3dB is half the output I would not see any signal at all..





texasbrit said:


> 3db is definitely half the signal strength, that's how the db system works. Every two-way split you make gives you 50% of the signal on each leg of the split - if it didn't you would somehow be creating energy from nothing (actually it is slightly less than 50% on each leg, because of losses in the splitter). You are confusing signal strength with signal quality measured by bit error rate - see Carl6's post. You can reduce the signal level without necessarily increasing the bit error rate, and even if the bit error rate increase the forward error correction will overcome many of the bit errors in a digital signal. That's why digital TV is normally either good or missing - as the signal degrades you get good reception until the error rate exceeds the ability of the error correction circuitry to correct the errors, then reception collapses completely, as compared with analog where the picture will degrade as the signal weakens.





bobnielsen said:


> One-half power *is* -3 dB (-3.0103 dB, actually). Take Carl6's (and my) word for it. This does not mean that a 90 level would drop to 45 when going through a splitter, since the "signal strength" is not a linear indication of level, but is related to bit error rate.
> 
> If your received signal level were marginal, you would definitely see a noticeable effect when running through a splitter, but with sufficient signal it will have no visible effect.


We're talking apples and oranges here. 3 dB is either 2 x or 1/2 x depending (and is not actual but close enough). This is for dealing with RF signals and its power. For the signal meter readings within the IRD, these don't correspond to RF signal directly (it is part of the equation however) but more geared towards Message Error Rates (MER), not directly bit errors (while bit error combines to get message errors), since there is Forward Error Correction (FEC) and other methods of to recreate garbaled signals based on the encoded schemes used.

So, genrally speaking, for link budget analysis, each split removes 1/2 power to each split. An easy way to visualize this is a hose passing water. The water coming down the main hose is constant. In order to feed the other legs of the hose, that entire volume is split into the number of splits, the combination of the splits equals the entire amount being supplied by the main line.

As for how the signal meter is representing signal strength, we can not be certain without a DirecTV engineer interjecting the specifics on what it means, but is not directly related to signal power since if the receiver was able to receive a signal of -100 dBm with a < 1% MER and the signal is increased to -50 dBm you would get the very same MER, the signal power increased but you have the same MER (this is the affect of Spread Spectrum Tranmission and Digital Encoding/Decoding).


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

This one is rated from 40-2150 MHz. That enough? /steve


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

Steve said:


> This one is rated from 40-2150 MHz. That enough? /steve


it SHOULD work


----------



## SSpectre (Feb 23, 2008)

dave29 said:


> it SHOULD work


Except for the "upcoming features"...... </sarcasm>


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

SSpectre said:


> Except for the "upcoming features"...... </sarcasm>


you must be talking about the new features that use the 2mhz band:lol:


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

i wonder whatever happened to the "swimman":uglyhamme


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

dave29 said:


> i wonder whatever happened to the "swimman":uglyhamme


Maybe he got hauled away in a black van with dark tinted windows with a tiny little DirecTv logo on the door. :lol:


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

smiddy said:


> We're talking apples and oranges here. 3 dB is either 2 x or 1/2 x depending (and is not actual but close enough). This is for dealing with RF signals and its power. For the signal meter readings within the IRD, these don't correspond to RF signal directly (it is part of the equation however) but more geared towards Message Error Rates (MER), not directly bit errors (while bit error combines to get message errors), since there is Forward Error Correction (FEC) and other methods of to recreate garbaled signals based on the encoded schemes used.
> 
> So, genrally speaking, for link budget analysis, each split removes 1/2 power to each split. An easy way to visualize this is a hose passing water. The water coming down the main hose is constant. In order to feed the other legs of the hose, that entire volume is split into the number of splits, the combination of the splits equals the entire amount being supplied by the main line.
> 
> As for how the signal meter is representing signal strength, we can not be certain without a DirecTV engineer interjecting the specifics on what it means, but is not directly related to signal power since if the receiver was able to receive a signal of -100 dBm with a < 1% MER and the signal is increased to -50 dBm you would get the very same MER, the signal power increased but you have the same MER (this is the affect of Spread Spectrum Tranmission and Digital Encoding/Decoding).


Absolutely agree. Your hose and water analogy is a good one. From time to time we see posts from people asking where they can get a two-way splitter with better than a 3db loss and then they seem amazed it's not possible. As I posted, a two-way splitter gives 50% of the energy at each output, less the losses in the splitter itself (where the lost energy gets turned into heat). This has nothing to do with the reading on the signal meter, because as you said this is measuring something else, we assume based on message error rates in some way.


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

Ok, I forgot my college physics and a 3dB drop does cut the signal in half. That says that it takes a fairly dramatic drop in signal before significant degradation in what we see and hear. So if I split a split signal and still see number in the 90s, it says that all of the error correction bits et al are doing their job.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

smiddy said:


> We're talking apples and oranges here. 3 dB is either 2 x or 1/2 x depending (and is not actual but close enough). This is for dealing with RF signals and its power. For the signal meter readings within the IRD, these don't correspond to RF signal directly (it is part of the equation however) but more geared towards Message Error Rates (MER), not directly bit errors (while bit error combines to get message errors), since there is Forward Error Correction (FEC) and other methods of to recreate garbaled signals based on the encoded schemes used.
> 
> So, genrally speaking, for link budget analysis, each split removes 1/2 power to each split. An easy way to visualize this is a hose passing water. The water coming down the main hose is constant. In order to feed the other legs of the hose, that entire volume is split into the number of splits, the combination of the splits equals the entire amount being supplied by the main line.
> 
> As for how the signal meter is representing signal strength, we can not be certain without a DirecTV engineer interjecting the specifics on what it means, but is not directly related to signal power since if the receiver was able to receive a signal of -100 dBm with a < 1% MER and the signal is increased to -50 dBm you would get the very same MER, the signal power increased but you have the same MER (this is the affect of Spread Spectrum Tranmission and Digital Encoding/Decoding).


What is the reality?

I split the signal 8 times am I going to notice it on my 42" plasma?

A friend at work tried to explain some RF theory to me with equations and charts(who is this Smith guy and who the heck taught him to make a graph :guck: ).

I'm a pretty smart guy...smarter than average...one look at the Smith Chart and he lost me.

So, my question is, in a normal installation, will see a difference splitting a SWMLine 8 times vs the normal wiring schemes?

I gotta tell you, it seems to me that if I'm using a properly rated splitter, I should not see a difference.

Mike


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> What is the reality?
> 
> I split the signal 8 times am I going to notice it on my 42" plasma?
> 
> ...


First, in general with digital signals you will not see any gradual degredation in picture quality as the signal level decreases, until the error correction can't handle the error rate and then the picture will breakup completely. Second, for 99.99% of users, splitting the satellite signal eight times through an SWM will have no effect. The only people who might be concerned are those who are already in a problem signal situation because they have extremely long runs, they are trying to reduce signal loss as much as possible. They would probably need to balance off the splits on each output of the SWM8, taking into account that any DVRs already have a built-in two way split. 
If you are driving OTA signals through the diplexer in an SWM8 then you might need to be more careful about the configuration design if your OTA signals are already marginal. As was posted earlier, the SWM8 starts by splitting the signal to the two outputs, so if you have eight OTA tuners than putting them all on one SWM output means they are each receiving one sixteenth of the signal, it makes more sense to put four on each of the outputs because that doubles the signal level at each tuner.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> What is the reality?
> 
> I split the signal 8 times am I going to notice it on my 42" plasma?
> 
> ...


I don't know how they are doing it but...
Even with the equivalent of a 16way split (2way>2-4ways>2way) and 130' of RG6, I have seen no loss in signal... That is no loss in rain fade resistance or aiming sensitivity.. I know there is drop from the SWM to recievers but it doesn't effect sat lock at all (which is what realy counts here)..


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> What is the reality?
> 
> I split the signal 8 times am I going to notice it on my 42" plasma?
> 
> ...


The first time they showed me a Smith chart I went  [and this was with five years of working/fixing RF systems].

Perhaps the best way to "think" about it is from a "normal" graph where there are four quadrants. Image the ^ going to infinity. Now have the > do the same. Lastly thing of the \/ going there also.
So the left < is zero, and all other "ends" are infinite. Since there are three "infinite" points [places], "Smith" changed the "normal" graph, so they are all in the same place on the > of the chart and made it circular.
A [Sine] wave, will travel around the outside of the circle twice. If you were to think of just the voltage [of a sine wave], you might see how "an open" [infinite] would have the highest voltage and "a short" [zero] would have zero voltage. "Unwrap" this and you have the "normal" sine wave, starting at zero, going to maximum, back to zero, then negative, and back to zero. These are 1/4 of the sine wave. On the Smith chart, zero is < and maximum is >.
I'll stop now otherwise  becomes     :eek2:


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I'll stop now otherwise  becomes     :eek2:


Its a conspiracy
http://www.engj.ulst.ac.uk/sidk/graph/smith.gif

You mean people learn and understand this stuff!?!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

CJTE said:


> Its a conspiracy
> http://www.engj.ulst.ac.uk/sidk/graph/smith.gif
> 
> You mean people learn and understand this stuff!?!


"Back in the day" that was the only way to do RF matching [that and using slotted line detectors].


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> The first time they showed me a Smith chart I went  [and this was with five years of working/fixing RF systems].
> 
> Perhaps the best way to "think" about it is from a "normal" graph where there are four quadrants. Image the ^ going to infinity. Now have the > do the same. Lastly thing of the \/ going there also.
> So the left < is zero, and all other "ends" are infinite. Since there are three "infinite" points [places], "Smith" changed the "normal" graph, so they are all in the same place on the > of the chart and made it circular.
> ...


:eek2:


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

CJTE said:


> Its a conspiracy
> http://www.engj.ulst.ac.uk/sidk/graph/smith.gif
> 
> You mean people learn and understand this stuff!?!


And then there is a double Smith chart, since there is a inverse of the three [impedance, inductance & capacitance] components of the "simple" Smith chart.

A little more about "the chart": http://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedia/Smithchart.cfm

From a place I spent sometime: http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/742

And what does this have to do with a SWM & Splitters? [not much].

Now back to our regular programing.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Pretty pictures :lol:


----------



## Spanky_Partain (Dec 7, 2006)

Any way to get a SWM from Directv yet?


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

Spanky_Partain said:


> Any way to get a SWM from Directv yet?


you MAY get a swm lnb if you are in the rollout markets and fit their criteria on a new install or an upgrade


----------



## Spanky_Partain (Dec 7, 2006)

dave29 said:


> you MAY get a swm lnb if you are in the rollout markets and fit their criteria on a new install or an upgrade


I am pretty sure I fit the criteria, but do we know where the rollout markets are?


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

hold on, i will find the post....................


----------



## Michael D'Angelo (Oct 21, 2006)

Spanky_Partain said:


> I am pretty sure I fit the criteria, but do we know where the rollout markets are?


Here is the list RobertE posted...



> They started a three phase roll out on May 1
> 
> First batch of markets are:
> 
> ...


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

Michael D'Angelo;1621769 said:


> Here is the list RobertE posted...


you beat me!
i saw you over in the cutting edge forum and i knew what you were doing:lol:


----------



## Michael D'Angelo (Oct 21, 2006)

dave29 said:


> you beat me!
> i saw you over in the cutting edge forum and i knew what you were doing:lol:


:lol:


----------



## Spanky_Partain (Dec 7, 2006)

Awesome...

On phone now....

Thanks guys.


----------



## bruiserk18 (May 25, 2008)

So let me ask this then. The SWS-2,4,8 splitters are the only ones 'approved' for use with the SWM which cover 2-2150MHz, but the 'approved' splitter/diplexer to split off the OTA signal is an ASKA TG2G-2DS which covers 5-2150MHz (at least that's what is listed at weaknees). 

Wouldn't using the approved splitter/diplexer cause you to lose any future communication at those lower signals even if you are using an SWS splitter?

(edit) Just to clarify, weaknees does not actually say that the ASKA splitters are 'approved'. But I still ask the question because I have this setup.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

Without knowing the detailed specifications of that device, it is not possible to answer your question. If it works, obviously the 2.3 MHz communication is functioning.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> And then there is a double Smith chart, since there is a inverse of the three [impedance, inductance & capacitance] components of the "simple" Smith chart.
> 
> A little more about "the chart": http://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedia/Smithchart.cfm
> 
> ...


There is also the Carter Chart (similar but different).

I had a copy of Smith's book at one time. It explained things in much more detail than you would ever want to know.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

bruiserk18 said:


> So let me ask this then. The SWS-2,4,8 splitters are the only ones 'approved' for use with the SWM which cover 2-2150MHz, but the 'approved' splitter/diplexer to split off the OTA signal is an ASKA TG2G-2DS which covers 5-2150MHz (at least that's what is listed at weaknees).
> 
> Wouldn't using the approved splitter/diplexer cause you to lose any future communication at those lower signals even if you are using an SWS splitter?
> 
> (edit) Just to clarify, weaknees does not actually say that the ASKA splitters are 'approved'. But I still ask the question because I have this setup.


Per DirecTv, diplexing is not supported or approved, so, there are no "approved" diplexers for SWM use.


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

bruiserk18 said:


> So let me ask this then. The SWS-2,4,8 splitters are the only ones 'approved' for use with the SWM which cover 2-2150MHz, but the 'approved' splitter/diplexer to split off the OTA signal is an ASKA TG2G-2DS which covers 5-2150MHz (at least that's what is listed at weaknees).
> 
> Wouldn't using the approved splitter/diplexer cause you to lose any future communication at those lower signals even if you are using an SWS splitter?
> 
> (edit) Just to clarify, weaknees does not actually say that the ASKA splitters are 'approved'. But I still ask the question because I have this setup.


As others have said OTA diplexing is not "approved". I use the Channel Master CM4002IFD and 4001IFD diplexers with success. (The are very inexpensive and Solid signal caries them).


----------



## bruiserk18 (May 25, 2008)

The ASKA 5-2150MHz splitters/diplexers do indeed work in separating the OTA signal (I'm using the OTA port of the SWM to combine the signal), but I was more referencing the 'rumors' of future functionality that would require the use of a special splitter that was using the 2-5MHz range. In theory wouldn't using the 5-2150MHz splitter to diplex the OTA signal not allow that "great new functionality"?

Sorry if I'm mangling some of the technical lingo.

Also, I'm curious on this. If OTA diplexing is not "approved" than why is there an OTA port on SWM and how do they expect you to get the signal off the line?

In case anyone cares I'm running (2) HR-21s and (1) H-21 off the SWM8.


----------



## tequila tim (Jun 25, 2008)

From several calls to DirecTV, and a few trucks coming out without SWiM switches, it seems like the story is that they will offer it to you if:

a) you have 6 or more receivers

and

b) at least most of them are already SWiM capable

and

c) they probably charge you an $80 upgrade fee

and

d) you give them your first born child

I picked up a cheap ($86 + $20 shipping!) SWiM LNB + 4 and 8-way switches on eBay...no brainer for me with my new install to 5LNB and the need to upgrade my remaining old-school receivers anyway.

Good luck y'all...happy SWiMming,

Tim


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

all i can say is wow, that is cheapest i have ever heard. must be a rogue installer trying to make some extra money with his companies equipment


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dave29 said:


> all i can say is wow, that is cheapest i have ever heard. must be a rogue installer trying to make some extra money with his companies equipment


"Buy now price" = $150 + shipping
Wonder which installs are being told they're not available :lol:


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> "Buy now price" = $150 + shipping
> Wonder which installs are being told they're not available :lol:


:lol: thats the only place(rogue installers) that they could be coming from that cheap. even 150+shipping is dirt cheap. way cheaper than what i can even get them for.


----------



## mangusta1969 (Oct 11, 2007)

I need a little help with a planned conversion from a working 5 LNB Slimline/WB68 setup to a 5 LNB Slimline/SWM-8 setup, driving 4 receivers and 2 DVRs. Some long cable runs are involved as described below:

Distance from SWM-8 to 5 LNB Slimline Antenna: 10 feet RG6
Distance from SWM-8 to Power Inserter: 15 feet RG6 (indoor mount for SWM-8 and PI)
Distance from SWM-8 to main house and 1 into 4 splitter: 130 feet RG6
Distance from SWM-8 to guest house and 1 into 2 splitter: 60 feet RG6

I will have two H20 receivers in the guest house
I have one HR20 and one HR21 DVRs in the main house
I have 2 H20 receivers in the main house

I would like to locate a 1 into 4 splitter in the main house to drive the two DVRs and the two H20s. Cable runs/types in the main house are as follows:
HR20 60 feet RG6
HR21 approx 120 feet of pre-existing RG59
H20 approx 50 feet of pre-existing RG59
H20 approx 120 feet of pre-existing RG59
Reminder, the splitter feeding each of the above units and cable runs is located 130 feet away from the SWM-8 via a single RG6 cable

I would like to locate a 1 into 2 splitter in the guest house to drive two H20 receivers. Cable runs/types in the guest house from the splitter to the receivers are as follows:
H20 45 feet of RG59 (could be upgraded easily to RG6)
H20 10 feet of RG59 (could be upgraded easily to RG6)

My questions are these:

1. Can the 1 into 4 splitter be located so far (130 feet of RG6) from the SWM-8?
2. Can the 1 into 4 splitter in the main house also drive some fairly long pre-existing RG59 cable runs?
3. Which high quality splitters are recommended for the minimum signal loss?

From looking at some other documentation (www.swm8.com/swm-faq.php), it appears that I am right on the edge of having a working configuration. My worst run is 130 feet of RG6 from the SWM-8 to the 1 into 4 splitter, followed by a run of 120 feet of pre-existing RG59 from the splitter to an H20 receiver.

I would appreciate any inputs from those who are currently operating with SWM-8s on similar long cable runs or from those who have experienced SWM-8 or splitter functional problems with long cable runs of RG6 and RG59. Thanks for your recommendations and help.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

mangusta1969 said:


> I need a little help with a planned conversion from a working 5 LNB Slimline/WB68 setup to a 5 LNB Slimline/SWM-8 setup, driving 4 receivers and 2 DVRs. Some long cable runs are involved as described below:
> 
> Distance from SWM-8 to 5 LNB Slimline Antenna: 10 feet RG6
> Distance from SWM-8 to Power Inserter: 15 feet RG6 (indoor mount for SWM-8 and PI)
> ...


you may get away with the 130 of rg6 but that 120 of rg59 will problably be touchy..


----------



## mangusta1969 (Oct 11, 2007)

Anyone out there who has driven 100 plus feet of SWM-8 signal (signal will actually be directly from a 1 in/2 out splitter) through existing RG59 cable? I can't restring RG6 in the walls of my house and have a couple of pretty good lengths of RG59 with H20 receivers that are working fine when driven from one of the outputs of my current Zinwell WB68 multi-switch.

I want to "upgrade" to a SWM-8, but I don't want to lose my existing capability to drive some RG59-cabled H20 receivers. From my readings of the SWM-8 documentation and its ability to use splitters, it appears that the SWM-8 output signals are more tolerant of poor cabling (like my 20 year old internal RG59 coax), but I would like some actual user experiences (good or bad) before I take the SWM-8 plunge. Thanks!


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

mangusta1969 said:


> Anyone out there who has driven 100 plus feet of SWM-8 signal (signal will actually be directly from a 1 in/2 out splitter) through existing RG59 cable? I can't restring RG6 in the walls of my house and have a couple of pretty good lengths of RG59 with H20 receivers that are working fine when driven from one of the outputs of my current Zinwell WB68 multi-switch.
> 
> I want to "upgrade" to a SWM-8, but I don't want to lose my existing capability to drive some RG59-cabled H20 receivers. From my readings of the SWM-8 documentation and its ability to use splitters, it appears that the SWM-8 output signals are more tolerant of poor cabling (like my 20 year old internal RG59 coax), but I would like some actual user experiences (good or bad) before I take the SWM-8 plunge. Thanks!


Got a HR20-700 on the end of 150' rg59.. according to the test meter it's a little touchy (got 7 out of 8 SWM chanels) but it's been running fine.. It's cheap oooold 59 too..


----------



## mangusta1969 (Oct 11, 2007)

houskamp said:


> Got a HR20-700 on the end of 150' rg59.. according to the test meter it's a little touchy (got 7 out of 8 SWM chanels) but it's been running fine.. It's cheap oooold 59 too..


Houskamp,

Thanks for the info. What is your signal source? Are you driving the RG59 input signal directly from an SWM-8 port or from an externally located splitter? If split, what type of splitter are you using and how many outputs does the splitter have (e.g. 2 or 4)? Thanks.


----------



## mangusta1969 (Oct 11, 2007)

www.solidsignal.com just went down to a real killer price on the SWM-8, so I am going to go experimenting and will report back.


----------



## Fly Navy (Oct 31, 2007)

Regarding the <40' between the dish and the SWM, what if the dish runs into a WB616 and the run between the dish and the WB616 is greater than 40' (probably closer to 100') but I run run the SWM8 downstream of the WB616 and the distance between the WB616 and the SWM8 is less than the 40'. Any idea if that would work? Since the WB616 are powered, isn't there less risk of signal loss which is what's driving the 40' limitation? 

I live in a condo building and we're trying to come up with a solution to increase the number of receivers that each unit can run since we're limited to the two lines run from the multiswitches into the units currently.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

mangusta1969 said:


> Houskamp,
> 
> Thanks for the info. What is your signal source? Are you driving the RG59 input signal directly from an SWM-8 port or from an externally located splitter? If split, what type of splitter are you using and how many outputs does the splitter have (e.g. 2 or 4)? Thanks.


the run is: SWMline dish>70'rg6>PI>diplexed ota>8way split (2way>pair of 4ways)>100'rg59 (upstairs run)>2way split>25'>wall jack>10'>diplexer>hr20-700
now my head hurts :lol:


----------



## mangusta1969 (Oct 11, 2007)

houskamp said:


> the run is: SWMline dish>70'rg6>PI>diplexed ota>8way split (2way>pair of 4ways)>100'rg59 (upstairs run)>2way split>25'>wall jack>10'>diplexer>hr20-700
> now my head hurts :lol:


Houskamp,

Thanks for the detailed info. I have some longer RG6 and long RG59 runs, but I won't have as many splits and no OTA/diplexer to worry about.

Of course now that I just ordered a SWM-8 from Solid Signal (wonderful price), my 9 month old HR20-700 in the living room will not boot up. Bedroom HR21 is just fine. Technology...


----------



## will49 (Jul 17, 2008)

Is it possible to use the 3 legacy ports on the SWM-8 to go into a 4x8 multiswitch which would then drive legacy (Ultimate TV) receivers? Obviously not all 3 sats would be available because only 3 of 4 inputs are used, but i just need the main sat for my legacy receiver.

So:
Ka/Ku ---4cables--> SWM8 ---legacy port 3 cables---> 4X8 multiswitch -> legacy receivers


----------



## will49 (Jul 17, 2008)

FYI for those existing customers who want to upgrade their system and get a SWM Dish or Ka/Ku dish with SWM switch - DTV will not allow you to get this if you are an existing customer. It is only available for new customers.

I spent 2 hours 20 minutes on the phone with DTV today (after 3 weeks of trying to get installers to bring a SWM system + 2x HR21 to go with my existing 4 x UltimateTVs). There is a hidden policy that the SWM is not to be given to existing customers. There is no way to order or override this. The CSR at DTV spent ages taking with different level people and it simply cant be done. 

In the end the CSR was told by manager they would have to loose me as a customer because they simply could not order a SWM for me and it is needed because of the existing wiring.

As a final deal I told them I would personally buy a SWM8 and have it ready for the installer next week. They gave me $150 credit to offset this cost.

Pretty amazing how messed up they are.


----------



## Michael D'Angelo (Oct 21, 2006)

will49 said:


> FYI for those existing customers who want to upgrade their system and get a SWM Dish or Ka/Ku dish with SWM switch - DTV will not allow you to get this if you are an existing customer. It is only available for new customers.
> 
> I spent 2 hours 20 minutes on the phone with DTV today (after 3 weeks of trying to get installers to bring a SWM system + 2x HR21 to go with my existing 4 x UltimateTVs). There is a hidden policy that the SWM is not to be given to existing customers. There is no way to order or override this. The CSR at DTV spent ages taking with different level people and it simply cant be done.
> 
> ...


:welcome_s to DBSTalk!

Sorry to hear you were unable to get the setup you wanted but you would not have been able to use the SWMLine dish anyway. It will not work with your 4 UltimateTV units.


----------



## will49 (Jul 17, 2008)

I know that SWM won't work with legacy receivers.

The idea was to keep the existing dish for my legacy receivers and add the SWM for the HR21s. But DTV's internal order system won't let you do that.

The reason for needing the SWM is because there are only 3 cables going to a room that has 2 x UltimateTV DVRs + OTA.

At the moment I have both of the UltimateTVs running off a 2x4 switch in the room (not all sats available simultaneously of course but otherwise works perfectly), and the third cable used for OTA.

I wanted to swap one of the UltimateTVs for the HD-DVR which would mean:

1 cable for SWM with HR21 from new dish.

2 cables for legacy UltimateTV with OTA multiplexed on one of the cables.

Just ordered the SWM-8 and will DIY. Shame on DTV.



Michael D'Angelo;1684453 said:


> :welcome_s to DBSTalk!
> 
> Sorry to hear you were unable to get the setup you wanted but you would not have been able to use the SWMLine dish anyway. It will not work with your 4 UltimateTV units.


----------



## bobnielsen (Jun 29, 2006)

will49 said:


> FYI for those existing customers who want to upgrade their system and get a SWM Dish or Ka/Ku dish with SWM switch - DTV will not allow you to get this if you are an existing customer. It is only available for new customers.
> 
> I spent 2 hours 20 minutes on the phone with DTV today (after 3 weeks of trying to get installers to bring a SWM system + 2x HR21 to go with my existing 4 x UltimateTVs). There is a hidden policy that the SWM is not to be given to existing customers. There is no way to order or override this. The CSR at DTV spent ages taking with different level people and it simply cant be done.
> 
> ...


Hmm, $139.99 + 8.95 shipping = $148.94 for SWM8 from Solid Signal. $150 credit from Directv. Sounds good to me. It's not much different than their limiting the number of HD DVRs you can get directly from them. I suspect that the HSP inventories drive both policies (and I don't know if all HSPs even stock the SWM8 yet).


----------



## evan_s (Mar 4, 2008)

Since SWM8's are only used for MDUs at this point. Its likely that most HSP have no stock in them at all.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

evan_s said:


> Since SWM8's are only used for MDUs at this point. Its likely that most HSP have no stock in them at all.


"only" should be "mostly".


----------



## evan_s (Mar 4, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> "only" should be "mostly".


Since SWM8's are only used by DirecTV for MDUs at this point. Its likely that most HSP have no stock in them at all.

That should be a little more specific =)


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

evan_s said:


> Since SWM8's are only used by DirecTV for MDUs at this point. Its likely that most HSP have no stock in them at all.
> 
> That should be a little more specific =)


They're not only used for MDUs, but "most" of the demand is for MDUs.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

will49 said:


> FYI for those existing customers who want to upgrade their system and get a SWM Dish or Ka/Ku dish with SWM switch - DTV will not allow you to get this if you are an existing customer. It is only available for new customers.
> 
> I spent 2 hours 20 minutes on the phone with DTV today (after 3 weeks of trying to get installers to bring a SWM system + 2x HR21 to go with my existing 4 x UltimateTVs). There is a hidden policy that the SWM is not to be given to existing customers. There is no way to order or override this. The CSR at DTV spent ages taking with different level people and it simply cant be done.
> 
> ...


Sorry things didn't work out like you wanted. But, it has been posted multiple times in multiple forums as to who qualifies for a SWM and where they are available.

Also, be aware that whatever tech you may get, may not have been trained on the SWM. If he has not, he won't have the installation meter to make sure your lines work as they should. He may not want to install the SWM as then he is now on the hook for any issues that may arise and be subject to chargebacks.


----------



## will49 (Jul 17, 2008)

Yeah I'm fully expecting to have the tech go "ummmm never seen one of those before". It's been a 4 week battle with DTV to get HD and AM21s and I have been basically lied to by the CSRs on so many occasions now I've come to expect it.

As long as he puts up the dish I can take it from there. The only thing I'm not sure on is if I can use the 2 legacy ports on the SWM8 to feed into a multiswitch for my legacy receivers (for one sat only), or if I should split the 4 feeds from the dish to go into the SWM and multiswitch.

Another question: If the tech has to install splitters and diplexers will he normally provide them as part of the install, or will it be a case of "its not on the order sheet"?



RobertE said:


> Sorry things didn't work out like you wanted. But, it has been posted multiple times in multiple forums as to who qualifies for a SWM and where they are available.
> 
> Also, be aware that whatever tech you may get, may not have been trained on the SWM. If he has not, he won't have the installation meter to make sure your lines work as they should. He may not want to install the SWM as then he is now on the hook for any issues that may arise and be subject to chargebacks.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

will49 said:


> Yeah I'm fully expecting to have the tech go "ummmm never seen one of those before". It's been a 4 week battle with DTV to get HD and AM21s and I have been basically lied to by the CSRs on so many occasions now I've come to expect it.
> 
> As long as he puts up the dish I can take it from there. The only thing I'm not sure on is if I can use the 2 legacy ports on the SWM8 to feed into a multiswitch for my legacy receivers (for one sat only), or if I should split the 4 feeds from the dish to go into the SWM and multiswitch.
> 
> Another question: If the tech has to install splitters and diplexers will he normally provide them as part of the install, or will it be a case of "its not on the order sheet"?


While other DMAs/HSP may be different, if we do not have it on the workorder for a SWM, we are not issued any of the equipment for it (SWM, SWM Splitters, PI).

There is also a mandate from DirecTv that Diplexing is NOT to be done on any SWM installation. Yes I know people have done so since the early days of the field testing and have had little to no problems. However, that is DirecTvs stance, and it is what it is.


----------



## Amerikes (May 18, 2006)

Hmmmm! Let me see if I understand the hookup to HR-21's from the SWM8....

From what I have read, from the SWM8, you only need one RG6 run from the SWM8 to the HR21, and connect that run directly to Satellite IN 1 (SWM-2) on that HR21 to be able to record programs.

However, without the SWM8, I must run two RG6 runs, and connect them to each of the two inputs Satellite IN 1 (SWM-2) and Satellite IN 2 inputs on the HR21.

One of my questions would be, how does the SWM8 provide the ability to record, without inputs to both Satellite IN inputs?

And if that is correct, then I would not need a SWS-2 splitter at the HR21 for the two Satellite inputs to the HR21......???


----------



## Michael D'Angelo (Oct 21, 2006)

Amerikes said:


> Hmmmm! Let me see if I understand the hookup to HR-21's from the SWM8....
> 
> From what I have read, from the SWM8, you only need one RG6 run from the SWM8 to the HR21, and connect that run directly to Satellite IN 1 (SWM-2) on that HR21 to be able to record programs.
> 
> ...


That is correct. From the SWM8 you would only connect one line to SAT 1 and the HR21 will split the signal internally to feed a signal to both tuners.


----------



## will49 (Jul 17, 2008)

It is apparently on the work order that "customer to supply SWM", so fingers crossed on that one!

Just to clarify when you say "Diplexing is NOT to be done", are you meaning splitting of the output of the LNBs into a SWM + other (such as legacy multiswitch)?

In that case the only way to run my legacy equipment would be:

a) Keep the old dish for legacy only
b) Connect the legacy multiswitch to the legacy outputs of the SWM8

Does that sound right?



RobertE said:


> While other DMAs/HSP may be different, if we do not have it on the workorder for a SWM, we are not issued any of the equipment for it (SWM, SWM Splitters, PI).
> 
> There is also a mandate from DirecTv that Diplexing is NOT to be done on any SWM installation. Yes I know people have done so since the early days of the field testing and have had little to no problems. However, that is DirecTvs stance, and it is what it is.


----------



## evan_s (Mar 4, 2008)

diplexing is adding in a second signal, typically the signal from an OTA antenna. It has nothing to do with using multiple switches. The old multiswitch should work just fine off the legacy ports but would obviously be limited to only the 101 sat with 2 cables hooked up.


----------



## Grydlok (Mar 31, 2007)

RobertE said:


> While other DMAs/HSP may be different, if we do not have it on the workorder for a SWM, we are not issued any of the equipment for it (SWM, SWM Splitters, PI).
> 
> There is also a mandate from DirecTv that Diplexing is NOT to be done on any SWM installation. Yes I know people have done so since the early days of the field testing and have had little to no problems. However, that is DirecTvs stance, and it is what it is.


If you use Rio3 it will be the last line Item. SWM- 5 or SWM- 8.

Also the menu has changed to the advanced menu for SWM LNB install.


----------



## unc8185 (Jun 25, 2006)

RobertE said:


> Sorry things didn't work out like you wanted. But, it has been posted multiple times in multiple forums as to who qualifies for a SWM and where they are available.
> 
> Also, be aware that whatever tech you may get, may not have been trained on the SWM. If he has not, he won't have the installation meter to make sure your lines work as they should. He may not want to install the SWM as then he is now on the hook for any issues that may arise and be subject to chargebacks.


Yes, that is clearly the DirecTV's policy. However, haven't some of the posters had a SWM installed? Is it totally up to the CSR or installer to bend the rules?

The frustrating thing for me is how the rollout has gone. There have been numerous delays in availability of the SWM and then of the Slimeline-SWM. Now, it appears that I may have to obtain my own SWM from alternative (grey?) channels and attempt the installation myself.

I may check out Dish again. Neither company has delivered yet on serving the my market with local HD. Perhaps the new satellite will result in local HD to my market. I do believe that Dish may be able to provide service to 2 tuners with one wire now. It sounds like this may never happen for existing DirecTV customers who do not live in apartments.

If I cancel my subscription, how long will it take to become a "new customer" again?


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

unc8185 said:


> Yes, that is clearly the DirecTV's policy. However, haven't some of the posters had a SWM installed? Is it totally up to the CSR or installer to bend the rules?
> 
> The frustrating thing for me is how the rollout has gone. There have been numerous delays in availability of the SWM and then of the Slimeline-SWM. Now, it appears that I may have to obtain my own SWM from alternative (grey?) channels and attempt the installation myself.
> 
> ...


As far as I know no-one has had a standalone SWM installed unless they were in one of the few areas that were used for installer field testing. The SWMline dish is available in a number of areas now and is supposed to be rolled out nationally in August. But many installers have not even been through SWM installation training yet. And the SWMline is generally only available for new installations, or new upgrades to HD, and some installers will only use it where people have more than two tuners and would otherwise need a multiswitch.
There is no point in pressuring a CSR to get the SWMline, they do not have control. If the installer is not in one of the areas designated for rollout, and/or is not trained on the SWMline, you won't get one - period. You won't get a standalone SWM however hard you try because the installers don't carry them. So if you absolutely have to have an SWM, you will have to buy a standalone SWM8 from one of the internet suppliers, or from dave29 http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=114457 , or get an SWM LNB from ebay and install it yourself in the dish (it replaces the existing LNB).


----------



## unc8185 (Jun 25, 2006)

Thanks Texasbrit -

I will try to wait another month or so for further rollouts. If the Slimline option is delayed for my area and/or I am not eligible, I will have to go the standalone SWM-8 way or go towards Dish.


----------



## webby_s (Jan 11, 2008)

So this is my set-up (and I am telling you this so I can eventually get the SWM-8 in)

AU-9 "Slimline" Dish
4 RG6 from AU-9
HR21 Living room
H21 bedroom
H21 basement

All installed the begining of June of 2008

So as stated above, I may be interested in the whole setup of SWM-8
I have looked into these two websites:
http://www.weaknees.com/swm-directv.php and
http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?main_cat=02&CAT=&PROD=SWM-8\

What am I missing? What would I need? Any help would be appriciated and apologise if I am starting a reply that has been asked before. I have read and search through this specific post and there is a lot of technical stuff to read but it all seems to be a pretty straight forward install if one goes off of http://hr20.dbstalk.com/docs/SWM-8-030707.pdf Diagram, right:sure:

I know everyone is really helpful so please go easy on a rookie (to the boards) But I am pretty sure I have enough knowledge and internet searchability to get this accomplished.

:icon_bb:Here's to future multiple HR-21's in my house.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

webby_s said:


> So this is my set-up (and I am telling you this so I can eventually get the SWM-8 in)
> 
> AU-9 "Slimline" Dish
> 4 RG6 from AU-9
> ...


since you have all compatible recievers, you can go with either the SWM8 (with current dish setup) or the SWMLine LNB (replaces just the LNB on your current dish)..
then you need the Power inserter and compatible splitter..


----------



## webby_s (Jan 11, 2008)

houskamp said:


> since you have all compatible recievers, you can go with either the SWM8 (with current dish setup) or the SWMLine LNB (replaces just the LNB on your current dish)..
> then you need the Power inserter and compatible splitter..


That is very helpful! Thank you :icon_cool

Now is there any nifty diagrams just like the one I have linked to above.... just in case? I guess the only real question I have would be how do I hook up the PI (power supply).

Do you just have an RG6 from the PI to the SWMLine? or visa versa?


----------



## bakers12 (May 29, 2007)

If you buy an SWM-8 (Solid Signal has them for $149 with shipping) you could install it where it's most convenient. It's OK outdoors and can be installed near the dish for a single-wire run. SMWLine LNBs aren't available at retail yet that I've seen.

Check out the First Look. The first post has a link to a pdf with some good information, including diagrams.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=1419520&postcount=4
RG6 is the recomended wire from PI to SWM, after PI it's not as critical..


----------



## webby_s (Jan 11, 2008)

houskamp said:


> http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=1419520&postcount=4
> RG6 is the recomended wire from PI to SWM, after PI it's not as critical..


Thanks.... This will help a ton. The diagram on there is spot on what I was looking for. Thanks all.


----------



## trice9 (Aug 27, 2008)

dave29 said:


> the approved splitters start with "sws". for example "sws2", "sws4", or "sws8"
> i have plenty of them if needed, along with swm8's for WAY less money.


Dave I need one, how do I arrange it? Thanks T


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

solidsignal.com has them
their price is the best now


----------



## thestaton (Aug 14, 2008)

I'm planning on only hooking up one HD-DVR. Right now, I have one line ran to the room that is accessible from the outside of the house. Currently connected to the TWC box. 

Would the installer have to run a second line to my room to get both tuners to work?

Or should I just pick up a SWM 8 and save the work? Does one get it with a power supply or not?


----------



## thestaton (Aug 14, 2008)

thestaton said:


> I'm planning on only hooking up one HD-DVR. Right now, I have one line ran to the room that is accessible from the outside of the house. Currently connected to the TWC box.
> 
> Would the installer have to run a second line to my room to get both tuners to work?
> 
> Or should I just pick up a SWM 8 and save the work? Does one get it with a power supply or not?


bump?


----------



## SSpectre (Feb 23, 2008)

thestaton said:


> I'm planning on only hooking up one HD-DVR. Right now, I have one line ran to the room that is accessible from the outside of the house. Currently connected to the TWC box.
> 
> Would the installer have to run a second line to my room to get both tuners to work?
> 
> Or should I just pick up a SWM 8 and save the work? Does one get it with a power supply or not?


Without a SWM8, the installer would need to run a second line to the room.

You will need the power supply if you purchase an SWM8.


----------



## darita (Aug 16, 2006)

I have recently moved to a new house and have yet to call DTV for the free moving install. What do I need to tell DTV before the install, to make it all work?
I have 3 HR20s and 2 yet to be determined, standard def boxes. I want to run cable to a forth room to be HD DVR ready, incase I decide to add another HD DVR. So, I guess you could say I have 4 HD DVRs to run cable for. Besides an SWM8 or two, what other pieces would I need to complete the package and how should it all be hooked up?


----------

