qpsk and 8psk

[interd0g]

I am planning to do a minimum upgrade from my old 510 to a 512.
Questions
1) Is there any difference in performance or gui?
2) Can the 512 run with a single antenna feed like the 510 ( if you don't need dual tuners)
I'm hoping it will be a plug and play changeover!

 

[navychop]

Are you sure this is allowed? I thought all upgrades were to a 625, minimum, today.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[TheKrell]

The claim when the 522 was crippled/rebadged to a 512 was that it will run off one tuner. I know my 625 gave me a lot of guff when I didn't plug in both cables.

I have no idea if the 512 works like a 612 (dual tuner w/one output), or more like your 510. But if I were you, I would at least upgrade to a DPP twin and use a separator and see if you could get two tuners out of it. Very much better than only one.

 

[3HaloODST]

DVR 512 is essentially a 522 in single mode and a 522 is essentially a 625 with a smaller hard drive.

The 512 won't like having only 1 input connected.

Sent from my iPhone 4S using Forum Runner

 

[TommyF@DISH Network]

1) We are currently in the process of replacing QPSK receivers with 8PSK receivers to free up bandwidth and provide more content. QPSK receivers are also not compatible with 8PSK compression, which prevents certain local programming from being broadcast. There is no change to the GUI. Being able to utilize 8PSK compression is the only real preformance change.

2) The 512 is the exact same as the 510, it is just a newer version.

 

[TommyF@DISH Network]

Are you sure this is allowed? I thought all upgrades were to a 625, minimum, today.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

An upgrade can be preformed to a 625 receiver, though in most cases our 50X model receivers are replaced with a 512.

 

[navychop]

510 has only one sat connection, 512 has two - and a larger HDD, IIRC.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[navychop]

An upgrade can be preformed to a 625 receiver, though in most cases our 50X model receivers are replaced with a 512.

Thank you. I expect it won't be too many years before the WA will start switching to 8PSK/MPEG-4 capable boxes only.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[interd0g]

Thanks for the info. Very thorough!

 

[3HaloODST]

DVR 512 is a dual-tuner receiver that supports a single, standard-definition TV. It has a 120 GB hard drive. 522 is identical except it has a TV2 out. 625 is identical to 522 except with a 250 GB hard drive.

OP, I assume you have a DISH 500? If so, you'll need a DPP Twin LNBF w/separator to supply both tuners with a single cable. Otherwise, you'll need two cables from the dish.

Sent from my iPhone 4S using Forum Runner

 

[Claude Greiner]

1) We are currently in the process of replacing QPSK receivers with 8PSK receivers to free up bandwidth and provide more content. QPSK receivers are also not compatible with 8PSK compression, which prevents certain local programming from being broadcast. There is no change to the GUI. Being able to utilize 8PSK compression is the only real preformance change.

2) The 512 is the exact same as the 510, it is just a newer version.

The 512 is actually a broken 522 that has a bad RF modulator for TV2. Instead of trashing the 522 , or trying to repair it Dish decided to rebrand it as a 512 to use as a single television installation.

The same thing goes for the 381, which is a recycled 811 that is an obsolete HD receiver that does not do MPEG4, or these 312 receivers that's basically a 322 receiver with a bad modulator so TV 2 is disabled.

Only dish would try to recycle broken obsolete equipment in this manner and repurpose it with fewer features because its original feature are obsolete or broken.

 

[Zero327]

The 512 is actually a broken 522 that has a bad RF modulator for TV2. Instead of trashing the 522 , or trying to repair it Dish decided to rebrand it as a 512 to use as a single television installation.

The same thing goes for the 381, which is a recycled 811 that is an obsolete HD receiver that does not do MPEG4, or these 312 receivers that's basically a 322 receiver with a bad modulator so TV 2 is disabled.

Only dish would try to recycle broken obsolete equipment in this manner and repurpose it with fewer features because its original feature are obsolete or broken.

Claude...Claude...Claude. Aren't you termed from using the phrase "DISH" for life at this point?

None of the equipment is broken and you know it. Pieces of it are removed, intentionally disabled or the software changed to serve other purposes at a lower cost. That's a far cry from intentionally fielding broken equipment, especially when it's all still tested.

 

[whatchel1]

Claude...Claude...Claude. Aren't you termed from using the phrase "DISH" for life at this point?

None of the equipment is broken and you know it. Pieces of it are removed, intentionally disabled or the software changed to serve other purposes at a lower cost. That's a far cry from intentionally fielding broken equipment, especially when it's all still tested.

I just Claude the anti-E ranter. He hasn't a good word for anything to do w/ E*. So the only reason to read anything he says is to get a good laugh out of his BS.

 

[boba]

Irregardless of your relationship with DISH the models Claude mentioned are RECYCLED RECEIVERS with fewer features. We've all seen plenty of posts about remanufactured receivers not working correctly so how far off is Claudes warning?

 

[Claude Greiner]

Claude...Claude...Claude. Aren't you termed from using the phrase "DISH" for life at this point?

None of the equipment is broken and you know it. Pieces of it are removed, intentionally disabled or the software changed to serve other purposes at a lower cost. That's a far cry from intentionally fielding broken equipment, especially when it's all still tested.

Gee, how many thousands of Dish receivers did I sell over the past several years?

I have always has a stack of 20-30 Dish receivers at any given time that needed to be sent back under warranty.

Going back to the 512 for example, they took a 2 tv receiver and changed it to a 1 tv receiver. Why?

If the modulator was not broken, they wouldn't have put a big black plug over the output and simply would have it mirror Tv1. Or they would have specifically designed a 512 receiver.

The SD remanufactured stuff dish is putting out Is recycled garbage.

Unrelated, been selling Directv for 3 years and can count on 1 hand the number of receivers I had to send back for warranty. I have never been forced to give my customers remanufactured garbage like I had to do with Dish.

 

[Tyralak]

The 512 is actually a broken 522 that has a bad RF modulator for TV2. Instead of trashing the 522 , or trying to repair it Dish decided to rebrand it as a 512 to use as a single television installation.

The same thing goes for the 381, which is a recycled 811 that is an obsolete HD receiver that does not do MPEG4, or these 312 receivers that's basically a 322 receiver with a bad modulator so TV 2 is disabled.

Only dish would try to recycle broken obsolete equipment in this manner and repurpose it with fewer features because its original feature are obsolete or broken.

 

[Tyralak]

Going back to the 512 for example, they took a 2 tv receiver and changed it to a 1 tv receiver. Why?

If the modulator was not broken, they wouldn't have put a big black plug over the output and simply would have it mirror Tv1. Or they would have specifically designed a 512 receiver.

Logic fail. The actual reason is, the 522 was no longer an acceptable substitution for a 625. It had less recording time than the 625, thus customers were less satisfied with a 522 instead of a 625. So instead of being wasteful and scrapping all these receivers, or wasting a large amount of money creating a new MPEG2 SD receiver which would have a very limited lifespan, they re-purposed the 522. It was a smart move. Once the TV2 modulator was disabled, these made for a great single room, dual tuner DVR. It had nothing whatsoever to do with broken RF modulators. I've installed hundreds of 522s since their initial release. The number of units that were RAed for that particular issue were very few. The idea that they created an entire line of receivers based around a single failed part is laughable. Try again, Claude.

 

[Claude Greiner]

Logic fail. The actual reason is, the 522 was no longer an acceptable substitution for a 625. It had less recording time than the 625, thus customers were less satisfied with a 522 instead of a 625. So instead of being wasteful and scrapping all these receivers, or wasting a large amount of money creating a new MPEG2 SD receiver which would have a very limited lifespan, they re-purposed the 522. It was a smart move. Once the TV2 modulator was disabled, these made for a great single room, dual tuner DVR. It had nothing whatsoever to do with broken RF modulators. I've installed hundreds of 522s since their initial release. The number of units that were RAed for that particular issue were very few. The idea that they created an entire line of receivers based around a single failed part is laughable. Try again, Claude.

Do you think the average customer knows the difference between a 510, 512, 522 or 625?

Customer orders a DVR, it don't matter what model DVR the installer shows up with because its a DVR.

Besides, dish will never downgrade a customer, as you just mentioned A customer with a 625 will never be given a 522

Only customers who complain are the ones on this board because they are educated enough to know the difference.

 

[whatchel1]

Claude just wants to dis E* any way he can. Logic has little to do with it.

 

[Tyralak]

Do you think the average customer knows the difference between a 510, 512, 522 or 625?

Yes they do. Not necessarily the model numbers, but quite a few have told me "Wait. They said this had 150 hours of recording not 100."

Besides, dish will never downgrade a customer, as you just mentioned A customer with a 625 will never be given a 522

Nonsense. I didn't say that. They were considered the same receiver family. When I replaced defective 625s and all we had in the warehouse were 522s, we would replace their 625 with a 522. Yeah, a lot of customers weren't happy. I wouldn't have been either. When I said not an acceptable substitution, I was talking about from the customer's perspective.