That's surprising, considering that the 1600 appears to lag behind at lower signal strengths in the pictures above.
Brian
NIM tuner PCB.
Forum rules
This forum is run by the BATC (British Amateur Television Club), it is service made freely available to all interested parties, please do not abuse this privilege.
Thank you
This forum is run by the BATC (British Amateur Television Club), it is service made freely available to all interested parties, please do not abuse this privilege.
Thank you
Re: NIM tuner PCB.
TT S2-1600 has no booster on the PCI card and I used no LNA for my test.
when I used -73dB attenuation, RF input was about -109 dBm, without LNA, S2-1600 can't receive, it 's normal
If I have same level at the input of zero tuner STV6110, result for S2-1600 and Samsung are similar.
RF level given by Tutioune/minitioune is the RF level measured at the demod input, computed from AGC level, so booster is ignored.
Samsung NIM booster gives about 15/16dB gain
Eardatek NIM booster gives about 17/18dB gain
S2-1600 has no booster.
So
for -90dBm signal , Tunioune1600 say -90 dBm, SamsungMinitioune say -74 dBm and Eardatek Minitioune say -72 dBm
for -96dBm signal , Tunioune1600 say -95 dBm, SamsungMinitioune say -80 dBm and Eardatek Minitioune say -78 dBm
data given by SHARP:
SHARP NIM 0169 has 6dB noise figure, same chips than the S2-1600 + booster
SHARP NIM 0164 has 8 dB Noise figure, characteristics near S2-3200 + booster
Samsung NIM 711 seems always better than SHARP,(same chips, only pcb and booster is different)
Tutioune1600 has a new scan strategy to lock quickly and relock quickly in QSB
Tutioune3200 has only standard scan mode
Eardatek NIM :zero tuner is the same as S2-3200, demodulator the same as S2-1600
I will make these tests with the SHARP when I get it back(lent to a friend)
When I made a first comparison 3 month ago, my results say:
1st : Samsung, 2nd Eardatek, 3rd Sharp.
But I used no LNA, so , as say Rob, we must remember that we always use some LNA, LNB or down converter before the NIM that gives us several dB of gain that will offset most of the differences.
Jean-Pierre F6DZP
when I used -73dB attenuation, RF input was about -109 dBm, without LNA, S2-1600 can't receive, it 's normal
If I have same level at the input of zero tuner STV6110, result for S2-1600 and Samsung are similar.
RF level given by Tutioune/minitioune is the RF level measured at the demod input, computed from AGC level, so booster is ignored.
Samsung NIM booster gives about 15/16dB gain
Eardatek NIM booster gives about 17/18dB gain
S2-1600 has no booster.
So
for -90dBm signal , Tunioune1600 say -90 dBm, SamsungMinitioune say -74 dBm and Eardatek Minitioune say -72 dBm
for -96dBm signal , Tunioune1600 say -95 dBm, SamsungMinitioune say -80 dBm and Eardatek Minitioune say -78 dBm
data given by SHARP:
SHARP NIM 0169 has 6dB noise figure, same chips than the S2-1600 + booster
SHARP NIM 0164 has 8 dB Noise figure, characteristics near S2-3200 + booster
Samsung NIM 711 seems always better than SHARP,(same chips, only pcb and booster is different)
Tutioune1600 has a new scan strategy to lock quickly and relock quickly in QSB
Tutioune3200 has only standard scan mode
Eardatek NIM :zero tuner is the same as S2-3200, demodulator the same as S2-1600
I will make these tests with the SHARP when I get it back(lent to a friend)
When I made a first comparison 3 month ago, my results say:
1st : Samsung, 2nd Eardatek, 3rd Sharp.
But I used no LNA, so , as say Rob, we must remember that we always use some LNA, LNB or down converter before the NIM that gives us several dB of gain that will offset most of the differences.
Jean-Pierre F6DZP
Re: NIM tuner PCB.
I assume that an LNA improves the overall noise figure of the S2-1600 more than the others.
Brian
Brian
Re: NIM tuner PCB.
The pcb design has been sent to the manufacturer and they should be back 2 weeks from today.
Brian
Brian