Review of Manhattan RS-1933

[stone1150]

You're being a little too defensive about this receiver. I have two of them, and neither offers the options you show in your post. That's what I'm saying, and what Iceberg is saying. We want this receiver to get worked out right, but we don't have stock in the company

Your insinuations are very offensive.......

 

[skysurfer]

Your description makes me wonder if the tuner IS picking up the signal, but the underlying software is rejecting the signal as invalid, possibly because it's "out of parameters" . There is probably some sort of "validity check" in the software for SR values, to exclude anything that is really spurious.

that only makes partial sense to me. It would explain why it wouldn't tune the signal in memory, but if the firmware had a validity check, you'd think it'd also reject the signal in blind scan mode (keeping the signal from reaching memory). I locked other greater than 30,000 SR signals and they blind scan and lock to watch fine, so there is something funky about the mux in my first posting (second funky mux of the two mentioned in my first post about this issue). Considering there is a mirror two satellites over of that signal, I should go check to see if the issue on one sat is duplicated on the other sat where the frequency/sr are the same.

 

[brentb636]

Partial sense is giving me a lot of credit. Something is going on, and it might not be easy to nail it down , considering that we're not working with lab equipment. Good luck, hope you nail it down .

 

[skysurfer]

Good luck, hope you nail it down .

I doubt i'm going to be able to nail it down. I don't have the source code of the receiver and even if I did, that goes beyond the programming I know so I wouldn't be able to see if there is something about that particular frequency (or freq and polarity) that causes over 30,000 SR signals not to work, assuming when I look at the mirror satellite in a little while that I get the same result. the first mux I mentioned in my original post locks fine now when I go back to AMC-3, so I can't explain why on the first night I blind scanned that sat that I wasn't able to tune that particular mux right away after scanning. Maybe it's some hardware quirk that will never be discovered even if one used the perfect program coded firmware.

 

[skysurfer]

Then with issue number 2 that I gave an example of, people seem to think that if the receiver don't work like a card that has a complete program on a computer to scan with, (Crazyscan) that the receiver is no good when compared to a couple other receivers the receiver works fine! All I ask is that people compare apples to apples. (...)3. try to compare performance with something like a commercial receiver that was built for a certian job and has the price to go with it. That is why I get defensive. I will be that way with ANY RECEIVER that comes out.

The Manhattan can't do some of the things my $75 Traxis does. Should I expect the Manhattan to perform worse than a receiver almost one-third its cost?

If the hardware supports something through firmware commanding, I don't see why the Manhattan can't do it, regardless of if a receiver being compared to the Manhattan is specialized or not, cheaper or not, more expensive or not. Be defensive about the Manhattan on features (or accuracy/completeness of features), not price range, assuming hardware/firmware additions or tweaks is possible to do that.

 

[mr3p]

Some people want to load our proprietary sw onto other receivers. Now some of you can understand why we did not have RS-232 on the unit. Hacking is back with a vengeance.

Jeff,
Thank you for the updates. There definitely appear to be some software updates released although based upon feedback in this thread not everyone has them yet. I'm somewhat confused by your comment above, is the manhattan a clone of a different receiver or which receiver are you implying one would attempt to load your firmware?
BR

 

[Mr Tony]

The settings are there............. How about trying that again.....Flip through those options and then tell if the receiver "don't have" them............. The receiver was set to motor, then ant setup, then motor settings.... In there you will find the diseqc 1.0 and 1.1 settings.... What is so hard about that????? Maybe someone here can eliminate my confusion......

calm down Hoss

And you must have some new secret software and NOT what you sent me. Look at my screens. When I go into antenna settings after selecting motor I do not get the same menu as you do

by the way I'm running version 3.1 (Aug 18th or something like that)

 

[Mr Tony]

Jeff's most recent post indicated that Diseqc 1.0 "was being looked at" . It seems that Jeff doesn't know what's in the software, so maybe his posts only confuse the issue.

BINGO. I'm trying to find out who this receiver is for.....The hobbyist or the person who wants to get it to pick up some religious channels or find a way to subscribe to say the Thai channels on 101? Reason I say that is if its the latter they dont care about HDMI connections,. AC-3, motor, blind scan, etc. They want it to get the channels they sub too. If its the hobbyist then the receiver needs to be customized to work for the hobbyist....and right now its not even close to that.

You're being a little too defensive about this receiver. I have two of them, and neither offers the options you show in your post. That's what I'm saying, and what Iceberg is saying. We want this receiver to get worked out right, but we don't have stock in the company. I accept that you have software that I don't , but you can only expect ME to comment on software that is running on my machine.

exactly. And from my pics above it shows that I do not have the same software stone does.

 

[Mr Tony]

Iceberg has the same firmware I have........ So........ The post he made confused me.

from the pics above it shows I dont.

I get defensive of anyone when people complain about something that there should be no complaint about!

I dont know why you get so offended when people are trying to HELP make the receiver better. Because right now this thing isnt even close to "prime time". Yesterday I put it up against my Coolsat 5000 for blind scanning. Being mainly KU only there are only a couple of S2 feeds so I want something that is thorough yet good and right now the Coolsat 5000 with version 1.00 software (the original from like 2005) totally kicked the Manhattan's ass yesterday in speed and thoroughness. It found DVB-S feeds the Manhattan didnt and beat it by a long shot. The Manhattan wasnt barely half done and the Coolsat was done and I was watching TV. Since the Manhattan can do S2 it did find those couple of feeds. But it clearly missed 2 or 3 games on the blind scan and the Coolsat found them.

All I ask is that people compare apples to apples. One can't do that when they 1 don't have the same firmware,

considering I am supposedly a "tester" according to Jeff and the software on the USB stick was corrupt and you have something different than I or Brent do and probably something else more than others do (and showing proof) makes it a moot point

and 2 don't look far enough to see if the problem lys with there setup,

BULLS**T....So lemme understand this. I've tried around 50-60 FTA receivers in 8 years using the EXACT SAME SETUP I have had since 2004 now (76cm dish, SG2100 motor). The only thing that changes is the KU LNB and I've had that up there for about 4 years now and when the Manhattan doesnt do what it should you blame it on our setups?
Sorry hoss but your either grasping at straws or drinking way too much kool-aid

or 3. try to compare performance with something like a commercial receiver that was built for a certian job and has the price to go with it. That is why I get defensive. I will be that way with ANY RECEIVER that comes out.

I dont see anyone trying to compare it to a commercial unit

But I still throw this out....what exactly is the Manhattan's "customer"? If Jeff is asking about Diseqc 1.0 it sounds like we might not be that.

I'm real tempted to send this back to Jeff because other than the "record 2 shows on same TP" I have not found anything to make me say "wow". Heck the azbox played the Montana game fine yesterday. The Manhattan kept choking on it (stuttering and partial pixeling). Also the whole entertainment center thing still annoys me because plasmas aren't suppose to interfere with remotes. LCD's can.

 

[stone1150]

I swore on my mothers grave that I sent you the latest because you couldn't open up your attatchment.... My apoligies. See, I make mistakes too. But at least I will attempt to make it right. A simple e-mail or PM from you asking about if I was sure I sent the right firmware to you could have saved all this crap now couldn't it? The only thing that offended me was the crack about having stock in the company?????? And in the end, my analogy was spot on..... Making a comparrison with different firmware.... Even though it was my bad. You will have mail at once.......

Now to address the skysurfer...... You never said you had a traxis in the beginning. If you did, then strike two on me. I only saw the comparrison that you made with the commercial receiver, and the computer card. Again... My bad and for that I apoligise. But you people have to admit, there are meny complaints that are made prematurely with many receivers, dishes, lnbs. I just got an e-mail because someone saw that Pixl was stuttering and wonders if it is the receiver..... I just looked and it is not. I don't know what the guy is running, but on my 10 footer there is no problem.

 

[Mr Tony]

I swore on my mothers grave that I sent you the latest because you couldn't open up your attatchment.... My apoligies. See, I make mistakes too.

Thats the whole problem. There are 8 or 9 firmware versions running around and folks have various versions. I have version 3.1 dated 8/11 that you sent me when the USB stick I had was corrupt

But at least I will attempt to make it right. A simple e-mail or PM from you asking about if I was sure I sent the right firmware to you could have saved all this crap now couldn't it?

I was responding to your post that assumed I had the same software and showing I didnt have it. Your post 316 (where you posted the pics) some folks may read that as you belittling someone thinking they dont know what they're doing when I do think I know what I'm talking about

 

[stone1150]

and 2 don't look far enough to see if the problem lys with there
setup, BULLS**T....So lemme understand this. I've tried around 50-60 FTA
receivers in 8 years using the EXACT SAME SETUP I have had since 2004 now (76cm
dish, SG2100 motor). The only thing that changes is the KU LNB and I've had that
up there for about 4 years now and when the Manhattan doesnt do what it should
you blame it on our setups?
Sorry hoss but your either grasping at straws or
drinking way too much kool-aid

I never mentioned you. I was talking about complaints in general. And showing the screens was far from moot. That's how you found out about the differnet firmware now isn't it? So since no questions were asked, it appears that we still got to the destination, just had to take a bumpier road..... I love how people take bits and pieces completly out of context when they "quote" me in their replies...... I make a compltet post for a reason. Not to have half of it ignored. I also fail to see where I resort to name calling or insinuating anything about anyones intellect... That kind of thing has nothing to do with improving a receiver, it only adds fuel to a fire and does no one any good. Now... Ice... You have mail. Have a great day!

Like I said... a simple question to me about if I sent the right file could of saved all of this crap.

 

[Mr Tony]

I never mentioned you. I was talking about complaints in general.

and that is how receivers get improvements.....if there are issues what are we suppose to do...sit on our hands and say nothing? No we bring up the issues with the receiver. Since Jeff has clearly stated he wants feedback that is what we are doing. Giving feedback

Like I said... a simple question to me about if I sent the right file could of saved all of this crap.

funny how you throw this on me.....gee couldnt you have asked instead of assuming?
Also post 308 dated 9/8 I mention the motor/switch issue with the firmware some of us are using

 

[stone1150]

We have a winner! I was beginning to question my own eyesight.. I am running the July update. I figured that little discrepency out this morning and sent a pm to Scott. No wonder there was misscommunication. We are looking at two different firmware versions... Maybe we should mention what fw version is being run when a question is asked.... My bad for not asking that right upfront as I never ran the May fw. Have a great day!

The fact that there was different firmware floating around was mentioned clear back in this post on 8-11...... Just put this out there so people will be reminded that us testers are using different firmware than the rest. It seems to of slipped peoples minds.... Hopefully all us that are testing will have the same version??? Ask if your in doubt. Please! I knew I said that I had seperate firmware,,,,

 

[stone1150]

funny how you throw this on me.....gee couldnt you have asked instead of
assuming?
Also
post 308 dated 9/8 I mention the motor/switch issue with the firmware some of us
are using

For the record...... My baby here. I sent the wrong file.... I'm human. I could of just as easily sent you a pm asking. Live and learn.

 

[Mr Tony]

OK now I have version 3.2 and I do see those same options you do
Now to figure out the remote and entertainment center issue

 

[brentb636]

OK now I have version 3.2 and I do see those same options you do
Now to figure out the remote and entertainment center issue

 

[mr3p]

with threads like this one who needs tv

 

[tdti1]

I have no updates on mine yet, just a question for us using a feed with lnb's, lon all receivers I play with including this one (for now) if I scan H then V on each bird I edit each polarity before I scan the next, question is, is this is in the new update or if is possible to add.

Lets say 1 month goes by and I want to rescan the same bird, if my H is channels 1-55 and my V is 56-111 when I rescan I have the H after the 111 and have to move all my findings, is it possible to have an option that when I select a H scan on a bird it would automatically just add it to my already scanned H, making H go from 1-63 , and moving the V to 64 and up. You follow? That would be a neat option if it's not already in the new file.

 

[hd fan]

then they will have to also arrange the channels into the particular satellite within the list. IMO that is too much to ask, all you have to do is move the channels within the list accordingly. Besides what would be the purpose of H before V, less polarizer failure? saving energy? , most people use a Voltage controlled polarity solution probably. One thing is the lack of switch options with motor or full diseqC support the other to tailor the firmware to everyone particular needs out there.