Off the air signal with 622 not as good

M

MichaelC

Thread Starter
Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Mar 22, 2004
79
0
MA
I've had my 622 for a couple weeks now. I find the off the air HD tuner not quite as good as my Zenith HD-Sat520 or my old Voom receiver. Both receivers will lock on one distant station, where as the 622 just breaks up. I'm still glad I switched from Direct TV, but the grass is not all green here.
 
Tom Bombadil

Tom Bombadil

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
May 5, 2005
3,601
1
Chicago-Milwaukee Region
FWIW - Most owners of earlier Dish HD receivers report that the 622's OTA performance is better than what they got from their 811, 942, 6000 receivers.
 
VegasVoomer

VegasVoomer

SatelliteGuys Pro
Dec 3, 2004
663
31
Las Vegas
Actually my 811 OTA reception was better than the 622. I still get a lock but only in the 60-70% range. The 811 was in the high 80's on all channels using the same antenna. The very first time I used the DVR to record I was sad when I played it back and it was unwatchable due to pixelation caused by low signal on a digital local.
 
tnsprin

tnsprin

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 27, 2003
1,601
0
VegasVoomer said:
Actually my 811 OTA reception was better than the 622. I still get a lock but only in the 60-70% range. The 811 was in the high 80's on all channels using the same antenna. The very first time I used the DVR to record I was sad when I played it back and it was unwatchable due to pixelation caused by low signal on a digital local.
Note that the scales on these receivers are not the same. However if you are receiving more pixelation you may be right. It is clearly better then my 6000, and 921 (just replaced with a second 622).
 
Last edited:
B

bhelms

Retired & lovin' it!
Lifetime Supporter
Feb 26, 2006
7,795
853
Central PA
My Sony TV's ATSC tuner is definitely superior to the OTA tuner in my 622, and that is true with both 622s I have had. I don't have a lot of digital OTA stuff to play with yet, but in the case of my PBS channel, I can do a meaningful A/B comparison. The signal on the TV is rock solid while the same signal through the 622 pixelates a lot. I also did a similar comparison with my 811. IMO, the 811 and 622 are roughly comparable, both running behind the Sony.

I agree with Tom B - a lot of folks report that the 622's receiver is superior. But in my experience (with 2 units) it is not. YMMV...

NOTE: I have yet to do any meaningful experimentation to better assess my particular situation. I recently received my CM4228 antenna and I hope that will give me a lot more to work with. I'm not sure if the 622's receiver problems are due to a relatively inferior gain characteristic vs. the TV, or if it's instead perhaps more due to a lack of selectivity in the 622 which I believe would contribute to more issues with multipath and the same resultant pixelation. Since the 4228 is reported to be very directional, I hope to be better able quantify the problem when I can spend some time experimenting.
 
Last edited:
Tom Bombadil

Tom Bombadil

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
May 5, 2005
3,601
1
Chicago-Milwaukee Region
There isn't much motivation for Dish to put a top notch OTA tuner in their receivers. After all, you might not buy your locals from them if it was really good.
 
M

MichaelC

Thread Starter
Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Mar 22, 2004
79
0
MA
Tom Bombadil said:
There isn't much motivation for Dish to put a top notch OTA tuner in their receivers. After all, you might not buy your locals from them if it was really good.

Now that one makes a lot of sense to me. I'll buy that. Maybe when fall comes and the leaves fall off, my 622 will pickup all my off air stations or I can raise my antenna or use my Voom receiver for off air.
 
B

BigTVSteve

SatelliteGuys Family
Nov 27, 2004
67
0
211/622 tuners more sensitive than VOOM receiver's tuner

I just replaced a March 2005 VOOM receiver with a VIP 211 unit, using the exact same wiring and a Wineguard Square Shooter antenna, with no orientation changes for the antenna. The VIP 211 receiver picks up two additional UHF SD digital stations that the VOOM receiver could not receive at all. It also provides a steady signal/picture on a third UHF HD station that the VOOM receiver had severe dropouts on in the San Diego area.

Either the VIP 211 is more sensitive or it is better at handling multipath signal conditions than the older Motorola VOOM receiver. All in all, I am pleasantly surprised at its performance with OTA signals.

On a second installation with a Channel Master CM4228 antenna, my new 622 DVR tuner is also a little more sensitive or better on multipath than another VOOM receiver was on the same antenna. The 622 receiver has about the same OTA performance as the internal tuner in my 9 month old 60 inch Hitachi LCD TV (60VS810). Again, a pleasant surprise...
 
A

ahanif

Active SatelliteGuys Member
Feb 4, 2004
19
0
211 and poor reception

I just had a 211 put in today for my panasonic 60U plasma and I too noticed that the picture is far more pixelated than it was when the OTA was directly connected to the tv. I guess thats something I just have to deal with based on this thread ...
 
waltinvt

waltinvt

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Feb 16, 2004
3,439
1
Vermont
Tom Bombadil said:
There isn't much motivation for Dish to put a top notch OTA tuner in their receivers. After all, you might not buy your locals from them if it was really good.

Tom, I'm glad to finally see someone agree with me about that. I also think that's why Dish goes out of their way to make EPG information NOT available for OTA stations unless you sub to their LiLs. I know of no other digital tuners that can't / don't use the PSIP data stream for EPG.

I do have to disagree with your previous post about the 622 being better at OTA than previous receivers. It's a good receiver and PVR but it definitely is not as good at pulling in fringe stations OTA as the 811 was and the 811 wasn't as good as a lot of built in digital tuners and other STBs.
 
D

drummerguy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 5, 2006
343
0
Indianapolis, IN
I just got my 622 (replacing a 942), and I can now pull in the WB affiliate here in Indianapolis, whereas the 942 couldn't. So I'm thinking that the 622 is better at OTA (at least for right now :)
 
B

bhelms

Retired & lovin' it!
Lifetime Supporter
Feb 26, 2006
7,795
853
Central PA
I agree with Tom and Walt that there is little incentive for E* to provide a superior OTA tuner in their new boxes. Perhaps the majority of HD subs are in major DMAs that already have or will soon have HD LiLs. Unfortunately, that's not me, so I will be dependent on OTA for HD networks for quite some time.

I also noted Steve's comments about the 4228 being part of his solution for multipath - I hope I get more favorable results with the 622/4228 combination...
 
N

noremac

SatelliteGuys Pro
Oct 28, 2004
251
0
Wash, DC
bhelms said:
I agree with Tom and Walt that there is little incentive for E* to provide a superior OTA tuner in their new boxes...

The only incentive is to remain competitive with cable. In my area, we have many more OTA HD stations beyond the four prime networks that Dish offers LIL. When, if ever, do you think that Dish will have the bandwidth to carry all those stations (UPN, WB, PBS1, PBS2, etc.)? Maybe never, so giving customers an OTA solution is a competitive alternative. Cable, on the other hand, has no real issue with bandwidth.
 
B

bhelms

Retired & lovin' it!
Lifetime Supporter
Feb 26, 2006
7,795
853
Central PA
noremac said:
The only incentive is to remain competitive with cable. In my area, we have many more OTA HD stations beyond the four prime networks that Dish offers LIL. When, if ever, do you think that Dish will have the bandwidth to carry all those stations (UPN, WB, PBS1, PBS2, etc.)? Maybe never, so giving customers an OTA solution is a competitive alternative. Cable, on the other hand, has no real issue with bandwidth.
I agree with what you say to an extent. I was lamenting the lack of a "superior" OTA tuner in the 622 meaning one that would do a better job for distant OTA signals, which all of mine are. You and many other subs live in markets where you apparently have a lot of nearby HD signals and I bet the 622's current tuner with a proper antenna and perhaps a rotator would get them all for you just fine.

In my rural area cable is not available and we probably won't see FIOS in my lifetime. Unless some other wireless technology (what ever happened to wireless local loop, etc.?) comes along, it's sat. or OTA. My OTA offering will be limited to the 5 conventional networks, all from at least 25 miles away, and as I mentioned, I have first-hand experience with the limitations of the 622's and 811's OTA tuners...
 
tnsprin

tnsprin

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 27, 2003
1,601
0
bhelms said:
I agree with what you say to an extent. I was lamenting the lack of a "superior" OTA tuner in the 622 meaning one that would do a better job for distant OTA signals, which all of mine are. You and many other subs live in markets where you apparently have a lot of nearby HD signals and I bet the 622's current tuner with a proper antenna and perhaps a rotator would get them all for you just fine.

In my rural area cable is not available and we probably won't see FIOS in my lifetime. Unless some other wireless technology (what ever happened to wireless local loop, etc.?) comes along, it's sat. or OTA. My OTA offering will be limited to the 5 conventional networks, all from at least 25 miles away, and as I mentioned, I have first-hand experience with the limitations of the 622's and 811's OTA tuners...
Actually the 622's chipset for OTA is considered typical of the current generation of OTA tuners, and superior to those of a couple years ago. Your miles may vary.
 
B

bhelms

Retired & lovin' it!
Lifetime Supporter
Feb 26, 2006
7,795
853
Central PA
tnsprin said:
Actually the 622's chipset for OTA is considered typical of the current generation of OTA tuners, and superior to those of a couple years ago. Your miles may vary.
Interesting. But I still contend that whatever is in the 622 is inferior to what is in my Sony ('06 model) based on my limited OTA experience to this point. I have always considered Sony's XBR line above average in many other respects. Maybe that also applies to the OTA tuner ?!? Regardless, if the 4228 allows me to receive the distant HD channels I know are there (I was once able to scan-in several digital/HD channels in both the Sony and the 811 that are now missing, perhaps due to leaves on the trees, etc.) then I won't complain any more. I think I'm right on the verge of making this work. Now if I can just get "a round tuit"...
 
Tom Bombadil

Tom Bombadil

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
May 5, 2005
3,601
1
Chicago-Milwaukee Region
waltinvt said:
Tom

I do have to disagree with your previous post about the 622 being better at OTA than previous receivers. It's a good receiver and PVR but it definitely is not as good at pulling in fringe stations OTA as the 811 was and the 811 wasn't as good as a lot of built in digital tuners and other STBs.

Note that I was only summarizing what others have reported on this forum. Over the past 5 months a lot of people have written that the 211/622 OTA tuners were better than their 811/921/942 OTA tuners.

As I have never even laid my eyes on a 622, I have no personal opinion on the matter.
 
B

bhelms

Retired & lovin' it!
Lifetime Supporter
Feb 26, 2006
7,795
853
Central PA
Echoing again what Tom said - many folks reported the 622 is superior for OTA reception to whatever they were using previously, I think in many cases the 942 and in some cases the 811. Since I was using an 811 at the time, those reports were one factor that caused me to jump on the "$499 to own" bandwagon in early May. I was however disappointed in the 622's OTA reception as I have mentioned many times. When my replacement unit exhibited the same lackluster performance I was convinced that at least in my case, the 622's OTA tuner was not the best I have experienced. As I and many others have said - your mileage may vary...

BRgds, all. I think I'll move on out of this thread...
 
Tom Bombadil

Tom Bombadil

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
May 5, 2005
3,601
1
Chicago-Milwaukee Region
Even early on I was wondering if the reports on the OTA capability of the 622 was more the result of people wanting to like the 622 than actually performance.

I read about better OTA, better SD quality, better HD quality, everything worked faster, very few problems out of the box, and so on and so forth. It was a 622 love fest.

Since then the overall reports have still been positive, but more tempered with problem reports and less than glowing reviews.
 
Jim5506

Jim5506

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
7,830
2,812
Lubbock, Texas
Before I got my 622 I bought both a Samsung SIR-T351 and an Accurian 6000 HD tuner.

We have two local DTV stations that broadcast a 0.96kW and 0.98kW and are about 6 miles SE of my house. With only a few trees between me and the towers, I can see the lights of both towers from my rooftop. I am using a Radio Shack U-75R corner reflector yagi antenna with 50 ft of solid RG-6 directly to my tuner.

The Samsung could not lock on the ABC channel at all and could intermittently lock the CBS channel.

The Accurian 6000 could lock the CBS channel most of the time and once It locked on the ABC channel (in the middle of a blinding sand storm).

When I tried the tuner on the ViP622 it locks the CBS station 99% of the time and the ABC station is solid at night and locks about 50% of the time during the day.

While this is anecdotal evidence, it does say to me that in my situation the 622 has a better tuner than both the Samsung SIR-T351 and the Accurian 6000.
 

Similar threads

C
Replies
18
Views
829
tanman
tanman
worstman1
Replies
10
Views
811
Tampa8
Tampa8
worstman1
Replies
16
Views
1K
NYDutch
NYDutch
Range Maggot Bob
Replies
1
Views
376
brittanygarden
brittanygarden
T
Replies
3
Views
522
TomC83
T

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

  • MichaelC
Top