[mythtv-users] Time to take the next step...

Jake jakeisawake at gmail.com
Sun Nov 16 02:18:31 UTC 2008


> One possible solution to this is the SiliconDust HDHomeRun.  But at least
> as I understand it, this would add several additional layers of complexity
> to the project:  If I have, say, two or three "conventional" ATSC tuner
> cards in the system *plus* one or more HDHomeRun boxes hung off the
> network, having the MythTV system decide which one to use for any given
> recording becomes more complex.  If I were to forego internal tuner cards
> entirely, I'd need _at_least_ two (preferably three) HDHomeRun boxes.  This
> leads to the question of how does Myth keep them sorted out?
>
> And either way (i.e., all HDHomeRuns, or a mix of HDHomeRun & PCI tuner
> cards), given that the HDHomeRun(s) would be on "equal footing" on the LAN
> with both the existing FE/BE system and the new BE-only system, I'm not
> certain how I could force the stuff coming from the HDHomeRun(s) to be
> stored *only* on the new BE-only system, where there will (presumably) be
> adequate room for it (high-def recordings would quickly swamp that little
> 120GB drive in the existing FE/BE system).
>

wow, that was a long e-mail to read.  i'll stick to commenting on the
hdhomerun as we have one and love it.  each hdhomerun has a unique
identifier mythtv can use if you have more than one hdhomerun on your
lan.  also a tuner will only record or be controlled by a backend that
it is setup on.  so for the hdhomerun it doesn't matter that it lives
on your lan, you set it up on the backend you want to record to (be it
a master or slave) and it acts like any other tuner card.  in general
i'd say go for the hdhomerun if you want to do atsc and just add as
many to your network as you need.  lots of people here use them and
love them and i don't think i've seen a complaint from anyone using
the hdhomerun.

hope that helps and welcome to the party ;)


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list