DMX741U & DMX741 Quad Polar C & Ku Band LNBF

[Babadem]

In my research to find a suitable C/KU LNB for my forthcoming 1.2M Motorized setup, I saw the DMX741 and the DMX741U on Galaxy Marketing website, claiming to be "New & Improved"!!!! I spoke to a sale's rep who claimed that the poor Signal "Quality" issue with KU side of the combo has been solved with this version of this latest C\KU band LNB. He claimed to have tested them last week and they in his word " they worked beautifully both on the Cand KU side." Could this be true? He also pointed out that they are better than the BSC621-2 C\KU LNB. Has anyone tested or know anything about these "New" LNBs?

 

[C-band]

I almost bought one last night. I didn't because I haven't found any reviews on them yet. I ended up getting a GEOSAT C/KU. I still may buy the DMX741U if I find its better. I'm sure theres some improvment over the BSC621-2 but HOW MUCH better is what I want to know.

 

[Anole]

good news; bad news:

Well, it won't cost much to find out.

But the B/S, snake oil, and outrageous claims on their site aren't exactly encouraging.
Pretty thin on specs, too.
There is certainly nothing "quad" about it, either!

I dislike this outfit just on principals, but won't discriminate if they actually -do- have a winner.
A new and reliable product would be exciting for the FTA world!

Oh, I have a suggestion: Galaxy - send one to Linuxman! We'll see what he has to say about it.

 

[Tron]

A bandstacked version would be nice...

 

[SatelliteAV]

Definitely a credible product performance claim from a company that sold a Grey Market Import of the Exclusive Satellite AV designed GEOSATpro SL1 LNBF and claimed it as their exclusive design and distribution. WSI (aka Galaxy Marketing) continues to advertise the unit even after we purchased the remaining stock and requested that the item be removed.....

http://wsidigital.com/techsat-tracker-ii-linear-ku-band-satellite-lnb-lnbf.htm

 

[meinename]

Definitely a credible product performance claim from a company that sold a Grey Market Import of the Exclusive Satellite AV designed GEOSATpro SL1 LNBF and claimed it as their exclusive design and distribution. WSI (aka Galaxy Marketing) continues to advertise the unit even after we purchased the remaining stock and requested that the item be removed.....

http://wsidigital.com/techsat-tracker-ii-linear-ku-band-satellite-lnb-lnbf.htm

That seals it I'm NOT doing business with them!

 

[Babadem]

Definitely a credible product performance claim from a company that sold a Grey Market Import of the Exclusive Satellite AV designed GEOSATpro SL1 LNBF and claimed it as their exclusive design and distribution. WSI (aka Galaxy Marketing) continues to advertise the unit even after we purchased the remaining stock and requested that the item be removed.....

http://wsidigital.com/techsat-tracker-ii-linear-ku-band-satellite-lnb-lnbf.htm

That's definitely an eye opener!

 

[WSInternational]

Gentlemen,

Let me take a second to make some clarifications:

1. Ku performance on an offset dish is still poor. The claim that the Ku portion works "beautifully" is based on the performance on prime focul dish and not an offset dish.

2. Quad Polar - We include a dielectric plate that is inserted inside the LNBF that will allow for circular reception. - Please see pictures below.
1st Polarity = Vertical
2nd Polarity = Horizontal
3rd Polarity = Left Circular
4th Polarity = Right Circular

3. I think this is an excellent forum, and Scott has done an excellent job with it. It's a great resource for information and everybody does a spectacular job at giving a helping hand, but since the site is sponsored by competitors, I truely do not expect our product to get a fair review based on its performance, but I'm open to taking the suggestion of Anole.

4. Quite honestly, I would not expect anything less than attacks coming from a competitor on a public forum, but as a sponsor, I would expect a superior and different behavior. Easy Killer....

Another thing I'd like to clarify: The TechSAT Tracker II was removed from the navigation of our sites but the page still exists on our server, and that's the way it will remain. We stopped selling the particular LNBF because just as times changes, we change with it and will have a new LNBF that will be released soon with a bit different specifications. The name TechSAT and the model Tracker is one of our brands and we are the distributor for the TechSAT and Tracker model LNBFs - So I would see both sides to a story.

Brian, I've always been open to discuss any issues, and this is no different. If something is bothering you, all you have to do is send me an email or give me a call and we can discuss our business. We are both in this industry and if there are any issues, we should both be open to discussing it with one another.

 

[Babadem]

Gentlemen,

Let me take a second to make some clarifications:

1. Ku performance on an offset dish is still poor. The claim that the Ku portion works "beautifully" is based on the performance on prime focul dish and not an offset dish.

2. Quad Polar - We include a dielectric plate that is inserted inside the LNBF that will allow for circular reception. - Please see pictures below.
1st Polarity = Vertical
2nd Polarity = Horizontal
3rd Polarity = Left Circular
4th Polarity = Right Circular

3. I think this is an excellent forum, and Scott has done an excellent job with it. It's a great resource for information and everybody does a spectacular job at giving a helping hand, but since the site is sponsored by competitors, I truely do not expect our product to get a fair review based on its performance, but I'm open to taking the suggestion of Anole.

4. Quite honestly, I would not expect anything less than attacks coming from a competitor on a public forum, but as a sponsor, I would expect a superior and different behavior. Easy Killer....

Another thing I'd like to clarify: The TechSAT Tracker II was removed from the navigation of our sites but the page still exists on our server, and that's the way it will remain. We stopped selling the particular LNBF because just as times changes, we change with it and will have a new LNBF that will be released soon with a bit different specifications. The name TechSAT and the model Tracker is one of our brands and we are the distributor for the TechSAT and Tracker model LNBFs - So I would see both sides to a story.

Brian, I've always been open to discuss any issues, and this is no different. If something is bothering you, all you have to do is send me an email or give me a call and we can discuss our business. We are both in this industry and if there are any issues, we should both be open to discussing it with one another.

Very nice of you to clear things up. So you’re saying, the KU portion of your C\KU combo would perform poorly on and offset dish, but would perform as advertized on a Prime Focus setup?

About taking Anole's suggestion; will you be sending Linuxman a copy of Either the DMX741U or DMX741 Quad Polar C & Ku Band LNBF for testing and review? If you did that, it would put a lot of speculations and confusion about those LNBs to rest. Oh.......and thanks for your response.

 

[Anole]

When there ARE specs on the Ku performance of a dual-band LNBF, such as the DMX741 or competitors, they usually reveal that the F/D ratio of the KU side is around 0.6 or 0.7.
That would actually match an offset dish better than a prime focus dish (which is in the 0.3 to 0.4 range).
And, I wonder if it's a contributing factor the modest Ku performance and difficult tuning observed.?.
I don't know. Just raising the question.

....hrmmmm.... that would lead to the question of how much a conical scalar would help on an offset dish on Ku?
We know it's beneficial on C-band....
Perhaps Ku would not be affected...?

 

[walrus1957]

When there ARE specs on the Ku performance of a dual-band LNBF, such as the DMX741 or competitors, they usually reveal that the F/D ratio of the KU side is around 0.6 or 0.7.
That would actually match an offset dish better than a prime focus dish (which is in the 0.3 to 0.4 range).
And, I wonder if it's a contributing factor the modest Ku performance and difficult tuning observed.?.
I don't know. Just raising the question.

....hrmmmm.... that would lead to the question of how much a conical scalar would help on an offset dish on Ku?
We know it's beneficial on C-band....
Perhaps Ku would not be affected...?

My tests and comparisions of the BSC621-2 KU portion and the Invacom QPH-031 for linear KU on the same 1 meter offset dish speaks for itself. I had tested the BSC621-2 with both my home made version of a conical scalar and a comercially availible conical scalar for offset dishes.

I will use this as an example so you can judge for yourself the difference between the two LNBFs using a Coolsat 5000 and a 1 meter offset dish. On any certain satellite and KU transponder using the Invacom QPH-031 the signal quality might be 94%. Replace the Invacom with the BSC621-2 and add the conical scalar (my version or the comercial version) the signal level quality drops to 90% on the same transponder.

There is an inherit drop of signal quality of aproximately 4 to 5% across the board comparing the Invacom to the BSC621-2. Keep in mind the Coolsat 5000 threashold for signal is roughly 64%, anything less and you loose the audio/video. If your quality on transponders is normally 94% there is no cause for concern, but its the transponders that come in around 67% using the Invacom that have me worried, they can easily drop below the receivers signal threashold using the BSC621. You can bet that some channels like RTNs on 83W AMC would deal you a fit using the BSC621. So either the Invacom is just that good of an LNBF or the problem lies when you try and combine a C and KU LNB like is done with the BSC621-2.

More to the point, I do not believe the conical scaler helps the KU portion of the combined LNB. I also noted that the BSC621-2 has a small scalar for the KU portion built into it below the H/V C-Band probes to focus the beam, perhaps its the design of this internal scalar that can be improved on.

 

[Mr Tony]

3. I think this is an excellent forum, and Scott has done an excellent job with it. It's a great resource for information and everybody does a spectacular job at giving a helping hand, but since the site is sponsored by competitors, I truely do not expect our product to get a fair review based on its performance, but I'm open to taking the suggestion of Anole.

interesting statement. I guess the reviews I did for the Tracker I, Tracker II (aka the red LNB) and a receiver just were bunk then? I guess because I also do reviews for products sold by "the sponsers" then my statements are false? Really hate to say it but when I do a review I do a review for the folks here to see the new products and how a product works, not to keep a company happy. Hell if I did that I wouldnt note the flaws of a product or tell you what doesnt work. I would be like other sites and say "oh this is the best thing out there" and not tell people of the flaws they might see. When I did the review of a receiver there was no satellite software in the original batch. Did I hide that fact? Heck no, I mentioned it in the review that they forgot to put the software in it for satellite (basically the box was a OTA receiver otherwise). I do reviews for the people here but if I did fake reviews to make a company sell items, then I am a fraud in my mind.

I guess I'll remember that next time I do a review....should I review it legit and tell of the flaws or should I keep a company happy because they are a sponser here?

 

[Lak7]

I ordered it today, should have it on Friday to try.
Using a BSC621 now, so I'll see if I notice any improvement.

 

[Anole]

There is an inherit drop of signal quality of aproximately 4 to 5% across the board comparing the Invacom to the BSC621-2.

Well, a few years ago, that difference would have just been chalked up to the Invacom being better than the -average- LNB out on the market.
I realize today, some probably equal the performance, at least part of the time, and/or in some areas.
I'm sure some LNBs I've bought for -average- usage, would probably do about what you got from the BSC621-2, so I'd actually consider your data point to be even better than I expected.

Now, if you (or someone) were to run the same test on a prime feed dish, on Ku, that would be telling.
And probably the test would need to use a DMSI/GeoSat/Galaxy Prime Feed Ku LNB, along with an Invacom QPH-031, as well as a QPF-031, sporting their Prime Feed Ku scalar!
Oh, and throw in a Dish Network bandstacked FSS with both its own and the Invacom scalar, for good measure!

The whole point being, to get a .3 to .4 F/D on a Ku LNB, of course.

 

[walrus1957]

Well, a few years ago, that difference would have just been chalked up to the Invacom being better than the -average- LNB out on the market.
I realize today, some probably equal the performance, at least part of the time, and/or in some areas.
I'm sure some LNBs I've bought for -average- usage, would probably do about what you got from the BSC621-2, so I'd actually consider your data point to be even better than I expected.

Now, if you (or someone) were to run the same test on a prime feed dish, on Ku, that would be telling.
And probably the test would need to use a DMSI/GeoSat/Galaxy Prime Feed Ku LNB, along with an Invacom QPH-031, as well as a QPF-031, sporting their Prime Feed Ku scalar!
Oh, and throw in a Dish Network bandstacked FSS with both its own and the Invacom scalar, for good measure!

The whole point being, to get a .3 to .4 F/D on a Ku LNB, of course.

I wish I owned a prime focus dish, would be out testing it right now. And that be the whole point here, your using an LNB that was designed for a certain scalar and a dish with an f/d ratio of 0.3 to 0.4, then trying to adapt it to an offset dish with a 0.6 f/d ratio, and changing out the flat scalar for the conical shaped feed horn. I heard of others testing the BSC621 on a prime focus and saying the KU portion of it is almost useless. But I can not speak for what type dish they were using, if it be a screen mesh with large spacing then yes I could understand that the higher KU frequency would not be reflected by the dish.

I would love to see some one plug and play (test) all the different LNBs and feedhorns on the market (on the same dish) and log the comparisions. Do this on both a large prime focus and 1.2 meter offset dish.

Think we could talk Iceberg into setting up the tests and writting the reviews for each!

 

[Mr Tony]

someone send me a 1.2m dish then

 

[Anole]

He's only got a two-speed gearbox: 30 inches and six feet!

 

[Mr Tony]

no there is a 36" and a couple 40x30 dishes involved too

 

[SatelliteAV]

Thank you for removing the item from the WSI website LNBF page today 3.18.2009. Ku LNBF's I had linked to the TechSAT Tracker II Mini this morning from the WSI LNBF page, not from a hidden link. (see attached screen capture) Thanks!

Robby, we had a very open and candid discussion in November about the gray market status of the TechSAT Tracker II, the infringement of our exclusive manufacturing agreement, the validity of marketing statements associated with the product, and requested the removal of the item from the websites. Satellite AV purchased your remaining LNBF stock and offered WSI very competitive OEM pricing on the SL1 bullet LNBFs.

If we had a misunderstanding about the situation I certainly do apologize.

4. Quite honestly, I would not expect anything less than attacks coming from a competitor on a public forum, but as a sponsor, I would expect a superior and different behavior. Easy Killer....

Another thing I'd like to clarify: The TechSAT Tracker II was removed from the navigation of our sites but the page still exists on our server, and that's the way it will remain. We stopped selling the particular LNBF because just as times changes, we change with it and will have a new LNBF that will be released soon with a bit different specifications. The name TechSAT and the model Tracker is one of our brands and we are the distributor for the TechSAT and Tracker model LNBFs - So I would see both sides to a story.

Brian, I've always been open to discuss any issues, and this is no different. If something is bothering you, all you have to do is send me an email or give me a call and we can discuss our business. We are both in this industry and if there are any issues, we should both be open to discussing it with one another.

 

[WSInternational]

Thank you for removing the item from the WSI website LNBF page today 3.18.2009. Ku LNBF's I had linked to the TechSAT Tracker II Mini this morning from the WSI LNBF page, not from a hidden link. (see attached screen capture) Thanks!

Robby, we had a very open and candid discussion in November about the gray market status of the TechSAT Tracker II, the infringement of our exclusive manufacturing agreement, the validity of marketing statements associated with the product, and requested the removal of the item from the websites. Satellite AV purchased your remaining LNBF stock and offered WSI very competitive OEM pricing on the SL1 bullet LNBFs.

If we had a misunderstanding about the situation I certainly do apologize.

Brian, no problem and thank you for appologizing. I think as colleagues in the same industry, we should discuss any issues at hand with each other. To me a forum is a fun place to discuss new ideas, and similar interests. Let's move on.

About taking Anole's suggestion; will you be sending Linuxman a copy of Either the DMX741U or DMX741 Quad Polar C & Ku Band LNBF for testing and review? If you did that, it would put a lot of speculations and confusion about those LNBs to rest. Oh.......and thanks for your response.

Sure, I will be happy to do that. If nothing else, I'm sure Linuxman will enjoy us planning his next testing project for him. I will get in contact with him and will send one out with all expenses paid.

interesting statement. I guess the reviews I did for the Tracker I, Tracker II (aka the red LNB) and a receiver just were bunk then? I guess because I also do reviews for products sold by "the sponsers" then my statements are false? Really hate to say it but when I do a review I do a review for the folks here to see the new products and how a product works, not to keep a company happy. Hell if I did that I wouldnt note the flaws of a product or tell you what doesnt work. I would be like other sites and say "oh this is the best thing out there" and not tell people of the flaws they might see. When I did the review of a receiver there was no satellite software in the original batch. Did I hide that fact? Heck no, I mentioned it in the review that they forgot to put the software in it for satellite (basically the box was a OTA receiver otherwise). I do reviews for the people here but if I did fake reviews to make a company sell items, then I am a fraud in my mind.

Iceberg, the statement was not made towards or ment to be offensive towards any one person or people. If you took it the wrong way, I appologize. I am glad to hear that you are honest about reviews and are here for the right reason.

someone send me a 1.2m dish then

As a token of my appreciation, your hard work and dedication to this forum and being so informative and willing to help others, I will take care of your request for a 1.2m offset dish. I will send you one of our WS1247 120cm offset dish with polar mount free of charge and with all shipping and handling paid.

I think I speak for everybody here when I say thank you for everything you do. Your hard work is appreciated not only by me, but I'm sure by every member. :up

Thank You
:clap​

Now I'm going to get out of here before I start giving away the whole warehouse.