Humax 2000T and Samsung Smart TV Signal Strength.

[greywizard]

I recently bought a new Samsung 4K Smart TV to replace my old Samsung that had a wonky screen.
Watching with the old set, using the 2000T as source the Signal strength, on the majority of channels, was
around 71% with Quality being around 100%. With the new set Humax shows the same figures.
When using the old (non-smart) tv as source the figures were around 74% and 100%.
Now if I use the Smart TV as source ,the figures are from around 42% to 60% for strength but
with 100% on quality. The strange thing is the picture and sound on the new Samsung cant be faulted - up to 4k quality.
Is it a case that the Smart TV views the signal strength in a different way to the old set.

 

[Black Hole]

Is it a case that the Smart TV views the signal strength in a different way to the old set.

Yes. I keep telling people there is no standard for what "100%" means in terms of signal strength.

All you need to concern yourself with is quality, which needs to be 100%. If quality is anything less than 100%, the signal strength gives a clue why (too weak or too strong).

 

[EEPhil]

All you need to concern yourself with is quality, which needs to be 100%. If quality is anything less than 100%, the signal strength gives a clue why (too weak or too strong).

I’d agree with that. Beware of the local multiplexes though. I get a signal quality less than 20% on the Humax but still get a mostly watchable result. Seem to think the TV shows the signal quality much higher, but not 100%.

 

[Black Hole]

I get a signal quality less than 20% on the Humax but still get a mostly watchable result.

That sounds strange to me. I'm not exactly sure how quality is assessed, but my educated guess is it is a metric of how much work the ECC (error checking and correction) codes have to do (the data streams contain redundancy which can be used to deduce the correct data so long as it is not corrupted too much). If correction is 100% successful, the picture won't be degraded at all (but signal quality will be less than 100% because the correction has something to do).

Thus "quality" could be a measure of the percentage of data packets which need any correction, or the percentage which are unrecoverable, or some combination of both.