dp34 switch and dishpro quad lnb

taylorm

New Member
Original poster
Mar 5, 2005
1
0
Does it matter which port of the quad lnb that you connect to the DP34 switch? I am trying to get a 3rd receiver working. Without the switch, i can get both 110& 119. With it, I can only get 110.

Thanks.
 
taylorm said:
Does it matter which port of the quad lnb that you connect to the DP34 switch? I am trying to get a 3rd receiver working. Without the switch, i can get both 110& 119. With it, I can only get 110.

Thanks.

you do not need quad with 34sw 34 is designed to work with dp twin. I and my techs failed on many attempts with that configuration dp is dual function the lmbf will talk with switch and so on \\ Get a dp twin
 
taylorm said:
Does it matter which port of the quad lnb that you connect to the DP34 switch? I am trying to get a 3rd receiver working. Without the switch, i can get both 110& 119. With it, I can only get 110.

Thanks.

If the switch is working properly, then it does not matter what port you use - but you must have a receiver connected to the first port since that receiver powers the switch.
 
it does make a difference, i've run into that trouble before. If i remember correctly, the dp 34 is connected to the left-most ports of the quad, labelled 119 on the plastic yoke. the other receivers can run off of ports 3 and 4 of the quad. the first time i tried it i used opposit ports on the quad, 1 and 4, as if i was connecting to a twin, but it wouldn't work right.
 
correct.
Whenever connecting a Quad to a switch, you must use 1 of the pairs of outputs. Either ports 1 & 2 or 3 & 4. The DP-34 manual even mentions this point.
The reason is, because prior to a switch test being performed and activating the built in switch, the outputs are as follow:
Output 1 - 119
Output 2 - 110
Output 3 - 119
Output 4 - 110
When the outputs are sent to a switch, the switch only uses the default satellite from the output, not both, since it does it's own switching.
Therefore to have both satellites at the switch, you need a pair. 1 & 2 or 3 & 4. Of course 1 & 4 or 2 & 3 could possibly work, but I don't think I've ever seen them used like that.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts