expensive Pace Twin v. cheap Ferguson FDT500
 

Just thought I'd post an observation - along the lines of "you get get
you pay for" I suppose.
I've been using the Pace Twin for months now. Having always had awful
reception on analogue, and having never had cable/satellite, plugging in
the Twin was a revelation. I personally can't distinguish the picture
quality from DVD. I'm now of course used to it, along with the terrific
PVR function.
I assumed "Good, that's Freeview, then".
So today, as a christmas gift, I bought a (much) cheaper box for a
cable-less sibling, to get her "onboard".
I bought the Ferguson FDT500 from Dixons - it's gone up to £70, but at
least they're now in stock (inner London).
At home I've swapped the Twin for the Ferguson to set it up and check it
out, and yes, it works. But the picture really is noticably bad quality
in comparison. It's like I'm watching it on a different TV. Text is
slightly fuzzy, and there's a very slight flicker. It's not truly awful
- it does work - but after the sheer quality of the Pace I personally
couldn't use the cheaper box.
It's still headed for my sister - I think it's just about ok...
To be fair, the Twin costs nearly FIVE times as much as the Ferguson !!
(It is a much higher spec machine, of course.) But you really do get
what you pay for. I've just swapped my Twin back in, and again it exudes
quality - the picture is rock solid and rich and there is simply no
comparison.

I know the Pace can freeze up - very, very rarely for me. No doubt other
boxes can as well. But it really hasn't been a problem.
Must plug the hard disk recording on the Twin - i'm still knocked out by
it :-)

I just wanted to post this observation, as I didn't think the difference
in picture quality would be quite so great.
There obviously is a great difference in the performance of the chips
used in various boxes ...

Intersting observation Martin. My view is that you do generally get what you
pay for, although higher prices are no absolute guarantee of higher quality.
Careful research pays off I suppose.

As an aside, people used to complain about "softness" with the Pace Twin
picture (centre screen IIRC) - I assume that's been resolved now?

Intersting observation Martin. My view is that you do generally get what you
pay for, although higher prices are no absolute guarantee of higher quality.
Careful research pays off I suppose.

As an aside, people used to complain about "softness" with the Pace Twin
picture (centre screen IIRC) - I assume that's been resolved now?

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:00:52 +0000 (UTC), Martin
wrote:

Just thought I'd post an observation - along the lines of "you get get
you pay for" I suppose.

At home I've swapped the Twin for the Ferguson to set it up and check it
out, and yes, it works. But the picture really is noticably bad quality
in comparison. It's like I'm watching it on a different TV. Text is
slightly fuzzy, and there's a very slight flicker. It's not truly awful
- it does work - but after the sheer quality of the Pace I personally
couldn't use the cheaper box.

It's not just that the Pace is using RGB, while the Fergie is set to
composite, is it?

--
QrizB

I sound like I know what I'm talking about, but don't
be fooled.

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:00:52 +0000 (UTC), Martin
wrote:

Just thought I'd post an observation - along the lines of "you get get
you pay for" I suppose.

At home I've swapped the Twin for the Ferguson to set it up and check it
out, and yes, it works. But the picture really is noticably bad quality
in comparison. It's like I'm watching it on a different TV. Text is
slightly fuzzy, and there's a very slight flicker. It's not truly awful
- it does work - but after the sheer quality of the Pace I personally
couldn't use the cheaper box.

It's not just that the Pace is using RGB, while the Fergie is set to
composite, is it?

--
QrizB

I sound like I know what I'm talking about, but don't
be fooled.

In article ,
"Alick" wrote:

As an aside, people used to complain about "softness" with the Pace Twin
picture (centre screen IIRC) - I assume that's been resolved now?

There was a particular version of the software which tended to
make people stop complaining about the problem. My sight is
not very good and I never noticed it in the first place.

In article ,
"Alick" wrote:

As an aside, people used to complain about "softness" with the Pace Twin
picture (centre screen IIRC) - I assume that's been resolved now?

There was a particular version of the software which tended to
make people stop complaining about the problem. My sight is
not very good and I never noticed it in the first place.

I read about that a number of times on this group, but I could never see
what the problem was. Maybe there are much higher quality boxes out
there that make my Twin look cheap :-)

I read about that a number of times on this group, but I could never see
what the problem was. Maybe there are much higher quality boxes out
there that make my Twin look cheap :-)

Whoops - that was a typo. They're now £60 (well, £59.99), not 70 quid !
I caved in at that price because at least now they're available.
I didn't mention I want to get a second box for my brother too, but I
only bought one of the cheap(er) Ferguson's to check out the quality.
The second box won't be one ...

Whoops - that was a typo. They're now £60 (well, £59.99), not 70 quid !
I caved in at that price because at least now they're available.
I didn't mention I want to get a second box for my brother too, but I
only bought one of the cheap(er) Ferguson's to check out the quality.
The second box won't be one ...

QrizB wrote:

It's not just that the Pace is using RGB, while the Fergie is set to
composite, is it?


Don't know - they're both SCART

QrizB wrote:

It's not just that the Pace is using RGB, while the Fergie is set to
composite, is it?


Don't know - they're both SCART

"Martin" wrote in message
...
QrizB wrote:

It's not just that the Pace is using RGB, while the Fergie is
set to
composite, is it?


Don't know - they're both SCART

Most boxes have a menu option for PAL or RGB. The FDT500 doesn't
have the RGB option, presumably to cut costs.

"Martin" wrote in message
...
QrizB wrote:

It's not just that the Pace is using RGB, while the Fergie is
set to
composite, is it?


Don't know - they're both SCART

Most boxes have a menu option for PAL or RGB. The FDT500 doesn't
have the RGB option, presumably to cut costs.

In article , Wills
wrote:
Martin wrote:

I read about that a number of times on this group, but I could never
see what the problem was. Maybe there are much higher quality boxes
out there that make my Twin look cheap :-)

Well how nice it is to see someone else compliment the Pace Twin. I
think it is a superb bit of kit, and is getting better all the time with
software updates.

BTW the 'soft' picture was sorted by a update.

But still you get the people putting it down. Are they all ex-Acorn folk
who haven't forgiven Pace for killing Acorn :)

O.T: Pace didn't kill Acorn. *Acorn* killed Acorn. :-) Pace just took
over some of the pieces and then didn't really know what to do with them so
far as desktop computers are concerned.

Fortunately, new RISC OS machines have been developed by other people, and
I'm using one at this very moment. :-) Castle Technology essentially now
own the operating system and develop new machines.

Back on topic: FWIW I was tempted by the 'Twin' (it even reminds me of an
editor I used to like ;- ). However until I bought a DTTV box I wasn't
sure we could get the signal reliably. I also still have not heard any
figures for the audible (mechanical) noise level from its HD. Hence I ended
up buying the Nokia 221T.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , Wills
wrote:
Martin wrote:

I read about that a number of times on this group, but I could never
see what the problem was. Maybe there are much higher quality boxes
out there that make my Twin look cheap :-)

Well how nice it is to see someone else compliment the Pace Twin. I
think it is a superb bit of kit, and is getting better all the time with
software updates.

BTW the 'soft' picture was sorted by a update.

But still you get the people putting it down. Are they all ex-Acorn folk
who haven't forgiven Pace for killing Acorn :)

O.T: Pace didn't kill Acorn. *Acorn* killed Acorn. :-) Pace just took
over some of the pieces and then didn't really know what to do with them so
far as desktop computers are concerned.

Fortunately, new RISC OS machines have been developed by other people, and
I'm using one at this very moment. :-) Castle Technology essentially now
own the operating system and develop new machines.

Back on topic: FWIW I was tempted by the 'Twin' (it even reminds me of an
editor I used to like ;- ). However until I bought a DTTV box I wasn't
sure we could get the signal reliably. I also still have not heard any
figures for the audible (mechanical) noise level from its HD. Hence I ended
up buying the Nokia 221T.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In message
Jim Lesurf wrote:


Back on topic: FWIW I was tempted by the 'Twin' (it even reminds me of an
editor I used to like ;- ). However until I bought a DTTV box I wasn't
sure we could get the signal reliably. I also still have not heard any
figures for the audible (mechanical) noise level from its HD. Hence I ended
up buying the Nokia 221T.

The drive is quiet, inaudible at more than four feet, it's much quieter
than an Iyonix. (An in comment for connoisseurs of fine products.)
However (some) have a sound fault which results in a low level buzz
from all its analogue outputs. It has to be returned for a hardware fix.
Mostly it works very well indeed, the concept is very well thought out
with good sound and vision, but it does need resets of the mains plug
type. It is outperformed in reliability terms by my Nokia OnDigital box.

--
Dave Pitt.

Iyonix, OS5.03.

In message
Jim Lesurf wrote:


Back on topic: FWIW I was tempted by the 'Twin' (it even reminds me of an
editor I used to like ;- ). However until I bought a DTTV box I wasn't
sure we could get the signal reliably. I also still have not heard any
figures for the audible (mechanical) noise level from its HD. Hence I ended
up buying the Nokia 221T.

The drive is quiet, inaudible at more than four feet, it's much quieter
than an Iyonix. (An in comment for connoisseurs of fine products.)
However (some) have a sound fault which results in a low level buzz
from all its analogue outputs. It has to be returned for a hardware fix.
Mostly it works very well indeed, the concept is very well thought out
with good sound and vision, but it does need resets of the mains plug
type. It is outperformed in reliability terms by my Nokia OnDigital box.

--
Dave Pitt.

Iyonix, OS5.03.

In article , David Pitt
wrote:
In message Jim Lesurf
wrote:


Back on topic: FWIW I was tempted by the 'Twin' (it even reminds me of
an editor I used to like ;- ). However until I bought a DTTV box I
wasn't sure we could get the signal reliably. I also still have not
heard any figures for the audible (mechanical) noise level from its
HD. Hence I ended up buying the Nokia 221T.

The drive is quiet, inaudible at more than four feet, it's much quieter
than an Iyonix. (An in comment for connoisseurs of fine products.)

That is a useful calibration as I'm also writing this reply on an Iyonix.
;-

Pity that the magazine reviews never seem to actually *measure* the
mechanical noise level and can give a value in something dB(A) at a couple
of metres. I'd find this useful.

However (some) have a sound fault which results in a low level buzz from
all its analogue outputs. It has to be returned for a hardware fix.

OK. I'm using the S/PDIF from the nokia I have as this gives decent
results.

Mostly it works very well indeed, the concept is very well thought out
with good sound and vision, but it does need resets of the mains plug
type. It is outperformed in reliability terms by my Nokia OnDigital box.

Is the 'mains out and in again' reset a common 'feature' of DTTV boxes?

The Nokia 221T I have has locked up a few times since we bought it, and has
required this sort of reset to poke it back into behaving correctly. When
it freezes it ignores the remote. Mostly the problem locks up the picture
and occurs when using the handset to issue some commands. However last
night it just ignored the handset at one point when I tried to change
station, but continued to output the vision and sound as if all was well.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , David Pitt
wrote:
In message Jim Lesurf
wrote:


Back on topic: FWIW I was tempted by the 'Twin' (it even reminds me of
an editor I used to like ;- ). However until I bought a DTTV box I
wasn't sure we could get the signal reliably. I also still have not
heard any figures for the audible (mechanical) noise level from its
HD. Hence I ended up buying the Nokia 221T.

The drive is quiet, inaudible at more than four feet, it's much quieter
than an Iyonix. (An in comment for connoisseurs of fine products.)

That is a useful calibration as I'm also writing this reply on an Iyonix.
;-

Pity that the magazine reviews never seem to actually *measure* the
mechanical noise level and can give a value in something dB(A) at a couple
of metres. I'd find this useful.

However (some) have a sound fault which results in a low level buzz from
all its analogue outputs. It has to be returned for a hardware fix.

OK. I'm using the S/PDIF from the nokia I have as this gives decent
results.

Mostly it works very well indeed, the concept is very well thought out
with good sound and vision, but it does need resets of the mains plug
type. It is outperformed in reliability terms by my Nokia OnDigital box.

Is the 'mains out and in again' reset a common 'feature' of DTTV boxes?

The Nokia 221T I have has locked up a few times since we bought it, and has
required this sort of reset to poke it back into behaving correctly. When
it freezes it ignores the remote. Mostly the problem locks up the picture
and occurs when using the handset to issue some commands. However last
night it just ignored the handset at one point when I tried to change
station, but continued to output the vision and sound as if all was well.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In message
Jim Lesurf wrote:

In article , David Pitt
wrote:
In message Jim Lesurf
wrote:


Back on topic: FWIW I was tempted by the 'Twin' (it even reminds me of
an editor I used to like ;- ). However until I bought a DTTV box I
wasn't sure we could get the signal reliably. I also still have not
heard any figures for the audible (mechanical) noise level from its
HD. Hence I ended up buying the Nokia 221T.

The drive is quiet, inaudible at more than four feet, it's much quieter
than an Iyonix. (An in comment for connoisseurs of fine products.)

That is a useful calibration as I'm also writing this reply on an Iyonix.
;-

Pity that the magazine reviews never seem to actually *measure* the
mechanical noise level and can give a value in something dB(A) at a couple
of metres. I'd find this useful.

It is difficult to quantify this but at least 20dB down on the Iyonix
with very uncalibrated ears. The unused internal speakers on the TV
hiss at about the same level as the Twin which is more of a whine. It
is also quieter than the VCR. The only time I have heard the Twin in
use was replaying delayed live TV.

Mostly it works very well indeed, the concept is very well thought out
with good sound and vision, but it does need resets of the mains plug
type. It is outperformed in reliability terms by my Nokia OnDigital box.

Is the 'mains out and in again' reset a common 'feature' of DTTV boxes?

It's not uncommon. The Twin has a more frequent and broader range of
malfeasance than the previous Nokia OnDigital and Grundig GDT1500 boxes.

The Nokia 221T I have has locked up a few times since we bought it, and has
required this sort of reset to poke it back into behaving correctly. When
it freezes it ignores the remote. Mostly the problem locks up the picture
and occurs when using the handset to issue some commands. However last
night it just ignored the handset at one point when I tried to change
station, but continued to output the vision and sound as if all was well.

I am sure a good part of the software is common, or of common origin, to
all these boxes. It is the user veneer on top that varies.

--
Dave Pitt.

Iyonix, OS5.03.

In message
Jim Lesurf wrote:

In article , David Pitt
wrote:
In message Jim Lesurf
wrote:


Back on topic: FWIW I was tempted by the 'Twin' (it even reminds me of
an editor I used to like ;- ). However until I bought a DTTV box I
wasn't sure we could get the signal reliably. I also still have not
heard any figures for the audible (mechanical) noise level from its
HD. Hence I ended up buying the Nokia 221T.

The drive is quiet, inaudible at more than four feet, it's much quieter
than an Iyonix. (An in comment for connoisseurs of fine products.)

That is a useful calibration as I'm also writing this reply on an Iyonix.
;-

Pity that the magazine reviews never seem to actually *measure* the
mechanical noise level and can give a value in something dB(A) at a couple
of metres. I'd find this useful.

It is difficult to quantify this but at least 20dB down on the Iyonix
with very uncalibrated ears. The unused internal speakers on the TV
hiss at about the same level as the Twin which is more of a whine. It
is also quieter than the VCR. The only time I have heard the Twin in
use was replaying delayed live TV.

Mostly it works very well indeed, the concept is very well thought out
with good sound and vision, but it does need resets of the mains plug
type. It is outperformed in reliability terms by my Nokia OnDigital box.

Is the 'mains out and in again' reset a common 'feature' of DTTV boxes?

It's not uncommon. The Twin has a more frequent and broader range of
malfeasance than the previous Nokia OnDigital and Grundig GDT1500 boxes.

The Nokia 221T I have has locked up a few times since we bought it, and has
required this sort of reset to poke it back into behaving correctly. When
it freezes it ignores the remote. Mostly the problem locks up the picture
and occurs when using the handset to issue some commands. However last
night it just ignored the handset at one point when I tried to change
station, but continued to output the vision and sound as if all was well.

I am sure a good part of the software is common, or of common origin, to
all these boxes. It is the user veneer on top that varies.

--
Dave Pitt.

Iyonix, OS5.03.