Can't Get BBC4 HD

[ChrisDaniels]

Com7 reception for your postcode IP19 is shown as variable.
You would be best ringing round local aerial installers and asking for their advice as they will know best if you have a chance of getting it. Or just try a booster if you have one handy.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[MartinLiddle]

Com7 reception for your postcode IP19 is shown as variable.

Given that the Humax has more sensitive tuners than most equipment I would have thought that there was a reasonable chance (but no certainty) of getting it to work on the basis of the predictions.

 

[prpr]

That's a rather touchy reading of my post.

Too right.

I accept that it is, but as I have not verified it for myself it will always be "supposedly" or "reported to be".

Do you not believe anything in the whole wide world until you have verified it yourself then? You really need to get a life if so, as you are wasting yours verifying things that you could just accept. Leave the verification for the important stuff. The presence or absence of COM7 on Mendip is not really that important.

At least it has more weight of evidence than a WiFi link working with the Humax booted in maintenance mode

Both myself and af123 have told you it works for us, yet you still refuse to accept it without complaining?

 

[prpr]

1 I do not think I need to clarify my question in Post 6, "Is there some way of finding if/when the power will be increased?

Who cares. Transmitter power is not the be all and the end all. You might have gleaned that from my line of questioning, but you obviously know better from your "nontech" background.

2 I felt prpr in post 10 was tending to be rude, hence my curt reply.

It wasn't, it was trying to cajole you into providing some answers so that you may help yourself or allow someone else to help you. But you are obviously not interested. You are one of those people who thinks they know better, but can't stop asking pointless questions, unless you get the answer you want to hear.

3 I think prpr's rudeness is proven by his post 12, further borne out in his reply post 9

Post 9 is nothing to do with you and you exhibited your sarky attitude in post #11 which resulted in post #12. In case you need it spelt out, you would rather stick your head in the sand.

4 prpr's request of more information from me "Giving a rough idea of your location, the age/size/location of your aerial, the age/length of your downlead etc. might help, " is not known, other than the Post Code which is IP19.

You don't even know whether your aerial is inside or outside? Frankly, I don't believe you.

5 I will not further this line of conversation only to say I'm asking for advice.

You've had plenty of free advice, but you don't want to take it. Go away and pay an aerial rigger to come and sort your problem out.

 

[Nontech]

Have checked with one neighbour with Humax & they get BBC4HD on channel 106.
have tried a Manual retune & it states "no channels available"
Hence I think it's the aerial (which is outside & about 8 years old)

 

[MikeSh]

What sort of strength are the muxes you are getting showing?
Also check the aerial cable and connections as that could be the problem rather than the actual aerial, especially if water has got in.

 

[Owen Smith]

Have checked with one neighbour with Humax & they get BBC4HD on channel 106.
have tried a Manual retune & it states "no channels available"
Hence I think it's the aerial (which is outside & about 8 years old)

It could just as easily be a poor quality downlead. Or maybe your neighbour has a masthead pre amp and you don't. Or you could be sitting in a reception null, the signal strength can vary remarkably over a short distance.

 

[MontysEvilTwin]

Check the aerial alignment too. If it is not optimally adjusted you will get a weaker signal.

 

[Black Hole]

Both myself and af123 have told you it works for us, yet you still refuse to accept it without complaining?

Okay, but why does it work for you and not for others? That's my point. At least we think we know why some people can't pick up COM7 (including me).

 

[Nontech]

Re Mikesh post number 26, if by Muxes you mean signal strength & quality the figures this morning for Channel 50 were Strength 52%, Quality 100%.
I tried to do another Manual download, but again no channels found.

 

[MontysEvilTwin]

Okay, but why does it work for you and not for others? That's my point. At least we think we know why some people can't pick up COM7 (including me).

I posted on this in message #18 in this very thread. I could not get WiFi to work in maintenance mode either at first but it does work if you follow the steps outlined in that message. Do you have a suitable dongle in your possession? If you do, why not spend five minutes trying it out for yourself?

 

[Owen Smith]

Re Mikesh post number 26, if by Muxes you mean signal strength & quality the figures this morning for Channel 50 were Strength 52%, Quality 100%.
I tried to do another Manual download, but again no channels found.

So at 50% you're already a bit low on signal strength. My COM7 from Sandy Heath is about 60% when all the other muxes are about 80% strength. And that's with a decent power (ish) COM7, if I remember correctly it's on about a quarter power from Sandy Heath compared to the other muxes, and is also broadcast from slightly lower down the mast.

Looking at post #21 and comparing predicted signal strengths, that will probably take COM7 down so far that it isn't receivable on your box. However, if the prediction says 99 for the other muxes you ought to be getting more than 50% strength for them I would have thought. I think there is mileage in getting someone to look at your aerial system, and tell them the goal is to reliably receive COM7.

 

[Trev]

Hence I think it's the aerial (which is outside & about 8 years old)

Can you get at it easily to whip off the cover and look for corrosion of the terminals/co-ax. Is it pointing pretty much the same way as others around you? Was the co-ax new at the time of the aerial fitting, or was the aerial a replacement, using the old co-ax?

 

[Black Hole]

I posted on this in message #18 in this very thread. I could not get WiFi to work in maintenance mode either at first but it does work if you follow the steps outlined in that message. Do you have a suitable dongle in your possession? If you do, why not spend five minutes trying it out for yourself?

If I were to try it for myself, I would have to reconfigure my entire network (which uses parameters incompatible with the Humax), or at the very least reconfigure the router and then reinstate the previous settings.

You think the only reason others don't have success connecting with WiFi in Maintenance Mode having installed wireless-helper is because they are using the wrong IP address???

 

[MontysEvilTwin]

If I were to try it for myself, I would have to reconfigure my entire network (which uses parameters incompatible with the Humax), or at the very least reconfigure the router and then reinstate the previous settings.

You think the only reason others don't have success connecting with WiFi in Maintenance Mode having installed wireless-helper is because they are using the wrong IP address???

Did you just skim my message, or are you trying to wilfully misconstrue its contents to allow you to dismiss it out of hand?

The key points (AGAIN):

Install the additional CFW WiFi packages.
Connect the HDR-FOX to your network using the wireless dongle by DHCP (and obviously note the IP address): if you set up a manual IP address it won't work in maintenance mode.
Telnet in to the box and boot into maintenance mode. The front display will show an IP address but it will be incorrect, so ignore it.

:rtfm:

Have you ever tried to connect wirelessly then? If not, haven't you shot a large hole in your already flimsy argument? Why would you dismiss the reports of people such as prpr and af123 without firm evidence to the contrary? Surely reports of it not working are no less anecdotal, using your line of reasoning?

 

[Black Hole]

You just don't get it.

We have reports of that not working. All I am trying to do, quite reasonably, is figure out why it works for some people and not for others. Do you lack a sense of scientific inquiry? What is it about people that they think one (or a few) examples must be the be all and end all? How do you think the CF was debugged (and continues to be debugged) in the first place?

A positive result is not proof. A body of positive results and no negative results is proof (until a negative result turns up). Any particular negative result cannot be dismissed until it is investigated and shown to be due to some circumstances which have already been taken into account by the theory (or, as you say, an inability to RTFM).

 

[MontysEvilTwin]

We have reports of that not working. All I am trying to do, quite reasonably, is figure out why it works for some people and not for others. Do you lack a sense of scientific inquiry? What is it about people that they think one (or a few) examples must be the be all and end all? How do you think the CF was debugged (and continues to be debugged) in the first place?

A positive result is not proof. A lack of negative results is proof (until a negative result turns up). Any particular negative result cannot be dismissed until it is investigated and shown to be due to some circumstances which have already been taken into account by the theory.

Nonsense, you dug up the maintenance mode WiFi issue from the past because you wanted to have a go at prpr and there was nothing in his posts on this thread that you had a hope of challenging. Some prominent members of this forum have said that it works for them other posters have not been able to get it to work. As far as I am aware only prpr and myself have actually stated conditions that are required to make it work: prpr stated that the wireless helper package was needed, I have said that the wireless connection needs to be set up with DHCP. No one who failed to get it to work has outlined any troubleshooting steps or outcomes. Unless you are prepared to say otherwise I take it that you have never attempted it yourself.

As for me, I graduated with a Ph.D in Chemistry from a Russell Group university twenty years ago, I spent six years carrying out post-doctoral research and lecturing in Sweden. Since then I have been working in the pharmaceutical industry in the UK so don't give me your BS about 'lacking a sense of scientific enquiry'. Your jejune description of the scientific method would be amusing if it weren't presented in such a patronising fashion. Go and tell it to someone who might be impressed.

 

[Trev]

And I thought that this thread was about the OP's inability to get BBC4HD from Tacolneston. How the hell has it degenerated into a slanging match about wireless networking?

 

[MontysEvilTwin]

And I thought that this thread was about the OP's inability to get BBC4HD from Tacolneston. How the hell has it degenerated into a slanging match about wireless networking?

See post #14. Black Hole brought it up as a way of annoying prpr.

 

[Black Hole]

Oh, I see. You didn't read post 9 then.

Don't lecture me - I'm not the one denying the scientific principle. I don't think I have been immoderate in any of my posts, yet the responses have been somewhat less so.