Kaffeine DVB-T & Sutton Coldfield's new MUX's

[Jonesy]

If your looking at a black screen following the big switch over to digital from the Sutton Coldfield transmitter and downloading a scandata update doesn't solve the problem because the download is months out of date. There was a major MUX change but never fear. Here are five of the six (the important ones) that came into effect today.

Edit your kaffeine scanfile.dvb file in the /.kde4/share/apps/kaffeine/ folder and replace the existing Sutton Coldfield entry wiv dis........

Code: [Select]

T 650000000 8MHz 2/3 NONE QAM64 8k 1/32 NONE
T 674000000 8MHz 2/3 NONE QAM64 8k 1/32 NONE
T 642000000 8MHz 2/3 NONE QAM64 8k 1/32 NONE
T 666000000 8MHz 2/3 NONE QAM64 8k 1/32 NONE
T 618167000 8MHz 2/3 NONE QAM64 8k 1/32 NONE

I didn't include the HD MUX for two reasons. First I don't have it, because second, it doesn't work so I didn't bother
wasting any more time figuring it out.

Enjoy.    

[Just17]

Just wondering .....  would a scan by Kaffeine not have picked up the changes?

I understand that editing the file is probably alot quicker 

[Jonesy]

Just wondering .....  would a scan by Kaffeine not have picked up the changes?

I understand that editing the file is probably alot quicker  

No the frequencies and other parameters have completely changed. The download updated scan data option doesn't (or didn't last time I checked) currently work because the data is a couple of months out of date now. Unless they do update it over the next few days a manual update is needed for now. Using the Auto scan option will use the old Waltham settings which have also now changed, and so still only find half the channels. Several of the "+1" channels have actually been droped by Freeview altogether for the time being which is also confusing. With the HD MUX now being QAM256 many DVB-T devices as well as some peoples nice new HD TV's won't recognize HD broadcasts any longer!!. All channels are now using the pre DSO HD QAM64 anyway..

[Just17]

I understood that Kaffeine could do a 'blind scan' and not be dependent on any scan data .....  which is what I guess I meant to say.