Sky to unveil 4K STB next month?

[davemurgtroyd]

Does this mean it is incompatible with existing multiswitches too?

No need for multiswitches - you only need amplified splitters, no polarisation or frquency band switching required. The wideband lnb outputs 230 to 2350 MHz IIRC so definitely no diplexing DTT down Sky Q cables.

 

[Pride Of Cucamonga]

I would imagine two feeds. one Vertical and one horizontal, then use the VHF and UHF, plus IF bands on each, that would give you 2GHz to suit existing cable infrastructure (very important), but I would guess that if you're living in an apartment witha communal system, it'll be quite a long while before these would be upgraded.

Cheers. Any thoughts on why Sky didn't the use this system for the original Sky+ boxes when they had to replace all the LNBs anyway? If anything, it seems simpler technology. Perhaps because the boxes they replaced were often moved to the bedroom?

 

[AndyX]

Cheers. Any thoughts on why Sky didn't the use this system for the original Sky+ boxes when they had to replace all the LNBs anyway? If anything, it seems simpler technology. Perhaps because the boxes they replaced were often moved to the bedroom?

Probably because the technology wasn't available then.

 

[Pride Of Cucamonga]

Probably because the technology wasn't available then.

What technology? Nothing new here that I can see - just a different way of configuring

 

[davemurgtroyd]

What technology? Nothing new here that I can see - just a different way of configuring

Wideband lnb, wideband tuner - not just reconfiguration

 

[tfc]

No need for multiswitches - you only need amplified splitters, no polarisation or frquency band switching required. The wideband lnb outputs 230 to 2350 MHz IIRC so definitely no diplexing DTT down Sky Q cables.

You mention that the LNB outputs wideband signals. Is there likely to be any problem with existing coax runs not being capable of handling the increased bandwidth?

Also, ignoring DTT for the moment, could it be said that Sky are introducing a more simplified and cost effective approach to distributing satellite TV signals? It seems that what is needed at the receiver end (for existing receivers) is a device capable of replicating the LNB functions. Presumably this is now just another chipset which Sky have included in their 'Q' boxes?

Are there any stand alone devices which fulfil this function or are there any existing receivers which contain this functionality?

Also, the topology you describe is analogous to a fibre setup. Would this change in approach translate better if fibre became the method of carrying the signals, rather than coax?

 

[Pride Of Cucamonga]

Wideband lnb, wideband tuner - not just reconfiguration

Haven't cable boxes had wideband tuners for decades?

 

[davemurgtroyd]

You mention that the LNB outputs wideband signals. Is there likely to be any problem with existing coax runs not being capable of handling the increased bandwidth?

Unlikely as the downconverted band has been moved mostly downwards to 230 MHz to 2350 MHZ - "Standard" is around 1000 to 2000 MHz (can't remember exact figures at present). Raising top frequency would cause problems.

Also, ignoring DTT for the moment, could it be said that Sky are introducing a more simplified and cost effective approach to distributing satellite TV signals? It seems that what is needed at the receiver end (for existing receivers) is a device capable of replicating the LNB functions.

You have completely the wrong idea here - the Sky box tunes individual TV channels and distributes 2 at present to other boxes it does NOT replicate the lnb functions and is only tuners controlled remotely from the slave boxes.

Presumably this is now just another chipset which Sky have included in their 'Q' boxes?

Are there any stand alone devices which fulfil this function or are there any existing receivers which contain this functionality?

Also, the topology you describe is analogous to a fibre setup. Would this change in approach translate better if fibre became the method of carrying the signals, rather than coax?

This is NOT a system for distributing satellite lnb signals but merely TV channels derived from them. Optical fibre lnbs (at around £60 to £70) exist with a single fibre output (that carries the whole band and both polarisations) that can be split up to 32 ways (some installers claim 64) in domestic/small installations (communal installs can go a lot higher) using simple optical splitters and is a relatively simple way to distribute to many rooms and can also be used to feed present standard receivers (and even feed multiswitches) by merely using simple optical to RF converters. For smaller systems there arre Sat IP lnbs which can feed up to 8 devices on a home network (either WiFi or cabled) but are at present very expensive at around £240.

 

[tfc]

You have completely the wrong idea here - the Sky box tunes individual TV channels and distributes 2 at present to other boxes it does NOT replicate the lnb functions and is only tuners controlled remotely from the slave boxes.

Thank you for correcting me. So am I understanding that the new Sky LNBs provide the wide band signal Vertical and Horizontal polarisations over two cables, and the Sky tuner is able to select channels from the full bandwidth, instead of being restricted to a High or Low band?

 

[davemurgtroyd]

Correct

 

[tfc]

Are there any suggestions as to how a communal system could now be set up, or upgraded to handle the new Sky Q? Any replacement would still need to provide for DTT, satellite non-Sky (FreeSat etc.) , the current Sky, Sky+ etc, and Sky Q at each resident.

In the communal environment it isn't acceptable to force everyone to use the existing Sky or the new Skq Q, or no Sky at all.

 

[PaulR]

Any replacement would still need to provide for DTT, satellite non-Sky (FreeSat etc.)...

Not in $ly's world, there isn't. They like to lock you in so that it's extremely difficult (but, importantly, not impossible) to go back to what you had before.

Most people, once they've made the switch, would consider it just too much hassle to change back. $ly certainly wouldn't give you any help.

 

[tfc]

Not in $ly's world, there isn't. They like to lock you in so that it's extremely difficult (but, importantly, not impossible) to go back to what you had before.

Most people, once they've made the switch, would consider it just too much hassle to change back. $ly certainly wouldn't give you any help.

I appreciate that, but in the real world, if there is a communal system there has to be some solution, surely.

 

[PaulR]

I don't think this aimed at communal systems at all. This is for their better off customers who probably have five bedroomed houses with a couple of reception rooms.

 

[davemurgtroyd]

There is a solution for communal systems with the addition of a DSCR to outputs from the multiswitch and then switching cables to that as required by individual residents. However the wideband (230 to 2350 MHz) of the signal to the Sky Q box will I believe not allow diplexing DTT down the same cable. Installers are already touting for business with this mod. See here - Sky | Communal TV | Home

 

[Fisty McB]

I suspect any communal system that is "upgraded" to handle SkyQ will probably have a third-party hardware component available whereby the two wideband feeds from each polarity are fed in, with an output of 2-4 outlets (for example) to feed a traditional voltage/tone band switching tuner, basically a multi switch in a very scaled down form and taking two wideband polarised feeds instead of four inputs from a quattro LNB. A "legacy" idea a similar way several external modulators were produced for the latest Sky+ HD receivers using their I/O port. Going to be needed anyway for potential viewers of Freesat in such communal systems if nothing else.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[tfc]

There is a solution for communal systems with the addition of a DSCR to outputs from the multiswitch and then switching cables to that as required by individual residents. However the wideband (230 to 2350 MHz) of the signal to the Sky Q box will I believe not allow diplexing DTT down the same cable. Installers are already touting for business with this mod. See here - Sky | Communal TV | Home

Thank you for your reference. Please could you explain how it works.

Sky state "A Sky Q ready upgrade is an enhancement to your existing communal system where a DSCR switch is fitted at the head-end allowing anyone that wants Sky Q to be connected."

This seems to imply that this modification to an existing system that allows the addition of Sky Q to the system. I thought that I had understood previously that for Sky Q to be used the LNB had to be changed, thus making existing Sky services and other conventional receivers incompatible.

If the SCR is connected to the outputs from the multiswitch, does this mean one DSCR for each user who wants to use Sky Q?

Also, what is the DSCR doing, what two signals is it putting into one cable?

 

[davemurgtroyd]

Thank you for your reference. Please could you explain how it works.

Sky state "A Sky Q ready upgrade is an enhancement to your existing communal system where a DSCR switch is fitted at the head-end allowing anyone that wants Sky Q to be connected."

This seems to imply that this modification to an existing system that allows the addition of Sky Q to the system. I thought that I had understood previously that for Sky Q to be used the LNB had to be changed, thus making existing Sky services and other conventional receivers incompatible.

If the SCR is connected to the outputs from the multiswitch, does this mean one DSCR for each user who wants to use Sky Q?

Also, what is the DSCR doing, what two signals is it putting into one cable?

I have not seen the specs or details of the DSCR but would guess that the DSCR takes 4 outputs from the multiswitch and combines these into two wideband outputs in the same format as that required from the lnb by the Sky Q box. As they state a DSCR switch I assume only one DSCR with multiple outputs - not too different a technology from existing multiswitches - combining instead of switching inputs and then amplifying them to multiple outputs. An alternative to this would be to fit (possibly amplified ?) splitters to the quattro inputs to the multiswitch and then combine these signals in the DSCR

This raises the point that if only one resident wishes Sky Q then it would need two additional spare outputs from the existing multiswitch (or an upgrade to it). If two or more residents want Sky Q then no problem then there will be more than 4 outputs available from the multistch.

 

[tfc]

I have not seen the specs or details of the DSCR but would guess that the DSCR takes 4 outputs from the multiswitch and combines these into two wideband outputs in the same format as that required from the lnb by the Sky Q box. As they state a DSCR switch I assume only one DSCR with multiple outputs - not too different a technology from existing multiswitches - combining instead of switching inputs and then amplifying them to multiple outputs. An alternative to this would be to fit (possibly amplified ?) splitters to the quattro inputs to the multiswitch and then combine these signals in the DSCR

This raises the point that if only one resident wishes Sky Q then it would need two additional spare outputs from the existing multiswitch (or an upgrade to it). If two or more residents want Sky Q then no problem then there will be more than 4 outputs available from the multistch.

Thank you. It looks as though this could be a real possibility. If someone wants Sky Q, via the DSCR the DTT requirement is not likely to be required by them. Other users would still have access to services in the normal way. One presumes any DTT component in the outputs from the multiswitch would be dropped before this combining.

Presumably we will have to wait to find out the full details of this new DSCR, and if there are to be any provided by other manufacturers.