# Vip 622 signal strength



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

I finally gave up on my 921 and leased a vip622. I had already installed a dish 1000 and peaked it with the 921 and got good signal strengths (110, 119 mostly about 100) and 129 (mostly 70's with 1 80. (I'm in San Francisco).

When the 622 was installed all the signal strengths were at least 10 points lower, including OTA signal strengths.

Question: Does the 622 have less sensitive tuners than the 921 or does it just compute signal strength (really signal/noise ratio) differently?

Has anyone else noticed this?


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

If I recall. the 622 scale is 0-100 and the 921 is 0-125 so you will see a lower reading when going from a 921 to the 622.

And welcome to a new world. Hope you find the jump enjoyable.


----------



## BNUMM (Dec 24, 2006)

Was the 921 using separator? I have noticed that the 322, 522, 625 and 622 always show a lower signal than the single tuner receivers (301 and 311). I have only installed 3 - 921's and I cannot remember the signal strengths that they were getting. I know that in West Michigan I can get 125 on spotbeam #5 on a 301 receiver. If I put in a 622 on the same system I only get 110 signal strength.


----------



## brYdn (May 16, 2007)

Are you loosing HD channels or are they pixelating, because the dish 1000 doesn't work in the NorthWest. There is something wrong with the spacing of the 129w lnb. The best signals are with the dish 1000 DPP twin pointed at 110w and 119w orbitals and then port into the DPP twin the 129w orbital with a 24" dish or another dish500 and a DPP dual. Then transponder 16 should be around 70 on the signal scale. With a seperated 129w dish locked on right at the satellite the signal is never a problem. And, otherwise, 110w and 119w are in and 129w is out and visa versa...


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

Ron Barry said:


> If I recall. the 622 scale is 0-100 and the 921 is 0-125 so you will see a lower reading when going from a 921 to the 622.
> 
> And welcome to a new world. Hope you find the jump enjoyable.


My 622 has a 0-125 scale on the installation signal strength screen so that can't be the reason for the difference. Maybe they just changed the Way they calculate signal strength. I can't believe the 921 had a better sat and OTA tuner!

Otherwise I'm very happy the my 622 (and glad I waited for most of the bugs to fixed instead of getting the first version as I did with the 921 in Jan 2004 and it took a year for the SW to become stable. Then after they put in the daylight savings time update the 921 had allot of the old bugs return (missed timers, crashing and freezing, etc)


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

BNUMM said:


> Was the 921 using separator? I have noticed that the 322, 522, 625 and 622 always show a lower signal than the single tuner receivers (301 and 311). I have only installed 3 - 921's and I cannot remember the signal strengths that they were getting. I know that in West Michigan I can get 125 on spotbeam #5 on a 301 receiver. If I put in a 622 on the same system I only get 110 signal strength.


The dish pro plus uses a separator for sat 1 and 2 inputs from a single 2.25 gHz cable. None of the wiring was changed when I changed receivers (only 1 receiver is installed.)


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

brYdn said:


> Are you loosing HD channels or are they pixelating, because the dish 1000 doesn't work in the NorthWest. There is something wrong with the spacing of the 129w lnb. The best signals are with the dish 1000 DPP twin pointed at 110w and 119w orbitals and then port into the DPP twin the 129w orbital with a 24" dish or another dish500 and a DPP dual. Then transponder 16 should be around 70 on the signal scale. With a seperated 129w dish locked on right at the satellite the signal is never a problem. And, otherwise, 110w and 119w are in and 129w is out and visa versa...


I'm in San Francisco and have the Dish 1000 -1 with one twin and one single Lnb. I had to peak on 110 (using my 921) to get the best signal strength on all three sats, and then swapped out the 921 for the 622 with the exact same wiring and got lower signal levels on all sats and OTA.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

paulcdavis said:


> My 622 has a 0-125 scale on the installation signal strength screen so that can't be the reason for the difference. Maybe they just changed the Way they calculate signal strength. I can't believe the 921 had a better sat and OTA tuner!
> 
> Otherwise I'm very happy the my 622 (and glad I waited for most of the bugs to fixed instead of getting the first version as I did with the 921 in Jan 2004 and it took a year for the SW to become stable. Then after they put in the daylight savings time update the 921 had allot of the old bugs return (missed timers, crashing and freezing, etc)


Hmmm I was going off the top of my head at work. Perhpas it is the other way around or I am thinking about the 811. Or perhaps it was changed with a previous version. Anyway... I went from the 921 to the 622 and my OTA improved and I have not noticed any degress in end user experience with my 622 signal. Unless you running into signal issues I would not be too concerned.

Hmmm anyone remember the scales being different? I searched back and I did make this statement back in 6/06 so perhaps the scale was changed at some point but it is possible that it is calculated differently. Hard to say, but like I said if things are working well and you are not around 60 I would not be too concerned myself.


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

Ron Barry said:


> Hmmm anyone remember the scales being different? I searched back and I did make this statement back in 6/06 so perhaps the scale was changed at some point but it is possible that it is calculated differently. Hard to say, but like I said if things are working well and you are not around 60 I would not be too concerned myself.


Ron,

I'm pretty sure that the bar/scale went to 100 with the 921. The 622 goes to 125 and hasn't changed in scale.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Well then I had them inverted... I remembered them being different.... THen I would expect the raw number to increase going from a 921 to 622 if the same algorithm is used to come up with the strength number. I have no idea if this is the case or not.


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

boylehome said:


> Ron,
> 
> I'm pretty sure that the bar/scale went to 100 with the 921. The 622 goes to 125 and hasn't changed in scale.


Bar scale on my 921 went up to 125. I know this because I wrote down all the transponder strengths after I installed my dish 1000 and one of the transponders gave me a 125 signal strength and quite a few of the 110 and 119 transponders had signal strengths (which I believe is really signal/ noise ratio) of over 100.


----------



## BNUMM (Dec 24, 2006)

The 721 is the receiver that had a scale of 1 to 100. I have one.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Here is a early thread discussing signal strength on the OTA. I was referring to the OTA scale, but given my mind is fried at the moment I can totally be off here. Anyway... here is the thread.

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=59306


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

paulcdavis said:


> Bar scale on my 921 went up to 125. I know this because I wrote down all the transponder strengths after I installed my dish 1000 and one of the transponders gave me a 125 signal strength and quite a few of the 110 and 119 transponders had signal strengths (which I believe is really signal/ noise ratio) of over 100.


I looked back through my old records. Somewhere along the lines a software update changed the scale from 0 - 100 to 0 - 125 for the 921. I searched through 921 records in the forums but couldn't find any pictures.

Ron, my brain is fried at this point too.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

I didn't find "100" "125" or "scale" in the EKB software history of the 622, 921 or 811. Could easily be something I missed though.


----------



## rice0209 (Oct 11, 2005)

I've noticed this problem as well. I checked signal strengths with a 510 receiver and got 119 and 110 up around 114. when i ran the check switch on my 622, the signals were at 100 roughly. 

Last year, when i moved into my previous house, the installer told me it happens every time and that no matter what he has done, he loses 10 - 15 points on the scale with the 622.

I've always wondered what the deal is as well. is it the use of the dp44 switch along with the separator?


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

paulcdavis said:


> My 622 has a 0-125 scale on the installation signal strength screen so that can't be the reason for the difference. ...


It's apples and oranges. The numbers on one receiver do not match the scale on the other receiver. In fact, they changed the scale on the 622 in a software revision some months ago.


----------



## BNUMM (Dec 24, 2006)

It is not specific to the 622. It started with the 522. The signal has always been lower on the 322, 522, 625 and the 622. I can't remember what the signal strengths were on the 921's and the 942's that I have installed. The 721 has a different scale (0 to 100).


----------



## rice0209 (Oct 11, 2005)

I was using a 510 which had a scale of 0 to 125. I know that my 622 had a scale of 0 to more than 100, because 100 was not at the end of the scale. I believe my 622 also had a scale to 125 or close enough.

Regardless, my 510 showed a signal of over 115 and my 622 strength never crossed the 100 barrier (even though it had plenty of scale left after 100 to do so).

I have heard that realistically, separators can contribute up to a 10% loss in signal. I wonder if that loss would effect how the 622 reports its signal strength for the dish.

When i tested my 510, it was hooked directly to the dish. The time before, when i tested, it was hooked through a switch, but obviously had no separator since its a single tuner.


----------



## vader22 (Oct 25, 2005)

I have started noticing (or just started getting annoyed) that my hd locals can be quite pixelated. I checked all my signal levels and they range from 70-100 on a scale of 125. Should they be higher than that? The channel I notice it on the most but probably only because it gets watched the most is FOX (St. Louis).


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Since none of us knows exactly how the various signal level indicators across the Dish receivers are calibrated or what exactly they are taking into account for the measure... it may not be reasonable to even assume that a 0-125 scale on one receiver means the same as a 0-125 scale on another receiver.

I know it might seem like it ought to... but this isn't like measuring height with a ruler where an inch is always an inch... I doubt any of the Dish receivers (except possibly ones in the same series like 501/508) share any direct reasonably correlation.

So... if you are seeing 110 on your 510 receiver for a given transponder... and 100 on your 622 for that same transponder... even if both scales are 0-125... there is not a concrete reason to assume the 622 is seeing 10% lower signal. Both receivers could in fact be seeing the same level of signal, but each meter's scale is not calibrated to the same degree.

Bottom line... there is not really a way to compare different receivers like you might want to. You could take your 510 receiver and move it to another room, and if you get lower signal in one room than another that would tell you something... but comparing different model receivers really doesn't seem to tell you anything relative to the amount of signal getting to receiver A vs receiver B.


----------



## rice0209 (Oct 11, 2005)

HDMe said:


> Since none of us knows exactly how the various signal level indicators across the Dish receivers are calibrated or what exactly they are taking into account for the measure... it may not be reasonable to even assume that a 0-125 scale on one receiver means the same as a 0-125 scale on another receiver.
> 
> I know it might seem like it ought to... but this isn't like measuring height with a ruler where an inch is always an inch... I doubt any of the Dish receivers (except possibly ones in the same series like 501/508) share any direct reasonably correlation.
> 
> ...


EXACTLY, that is why i was asking the question in the first place. To try and understand what differences there were since the results were not matching up. I am just simply trying to point out the facts in order to understand what makes this so different.

I have never had problems with different rooms. In my old system at my last house, the signals were all the same on every receiver. It was only when i introduced the 622 into the system with my two 510s that i started reporting a lower signal strength. My installer in the last house confirmed that he sees it happen all the time. He will peak a signal, and as soon as he hooks in a 622, the signal begins to report 10 - 15 points lower. This caused all my receivers to report the same as the 622 after it was installed.

I installed my own dish this last time, and without remembering this weird problem, experienced it all over again.

It definitely could just be a difference of scales or it could be something a little more deep in the programming of switches and signal loss due to all the extra logic being introduced. I don't know. If anyone does know, out of curiousity, i would like to know as well.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

vader22 said:


> I have started noticing (or just started getting annoyed) that my hd locals can be quite pixelated. I checked all my signal levels and they range from 70-100 on a scale of 125. Should they be higher than that? The channel I notice it on the most but probably only because it gets watched the most is FOX (St. Louis).


if your signals on the transponder for your locals are in the 70-100 range, I would suspect the issue might be in the stream. I am sure they are still tweaking the MPEG4 stuff so I would shoot dish quality a email and tell them what you are experiencing.


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

rice0209 said:


> I was using a 510 which had a scale of 0 to 125. I know that my 622 had a scale of 0 to more than 100, because 100 was not at the end of the scale. I believe my 622 also had a scale to 125 or close enough.
> 
> Regardless, my 510 showed a signal of over 115 and my 622 strength never crossed the 100 barrier (even though it had plenty of scale left after 100 to do so).
> 
> ...


I had a 921 tweaked for max signal strength (really signal / noise ratio) using a Dish 1000.1 with separator at receiver.

When I took out the 921 and put in the 622, all the signal strengths were at least 10 points lower. No change in wiring or antenna adjustment. Both the 921 and 622 have a 0-125 scale. Unless the tuner in the 622 is not as good as the tuner in the 921 (unlikely), the way they calculate signal strength on the 622 must be different from how it was calculated on the 921.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

If you will insert 3 dB or 6 dB attenuator and the receiver does not reveal decrease of SS, then the scale shows a ratio of good/bad packets (BER). For sure FTA DVB-S cards working this way with Quality scale ( plus separate SS sclae ).


----------



## fadi (Mar 23, 2007)

my scale on my 622 is 0 - 125. Signal strength for the 110, 119, and 121 are 75 - 90, but for the 129 is 54 - 62. I occasionally get pixelation, or the picture may momentarily blackout (but not the sound).

Would inserting an inline sattellite signal amp make any difference. Channel Vision has one that is 20 dB. True Spec has one that is sloped, 16 - 20 dB from 950 MHz - 2250 MHz. My total cable run from dish to distribution panel to receiver is around 200', all RG6 Quad shield.


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

fadi said:


> my scale on my 622 is 0 - 125. Signal strength for the 110, 119, and 121 are 75 - 90, but for the 129 is 54 - 62. I occasionally get pixelation, or the picture may momentarily blackout (but not the sound).
> 
> Would inserting an inline sattellite signal amp make any difference. Channel Vision has one that is 20 dB. True Spec has one that is sloped, 16 - 20 dB from 950 MHz - 2250 MHz. My total cable run from dish to distribution panel to receiver is around 200', all RG6 Quad shield.


Hi

At 200 ft you are just about at the limit of cable length for Dish pro plus transponders and the 622.

Do you have a dish 1000.1 (18" x 24") or dish 1000.2 (24 x 30)? The newer dish will give you better signal strength. Dish should upgrade you for free with 129 signals below 60.

An in-line Satellite amp might help if installed near the dish and amplifies the full 2.25 or 3 GHz. frequency range. Most Sat amps are only up to 1 GHz and would not work with Dish pro plus transponders.

Remember to use only 3 GHz connectors, grounding blocks, surge protectors, etc, as each time you insert something into the RG-6 cable you lose some signal strength.

Paul


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

"Most Sat amps are only up to 1 GHz and would not work with Dish pro plus transponders."

Sat amps have 950-1450 MHz range at most !


----------



## fadi (Mar 23, 2007)

paulcdavis said:


> Hi
> 
> At 200 ft you are just about at the limit of cable length for Dish pro plus transponders and the 622.
> 
> ...


I have a dish 1000.2 hooked to 3 receivers (2 x 622's and 1 x 211). Both 622's are running 4.05 Software. The in-line sat amps that I'm looking at have a spec that says they amplify 950 MHz - 2.25 GHz. Not sure about the specs of the barrel connectors though. How can I tell if they're 3 GHz or not?


----------



## BNUMM (Dec 24, 2006)

They will have a blue center.


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

P Smith said:


> "Most Sat amps are only up to 1 GHz and would not work with Dish pro plus transponders."
> 
> Sat amps have 950-1450 MHz range at most !


Not true. There are manyr of them that go up to 2.1 or more Ghz (2100 Mhz), such as the Terk BIA-20, Sima SLA, the Trianglecables 201-605, Zenith ZDS-505 etc.


----------



## rice0209 (Oct 11, 2005)

So I've probably got about a 50 to 60 foot run from my satellite to my DP44 in my basement. The distance between my DP44 and my receiver is about 30 ft or so.

I am using QUAD shielded RG6, solid copper core, rate up to 3 GHZ.

Do I possibly need an inline amplifier between my switch and dish?

As stated before, my signals were peaked around 115 strength for 110/119 but now only report around 97 with no changes.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Not necessary.

to wje - you should pickup paulcdavis's post for quote


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

fadi said:


> I have a dish 1000.2 hooked to 3 receivers (2 x 622's and 1 x 211). Both 622's are running 4.05 Software. The in-line sat amps that I'm looking at have a spec that says they amplify 950 MHz - 2.25 GHz. Not sure about the specs of the barrel connectors though. How can I tell if they're 3 GHz or not?


As Bnumm said, the center of the barrel connectors will be blue. not white. Radio shack sells 3MHz dual gounding blocks that you can cut (if you have the tools) to use as connectors without the grounding block bracket. Or buy the single 3Ghz grounding block and just ignore the grounding bracket. I have not been able to find 3GHz barrel connectors on the net. If BNUMM has a source, please post a link.

The Dish Network Approved Panamax satellite surge protector for Dish Pro Plus transponders does not have the blue connectors that it should, although it seems to work OK.

Paul


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

P Smith said:


> "Most Sat amps are only up to 1 GHz and would not work with Dish pro plus transponders."
> 
> Sat amps have 950-1450 MHz range at most !


Stated range of an RF amp is only useful if the frequency response curve is flat (or nearly so) over the entire range. Unless they have elaborate filters, they will amplify below 500 MHz and over 1 GHz, just not very well. An amp with a 3 GHZ upper range would be best for dish pro plus band stacking.

You can test this at home my checking the signal strengths on T1 and T2 for the same transponder in the point Dish menu. If one Sat input is allot lower than the other (say 10 points or more) you may have a problem with the frequency response of your cable, grounding block, surge protector, diplexer, barrel connector, etc.

Paul


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

rice0209 said:


> So I've probably got about a 50 to 60 foot run from my satellite to my DP44 in my basement. The distance between my DP44 and my receiver is about 30 ft or so.
> 
> I am using QUAD shielded RG6, solid copper core, rate up to 3 GHZ.
> 
> ...


50 - 60 ft should be OK. Changing weather conditions, solar flares, and Dish playing with the transponders can cause a 15 point signal drop. Your Dish may also have moved and you might get higher signals back by tweaking the dish azimuth a bit. ( not for the faint of heart on a steep roof without a peaking meter)

At 97 you'll have no problems with satellite lock and picture reception, I would worry if it drops below 60, as my Dish 1000.1 does sometimes on Satellite 129.

Paul


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

paul, my point was _sat_ RF amp have nominal range 900-1500 MHz, not as you mentioned 1 GHz . And other poster noticed, newest sat RF amps have 2.1+ GHz upper range.
If you're really care, provide a link to that _sat_ ams specs.


----------



## fadi (Mar 23, 2007)

I guess my original question was if the occasional pixelation or momentary disappearance of the picture but not the sound, is that a sign of a weak signal, and if so would a proper in-line sat amp (rated to amplify signals to at least 2.25 GHz) fix the problem. Or should I look elsewhere? wiring is all 3 GHz rated RG 6 Quad. All barrel connectors have the blue insert.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

I wouldn't worried at all - seems to me it happened up there, someone did overcompress the signal.


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

fadi said:


> I guess my original question was if the occasional pixelation or momentary disappearance of the picture but not the sound, is that a sign of a weak signal, and if so would a proper in-line sat amp (rated to amplify signals to at least 2.25 GHz) fix the problem. Or should I look elsewhere? wiring is all 3 GHz rated RG 6 Quad. All barrel connectors have the blue insert.


I agree with P Smith,

unless you have low signals strengths, especially on T1 or T2 and not the other, you don't need an amplifier. Momentary glitches occur some time in the data stream between the source, the Sats and your Dish.

Paul


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

P Smith said:


> paul, my point was _sat_ RF amp have nominal range 900-1500 MHz, not as you mentioned 1 GHz . And other poster noticed, newest sat RF amps have 2.1+ GHz upper range.
> If you're really care, provide a link to that _sat_ ams specs.


This was the first link I found when searching for amps:

http://www.showmecables.com/showProducts.asp?category_id=394

I agree most now go up to at least 2 GHz, although I doubt the frequency response is flat

Paul


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

"Indoor Home / Apartment CATV multimedia amplifiers. Suitable for Internet modem digital applications. Compensate for long cable drops or multiple devices."

I don't know how are you reading the specs - it's clearly stated "CATV"; perhaps you mistaken by that words 'Satellite/CATV Amplifiers".
OK, let me expalin to you  - That was a chapter's header !


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

P Smith said:


> "Indoor Home / Apartment CATV multimedia amplifiers. Suitable for Internet modem digital applications. Compensate for long cable drops or multiple devices."
> 
> I don't know how are you reading the specs - it's clearly stated "CATV"; perhaps you mistaken by that words 'Satellite/CATV Amplifiers".
> OK, let me expalin to you  - That was a chapter's header !


Noted. As a 52 year old EE I get my senior moments. (But ask me about Nova Mini-computers with 33 mbyte disk drives the size of a washing machine that cost $50,000 and I remember all the details.


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

BNUMM said:


> They will have a blue center.


I finally found a source:

http://www.prosatellitesupply.com/f81_hi-freq_barrel_connectors.htm

Paul


----------

