So is the HDPVR worth it yet?

[rwc]

THe HDPVR seems great, but with all teh problems I keep reading about, I"m not sure if I should get one? (What about multiple ones?)

If I do, is the only way to get any sort of stability to open up the box and put on an external fan?

Should I just wait for the next revision?

rwc

[stanger89]

Mine runs just fine, and I think I've got one of the originals. I hear the new revisions have an internal fan.

[fyodor]

It seems that a lot of the problems have to do with playback, which has to do with the fact that the STV software has always had really problematical playback of HD content, especially in Vista. I'm not saying that everyone has problems, but there really isn't any reliable, predictable way to get smooth, good-looking playback, even for ATSC.

In the case of the HD-PVR, it is compounded by the fact that H264 is especially hard to play back.

All this is to say that if you're going to get one you should probably be using the extender for playback. It seems that the people who use that generally have good results. Or you can wait until the software supports EVR, which should presumably help a lot.

[Taddeusz]

Originally Posted by fyodor

It seems that a lot of the problems have to do with playback, which has to do with the fact that the STV software has always had really problematical playback of HD content, especially in Vista. I'm not saying that everyone has problems, but there really isn't any reliable, predictable way to get smooth, good-looking playback, even for ATSC.

I've actually found just the opposite. Smooth playback with HD content is easier to get working in Vista. I've never had a problem getting recordings from my HDHR playing smoothly on my client machine which runs Vista x64. HD-PVR recordings were a little more difficult but am getting silky smooth playback from those as well with only a little effort.

[SWKerr]

I can not claim that getting it setup was simple but once it was configured properly it has run perfectly. I am using it with a DirecTV H20 with the optical sound plugged into it. I have the DirecTV receiver set to 720 since on my TVs I could not see a difference in the output and the file is only about 3gb per hour at 720. If you have a really big screen you might notice but I can’t. I had issues with the ArcSoft software on both my systems but the codec running is Sage worked fine. Once I edited the properties file to use the ArcSoft decoder the playback was great on both the HTPC and the client machines. (I don’t have the extender so can’t comment on it.) I have read a lot of the posts from people that are having problems and I have not experienced anything as painful as what I have seen posted.

The only concern I might have would be the fan. It makes a noticeable sound when recording if the door to the entertainment center is open. If it is closed I can’t hear it. If you need to put it someplace where it is out in the open near you TV this might be an issue. I also ended up sticking it in the back behind the AV receiver because I found the glowing blue neon light to be kind of distracting when the lights were out.

[Taddeusz]

I actually had most of the work done already trying to get my MKV's playing properly. All I ended up having to do is install the Arcsoft software and adjusting my filter merits so that it would automatically choose the Arcsoft Decoder.

That being said I really did not like the output quality I was receiving from the Arcsoft decoder. But it did playback smoothly. I tried time after time to get the Cyberlink H.264 decoder to work from within SageTV without success. I finally ran across a thread explaining how to configure SageTV to use a custom demux. I tried different demuxers without success and finally got it working using the Haali Media Splitter (AR) filter as the custom demux. It is working perfectly now using the Cyberlink H.264 decoder.

[bhyman1]

Mine works great running off an older P4 3Ghz server. Plays back great on the HD extenders. Plays back quite well on my PC client.

I set my Dad up with two, and he's got all Hd extenders as clients. His setup works perfectly.

So yeah, they're definately worth it.

[Brent]

I'm using one HD-PVR (one of the first ones to be shipped - without fan) and it's working great for me.

Setup for playback on a PC is difficult (although working just fine for me) and others report mixed success. Playback on an HD100 is awesome.

[Opus4]

The output looks good to me, but I would be a lot happier with them if I didn't need to check daily to make sure the things haven't locked up & need to be power cycled. I still need to remove one to try running a single unit, but others have reported problems with just one, so that may not work any better. I don't know if it is a system incompatibility or what, but peoples' experiences are here.

- Andy

[fyodor]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

I've actually found just the opposite. Smooth playback with HD content is easier to get working in Vista. I've never had a problem getting recordings from my HDHR playing smoothly on my client machine which runs Vista x64. HD-PVR recordings were a little more difficult but am getting silky smooth playback from those as well with only a little effort.

As I said, not everyone has problems. But many people do and there doesn't seem to be any reliable algorithm in terms of hardware, drivers, configuration, etc.

[Taddeusz]

Originally Posted by fyodor

As I said, not everyone has problems. But many people do and there doesn't seem to be any reliable algorithm in terms of hardware, drivers, configuration, etc.

I think most of that is because there is practically an infinite number of configurations. Getting things working on all of them is next to impossible.

[phelme]

I currently just have one HD-PVR. It's directly connected to my Sage server as it would not work at all as a network encoder for me. It would simply stop recording several times per hour for a reason neither I nor Sage could figure out (it replaced a Hauppauge PVR-150 which worked just fine in that config). Connected directly to the server it works fine.

Playback is the big issue. you need a lot of graphical horsepower to play back the files, get an HD100 or a minimum of an ATI 3450 card on a client for playback. it doesn't work yet with Placeshifter and when it does will put a lot of CPU strain on the server. you'll need a dual CPU at minimum for it.

[DOS64K]

Originally Posted by Taddeusz

I think most of that is because there is practically an infinite number of configurations. Getting things working on all of them is next to impossible.

And this has always been the lithmus test for emerging technology. First-adopters must take this pill (bitter or not) and live with the consequences.

[bcjenkins]

1 unit running great in Linux using HD100s for playback.

B

[othy]

Count me as one who has found the HD-PVR to be well worth the money. I have one of the first ones (no fan) and I'm never had a single problem with it. Playback on an HD100 with zero issues.

Guess I'm one of the lucky ones, but for me it just works. And since it's opened up a big handful of HD content that I wasn't able to get via clear QAM, it's been great.

Tim

[sic0048]

I say if you are using the HD-100 extenders, then they are definitely worth it. If you are going to be using a computer for playback, then expect to spend more time getting it to work and you might end up frustrated and unhappy with the results.

[mistergq]

I have 2 HD PVRs running on XP MCE. 1 HD PVR is one of the original ones without the internal fan. The second one is a recent one I just purchased and has the internal fan. I am very happy now that I have two. Quality is great. I am using HD 100 for playback so maybe that is the reason. I have the newer one as the first PVR to record from. But I am looking forward to the new fall season with two HD PVRs and my HDhomerun. So yes, well worth the money.