# L4.06 Software Experiences/Bugs Discussion



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Please use this thread to discuss your experiences with L4.06 and any bugs you have found.

Release notes for L4.06 have been posted and can be found here -- Rob


----------



## 4bama (Aug 6, 2006)

Ron Barry said:


> Well I reopened the thread. I personally have not gotten 4.06 and I find it rather odd that only a few people have pipped up indicating they have. Well for now.. Post here if you received it and post your experiences in the sticky. Also, sorry Chuck, Jim and Gravel.. When I was closing the thread I accidentally deleted your posts. So if you were wondering where they went.. That is where and they are back.


It was on my 622 Friday morning and the only change I've seen is the one already reported, the installation/pointing strength meter has been modified for a wider range, check the "Help" link at this option for DISH's explanation.

The pause/frame skip problems are still as before on my 622.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

I got L4.06 and noticed nothing much except my ota strength has dropped by 10 points across the board on my strongest received ota stations. Oh and my sat signal meter is now much , much lower strength. I don't know how I am going to be able to peak a sat dish now that 75 is considered good signal strength.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> I don't know how I am going to be able to peak a sat dish now that 75 is considered good signal strength.


I understand confusion and getting used to a new signal meter... but how is it any more difficult to peak? It is a relative strength level meter anyway... so you would just peak your dish until you get the highest level on the meter for that transponder and you are done.

Doesn't matter if peak is 100 or 90 or 10... it shouldn't change what you do or how you peak a dish, right?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

I would unify it that way as schools doing  - simple and easy to understand for EVERYONE: 

- A/B/C/D/E.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

HDMe said:


> I understand confusion and getting used to a new signal meter... but how is it any more difficult to peak? It is a relative strength level meter anyway... so you would just peak your dish until you get the highest level on the meter for that transponder and you are done.
> 
> Doesn't matter if peak is 100 or 90 or 10... it shouldn't change what you do or how you peak a dish, right?


 I meant that I have gotten used to the strengths I already have on certain transponders on 110/119/61.5/129 and now I will have to relearn what is considered a good signal strength all over again. THis means relearning what I thought I already knew.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> I meant that I have gotten used to the strengths I already have on certain transponders on 110/119/61.5/129 and now I will have to relearn what is considered a good signal strength all over again. THis means relearning what I thought I already knew.


I understood that part, which is why I mentioned an adjustment period to get used to the new levels... but your post implied you would not be able to peak a dish. Maybe you didn't actually mean it the way you wrote it.

To my way of thinking, in order to properly peak a dish you would adjust until you get the maximum signal strength for that installation. Knowing that 70, as an example, is a "good" level is not pertinent to peaking a system. When peaking, you would be going for the maximum be it 70 or 80 or whatever... so I just didn't see where the signal meter changing would effect the work that needs to be done in order to peak an installation.

You have to get used to the new lower numbers of course... but peaking would still be the same process to get the best/highest signal and should be no more work than before.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Yeah, but now imagine you're try find a gap between threes. You'll need to know local clear sky maximum before that. 
No, relative SS is not enough.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

HDMe said:


> I understood that part, which is why I mentioned an adjustment period to get used to the new levels... but your post implied you would not be able to peak a dish. Maybe you didn't actually mean it the way you wrote it.
> 
> To my way of thinking, in order to properly peak a dish you would adjust until you get the maximum signal strength for that installation. Knowing that 70, as an example, is a "good" level is not pertinent to peaking a system. When peaking, you would be going for the maximum be it 70 or 80 or whatever... so I just didn't see where the signal meter changing would effect the work that needs to be done in order to peak an installation.
> 
> You have to get used to the new lower numbers of course... but peaking would still be the same process to get the best/highest signal and should be no more work than before.


 Okay my definition of peaking a dish on certain transponders and your defintion is different. I meant that I am used to peaking on high numbers on certain transponders on all 4 sats and I know when I have the best peak by doing so. Now I have to relearn all the strengths for those certain transponders so I know I am at the best strength. I use a cheap $20.00 sat finder to peak my installs on my friends and family's installs, repeaks etc. IT doesn't give me a number like 90 or 100 , just 1 - 10 on a meter.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> I use a cheap $20.00 sat finder to peak my installs on my friends and family's installs, repeaks etc. IT doesn't give me a number like 90 or 100 , just 1 - 10 on a meter.


Ok... now I'm confused. If you are using a satfinder to peak your installs... then what does the signal meter on the receiver have to do with anything? It sounds like you are peaking based upon the meter reading of the sat finder... in which case, that hasn't changed and I'm not sure I see why the receiver signal meter has anything to do with how you are peaking the satellite installation.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

The one OTA channel I was having issue with (100 SS and frequent dropouts) seems to have been fixed when I got 4.06.

Good deal.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

Larger scale would show more detail. 1 to 10 would say show a 7 for the peak. Where as a 1-100 could show a 75 on the same SS. Having more divisions makes it easier to get the best in the SS.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

HDMe said:


> Ok... now I'm confused. If you are using a satfinder to peak your installs... then what does the signal meter on the receiver have to do with anything? It sounds like you are peaking based upon the meter reading of the sat finder... in which case, that hasn't changed and I'm not sure I see why the receiver signal meter has anything to do with how you are peaking the satellite installation.


 Okay I can't explain any better than I have already done. Suffice to say we seem to have a miscommunication here. Okay one more time here. I peak the dish based on my cheap sat meter and then go look at the screen on my tv to see if certain transponders are at the same signal strength on my installation as on my parents, friends , family. If they are on a similar strength then I know that they are peaked as good as I can get them on the same skew, elevation, azmuith etc. IF the spotbeams for my locals is off I know that I need to repeak it or change the elevation a little to get it back to what I know is a good strength for reception. For example my Houston locals are at about 90 strength on a spot beam . IF I don't get at least 90 on that transponder 4 on the 110 sat , I know that I need to make sure I am level , plumb, that the elevation doesn't have to be changed to compensate so I can get that 90 lock on that transponder.

I will post what I have found out here comparing the old signal strength on my back bedroom 622, that has L4.05 and my living room 622 that does have L4.06. The changes in signal strength have dropped anywhere from 23 - 37points. Here are some transponders at L4.05 and at L4.06.

110 sat 
---------------------------------------------------
old L4.05 / new L4.06 
transponder 1 ) 93 64 (-29 drop)
transponder 2 ) 99 70 (-29 drop)
transponder 5 ) 84 55 (-29 drop)
transponder 11) 87 59 (-28 drop)
transponder 16) 101 71 (-30 drop)
transponder 22 ) 103 73 (-30 drop)

119 sat
---------------------------------------------------- 
old L4.05 / new L4.06
transponder 2 ) 104 75 (-29 drop)
transponder 4 ) 99 70 (-29 drop)
transponder 11 ) 97 63 (-34 drop)
transponder 18 ) 104 74 (-30 drop)
transponder 21 ) 95 65 (-30 drop)

61.5 sat
------------------------------------------------------ 
old L4.05 / new L4.06
transponder 1 ) 93 56 (-37 drop)
transponder 9 ) 98 62 (-36 drop)
transponder 11 ) 95 59 (-36 drop)
transponder 14 ) 107 75 (-32 drop)
transponder 31 ) 96 67 (-29 drop)
transponder 32 ) 82 59 (-23 drop)

My question is how is dropping the signal strength by over 30 points, going to help assist anyone in getting a better peak on the dish as the NEW instructions say in the dish point screen?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

That's close to eliminate that bogus 125 scale what it was invented a few years ago. 
Perhaps returning back to pure 100 points scale across of very old, not that old and new models.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> My question is how is dropping the signal strength by over 30 points, going to help assist anyone in getting a better peak on the dish as the NEW instructions say in the dish point screen?


I thought the main point of these changes were to make ALL dish rcvr's display the same SS instead of showing different numbers at the same residence.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Then what was a point to invent the strange 125 points scale initially when all receivers that time had 100 pints scale ?!


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

What L406?? I still have the L405 with no problem. is the L406 good for anything?? did it fix anything??


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It looks like the meter was the major change, Tom. Although there probably is something else going on there. ViP-211s also got the new meter briefly before going back to L345.

As far as how to use the new meter ... and the brief time I had it on my 211 ... you still tweak for the highest signal. I do wish that the numbers went higher on all scales. I don't mind not getting readings in the "120"s on my receivers any more, but seeing 30's and wondering if that is good?

It is a sliding scale and I believe the intent was to make a good signal from 129° read the same as a good signal from 119° or 110° instead of seeing 100's on 119° and 110° and 70's on 129° and needing experience to know that it is all good.

What I'd like to see ... is a calibration where "100" is considered the target for that satellite and transponder and "20" would be the minimum for a usable signal - calibrated for EACH satellite and transponder and sent in the system tables. If a power level is changed on the satellite (moving from single power transponder to dual) the calibration changes in the tables.

Then one could peak for the 100's on all transponders/satellites and know that if they saw a reading closer to 20 that they would be risking (or experiencing) signal loss. Seeing 70's on an accurately aimed dish that saw 100-125's the day before isn't cool.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

P Smith said:


> Then what was a point to invent the strange 125 points scale initially when all receivers that time had 100 pints scale ?!


When they started putting TPs in double-power mode it became possible to get >100 signal. P Smith can stop reading here . That's points, not %.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

elwaylite said:


> I thought the main point of these changes were to make ALL dish rcvr's display the same SS instead of showing different numbers at the same residence.


Well that would be fine except they kept the 125 signal strength scale. Now it looks very off to the average customer than before. They need to change the scale back to 100 or even less to make it look right. THe highest signal strength I got was about 80 on one transponder and that one used to be at 107 strength before the new software.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> Well that would be fine except they kept the 125 signal strength scale. Now it looks very off to the average customer than before. They need to change the scale back to 100 or even less to make it look right. THe highest signal strength I got was about 80 on one transponder and that one used to be at 107 strength before the new software.


Agreed. Wonder why they did not change that also.

I remember people stating that the meter change would not be a big deal and the avg person would not notice. If the avg person looks at TP's on 129 and has had sat before, they are gonna say "WTF?" .


----------



## Taco Lover (Jan 8, 2007)

It's not like I'm in a hurry to get 406, but anyone know why I haven't received it or how long these updates usually take? I haven't gone through a software update since signing on to Dish. Just wondering.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

E* normally rolls out software in stages ... that way if there is an unforseen problem it affects less receivers (and less customers). If there are no problems more receivers are given the new software then it becomes the new default. If problems are found they are corrected (hopefully) and you will see the next version after it is tested and released via the same process.


----------



## Taco Lover (Jan 8, 2007)

Thanks James.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

BobaBird said:


> When they started putting TPs in double-power mode it became possible to get >100 signal. P Smith can stop reading here . That's points, not %.


Dish keep silence about meaning the numbers - no one installer or their managers informed . 
for sure it is NOT signal level, but sort of result of composite SS and SQ.
Your suggestion is good, but without facts - do you know all history of output power of all tpns on all sats ? I suggest Rainbow-1 used double powered tpn old days.


----------



## Rob Glasser (Feb 22, 2005)

Release notes for L4.06 have been posted and can be found here

Thanks


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

Thats strange. Nothing about OTA. My issue appears to have been fixed. Maybe it was the one station all along.


----------



## Rob Glasser (Feb 22, 2005)

If it was not working before the release and is working after it was probably a fix in the release. Typically the release notes I get cover major/general changes, not every single bug fix is documented.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Perhaps elwaylite. But past history has shown that not all fixes are shown in the release notes so it is possible there was a fix in the OTA subsystem and it just did not make the release notes.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

Gotcha. It was having issue like two days before the update, so Im fairly certain dish fixed the 622.


----------



## sledhead 700 (Apr 27, 2004)

elwaylite said:


> Thats strange. Nothing about OTA. My issue appears to have been fixed. Maybe it was the one station all along.


Mine is fixed also...I had one station that worked before we went into the 4.XX updates. It had 100 strength but would drop and pickup every 10-20 sec . Now it is solid...watched for 2 hours and no drop after 4.06 .

Dave


----------



## dmspen (Dec 1, 2006)

I got 4.06 the other day. Since then, I've noticed an increase in audio/video sync issues with HD movies. I recorded Talledega Nights and the first third of the movie was out of sync, the second third was fine and the last third was out of sync again.

We've seen the in/out of sync on several recordings.


----------



## david803sc (Jun 22, 2006)

I am very upset, it seems 4.06 has fixed the OTA problems that were caused by 4.05, I use HD OTA all the time and never had any problems, with dropouts or anything else beofre 4.05 now with 4.05 some of the stations are unwatchable, so why am I upset? becuase neither of my 622's have recieved the 4.06 I am still stuck on 4.05 its not right, and my OTA is still screwed up.

David


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

david803sc said:


> I am very upset, it seems 4.06 has fixed the OTA problems that were caused by 4.05, I use HD OTA all the time and never had any problems, with dropouts or anything else beofre 4.05 now with 4.05 some of the stations are unwatchable, so why am I upset? becuase neither of my 622's have recieved the 4.06 I am still stuck on 4.05 its not right, and my OTA is still screwed up.
> 
> David


I wouldn't be upset at this point. This happened several times once L4.01 started spooling for some and not others.. and people would get mad that they didn't get the upgrade... then a few days later people who got the upgrade would post a problem and say they wish they could go back.

Seems like this sort of thing always makes someone mad either because they got the update or because they didn't.

I haven't gotten the latest update myself, and am curious to see if it helps my OTA any... but I figure I'll get it when I get it or maybe there are still bugs and I'll get the next version.


----------



## Rob Glasser (Feb 22, 2005)

Typically when Echostar releases software in phases it's to make sure it doesn't cause any new issues. If it doesn't then they continue to release it to the rest of the receivers. If a new problem is detected then they stop the release and quickly try and fix the new problem and start releasing again. Based on past history I would expect the release to continue on or a new release to start spooling soon. Hopefully your OTA issues will be fixed shortly.


----------



## Eagles (Dec 31, 2003)

Rob Glasser said:


> Release notes for L4.06 have been posted and can be found here
> 
> Thanks


Rob,

Do you know exactly what closed captioning issues were addressed in this release? 
I'm really hoping some of the "display option" bugs and "CC sync" issues have been resolved.
Obviously I haven't received L4.06 yet.

Thanks


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Just as a Data Point Eagle. About a month ago CC topic came up and I went and looked at my locals that were having CC issues and found that CC seemed to have improved for me a lot on my Dish HD locals. The wording was not jumbled and I did not take a software update so I can only assume that some changes up stream were made that improved things so I am still of the theory CC issues are both in box and up stream. 

The one thing I did notice, I am by no means a CC expert since I don't use it at all and only check it when discussions pop up, was that my Dish HD locals did still seem to be a bit lagged though it could just be the nature of CC and I have not had a lot of time to dig into it. IF there is any CC viewers in SoCal, It would be interesting to get there thoughts given I am in the same area.


----------



## Rob Glasser (Feb 22, 2005)

Eagles said:


> Rob,
> 
> Do you know exactly what closed captioning issues were addressed in this release?
> I'm really hoping some of the "display option" bugs and "CC sync" issues have been resolved.
> ...


Sorry I do not have any further detail. I know about the issues you have mentioned to me before and I do not know how much/if any of that was addressed. Hopefully you will see a new release yourself soon and can take a look. I know that is not the answer you were hoping for but it's all I have at the moment.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Definitely provide CC feedback Eagles. We need to keep on it for the people that use it. Hopefully you will see some level of CC improvement for L4.06.


----------



## Eagles (Dec 31, 2003)

Ron Barry said:


> Just as a Data Point Eagle. About a month ago CC topic came up and I went and looked at my locals that were having CC issues and found that CC seemed to have improved for me a lot on my Dish HD locals. The wording was not jumbled and I did not take a software update so I can only assume that some changes up stream were made that improved things so I am still of the theory CC issues are both in box and up stream.
> 
> The one thing I did notice, I am by no means a CC expert since I don't use it at all and only check it when discussions pop up, was that my Dish HD locals did still seem to be a bit lagged though it could just be the nature of CC and I have not had a lot of time to dig into it. IF there is any CC viewers in SoCal, It would be interesting to get there thoughts given I am in the same area.


Ron,
Thanks for the reply. As a CC expert by necessity I pretty much saw the same thing you describe. You are correct about the Dish HD locals and CC support or lack of it. It is not software related. This is something Dish continues to work on with the providers to get all the glitches out. 
I have been making a nuisance of myself to Dish for well over a year to try to get some of these other software related CC issues resolved. I will cut and paste one of my e-mails to Dish which describes some of the CC bugs I'm trying to get fixed for anyone who is interested. 
The problem with something like this is that it's such a low priority as far as Dish is concerned because it affects such a small percentage of customers. I do understand this, but it is still frustrating. I'll just keep on trying.

E-MAIL TO DISH SENT SEPT, 2006:

Thomas,

Thanks again for your assistance with this. What I will be sending you will be some screen shots and short video clips in an attempt to highlight the problems I'm describing. Because of the file size of some of the video clips and a limit placed on e-mail attachments by the server, I will be sending a number of separate e-mails in order to accommodate all the information. Each one may have some additional narrative information. The attached files in this e-mail contain the relevant system info screen shot and a short video clip displaying the problematic CC display in the cursive font setting.

There are three issues that are a concern.

#1 No Closed Captioning Support on Dish HD Locals. (Known issue Dish is working to correct)

#2 Optional display settings are generally all messed up. One of the great features on the 622 is the ability to display the CC in many different ways, shapes, colors, and fonts. Being able to make the background transparent is a great feature, especially on a large wide screen TV. It makes the viewing experience so much more enjoyable. This worked great on the 921. Once again, these clips are just a couple of examples of a larger problem. The "proportional w/o font" seems to be the only font that is even close to OK. Look closely at the "FOREGROUND OPACITY" settings in the CC menu. This controls how the lettering is displayed. As far as I can tell it is not working at all and may be part of a larger problem. If you set the background opacity to transparent as to only show the lettering this becomes obvious. There is no difference in the lettering display if you choose transparent, translucent or solid.

#3 - CC is out of sync. I know Dish may argue this, but aside from live broadcasts the CC, when working properly should be in sync. This is my opinion based on the fact that I have been using it for years, and have never seen this problem except on the 921 & the 622. Also as the video clips will show, the CC information stream coming in from the satellite is good and in sync. Please see my video clips which show CC display coming from the same channels and shows on different tuners. The 625 vs. the 622. I realize that the 625 does not decode the CC as the 622 does, it just passes thru to the TV decoder. That is my point. If the CC info coming from the satellite was out of sync, it would be displayed out of sync while viewing the 625 also. As you will see it is not. Something seems to be lost in translation when the CC info coming from the satellite enters the 622. For someone like myself who can still hear some of the dialog, I have learned to glance at the CC as necessary. When it's out of sync it's really unwatchable for me. This would be equivalent to a person with good hearing viewing a show where the audio is way out of sync with the video or the audio has dropouts every couple of seconds.

The funny thing with this is that all shows on these channels are not out of sync on the 622. There seems to be no pattern. All of my SD Dish locals are fine. I know that Nip/Tuck and Rescue Me on FX are always out of sync, while other shows on that channel are fine. The same applies with different shows on A&E, Disc, and Court TV ect, some are fine some are out of sync on the 622, while they are always fine on my other receivers. The information I'm sending is just a small example of a larger problem. Maybe your tech people can conduct some more extensive testing to figure out why this is happening.

I will be sending a total of five e-mails including this one. Please let me know if you received them and if you were able to successfully open up the zip files.

Let me know if you need any more information. I will be glad to help.

Thanks again,

Rob Palladino

PS: I just found out that L3.65 downloaded last night. I don't know if any of these problems were

addressed. All information I'm sending here was under SW version L3.63.


----------



## Slordak (Dec 17, 2003)

dmspen said:


> I got 4.06 the other day. Since then, I've noticed an increase in audio/video sync issues with HD movies. I recorded Talledega Nights and the first third of the movie was out of sync, the second third was fine and the last third was out of sync again.


This movie was out of sync for a large portion of the broadcast on the night it premiered on Starz HD. I don't know if the problem was specific to the 622, but it's certainly not specific to 4.06, since I believe the movie premier took place before this software update rolled out.


----------



## 4bama (Aug 6, 2006)

Rob Glasser said:


> Release notes for L4.06 have been posted and can be found here
> 
> Thanks


I've watched 4.06 for 4 days and am convinced the SD picture quality has been improved. At least for me, on my 622 and my RCA 52" via HDMI/DVI. The SD pictures seem to have more resolution and clarity. My standard view for SD channels is in streached mode so this seems like a hugh improvement to me. Anyone else notice this?

HD quality seems the same as L405 to me, on SD improvements.


----------



## dmspen (Dec 1, 2006)

Thanks, good to know.



Slordak said:


> This movie was out of sync for a large portion of the broadcast on the night it premiered on Starz HD. I don't know if the problem was specific to the 622, but it's certainly not specific to 4.06, since I believe the movie premier took place before this software update rolled out.


----------



## MarcusInMD (Jan 7, 2005)

Still no folders.  Which in my opinion would make this the PERFECT HD sat receiver. Maybe the next round of updates before the fall TV season begins.


----------



## M. Campbell (Jul 5, 2006)

What exactly are the MPEG4 improvements? Anything specific? Than you.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Time to close the thread - L4.09 spooling in first phase.


----------



## tvhawaii (May 14, 2006)

Ron Barry said:


> Definitely provide CC feedback Eagles. We need to keep on it for the people that use it. Hopefully you will see some level of CC improvement for L4.06.


I've been reporting CC issues to Tech Support for over three months and finally threatened to move to D* and tell Charlie why. My biggest gripe was DISC HD and TNT did not have CCing. Yesterday, DISC HD started CC and I was -still- at 4.05. Today I am at 4.09 and TNT HD has CCing. Make of this what you will.<g>

--Michael


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

tvhawaii said:


> I've been reporting CC issues to Tech Support for over three months and finally threatened to move to D* and tell Charlie why.


I'm pretty sure they know how bad the CC situation is over at D*.


----------

