Channel Master DVR+ Owners Thread - Page 276 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
Reply
Thread Tools
post #8251 of 8266 Unread Yesterday, 11:59 AM
Newbie
 
badsede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Seagate 2TB and cloning

We just got a 2TB Seagate drive (STBX2000401) and it works perfectly, so that one can be excluded from the problematic list of 2 TB drives.

A couple of notes on migration/cloning to the new drive.

I tried the copy method first (let the DVR+ format the new drive, connect both drives to a computer with ext3 access, copy over files) but it didn't work. The drive just came through as empty afterward

I then tried Clonezilla to do a whole drive to whole drive clone. It worked great, except the it did not expand the recordings partition, so I still just had a 500GB drive to use. I'm just not facile enough with linux to figure out the right settings to make it expand the recordings partition to fill the drive.

So then I let the DVR+ format the new drive and did a partition to partition clone with clonezilla. Unfortunately, the DVR+ created a slightly smaller 1 GB "info" drive on the 2TB than it had on the 500 GB, so Clonezilla couldn't do the clone on that partition, just the recordings partition. Again, I don't know linux well enough to get Clonezilla to ignore the discrepancy.

Ultimately, the method that worked for me was that I let the DVR+ format the new drive. I used Clonezilla's partition to partition function to clone the recordings partition. Then I manually copied the files on the info partition. It was hackneyed, but it worked. I don't know why the manual copying method didn't work the first time. If I were to do it again, I would give the manual copy one more try before going through all the rigamarole that I ultimately went through.

A final note on Clonezilla. If you have attached your DVR+ drive to a computer, your computer might add a GPT to the MBR. If it does, then Clonezilla won't work. Clonezilla tells you how to destroy the GPT and keep just the MBR. I did that with no ill effect.
pachinko likes this.
badsede is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #8252 of 8266 Unread Yesterday, 02:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
qz3fwd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,173
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 214 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHBrandt View Post
....
In contrast, the 2.2 TB limit is sort of the opposite. It applies to any drive over that size, so it's a much bigger issue - but you could reasonably argue that strictly speaking, it isn't a "bug."
It sure seems like a bug. I would guess that they are using a really old linux kernel which does not suport partitions/drives over 2.2 TB? They should be competent enough to bring the OS up to current levels and enjoy all the benefits it brings along. Apparently not though. I meam really with 8TB drives avaliable, being limited to 2.2TB is kinda pathetic considering video takes up more space than just about any other application a consumer would typically used a hard rdrive for.
pachinko likes this.
qz3fwd is offline  
post #8253 of 8266 Unread Yesterday, 04:05 PM
Member
 
Zonker007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 11
How long until the release? 2 Weeks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post
^^
Just to be clear. It's going to be 2-3 weeks before you hear from them again on the subject. That should stir up the hornets on their facebook page.

Is anyone surprised?
As I predicted... just like the movie the Money Pit - 2 Weeks!

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/42-hdt...l#post33144953
Zonker007 is offline  
post #8254 of 8266 Unread Yesterday, 04:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JHBrandt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S. Garland, TX
Posts: 2,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 428 Post(s)
Liked: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by qz3fwd View Post
It sure seems like a bug. I would guess that they are using a really old linux kernel which does not suport partitions/drives over 2.2 TB? They should be competent enough to bring the OS up to current levels and enjoy all the benefits it brings along. Apparently not though. I meam really with 8TB drives avaliable, being limited to 2.2TB is kinda pathetic considering video takes up more space than just about any other application a consumer would typically used a hard rdrive for.
You could argue it either way. It's not a "bug" in the technical sense of a programming error, but it is a "bug" in the practical sense that large HDDs don't work as a reasonable user would expect.

But whatever you call it, I agree it's unacceptable and should have been addressed before CM even thought about selling 3 TB drives for the DVR+. But it wasn't, so now they need a fix that won't require reformatting, and losing your recordings, to reclaim unused space on large HDDs. We discussed some possible solutions earlier, but just adding support for >2.2 TB partitions isn't enough anymore.
JHBrandt is offline  
post #8255 of 8266 Unread Yesterday, 05:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Aleron Ives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,608
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 839 Post(s)
Liked: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by qz3fwd View Post
It sure seems like a bug. I would guess that they are using a really old linux kernel which does not suport partitions/drives over 2.2 TB?
They're using MBR instead of GPT, and the 2TiB partition size limit is one of MBR's defining characteristics. It's not a bug in the sense that MBR is working properly within the limitations of its specifications. It's a bug in the sense that CM lies in its product advertising by saying that you can use a 3TB drive to increase your storage capacity by 50% over a 2TB drive, when in reality you can't do that, because the DVR+ won't use all the extra space that a 3TB drive provides. If CM had just been honest by saying that 2TB was the maximum supported drive size, then all would be well, at least as far as false advertising concerns go.
Aleron Ives is offline  
post #8256 of 8266 Unread Yesterday, 05:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
metalsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western, Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,854
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 202 Post(s)
Liked: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post
^^
Just to be clear. It's going to be 2-3 weeks before you hear from them again on the subject. That should stir up the hornets on their facebook page.

Is anyone surprised?
Let's see how Arnold feels.
metalsaber is online now  
post #8257 of 8266 Unread Yesterday, 06:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
qz3fwd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,173
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 214 Post(s)
Liked: 97
I guess then my position would be that they misunderstood the user requirements for the product and picked an implementation that hampers the product and does not provide the proper capabilities for the product. That can only be blamed on their engineering department. We have had 4TB drives for a long time before this product launched and any competent CEM should have realized people would want to use > 2TB drives with a DVR for storing video, so the choice of this partitioning scheme is nothing but a poor choice. The only defense is if perhaps the Broadcom SDK or whatever underlying hardware it is running cannot support larger drives and they could not get the hardware supplier to correct the SDK? However I am pretty sure this runs a Linux flavor so they should have been able to fix this themselves.

Advertising 3 TB support when in fact the while drive is not fully utilized is pathetic and if true they should be taken to court or at least someone who is a lawyer here should contact their legal department.

Relying on an approved hard drive list is pathetic and a cop out if only a few drives are listed. Hard drives do go out of production so these QVL's very quickly become useless. Just look at motherboard QVL's for memory........what a joke.


BTW - I hope the tease is the ability to record and time shift streaming content. That would be cool.
qz3fwd is offline  
post #8258 of 8266 Unread Yesterday, 10:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
P Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mediterranean Sea
Posts: 2,207
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Regardless SDK, the solution is well know by e* engineers as they did implement it many years ago on same HW and core SW DVR platform - chained partitions (extended type), I posted here. Many partitions, each has 500 GB.
P Smith is offline  
post #8259 of 8266 Unread Today, 10:24 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Question DVR+ Remote Control problem?

Have only had my DVR+ for three months, but am already experiencing a "problem" with the remote. I noticed that it doesn't work if I don't give it a couple of seconds to "recover" before pressing a button again (i.e. advancing through programs on the guide, using the DVR, etc.).


Has anyone else experienced this? Could it be a problem with the remote itself, or a hardware problem with the DVR+?
sam.mpls is offline  
post #8260 of 8266 Unread Today, 11:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
qz3fwd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,173
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 214 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam.mpls View Post
Have only had my DVR+ for three months, but am already experiencing a "problem" with the remote. I noticed that it doesn't work if I don't give it a couple of seconds to "recover" before pressing a button again (i.e. advancing through programs on the guide, using the DVR, etc.).


Has anyone else experienced this? Could it be a problem with the remote itself, or a hardware problem with the DVR+?
Or the battery could be almost dead. its a tiny little battery-try replacing it.
qz3fwd is offline  
post #8261 of 8266 Unread Today, 12:46 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 0
It appears to be the contacts in the remote. The batteries themselves are fine.
sam.mpls is offline  
post #8262 of 8266 Unread Today, 12:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JoeKustra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ashland, PA 17921
Posts: 7,098
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam.mpls View Post
It appears to be the contacts in the remote. The batteries themselves are fine.
Starting at post 6597 there is a conversation on the batteries and their contacts.
JoeKustra is online now  
post #8263 of 8266 Unread Today, 01:19 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by owburp View Post
I have that problem as well. And I don't think resetting the DVR+ is the complete answer. I found that the remote goes unresponsive fairly quickly after a reset so I searched for a different route.

Others have felt that replacing the batteries is the answer and I wonder how long the new batteries will last before the remote starts acting up again.

What I have found so far is an "ugly" solution. Someone back in post 5000 or so suggested bending the contacts under the batteries. Instead of doing that, I put a thin cardboard shim between the batteries and the removable access door. Now, when the remote becomes unresponsive, I squeeze the spot where the shim is and the remote starts working again. Until someone comes up with a better answer (or finds fresh batteries will last longer than a few months), I'll stay with this one.

And btw, bernieoc clued me in on a better way to reset the unit than pulling the power cord. Hold down the button that's just to the right of the LED for about 10 seconds and the DVR+ goes through a reset.

Sounds exactly like the same problem I've been having. I also found that the problem was not the batteries themselves (my DVR+ is less than three months old). The batteries themselves are fine. They simply were not making good contact. Bad design for the remote. I certainly hope Channel Master comes up with a better one, since they are asking 29 dollars for a new remote on their site!
sam.mpls is offline  
post #8264 of 8266 Unread Today, 05:50 PM
Member
 
pachinko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam.mpls View Post
Sounds exactly like the same problem I've been having. I also found that the problem was not the batteries themselves (my DVR+ is less than three months old). The batteries themselves are fine. They simply were not making good contact. Bad design for the remote. I certainly hope Channel Master comes up with a better one, since they are asking 29 dollars for a new remote on their site!
I too had battery contact issues in the remote control. I carefully stretched the springs and that solved that problem.

For what it’s worth, the original batteries lasted 17 weeks. They were so weak that the light under the power button was very dim, and the DVR+ did not respond to any commands.
pachinko is online now  
post #8265 of 8266 Unread Today, 07:36 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam.mpls View Post
Sounds exactly like the same problem I've been having. I also found that the problem was not the batteries themselves (my DVR+ is less than three months old). The batteries themselves are fine. They simply were not making good contact. Bad design for the remote. I certainly hope Channel Master comes up with a better one, since they are asking 29 dollars for a new remote on their site!
For the record ... The batteries in my remote started acting up about 4 or 5 months after I got the DVR+ in July. The shims I added eventually stacked to about 2mm high. The batteries finally gave up (or was it that I gave up on the batteries?) in mid-March and I replaced them with new batteries (and no shims). The remote immediately began working normally at that point.

ChannelMaster seriously needs to rethink and redesign the remote. This is the customer's main way of interacting with the DVR+ and the frustration (and four letter words) that goes with an unresponsive remote due to batteries that are so short-lived gets associated with the ChannelMaster brand. That's NOT good marketing!
owburp is online now  
post #8266 of 8266 Unread Today, 07:37 PM
Member
 
STRONTY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I finally connected my DVR+ to the internet after several months using the OTA guide. My trouble is that I can no longer access the menu function from the recordings screen since the latest firmware eliminated that function when you press left.. I am using a Philips universal remote since I had so much trouble with the original remote which is practically broken now and cant teach my new remote the menu command. Is there a code I can program into the universal remote to regain menu functionality? Maybe there is a backdoor way to enter the menu?
STRONTY is online now  
Reply HDTV Recorders

Tags
578 , Channel Master , dvr+ , maintanance restart , P552UI-B2 , vid posts 576/578 , vizio 4k
Gear in this thread



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off