# spent 3 1/2 hours with installer - MRV only partially working



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

I just spent 3 1/2 hours with an installer for an MRV upgrade.

Now, 3 of 7 DVRs "see" that they can do MRV. I have no idea why the other 3 aren't cooperating and neither does the installer. 

The working DVRs are 1 HR24-100, 1 HR24-500 and 1 HR20-700.

The ones that aren't showing up for MRV are 2 HR24-500s and 2 HR22-?.

Any ideas what could be going wrong.

Thanks


----------



## matt (Jan 12, 2010)

Can you give us more details on your setup? I am assuming you have a SWM16?


----------



## dsw2112 (Jun 13, 2009)

matt1124 said:


> Can you give us more details on your setup? I am assuming you have a SWM16?


Yup, definitely need more info (as specific as you can get.)

P.S. Diagrams can be helpful


----------



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

matt1124 said:


> Can you give us more details on your setup? I am assuming you have a SWM16?


Yes, he installed a new SWM16. At first he put all the DVRs on one port, but when some of the tuners didn't work I remembered seeing something about a tuner limit here. When I mentioned that, he went back and moved half to the second port on the SWM.

I'm not sure which DVRs are on which port and, honestly, at this moment am too tired and hungry to care. But I will check that and post more info later.

All of the DVRs do appear to be getting a valid IP address which I presume is coming from my router through the DECA Ethernet bridge.

Thanks for any suggestions.


----------



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

OK, checked the SWM and there are working and non-working DVRs on each port, so no apparent pattern there.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

cover said:


> OK, checked the SWM and there are working and non-working DVRs on each port, so no apparent pattern there.


Could your router be currently limiting the IPs?
While mine doesn't seem to do this, we have read posts of others who's router needed to be adjusted to allow more IPs to be given out.
What are all the IPs? Hope none are 169.xxx.xxx.xxx as this is a sign of them using the internal IP and not the one from the router.


----------



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Could your router be currently limiting the IPs?
> While mine doesn't seem to do this, we have read posts of others who's router needed to be adjusted to allow more IPs to be given out.
> What are all the IPs? Hope none are 169.xxx.xxx.xxx as this is a sign of them using the internal IP and not the one from the router.


The router is set to allow around 200 IP addresses in the DHCP pool. All the DVRs, both working and not, having IPs in the 192.168.0.x range.

DoD is working through DECA on at least one box that is not working with MRV.

Thanks


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

He didn't install any band stop filters anywhere did he?


----------



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

RobertE said:


> He didn't install any band stop filters anywhere did he?


I don't believe so. I had to show him the diagram from DBSTalk to get the DECA working on the HR20, so he was not an expert. But I didn't see any filters go in.


----------



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

Does the SWM16 require a separate power connection to the its power port?

All the tuners and sats seem to be working correctly - just MRV that is no cooperating.


----------



## jacmyoung (Sep 9, 2006)

cover said:


> Does the SWM16 require a separate power connection to the its power port?
> 
> All the tuners and sats seem to be working correctly - just MRV that is no cooperating.


My MRV upgrade took 2X4-hour visits to get it right.

If you had MRV using Ethernet, now upgrading to DECA, assume all physical connections are correct, the HR24 DVRs need to go through "satellite/antenna setup" step, select the correct SWiM dish option, then the receiver will be able to switch from its Ethernet to DECA internally. Without such step, the HR24s will be stuck at Ethernet, not able to see other receivers on the DECA network.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

jacmyoung said:


> My MRV upgrade took 2X4-hour visits to get it right.
> 
> If you had MRV using Ethernet, now upgrading to DECA, assume all physical connections are correct, the HR24 DVRs need to go through "satellite/antenna setup" step, select the correct SWiM dish option, then the receiver will be able to switch from its Ethernet to DECA internally. Without such step, the HR24s will be stuck at Ethernet, not able to see other receivers on the DECA network.


This is true, "but" if they're pulling the 192 IP, then they're each connected to the router, so they are using the DECA/coax network.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

cover said:


> Does the SWM16 require a separate power connection to the its power port?
> 
> All the tuners and sats seem to be working correctly - just MRV that is no cooperating.


It can be connected this way, or using the SWiM #1 connector through the splitter too.









On the receivers that aren't working, do they show MRV active in the setup menu?

If not, they may need to be reauthorized.

Also you can look at any 24s that aren't working and see what the DECA looks like. You can do this from the front panel, by pressing the guide+ > buttons. This [when you get the pressing right] will bring up a menu with modem and coax network. Select network and it will test the losses between this receiver and all the other nodes [DECAs]. Post this page data and we can get an idea of the DECA status.


----------



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> It can be connected this way, or using the SWiM #1 connector through the splitter too.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm pretty sure that the SWiM power inserter is connected through the splitter. It seems to be working, just wanted to make sure that is an OK way to do it.

Reauthorizing seems to have done the trick on all but one. The one still not showing up is an HR24 in the bedroom and I'd have an even angrier wife if I woke her up trying to do anything with it tonight.  It probably has some minor issue I can sort out in the morning.

On the network stats, Phy Levels are

52
42
38
56
52
36

and the Rate Mesh screen numbers are between 250 and 253 with the exception of one 239.

In my opinion the installer made a few mistakes through lack of training and understanding...

1) Connected too many tuners to one port on the SWiM, but he recognized that immediately after I mentioned it and fixed it.

2) Insisted that the HR20-700 needed to have the DECA installed differently like the HR20-100, but didn't know _how_ to install it until I showed him the diagram from DBSTalk. It worked that way, but just wasn't necessary - I took the splitter out and reconnected to input 1 only and it works fine. To his credit, he did ask that I print the diagrams for their reference.

3) Kept trying to fix the MRV not showing up by forcing the same software download over and over on several of the boxes, when apparently all that was needed was reauthorization. That probably wasted at least an hour.

4) Accidentally started the diagnostics when setting up a new HR24. He had never seen them before and insisted that it needed to go through each one while I kept suggesting he just back up and exit or restart the box. That wasted a few minutes to.

I'm just amazed at the apparent lack of training and knowledge some of these guys have. No matter how nice or well-meaning they are, I shouldn't know more about this stuff than they do. I think they should be required to read DBSTalk for 15 minutes a day - that would go a long way toward filling the knowledge gap.

Oh, and while I'm sniping, get this - a lady in case management actually told me on the phone today that the AM21 wouldn't work with the HR24 because there isn't room in the guide for the OTA locals and it would block the HD channels. sheeesh :nono2:

Anyhow, thanks for all your help.

Edit:

I was tired and cranky when I originally wrote this. I don't really mean to criticize the tech who did the install. He was a nice guy, worked hard at it and tried to do his best. In the end, he pretty much had everything done correctly. What I do want to express is that whatever training program is in place is not adequate.


----------



## azarby (Dec 15, 2006)

cover said:


> Does the SWM16 require a separate power connection to the its power port?
> 
> All the tuners and sats seem to be working correctly - just MRV that is no cooperating.


The SWiM16 does need power, either through the dedicated power port or through port 1 fed from the Pi dierectly in line with the splitter or from behind the splitter attached to the power pass through port.


----------



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

azarby said:


> The SWiM16 does need power, either through the dedicated power port or through port 1 fed from the Pi dierectly in line with the splitter or from behind the splitter attached to the power pass through port.


Ah, that makes sense. The PI is connected to the power pass port in the splitter - thanks for the tip.


----------



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

I found this morning that the one DVR that was still not playing nice with MRV was still set to Single Tuner. After I changed that, it started working fine.

In the end, though the install took a lot longer than I would have liked and I believe the techs need more or better training on this, everything seems to be working with MRV.

It looks like there may be a 5 DVR display limit in the list of networked DVRs on the MRV status screen. But I'll be the first to admit that more than 6 total DVRs in a house is rare and perhaps excessive .

I hope DTV recognizes the value of the information and expertise that is shared here. At times, relying on just information (and sometimes misinformation) that the techs and CSRs are able to hand out I would really feel lost in the wilderness. 

Thanks everybody.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, *this place is a gold mine* for those who need help. While there are a lot of pretty silly threads (to me), there are plenty of very helpful threads that make dbstalk the very best at what it does.

I like avsforum for its purpose, but the folks there (in my experience) are no where near as responsive and thorough as I would characterize dbstalk, specifically for the H* series boxes.

The signal to noise ratio of the D* forums is impressive!


----------



## azarby (Dec 15, 2006)

cover said:


> I found this morning that the one DVR that was still not playing nice with MRV was still set to Single Tuner. After I changed that, it started working fine.
> 
> In the end, though the install took a lot longer than I would have liked and I believe the techs need more or better training on this, everything seems to be working with MRV.
> 
> ...


Yes, as you have discoverd, there is a 5 receiver limit for display. There is also a 16 device limit on MRV, 15 tuners + DECA to internet.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

cover said:


> Oh, and while I'm sniping, get this - a lady in case management actually told me on the phone today that the AM21 wouldn't work with the HR24 because there isn't room in the guide for the OTA locals and it would block the HD channels. sheeesh :nono2:


!rolling

- Merg


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

cover said:


> I'm pretty sure that the SWiM power inserter is connected through the splitter. It seems to be working, just wanted to make sure that is an OK way to do it.
> 
> Reauthorizing seems to have done the trick on all but one. The one still not showing up is an HR24 in the bedroom and I'd have an even angrier wife if I woke her up trying to do anything with it tonight.  It probably has some minor issue I can sort out in the morning.
> 
> ...


Though I would be concerned about the high signal loss to these three nodes since they are close to the 60 (db) loss figure considered the maximum you should have to a DECA node.

Just out of curiosity are all the SWM splitters in the install green label type?



> ... Oh, and while I'm sniping, get this - a lady in case management actually told me on the phone today that the AM21 wouldn't work with the HR24 because there isn't room in the guide for the OTA locals and it would block the HD channels. sheeesh :nono2: ...


Oh well ...

Just when you think you've heard it all I guess ...


----------



## cover (Feb 11, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Though I would be concerned about the high signal loss to these three nodes since they are close to the 60 (db) loss figure considered the maximum you should have to a DECA node.
> 
> Just out of curiosity are all the SWM splitters in the install green label type?


Thanks - I'll take a look at those cable runs when I have a chance and see if anything can be improved there. Not sure which boxes they are but suspect 2 of them are using pre-existing coax runs with cheap barrell and crimp connectors at some point along the way. The runs would be too much trouble to fish again unless they're causing actual problems, but I could replace the easy to reach connectors at the wall plates if that would make any difference.

The rest of them are newish <= 100' RG6 runs directly from the SWiM and I think the installer replaced all the crimp connectors he could see with compression.

I think the only splitters are the two on the SWiM and they are both green label.

Thanks


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Though I would be concerned about the high signal loss to these three nodes since they are close to the 60 (db) loss figure considered the maximum you should have to a DECA node.





cover said:


> Thanks - I'll take a look at those cable runs when I have a chance and see if anything can be improved there. Not sure which boxes they are but suspect 2 of them are using pre-existing coax runs with cheap barrell and crimp connectors at some point along the way. The runs would be too much trouble to fish again unless they're causing actual problems, but I could replace the easy to reach connectors at the wall plates if that would make any difference.
> 
> The rest of them are newish <= 100' RG6 runs directly from the SWiM and I think the installer replaced all the crimp connectors he could see with compression.
> 
> ...


At first I was also going to point out those "high" losses, "but" your bit-rates are so good that you are within range. It's always nice to have some headroom, but if everything stays the way it is, there is nothing wrong at this point.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> At first I was also going to point out those "high" losses, "but" your bit-rates are so good that you are within range. It's always nice to have some headroom, but if everything stays the way it is, there is nothing wrong at this point.


Yeah, I meant to reply in clarification of my earlier statement that the OP should not be "overly" concerned here since, at least for me, at first glance I have historically had a bad habit of tending to treat a logarithmic decibel scale as though it were a linear one. Therefore when I see numbers close to the 60db limit like 52 and 54 db I initially think you are dangerously near the edge.

But then quickly realize that it would still actually take a further substantial power loss by a factor ~6 and 4 respectively to reach a 60db loss. So I agree the OP should be safe and not worry about trying to replace those lines if they are too much trouble to do.

BTW: Though acceptable I'm still trying to track down a peculiarity in my numbers. Have six DVRs on a SWM-16 with (green lable) 8-way slitters of each leg, of which three are HD and activated for MRV. An HR24-500, HR21-200, and HR22-100. All the others are R16s with BSFs attached. A BB DECA dongle is also installed for internet/home network access.

The coax network test numbers from the HR24 are;

Node 0=44db (to the BB DECA)
Node 1=27db (to the HR22)
Node 3=44db (to the HR21)

The PHY Rate Mesh ranges between 247-253.

Yet the HR22's DECA dongle which is upstairs has the greatest distance and thereby the longest total line length from the HR24 than the other two nodes, yet has a much lower (17db improvement) signal loss.

Go figure ...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> BTW: Though acceptable I'm still trying to track down a peculiarity in my numbers. Have six DVRs on a SWM-16 with (green lable) 8-way slitters of each leg, of which three are HD and activated for MRV. An HR24-500, HR21-200, and HR22-100. All the others are R16s with BSFs attached. A BB DECA dongle is also installed for internet/home network access.
> 
> The coax network test numbers from the HR24 are;
> 
> ...


I'd look to see which units are connected to which leg of the SWiM-16. "I'd bet" the extra loss comes from having to go through the SWiM-16, crossover, and out the other leg to the splitter there.
"in other words" if:
HR24-500, HR21-200, HR22-100, and A BB DECA dongle were all connected to the same splitter, that the levels would be closer to each other.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> I'd look to see which units are connected to which leg of the SWiM-16. "I'd bet" the extra loss comes from having to go through the SWiM-16, crossover, and out the other leg to the splitter there.
> "in other words" if:
> HR24-500, HR21-200, HR22-100, and A BB DECA dongle were all connected to the same splitter, that the levels would be closer to each other.


That's my theory as well and I will test it out whenever I get the chance when the boxes are not in use by disconnecting each input to the SWM splitters one at a time to see what's going where.

But if true is that normal for the SWM-16's internal crossover bridge to introduce that much loss to the DECA signals passing thru?

If so then I'm quite disappointed in the SWM-16's performance in this regard. As this is about a 50:1 (17db) power loss.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> But if true is that normal for the SWM-16's internal crossover bridge to introduce that much loss to the DECA signals passing thru?
> 
> If so then I'm quite disappointed in the SWM-16's performance in this regard. As this is about a 50:1 (17db) power loss.


Now why did I know you'd ask this [wrong] question? :lol:


DECA to DECA on the same 8-way green splitter should be 14 dB "output to output" [based on a 2-way measuring 8 dB, & a 4-way measuring 11 dB].
For a baseline I barreled two DECAs with 6' of coax and measured 10-11 dB.
Now when they're on two different splitters:


the same cable loss to the splitter as above.
*3.5 dB backwards through the 1st splitter.*
*Cable loss to the SWiM, crossover, Cable loss to the 2nd splitter.*
*12.5 dB through the second splitter.*
same cable loss to the DECA as above.
The loss of the two splitters = 16 dB verses the 14 dB, so here is 2 dB more and then what's the coax losses going from the input of one splitter through the SWiM and to the input of the other splitter?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> Now why did I know you'd ask this [wrong] question? :lol:
> 
> 
> DECA to DECA on the same 8-way green splitter should be 14 dB "output to output" [based on a 2-way measuring 8 dB, & a 4-way measuring 11 dB].
> ...


Thanks for the analysis VOS;

But I'm still not quite following why I at least totally asked the "wrong question" 

With only a 2db difference between one and two 8-way splitters that still leaves a pretty hefty signal loss for DECA data traversing the SWM-16 if indeed I'm suffering a 17db loss disparity between DECA paths on the same SWM splitter as opposed to those traveling splitter to splitter.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Thanks for the analysis VOS;
> 
> But I'm still not quite following why I at least totally asked the "wrong question"
> 
> With only a 2db difference between one and two 8-way splitters that still leaves a pretty hefty signal loss for DECA data traversing the SWM-16 if indeed I'm suffering a 17db loss disparity between DECA paths on the same SWM splitter as opposed to those traveling splitter to splitter.


What you called "crossover loss", is simply more than just the crossover, which is what I tried to show with values similar.
If you actually want to measure the SWiM-16 crossover, then use a H/HR-24 barreled to a DECA [like the BB one] get a reading with the two connected directly to each other. Then remove the barrel and connect them to SWiM1 & SWiM2 and measure this. Then subtract the two measurements and you have a fair idea of the crossover insertion loss.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> What you called "crossover loss", is simply more than just the crossover, which is what I tried to show with values similar.
> If you actually want to measure the SWiM-16 crossover, then use a H/HR-24 barreled to a DECA [like the BB one] get a reading with the two connected directly to each other. Then remove the barrel and connect them to SWiM1 & SWiM2 and measure this. Then subtract the two measurements and you have a fair idea of the crossover insertion loss.


Update:

Yep, just ran the test (after finally getting the chance to here  ). And it is indeed as you and me theorized VOS. The BB DECA dongle (Node 0) and the HR21 (Node 3) are indeed connecting to the DECA cloud through the SWM-16's internal DECA crossover bridge at 17 db loss in comparison to the HR22 (node 1) which is connected to the same 8-way SWM splitter as the HR24 (node 2).

I guess the next test will be to disconnect and barrel the two SWM splitters together at their short jumper cable inputs to the SWM-16 to try and determine where the majority of this heavy signal loss is. The internal DECA bridge or interconnecting SWM splitters and cabling.

I take it that I can still run the MRV coax network test for loss and PHY Rate Mesh on the HR24 even though there will be no SWM satellite signal inputs to any of the receivers?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Yes, I simply removed the coax to my splitter [losing the SWiM] and then connected it to the coax I wanted to measure.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> Yes, I simply removed the coax to my splitter [losing the SWiM] and then connected it to the coax I wanted to measure.


Update:

OK VOS;

Was finally able to run the additional test (a few times actually) to try and track down the culprit in the some 17db DECA signal loss (last time anyhow) in my setup when traveling across the SWM-16's internal DECA bridge.

When I barreled the two 8-way SWM splitters (Green labile of course  ) together after removing each from the SWM-16's two output legs, the coax test on the HR24 showed a 28db loss for a DECA client connected to the same SWM splitter and a 38db loss to a DECA client on the other SWM splitter.

So it seems that the DECA crossover bridge loss is only about 3-5db (since the coax test results now show a 41-43 db loss for DECAs on the opposite splitter when reconnected to the SWM-16), so the inter-splitter loss of around 10db is the primary contributer for the high DECA signal loss when going between splitters.

BTW: For some reason the BB DECA dongle wouldn't connect to the DECA cloud during this test.

It wouldn't never show up on any of the coax network tests, and the indicator lights on the dongle would only show the green power LED and the c.LINK a slow blinking amber. NTWK LED was not lit at all even though it was still connected to the router/home network through an ethernet switch.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Update:
> 
> OK VOS;
> 
> ...


1st: the BB DECA may have needed a reset. When I was playing with this, it seemed as though it would cycle/search and time out and then wouldn't search again until a re-powering, which would have it then pick up the others quickly.
2nd:
How were these splitters configured?
I first barreled two DECAs and established a base line, which seemed to be 10 dB above reasonable line loss.
Next I connected these to the outputs of a splitter and terminated all un-used ports. This difference in loss is what was the splitter loss between outputs. I could have moved one coax to the input and measured the loss in this path, but didn't as my interest was in the output to output loss.
I've measured the 2-way & the 4-way, but don't have an 8-way to measure. 2-way was 8 dB & 4-way was 11 dB, so "I'd guess" the 8-way would be 14 dB.
The crossover loss of 3-5 dB seems reasonable.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> 1st: the BB DECA may have needed a reset. When I was playing with this, it seemed as though it would cycle/search and time out and then wouldn't search again until a re-powering, which would have it then pick up the others quickly. ...


Oh ... never occurred to me to try power-cycling the BB DECA.  Anyhow the two DECA dongles attached to an HR21 and HR22 did connect to the cloud during the coax test and showed 38db and 28db respectively.



> 2nd:
> How were these splitters configured? ...


One splitter has cable runs to a HR24, an HR22, and two R16s (with BSFs attached of course). The remaining four outputs are terminated. The other splitter has runs to an HR21, an R16 (with BSF), and the BB DECA dongle with remaining five outputs terminated.



> ... I first barreled two DECAs and established a base line, which seemed to be 10 dB above reasonable line loss.
> Next I connected these to the outputs of a splitter and terminated all un-used ports. This difference in loss is what was the splitter loss between outputs. I could have moved one coax to the input and measured the loss in this path, but didn't as my interest was in the output to output loss.
> I've measured the 2-way & the 4-way, but don't have an 8-way to measure. 2-way was 8 dB & 4-way was 11 dB, so "I'd guess" the 8-way would be 14 dB.
> The crossover loss of 3-5 dB seems reasonable.


OK, but I thought in this situation I could just quickly determine the DECA signal loss from the SWM-16's internal crossover bridge by simply bypassing it through barreling together the two short coax jumpers normally connected to the SWM-16's two output legs which feeds the SWM splitters and then run the coax network test on the HR24.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> OK, but I thought in this situation I could just quickly determine the DECA signal loss from the SWM-16's internal crossover bridge by simply bypassing it through barreling together the two short coax jumpers normally connected to the SWM-16's two output legs which feeds the SWM splitters and then run the coax network test on the HR24.


If you used the baseline of before to determine the delta, then you can and seems like you did to get the 3-5 dB loss.


----------

