# FTA HD receiver with DVR and 2 tuners finally available



## Chandu

What seems like really long time ago, there was a thread with discussion of HD FTA receivers (and specifically HD FTA receivers with DVR functionality and multiple tuners). Well, that thread has now been locked:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=55026

and whatever latest and greatest products were discussed in it never made it to the market (still i.e. Dreambox 8000s, Zinwell ZDX-640 HD CA / CI) OR were offered exclusively through certain satellite providers like BSkyB (Pace TDS850HD).

But anyway, finally there is a product out on the market which contains all of these features (along with other standard features expected of an FTA receiver such as USALS / DiSEqC 1.2, smartcard slots etc. etc.) This product is called Humax iCord HD. Hard disk capacities for DVR come in 80 GB, 160 GB and 320 GB varieties. Here is the complete user manual:

http://www.humax-digital.de/products/new_manual/iCordHD_100GB_M.pdf

There is a good video review of this top of the line machine here. The CEO of Humax himself is interviewed in it. Unfortunately, it's a flash video and there is review of an unrelated product (Humax 40 inch HDTV with built in DVB-T tuner and some other gizmos) preceding it. There is no way to fast forward it, it being a flash video, for whatever it is worth.

http://www.drdish.dweb.de/?p=42


----------



## stogie5150

Humax doesn't sell DVB-S equipment in the US that I know of. 

Which is a shame because there is a gaping hole in the FTA market for a receiver that will do ALL DVB formats, HD, 4:2:2, DVB-S2 8psk, H.264, PVR and blind scan. 

A LOT of what we watch on the FTA sats is slated to go MPEG 4 DVB-S2 8psk in the very near future, and we have no solution to scan for said signal just yet. A few boxes we have will DISPLAY the signal, but if you need to FIND them, unless you have a spectrum analyzer, you're sunk.


----------



## Chandu

stogie5150 said:


> Humax doesn't sell DVB-S equipment in the US that I know of.


Above box isn't (and won't probably for the nearest future) being sold in any US retail. But it doesn't really matter. There is nothing stopping anyone in the US from buying it from retail outside USA.



> Which is a shame because there is a gaping hole in the FTA market for a receiver that will do ALL DVB formats, HD, 4:2:2, DVB-S2 8psk, H.264, PVR and blind scan.


Yes, the Humax iCord HD does all of these things and more.


----------



## Elchucko

Chandu said:


> Above box isn't (and won't probably for the nearest future) being sold in any US retail. But it doesn't really matter. There is nothing stopping anyone in the US from buying it from retail outside USA.
> 
> Yes, the Humax iCord HD does all of these things and more.


There is no mention of 4:2:2 in the pdf. The only available machine to decode it has been the QualiTV. Do you have personal knowledge of this machine decoding 4:2:2?


----------



## Chandu

Elchucko said:


> There is no mention of 4:2:2 in the pdf. The only available machine to decode it has been the QualiTV. Do you have personal knowledge of this machine decoding 4:2:2?


I believe I heard the Humax CEO say that in that long video somewhere, in his German accent. The trouble is, I don't want to go listen to that whole thing now without ability to fast-forward/rewind, only trying to catch the single 4:2:2 mention being spoken. To be sure, I will send an email to the Dr. DISH program right now to confirm. As and when I hear back from them, I'll update here.

BTW, I found that program to be extremely knowledgeable about the most obscure stuff. Later in that video, Dr. DISH was answering satellite questions of people from all over the world - Dubai/Abu Dhabi, Hungary, USA, Tanzania, Canada, Seychelles Island and on and on. So I expect them to be very responsive.


----------



## Chandu

I'm still awaiting my question to be answered by Dr. DISH. But unfortunately some preliminary search seems to indicate that indeed there is no 4:2:2 support due to the choice of Broadcom chip being used. This from discussion on another message board. Still awaiting answer to the question sent to Dr. DISH.

http://www.satclub-thueringen.de/wbb2/thread.php?threadid=6201



> 4:2:2 zeigt er leider nicht an, aber vielleicht wird ja was drauß. Es ist ein Broadcomchip verbaut. Der sollte es können.


----------



## bruin95

This Humax box is around $800US. Yikes!!


----------



## starman345

If this is built for the European/Asian market won't there be a problem trying to use it in the US with the pal/ntsc. 50hz-60hz difference?


----------



## Chandu

starman345 said:


> If this is built for the European/Asian market won't there be a problem trying to use it in the US with the pal/ntsc. 50hz-60hz difference?


What PAL/NTSC? This is fully digital technology, not the analog technology (especially NTSC) you quote which will be obsolete.

Only incompatibility I see is following (which shouldn't be a big deal): The SD output resolutions supported by this receiver are 576i and 576p which are compatible with PAL. None of consumer display devices in US/Canada can handle this resolution as far as I know.

But this is not a big deal at all. Why?

The very fact someone in North America would be interested in a receiver like this would be if they own an HD display device (see the title of this thread - HD receiver). All of these should handle 720p, almost all should handle 1080i. (And now a lot of them handle 1080p as well, but there is no broadcast material in this resolution.) And this receiver supports output resolutions of 720p and 1080i. As long as the receiver's output resolution is set to one of 720p or 1080i, even for SD material it should spit out digital signal compatible with the display.

I presume the 50Hz/60Hz difference you mention is w.r.t. the refresh rate frequency for the digital signal. I thought most high end display devices come with built-in video processing circuits which could handle these differences and convert an incompatible signal to compatible. In the worst case, such problem may need addition of an external video processor such as Faroudja and that should take care of the problem, no?


----------



## Chandu

And I have couple more updates to make to this thread about couple of other receivers.

The reason Dreambox 8000 seems to have died before even being born is because of problems in obtaining license for HDCP. Apparently the HDCP licensing body is extremely paranoid about granting license to someone like Dream Multimedia, whose whole philosophy is built upon open source software. Seems like they fear aggressive, tech-savy end users might crack HDCP using such a box. If Dream dropped HDMI or DVI output altogether, they could in theory stick to only component outputs. But this would prevent the user from being able to watch programs with HDCP, which would make the existence of such a high end box worthless.

Having said that, for the first time ever on any official website belonging to Dream Multimedia (this one being their Middle East division in Dubai) has anything official about Dreambox 8000 been posted. I think this website update was made about a month ago. It could be nothing more than vaporware, which it has been all along. But the fact that they're bothering to update their website now makes you wonder and say: Hmm.

http://www.dreammultimedia-tv.com/flyers/2008/DM_8000.indd.pdf

The second update is about another receiver from a company in Sweden called Lyngbox. Similar to Dreambox 8000, this one had been rumored to be coming for a long time and almost given up for as vaporware. But surprisingly, over the last month they've actually gone past that stage and have started selling in few countries (Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, Spain etc.) Here is the official info about their specs I could find:

http://www.lyngbox.com/specs/

Manuals:

http://www.lyngbox.com/downloads/docs/manual/lyngbox-manual-english.pdf

http://www.lyngbox.com/downloads/docs/manual/lyngbox-lb-st1-quickstart-guide.pdf

http://www.lyngbox.com/downloads/docs/manual/lyngbox-rcu-manual-english.pdf

Now for the discouraging news about this Lyngbox. Based on whatever I could gather after searching, I do not believe it supports reception for 4:2:2 feeds.  Also, this box doesn't even support blind scan functionality. The product marketers for this box are lot more communicative with end user community, discussing issues on their own forums. They claim they're receptive to more and more feedback from consumers about product requirements, and may just incorporate a 4:2:2 feature in a future version. Of course, 4:2:2 being a professional grade format, costs a lot more computing power to decode. That would end up making the box even more expensive.

Now here is something very interesting I found in the Lyngbox manual:



> Add an Extra Tuner
> 
> It is possible to install an additional tuner in the LyngBox. By doing this you can record and watch channels from the same source simultaneously. An expansion card with an additional tuner can be purchased at most stores selling the LyngBox. An installation guide is supplied with the tuner card.


Could this mean that you could install your own tuner card capable of receiving 4:2:2 feeds in this box, and voila!?!?!?! If such a feature could be supported, sounds pretty radical. Or does it mean, only specific tuners which only Lyngbox will sell can be added?


----------



## Chandu

I finally got a reply from LyngBox about my 4:2:2 question. To give a perspective to end consumers like us about why it is so difficult to find many receivers with 4:2:2 capabilities, here is their reply. This gives an insight on what product marketing for manufacturer of such boxes have to think about. I'm not saying I'm happy to a hear a reply like this at all, but this cost-benefit trade off is the reality. The easiest solution I can think of is: In the extra tuner slot they've left open, they could sell a tuner with 4:2:2 capabilities in the future. Of course it would cost more. But if someone is interested in this functionality, they would be willing to pay more for it. They would get it in a single box, without having to sacrifice other capabilities offered by the box.



> "Sorry to inform you that the LyngBox will not be able to receive 4:2:2
> signals. Facts like; 4:2:2 is only for professional feeds and there are only
> like five such feeds* ( * Correction dated 18.09.2007 - Many feeds yet only
> 5 regular TV transmissions in 4:2:2) in the world."
> 
> At this point in time we do not feel that five feeds justify costly license
> fees associated with them. What the future holds, I can't say.


I think they're missing the point by pinning on "regular transmissions" instead of feeds. Large number of FTA users are interested in feeds. I can't argue about the cost factor. Of course it costs more to process 4:2:2 feeds, and it is in their interest to not make base cost of the box exorbitant for wanting to have bigger market footprint. But a compromise solution is possible. I will propose to them and see what they have to say.


----------



## Chandu

LyngBox product marketing/tech support came back to me. They say that the immediate specification for expansion slot tuner has already been written and work is underway implementing it without any commitment for 4:2:2 support. Having said that, they understand the value of my feedback, and have started discussing it for next version of expansion slot tuner. This is very encouraging.

I urge all of you who care about 4:2:2 support in a single box with good architecture (OK, I know about the blind scan deficiency, but they have taken input on hardware supported blind scan in next version of tuner as well), to go the following link and let LyngBox know about this. The more potential customers they hear from the better. This would be best bet for a quality receiver in my opinion, as opposed to the DreamBox which seems to have failed.

http://www.lyngbox.com/contact/sales-end-consumer/


----------



## Chandu

See this thread for where 4.2.2 in expansion tuner slots to Lyngbox as I originally suggested is being discussed:

http://www.lyngbox.com/support/forum/discussion/93/422/


----------



## Chandu

Chandu said:


> ...whatever latest and greatest products were discussed in it never made it to the market (still i.e. Dreambox 8000s...





Chandu said:


> The reason Dreambox 8000 seems to have died before even being born is because of problems in obtaining license for HDCP. Apparently the HDCP licensing body is extremely paranoid about granting license to someone like Dream Multimedia, whose whole philosophy is built upon open source software. Seems like they fear aggressive, tech-savy end users might crack HDCP using such a box. If Dream dropped HDMI or DVI output altogether, they could in theory stick to only component outputs. But this would prevent the user from being able to watch programs with HDCP, which would make the existence of such a high end box worthless.
> 
> Having said that, for the first time ever on any official website belonging to Dream Multimedia (this one being their Middle East division in Dubai) has anything official about Dreambox 8000 been posted. I think this website update was made about a month ago. It could be nothing more than vaporware, which it has been all along. But the fact that they're bothering to update their website now makes you wonder and say: Hmm.
> 
> http://www.dreammultimedia-tv.com/flyers/2008/DM_8000.indd.pdf


For those who were waiting, the Dreambox 8000 HD with DVR did finally make it to market, after a promise of some 3 years. I doubt the tuners have any 4:2:2 support; but for whatever it is worth the product information is here:

http://www.dream-multimedia-tv.de/english/products_dm8000.php

I've seen it on sale at different online sites e.g. multishop:
http://multishop.ch/osc/product_info.php/manufacturers_id/21/products_id/52765


----------

