Twinhan 1020a will not lock signal

[glen4cindy]

Question about a feed with weird looking video

I scanned 91 W to find some sports feeds today, and found several but have questions about 2 of them. They seem to be the same game, but, there are two different transponders:

11988-H-13240 - Stable Video

12006-H-13240 - Strange looking video, looks to be heavily pixelating despite 60% quality.

I cannot lock the 12006 on my Twinhan. Is this a 4:2:2 feed?

If so, how does one tell? My box certainly does not give me any indications as to the video signal type.

Thanks!

 

[Mr Tony]

is the video tearing or do you have a frozen picture of another channel?

If so then its probably 4:2:2

HD feeds usually are green screen

 

[glen4cindy]

is the video tearing or do you have a frozen picture of another channel?

If so then its probably 4:2:2

HD feeds usually are green screen

The feed on 11988 is gone now, but, if I go from that feed to the 12006, I have a semi-frozen screen from that channel. If I go from the next channel down and then back, I get a mostly frozen screen from the channel I was just on.

There are hundreds of tiny squares, mostly green, but, it looks like DirecTv or Dish Network in a moderately heavy rain. Lots of pixelization like appearance.

 

[Mr Tony]

4:2:2

 

[glen4cindy]

4:2:2

And, I guess right now, the QualiTV is the only consumer grade FTA box that will display these signals?

And is it also so that there is no blind scan on that box?

Is 4:2:2 the same thing as HD?

Thanks

 

[voomvoom]

And, I guess right now, the QualiTV is the only consumer grade FTA box that will display these signals?

Yes, but a comperter can do it with the right codecs and a satellite PCI card

And is it also so that there is no blind scan on that box?

no blind scan is correct

Is 4:2:2 the same thing as HD?

Thanks

no, 4:2:2 is a color scheme for video, has nothing to do with HD, can be found in SD programs at times, especially sports, and NBC has been using it for years on most of there feeds

 

[glen4cindy]

Someone completely deleted my question, and I'm not really sure why, so I am going to attempt to re-post. If this question violates policy, please tell me, and I'll try to find out some other way.

Here is what I posted:

I've been feed hunting on 91 W today and using my Twinhan that is slaved off my Classic NA. I've had not problems until I tried these two transponders:

11988-H-13240

12006-H-13240


I don't usually have problems locking horizontal transponders, and I've never had a power problem with this PC and the Twinhan. I've tried this with my STB on and off, not from the back, but, from the remote. If I turn it off from the back, the pass thru does not work at all.

I've got 70% quality on the Classic NA.

There are not any other H transponders active on 91 W right now that I can test. It will lock 12050-V just fine.

I'm watching the game right now so I really don't want to move the dish to another satellite to test an H transponder, but, I've never had any trouble until now.

Any ideas?

Adding to this, I just moved to 101 W and tuned 11860-H-28138 and my Twinhan locked it just fine, so I don't know why it would not lock those above. My STB locked them just fine.

Any idea why the STB would lock the feed and the Twinhan would not? Did not seem to be a power issue since it locks other H transponders.

Thanks.

 

[Mr Tony]

very possible that the Twinhan is like the Quali-TV and you sometimes have to work with the frequency +- up to 5

I've seen the Coolsat 5000 scan something at 11710 and the Q will only lock it at 11708 (not 11710)

(as for the delete I was trying to merge this thread with the original one you had made and somehow the system froze up)

 

[glen4cindy]

(as for the delete I was trying to merge this thread with the original one you had made and somehow the system froze up)

Yeah, something weird is happening.

I posted about two different subjects today in two different sub-boards on the FTA section.

Now, this one seems to not show up in the posts list, but, I was able to get to it from my e-mail saying that you had responded.

The subject shows up in the list of posts, but, it goes to my other post about the 4:2:2.

The inability to lock these two transponders was a separate issue and question. There was a different feed on there at the time, and both frequencies were working on my STB but neither would lock on my Twinhan. For the 4:2:2 question, one would lock and the other would not.

I didn't realize that the two posts would be confused in the way they were!

Sorry!

 

[B.J.]

I'm a little confused trying to follow the previous posts, however with a Twinhan, you should have no problem locking a 4.2.2 feed. You might have problems playing the video if your computer is very slow, but most computers will play it OK as long as it's SD.

One thing about the Twinhan though, is that it's tuner is very tight, and you generally cannot lock anything if your frequency is off by as much as 10 MHz, and also you generally need the SR to be quite close also. If you have located these signals via blind scanning with some other receiver, it's possible that there was really only one signal there, and that you were trying to tune them off freq with the Twinhan. Generally, if I blind scan with my Fortec Ultra, the freq is usually right on, and the Twinhan will lock it, however the darn Mercury is generally off frequency enough that if I blind scan the signal, I often cannot get it to lock properly or at all. My guess is that the frequencies you've plugged into the Twinhan are off freq, which is responsible for the pixelation.

BTW, if you think that the signal is 4.2.2, I suggest loading up TSREADER. It will tell you if it is 4.2.2 or 4.2.0 . I really doubt that what you have there is 4.2.2. I think you are just off frequency. STBs will lock fine when you're off frequency, but the Twinhan won't.

 

[glen4cindy]

I'm a little confused trying to follow the previous posts, however with a Twinhan, you should have no problem locking a 4.2.2 feed. You might have problems playing the video if your computer is very slow, but most computers will play it OK as long as it's SD.

One thing about the Twinhan though, is that it's tuner is very tight, and you generally cannot lock anything if your frequency is off by as much as 10 MHz, and also you generally need the SR to be quite close also. If you have located these signals via blind scanning with some other receiver, it's possible that there was really only one signal there, and that you were trying to tune them off freq with the Twinhan. Generally, if I blind scan with my Fortec Ultra, the freq is usually right on, and the Twinhan will lock it, however the darn Mercury is generally off frequency enough that if I blind scan the signal, I often cannot get it to lock properly or at all. My guess is that the frequencies you've plugged into the Twinhan are off freq, which is responsible for the pixelation.

BTW, if you think that the signal is 4.2.2, I suggest loading up TSREADER. It will tell you if it is 4.2.2 or 4.2.0 . I really doubt that what you have there is 4.2.2. I think you are just off frequency. STBs will lock fine when you're off frequency, but the Twinhan won't.

This used to be two different threads that were merged into one.

There were different feeds on those frequencies at different times of the day.

In the first instance, there were actually two feeds on the STB, one looked stable and one did not. The one that looked stable would indeed lock on the Twinhan, but, the one that was not stable would not.

Later in the day, there was a different set of feeds on the same frequencies and BOTH would lock on the STB but neither would lock on the Twinhan.

I did not do a new blind scan, the feeds just showed up on the same freq/SR as the earlier feeds. So this tells me that the freq/SR was probably off but not enough for the STB to care.

So, Bill, next time this happens, should I try to vary the frequency up and down a few points to see if the Twinhan will lock? There does not seem to be a "scanner" for the Twinhan, even the other programs I have for it seem to need exact transponder frequencies.

I assume that a transponder on a satellite is not a fixed frequency like say broadcast TV has for channels 5, 6, 7 etc. Would this be a correct assumption? I say this because sometimes, the frequencies that I scan do not even come real near matching what I see on Lyngsat, so it seems like the downlink frequency is not fixed for every transponder. That would seem to be the case too in case the satellite has to move. Is this correct?

Thanks. I've been at this a few years but I still feel like a newbie in many ways!

 

[Mr Tony]

One thing about the Twinhan though, is that it's tuner is very tight, and you generally cannot lock anything if your frequency is off by as much as 10 MHz, and also you generally need the SR to be quite close also. If you have located these signals via blind scanning with some other receiver, it's possible that there was really only one signal there, and that you were trying to tune them off freq with the Twinhan. Generally, if I blind scan with my Fortec Ultra, the freq is usually right on, and the Twinhan will lock it, however the darn Mercury is generally off frequency enough that if I blind scan the signal, I often cannot get it to lock properly or at all. My guess is that the frequencies you've plugged into the Twinhan are off freq, which is responsible for the pixelation.

Thats what I was thinking too that you just have to monkey with the frequency. But there were 2 signal there

BTW, if you think that the signal is 4.2.2, I suggest loading up TSREADER. It will tell you if it is 4.2.2 or 4.2.0 . I really doubt that what you have there is 4.2.2. I think you are just off frequency. STBs will lock fine when you're off frequency, but the Twinhan won't.

actually I did scan those in yesterday and the 2nd one was 4:2:2. Coolsat 5000 shows tearing.

 

[Smith P.]

You guys can avoid blind searching if you would use BLSA - PCI card spectrum analyzer - nice companion to your TH cards !
It will estimate SR for you, you will see real signals and could do PID scan with knowledge about particular TP.
(It's on sale for SG members now).

 

[B.J.]

Thats what I was thinking too that you just have to monkey with the frequency. But there were 2 signal there



actually I did scan those in yesterday and the 2nd one was 4:2:2. Coolsat 5000 shows tearing.

OK. On my STBs, I think the 4.2.2 usually comes up as complete gibberish, so when he described it as being pixelated, I figured he just had a poor signal due to being off freq. But I guess what I refer to as gibberish would be pixelation to someone else.

If the freq was right though, it's strange that the Twinhan wouldn't lock. I just now locked the 11988 transponder (although it shows up for me at about 11990). Some kind of basketball game on there now. It's 4.2.0 I'm seeing another 4.2.0 basketball game at 12009 also. Both of these are quite high bitrate SD.
Also seeing another basketball game at 12089 and a baseball game at 12129. Both of these are 4.2.2 in case Glen is still reading.

 

[gillham]

You guys can avoid blind searching if you would use BLSA - PCI card spectrum analyzer - nice companion to your TH cards !

I agree! Mine is working great.

My Coolsat 6000 scans those as:
11991H/13235 SQ=87%SQ, Twinhan SQ=31%
12009H/13235 SQ=90%SQ, Twinhan SQ=35%

BLSA shows them centered around 11993 and 12010. My Twinhan gets the same SQ with my CS6K scan or BLSA center.

I punched in the OP's numbers with TSReader with the Twinhan:
11998H/13240 SQ=20%
12006H/13240 SQ=23% (won't lock easily, 12007 will)

So on both of these the OP's receiver's numbers are about 4Mhz low and when the Twinhan does lock it does not get all the quality available. Using the BLSA it is easy to see where they really are and use the centers with the Twinhan.

The SR from the BLSA can't be used directly, but 13240/13235 both worked with the same quality.

Attached is the zoom in just that split transponder from the BLSA.

 

[glen4cindy]

OK. On my STBs, I think the 4.2.2 usually comes up as complete gibberish, so when he described it as being pixelated, I figured he just had a poor signal due to being off freq. But I guess what I refer to as gibberish would be pixelation to someone else.

If the freq was right though, it's strange that the Twinhan wouldn't lock. I just now locked the 11988 transponder (although it shows up for me at about 11990). Some kind of basketball game on there now. It's 4.2.0 I'm seeing another 4.2.0 basketball game at 12009 also. Both of these are quite high bitrate SD.
Also seeing another basketball game at 12089 and a baseball game at 12129. Both of these are 4.2.2 in case Glen is still reading.

Okay, I hooked up my Lifetime Ultra to see what it would do.

On my Classic NA I got 12128 H 13240 on a scan today. It had the gibberish so I suspected 4:2:2. It would not lock on my Twinhan.

On my Lifetime Ultra, it scanned 12129 H 13235 and I had the gibberish. So I tried this on my Twinhan and it locked just fine. The picture was stable and fed to VLC and I was able to watch just fine. So, it is 4:2:2 and the SR was 5 off, so I guess that was enough to make the Twinhan not lock properly. I also found 12008 H 13235 on the ultra and it locked on the Twinhan but, the NA found 12006 H 13240 and it would not lock on the Twinhan.

So, it's apparent that is just a problem with Twinhan just being so precise.

B.J. or anyone who knows, how can to tell within TSReader that it is a 4:2:2 signal? I looked at all I could think of and did not see anywhere in the data where it identified it as such. I know you have lots of experience with it so, I was hoping you could answer.

Another issue I noted, the Ultra "saw" alot of signals from Nimiq, even though it is on DiSEqC 3 and G 17 is on port 1. Is this just bleedover in the LNB since it is a combination L/C unit?

Thanks

 

[B.J.]

Okay, I hooked up my Lifetime Ultra to see what it would do.

On my Classic NA I got 12128 H 13240 on a scan today. It had the gibberish so I suspected 4:2:2. It would not lock on my Twinhan.

On my Lifetime Ultra, it scanned 12129 H 13235 and I had the gibberish. So I tried this on my Twinhan and it locked just fine. The picture was stable and fed to VLC and I was able to watch just fine. So, it is 4:2:2 and the SR was 5 off, so I guess that was enough to make the Twinhan not lock properly. I also found 12008 H 13235 on the ultra and it locked on the Twinhan but, the NA found 12006 H 13240 and it would not lock on the Twinhan.

So, it's apparent that is just a problem with Twinhan just being so precise.

B.J. or anyone who knows, how can to tell within TSReader that it is a 4:2:2 signal? I looked at all I could think of and did not see anywhere in the data where it identified it as such. I know you have lots of experience with it so, I was hoping you could answer.

Another issue I noted, the Ultra "saw" alot of signals from Nimiq, even though it is on DiSEqC 3 and G 17 is on port 1. Is this just bleedover in the LNB since it is a combination L/C unit?

Thanks

Re TSREADER, if you open up the channel, and click on the video PID over at the left, then if you look in the center, and it will tell you if it is 4.2.0 or 4.2.0

For example I just did that on the 12129 signal, and it gave the following:
###################################
Elementary Stream PID 33 (0x0021) MPEG-2 Video
MPEG Video: Bitrate 17.400 Mbps Resolution 720 x 480i
MPEG Video: Framerate 29.97 fps Aspect Ratio 4:3 Chroma Format 4:2:2
Descriptor: Video Stream Descriptor
Multiple frame rate flag: False
Frame rate: 29.97¼
MPEG-1 only flag: False
Constrained paramter flag: True
Still picture flag: False
Descriptor: Data Stream Alignment Descriptor
Alignment type: video access unit
###################################

You see the 4.2.2 in the third line.

BTW, by the time I went down to check the SRs of these signals, most of them were gone. But I just checked the 12129 peak via the SW method, and it gave me 13236 which is usually within 1 unit of being right. So you're probably right that the SRs of all of them wer 13235, although I was able to lock them with either 13235 or 13240 .
The NIT in the mux said that the SR was 13275, but that was incorrect.

 

[glen4cindy]

BTW, by the time I went down to check the SRs of these signals, most of them were gone. But I just checked the 12129 peak via the SW method, and it gave me 13236 which is usually within 1 unit of being right. So you're probably right that the SRs of all of them wer 13235, although I was able to lock them with either 13235 or 13240 .
The NIT in the mux said that the SR was 13275, but that was incorrect.

Yes, they didn't last long or were almost over by the time I began scanning today.

What do you mean by the statement above, ...checked the 12129 peak via the SW method.......

My SR was only 5 off from what I tried before. Is the Twinhan really this picky? One poster said the 13235/13240 worked equally well, but here the 13235 would not lock.

Thanks.

 

[gillham]

My SR was only 5 off from what I tried before. Is the Twinhan really this picky? One poster said the 13235/13240 worked equally well, but here the 13235 would not lock.

Thanks.

Yes, it is that picky! After reading the latest RTN thread I was checking it out with my Twinhan and Coolsat 6000.

Twinhan:
For 11736H/4440:
4437: no lock
4438: lock 17-18%SQ
4439: 19-20
4440: correct rate. 19-20
4441: 19-20
4442: lock 18-19%SQ
4443: no lock

So +/- 2 Ksymbol/s to lock.

A similar test with the Coolsat 6000 was interesting, but then it started acting goofy, so this might not be completely accurate:
4294: no lock
4295: lock
4440: correct symbol rate
4654: lock
4655: no lock

I tested a few values via binary search to find the edge of lock/no lock.

That is -145Ksym/s and +214Ksym/s. Rather significant different.
I then tested different frequencies on the Twinhan:
11734 = no lock
11735 = 19-20%
11736 = 19-20%
11737 = 19-20%
11738 = 19-20%
11739 = no lock

The same test didn't work on the Coolsat 6000 as it got confused and started locking at just about any frequency even though I was moving to different transponders and back after editing the TP.

So roughly +-2 on frequency and symbol rate. That is pretty tight considering how much wider the Coolsat seems to be, at least with symbol rate.