Digiwave 8x1 uncomitted switch

[Mr Tony]

broke off from another thread

This switch looks promising;
"Digiwave Brand SW81 8x1 DiSEqC Switch 8 in 1 switch".

8 ports all uncommited. Uncommited switch 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8.

about $20 shipped

If the switch works good then, we will have to ask Anole to update the Diagram for "32 satellites on one diseqc switch". he he he (mad scientist laugh)

a uncommitted diseqc switch can be cascaded in front of the standard (committed) diseqc switches for 32 ports. If you add tone switches (or multiswitches) then 64 ports, If you add band stacked LNB's, then you have 128 ports.

I bought one and just installed it today. It works....um how you say...um

AWESOME!!

Now it will ONLY work if your receiver does Diseqc 1.1
It will not work with Diseqc 1.2 (been there tried that). The receiver MUST support Diseqc 1.1

Hooked it up to my Visionsat...and now have 11 LNB's on it
port 1 is 74
port 2 has a 4x1 diseqc switch on it. Port 1-4 is 72,79,85,89
port 3 is 119
port 4 is 123
port 5 is 99C Band
port 6 is 93
port 7 is 97
port 8 is 101

setup is a breeze. For all ports but 2 (since it has a switch attached) you just set it up as port 1,3,4,5,6,7,8 as uncommitted (there are 16 spots)
port 2 is weird but easy...on those 4 LNB's just set uncommitted to port 2 and the committed like a regular diseqc depending on which port its on

so set up is (diseqc 1.0/diseqc 1.1)

74 X 1
72 1 2
79 2 2
85 3 2
89 4 2
119 X 3
123 X 4
99 X 5
93 X 6
97 X 7
101 X 8

The "X" means I don't set the diseqc 1.0

 

[Keith Brannen]

I bought one and just installed it today. It works....um how you say...um

AWESOME!!

Now it will ONLY work if your receiver does Diseqc 1.1
It will not work with Diseqc 1.2 (been there tried that). The receiver MUST support Diseqc 1.1

Unfortunately, it seems that few do support Diseqc 1.1 (my Pansat not being one of them). I have also noticed that some dealers claim: "Works for all FTA Receivers. Compatible with Coolsat, Viewsat, Pansat, Sonicview, Fortec, CaptiveWorks, Neosat, Ariza, Dreambox, Mvidea, etc."

 

[updatelee]

some receivers support v1.1 on legit firmware and loose the functionality when hacked firmware is loaded. many ebay ird's might come this way, uploading latest firmware from manufacturers website is a good idea imo.

I wish all ird's did support v1.1, but alas not all do, its not even a manufact thing, some models will and some wont even from the same manufacturer. viewsat for example.

 

[Mr Tony]

Coolsat is the same way

4000/5000/6000 will
8000 will not

 

[cracklincrotch]

I've got two that seemed like a good deal - $35 for the two shipped. The seller swore up and down it that it would work with my Viewsat.

I have an EMP-Centauri 8x1 switch coming now.

 

[updatelee]

some viewsats it may work with, I beleive the pvrpro that does support uncommited switchs, the 7000 does not though.

 

[Mr Tony]

I can verify it WILL NOT WILL NOT WILL NOT work with a reciever that does not have DIseqc 1.1
Hell the only port that works is port 1...the rest do not work. I hooked it to my Fortec and selected SBS6 and port 1...99%
switched to G10 and selected port 4.....nothing
Tried to do a motorized setup...nothing

Unless you have a reciever that does do Diseqc 1.1 if you buy this you're just wasting your money

 

[elect101]

Iceberg,
I'm a bit confused regarding the Diseqc 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 - in your photos you show three horizontal lines that use Diseqc 1.0, 1.0, and 1.1. When I look at the specs for a Visionsat IV-200 Plus, it says 1.0 and 1.2. Nothing about 1.1. Also, photos of the setup screens at the Visionsat site, show just two lines and they are 1.0 and 1.1! My question is - does the IV-200 really have the three lines your photos show and does do 1.1, or does it really have 1.0 and 1.2 ? Also, I found a site that sells the IV-200 for only $59.95 and I found another site that says early IV-200's came with bad remotes. Any thoughts about these being one and the same?
Thanks for any enlightenment you can supply.

 

[scottc98]

I can verify it WILL NOT WILL NOT WILL NOT work with a reciever that does not have DIseqc 1.1
Hell the only port that works is port 1...the rest do not work. I hooked it to my Fortec and selected SBS6 and port 1...99%
switched to G10 and selected port 4.....nothing
Tried to do a motorized setup...nothing

Unless you have a reciever that does do Diseqc 1.1 if you buy this you're just wasting your money

Might be a good time to put a list together of 1.1 compatable receivers

 

[Mr Tony]

Iceberg,
I'm a bit confused regarding the Diseqc 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 - in your photos you show three horizontal lines that use Diseqc 1.0, 1.0, and 1.1. When I look at the specs for a Visionsat IV-200 Plus, it says 1.0 and 1.2. Nothing about 1.1. Also, photos of the setup screens at the Visionsat site, show just two lines and they are 1.0 and 1.1! My question is - does the IV-200 really have the three lines your photos show and does do 1.1, or does it really have 1.0 and 1.2 ?

my photos are from my box and taken 1/2 hour before that post was made so hopefully that answers the question

Honestly the original original software on the box had a screen for Diseqc 1.0 and Diseqc 1.1. The newest legal firmware has 3 option
Diseqc 1.0
Diseqc 1.0 (distant) ....have no clue what that is for
Diseqc 1.1

Diseqc 1.2 and 1.3 (USALS) are in a different screen

Its all hidden in a separate screen. The original showed on the front screen
as seen here
http://www.satelliteguys.us/fta-mpeg2-equipment-reviews/101350-visionsat-iv200-pvr-plus.html
4th picture

Diseqc 1.1 is for a committed/uncommitted switch (8x1). Diseqc 1.0 is for a 2x1 or 4x1. Diseqc 1.2 is a motor and Diseqc 1.3 is for USALS

 

[Pepper]

here i was stupidly thinking it was like a version number and if i got one that supports 1.3 it would support 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 as well.

 

[elect101]

Hey THANKS for the info! Knowledge allways helps a great deal.
Thanks also for the link to your previous article and for the pix you took the trouble to include.... all excellent!

 

[Mr Tony]

no problemo We have a great group of knowledgeable people here

The Pics are no trouble. My camera gets as much of a workout as the receivers do