Which one less problematic?

[bits]

I am trying to decide between getting the HD PVR and the HD Homerun. I know they are very different devices and provide different capabilities. What I desire most is a recording solution that is solid, reliable, consistently plays nice with SageTV and is easy to implement within STV. I have browsed these threads and it seems that the HD PVR has quite a few issues most of which seem to be independent of STV but not all.

So from a trouble free standpoint what would be the best choice? The HD PVR or the HD Homerun or ?

Thanks

[GKusnick]

What problem are you trying to solve? If you need to be able to record premium cable or satellite channels, the HDHR won't do that and the HD-PVR is your only choice.

If all you need is OTA or clear QAM network channels, then there's no reason to consider the HD-PVR; the HDHR does that simply and cleanly.

But for most people it's not an either/or choice. A good all-round strategy includes both a dual-tuner HDHR (or similar OTA/QAM tuner) for coverage of the network channels, plus an HD-PVR for the premium channels.

[stanger89]

Yeah, while not quite mutually exclusive, they're pretty close. They really aren't alternatives to each other. Either your source requires one or the other, though like Greg said, many of us have multiple sources and use both.

[wrems]

To answer your question, the HDHR is less problematic. At the same time, your specific needs will dictate which one you need, or both... The HDHR's are very nice units as far as tuners go. A nice benefit of the HDHR is that it not only is a dual tuner but it has dual coax inputs. Allowing you to separate your incoming signals: 1 for OTA/ATSC and 1 for any clearqam you have. In that respect it can really act sort of like 2 different tuners...

[bits]

Originally Posted by wrems

To answer your question, the HDHR is less problematic. At the same time, your specific needs will dictate which one you need, or both... The HDHR's are very nice units as far as tuners go. A nice benefit of the HDHR is that it not only is a dual tuner but it has dual coax inputs. Allowing you to separate your incoming signals: 1 for OTA/ATSC and 1 for any clearqam you have. In that respect it can really act sort of like 2 different tuners...

All who have posted so far to this thread are correct in that my specific needs should dictate which tuner since they have different distinctive capabilities. What I really want is all of the capabilities that both tuners combined provide but I can not justify spending the money for both. So what I was trying to do was make a choice based on which one was the more hassle free.

My biggest need at the moment is to be able to simultaneously record 2 HD channels from the major networks (not premium stuff like HBO). I have cable and at the moment do not have a way to record HD using QAM. I am recording these channels in HD using HDTVFusion USB for OTA. The HDHR sounds like a perfect solution for this issue.

It would be nice to be able to record all of my cable HD channels but may not be worth the expense of the HD PVR and the hassles associated with its issues and those that seem to exist between it and STV.

If the HD PVR where a little more reliable and easier to setup in SageTV then maybe it would be the best overall solution.

[stanger89]

I just want to point out that "hassle free" is an interesting question re the HD PVR vs the HDHR. I agree that as far as failed recoridings, and general hardware, the HDHR is less hassle (but my HD PVR has been essentially perfect for months now, so it's kind of a tie).

The rub is with QAM and remapping. IIRC I've seen threads where cable companies like to move their QAM channels around, which means you've got to rescan and relocate all your remapped channels every time that happens, you don't have to do that with the HD PVR.

So the hassle question is not quite as straitforward as it seems at first.

Originally Posted by bits

My biggest need at the moment is to be able to simultaneously record 2 HD channels from the major networks (not premium stuff like HBO).

First you must define "major networks", if it means the "big 5" that you can get OTA, or are you including things like TNT, TBS, USA, etc, because the latter may not be helped with an HDHR.

So step 1 would be to go to the silicondust site and punch in your zip to figure out what's available in clear QAM:

I have cable and at the moment do not have a way to record HD using QAM. I am recording these channels in HD using HDTVFusion USB for OTA. The HDHR sounds like a perfect solution for this issue.

FWIW, if you can already record OTA HD, your goal is to record 2 things at once (you've got one covered already), and you want to record from cable, personally the answer seems clear. Get the HD PVR and add it to your system so you can record OTA and cable.

It would be nice to be able to record all of my cable HD channels but may not be worth the expense of the HD PVR and the hassles associated with its issues and those that seem to exist between it and STV.

If the HD PVR where a little more reliable and easier to setup in SageTV then maybe it would be the best overall solution.

I think we need to archive all the old HD PVR threads and start over. I know there are some that still have trouble with it, but for me my HD PVR has been perfect since the 1.0.5.301 drivers came out many months ago, and it wasn't any harder to setup than the PVR250 it replaced. Actually it was a bit easier since I already had the IR blaster (USB-UIRT) setup for the STB with the PVR250.

[ericscottf]

I've been running sage since december 09ish, with two HD-pvrs on driver 301, and i've had maybe 3 red "i" notes the whole time, which a restart fixed.

I call that nearly perfect. certainly better than what i came from, and i really can't ask for much more.

FWIW, i went out of my way to give each PVR its own separate USB controller. I bought a mobo with 4 separate controllers on it, 1 for each pvr, and 1 for each of two external hard drives, so all my high speed usb requirements are separated. I don't know if it makes a stability difference, and i also don't know if the PVR saturates a USB connection, but it definitely makes a difference when copying drive to drive.

[bits]

Originally Posted by ericscottf

I've been running sage since december 09ish, with two HD-pvrs on driver 301, and i've had maybe 3 red "i" notes the whole time, which a restart fixed.

I call that nearly perfect. certainly better than what i came from, and i really can't ask for much more.

FWIW, i went out of my way to give each PVR its own separate USB controller. I bought a mobo with 4 separate controllers on it, 1 for each pvr, and 1 for each of two external hard drives, so all my high speed usb requirements are separated. I don't know if it makes a stability difference, and i also don't know if the PVR saturates a USB connection, but it definitely makes a difference when copying drive to drive.

You bring up a good point in regards to USB. I currently record OTA HD via USB. A short while back I tried to use a 2nd HDTVFusion USB device to record QAM but I was not able to get STV to see them both only one or the other. At the time I thought it was more an issue with Divco device software but I also suspected it had something to do with using two USB ports. Maybe I should not consider any solution that requires a usb port. Maybe I should go with something internal like the 2250?

[freedml]

I have found that redundency is the key with sagetv. I have one server with OTA tuners and another server with HD-PVRs. That way, when one system dies the other is available for viewing. WAF has gone way up since I got server #2 working.

No question HD-PVR is more problematic, if only because you have to deal with channel-changing outside of the HD-PVR while HD-HR has it built-in.

[bits]

Does the HD Homerun decrease network band width? Will it cause video studdering when streaming video from HDD to HD200 when it is recording?

I have only one network. My recording PC does have two LAN connections, could I use one of them?

[freedml]

each HD video stream will take at most 10% of a 100mb network, so plenty of headroom with 2 signals.

[Grant.Edwards]

Originally Posted by bits

Does the HD Homerun decrease network band width?

No.

It does _use_ network bandwidth -- up to approximately 19Mbps for each
OTA HD stream that's being recorded. QAM streams can be slightly
highter, IIRC.

Will it cause video studdering when streaming video from HDD to HD200
when it is recording?

Not if you have enought bandwidth available. A 100M link can handle
four HD streams.

I have only one network. My recording PC does have two LAN
connections, could I use one of them?

Yes.

[bits]

Originally Posted by Grant.Edwards

No.

It does _use_ network bandwidth -- up to approximately 19Mbps for each
OTA HD stream that's being recorded. QAM streams can be slightly
highter, IIRC.

Not if you have enought bandwidth available. A 100M link can handle
four HD streams.

Yes.

Thanks for the information.

Taking all things into account I think that the HD Homerun is a good choice. I think the risk that the HD PVR, a USB device, will have a problem in combination with my PC and STV is high given that one of my main recording devices is also USB. Two USB recording devices seems like a recipe for problems especially if one of them is an HD PVR.