Frage von Chris Rainer:
Hi folks,
My derzeige configuration:
Cable TV.
Satellite dish (Astra, Hotbird)
JVC DVD recorder without a hard drive.
Standalone DVD Player
I'm playing with the idea of a Panasonic (DMR-EH65EC) HDD_DVD_Rekorder
to buy.
Does it make sense in my case?
I want my devices with a good quality recording and allow
in favor
the recordings to burn DVDs (good quality).
Other suggestions?
I can s.PC edit video material, but I do not want my
Family force
the computer as a "living room" solution to use.
Mfg. and thank
Chris
Antwort von Sky:
Chris Rainer wrote
> Hi folks,
> My derzeige configuration:
> Cable TV.
> Satellite dish (Astra, Hotbird)
> JVC DVD recorder without a hard drive.
> Standalone DVD player
>
> I'm playing with the idea of a Panasonic (DMR-EH65EC) HDD_DVD_Rekorder
> To buy.
>
> Does it make sense in my case?
If you just want to record of satellite, a satellite with a built-in
hard drive is more appropriate. You need only program a timer and
loss to take. Do you want a DVD burn times can you use your DVD
Recorder, or, if the receiver is USB, or LAN FW has the program
Of the hard drive to play on PC and then burn it.
mfg
Stefan
Antwort von Juergen Brumberg:
Hi,
>> My derzeige configuration:
>> Cable TV.
>> Satellite dish (Astra, Hotbird)
>> JVC DVD recorder without a hard drive.
>> Standalone DVD player
>>
>> I'm playing with the idea of a Panasonic (DMR-EH65EC)
>> HDD_DVD_Rekorder to buy.
>>
>> Does it make sense in my case?
Sk> If you just want to record of satellite, a satellite with
Sk> a built-in hard drive more suitable. You need only a timer
Sk> program and take losses on. Do you want a DVD times
Sk> burn, you can use your DVD recorder or, if the
Sk> Receiver USB, or LAN FW has the program of the hard drive to PC
Sk> about playing there and then burn.
Why should a satellite be better, the general disadvantage remains:
The recorded stream is analog only, NOT the original digital
MPEG stream! So I would recommend to a Panasonic, because the
Simply recording quality is very good. They have to know how this
Area.
Anyone who wants to record the digital stream, which must still use a PC Card
purchase.
Juergen Tschuess ...
Antwort von Sky:
Juergen wrote Brumberg
> Why should a satellite be better, the general disadvantage remains:
> The stream is captured only by analogy, that is NOT the original digital
> MPEG stream!
The satellite, the digital signal directly to the hard drive on.
An analog conversion is not done.
> Anyone who wants to record digital stream, which must still use a PC Card
> Buy.
Nope
mfg
Stefan
Antwort von Günter_Hackel:
Juergen Brumberg wrote:
> Why should a satellite be better, the general disadvantage remains:
> The stream is captured only by analogy, that is NOT the original digital
> MPEG stream! So I would recommend to a Panasonic, because the
> Easy recording quality is very good. They have to know how this
> Area.
> Anyone who wants to record digital stream, which must still use a PC Card
> Buy.
So no, weest So You! Are you randomly consultant in Media Markt, the
sounds almost like that. Seriously, this is nonsense, because what you tell,
since when is it on hard data to analog?
PC cards are designed especially for a well, it will never be bored with the
Calculator because you must constantly fiddle anything. Because I love you but
the pot, which needs no drivers, is lightning fast and there is synonymous
not optional "hum problems or problems with the LNB control
gh
Antwort von Chris Rainer:
Hello,
> since when is it on hard data to analog?
How should I interpret this?
From the cable-TV Austria (analog broadcasts, I think) takes you to digitally
the Festplattenkorder?
Will not the quality on the line (analog TV)?
The transfer of the HDD to the HDD is the digital recording synonymous?
Quality loss here?
Gruss Chris
Antwort von Josef Moellers:
Chris Rainer wrote:
> Hello,
>
>> Since when is it on hard data to analog?
>
>
> How should I understand?
> From the cable-TV Austria (analog broadcasts, I think), take digital au =
f
> The Festplattenkorder?
> Will not the quality on the line (analog TV)?
It depends of two factors:
1. analog source material: is it bad, you have lost anyway
2. Converter: good converters deliver good results, YMMV.
> The transfer of the HDD to the HDD is the Recording synonymous di =
scriber?
> Quality loss here?
The loss is about, pretty much, absolutely 0.
Josef
--
Josef Möllers (penguin keeper at FSC)
If failure had no penalty success would not be a prize
- T. Pratchett
Antwort von Bernd Daene:
Chris Rainer wrote:
>
> From the cable-TV Austria (analog broadcasts, I think) to take digital
> The Festplattenkorder?
> Will not the quality on the line (analog TV)?
If you are synonymous from analog cable to want to include plate, you need
actually a DVD-HDD recorder with analog input. And if the source
sometimes a digital receiver is running the transfer to the recorder
anyway from analog, and this needs to be re-compress.
You've sat synonymous but if you willing to it, only of
Sat harddrive incorporated, you take a hard disk receiver
(which was the proposal of Sky). The recording on the hard drive is
then identical with the data. The path then leads to DVD
but either on the computer (better) or via the existing
DVD Recorder (losses due to analog transmission and Neukomprimierung).
And you should have a look of analog cable, or wish to have
then stop with the existing recorder directly to DVD.
If you want to remain universal and Money no preference, you can of course
Buy both. But if the hard disk receiver synonymous burn DVD, will
it closely. You will land in "disguised PCs" such as the Media Center ACTIVY.
Bernd
Antwort von Jürgen_He:
Chris Rainer wrote:
[...]
> How should I understand?
> From the cable-TV Austria (analog broadcasts, I think), take digital
> On the Festplattenkorder?
> Will not the quality on the line (analog TV)?
A DVD recorder, the analog video signals and converts opposite
(digitized) prior to the recording in an MPEG-Datenstom.
In this respect, what is of him on the DVD or HDD will be a written
digital signal, which might let lossless copy.
If you have DVB-S (the data are digitized as MPEG data stream
received) as a source, you mean this in a recording with
DVD recorder that an additional DA / AD conversion with corresponding
Quality losses in Purchase must be taken. When recording with
a DVB-S Receiver HDD, however, would be the received data 1:!
loss recorded.
Gruß, Jürgen
Antwort von Chris Rainer:
> And you should have a look of analog cable, or wish to have
> then holding with the existing recorder directly to DVD.
Why not on the HDD?
What advantages does it work?
Time savings?
If I have understood correctly, is the quality in both cases
equal?
In favor of the non-recorded material (HDD), I can with one click
Delete everything.
Mfg Chris
Antwort von Bernd Daene:
Chris Rainer wrote:
>> And you should have a look of analog cable, or wish to have
>> Then stop with the existing recorder directly to DVD.
>
> Why not on the HDD?
Because a HDD receiver usually no analog input and no synonymous
Encoder etc.. He can only of himself received digital signal
record.
> What advantages does it work? Time savings?
At least better handling: The recording programming is fully
s.Receiver to make. With separate HDD DVD recorder would be every
both units involved. (There are however devices with relief).
> If I understand correctly, is the quality in both cases
> Equal?
Depends on the quality of the recording when HDD HDD Receiver
better, because here nothing is umcodiert or converted. The quality of
DVD must be worse if you overdose on games
separate DVD recorder to produce. That is no real difference
HDD to DVD recorder. But you create the DVD s.PC (from the recording of
HDD receiver), it looks better. Furthermore, let's say you have the chance to
the 5.1-Sound with the disc to get.
> If not favor the recorded material (HDD), I can with a
> Click delete all.
For RW and RAM, in principle, synonymous.
The proposal with the HDD of the receiver went from thinking that the
Transmitters offer digital satellite a superset of the cable is offered (with
few exceptions, such as city channels) and therefore the analog recording
rare exception may remain. If the constellation is not in your
so, then forget the proposal.
Bernd
Antwort von Chris Rainer:
>> And you should have a look of analog cable, or wish to have
>> Then stop with the existing recorder directly to DVD.
> Why not on the HDD?
> Because a HDD receivers do not normally synonymous analog input and no
> Encoder etc.. He can only of himself received digital signal
> record.
You've misunderstood me.
At this point, we speak of a DVD-HDD recorder (Panasonic) is not of
an HDD satellite receiver.
The case with the HDD receiver is now clear to me.
> If I understand correctly, is the quality in both cases
> Equal?
That was the Studio: Analog signal to the DVD or the HDD
DVD-HDD recorder?
>> If not favor the recorded material (HDD), I can with a
>> Click delete all.
> When RW and RAM, in principle, synonymous.
But only in principle.
DVDs cost money (did ca.30Stk. RWs un RAM) and need space.
Viele Grüsse
Chris
Antwort von Bernd Daene:
Chris Rainer wrote:
>>> And you should have a look of analog cable, or wish to have
>>> Then stop with the existing recorder directly to DVD.
>> Why not on the HDD?
>
>> Because a HDD receivers do not normally synonymous analog input and no
>> Encoder etc.. He can only of himself received digital signal
>> Record.
>
> You've misunderstood me.
> At this point, we speak of a DVD-HDD recorder (Panasonic) is not
> Of a HDD-satellite receiver.
The paragraph in my posts, from which the quotation is taken from the top,
began with the words "... If you're willing to it, only of satellite
hard drive to record, you take a hard disk receiver for ...".
this case was the statement, otherwise not.
>> If I understand correctly, is the quality of both
>> Cases the same?
> That was the Studio: Analog signal to the DVD or the HDD
> DVD-HDD recorder?
Yes clear. It is the same converter and the same encoder. Quality loss
internal dubbing of HDD to DVD is possible if we are
re-encoded. But most devices (including Panasonic) are synonymous
a quick-copy mode without modification of the quality and quantity of data.
Bernd
Antwort von Günter_Hackel:
Chris Rainer wrote:
> Hello,
>> since when is it on hard data to analog?
>
> How should I understand?
> From the cable-TV Austria (analog broadcasts, I think) takes you to digitally
> The Festplattenkorder?
> Will not the quality on the line (analog TV)?
Hello
hmpf, TV and quality, the fit is not ever really together.
Worsening of the quality as the broadcast channels or different
spread premiums, there are hardly any. About the quality via cable,
Compression losses in order to save bandwidth, etc. is already here
constantly discussed, must now not again. Even if you have the
currently the best quality can use, so a digital
Satellite system, you receive often synonymous there kaputtkomprimierte films. IMO
with the full intention of doing so many films
Buy the DVD.
> The transfer of the HDD to the HDD is the digital recording synonymous?
Of course, what else?
> Quality loss here?
No, synonymous after the 100th Copy. If there were errors when copying,
computer would not work.
gh
Antwort von Chris Rainer:
Hello s.alle,.
The contributions have really helped.
Thank you very much
Chris
Antwort von Juergen Brumberg:
>> Why should a satellite be better, the general disadvantage
>> Remains: The stream is captured only by analogy, that is NOT the
>> Original digital MPEG stream!
Sk> The satellite, the digital signal directly to the hard drive
Sk> on. An analog conversion is not done.
Since you're on the wrong! No commercially purchased key recorder notes
receiving stream directly to the hard drive on, without any conversion!
Juergen Tschuess ...
Antwort von Juergen Brumberg:
GH> So no, weest So You! Are you randomly consultant in Media Markt, the
GH> sounds almost like that. Seriously, this is nonsense, because what you tell,
GH> since when is it on hard data to analog?
Since I was perhaps wrong words, the receiving signal is
digital-analog converted, including the interfaces, then
for the record back into a digital signal.
The signal on the plate is changed twice.
Juergen Tschuess ...
Antwort von Jürgen_He:
Juergen Brumberg wrote:
Sk> The satellite, the digital signal directly to the
Sk> hard drive on. An analog conversion is not done.
> Since you're on the wrong! No commercially purchased key recorder notes
> Directly to the receiving stream to the hard drive, without the prior
> Conversion!
>
It is probably better so that you have this mistaken beschreitest.
Look at times the list here
(http://www.haenlein-software.com/HS/index.php?PHPSESSIDô9029b7326918a89503e2684949bfba)
, which is only a partial selection of DVB-S / T receiver, the Datensrom
1:1 record to the HDD.
The of you in your other posting (news: GED44995FC9@jbrumi.de)
DA-mentioned conversion is done independently of a Aufzeichnug alone
for the analog outputs.
Gruß, Jürgen
Antwort von Bernd Daene:
Juergen Brumberg wrote:
> ... No commercially purchased key recorder notes
> Directly to the receiving stream to the hard drive on, without any conversion!
DVB-Receiver with hard drive, such as the devices mentioned here more often
of Topfield and Humax have no A / D converter for video and
no MPEG encoder and these need not be synonymous. The received MPEG
Data are stored unchanged. Operations s.Streammultiplex
but instead of finding.
In the gray plug, however, some are now available DVD
HDD recorder with analog inputs and an additional DVB-T receiver.
Here is the DVB-T signal received for the new recording
encoded, and even the existence of an "analogue detour" can
not entirely ruled out.
Bernd
