Failed recording

Brian Harrison

New Member
I have to come back to this subject yet again, by and large my Foxsat records reasonably well but on occasions we get "recording failed" with an icon next to it which looks like a strip of film with zigzag through the middle. Now I think this means broken recording but on investigating the recording settings and the scheduler I can find no conflict or error, my local transmitter is Bluebell hill in kent. I might add we did not get this problem with our previous Humax freeview recorder 9300T.
Some advice please.
 

Trev

The Dumb One
I think the OP knows that. He was just saying that his 9300 did not do what his Foxsat is doing. Both mad by Humax.
 

prpr

Well-Known Member
He didn't. He was talking about Foxsat and then mid-sentence changed to talking about local transmitters, than added another sentence about an unrelated (as far as satellite is concerned) box. This is very confusing. Freesat has absolutely nothing to do with Freeview.
In any case, the recording failure could be due to lots of things potentially. It is difficult to gather evidence after the event to pin down why it didn't happen.
 

Black Hole

May contain traces of nut
I have to come back to this subject yet again, by and large my Foxsat records reasonably well but on occasions we get "recording failed" with an icon next to it which looks like a strip of film with zigzag through the middle. Now I think this means broken recording but on investigating the recording settings and the scheduler I can find no conflict or error
Many things can result in a broken recording flag. On HDR-FOX (Freeview) for example, the recording will be marked as broken if the signal was apparently missing (even for a few moments) when the recording was due to start, or if the recording was forced to start late by other (particularly over-running) recordings, or if the AR flag did not occur within the EPG window of opportunity. The first two are recordings which will play if you force it to, the last obviously results in a lost recording.

my local transmitter is Bluebell hill in kent.
What does this have to do with it? Are we not talking about a satellite receiver?

I might add we did not get this problem with our previous Humax freeview recorder 9300T.
I don't know the 9300, but it is a less sophisticated unit and may well have just given up rather than let you know there may have been a problem. In any case, the 9300 is terrestrial Freeview, and the Foxsat-HDR is a satellite receiver/recorder, so they will have different characteristics because of the capabilities of the broadcast medium.
 

grahamlthompson

Well-Known Member
The accurate recording and series recording systems use the same basic control codes (crid - content reference identifiers) for Freeview and Freesat. Assuming the broadcaster gets the codes right and the box is working as it should then the outcome should be the same. The 9300 is known to have a slow response to accurate recording start signals, compared to newer Humax units (most likely down to a lower power cpu and less memory).
 

prpr

Well-Known Member
The 9300 is known to have a slow response to accurate recording start signals, compared to newer Humax units (most likely down to a lower power cpu and less memory).
No, most likely down to poor implementation of an algorithm AKA crap programming.
How long do you think it takes the processor to process things even if it is old and slow? A fraction of a second maybe. What's the difference with a newer one? A smaller fraction of a second.
 

grahamlthompson

Well-Known Member
No, most likely down to poor implementation of an algorithm AKA crap programming.
How long do you think it takes the processor to process things even if it is old and slow? A fraction of a second maybe. What's the difference with a newer one? A smaller fraction of a second.

Depends on the process priority. You would expect the priority to be given to maintaining on going recordings. The cpu has to handle multiple operations via a interrupt processing priority system. You make it sound as if the only job it has to do is watch and instantly process a change of running status, which isn't true. If the process is only accessed every few seconds you are bound to get some delays.

They tried to implement series and accurate recording on the 9200. The UI became extremely unresponsive. One extra process too many ?

How many windows processes could a Pentium handle before slowing to a crawl compared to modern i5 multicore processor. According to you the difference is minute.
 

Black Hole

May contain traces of nut
They tried to implement series and accurate recording on the 9200. The UI became extremely unresponsive. One extra process too many ?
AR - fair enough, especially if there is no dedicated hardware support (which I suspect the Broadcom chip provides in HD/HDR-FOX). Series recording? Not a time-critical operation. All it has to do is search the EPG for a matching CRID every now and then to add the next schedule item. That could be coded no problem.
 

grahamlthompson

Well-Known Member
AR - fair enough, especially if there is no dedicated hardware support (which I suspect the Broadcom chip provides in HD/HDR-FOX). Series recording? Not a time-critical operation. All it has to do is search the EPG for a matching CRID every now and then to add the next schedule item. That could be coded no problem.

Not aware of any problems with a 9300 following a series recording. The reported issue is the box often starts late compared to say a HDR FOX T2 when making the same recordings. Clearly a time critical operation. That's what I said if you read my post.
 

Black Hole

May contain traces of nut
Not aware of any problems with a 9300 following a series recording. The reported issue is the box often starts late compared to say a HDR FOX T2 when making the same recordings. Clearly a time critical operation. That's what I said if you read my post.
You can't have read my post properly.
 
Top