Loop through update? « My Humax Forum

My Humax Forum » Freeview HD » HDR 1800T, 2000T

Loop through update?

(70 posts)

Faust

special member
Joined: Jun '13
Posts: 1,598
offline

After reading the last few posts I've had to check todays date and yes it is still September 2014. For a moment I thought I had gone back to pre-VCR days.

It's the 21st Century and we are talking about having to use splitters because a company renowned for their PVR's have for some bizarre reason omitted loop through on one of their top products.

The aerial feeds in my property come from a six-way mast head. However, I too only have the one feed to each room so yes I too want loop through and have no intention of providing what Humax forgot to include - priceless.

| Sun 28 Sep 2014 21:36:33 #51 |
grahamlthompson

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

Faust - 11 hours ago »
After reading the last few posts I've had to check todays date and yes it is still September 2014. For a moment I thought I had gone back to pre-VCR days.
It's the 21st Century and we are talking about having to use splitters because a company renowned for their PVR's have for some bizarre reason omitted loop through on one of their top products.
The aerial feeds in my property come from a six-way mast head. However, I too only have the one feed to each room so yes I too want loop through and have no intention of providing what Humax forgot to include - priceless.

Missing the point, it's not good practice to use loopthrough unless you absolutely need it. No professional installer would rely on this. A properly designed set up will provide a separate feed to each item with the minimum number of signal amplifiers. Preferably without any amplification at all.

That's why it's mandatory to provide a ultra low power sby mode on all newer pvrs. If they are connected to a properly set up system there is no need to use loopthrough unless you wish to use a built in RF Modulator that you cannot access externally.

I don't understand why there is such an issue with using passive splitters, unlike amplifiers they don't add unwanted noise to the signal and of course they use zero power.

| Mon 29 Sep 2014 9:10:23 #52 |
Pollensa1946

special member
Joined: Sep '12
Posts: 1,171
offline

There's a subtle but important difference in how satellite PVRs vs Freeview PVRs are typically used. Most TVs do not have a satellite tuner so the attached satellite PVR is typically going to be powered on all of the time that the TV is in use. Contrast that with all TVs having Freeview tuners and therefore the Freeview PVR might only be powered up when required. In that use the average user will expect the Freeview signal to work as normal and will be suprised it does not due to no pass-thru in standby. It follows that the average user will regard that as a fault. So I argue why should I have to buy an add-on to correct what is a fault in the product. Just my POV.

| Mon 29 Sep 2014 13:09:18 #53 |
grahamlthompson

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

Pollensa1946 - 3 minutes ago »
There's a subtle but important difference in how satellite PVRs vs Freeview PVRBs are typically used. Most TVs do not have a satellite tuner so the attached satellite PVR is typically going to be powered on all of the time that the TV is in use. Contrast that with all TVs having Freeview tuners and therefore the Freeview PVR might only be powered up when required. In that use the average user will expect the Freeview signal to work as normal and will be suprised it does not due to no pass-thru in standby. It follows that the average user will regard that as a fault. So I argue why should I have to buy an add-on to correct what is a fault in the product. Just my POV.

A splitter can be had for around £2.00. It will pay for itself in a very short period. A very good quality fully screened one for £2.79

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SATELLITE-TV-AERIAL-SIGNAL-COMBINER-SPLITTER-DIPLEXER-VHF-UHF-F-SAT-CABLE-NEW-/221532099492?pt=UK_Sound_Vision_Satellite_Combiners_Splitters&hash=item33945793a4

If nothing else it makes economic sense to use one in the first place.

Pretty well every new pvr will not have loop through enabled by default anyway. Low Power Sby will be the default setting.

| Mon 29 Sep 2014 13:16:07 #54 |
michaelangelo

member
Joined: Aug '14
Posts: 19
offline

I thought the problem with the 1800/2000T is that there is no provision for you to decide how you want to default - LPS or loopthru. MaYbe I'm wrong.

| Mon 29 Sep 2014 14:08:01 #55 |
grahamlthompson

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

michaelangelo - 5 minutes ago »
I thought the problem with the 1800/2000T is that there is no provision for you to decide how you want to default - LPS or loopthru. MaYbe I'm wrong.

You get low power sby, currently there is no way to turn off power saving. Humax boxes that do have the option default to Low Power Sby on. I imagine other makes will be the same. A max 0.5W sby mode is mandatory for all new pvrs and set top boxes. Afaik there is no requirement to provide loopthrough sby modes, though in this case I do think it's an oversight (The other thing you get with low power sby off is a clock on the display. As the boxes don't have a display there's no clock anyway).

| Mon 29 Sep 2014 14:16:09 #56 |
Faust

special member
Joined: Jun '13
Posts: 1,598
offline

I do wonder if we may see this lack of loop through on devices more generally? Was it an oversight not to use loop through or is there pressure from Brussels to take away consumer choice in the name of energy saving?

| Wed 1 Oct 2014 22:13:02 #57 |
damian

special member
Joined: Jan '12
Posts: 597
offline

I think you're right, we will see a lack of loop through generally, it's also cheaper to manufacture. There's no arguing that it saves energy; however just like water meters, people cut back, the companies still need to turnover the same revenue make profit and pay shareholders, so the unit price has to go up, the same goes for energy, the more we save the more expensive it will get.
Brussels is a completely different kettle of fish and you're bringing politics in here, seatbelts, Tachographs in lorries, doctors not forced to work 120 hours a week, worker's rights, straight bananas, the list goes on.
I don't think Brussels dictated to Humax, but I don't see how the loop through could be a simple oversight, I guess Humax are testing the waters, they've already got rid of a display.
We all know it'd take seconds to add a line to allow loop through and Barry has already confirmed this should be implemented in the next release.
Back to your original question though, and yes, I expect to see a single RF input in future and we'll leave Brussels to another day.

| Wed 1 Oct 2014 23:56:15 #58 |
JamesB

special member
Joined: Dec '13
Posts: 1,717
offline

Both Humax and Freesat would presumably like their box to be the only box connected to your TV. That probably is quite enough to explain the loop through oversight, be it due to water-testing or wishful thinking.

| Thu 2 Oct 2014 5:48:40 #59 |
REPASSAC

special member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 4,100
offline

Perhaps the answer is to build in a passive splitter to new models.

| Thu 2 Oct 2014 5:50:36 #60 |