ok, newbie here - be kind!

I have been pulling SD signals OTA for years and have been using a Pioneer stand-alone DVR/DVD-Recorder that I have become thoroughly accustomed to. No monthly fees, no subscriptions, just pure digital recording goodness.

Along came Black Friday, and like many Americans, I stimulated the economy through the purchase of an HDTV. Plugged in my OTA antenna and got seven to eight channels of 46" HD goodness - enough to keep my family happy. Yet, my DVR remains stuck in SD/NTSC.

So, to my question: I'm looking for an HD/ASTC DVR stand alone unit, so that I can continue to record TV sans subscription service. It seems such units are in short supply these days. I understand there are some older units floating around, and I'm looking for any recommendations.

Thanks.

Dish DTVPal DVR

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=972197

And for completeness...

TiVo HD

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=879469

Those are the only two mass-market options currently in production for sale to the general public in the United States.

In addition to the options above, you could find the discontinued Sony DHG-HDD250 (or HDD500) or the LG-3410A from eBay or Craigslist.

Both units can record ATSC signals and have 8-day guides via TVGOS (TV Guide On Screen). The limitation is that they are only single-tuner devices and there are concerns as to how well they'll work after 2/09.

But if you're somewhat tech-savvy and willing to fiddle, these devices could be an option.

Also, if you expand your scope outside of a stand-alone unit, you could always build a HTPC. If you shop wisely, you could probably build one for less than $500.

And for completeness...

TiVo HD

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=879469

Those are the only two mass-market options currently in production for sale to the general public in the United States.

I didn't mention the TivoHD (which I have) simply because the OP mentioned no subcription fees. IMO, the $12.95 monthly fee is acceptable, considering everything the Tivo can do (we enjoy surfing YouTube, for example). But I would also second ftaok's recommendations. I also have the Sony DHG-HDD250 and it has done a great job for me for 2 & 1/2 years now.

So, to my question: I'm looking for an HD/ASTC DVR stand alone unit, so that I can continue to record TV sans subscription service.If you want something provenly reliable, at this point in time, the TiVoHD with lifetime service would be your best choice.

I didn't mention the TivoHD (which I have) simply because the OP mentioned no subcription fees.With the lifetime service option, the TiVo HD has no monthly subscription fees. That may or may not match what the OP is looking for.

With the lifetime service option, the TiVo HD has no monthly subscription fees. That may or may not match what the OP is looking for.

True, but that also makes it about $700, as opposed to $250 for the DTVPal DVR.

It will be interesting to see if it is worth the extra $450. It isn't clear, yet, that it is not.

Both units can record ATSC signals and have 8-day guides via TVGOS (TV Guide On Screen). The limitation is that they are only single-tuner devices and there are concerns as to how well they'll work after 2/09.



Thanks for all the responses! The Sony seems like a good fit (we're used to a single-tuner DVR, but I'm curious about the concerns mentioned above. Could you elaborate?

I'm tech-savvy enough to hack something together, but it the interest of my better-half, I need to find a simple solution. In my dream world, Apple with integrate an ASTV tuner into AppleTV. Does Steve Jobs read these forums??

Thanks for all the responses! The Sony seems like a good fit (we're used to a single-tuner DVR, but I'm curious about the concerns mentioned above. Could you elaborate?

I'm tech-savvy enough to hack something together, but it the interest of my better-half, I need to find a simple solution. In my dream world, Apple with integrate an ASTV tuner into AppleTV. Does Steve Jobs read these forums??The concerns with the Sony is two fold.

1. The Sony DHG-HDD250/500 were designed to get the TVGOS data from an analog TV station. Typically, it's a local PBS station that sends the signal. After 2/09, there's no analog signal, so the fear is/was that these units won't work. Without a guide, they're very limited. Without an accurate clock, they're just about useless. These units get both the guide and the clock from analog.

2. These units typically are very reliable, except when they're not. Seriously, take a look at the very big thread for these units. There's a whole lot of people with guide problems, including me.

For the most part, #1 has been solved. There are many AVSers that have had success in getting the Sony to download the guide via a digital channel (typically a CBS station), however, neither Sony or Macrovision will acknowledge that this is possible. Go figure.

If you can score one of these for less than $250 (the pre-order price of the Echostar TR-50), then it might be worth a shot.

Keep in mind, that just like any DVR, the HDD is the key component. If it fails, you're screwed and need to ship it off to Sony for repairs. No one has been successful in dropping in a new HDD and have it work. Sony puts some sort of magic on the HDD to allow it to work.

ft

EDIT - as far as it being easy, it's very easy. Once YOU set it up, the operation is pretty much a no brainer. As long as the clock and guide are OK, anyone that can read English can pretty much operate it.

As far as the Apple comments, don't hold your breath, but that's just my opinion. I've given up on an aTV with a tuner.

Our current DVR has the same TVGOS, so I can relate to the ease of use yet lack of reliability from time to time. Too many missed episodes of The Simpsons. Familiarity with the TVGOS is a big plus towards the Sony.

Sounds like I might take a wait-and-see approach. Wait to see if the Sony works post-2/09; wait to see how people feel about the EchoStar (what an ugly product, btw); wait to see January's MacWorld with crossed fingers.

thanks again!

I didn't mention the TivoHD (which I have) simply because the OP mentioned no subcription fees. IMO, the $12.95 monthly fee is acceptable, considering everything the Tivo can do (we enjoy surfing YouTube, for example). But I would also second ftaok's recommendations. I also have the Sony DHG-HDD250 and it has done a great job for me for 2 & 1/2 years now.
Note TiVo now sells (http://www3.tivo.com/promo/customerholiday/index.html) their HD boxes without fees. They do cost more. Edit: Only existing subscribers can place gift orders using this link. New subscribers must buy the box for $200-$250, and then add a lifetime subscription for $399 to avoid all future fees.

At the moment, the TivoHD doesn't really have any competition in the market, but the DTVPal DVR (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=972197) for OTA should be among the first alternatives when it ships in a few weeks.

http://mysite.verizon.net/~fiosdvr/tivo/nowplaying14.jpg

Hello,

Does anyone know if the ATSC tuner in the Tivo HD or series 3 is good and sensitive ?

Also what generation is the tuner ?

I asking this because I would have to plug my CM4228 with CM7777 to the Tivo instead of my Samsung plamsa 42a450 and would need a good tuner.

I would plug the 4221 for local channels (NTSC) in the Samsung tuner.

Can I also use a splitter between the TV and Tivo instead ? or I will loose some signal because of the splitter lost ?


Thanks,

Intravino

Some lesser-known older models:

Mitsubishi HD-6000 (120GB)
Contemporary Research IP-HDVR (120GB)
Zenith HDR230 (80GB)

Some lesser-known older models:

Mitsubishi HD-6000 (120GB)
Contemporary Research IP-HDVR (120GB)
Zenith HDR230 (80GB)

I've been using the Zenith HDR230 since May 2003 -- it was the first HD DVR to be available in the US, and I bought one of the first ones sold here. It was only on the market for a brief time (less than one year), and was quickly replaced by the LG 3410 (same company, under a different brand name).

Unlike the LG and Sony models, the Zenith does not use TVGOS -- it can be programmed using PSIP data or manually programmed by selecting date/channel/time like you would on a DVD recorder or VCR. The clock can be set using either PSIP data (if it is accurate in your market) or manually.

It's a single tuner model, does not support playing one program while another is recording, and while the 80 GB hard drive can be easily replaced with a larger one (because the operating software/system is not on the hard drive), it's file formatting limits the amount of useable hard drive space to 127 GB -- roughly 13 hours of HD programming.

In short, it is a relatively crude and unsophisticated product -- but it is a product that works, is reliable, robust, easy to repair, and not dependent on *any* program guide services for its continued operation. If the hard drive dies, it can be easily swapped out without any hassles.

If you can find one for cheap, and can live with the limitations, I would have no hesitation in recommending the Zenith HDR-230. Despite it's limitations, I've been happy with mine, and am still using it. Needless to say, mine isn't for sale...

I've been using the Zenith HDR230 since May 2003 -- it was the first HD DVR to be available in the US, and I bought one of the first ones sold here. It was only on the market for a brief time (less than one year), and was quickly replaced by the LG 3410 (same company, under a different brand name).

Unlike the LG and Sony models, the Zenith does not use TVGOS -- it can be programmed using PSIP data or manually programmed by selecting date/channel/time like you would on a DVD recorder or VCR. The clock can be set using either PSIP data (if it is accurate in your market) or manually.

It's a single tuner model, does not support playing one program while another is recording, and while the 80 GB hard drive can be easily replaced with a larger one (because the operating software/system is not on the hard drive), it's file formatting limits the amount of useable hard drive space to 127 GB -- roughly 13 hours of HD programming.

In short, it is a relatively crude and unsophisticated product -- but it is a product that works, is reliable, robust, easy to repair, and not dependent on *any* program guide services for its continued operation. If the hard drive dies, it can be easily swapped out without any hassles.

If you can find one for cheap, and can live with the limitations, I would have no hesitation in recommending the Zenith HDR-230. Despite it's limitations, I've been happy with mine, and am still using it. Needless to say, mine isn't for sale...

Thomas - thank you for the additional info. What type of HDD does it use? If 127 GB is the max, then I suppose any size above 120 GB is not worth it.

This thread has been very, very helpful. It seems like there is a market for OTA HD DVR's, so I was completely caught off guard when I discovered there are no current offerings. Thanks again for all the options.

Thomas - thank you for the additional info. What type of HDD does it use? If 127 GB is the max, then I suppose any size above 120 GB is not worth it.

This thread has been very, very helpful. It seems like there is a market for OTA HD DVR's, so I was completely caught off guard when I discovered there are no current offerings. Thanks again for all the options.

I've never opened it up to look for myself, but from what I read at the time, it uses a 7200 rpm "consumer electronics" (that means it is quieter operating) drive.

I've never opened it up to look for myself, but from what I read at the time, it uses a 7200 rpm "consumer electronics" (that means it is quieter operating) drive.

Maybe my pics will help you out. :D

I have the same unit. The limited HDD space is really bugging me lately. I want to swap out the HDD for something larger, but I'm very annoyed at the 127GB limit.

I've had it since it was first released. I had the very first one from J&R. Cost me $1,000 but it's been worth it. I still have the original software and don't know if a newer version was ever available or how I could update it. If anybody knows, I'd appreciate the help.

Maybe my pics will help you out. :D

I have the same unit. The limited HDD space is really bugging me lately. I want to swap out the HDD for something larger, but I'm very annoyed at the 127GB limit.

I've had it since it was first released. I had the very first one from J&R. Cost me $1,000 but it's been worth it. I still have the original software and don't know if a newer version was ever available or how I could update it. If anybody knows, I'd appreciate the help.

You're in about the same position that I am -- I figure that the one that I got was probably in the first 100 brought into the US. So, like yours, I'm sure it is original software. I doubt that there were many (if any) updates, since the Zenith was replaced by the LG model within six months -- and, really, the software in the Zenith seems to be pretty bullet proof.

The 127 GB limit, as I recall, is related to the operating system -- so any software updates would still be stuck with that limit. Fortunately, I've rarely had a problem even being limited to 80 GB, except when I've gone on vacation.

You're in about the same position that I am -- I figure that the one that I got was probably in the first 100 brought into the US. So, like yours, I'm sure it is original software. I doubt that there were many (if any) updates, since the Zenith was replaced by the LG model within six months -- and, really, the software in the Zenith seems to be pretty bullet proof.

The 127 GB limit, as I recall, is related to the operating system -- so any software updates would still be stuck with that limit. Fortunately, I've rarely had a problem even being limited to 80 GB, except when I've gone on vacation.
I record a lot of TV, and have a few great clips stored until I can transfer them to my PC (new PC build yet to take place). I often lose some shows when I go a few days without watching some shows, which I must do to make enough room for the new shows.

I went looking for this thread to see what other options there are for a new OTA HDD HD recorder, and it appears I have a the best one, considering what may happen with the Sony models.

True, my new PC will have OTA HD recording capabilities, but was hoping for something new for the time being, until my new PC is built. Guess I wont bother.

How reliable are PC OTA HD recorders? Seems like they wont be as reliable, IMO.

They're as reliable as you want them to be. Use good components, tweak it to your satisfaction, and don't touch it. I've got a Myth box with dual QAM cable tuners (which can also do OTA, but I don't) and it's been rock-solid for a year and a half now. Most likely because I only mess with it when Comcast remaps QAM channels here, and it's a dedicated HTPC, not a general-use box.

The nice thing about having an HTPC is that it can serve all your media to the TV and to other devices on your network (downloaded movies, audio, etc.) and act as an upscaling DVD player to boot.

New ATSC/QAM DVR from DVICO:

TVIX R3310 Tuner/Network Media Box (http://www.digitalconnection.com/products/video/r3310.asp)

New ATSC/QAM DVR from DVICO:

TVIX R3310 Tuner/Network Media Box (http://www.digitalconnection.com/products/video/r3310.asp)

That DVICO looks really interesting Kei. Have you or anyone else given it a try?

I have one and so does my friend Terry. I've been using it with OTA as I'm a Dish customer, but Terry has been testing QAM with cable. It's a media player so it does file playback of MPEG-2 but not as full featured in that arena as the other TVIX models that can do H.264 and .MKV. It's a pretty good DVR with the hard drive installed and you can define buffer size. It's a simple way to record transport stream from ATSC/QAM without having to use an HTPC.

New ATSC/QAM DVR from DVICO:

TVIX R3310 Tuner/Network Media Box (http://www.digitalconnection.com/products/video/r3310.asp)
Single tuner and no HD included for $329 (399 list)? Uh, no. You could build a dual-tuner Myth box and have much more capability for $400 or so.

Single tuner and no HD included for $329 (399 list)? Uh, no. You could build a dual-tuner Myth box and have much more capability for $400 or so.

You could do that....if you're so inclined.

Single tuner and no HD included for $329 (399 list)? Uh, no. You could build a dual-tuner Myth box and have much more capability for $400 or so.

If you are confident in your own ability to do so AND value your time at $0/hr then your's is a better solution. But, many people do not meet this criteria so this device MAY be the best solution for them. Without adding caveats your comparison is not valid and is really apples to oranges.

The only caveat is to have a clue about PCs. Wouldn't have to be Myth, you could also do QAM channels with BeyondTV, Sage, Vista MC, etc. if you wanted the hand-holding of Windows.

But I agree, some people just want to buy an overpriced black box as seen in this example. No hard drive and single tuner for what they're asking? C'mon, the Dish DTVPal DVR is $250 with a 250GB hard drive and dual tuners. It's OTA only, but the price is much more realistic.

Dual Tuner Myth box? I build my own home PC's, thats no problem. I want a Blu Ray recorder HDD DVR all in one to sit horizontally on my TV stand in the living room and controlled by my Harmony remote. Myth TV, dual tuners, which video card, EPG... Good Lord! Where do I begin? Recomended components for HD recording and playback? The DVR I want can only be had if I build it myself. But where to start? Please help!

But I agree, some people just want to buy an overpriced black box as seen in this example. No hard drive and single tuner for what they're asking? C'mon, the Dish DTVPal DVR is $250 with a 250GB hard drive and dual tuners. It's OTA only, but the price is much more realistic.

Can the hard drive on the DTVPal be upgraded? Because 250GB is tiny for a HDD recorder, and 150HRs of HD recording sounds optimistic (OTA is 19Mbps at roughly 7GB per hour). Can you easily connect it to a PC to USB for file transfers? Does the USB on it work with external hard drives? Can it play other MPEG-2 files like backed up DVD? Music? Photos? Can it's ethernet play those types of files from other drives on your network?

The TVIX R3310 is not a straight OTA DVR, it is also a network media player. And the fact that it can be used in conjuction with QAM is not trivial.

Can the hard drive on the DTVPal be upgraded? Because 250GB is tiny for a HDD recorder, and 150HRs of HD recording sounds optimistic (OTA is 19Mbps at roughly 7GB per hour). Can you easily connect it to a PC to USB for file transfers? Does the USB on it work with external hard drives? Can it play other MPEG-2 files like backed up DVD? Music? Photos? Can it's ethernet play those types of files from other drives on your network?

The TVIX R3310 is not a straight OTA DVR, it is also a network media player. And the fact that it can be used in conjuction with QAM is not trivial.

All the details of the Pal DVR are in the first post in its own thread.

All the details of the Pal DVR are in the first post in its own thread.

Thanks biker19, I guess answers to most of those questions (see no mention of the ethernet) is no.

(OTA is 19Mbps...)Good luck finding anything in this market that high.

Good luck finding anything in this market that high.

Has the broadcasters done something I am unaware of? I was not aware that any changes were made to the bitrate they are broadcasting. Unless the DTV Pal can record a specified sub-channel, wouldn't it still be 19mbps?

Has the broadcasters done something I am unaware of? I was not aware that any changes were made to the bitrate they are broadcasting. Unless the DTV Pal can record a specified sub-channel, wouldn't it still be 19mbps?Broadcasters still have 19.4Mbps available, but very few (if any) still dedicate it all to one network feed. It's usually split across multiple subchannels.

All modern DVRs -- and even the DTVPal DVR-- record the subchannels separately.

Broadcasters still have 19.4Mbps available, but very few (if any) still dedicate it all to one network feed. It's usually split across multiple subchannels.

All modern DVRs -- and even the DTVPal DVR-- record the subchannels separately.

Thanks bfdtv, imagine that's been true since they added content on the subchannels. I think the image quality of OTA is still better than what I get on Dish or what I've seen on cable. I'll try recording and find out the bitrate used for the main HD channel.

The TVIX R3310 is not a straight OTA DVR, it is also a network media player. And the fact that it can be used in conjuction with QAM is not trivial.
Check the thread title (and the forum itself) again, we're talking about HD DVRs here...

Look, I get that it's a media player. But with the Popcorn Hour and other competitors available for around $200, you're paying $200 extra (list) for a single tuner. But hey, it's your money.

Yeah, the R-3310 is HD DVR and media streamer all in one and as such is a bit of overkill for simple DVR functions. The R-2210, which has essentially the same functions (but no ethernet included) is a bit closer to "simple DVR" and saves a few bucks.

They're both far simpler to set up than any HTPC, as well as being less expensive (I dare anyone to come up with a truly comparable HTPC package at DC's price, even if you do value your builder time at $0/hr), less bulky, less noisy, and have better PQ than any sw-based player.

Their clear-QAM tuning capability is among the best in my experience and their trick play (+/- skipping, FF, RW) on large HDTV files is the best I've seen.

Their weak point is in being dependent on PSIP data for EPG reservations rather than allowing a subscription service. However, I've seen the broadcasters and Comcast both improving their support for PSIP EIT data slowly, but surely, over time, so I expect that weakness will appear less problematic with time.

Can the hard drive on the DTVPal be upgraded? Because 250GB is tiny for a HDD recorder, and 150HRs of HD recording sounds optimistic (OTA is 19Mbps at roughly 7GB per hour). Can you easily connect it to a PC to USB for file transfers? Does the USB on it work with external hard drives? Can it play other MPEG-2 files like backed up DVD? Music? Photos? Can it's ethernet play those types of files from other drives on your network?

The TVIX R3310 is not a straight OTA DVR, it is also a network media player. And the fact that it can be used in conjuction with QAM is not trivial.

No way one would get even close to 150Hrs of HD on that box. I have a TiVo HD w/ an optimized 750GB HDD installed (pulls out a lot of the extra TiVo default reserved space) and I get about 110Hrs of OTA HD recordings on it before it starts auto deleting the oldest material.

I think it's probably the best route to go as it supports about all the features you're looking for and a few more like movie rental, direct connections to YouTube, etc.

I got one when it first came out about (June '07 if I recall correctly) and did the 3yr $299 subscription. I get periodic offers to get a new one and then pay $299 for lifetime subscription (25% reduction off the standard offer which didn't exist when I purchased my TiVoHD) and I've been tempted to do this and dump my SA8300HD from Comcast. It should break even in cost after about 2yrs ($19 HD DVR rental fees, $7 2nd outlet fee, then add in $2 cablecard fee - and it's mine.)

CCourtney

Their weak point is in being dependent on PSIP data for EPG reservations rather than allowing a subscription service. However, I've seen the broadcasters and Comcast both improving their support for PSIP EIT data slowly, but surely, over time, so I expect that weakness will appear less problematic with time.
That is a HUGE weak point if you want to use it as a DVR. I'm surprised that they wouldn't support the TVGuide program data, at a minimum (the Dish DVTPal does). In my area, EIT data is often incorrect, not available on all channels, and only goes to 24 hours out anyway. So what you're saying is that this is basically a manual VCR-type device grafted on to a decent media player, which again makes the price way too expensive for what you get as a DVR.

Anyone connect to one of these with FTP Client. I've tried FileZilla and it returns the main directory but errors when you try to see the files. Please post if you have a working connection.

I'm using FireFTP with the R-2210, which should be about the same as the R-3310, and I see all of the folders and files.

FireFTP works perfectly. A little slow but that's FTP.

No IEEE-1394 firewire (MPEG-TS) output, No Deal.

No IEEE-1394 firewire (MPEG-TS) output, No Deal.

Then you're going to be waiting for awhile. The only DVRs I'm aware of that have such ports (and ever actually have them activated) are SA and Moto cable DVRs - and even many locations the hardware is available, the ports aren't activated. Supposedly one of Dish's DVRs has the port, but E* has never activated it, claiming something or other about their programming providers not letting them.

Of course, the reality is that's a moot point. The only production devices that would let you record everything that could be pushed over IEEE-1394 were D-VHS recorders. Which of course are no longer made now. You can record non-protected content transported via IEEE-1394 to a PC, true, but what you can actually get varies widely; with many cable providers, about all you can capture is your digital locals (not to mention capturing to a PC is a process with all the convenience of giving yourself gallbladder surgery). Therefore, even with the FCC mandates in place, IEEE-1394 as a video transport for recording applications, at least outside professional/pro-sumer applications, is basically deceased.

When watching ATSC channels I notice pixilation or groups of little boxes on the screen. This happens randomly 5-10 minutes apart. Sometimes breakup surrounds images like a boxy blur, sometimes just looks like noise. Disappears in a second. I have several other tuners in the house and no other ones do this. It also happens on every channel, and isn't affected by signal strength. Most of my channels show full strength and 2 or 3 one or two bars less. Unit records exactly what you see, so pixilation on this as well.

Anyone have any ideas I can try? I'm using latest firmware v1.5.4. Does this with and without hard drive. Didn't keep original firmware v1.4.2 long enough to see if it was happening then.

Rusty--

I haven't seen anything peculiar about the R-xx10 reception here. In fact, its tuner is among the best of my experience.

From your description it sounds as though you have a signal-quality problem of some sort--probably not "signal strength" from what you say, but something else, such as multipath reception or rf interference. Are your other DTV tuners sharing the same antenna as the R-3310? If not, can you arrange to test it on the same antenna to confirm that the pixelation events happen only on the R-3310?

demonfoo,

What you said is basically true, however, don't forget we didn't get a way to record SD NTSC until D-VHS or DVD came to the market place. What I'm getting at here is that at the end of the useful life of NTSC, only then, did we get the ability to record.

So we are many, many years away from getting the ability to record HD.

Of course, D-VHS did this splendidly, but due to bizarre market forces, the only HD recording technology became obsolete before HD made its big market penetration(!)

Talk about bad timing.

Ironically, D-VHS will probably be, still the only practical technology for recording HD until the successor of BluRay appears. This is because BR will never have cheap media.

Of course, by that time, HD TV will be ho hum about as interesting as NTSC is right now.

At least that's how I'm reading the cheese...

I don't know what you're talking about re. lack of ability to record HDTV. There are now scads of options for making bit-perfect recordings of transport streams to hard disk, DVD, etc. And the means to play those streams are multiplying by the week. "Years away from getting the ability to record HD"? Hardly!

I don't know what you're talking about re. lack of ability to record HDTV. There are now scads of options for making bit-perfect recordings of transport streams to hard disk, DVD, etc. And the means to play those streams are multiplying by the week. "Years away from getting the ability to record HD"? Hardly!

Indeed, I do it daily with my TiVo. And I can download all the recordings from any web browser at any time.

I don't know what you're talking about re. lack of ability to record HDTV. There are now scads of options for making bit-perfect recordings of transport streams to hard disk, DVD, etc. And the means to play those streams are multiplying by the week. "Years away from getting the ability to record HD"? Hardly!
But there are not scads of options of recording *all* HD content for archive purposes, just what's provided in the clear. Outside of Tivo HD or a Cablecard HTPC, you're stuck. And even then, you have to subscribe to cable.
Firewire and D-VHS were valid options if the copy-once flag was set, but now you're SOL if you want to archive your own copy unless you hack the Tivo. I think that's what he meant, not sure.

Downgraded firmware to v1.3.8 and all picture problems gone. Guess its not a hardware problem.

Part of my problem is semantics.

In my opinion, HDD based TIVO, DVR, HTPC have nothing to do with recording anything.

They are "storage" devices with an inherent time limitation to their content built in.

BR, DVD, and tape are used by recorders.

I don't know any way to record HD onto DVD since there are no HD inputs on any DVD recorder I have ever heard of. (I'm guessing there is a way to do it via HTPC, and while legitimate, they are still essentially experimental devices that the lay person cannot operate.)

So that leads me back to the one-and-only consumer HD recording technology: the "obsolete" D-VHS" which requires an IEEE-1394 TS input. (and don't forget, HTPC's need firewire from set top boxes to record from the cable company)

The FCC established 1394 as the standard by which digital content would be transferred between devices. This was done way back when ATSC was in development and they maintained the ability to record content. Now, somehow, that functionality is being subverted and the FCC will not stand up for it - something from their own camp.

1394 is no harder to use than HDMI and probably is more stable to boot so there is no reason the consumer could not use it.

I feel that anyone producing a HD device w/o 1394 is cheating the public and that the FCC should do something about that. (I think I saw some reference to some Japanese Sharp AQUOS BR recorders w/HDD and 1394. ...but don't hold me to that.)

1394 is no harder to use than HDMI and probably is more stable to boot so there is no reason the consumer could not use it. Firewire is no substitute for HDMI as an uncompressed video transport. How many TVs do you know of with built-in MPEG-4 decoders?

You've probably heard about DTCP-IP. That's where the industry is focusing its efforts. Once they figured out how to do DTCP over a network, Firewire became obsolete. Future CE devices in the home will not be connected through Firewire, but by your home network. All recording and PC connectivity will be handled directly over the network without a direct connection between the devices.

Some HDTV recording devices like TiVo already have built-in web servers (to download recordings) and that is only the first step. Ultimately, video content from your various CE devices will be integrated into a single UI.

This protected network sounds like a new, parallel system similar to the existing cable TV network. In fact, it sounds just like cable tv's video on demand.

So, rather than using the cable per se we will use the internet via the cable which is sort of ironic.

This new network will actually be more secure than cable, so recording is probably not offered (again, HD stuff is not recording.)

So was 1394 a red herring to make people think the consumer was going to have a new television system that was just as functional as the one they already were used to? Maybe, the way it looks now.

I suspect, there could be an ugly market force that might open up recording if it might make someone lots of money in the industry. Greed can never be discounted.

In defense of 1394 as a legitimate format, somewhere on this site, they mention a company that mods satellite STB's for MPEG2 TS output via 1394 for something like $500 for the mod. That is a serious amount of money and it appears there is a demand for it.

Part of my problem is semantics.

In my opinion, HDD based TIVO, DVR, HTPC have nothing to do with recording anything.

They are "storage" devices with an inherent time limitation to their content built in.

They're selling them because that's what the market wants. Archival recordings of TV shows are rarely desired - people watch them once or twice, and delete them. TV networks certainly don't want them, because that cuts into their revenue later on selling those shows on DVD/BD/on-demand video systems.

Besides, if you want to permanently keep a program recorded with a TiVo, you can always download it, edit out the commercials, and burn it to a DVD. You can do the same with an HTPC. Of course, this isn't exactly something The Industry(TM) wants us to be able to do.

I don't know any way to record HD onto DVD since there are no HD inputs on any DVD recorder I have ever heard of. (I'm guessing there is a way to do it via HTPC, and while legitimate, they are still essentially experimental devices that the lay person cannot operate.)

While there are ways (BD-9 being one of them - Google it), (a) you have to slice the content up into relatively small chunks (due to the now-relatively-small capacity of DVD), and (b) normal DVD players can't play HD content off DVDs.

So that leads me back to the one-and-only consumer HD recording technology: the "obsolete" D-VHS" which requires an IEEE-1394 TS input. (and don't forget, HTPC's need firewire from set top boxes to record from the cable company)

The FCC established 1394 as the standard by which digital content would be transferred between devices. This was done way back when ATSC was in development and they maintained the ability to record content. Now, somehow, that functionality is being subverted and the FCC will not stand up for it - something from their own camp.

They've proven they don't care. It wouldn't be the first time that the FCC "officially" required something with no real effect. D-VHS didn't have enough market penetration besides - the player/recorders were expensive, and relatively few movie titles were released in the format. (Everyone wants the non-linear playback convenience of disc-based media, it seems?) Thus, it was a marketplace dud.

1394 is no harder to use than HDMI and probably is more stable to boot so there is no reason the consumer could not use it.

For recording from PC, it certainly is - it's frankly a disastrous proposition. There are no official releases of software for it, you have to use experimental software, the necessary drivers aren't available for 64-bit versions of Windows, on OS X it's a program you have to get out of the FireWire SDK. And if the material is flagged CCI 0x02 (copy-once)? DTCP-1394 enters the picture. At which point, you're boned. You can capture it, but you can't watch it, because no PCs are produced that are licensed to handle the DTCP-1394 encrypted content. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Sure, it works fine to D-VHS. However, D-VHS is *dead*. No one's even making recorders now. How long will the existing gear hold out? A year? Two? Five, if you're lucky? And you can't duplicate those tapes if it's flagged as copy-once. You can't edit out commercials. If that tape stretches or breaks, you're boned. Again.

I feel that anyone producing a HD device w/o 1394 is cheating the public and that the FCC should do something about that. (I think I saw some reference to some Japanese Sharp AQUOS BR recorders w/HDD and 1394. ...but don't hold me to that.)

And you're never going to see that particular piece of hardware materialize stateside. There's not a large enough market of people willing to pay what such a device will cost. Therefore they're not about to make the necessary adaptations to US video standards, US certification, and constructing new production lines/retooling existing ones to bring the device here.

Yes, in principle IEEE-1394 should be more available. Unfortunately, market realities have prevented it from being a practical option, for a litany of reasons. You can keep "fighting The Man" about what is versus what ought to be, but no one ever wins that fight.

In defense of 1394 as a legitimate format, somewhere on this site, they mention a company that mods satellite STB's for MPEG2 TS output via 1394 for something like $500 for the mod. That is a serious amount of money and it appears there is a demand for it.

At $500 a pop, it doesn't take too many interested customers to make a revenue stream - at least for now. But that's not going to last forever. 5 years down the road, when most D-VHS gear is hobbling along on its last legs, I don't think they'll be doing a bustling business...

I think it is sad about D-VHS. Even for NTSC it was stellar. I'm on my 2nd one. Started with the JVC 30k and now have the 40k and the video bandwidth at even LS5 (5 times STD recording time) made recording NTSC simply amazing with something near 20 hours on a S-VHS tape at near DVD quality.

But DTV isn't even adopted yet.

I don't think I can say 1/2 the people I know have a HDTV.

People haven't really gotten on-board with the learning curve required to hook this stuff up. So thoughts of recording anything aren't even materializing yet.

Granted, DVR's are convenient, but we'll see how their high price is going to work with our tanking economy. Where I live, Comcast wants something close to $80 for HD Cable w/o Premium Channels. I keep complaining and they keep knocking me back to under $60 with different offers each year. When those offers dry up, I'll cancel cable, do OTA, and probably get Netflix.

Cable is so expensive, you could eliminate it and then buy new BR of all the shows/movies you want to watch and you probably would save money and still own a copy of the program.

The Canadian government basically stepped aside and they plan to let the market dictate the adoption if DTV. What we are doing here is ill-conceived and there should be odd ramifications in the market place as this forced adoption proceeds. The disappearance of the DVD recorder w/HDD and ATSC tuner is another unfortunate extinction.

Granted, DVR's are convenient, but we'll see how their high price is going to work with our tanking economy. Where I live, Comcast wants something close to $80 for HD Cable w/o Premium Channels. I keep complaining and they keep knocking me back to under $60 with different offers each year. When those offers dry up, I'll cancel cable, do OTA, and probably get Netflix.And it's for that very reason that Netflix' business is one of the few that are booming right now.

The Canadian government basically stepped aside and they plan to let the market dictate the adoption if DTV.

You realize that Canada "let[ting] the market decide" is why they will never universally adopt digital terrestrial broadcast in Canada, right? Even CBC, (I believe) a government-run station, has as much as said it won't even *bother* going digital throughout most of Canada until after the supposed cutoff date has run out?

The market is lazy. "Letting the market decide" is a recipe for languishing in a technological dead zone. I'm not saying the alternative is some kind of panacea - we're certainly seeing here that it isn't. But "let the market decide" is a complete non-answer.

Well, my complaint with The Market is that with this mandated changeover, while that sounds like a Good Idea, unless the Asian Manufacturers jump on board, you end up with a vacuum.



The types of products available for DTV/HDTV is shrinking in my opinion or at least not exploding.

Pioneer is actively selling NTSC DVD HDD units in Canada and seems uninterested to throw in an ATSC tuner.... which they already have!

I mean like they could produce a comparable unit for the US for about an extra 29 cents. Yet, it appears it isn't worth the effort? Could it be the ramifications of the Echostar lawsuit regarding DVR technology perhaps?
________________________________________

What really stinks about this mandatory changeover is that TV's etc. were built with NTSC tuners up until about 1 year before the change. For the FTC to allow the manufacture of products doomed to obsolescence in a year is proof that the government basically lacked any kind of Plan for DTV adoption.
____________________________________________

There is another ugly fact: people were completely happy with their VHS. And as far as quality, they are quite happy with DVD. And one cannot say there is not a wide selection of DVD recorders out there. (of course, ironically, for archiving, VHS might actually be better for survivability. For sound, the ultimate archive is the vinyl phonograph record. It should work for 1000 years if played with the laser tonearm that was just barely developed in time. Show me some high tech that would claim that kind of life.)

For sound, the ultimate archive is the vinyl phonograph record. It should work for 1000 years if played with the laser tonearm that was just barely developed in time. Show me some high tech that would claim that kind of life

Computer punch cards from the 70s? :p

Well, my complaint with The Market is that with this mandated changeover, while that sounds like a Good Idea, unless the Asian Manufacturers jump on board, you end up with a vacuum.

The types of products available for DTV/HDTV is shrinking in my opinion or at least not exploding.

Pioneer is actively selling NTSC DVD HDD units in Canada and seems uninterested to throw in an ATSC tuner.... which they already have!

Yes, but the market's small, and it's a catch 22 - almost nothing airing in it (not enough to make reengineering worthwhile), so they don't reengineer it, so people keep buying NTSC equipment, and keep watching NTSC, so there's no desire for content aired via ATSC, thus no content. Vicious cycles 101.

I mean like they could produce a comparable unit for the US for about an extra 29 cents. Yet, it appears it isn't worth the effort? Could it be the ramifications of the Echostar lawsuit regarding DVR technology perhaps?

29 cents mortgaged out over how long? I doubt you could (you need an ATSC receiver, MPEG-2 decoder, scaler chip, MPEG-2 encoder - assuming you're not talking about making the recorder HD capable, which is a whole other mess), considering the cost of retooling existing production lines and so on. These sorts of "it only costs a little" statements rarely consider *all* costs involved, which are more than just the component parts.

What really stinks about this mandatory changeover is that TV's etc. were built with NTSC tuners up until about 1 year before the change. For the FTC to allow the manufacture of products doomed to obsolescence in a year is proof that the government basically lacked any kind of Plan for DTV adoption.

Yes, there was a lack of planning there, but also a lack of awareness of what's going on in the world on the part of the people who went out and bought NTSC TVs when ATSC was the clear, unquestionable future. Did the industry screw up? Sure. But the customers aren't blameless either. Inform thyself, dear consumer, or get burned. Caveat emptor.

There is another ugly fact: people were completely happy with their VHS. And as far as quality, they are quite happy with DVD. And one cannot say there is not a wide selection of DVD recorders out there. (of course, ironically, for archiving, VHS might actually be better for survivability. For sound, the ultimate archive is the vinyl phonograph record. It should work for 1000 years if played with the laser tonearm that was just barely developed in time. Show me some high tech that would claim that kind of life.)

VHS went away because it was expensive to make media for it, and DVDs provided not only cheaper, simpler media (inject, press, done, instead of hundreds of fiddly little bits in each tape), but the benefits of non-linear playback, menus, and of course the fact that you're not implicitly destroying your recording every time you play it back. There are some losses (DVDs are certainly less sturdy than VHS tapes were), but overall the convenience went up. There will always be those that will hang on to the bitter, bitter end, but technology does move on. Should the car not have taken over because the horse and buggy were fine? (You can still use your horse and buggy, but the market for them is not what it once was.)

VHS recordings are fine, assuming (a) you can find a player in the far flung future (reminds me of an episode of Cowboy Bebop, which is set only ~60 years from now), and (b) the electromagnetic substrate the recording is encoded on doesn't flake, fail, or get erased in the meanwhile. Playing them back destroys them though - you can play your DVD as many times as you want and the recording isn't going anywhere, but to *read* that tape, you're putting a magnet right next to it - which slowly but surely wears down the electromagnetic signal encoded on the tape. Again, it's a tradeoff - have shorter potential lifetime, but no loss in repeated playbacks, or longer potential lifetime, as long as you never actually watch it.

As far as vinyl goes: If you kept your vinyl in an environmentally-controlled hermetically sealed enclosure, maybe you'd get somewhere close to your claimed 1000-year lifespan. In the real world, pressing and other manufacturing defects, heat, humidity, and other factors will cause warping, layer separation, and other problems to crop up. Besides, who can afford the super-ultra-high-end optical scanning playback systems you're talking about? I know they do exist, but they cost a *lot* of moolah. That's not a realistic acquisition, unless you're Donald Trump or something.