Is the FVP 4000 fit for purpose

My Humax Forum » Freeview HD » FVP 4000T, 5000T

Is the FVP 4000 fit for purpose

(23 posts)

damian

special member
Joined: Jan '12
Posts: 597
offline

sleepingcaveman - 13 hours ago »
Does anyone else find it to be an innovative product but completely useless and unreliable.

Of course it's fit for purpose.

Yes - to innovative
No - to useless and unreliable

It's probably the most reliable humax I've owned. I don't think it's missed a recording and it rebooted itself once I think whilst streaming online.

The user interface (UI) is awful and I can't comment on the remote, apart from obvious buttons missing, as I've used a universal type since day one and the first thing I did was added a missing 'media' button.

There are features that I would like to see and also features that have been removed that I would like back again, but would I buy it again, Yes. Would I recommend it, Yes - with a little bit of explanation.

| Thu 9 Feb 2017 12:43:55 #11 |
Luke

special member
Joined: Apr '11
Posts: 1,475
offline

damian - 1 hour ago » I've used a universal type since day one and the first thing I did was added a missing 'media' button.

Did you add that though a macro, or are there additional functions that can be used if you know the correct IR code?

| Thu 9 Feb 2017 14:09:59 #12 |
damian

special member
Joined: Jan '12
Posts: 597
offline

No,
I cheated with my older sensibly priced Harmony remote, just set it as an older humax product and added 'media' as a customisable button. No 'info' unfortunately (just not allowed in software) and can't remember what else, 'opt+' is another rather than '+' and 'menu' in the right place rather than 'home' which means all or most of the buttons are in the same place across devices on the remote, which shouldn't be underestimated how useful that is. Those with a learnable remote could learn commands if they had access to the older humax remotes and some remotes will allow direct entry.
I never use any original remote, some were completely illogical, and all remain stored in a drawer with batteries removed.

| Thu 9 Feb 2017 14:54:20 #13 |
Minstrel SE

special member
Joined: Sep '16
Posts: 219
offline

Its interesting because I tend to wonder sometimes wether the Humax design engineers have been on the ball recently or if they are under pressure

Im revamping a 2000T to how I like it to operate in terms of noise. I feel Im doing the final quality control that should have been done at the design stage Im therefore interested what people say about the 4000.

I will say the UI when it works is great on the 2000T. The recordings have been superb and its a joy to resume playing a recording(so fast) or use the rewind pause on the telly buffering. The problem is that its prone to freeze with remote functions and loose recognition of the hard drive and sound function. I give it some leeway as a chip based product but I have to make sure its booted up properly from cold. I may start leaving it on standby 24/7 as its designed for this.

Does it seem like a case of so near yet so far for Humax at the moment? I dont fully know but I would expect PVRs to be fully reliable years into their development

| Thu 9 Feb 2017 19:56:37 #14 |
Stephenesque

special member
Joined: Nov '15
Posts: 213
offline

I have had mine for 14 months now and, with a few caveats, it is fit for my purpose.

I don't do anything 'techie' with it either, I simply programme it to record all the TV I want to watch and then watch it.

Yes, there are niggles, the list of recordings really needs work imo. I have no idea of the day of the week or the channel of most programmes I record so the ability to sort recordings in these categories is useless and it would be better with the option to sort alphabetically. Oh and get rid of the pointless icons and have more recordings showing on the screen.

The remote is clunky and the 4000T is slow to respond which can be frustrating at times, and those random reboots were a bit disconcerting, but luckily I only had half a dozen or so.

But overall the ability to record in HD four programmes at the same time, and to do so reliably and accurately, are the reasons I bought the 4000T and I haven't regretted doing so.

| Thu 9 Feb 2017 20:15:14 #15 |
Stephenesque

special member
Joined: Nov '15
Posts: 213
offline

sleepingcaveman - 9 hours ago »

To avoid an argument every morning I have had to disable the auto power down and we now leave the Humax turned on all the time. Otherwise the box gets confused if we turn on and access the recordings to play back when the menu to do so first appears before giving it 5 minutes to settle down.

Nigel

I must admit that I had a few heart-in-mouth moments when I went to recordings too quickly after start up and found nothing there. But because I now know that this happens I just switch it on a few minutes before I need it and do something else whilst it's settling down. It's behaviour is not that different to my iMac which I switch on every morning then open the curtains, put the kettle on etc. while everything is loading up.

You could still switch off the Humax and use the Timer to have it switch on 15 minutes or so before you get up in the morning then everything would be loaded and ready for you when you turned on your TV.

| Thu 9 Feb 2017 20:27:05 #16 |
sleepingcaveman

new member
Joined: Dec '16
Posts: 3
offline

Stephen
Thanks for suggestion of using the timer function to turn the box on. Will look into that as it will help with keping the blue light from glowing and eluminate the nighttime noise from the hard disk... Would be Ok if box was in lounge but we need to have it in a bedroom

| Thu 9 Feb 2017 22:10:43 #17 |
aciddad

special member
Joined: Jun '12
Posts: 103
offline

I agree entirely with Damian's two posts.

David.

| Fri 10 Feb 2017 11:01:48 #18 |
RichardS-UK

special member
Joined: Dec '15
Posts: 108
offline

I would say that the FVP-4000 is "quirky" but is fit for it's primary purpose. It's not as "solid" as my previous Humaxes but it they were just basic single and dual tuner recorders so you could say that they only had one "primary purpose".

The FVP-4000 replaced a home built 4-tuner Vista media centre PC which was very versatile but must have cost me over a £1000 over the years and was extremely quirky and less reliable than the FVP.

Bottom line: if my FVP-4000 blew up tomorrow I would buy another one unless there is an alternative 3 tuner recorder on the market which is attracting good reviews.

Richard

| Sat 11 Feb 2017 11:19:23 #19 |
grahamlthompson

special member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 14,442
offline

RichardS-UK - 17 minutes ago »
I would say that the FVP-4000 is "quirky" but is fit for it's primary purpose. It's not as "solid" as my previous Humaxes but it they were just basic single and dual tuner recorders so you could say that they only had one "primary purpose".
The FVP-4000 replaced a home built 4-tuner Vista media centre PC which was very versatile but must have cost me over a £1000 over the years and was extremely quirky and less reliable than the FVP.
Bottom line: if my FVP-4000 blew up tomorrow I would buy another one unless there is an alternative 3 tuner recorder on the market which is attracting good reviews.
Richard

Two secondhand HDR-FOX-T2's is much more versatile especially if you can run them at different locations.

| Sat 11 Feb 2017 11:38:11 #20 |