# D1000 used to find only 129?



## mattcombs (Feb 17, 2006)

Hey all,

I got a Dish 1000 upgrade this weekend, although my site is not sufficient to get 129. Well, not until we cut down a big black walnut tree that my wife and next-door neighbors HATE because of the mess it leaves. She wants the tree gone, I'm not a tree hugger but don't like cutting down trees unnecessarily. Most importantly, although I felt the installer competent, I'd like to "see" 129 before giving the tree the axe. 

So, the installer left all the gear for me to install at my request. Very happy about that, would rather do that than have to arrange for another install. WHat I would like to do is set up my D1000 to see the 129 Sat only from a place away from the tree, and leave my existing D500 (no 61.5, again due to crummy site). There's really no place to put the D1000 (with the tree) to see all 3 birds. 

I was thinking I'd set up the single LNB used for 129 on the dish, and not use the other one. Will ultimately send this into a switch, but for right now I just want to see the 129. Am I best off using the center port on the D1000 to get the 129 or keeping it in its normal place? Again, I'm gonna use that dish only for getting 129, at a place away from the tree. 

Any tips would be appreciated.


----------



## Mikey (Oct 26, 2004)

mattcombs said:


> ...
> I was thinking I'd set up the single LNB used for 129 on the dish, and not use the other one. Will ultimately send this into a switch, but for right now I just want to see the 129. Am I best off using the center port on the D1000 to get the 129 or keeping it in its normal place? Again, I'm gonna use that dish only for getting 129, at a place away from the tree.
> 
> Any tips would be appreciated.


Well, I suppose that using a Dish 1000 just to see 129 is possible, but might not be the most efficient way to get that done. Most people in your situation use another Dish 500, or a Dish 300, to get just one satellite.


----------



## mattcombs (Feb 17, 2006)

Thanks. In theory, I'd use a D300, but I have a Dish 1000 here, wehras I'd have to buy another 500 or 300. I guess my question is directred more towards the signal strength capabilities rather than size/WAF etc, and if I was going to use the D1000 to find only 129, would I be better off putting it in the middle of the dish or in its normal side location, or does it matter?


----------



## Mikey (Oct 26, 2004)

Well, as a Dish 1000 user, I'm happy with my 129 reception with the LNB in it's default location on the arm. But, if I was going to be using two dishes anyway, I think I'd use the Dish 1000 for 110/119, and the Dish 500 for 129. Most people are reporting better 129 signal strength with that configuration.


----------



## DP1 (Sep 16, 2002)

Normally you'd put the lnb in the center location in a scenario like that. Then not even bother with making any skew adjustment.. just az/el.

Kinda like with a d Dish 500 for only one slot. It'll work without it being in the "center" location because there is no center location. But then again they make a staight adaptor you can use instead of the Y bracket if you'd rather have it "centered". Dont have to account for any offest that way.


----------



## brg606 (Mar 6, 2006)

newbie here, maybe a dumb question, but why is dishnetwork trying to sell everyone on their hd programming on what appears to be the weakest location (129)? i am currently a dishnetwork subscriber, just regulat at60 package. i am thinking of upgrading to the bronze hd package, but all this talk of weak signal strengths and multiple dishes on the roof makes me want to switch to cable for hd. is the new echostar 10 satellite going to replace the 129 for the hd programming? thanks.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

brg606 said:


> newbie here, maybe a dumb question, but why is dishnetwork trying to sell everyone on their hd programming on what appears to be the weakest location (129)?


129 seems to be weak primarily on the West Coast. Other areas report it to be OK.

I'm still trying to figure out why they have birds parked way out over the oceans. I suspect they made enemies at the government agency in charge of assigning orbital slots.


----------



## Cokeswigga (Jan 25, 2005)

brg606 said:


> newbie here, maybe a dumb question, but why is dishnetwork trying to sell everyone on their hd programming on what appears to be the weakest location (129)? i am currently a dishnetwork subscriber, just regulat at60 package. i am thinking of upgrading to the bronze hd package, but all this talk of weak signal strengths and multiple dishes on the roof makes me want to switch to cable for hd. is the new echostar 10 satellite going to replace the 129 for the hd programming? thanks.


Rumor has it that echo X is going to 110

129 is fine as long as you don't use the D1000 for 110/119 and 129.

I used the D1000 for 129 only, 
and I have another D500 for 110/119.

This added 10 points to my signal strength


----------



## brg606 (Mar 6, 2006)

Cokeswigga said:


> Rumor has it that echo X is going to 110
> 
> 129 is fine as long as you don't use the D1000 for 110/119 and 129.
> 
> ...


maybe another dumb question, but if the signal strength was much better on the 110 & 119 satellites, why not put the hd programming there too? maybe not enough room? thanks. also, someone in another forum was talking about when the echostar 10 goes to 110, this will somehow help the signal strength on 129?


----------



## brg606 (Mar 6, 2006)

also, i don't plan on buying a hd tv and switching to hd programming til this summer, so maybe it'll be better by then.


----------



## Cokeswigga (Jan 25, 2005)

brg606 said:


> maybe another dumb question, but if the signal strength was much better on the 110 & 119 satellites, why not put the hd programming there too? maybe not enough room? thanks. also, someone in another forum was talking about when the echostar 10 goes to 110, this will somehow help the signal strength on 129?


I don't think there is currently any room.

However Echo X is rumored to be going to 110, but what they will put on there is unknown


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

E10 at 110 isn't a rumor - it is an announced fact.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

If you already have a Dish1000 and a Dish500... I second the suggestion to use the Dish1000 for 110/119 and use the Dish500 for 129.

Seems that would likely give you the best bang for your buck since you already have both of those dishes, just need to do some rearranging.


----------



## brg606 (Mar 6, 2006)

HDMe said:


> If you already have a Dish1000 and a Dish500... I second the suggestion to use the Dish1000 for 110/119 and use the Dish500 for 129.
> 
> Seems that would likely give you the best bang for your buck since you already have both of those dishes, just need to do some rearranging.


i don't want 2 satellites on my roof and i refuse to accept lower signal strength on satellite 129 for the hd programming package that i will be spending more for. if time warner cable gets espn2 in hd, i'll probably go over there unless something is done about this apparently weak satellite that for some reason dishnetwork has decided to put all their premium programming on.


----------



## vahighland (Mar 29, 2005)

I've heard two different configuration recommendations:
1) Use the Dish1000 for 110/119 and use the Dish500 for 129; OR
2) Use the Dish500 for 110/119 and use the Dish1000 for 129

Anyone care to comment on which configuration is the best out of these two?


----------



## Cokeswigga (Jan 25, 2005)

When I get a chance, I will move the D1000 to 110/119 and move the D500 to 129
and I will post the new signal strengths

also:
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=53879


----------



## hokie-dk (Feb 4, 2006)

This may be a little off topic, but I currently receive HD and have a Superdish. Do I need to change to the 1000 in April when I get my 622?


----------



## paulcdavis (Jan 22, 2004)

mpeltz said:


> I've heard two different configuration recommendations:
> 1) Use the Dish1000 for 110/119 and use the Dish500 for 129; OR
> 2) Use the Dish500 for 110/119 and use the Dish1000 for 129
> 
> Anyone care to comment on which configuration is the best out of these two?


Option 1) requires both dishes to be aligned

Option 2) only requires 1 dish to be aligned (if you have a working Dish500) and the Dish1000 has a center position for the 129 LNB.

Since my Dish 500 is currently aligned and getting good signal strengths, I plan to use the Dish1000 for 129 with the DPP dual in the center position of the W bracket. I will put the DPP+ twin from the Dish1000 kit on the Dish500 and not have to change its alignment. I'll post my signal strenghts for 129 when the rain stops long enough for me to do the install.


----------



## Cokeswigga (Jan 25, 2005)

paulcdavis said:


> Option 1) requires both dishes to be aligned
> 
> Option 2) only requires 1 dish to be aligned (if you have a working Dish500) and the Dish1000 has a center position for the 129 LNB.
> 
> Since my Dish 500 is currently aligned and getting good signal strengths, I plan to use the Dish1000 for 129 with the DPP dual in the center position of the W bracket. I will put the DPP+ twin from the Dish1000 kit on the Dish500 and not have to change its alignment. I'll post my signal strenghts for 129 when the rain stops long enough for me to do the install.


This is what I did, 129 comes in about 10 points high when the DIsh is pointed at 129 only vs 110/119/129.

So this option is a viable working solution. I just want to know if D500 for 129 and D1000 110/119 is a better solution.


----------



## Al_Chicago_DN (Aug 17, 2004)

Can I add an LNB for 129 on my existing D500 pointed at 110/119? From what I've been hearing about the D1000 signal strength problems, I'd rather just "add" 129 to my existing setup. Is this possible? Do they make a bracket that will hold three LNBs for 110/119/129?


----------



## Mikey (Oct 26, 2004)

Al_Chicago_DN said:


> Can I add an LNB for 129 on my existing D500 pointed at 110/119? From what I've been hearing about the D1000 signal strength problems, I'd rather just "add" 129 to my existing setup. Is this possible? Do they make a bracket that will hold three LNBs for 110/119/129?


I think the geometry of the Dish 500 doesn't lend itself to seeing 110/119/129. If they could have made a bracket that would see all three on the Dish 500, they would have, and there wouldn't be a Dish 1000.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Anything is possible - but with all the problems reported with Dish1000's and 129° I would not expect it to work very well.


----------



## DP1 (Sep 16, 2002)

Al_Chicago_DN said:


> Can I add an LNB for 129 on my existing D500 pointed at 110/119? From what I've been hearing about the D1000 signal strength problems, I'd rather just "add" 129 to my existing setup. Is this possible? Do they make a bracket that will hold three LNBs for 110/119/129?


You could cobble something together but theres no point in it. The deal with the 1000 has nothing to do with the dish, but the signal strengths from 129 itself. So you'd still get better numbers using a 1000 than you would with what you propose.

I did what you suggest but with other sats.. I have a Dish500 pointed at 82/91 for BEV channels and I just strapped another lnb on to those lnbs to get 101 from D* into the house for my ala carte NFL-ST sub. That works pretty decent .. but 101 is strong enough to where even if I'm losing 25 points as opposed to doing something "correctly", it still works fine.

With the strength from 129 one doesnt really have that luxury.


----------



## Cokeswigga (Jan 25, 2005)

Maybe they should have made d1000 a little bit larger


----------



## DP1 (Sep 16, 2002)

Well I suppose every little bit helps but even as you found in your trials of using a single dish for 129 alone, the strengths dont exactly give one the warm fuzzies. Especially for those used to seeing 100+, 90's or even high 80's on the other sats.

You still had like 18 tp's at 75 or less including a handful at 70 or less.

This sounds more like an exercise in tryin to get say the Canadian sats from the southern "provinces" where you dont necessarily expect to be well within the intended footprint.


----------

