Multi-room TV question

Toggle sidebar
B

bonesboy

New Member
Original poster
May 7, 2007
4
0
Maybe you guys can help me out.

I want to put a flatscreen TV on the wall in my kitchen, but do not want a satellite receiver box hooked up to it.

I have 2 receivers to work off - a VIP 722 & VIP 622.

What are my options to get TV to the kitchen with out wires or a receiver?

thanks.
 
bonesboy said:
Maybe you guys can help me out.

I want to put a flatscreen TV on the wall in my kitchen, but do not want a satellite receiver box hooked up to it.

I have 2 receivers to work off - a VIP 722 & VIP 622.

What are my options to get TV to the kitchen with out wires or a receiver?

thanks.
Click to expand...
No wires no receiver? No reception just maybe snow on the screen. You could try a wireless sender but that needs to be connected to a receiver.
 
What he wants is the Sling Monitor 150 which made it's appearance at CES 2010 and never was heard of again!
 
If I can use two sling extenders and one 722k + sling adapter , I can eliminate the other two 211k receivers and save myself $14.00 a month. Especially since Scott has said there won't be any monthly fee to use the sling extenders.
 
MikeD-C05 said:
If I can use two sling extenders and one 722k + sling adapter.
Click to expand...

Possibly if you want to take a picture quality hit.

I also think it is doubtful you could have both extenders streaming from the 722 at the same time if you need both TVs on at the same time. Could be all wrong on this, but Sling has always been 1 to 1 connections AFAIK.

.
 
JM42 said:
Possibly if you want to take a picture quality hit.

I also think it is doubtful you could have both extenders streaming from the 722 at the same time if you need both TVs on at the same time. Could be all wrong on this, but Sling has always been 1 to 1 connections AFAIK.

.
Click to expand...

You actually can't sling to two sling extenders at the same time. You can select which extender you want to sling it to in the menu. So My wife who watches tv for decorating shows during the day ,could watch it in the bedroom when I get home. My boy who watches tv only at night for an hour after the his Xbox marathon, could watch it in his room at night before he goes to bed. This would work great for my situation.
 
JM42 said:
Possibly if you want to take a picture quality hit.

I also think it is doubtful you could have both extenders streaming from the 722 at the same time if you need both TVs on at the same time. Could be all wrong on this, but Sling has always been 1 to 1 connections AFAIK.

.
Click to expand...

Why do you think there will be a picture quality hit? The sling extender is reported to sling in HD quality. Should be no PQ hit at all.
 
lakebum431 said:
Why do you think there will be a picture quality hit? The sling extender is reported to sling in HD quality. Should be no PQ hit at all.
Click to expand...

The way Sling works it does not just forward the sat data stream. I can't believe a consumer level $99 device can re-encode/re-compress the image without impacting quality. It will be another generation removed from the original data - a copy of a copy. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the hardware player will do better than the software. Maybe the combination will be smart enough to know it has 100mb to work with and minimally compress. I've never seen Sling on more than a 24" computer monitor and it was great in that context, but even then was noticeably not the "original" HD.

I don't have any doubt it will be more than watchable and blow the SD away, I just don't know if it would hold up to 40"+ displays for me - but I'm picky.
 
Last edited:
Well then maybe you should take a look at the CES video. There is no reason that it wouldn't work in the same quality as the original receiver. A home network has plenty of bandwith to send the signal.
 
I saw the CES video and it gives no indication the extender will be any better than PC viewing on the LAN. It's a copy of a copy using lossy commpression. PC viewing on the LAN is not as good as the original, even when viewing on a much smaller screen. Why would I assume the extender on the LAN would be any better? .
 
That is BS. When watching via sling in HD quality on LAN there is no difference from the normal quality. If you are seeing something different you are doing something wrong. Have you used a sling device that is capable of slinging HD and streamed to an HD capable monitor?
 
722 with Sling adapter, UI said it was HD, which it obviously was - the HDNet test patterns visually verified base resolution. Wired connections on PC and 722. LAN with gb switch. Side by side comparison. PC had 24" 1920x1200 hdmi monitor. 50" 1080p Sony for the 722. Not much to do wrong unless the software was flaky.

There were classic compression artifacts compared to the 722, they weren't bad at all, but they were definately there. Distortion around the logo bugs, blocking on moving backgrounds, etc.
 
Last edited:
JM42 said:
There were classic compression artifacts compared to the 722, they weren't bad at all, but they were definately there. Distortion around the logo bugs, blocking on moving backgrounds, etc.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I have seen on my 722 w/Sling Adapter going to a HTPC going to a 42" 720p HDTV. This degradation is not subtle when it's happening (which is fortunately not all the time), but it is definitely not what the original looks like either.

A more important strike against the Sling Extender (other than the PQ hit) is my supposition that it will still use the DRA interface which (to be kind) is rather cumbersome, laggy as hell, requires an Internet connection, and is radically different than the native UI on our DVRs. WAF will be nill. :(
 
Last edited:
TheKrell said:
A more important strike against the Sling Extender (other than the PQ hit) is my supposition that it will still use the DRA interface which (to be kind) is rather cumbersome, laggy as hell, requires an Internet connection, and is radically different than the native UI on our DVRs. WAF will be nill. :(
Click to expand...

I've wondered about the interface as well. Hopefully the reliance on DRA will be minimal, only to do some initial authorization. I would hope that pretty much any remote operation would just echo down to the host receiver and not try to bring up any sort of more "modern" over-engineered interface.

I've always thought the Dish UI and remote layout were some of their best features, even if they may not "sell" well. D* has always been prettier/slicker, Uverse has some "wow" features, but for just sitting down and watching TV Dish is more efficient and less intrusive than either.
 

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Share this page

Share this page
Top