Freeview HD
- Thread starter Vinylnut
- Start date
fryingtonite
pfm Member
I have a Humax Freeview HD box feeding a Panasonic LCD and I have to say it is fantastic. I can't think of a single thing to criticise. Picture quality is outstanding.
Tim
Tim
Telecat
Active Member
I have the HUMAX HDR-FOX-T2 and it's a good box. If the price is off putting the DigitalStream is a box using the same chipset and is about £100 cheaper. You do need to upgrade the firmware via the internet and a memory stick though. I have a 1TB disk connected via the USB socket which holds my Archived programs.
Analogue Andy
Active Member
Sony SDR-HDT1000 here. 
We've gone through a handful of Humax boxes over the years all of which had a tendency to crash frequently at the most awkward times (ie.when we had set to record an important programme-not Corrie!!), so we thought to try something else.
HD Freeview picture quality on the Sony is superb as are the menus and the massive 1TB HDD. Now that the frequencies have settled into their final positions in our region, reception is no longer problematic. No major qualms or minor quibbles!
We've gone through a handful of Humax boxes over the years all of which had a tendency to crash frequently at the most awkward times (ie.when we had set to record an important programme-not Corrie!!), so we thought to try something else.
HD Freeview picture quality on the Sony is superb as are the menus and the massive 1TB HDD. Now that the frequencies have settled into their final positions in our region, reception is no longer problematic. No major qualms or minor quibbles!
Mike Reed
pfm Member
Like Andy, I have the Sony, but the 500. However, my Sony 40" Tv has HD built in, but since HD started to be broadcast here (East Anglia) last November, I have remained unimpressed.
Maybe pic. quality is a shade better (but only a shade), but the sound drop-outs are a bloody nuisance. Things have improved of late though.
I am aware that my aerial could be improved, though it seems that reception is good. I dunno; maybe there are teething problems, but I did expect a more night and day comparison between standard Freeview and Freeview HD. Recordings in HD show a similar lack of quality difference, too.
Maybe pic. quality is a shade better (but only a shade), but the sound drop-outs are a bloody nuisance. Things have improved of late though.
I am aware that my aerial could be improved, though it seems that reception is good. I dunno; maybe there are teething problems, but I did expect a more night and day comparison between standard Freeview and Freeview HD. Recordings in HD show a similar lack of quality difference, too.
Minstrel SE
These go to eleven
Humax all the way. Great brand. The Fox t2 HDR is the one to look at 500gb or 1tb.
Analogue Andy
Active Member
Freeview HD reception was a problem in our region(Nottingham) until after the second switchover day. I didn't realise our Sony had an inbuilt Freeview HD tuner which came as a pleasant surprise. However, I don't bother with this as Digibox's sound is handled by a very nice Yamaha soundbar making the TV tuner redundant.
Glad to read of so many votes for Humax. I enjoyed using them, but had a number of HDD failures as well as the previously mentioned regular crashing.
Sony isn't immune, but so far less than Humax.
killie99
pfm Member
I've got one of the digitalstream HD recorders and it's fantastic, much more stable than my Humax boxes - I've only had to reset the Digitalstream once in the year I've owned it and I've never upgraded the firmware so not sure what you gain with the firmware upgrade, iPlayer maybe? The footie and F1 are superb in HD.
graystoke4
pfm Member
hi i also have a sony rdr-hxd970 but for some reason it will not tune in to itv3,qvc , bid tv,home itv +1, 5*, dont really care about the this but i do like itv3, the rest is fine , and the website does not let you download all the upgrade dater,any input welcome,,,
my humax boxes are completely stable. The software upgrades can do various things. One of the most important is to improve the scanning of the network for channels. The earlier software versions were tuned to improve the speed of scanning, but this didn't optimise the correct sources or channels. In my area it is possible to get reception from more than one transmitter. i have been involved with several humax boxes and all users are very happy with the boxes.
There have been problems with a complete crash with some humax boxes. This issue meant you had to restart the box to change channel. The upgrade sorted this problem. The crashing was caused by the transmitters changing transmission protocols which has happened at least three times with the move to freeview. There are many of the early boxes of competitor manufacture that have been obsoleted as the manufacturer can't or won't sort the problems.
Your comment about stability of humax boxes is ill-informed and not at all helpful.
killie99
pfm Member
Mudlark, your experience of Humax is obviously different to mine, and that of my family. You are in no position to tell me what my experience of Humax boxes has or has not been or to claim that your sole experiemce of Humax is the one and only opinion that should be listened to.
Your comment about the stability of Humax boxes is ill-informed and not at all helpful.
Go here for help with Humax Freeview boxes and discusssions on all their known problems:
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=119
Your comment about the stability of Humax boxes is ill-informed and not at all helpful.
Go here for help with Humax Freeview boxes and discusssions on all their known problems:
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=119
glancaster
In the silicon vale
On a good HD TV, with a broadcast of HD material, typical Freeview HD is a significant improvement over typical standard SD Freeview.
This is for 3 reasons:
1. HD having many times the resolution of SD.
2. Freeview HD using a superior compression algorithm, which gives higher perceived quality than standard Freeview even for the same bandwidth and resolution.
3. Each Freeview HD channel being given a lot more bandwidth than a typical standard Freeview channel.
If one compares one of the higher bandwidth standard Freeview channels, like BBC1, with a Freeview HD channel, the differences is less pronounced, but still there. This is because a good proportion of the terrible picture quality of a typical standard Freeview channel is because it is being squeezed into inadequate bandwidth for commercial reasons (more channels = more £££), but so far, at least, the Freeview HD channels have not been treated so badly.
On the subject of Humax, I've got their Freeview HD recorder and I'm very happy with it. It has the occasional glitch, like all computers running complex software, which is what a digital TV receiver basically is. I actually think their software is relatively minimal and elegant, properties which usually lead to low bug counts. Also, for people who like to fiddle with their consumer electronics, as I do, there is a thriving community of tweakers, providing such things as unencrypted backup of HD recordings. See http://hummy.tv/forum/ for more details.
Kind regards
- Garry
This is for 3 reasons:
1. HD having many times the resolution of SD.
2. Freeview HD using a superior compression algorithm, which gives higher perceived quality than standard Freeview even for the same bandwidth and resolution.
3. Each Freeview HD channel being given a lot more bandwidth than a typical standard Freeview channel.
If one compares one of the higher bandwidth standard Freeview channels, like BBC1, with a Freeview HD channel, the differences is less pronounced, but still there. This is because a good proportion of the terrible picture quality of a typical standard Freeview channel is because it is being squeezed into inadequate bandwidth for commercial reasons (more channels = more £££), but so far, at least, the Freeview HD channels have not been treated so badly.
On the subject of Humax, I've got their Freeview HD recorder and I'm very happy with it. It has the occasional glitch, like all computers running complex software, which is what a digital TV receiver basically is. I actually think their software is relatively minimal and elegant, properties which usually lead to low bug counts. Also, for people who like to fiddle with their consumer electronics, as I do, there is a thriving community of tweakers, providing such things as unencrypted backup of HD recordings. See http://hummy.tv/forum/ for more details.
Kind regards
- Garry
glancaster
In the silicon vale
Actually I remembered that there's a 4th reason - a lot of HD TVs are unsurprisingly optimized for display of HD images, and do less well with SD. As a previous poster suggested, for SD images, a good old CRT is hard to beat.
your post seemed to me to be dismissive of Humax software updates. They have been effective in my case. The updates do solve software issues they are not just feature changes. Have you ever tried to fix your Humax box problems? What particular faults are you referring to?