346 replies to this topic

[beka2]

 

What about the fibre solution from global invacom, does it work the same as those Unicable LNBs from inverto, since it sends all frequencies down a single fibre ?

No clue here.
 

Basically FBC tuners can use all quadrants from a single sat, is this right ?

No. In a regular setup they're just two normal tuners and six "leaf" tuners that enigma connects to one of them when required. In a SCR setup they're eight independent tuners.

 

 

Its in this SCR setup that I'm interested in.

These FBC tuners working in a SCR setup have to be paired with specific LNBs so that they can use the 8 separate tuners, right ?

I assume only the tuners in unicable.xml are supported and, besides these, the tuner will work as a regular setup?

 

 

I'm sorry for the questions but there's so much information around and nothing that one can actually read and understand the whole picture

[Abu Baniaz]

FBC tuners do not have to be paired to any specific LNBs. Confusion will not stop until people stop linking FBC and SCR, they are two different technologies that can be used together.

An FBC tuner will work with a universal LNB. Ignore the people who say you cannot.

An FBC tuner will work with an SCR LNB/Switch too. Ones with at least 8 SCR/channels will be best.

How many SCR/channels does your device have? Can you post a link to the data sheet?

Sent from my Moto G (5S) using Forum Fiend v1.3.3.

[Abu Baniaz]

If your device is not listed in the XML file, there is manual input, but best is to add it to the xml file.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) using Forum Fiend v1.3.3.

[beka2]

I've been reading for the entire afternoon about this topic.

I think I finally grasp the means of all this.

 

I wanted to upgrade from a Duo2 into an Ultimo4K not only because of the 4K for future proof, and also because I would be able to use more transponders.

 

At the moment I have my setup with a Fibre LNB, and at the other end a quad GTU which is basically the same as a quad LNB.

Through all the read I gave into the topic, I understand what is SCR, and it doesn't have SCR ( https://www.gionline...Quatro - 02.pdf ).

This would be the closest possible (https://www.gionline...nal version.pdf) however given it does only give 4 SCRs it's not an improvement over what I have given I'm not a Sky user and that I already have a "quad LNB" connected to the STB ...

 

I very much like this ( http://inverto.tv/mu...h-1-legacy-port ) however it doesn't look like it supports Quad LNB as input but only quattro.

Unfortunatelly I cannot find a multiswitch that accepts quad LNB input (I can find quattro through) and outputs Unicable support with 16+ SCRs which would be enough for the whole satellite

 

So I either keep the current setup as it is and use the FBC with standard quad LNB (4 transponders), or invest a few and will be able to use the full technology of FBC paired with Switch with many SCRs by changing the quad to quattro and adding a Unicable switch (16 tuners).

 

----

 

It confused me at first because of the "Full band" keyword. Given that my LNB actually sends the full band down the fibre, and then converts it to a quad output I though that it could be something related, and that each output of that quad GTU would be the same as that Unicable technology people have been talking about.

But it seems Full Band Capture is a synonym of any transponder to a maximum of 8 SCR, and not an actual full-band coming in any format.

[Abu Baniaz]

Even using a single port universal LNB, an FBC tuner will allow you more usage than a conventional tuner.

 

If your current device can only do 4 SCRs, then that is still usable until you upgrade. Please await further response regarding what that device can do for you from the more technically astute members. Maybe you can e-mail the manufacturers too?

 

Should you need it, there are SCR switches that can accept quad/quattro LNBS and have 32 SCR. Have a look around. The forum is sponsored by Jultec, so check theirs first.

[beka2]

I tried to edit the previous post but was too late.

 

It seems I was mistaken, where this ( https://www.gionline...q-dscr-gtu&sm=4 ) supports 16 SCR per output and input in fiber which is perfect for my setup...

There wasn't too much info on their site, but deepwebz ( https://www.bauckhag...S-dSCR-GTU.html ) shown that it has 32 SCR total...

[Erik Slagter]

I only have experience with JESS and Unicable switches no LNB's. Connecting an SCR switch is very simple, if you have one switch, connect it to input 1 (aka "A") and have all the other tuners link to it. If you have two switches (as in my case), connect both switches to either one of the inputs ("A" and "B") and then distribute the leaf tuners as "clients" to either switch.

[beka2]

Finally,

Assuming a twin FBC scenario, can I feed both (2x8 tuners) with 1 cable in one of them, or do I need a 2-way splitter with 1 cable going into each FBC?

 

Not sure if this is just a software thing, of if the second FBC also needs its own cable feed for 8 more SCR.

Edited by beka2, 10 July 2018 - 00:30.

[WanWizard]

If you have a Unicable setup, you need a splitter. If you have a legacy setup, you need two more cables for the second tuner. There is no internal loop-through between the two FBC cards.

[Erik Slagter]

Finally,

Assuming a twin FBC scenario, can I feed both (2x8 tuners) with 1 cable in one of them, or do I need a 2-way splitter with 1 cable going into each FBC?

 

Not sure if this is just a software thing, of if the second FBC also needs its own cable feed for 8 more SCR.

 

No, don't worry. All tuners can be connected to either input. Although I never tried connecting a cable to the second input and assigning it to tuner "A". It might work, but it's not how it's intended to work.

 

If you are using SCR using a single cable (one switch or all LNB's connected to one cable), you can assign ALL 8 tuners to this cable, connect it to the first input, and then loop all tuners B-H through to A.

If you are using SCR using a two cables (two switches), you assign (loop through) some of the tuners to the first input ("A")and some of them to the second input ("B"). But that's a rare situation.

 

If you're not using SCR, enigma will take care of the (dynamic) looping through.

[Erik Slagter]

If you have a Unicable setup, you need a splitter. If you have a legacy setup, you need two more cables for the second tuner. There is no internal loop-through between the two FBC cards.

But there is within on FBC tuner complex. All root and leaf tuners can be connected. If you're only connecting one single FBC tuner complex, you don't need a splitter, just connect the cable to the first input.

[WanWizard]

@Erik,

 

Assuming a twin FBC scenario, can I feed both (2x8 tuners) with 1 cable in one of them, or do I need a 2-way splitter

 

Yes, but as you can see, the question was explicit about two FBC tuners.

[beka2]

@Erik,

 

Assuming a twin FBC scenario, can I feed both (2x8 tuners) with 1 cable in one of them, or do I need a 2-way splitter

 

Yes, but as you can see, the question was explicit about two FBC tuners.

 

Yes, I meant two FBC tuners.

Sorry for the misunderstandment, sometimes it's difficult with english not being your native language. And to help we have dual twin tuners and stuff like that hahah.

@Erik To clear things up:

 

If you have a Unicable setup, you need a splitter. If you have a legacy setup, you need two more cables for the second tuner. There is no internal loop-through between the two FBC cards.

 

I will need a simple splitter and two cables, one for each FBC tuner as @WanWizard said (Unicable II setup),

since there will be no way of looping tuners IJKLMNOP through A.

 

After out discussion and a lot of reading I understand how these technologies work.

I'm very tempted in pulling the plug on Ultimo4K + multiswitch with 32SCR. Going for the ultimate setup hahah.

Luckily I'm using fiber LNB and everything can be done without going to the roof.

 

Thanks a lot for your help guys! And I hope this read helps someone else in need. =)

[Erik Slagter]

I tend to read "dual" or "double" or "2" FBC tuners as "one FBC tuner complex", as it's commonly used that way.

 

If you have FOUR inputs, then you really have TWO FBC tuners.

 

And yes, input 1+2 can be looped internally and input 3+4 can be looped internally, 2-3 must be done externally. The DVB signal goes directly into the tuner, it's not forwarded over the PCB connector. That would probably be implossible anyway, only with fixed, dual, tuners (like tuner A+B on the DM8000).

 

Anyway, I have found a splitter device doesn't influence the signal quality significantly, don't be afraid for that. I don't have two DVB-S2 FBC tuner, but I do have the DVB-S2 FBC tuner looped through to a "regular" dual tuner and it works quite well. All SCR of course.

Edited by Erik Slagter, 12 July 2018 - 18:49.

[GThomas]

Hi everyone.

I`m Tom and I was given a "problem" to sort out for a client of.. lets call him a friend of mine.

His own technical knowledge doesn`t permit him to do it hiself, so he asked me. Simples.

 

Problem itself is quite quite similar to original issue of this thread, so, instead of crating a new one, I decided to piggy-tail on this, existing one.

Of course I`ve read trough the thread first.

 

I`m about to provide all the details of my given problem below, followed by solutions that I either think as workable or I need some more information about, but first:

 

There seems to be a lot of confusion between terms "tuner" dual/double tuner, Tuner A/B/C and so on, therefore I will be using terms that may easily be called "lame" and even "dumb"- yet wont be leaving much space for confusion.

 

Since the matter circulates around using either Ultimo4K or Solo4K(se?), i wil refer to:

F-Type Input 1 or 2- actual, physical, cable input to tuner card, 2 such inputs per card, therefore numbering 1(top) and 2 (bottom)

Tuner Card -  a card with embedded tuners, either FBC with 8 tuners onboard in Slots 1 or 2, or dual tunercard in Slot 3 (only 2 tuners).

Slot 1/2/3 - for some reason VU+ marked them as "Tuner A/B/C" and it can be rather confusing. I believe my naming not to leave space for confusion, whilst being rather self-explanatory as well.

Tuner A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/and so on and so on -  actual tuners embedded on Tuner cards.

 Quadrant -  one of HHi/HLo/VHi/VLo bands

 

I assume that tuners on each tuner card can be assigned as A&B&C&D F-type input1, E&F&G&H- F-type input2 and so on.. Correct me if i`m wrong, and i have a feeling that i am wrong..

 

 

Problem:

To provide television from 3 different satellites (i think its irrelevant to discussion, but for the record: 13E, 19.2E, 28.2E, where only 13E will require decoding card/CAM), distributed over at least 4 TV receivers, with ability to watch any desired channel from any satellite at any time and on any TV.

 

I can safely assume that top requirement in regard to simultaneous streams will be

4 TVs Live TV

4 simultaneous recordings in the background

therefore i estimate peak at 8 simultaneous streams, where possible (solution1 wouldn`t permit this- explanation later in the text)

 

House:

Coaxial cabling next to non-existient, and where fitted, inadequate:

top floor bedrooms- no coaxial cabling, intention of fitting 2 TVs in 2 bedrooms

1st (in USA 2nd) floor- 2 coax cables into master bedroom, no intention to fit TV in there, though

Ground floor (USA 1st floor)- 1 coax cable to kitchen island, placement of island such that tv fitted there would be seen only from dining area, not kitchen itself (open plan kitchen) no intention of TV as yet.

kitchen worktop section has  1 coax cable , intended 1 TV serving kitchen (i guess cooking programmes/channels)

basement- main TV viewing area, home cinema system to be fitted, 2 coax cables provided

 

all these cables (subject to testing- date TBC) converge in an AV rack, in the loft.

 

no permission to provide any more coaxial cabling below top floor. permission to provide cabling from AV rack to top floor bedrooms only.

 

Cat5 cabling:

extensive. every room has a wall plate with at least 2, and max 6 Cat5 sockets.

these cables converge into the same AV rack as Coaxials

shame no Cat6 cable was used..

 

Solutions I`m thinking of:

 

Each will need either 3 satellite dishes or 1 dish with holder for 3 LNBs. My own preference would be to use 3 separate dishes- theres plenty of space for it and it will make adjustments easier.

cabling from dish(es) to AV rack- 6-12 metres cable distance, depending on which chimney stack i`ll choose as dish(es) support.

Therefore eventual multiswitch and other equipment would be fitted on that AV rack.

 

 

Solution 1 (irrelevant to this thread, but i place it here for full picture of issue/for the record)

to use Quattro LNBs, run 3x4 coax cables into AV rack, use 17/8 multiswitch (legacy, diseqc).

to run at least 1, but prefferrably 3 coax cables into each top floor bedroom (extra cabling may be needed for supplementary systems, SkyQ for example).

to use new and old coax cabling for distribution of signal and use TV sets with built- in satellite receivers/CAM slots.

 

pros:

independent viewing on each TV

one remote for each set

 

cons:

TVs can be fitted only in proximity to coaxial cable output in each room (with messy option to use coax extension cable from socket to tv)

cost of CAM modules (in this particular case, each CAM with activated card may well cost 150-200 British Pounds, buying one for each and every TV in the house... luckily only satellite at 13E requires that card/CAM, others are FTA)

only TVs with satellite tuner AND CAM slot AND support of diseqc can be used

no ability to simultanously watch one and record another channel, depending on TV, may be no ability to record at all.

 

Solution 2 (the one i have hard time with)

 

to use either VU+ Ultimo 4K or Solo4K fitted into the AV rack, distribute each desired channel or recording trough LAN network, using android IPTV boxes with KODI and VU+/Enigma2 plugin.

 

pros:

one interface for each TV.

free choice of TV (only requirements are HDMI input, screen and speakers, doesnt have to be smart, doesnt even have to have its own tuner of any kind)

ability to watch TV on almost any networked device (KODI+TV sets, mobile phones, tablets, PC computers)

only 1 CAM/viewing card involved, limiting the cost of CAMS (replaced by cost of VU+ of course)

no coaxial cabling used, other than cabling from dish(es) to AV rack.

fixed screens can be hard wired to LAN, mobile devices can work on WiFi.

much wider choice of TVs placement- if possible, close to Cat5 outlet, if not- on WiFi.

 

issue: providing independent signal from dish(es) in such a way, that any channel can be choosen by client, no matter whats being watched on any other TV..

 

my idea 1:

use the same multiswitch as in solution 1, providing 4 cables from multiswitch into 4 F-Type inputs of 2 TunerCards in Slots A&B, enabling diseqc.

my understanding:

request from KODI triggers VU+ to receive a channel from one of satellites. VU+ will use first available free (not being currently in use) to receive that channel, tuner will send diseqc request to multiswitch demanding correct dish/quadrant, when correct signal is provided, channel is streamed over LAN to KODI.

 

case simulation:

K1 (KODI receiver 1) requests channel from satellite1, HHi, in my understanding tuner A (Tuner card in slot 1, first tuner of the card, F-Type input1) will be assigned.

K2 requests channel sattelite 2 HLo, my understanding Tuner E (Slot1, F-Type input2) will be assigned

K3 requests sat3 HHi, tuner I (Slot2 F-type input 1) will be assigned

K4 requests sat1 HHi, tuner B (slot1/input 1 already on sat1/HHI) will be assigned

Sheduled recording1 requests sat2 VLo, Tuner M (slot2, input 2) assigned

Sheduled recording2 requests Sat2,VHi- ALL F-Type inputs in use, no F-input already on sat2/VHi, ACCESS DENIED

 

I could extend base of tuners into Slot3, giving me 2 extra F-Type inputs and therefore available Sat/Quadrant combinations, but will that be enough?

And first of all- is my logic above correct?

 

 

my idea2:

 

3 unicable LNBs

first coax cable from 1st LNB into F-type input1 on slot 1

second coax cable from 2nd LNB into F-type input 2, slot1

third and 4th cable from LNB3 into F-Type inputs 1&2 on slot2

 

will this give me ability to receive, simultaneously:

4 channels from sat1

4 channels from sat2

8 channels from sat3?

 

what happens if each channel on, for example, sat1 above, is on different quadrant?

 

 

my idea3 (and now its getting nicely compicated..)

 

to extend capability of idea2 above by using diseqc addresable Unicable multiswitch.. lets say 4 inputs/4outputs

 

does such a thing even exist?

 

 

 

out of ideas.

 

any comments and help much much appreciated.

 

now ill be off to find my bucket of nerve-calming drugs (just kidding)

and wait...

Edited by GThomas, 21 October 2018 - 18:43.

[WanWizard]

An FBC complex has 8 tuners, so if your requirements are 8 simultaneous streams / recordings, you don't need a second FBC card, which means you don't need an Ultimo 4K, a Solo 4K would do fine. But so would any other box with an FBC DVB-S2 tuner, there are cheaper options than a VU+. especially if you are going to hide it in the attic. Optionally you could add/use a legacy dual tuner for a second slot, giving you a total of 10 tuners (this is what I have in my Solo 4K).

 

If you use Unicable SCR LNB's, and you pick a model with 32 user bands, you can assign 8 bands per SAT position (and have 8 spare for additional assignment or to add a 4th SAT position), have the LNB's programmed that way, and connect them all up to the same coax with the correct T couplers.

 

If you want all TV locations to be able to record, I would not go for Android/KODI, but select a cheap Enigma box for each location, ignore the tuner, and use that as an IP box in combination with a fallback tuner setup. In the upcoming OpenPLi 7 that will sync the channel list, EPG data and recording timers with the master box, either on the disk in the Solo 4K, or on a NAS.

 

This is exactly what my setup looks like, only I stil have legacy LNB's, haven't made the switch to Unicable yet.

[Erik Slagter]

If you're not short on money, I'd definitely recommend using a JESS switch, not SCR LNB's. It works perfectly without any hassle or configuration. You can choose how many userbands you need and distribute them to all connected receivers+tuners. Only one cable required. Need more concurrent tuners? Only the switch needs replacement, cables and receivers+tuners can stay. Sometimes it's possible to cascade switches, so the first switch doesn't even need to be replaced, only added to.

[WanWizard]

Are there already switches available for more than 2 positions? Cascading switches will quickly become a very expensive habbit...  

 

I'm planning to switch to Unicable/JESS as well, early next year, for 4 positions, so very interested in a cost-effective solution.

[GThomas]

Thank you all for replies.

Currently im "gnawing" my way trough Unicable/SCR/dCSS.

A lot to read

Theres number of "worries" with this project, indeed.

But i try to tackle these one at the time.

First- providing AT LEAST (as opposed to "up to") 8 simultaneous streams available.

Second- indeed- suitability for the client.

Third- receivers actual transcoding capability. Its quite a different (in my understanding) matter to receive 8 channels, and to stream 8 channels. What are hardware requirements?

Fourth- ability to upgrade and costs of such. It may be that client will ask for SkyQ to be installed in a year or two. Or add a TV. Or even ask to incorporate Sky channels into Enigma receiver (I'd rather avoid this one, quite obviously)

Fifth- last, but not least- costs of it all. In both labour and equipment. I believe that client would accept higher costs in return of bigger flexibility and convenience of use of the system. But there's a limit...

One thing I'm not going to do here is to go Sky or any other provider route and say " my equipment is fine, its your walls limiting WiFi signal",or any other excuse like that.
Must work fully. If it doesn't work fully, if there's piece missing- it will be like it doesn't work at all.

I will need to think about every possibility.

One at time.

First- 8 simultaneous channels. Reading specs. Asking questions. Finding solutions.

Then next point.

WanWizzard- idea of several "lesser" Enigma receivers is intriguing..
But (I may be wrong, please correct me if it is so), my belief is that you can request Enigma to record from the level of client (in this case KODI), enigma will record it either to its own HDD or NAS unit, depending on settings given, and after that is completed- recording can be watched on any of the clients? That's KODIs, tablets and so on?

[WanWizard]

I'll leave "FIRST" to the specialists. If you go for a JESS setup, you have switches that support up to 32 SCR's, so plenty of room for future expansion.

 

The SECOND I can't comment on.

 

Any receiver that has FBC capability has no problem whatsoever with 8 channels (assuming your dish setup can handle that), I've seen people achieve double that.

 

SkyQ, although Unicable derived, is propriatary, and requires a separate dish, LNB and cabling. SKY goes to great length to make it as difficult as possible for UK residents to watch something else. For that reason it is also not possible to add SKY channels to an Enigma box, the SKY box uses encryption that is not available in a softcam at the moment, so none of the SKY transponders can be watched. And SKY UK doesn't supply a CI module to allow users to choice their own hardware, you are forced to use a DigiBox. The only channels still supported on an Enigma box are a list of SD channels, and the Freesat HD channels (BBC/ITV/Channel 4/Channel 5/Quest).

 

Obviously I can't comment on cost either.

 

Streaming and transcoding are two different things.

 

A stream is a realtime transport of a received transport stream over HTTP. Because of this, it is very sensitive to latency and jitter, if one packet arrives to late at the client, you have hickups, realtime means no buffering. This in turn means that a wired connection is usually not a problem (watch out for poor powerline connections), wifi can be problematic as it is a shared medium and the AP's radio will be set based on the weakest client connected.

 

A transcoded stream isn't realtime, in the sense that the server buffers the stream locally, sends it through the transcoder to convert it, and then sends the converted stream out. It is less sensitive to latency and jitter (you can send a transcoded stream over a stable internet connection). Downside is that 720p is the maximum achievable, and only more expensive boxes can transcode.

 

As to the client: yes, you could record from the client, but that means recording a HTTP stream (which is less stable than recording a local transport stream), and it also means data has to go over the cable twice (server -> client, client -> NAS) which may have an impact on throughput, latency and jitter, which is turn might impact the HTTP stream. 

And since you mention cost:

 

is it a lot more efficient to connect a NAS directly to the server box, or use an internal disk in that box (you can buy 10TB disks these days), then to equip every client box with storage. Not to mention the complexity, the chance of failure, the fact users need to figure out what was recorded where, etc. It also means you can switch the client boxes off (instead of leaving them in standby because they need to be able to record).

 

Adding Kodi means yet another layer to setup, maintain, etc, so that also has a cost implication.