And Paul, now that I have read your post #9 (it's a bit confusing because there are two threads discussing almost the same thing) I see that Humax have confirmed my suspicion and that there is software based amplification/attenuation in the system.
And telltuff, my advice is still the same.
Until you do further tests (by dialling in more attenuation), comparing the same results from 86% and 100% devices is pointless because 86% may still be far too much for your particular area/device.
My Humax Forum » Freeview HD » Aura UHD
Picture freezing on trailers and adverts
(35 posts)-
| Sat 14 Aug 2021 10:03:51 #21 |
-
Paul Bton - 51 mins ago »
It would be good to hear from a ‘signal expert’ about what is the best signal strength range, upper and lower for the Aura, if such a person exists.
Interesting what you say about much lower signal levels being ok as long as quality is 100%. I just don’t know. But surely you want it as high as you can get it but below 90% in the Aura?I can't speak for the Aura but with other Humax devices the signal strength is a secondary issue and all that matters is that the signal quality is 100%. I operated a Humax recorder for several years without problems on a 30% signal strength. With analogue broadcasts there was an advantage in having the highest workable signal strength but with digital broadcast streams, that have built in error correction, I don't think there is much to gain by maximising signal strength.
| Sat 14 Aug 2021 10:07:14 #22 | -
Martin Liddle - 3 hours ago »
Paul Bton - 51 mins ago »
It would be good to hear from a ‘signal expert’ about what is the best signal strength range, upper and lower for the Aura, if such a person exists.
Interesting what you say about much lower signal levels being ok as long as quality is 100%. I just don’t know. But surely you want it as high as you can get it but below 90% in the Aura?I can't speak for the Aura but with other Humax devices the signal strength is a secondary issue and all that matters is that the signal quality is 100%. I operated a Humax recorder for several years without problems on a 30% signal strength. With analogue broadcasts there was an advantage in having the highest workable signal strength but with digital broadcast streams, that have built in error correction, I don't think there is much to gain by maximising signal strength.
Ok but please don’t bring other Humax devices into the discussion as we are told the Aura is a new beast with sensitive tuners. So comparisons are not helpful.
Maybe all this signal discussion is irrelevant and it will all be fixed in software or firmware. Please don’t use term ‘fw’ as it also means ‘f**k with’.
| Sat 14 Aug 2021 13:43:13 #23 | -
SSThing - 3 hours ago »
And Paul, now that I have read your post #9 (it's a bit confusing because there are two threads discussing almost the same thing) I see that Humax have confirmed my suspicion and that there is software based amplification/attenuation in the system.
And telltuff, my advice is still the same.
Until you do further tests (by dialling in more attenuation), comparing the same results from 86% and 100% devices is pointless because 86% may still be far too much for your particular area/device.Can we have the full quote from Humax please? Or where in forum it is cited?
Yes other thread was started up with title that I did not realise was the same issue. I think titles should describe the problem not a possible hypothesis about the cause. But maybe that’s just me.
| Sat 14 Aug 2021 13:46:43 #24 | -
There was quite a long post from someone doing some testing, in the last couple of days, that included a reply from Humax where they stated (iirc) that the Aura used the same tuner as "previous" equipment... That would certainly suggest the 4000t/5000t, so some comparisons are legitimate.
However that post has disappeared (the original poster did wonder whether he was bound by some sort of nda, clearly someone thinks he was).
Unless I can't see the wood for the trees when I look for it?| Sat 14 Aug 2021 14:02:23 #25 | -
Found it.
https://myhumax.org/forum/topic/hd-channel-brief-pixilationsound-issue-update#post-92444They say successor to previous tuner, to me that suggests based on.
| Sat 14 Aug 2021 14:09:48 #26 | -
SSThing - 1 hour ago »
Found it.
https://myhumax.org/forum/topic/hd-channel-brief-pixilationsound-issue-update#post-92444
They say successor to previous tuner, to me that suggests based on.Thanks for that. I had read that bit but not put it all together. So perhaps it is all due to the firmware on the 'Demodulator chip' which is causing problems. And it is NOT the same as on other Humax models, but a 'successor' chip (so I think please no more discussion on 4000T or 5000T signal issues). On that post it was about brief pixilation when coming out of an app. But could it also cause freezes on the PCM sound issue?
| Sat 14 Aug 2021 15:30:58 #27 | -
As I have surmised in one of my previous posts, there is lot going on in the software at any one time. Demodulation/amplification/attenuation/coding/transcoding/swapping audio/swapping resolution etc etc etc. Perhaps there is an occasional bottleneck in processing if too many things happen simultaneously?
And Humax have already advised you personally that attenuation might be a solution (although they do have a habit of blaming signal for everything) so the experience of 4000t/5000t owners, with regard to that, is absolutely relevant because it affected so many.
I'd bet my house that a lot of the components in the Aura are the same as in earlier models. Designing a device like this from the ground up would not be in any way cost effective, there's probably components from 10 years ago inside. The 4000t and 5000t had the exact same motherboard. The biggest difference between the Aura and the previous models is the operating system and its obvious that pre-release testing had not ironed out enough of the problems (impossible to predict everything but a lot seemed have been missed).| Sat 14 Aug 2021 15:55:42 #28 | -
SSThing - 1 min ago »
As I have surmised in one of my previous posts, there is lot going on in the software at any one time. Demodulation/amplification/attenuation/coding/transcoding/swapping audio/swapping resolution etc etc etc. Perhaps there is an occasional bottleneck in processing if too many things happen simultaneously?
And Humax have already advised you personally that attenuation might be a solution (although they do have a habit of blaming signal for everything) so the experience of 4000t/5000t owners, with regard to that, is absolutely relevant because it affected so many.
I'd bet my house that a lot of the components in the Aura are the same as in earlier models. Designing a device like this from the ground up would not be in any way cost effective, there's probably components from 10 years ago inside. The 4000t and 5000t had the exact same motherboard. The biggest difference between the Aura and the previous models is the operating system and its obvious that pre-release testing had not ironed out enough of the problems (impossible to predict everything but a lot seemed have been missed).Yes previous experience relevant and some components and design maybe the same but it is a 'successor demodulator chip' and firmware on that chip. So: old and new. I won't ask for your house if I am right
I think maybe the attenuator is a short term fix until the problem is fully identified and a firmware fix can be tested and sent out. Just my opinion.
| Sat 14 Aug 2021 16:06:15 #29 | -
SSThing - 3 days ago »
But Humax tech support are only giving you half the story.
As I explained here:-
https://myhumax.org/forum/topic/just-got-aura-few-little-niggles
in post #7.Ok thanks for your input. Taking on board your comments regarding signal level I attempting to see if the fault manifests with the lowest input signal level which can achieve 100% quality. On Saturday evening 14/08/21 I reduced the input signal on one of my Auras (the one connected directly to the TV) and 100% quality could be achieved with a signal strength of 8% on CH4 HD (CH21 on the Rowridge transmitter) with any further attenuation reducing quality. To get this low a signal strength I had to use 2 attenuators in series and at this level of attenuation only CH21 was ok all others channels showing a significant drop in quality (the worst being CH25 on Rowridge with 25% quality). Periodic checks on the signal for an hour or so indicated that for CH4 HD 100% quality was maintained at 8% signal strength on Saturday evening.
On this Aura and my other Aura (100% strength and quality) I recorded the film Red Sparrow on CH4 HD. When the recordings were played back at ad breaks when the audio stream switched from stereo to multichannel a freeze could occur on both machines. Repeated rewinding and playing over this audio stream transition did show the heavily attenuated machine was less likely to freeze than the unattenuated machine, but that it could freeze. The unattenuated machine freezing 3 out of 10 times and the attenuated machine freezing 1 out of 10 times that the audio transition point was repeatedly replayed.
It appears to me that currently the Aura does have a problem handling a change in audio stream from stereo to multichannel. It appears that the issue can be made to manifest less frequently by reducing input signal but not totally prevented. In practice if a sweet spot can be found for an input signal level robust enough for reliable operation on all channels but low enough to prevent too many problems at changes in audio stream will probably vary from user to user. In my case 8% signal strength was to low for all other channels apart from CH21 transmitted from Rowridge on 14/08/21 and by Monday 16/8/21 it was to low for reliable reception of CH21 with quality dropping off leading to low signal warnings and picture artifacts. Further testing at higher input signal levels may provide me with a sweet spot until hopefully the firmware fix mentioned in other posts is supplied.
Further thoughts and suggestions welcomed.
| Tue 17 Aug 2021 12:21:33 #30 |
Reply »
You must log in to post.
