Twinhan VisionDTV PCI Sat - NO GOOD ???

Messages
1
Likes
0
#1
Hello, experts !
It seems to me that your forum`s members are truly knowledgeable and versed in all PCI cards. I have run into a big problem using the Twinhan Vision DTV PCI sat card with 2.43 PCI driver.
I tried to use this card to receive hotbird & Astra channels.
I receive both satellites impeccably - all transponders - when using the Technosat SkyStar2 card with driver 4.3.0 together with the latest version of ProgDVB. Average signal strenght-s. quality is about 65% !!
Whenever I install the Twinhan card - installation goes without any problem very smoothly - it does perform a scan of the respective satellite - BUT ________
________IT DOES NOT REGISTER-ACCEPT ANY CHANNELS -------------
Whatever the signal strength, whatever the satellite - it ALWAYS indicates that the signal`s quality is insufficient, i.e. too weak to discover-retain any channels of any transponder !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Before throwing away the 2 Twinhans I got I would like to have your expert advice - possibly there are some fellow sufferers among you having had - and having solved - the very same nasty problem ???????
I look forward to your replies - thanks in advance.
Loophunter
 

nacturnal

Regular Member
Messages
21
Likes
0
#2
loophunter said:
Hello, experts !
It seems to me that your forum`s members are truly knowledgeable and versed in all PCI cards. I have run into a big problem using the Twinhan Vision DTV PCI sat card with 2.43 PCI driver.
I tried to use this card to receive hotbird & Astra channels.
I receive both satellites impeccably - all transponders - when using the Technosat SkyStar2 card with driver 4.3.0 together with the latest version of ProgDVB. Average signal strenght-s. quality is about 65% !!
Whenever I install the Twinhan card - installation goes without any problem very smoothly - it does perform a scan of the respective satellite - BUT ________
________IT DOES NOT REGISTER-ACCEPT ANY CHANNELS -------------
Whatever the signal strength, whatever the satellite - it ALWAYS indicates that the signal`s quality is insufficient, i.e. too weak to discover-retain any channels of any transponder !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Before throwing away the 2 Twinhans I got I would like to have your expert advice - possibly there are some fellow sufferers among you having had - and having solved - the very same nasty problem ???????
I look forward to your replies - thanks in advance.
Loophunter
hi,
I am using twinhan from the last 4 months. I didn't get any problem.
twinhan uses LG tuner,it produces less heat when compared with skystar2
( I own skystar1 ,skystar2 and twinhan). In your case the problem may be with software installation or may be damaged card?
i
 

TV_From_The_Sky

Regular Member
Messages
24
Likes
0
#3
I have a Twinhan VisonPlus card but for DVB-T. I recently moved it into a new machine running Windows XP.

Despite the fact it worked fine before it said "Signal too weak" or words to that effect despite quality of 100% and strength of 80%.

I then spent two days downloading all the patches from Microsoft including the latest Windows Media Player. After this it now works fine.

I appreciate your problem is with Sat, but I think the Twinhan software is a little bit ropey.

In fact I ditched the Twinhan card and bought a Nebula DigiTV which is a gazillion times better (although DVB-T)
 

FRAZER

Regular Member
Messages
92
Likes
0
#4
*Nacturnal;

I was wondering if you could tell me which versions of the Twinhan and the Skystar2 you are comparing for heat production; I am dithering between the two (or the Pinnacle PCTV Sat) and as I'm planning to put it in a fanless case this is very important to me.

Supposedly the Skystar2 version 2.6b had "solved" the heat problem according to some reports, whilst some of the Twinhan's (the 1020 if I remember rightly) were running very hot themselves. I don't know if the later revisions of the Skystar2 (2.6c and d) are the same as the 2.6b for heat production, but I would hope they haven't gone backwards in that respect.

It's quite hard to find real comparisons out there as most only have one or the other, so your experience would be valuable.

Thank you,

Frazer
 

nacturnal

Regular Member
Messages
21
Likes
0
#5
FRAZER said:
*Nacturnal;

I was wondering if you could tell me which versions of the Twinhan and the Skystar2 you are comparing for heat production; I am dithering between the two (or the Pinnacle PCTV Sat) and as I'm planning to put it in a fanless case this is very important to me.

Supposedly the Skystar2 version 2.6b had "solved" the heat problem according to some reports, whilst some of the Twinhan's (the 1020 if I remember rightly) were running very hot themselves. I don't know if the later revisions of the Skystar2 (2.6c and d) are the same as the 2.6b for heat production, but I would hope they haven't gone backwards in that respect.

It's quite hard to find real comparisons out there as most only have one or the other, so your experience would be valuable.

Thank you,

Frazer
hi,
Iam holding vp 1020a and skystar2 2.6d
nacturnal
 

FRAZER

Regular Member
Messages
92
Likes
0
#6
nacturnal said:
hi,
Iam holding vp 1020a and skystar2 2.6d
nacturnal
Thanks (belatedly) nacturnal- only just realised that you had replied to this. I went for the Twinhan in the end anyway, though the one I actually received (from Germany on eBay- very cheap) was the 1025 "Sat Express" model, and not the 1020 that was pictured. This is a low profile version, and it does seem on first installation to get rather hot- the bracket at least becomes almost too hot to touch- even though I haven't yet got round to connecting it to the satellite dish.

As I have nothing to compare it to, I don't know if this is abnormally hot, but I also was wondering if low profile cards might in general be expected to get warmer, and if the fact that this one has no casing around the tuner either might make any difference- I actually thought that the small size might allow more air to circulate and keep it cooler. If it were likely to be warmer than the full size version though, I might try to send it back, as it was badly advertised.

Thanks again,

Frazer
 
Top