Recordings Cut Short

I have become the latest victim of my recordings ending before the programme ends... DON'T GET INTO THE SAME TRAP ...Do what I will do when my contract ends ...Go Back to SKY 
«1

Comments

  • DanielDaniel Posts: 1,840Member ✭✭
    Unfortunately some channels send AR signals and others don't if there is a channel it happens on regular maybe email them and let them know your recordings are getting clipped because of there lack of accurate recording start stop signals.
  • higgy1939higgy1939 Posts: 2Member
    Though the reasons are always passed on as the broadcasters fault uktv etc say my contract is with bt....BT say it's not their fault contact You View . YOU View say it's the broadcasters fault...and we start the next merry go round . RUBBISH  Typical jobsworth !! Very disappointed  with BT & YV


  • VisionmanVisionman Posts: 8,791Member ✭✭✭
    One could buy any Freeview box and you'd still get the same results, as they all use the same EPG timings. Appreciate frustrating though. SKY are no gods either, when it comes to EPG recordings. Unless its football.
  • RoyRoy Posts: 13,836Member ✭✭✭
    edited 31 December 2017, 5:14PM
    higgy1939 said:
    Though the reasons are always passed on as the broadcasters fault uktv etc say my contract is with bt....BT say it's not their fault contact You View . YOU View say it's the broadcasters fault...and we start the next merry go round . RUBBISH  Typical jobsworth !! Very disappointed  with BT & YV


    If this is a Freeview Channel you are having issues with, and not a BT internet-delivered channel, then yes, it is outside BT’s control.

    But the fundamental problem is that YouView will obstinately insist on behaving as if proper AR is mandatory for Freeview, which it isn’t, and will not  implement padding so YouView users can deal with the issue better.

    Accordingly, the issue can legitimately be laid at YouView’s door; but on present showing, YouView are extremely unlikely to ever open this door and take the issue in  :'(

    The workaround is to record the programme after the one you want, as well, when you will find the end of the programme you want at the beginning of that second recording.
    ‘Does television exist for us to watch, or do we exist to watch television?’ - Noah Hawley
  • RoyRoy Posts: 13,836Member ✭✭✭

    Visionman said:
    One could buy any Freeview box * * and you'd still get the same results, as they all use the same EPG timings.


    * which does not implement padding *

    For instance, the Humax Freeview Play box, the FVP-5000T, offers padding as a matter of course.
    ‘Does television exist for us to watch, or do we exist to watch television?’ - Noah Hawley
  • VisionmanVisionman Posts: 8,791Member ✭✭✭
    edited 30 December 2017, 10:53PM
    Roy>
    "Accordingly, the issue can legitimately be laid at YouView’s door."

    So speaks our forum oracle!! Who is all seeing and all knowing!
    And also wrong. Get any Freeview box and this would happen. Or is that a fact you just conveniently choose to ignore?   
  • Visionman said:
    One could buy any Freeview box and you'd still get the same results, as they all use the same EPG timings. Appreciate frustrating though. SKY are no gods either, when it comes to EPG recordings. Unless its football.

    Oh dear! Having tested multiple recordings using the BT Youview T2100 and a Humax HDR-1800T Freeview pvr (with padding turned off in settings) I can definitely state that both boxes are handling AR in differing manners. In ALMOST every instance the recording lengths were different, with Youview either missing anything from a few seconds at the start to anything up to 90 seconds off the end of recordings whilst the 1800 recorded programmes in their entirety. The recordings were done across mainstream channels and minor channels with a mix of sd and hd programming. 
    These findings have been reported by me elsewhere with the higher ups stressing they needed to push the broadcasters harder to provide the same 'triggers' to their (Youview) epg timings as they do to the 'regular' (my wording) Freeview epg timings.
    B)
  • VisionmanVisionman Posts: 8,791Member ✭✭✭
    I'm not aware the triggers supplied to YouViews EPG are different to Freeviews. 
    After all, why would they be? As thats twice the work.
  • Visionman said:
    I'm not aware the triggers supplied to YouViews EPG are different to Freeviews. 
    After all, why would they be? As thats twice the work.

    I agree it is strange but I'd assume Youview know what they're talking about to have acknowledged the findings from various people using different boxes for comparison.
    From testing it certainly points to their being different triggers because the alternative would be that the Youview software/hardware isn't playing ball with the triggers from the epg which of course could be another reason why Youview have said they are investigating further.
    B)
  • DanielDaniel Posts: 1,840Member ✭✭
    Fact is the original poster has not said which TV channels they are recording. So how would any of us even know if there recording a channel without AR triggers or not anyway??
  • VisionmanVisionman Posts: 8,791Member ✭✭✭
    edited 31 December 2017, 1:15AM
    Daniel said:
    Fact is the original poster has not said which TV channels they are recording. So how would any of us even know if there recording a channel without AR triggers or not anyway??
    Because there are two different EPGs. Theres a Freeview one and a YouView one.
    But I'm not aware the triggers on them are different at all.
  • joneshjonesh Posts: 1,159Member ✭✭✭
    Robert said:
    Having tested multiple recordings using the BT Youview T2100 and a Humax HDR-1800T Freeview pvr (with padding turned off in settings) I can definitely state that both boxes are handling AR in differing manners.
    You may well be right @Robert . Do all the channels/broadcasters behave differently? What examples have you got of the different behaviour of the two boxes?
  • I found that in ALMOST every case, from multiple channels/broadcasters, that there are differences between Youview and plain old Freeview PVRs. Even with the main broadcasters I've noticed differences although it would be fair to say that they do behave better than some of the lesser channels, with less important things being cut off early or jumped into a few seconds late. Unfortunately I passed on my research but I could certainly test further for you guys if you so wish. 
    B)
  • joneshjonesh Posts: 1,159Member ✭✭✭
    Robert said:
    I found that in ALMOST every case, from multiple channels/broadcasters, that there are differences between Youview and plain old Freeview PVRs.
    Evidence of your claim would be good @Robert .

    In our household we record more from FreeView than from YouView, but I can't say that we have noticed any difference between the two. Both occasionally don't get it quite right, but it happens so rarely that we don't consider it to be a significant issue.
    Robert said:
    Even with the main broadcasters I've noticed differences although it would be fair to say that they do behave better than some of the lesser channels, with less important things being cut off early or jumped into a few seconds late.
    Evidence could include data from the same broadcast being recorded on both a FreeView box and a YouView box simultaneously.

    Differences between broadcasters could be researched, but I suspect that gathering the data would become tedious.
    Robert said:
    Unfortunately I passed on my research
    ;)
    Robert said:
    I could certainly test further for you guys if you so wish. 
    Who are "you guys"?

    I am not aware that this forum has a hierarchy. Aren't we all Forum Members apart from the YouView emloyees, who are Members+ :)
  • David8David8 Posts: 641Member ✭✭
    What system to Sky use ? 

    I've not noticed missed starts or endings on my recordings across both the pay channels or terrestrial.
  • LukеLukе Posts: 9Member
    Robert said:
    I found that in ALMOST every case, from multiple channels/broadcasters, that there are differences between Youview and plain old Freeview PVRs. 
    With both Humax freeview boxes, and up to a couple of Humax Youview software ago, the AR trigger for a new recording comes from the multiplex bing watched or another programme that is already recording.  For a specific channel the frequency of update for the information used for AR will vary between multiplexes with the fastest refresh rate being the multiplex that carries the channel.  The response will depend on the multiplex that the box is using for the AR trigger.  If the operator of the multiplex is keeping to the agreed standards then this can vary by up to 8 seconds, and the difference can vary by even more if the multiplex operator is not keeping to agreed standards.  Even for the same model, using the same software and the same aerial the same recording can start and stop at different times depending on which multiplex the box has decided to use for looking out for the AR trigger. 

    For the HDR-1800T the easiest way of encouraging it to look a the best multiplex for a specific recording is for it to be in standby.  The same applied to the BT youview boxes, at least until a couple of software releases ago. (There has been a change to how my DTR-T2100 works AR wise this year and so the same may not *always* apply to youview any more.)
    Visionman said:
    Daniel said:
    Fact is the original poster has not said which TV channels they are recording. So how would any of us even know if there recording a channel without AR triggers or not anyway??
    Because there are two different EPGs. Theres a Freeview one and a YouView one.
    But I'm not aware the triggers on them are different at all.
    What is used as the AR trigger is not part of the multi-day freeview epg.  The multi-day epg is just used to trigger when the boxes start to be on the look out for the AR trigger, and does not contain the AR trigger itself.
    Robert said:
    Visionman said:
    I'm not aware the triggers supplied to YouViews EPG are different to Freeviews. 
    After all, why would they be? As thats twice the work.

    I agree it is strange but I'd assume Youview know what they're talking about to have acknowledged the findings from various people using different boxes for comparison.
    From testing it certainly points to their being different triggers because the alternative would be that the Youview software/hardware isn't playing ball with the triggers from the epg which of course could be another reason why Youview have said they are investigating further.
    Although using the same model, the same software and the same aerial for the same programme can result in a different AR result, something has happened to youview and its AR.  It was either in the previous (DTR-T2100) release to the current one or the one before that. The reason I spotted it is that *some* situations that previously triggered a dual transmitter issue not recording a programme now work fine on the DTR-T2100 but continue to fail on a similarly setup Humax Freeview+ HD (HDR-1800T being an example of one of those).
    It is possible that the change has also introduced another reason for variations between recordings of the same programme in addition to which multiplex is used to obtain the AR trigger.

  • @jonesh ; 1st off. Happy New Year to you and everyone else reading.

    Yes I agree evidence would be good but all I had collated I passed on to Youview. You seem to doubt me with your 'winking' emoji, however, a bit of searching on the BT Forum SHOULD bring up instances where it's been posted on by myself and others in the past, including evidence of testing at the time. This is something that has popped up on various fora over a number of years now. Someone posted recently on BT's forum that they felt the issue had got worse with the latest software. I've certainly noticed of late that two identical recordings on the 1800 and T2100 are handled differently whilst recording off ITV.

    Evidence could include data from the same broadcast being recorded on both a FreeView box and a YouView box simultaneously.
    That is how all testing was done to make it a fair and accurate test.

    Who are "you guys"?
    I used the term 'you guys' in relation to you or anyone else on here who may have wished me to do a fresh batch of tests over a week or so to have that 'evidence' you requested/wished to see. 
    I didn't intend to get your back up over a term used in innocence. 
    Like I said, the evidence is out there, so I shall apologise to you and anyone else who may have taken offence to my offer of help by using the wrong words in an attempt to include you all.

    At the end of the day I find Freeview/Freesat much more reliable than Youview but maybe that's just me!
    B)
  • RoyRoy Posts: 13,836Member ✭✭✭
    Daniel said:
    Fact is the original poster has not said which TV channels they are recording. So how would any of us even know if there recording a channel without AR triggers or not anyway??
    Let’s be clear that all channels have to use present/following triggers to demarcate their programmes as a condition of being on Freeview.

    There are a few advertising and music channels that don’t use them, as they regard themselves as being one continuous programme; but the principle stands.

    AR is a subset of present/following in which the broadcasters undertake to adjust the triggers in line with the actual programme durations, rather than with the nominal ones or with the EPG timeslots.

    Present/following is mandatory; getting it right, as with AR, is not.
    ‘Does television exist for us to watch, or do we exist to watch television?’ - Noah Hawley
  • RoyRoy Posts: 13,836Member ✭✭✭

    Visionman said:
    Roy>
    "Accordingly, the issue can legitimately be laid at YouView’s door."

    So speaks our forum oracle!! Who is all seeing and all knowing!
    And also wrong. Get any Freeview box and this would happen. Or is that a fact you just conveniently choose to ignore?   
    You are politely reminded of the forum rules about personal abuse.

    And those about not just telling people they are wrong.

    Now, would you like to post again, being civil this time, and I can explain what you seem to have missed from my posting that you quote?
    ‘Does television exist for us to watch, or do we exist to watch television?’ - Noah Hawley
  • VisionmanVisionman Posts: 8,791Member ✭✭✭
    edited 31 December 2017, 7:56PM
    I don't believe you are correct. 
  • RoyRoy Posts: 13,836Member ✭✭✭
    edited 1 January 2018, 9:55AM
    Visionman said:
    I don't believe you are correct. 
    Thanks, Visionman

    But what am I not correct about?

    Leaving aside Robert’s researches into whether YouView boxes trigger at different times from other Freeview boxes - which is not a consideration I was thinking about, or even aware of - let’s say I am trying to record programmes from a channel with notoriously inaccurate ‘AR’, albeit one that is compliant with the Freeview standards.

    Can I get the programmes reliably on my YouView box? No, because it is bound to its optimistic and unjustified, in theory as well as in practice, insistence that its AR will suffice.

    Can I get the programmes reliably on my DigitalStream box, or on a bang up-to-date Humax FVP-5000T? Yes. Because they offer Padding, and I will know to use this for these programmes, and it is entirely feasible to cover the few seconds or minutes of chopped-off broadcasting involved.

    While padding has its limitations, and is no panacea for all ills, my customer experience using it on every Freeview box that provides it is likely to be a great deal more satisfactory that the experience a YouView box provides in these circumstances.

    Now, where am I wrong in all this?
    ‘Does television exist for us to watch, or do we exist to watch television?’ - Noah Hawley
  • joneshjonesh Posts: 1,159Member ✭✭✭
    edited 1 January 2018, 5:41PM
    @Robert - Happy New Year to you too, and to all.

    I would be interested in seeing evidence of your claim that YouView boxes trigger at different times from other Freeview boxes, but not sufficiently interested to expect you to do further research. @Lukе's explanation of the possible/probable reasons for the differences that you observed makes interesting reading.

    The ;) emoji was an attempt at humour in response to your statement "Unfortunately I passed on my research". It made me smile because it can be read in more than one way. Earlier in the day I had been watching an episode of Mastermind . . .

    I asked about your use of the term "you guys" because it wasn't clear to me who you were addressing when you made your offer.
  • VisionmanVisionman Posts: 8,791Member ✭✭✭
    edited 2 January 2018, 1:39AM
    You make it sound like YouView is the worst platform in the world. It isn't.
    So where are you wrong? Well, everywhere.... 
  • scottscott Posts: 1,781Member ✭✭✭
    edited 2 January 2018, 11:05AM

    Or maybe OFCOM should start to fine when the AR is not done correctly. They like to fine everybody else for drop off's. That would soon make the lazy channel operators take notice as well as making AR sufficient without padding.

    It is only a minority of channels that consistently get it wrong and for scheduled programmes (not over running sports etc). Maybe rather than accepting the faults (and adding padding) there should be a way to make them take notice (verbal doesn't seem to work). I forget though OFCOM are only interested in fines/regulation for very specific areas (TV not being one hence why we have only one first subscription window supplier for all six major movie studio's, but that is not seen as anti-competitive - even the PL were made to have at least 2 suppliers).

  • RoyRoy Posts: 13,836Member ✭✭✭
    edited 2 January 2018, 1:24PM

    Visionman said:
    You make it sound like YouView is the worst platform in the world. It isn't.
    So where are you wrong? Well, everywhere.... 
    And you make hyperbola sound like litotes  :(

    I present a carefully constructed argument as to why YouView handles overruns worse than other Freeview boxes, referring to objective facts that you can hardly deny, and you somehow conflate this single point of criticism, the one that is relevant to this thread, and the only one that is relevant to this thread, into some kind of blanket condemnation of the box.

    Which any disinterested observer reading this thread will see was neither my intention, nor the case.

    But if you really want to see every shortcoming of the box neatly catalogued, I suggest you look at Keith’s magnum opus (which incidentally covers the lack of padding, the only thing I have discussed here, as item 22 out of 118).

    Are you going to accuse him of making it sound like YouView is the worst platform in the world also?
    ‘Does television exist for us to watch, or do we exist to watch television?’ - Noah Hawley
  • KeithKeith Posts: 2,402Member, Champion mod
    edited 2 January 2018, 12:36PM
    My ordered preference for solutions/workarounds to such clipped recording issues would be:

    1. All channels required to fully implement AR that is accurately maintained and updates in near-real time (be that by some well managed (semi) manual means at the broadcaster or by directly tying it to the actual playout system so it is tracking what actually happens).
    2. YouView introduce an optional intelligent padding feature, i.e. one that would add padding where it can, but not to the detriment of back to back and simultaneous recordings, and with such padded recordings they have time stamps for the AR start/stop points such that playback can initially start at the apparent correct point but you can back up into the padding if needed.
    3. YouView introduce an optional simple padding feature (i.e. a fixed amount of padding at the start and end of a recording but with no automatic consideration of any detriment to back to back or simultaneous recordings), but such a feature is enabled on a per channel basis by the user, and even then one can enable/disable it on a per recording set as desired (i.e. it is not an all or nothing solution and when it is deployed is ultimately at the user's discretion but with a handy option to default it to on/off on different channels given these issues tend to plague certain channels and only have limited impact on others).
    4. YouView implement an optional simple padding solution which when enabled means AR is no longer used and all recordings are padded by a fixed amount (regardless of the potential detriment to other recordings as this may now introduce overlaps that cannot be fully serviced).


    I've had PVRs before that offer option 4 and in such cases I tended to choose not to use it as AR has worked well enough and padding on all recordings has resulted in more clipping for me due to the number of back to back and simultaneous recordings I have set. As such if YouView implemented option 4 I expect it would appease and assist some people, but it would not be something I would use. 

    I would very much like to see option 1 realised. YouView have worked with broadcasters and my impression is that over time this has improved some channels/broadcasters. For the channels I tend to record from this means I rarely suffer any clipped recordings. As such the current situation is in practice adequate for me but, knowing that it is not a clean and complete solution, and thus problems can occur, is disappointing. If broadcasters could be made to provide accurate AR the existing system would be logically efficient and effective. It seems doubtful though that all broadcasters will be made to provide accurate AR or will do so voluntarily any time soon.

    That thus leaves options 2 and 3. As per the discussion on various other threads, option 2 is broadly what was apparently successfully and efficiently implemented in the Toppy MyStuff system, and remains my preferred solution to address the short comings of AR in as intelligent and automated fashion as possible, acknowledging what happens in the real world and making allowances for it where technically possible. Failing a willingness to implement option 2, then option 3 would suffice and be an adequate improvement on the current situation.

    In practice, given YouView's clearly stated position over the last 5+ years, I very much doubt they will make any changes in this area any time soon, if ever. As such, from time to time, they will continue to receive negative feedback about this short coming but, in the context of the 2.5m-3m boxes in service and their generally very positive customer feedback ratings, the scale and impact of such feedback seems limited.

  • RoyRoy Posts: 13,836Member ✭✭✭
    scott said:

    Or maybe OFCOM should start to fine when the AR is not done correctly.

    Ofcom can hardly fine people who are adhering to the present Freeview rules, in which AR, though desirable, is optional.

    They, or we, or somebody, should be badgering Freeview to change their rules to make AR mandatory from a given date, say 1 June 2018.
    ‘Does television exist for us to watch, or do we exist to watch television?’ - Noah Hawley
  • scottscott Posts: 1,781Member ✭✭✭
    edited 2 January 2018, 2:31PM
    Roy said:
    scott said:

    Or maybe OFCOM should start to fine when the AR is not done correctly.

    Ofcom can hardly fine people who are adhering to the present Freeview rules, in which AR, though desirable, is optional.

    They, or we, or somebody, should be badgering Freeview to change their rules to make AR mandatory from a given date, say 1 June 2018.


    @Roy So are you saying the Broadcasters could decide not to do AR at all and still be within Freeview guidelines. How would YouView's recording system work if they didn't present AR recording at all (apologies I am not aware of the actual details for the AR recording).

    It would seem bizarre to base the whole fundamental recording ability of a PVR on a system that was 'optional'?

    I presume the schedule must be mandatory to allocate the start and finish time but the ability to 'flex' this within the live timetable (AR) is optional. Surely that would mean programmes that consistently miss parts are then always running out of schedule, is that not in freeview guidelines.

  • alal Posts: 1,275Member ✭✭
    scott said:

    It would seem bizarre to base the whole fundamental recording ability of a PVR on a system that was 'optional'?

    Yes, it really is bizarre.
  • RoyRoy Posts: 13,836Member ✭✭✭
    edited 2 January 2018, 4:22PM
    scott said:
    Roy said:
    scott said:

    Or maybe OFCOM should start to fine when the AR is not done correctly.

    Ofcom can hardly fine people who are adhering to the present Freeview rules, in which AR, though desirable, is optional.

    They, or we, or somebody, should be badgering Freeview to change their rules to make AR mandatory from a given date, say 1 June 2018.


    @Roy So are you saying the Broadcasters could decide not to do AR at all and still be within Freeview guidelines. How would YouView's recording system work if they didn't present AR recording at all (apologies I am not aware of the actual details for the AR recording).

    It would seem bizarre to base the whole fundamental recording ability of a PVR on a system that was 'optional'?

    I presume the schedule must be mandatory to allocate the start and finish time but the ability to 'flex' this within the live timetable (AR) is optional. Surely that would mean programmes that consistently miss parts are then always running out of schedule, is that not in freeview guidelines.

    I have no idea.

    But if you look at this Digital UK document, page 5, you will read:-

    “Optional features

    The Freeview platform supports a range of services that you may want to discuss with your schedule provider to enhance your channel. These include:

    Accurate recording

    A trigger is sent as programmes are broadcast (instead of when they are scheduled), ensuring recordings always start at the correct time.”

    I am indebted to this posting of Yasha Noke’s for this and other references on the issue that you might want to follow up, though IIRC, Yasha was not the first to raise this inconvenient fact.

    (And I would be grateful if those who find these inconvenient, but incontrovertible, facts disagreeable would not mistake this for an opportunity to flag the posting Disagree.

    Without, at least, the courtesy of stating a good objective argument to the contrary, which is always welcome, if such can be made).



    ‘Does television exist for us to watch, or do we exist to watch television?’ - Noah Hawley
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.