Question Humax FVP-5000T or Manhattan T3-R Freeview?

jazzy2006

Standard Member
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
51
Reaction score
1
Points
41
I am looking for a new Freeview box and I have narrowed it down to two receivers a Humax FVP-5000T or a Manhattan T3-R. Just looking for advice which receiver would you consider is the best to purchase?
 
Humax. Although it is its own set of problems the software on the Manhattan is still in need of work, plus on the Humax you get 3 tuners and Netflix.

Clem
 
Bought the Manhattan T3-R last week and so far very happy with it, I have always liked Humax and my two previous PVR,s were Humax, but I couldn,t be bothered with another laboriously slow UI.
 
The lack of manual timers on the Manhattan means that it’s a non starter for me, along with the inability to set padding.

Clem
 
Yeh that's fair enough Clem, I just wanted a basic recorder and thought I'd give the Manhattan a try and I'm happy with it up to now. I agree if you need the extra features probably the Humax would be the way to go.
 
We have also been very happy with the T3-R. It's the only Freeview box my wife has been happy with.
 
Sorry to have to say that I must have put a hex on the box after I gave it a thumbs up. The day after, it started locking up it wouldn,t turn on, if I waited a couple of hours it would turn on but wouldn,t turn off, spoke to Manhatten customer support who said try unplugging from the mains and rebooting. This did not work so back it went to Amazon and it,s back to the slow Humax for now.
 
I can echo what millfield has said, I have both. While the 5000t has more bells and whistles it is let down by a painfully slow OS which is why I bought the T3-R. The speed is night and day, so for for me the T3-R is a no brainier, others will have more patience. Hopefully it turns out to be reliable, i'm only 2 weeks in.
 
I’ve only ever had minor issues with my T3-R and they have always been sorted after contacting Manhattan. Would love to see a 3 tuner version at some point.
 
Had my FVP-5000T for over a year now. Not sure why I've stuck with it though. It's slow beyond belief, and navigation is just painful - you can almost see the entire guide appearing channel by channel. For some reason, Humax used the same CPU in the 5000T as was in the 4000T, and it's just not fast enough. It seems reliable enough at recording, but I've never been able to detect all channels on it (my TV is fine though, and detects everything). Seriously looking at the T3-R 1TB as a replacement, for the speed alone. I don't think dropping from 3 to 2 tuners would cause me any issues.
 
Humax. Although it is its own set of problems the software on the Manhattan is still in need of work, plus on the Humax you get 3 tuners and Netflix.

Clem
Manhattan version 1.07 available for download today.
 
I’ve only ever had minor issues with my T3-R and they have always been sorted after contacting Manhattan. Would love to see a 3 tuner version at some point.
Manhattan version 1.07 available for download today.
 
Manhattan T3-R version 1.07 available to download today.
 
Had my FVP-5000T for over a year now. Not sure why I've stuck with it though. It's slow beyond belief, and navigation is just painful - you can almost see the entire guide appearing channel by channel. For some reason, Humax used the same CPU in the 5000T as was in the 4000T, and it's just not fast enough. It seems reliable enough at recording, but I've never been able to detect all channels on it (my TV is fine though, and detects everything). Seriously looking at the T3-R 1TB as a replacement, for the speed alone. I don't think dropping from 3 to 2 tuners would cause me any issues.


The cached epg is deleted overnight and rebuilt on first boot. If you set a power on timer at say 0800 BBC 1 - HD max volume and a power off at 0815. When you come to use the unit the epg should be fully populated.

The box is known to have sensitive tuners. The signal strength may be too high. Try a variable attenuator. Looking a signal quality reduce the signal level to a point where the quality starts to fall. increase it a bit to get some margin. then try a re-tune.

Make sure you do not have channels starting at 800 or up. If you do a manual tune is required for your location.
 
Just gort an email off manhattan to state there will be an update in September giving you

The ability to watch, pause and rewind a 3rd channel while you're recording 2 others

Now how does this work on a terrestrial box with 2 tuners. I know it can work on a satellite tuners,
transponders and all that. I though that tv channels had their own frequency and that was that.
 
In the analogue days each channel was broadcast on its own frequency. In the digital realm TV channels are bundled into multiplexes and each multiplex is broadcast on one frequency. This means if one of the channels being recorded is in the same multiplex as a channel you want to watch you can use one of the tuners to record one channel and watch the other one.
 
Wot ^ said.
As a direct example take PSB3/BBCB (what some call the HD multiplex (Mpx))
There is currently about 10 'Channels (LCNs)' multiplexed onto one RF channel. Normally, just one LCN is demultiplexed (recovered) from the RF channel so one RF tuner is needed. However, gven the correct number of demultiplexers, it would be possible to extract ALL the LCNs from the single RF channel simultaneously.
A lot of TVs/Boxes can demux two (possibly more) LCNs allowing the facility of 'watch one, record another (as long as they are on the same RF channel (Say PSB3/BBCB) with just one tuner.
Add a second tuner and that opens the door much wider alolowing two different Mpx to be 'tuned in' simultaneously.
 
I don't understand why Humax has a positive reputation at all.

I have the predecessor to the FVP5000-T, which is the FVP4000-T, and it's the worse piece of AV equipment I have ever owned. I doubt I need to repeat the issues here - unresponsive and clunky, long with absolutely ridiculous issues such as not being able to turn the damn thing on to watch any TV at all until after it's finished recording.

And the Manhattan is "still in need of work"?

What's wrong with the design and manufacturing of Freeview tuners/recorders? Surely it can't be so difficult to make a reliable unit that people are prepared to put up with this rubbish? Yet, every now and then I cast my eye over the selection on display when I happen to be in Curry's / PC world, and it still appears to be the same old units on offer.
 
Dying breed. Manufacturers aren’t interested in investing in a shrinking market. We should count ourselves lucky that there are still standalone PVRs out there, as poor as they are. Buy now to avoid disappointment... I think that this is the last year that Panasonic will offer any models. They haven’t been updated for some years now. As for Humax, well, yes, and for Manhattan, things seem to be improving. Recording padding is now up for grabs, but sadly no sign of a manual recording, option, nor is there likely to be.
 
You can't buy VHS/Betamax recorders either. Technology?
 
What? No VHS or Betamax machines? :D I wouldn't mind that PVRs will disappear at some point if the respective catch-up services offered the same (potential) quality levels, but they don't. Take the BBC as an example: Films and series are often transmitted at 1080i/p HD with full surround sound, yet on the archaic iPlayer it's 720p (at best) and stereo audio. The quality drop isn't acceptable. If I could get the same quality on catch-up services as I can recording live broadcasts then I'd happily junk my PVRs in a heartbeat. Sadly, what I suspect is going to happen is that PVRs will disappear soon and we'll be left with crappy catch-up services, offering sub-standard quality, with their output riddled with unskippable ads. Progress? I don't think so.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom