Home Entertainment & Technology Resource

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

How many hours recording from empty?

Discussion in 'Sky Forum' started by OurJud, Nov 18, 2009.

  1. OurJud

    OurJud Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Messages:
    89
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Ratings:
    +2
    I've just swapped my standard Sky box for Sky+ (not an upgrade, it's my sister's old one) and decided to see if I could work out how many hours recording I'd get from empty. I set a manual recording from 12:00 noon, right through until 05:30 in the morning (17.5 hrs by my reckoning) and it said this would require 114%

    I thought I'd read somewhere that even the oldest Sky+ boxes would hold about 40hrs ?

    NOTE: I haven't yet replaced my LNB for a twin cable one - so can only record on the channel I'm watching. I'm sure this isn't relevant to my question, but I thought I should mention it just in case.

    Thanks in advance.
  2. Miss Chief

    Miss Chief Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    7,704
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,139
    older Sky+ boxes, so called PVR1's made by Pace have 20 hours. These things are HUGE, so easily recognised. The slightly newer PVR2's also have 20 hours. Check in the system details (Services, 4, 5) for the version number. Amstrad 4F20 and Pace 9F20 are the PVR2's. PVR3's made by Amstrad (4F21), Thomson (4E21) and Pace (9F22) have 40 hours of recording and are also capable of Sky Anytime.

    To further complicate matters there are 80 hour capable boxes, Thomson Sky+ 160's, which have '160' written on the front so you can't really miss it and Pace PVR2's converted to run 160GB hard Drives which carry the version 9F23.

    The single feed won't matter too much as long as the box is on the channel to be recorded. if it's not, the recording will fail. manual recordings can often assume the bitrate will be at it's highest so can, and usually does, over-estimate the amount of space required.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  3. OurJud

    OurJud Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Messages:
    89
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Ratings:
    +2
    Thanks very much, Miss Chief.

    I'm not at home right now, but it is a rather cumbersom fellow. I've searched google images for pvr1 and am pretty sure it's this one (unless there are others that look like it)

    [​IMG]

    20 hours, you say? That's pitifull really, isn't it?

    Anyway, thanks again.
  4. Starburst

    Starburst Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    17,838
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,037


    To be honest even in 2001 it was a small hard drive but SKY offer the SKY+ as a time shifting device not an archiving tool and of course I bet they got a great deal for those drives in bulk:)

    The 20 hours is based on around 2gig per hour of mpeg2, most SD channels run a little lower than that so you can easily record more. The estimated usage always has a generous safety margin and can be wildly inaccurate.
    Replacing the hard drive in the PVR1 requires the right sort of drive, might be tricky now but if you like the system there are plenty of higher capacity boxes on ebay etc.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  5. OurJud

    OurJud Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Messages:
    89
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Ratings:
    +2
    Thank you, Starburst.

    I won't pretend I understood the first bit of your post - "based on around 2gig per hour of mpeg2, most SD channels run a little lower than that so you can easily record more." - but I'll certainly investigate upgrading the hard drive if I like the machine.

    Incidently, I don't know if asking a seperate question within a thread is frowned upon (apologies if so) but is it at all possible that Sky boxes give varying degrees of picture quality? This Pace might be cumbersome, but the response times (channel switching, planner info, programme synopsis) is so much quicker with this box, and I'd swear the picture has improved too!
  6. Starburst

    Starburst Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    17,838
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,037


    So easy to fall into tech talk:)
    In basic terms digital television is compressed that's why there are more channels and they use a system based on the mpeg2 encoder (DVD uses the same) and that is generally considered to give a good picture at 2gigabytes of data per hour.
    Alas to save money many broadcasters use a lot less data to make the picture so the less data per hour the more hours you can get on a fixed amount of space as in a fixed hard drive.





    It's not only possible it happens:)
    Each manufacturer works of reference designs but they use their own sourced components and put them together as they see fit so even models from the same manufacturer can vary.
    The overall speed of the box may simply be down to a more powerful main processor compared to your previous set top box.

    Once you have the second LNB feed in place you will wonder how you watched TV before the delights of a twin tuner PVR and no reason what so every to put up with adverts:)
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  7. OurJud

    OurJud Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Messages:
    89
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Ratings:
    +2
    Thanks again, Starburst, that makes more sense now.

    Yes, I can't wait to get the twin cabled LNB in place :)
  8. logiciel

    logiciel Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    46,275
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,488
    No problem.
    • Thanks Thanks x 1

Share This Page