Any lnb test reviews lately?

[ymttt]

It would also be interesting to be able to compare them with these two Inverto Black Ultra models.
They're old models, but they're a reference for receiving weak signals.
View attachment 158971

If I remember correctly, these two were initially beaten by the golden media plus lnb in a number of test reports. So we left them behind focusing on the new champion and now the devil is also overpowering the golden media plus making the black ultras way behind the devil.

 

[stephan94]

If I remember correctly, these two were initially beaten by the golden media plus lnb in a number of test reports. So we left them behind focusing on the new champion and now the devil is also overpowering the golden media plus making the black ultras way behind the devil.

I'm talking about the reception of weak signals (the result on 19°2; Hotbird, or 1° west is not really significant for me).
here you can see a test where the old Inverto LNBs are (or were) the best for weak signals and are ahead of Golden media +

Best receivers for weak transponders

HD Tuner Sensitivity test Gibertini 100cm dish used in this trial fitted with a 0.2 Inverto Black Ultra I have picked the weakest satellite transponder at my location for this test ABS 3A @ 3 west 11460 V 2992 HD 1920 x 1080 ½ DVB-S2 QPSK MPEG-2 = ABS Test card 1=Amiko A4K combo=======66%...

www.satellites.co.uk

That's why I made this request in post 260.

 

[dmaavrigdo]

If I remember correctly, these two were initially beaten by the golden media plus lnb in a number of test reports. So we left them behind focusing on the new champion and now the devil is also overpowering the golden media plus making the black ultras way behind the devil.

This inspired me, despite the -7C temperature to pop up and replace my Inverto Premium twin with a Golden Media 202+. Aimed at 15W 11043V Possibly slightly, 0.1 db, better. Which might help maintain lock on bad days.

 

[Beli1910]

Mr. @stephan94. I will tell you my experience with the Inverto black ultra lnb. For many years I was convinced that this is the best lnb that exists for the motor system. Until I did more detailed tests on the entire Clark path. The conclusion is the following. The Inverto black ultra single, twin lnb does not lock anything on the Clark path, nor would the Diavlo Red. Here the differences are minimal. But if I compare the signal level from the Ibu and Diavlo, as well as some other lnbs, the Inverto showed very poor results, especially on the central satellites. For example, 19e has a signal that is even 20% weaker than ordinary lnbs - on Spanish frequencies. Then it is significantly worse on the following satellites. 28E, 13e, 1.9e, 0.8w, etc. on critical frequencies at 7w, 26e and if you could find something, the results are comparable between the Inverto and diablo. In general, the black ultra does not lock anything that the diablo would not lock with minimal differences that are not of great importance for Lock. The black ultra single is slightly worse in results than the twin model, which is slightly better on central satellites. Here I compare the black ultra model and diablo, I am not talking about ppl models. All tests are done by me with a measuring instrument and real short time. On antennas 110,120,150. and 1.8m antenna. Of course, as I said, try it yourself and decide according to the results you get. I personally stay on the red color of the diablo until I find a better lnb. Even the flange lnbs that I tested were not even close to the results on the clark, so I would leave them on the antenna. - I am talking about the Invacom flange, gibertini original and invert. I wish you all good luck in your search for the best LNB. I hope that something better will appear on the market so I can test again and compare the results with the competition.I agree with you that the Inverto black ultra is one of the best LNBs for receiving weak signals. But this does not apply to me on the 28e satellite for receiving UK beam.

 

[Beli1910]

If I can find some free time, which has become a problem for me in the last couple of years due to small children, I will do measurements again with the Drhd measuring instrument model 1000combo or 500combo - I have both, so I will pull the report of the entire satellite and then you will be able to compare the differences between the LNBs that I will test on a specific satellite. That is, you will have measurements of all frequencies and measurement times.

 

[a33]

In posts #15 and #21 (and #22) the ALPS single LNB (BSNE-8) is mentioned.

Has anyone ever tested the ALPS quad LNB of the BSTE series, BSTE-4?

I have a series of them on my multifeed setup, because they are narrow, and were said to be "high quality".
Are they better than 'average', or maybe not?

Greetz,
A33

 

[stephan94]

Having received the LNB Megasat this Saturday, here is my comparison between the LNB diavolo and the inverto black ultra (old model as in the photo).

These tests were carried out trying to reduce the time between comparative tests as much as possible (between 6 and 13 minutes).

These comparisons are on satellites where certain frequencies are at their reception limit. Astra 19.2 28.2 and Türksat have a particular skew and as these tests were carried out with a motorised antenna I did not try with these satellites.

The diavolo is a very good LNB which compares well with the IBU, the differences between the two LNBs are really very small, but to say that it is superior to the inverto (the old model) seems to me to be a bit of an exaggeration.

 

[Beli1910]

Excellent work, now try the same on 19.2E, 0.8w, I also suggest 28E, the following frequencies: 11306 H and V. 11344 H and V, 12382 27500 H 5/6. You are significantly closer to me for receiving UK beams with a 1.8m antenna. I am convinced that it is much better here. You can try 52.5e, 54.9e, what will the comparison be like there? The differences are actually small, but personally, according to my conclusions, I stay on red, due to the assessment that it gives me better results overall, considering my location, which I can lock from exotic frequencies. I would be happy if you tested satellite by satellite, so that members will get a broader picture of the results.
It is interesting to see how Ultra has very poor results in the 10.7-11.2 GHz band and how it has fantastic results in the High band

 

[stephan94]

Diavolo is one of the LNBs that (with receivers that can write frequencies below 10700) can go below the theoretical limit of 10700.

 

[Beli1910]

We are glad that you have dedicated yourself to more detailed LNB tests. I will also join in when I find the time for it.

 

[Channel Hopper]

Diavolo is one of the LNBs that (with receivers that can write frequencies below 10700) can go below the theoretical limit of 10700.
View attachment 159050

When you have time please advise which LNBs (with receivers that can write frequencies below 10700) cannot go below the theoretical limit of 10700.

 

[AtOM13]

Here comes a new challenger

Will test on Triax 100cm against Diavolo soon

 

[stephan94]

one satellite where the difference is very visible (from my reception location) between Diavolo (twin) and IBU (single) is Nilesat at 7° West.
Diavolo really has better results (5 transponders have a visible signal whereas the IBU cannot read them).

 

[Beli1910]

Excellent - just keep looking at the satellites and you will encounter surprises. It's a shame that there is no LNB that would have the properties of an IBU and a Devil.
In general, I can say that the Diavlo is definitely better at 28e, 23, e19e, 13e, 0.8w, I haven't seen this for 7w myself, but it's been about 2 years since I compared LNBs.

 

[humaxboy1]

Here comes a new challenger

Will test on Triax 100cm against Diavolo soon


View attachment 159051

Already tried it...it is PLL lnb but Diavolo is better. One thing about Diavolo: very good cross polarisation so reception on the same frequencies with different polarisation is the best. Example as told from Beli1910: 11306 H and V on 28.2 E.

 

[Channel Hopper]

Already tried it...it is PLL lnb but Diavolo is better. One thing about Diavolo: very good cross polarisation so reception on the same frequencies with different polarisation is the best. Example as told from Beli1910: 11306 H and V on 28.2 E.

The twin is the one to have.

 

[stephan94]

The comparison continues,
first on 62° East where many frequencies are found close together and with a small SR
Here too, the diavolo is superior to the IBU (better dB and two additional frequencies found).
Secondly on Türksat 42° East with very close frequencies and very small SR (below 500).
The diavolo as usual indicates higher dB, but a frequency with SR 400 was not found while the IBU found them all.
Of course, all these tests were carried out under the same scan conditions and with the same programmes.

 

[stephan94]

For the comparisons I've been using an IBU single LNB.
As I was a little surprised by the differences between the two LNBs, I did a new comparison with an IBU twin LNB (like the diavolo).
All of a sudden the results in Vertical have changed.
In Horizontal the IBU twin has better results than the diavolo, in Horizontal the diavolo remains the best.
I'm going to repeat the tests on the other satellites with these two LNBs.

 

[tompouce]

Hello Stephan, great job! In addition, in fast times when the weather conditions are not always favourable.
Always difficult to find the best lnb with a large dish (not always designed for the LNBF!)

It is a compromise; we must never forget that at the time of our antennas, there were accessories typically provided by the brand and not the use of different/universal brands.

I remembered a few years ago; the superb discovery which was the comparison between the focal length of the satellite dish produced and the best/real place (thanks to Riman) to gain +/- 0.5 dB for Channel Master antennas.

For my job, the IBU are always used !
But I never seen something better than a Kathrein ZAS 572 LNB with a CAS Antenna ! You know what I mean by the Deutsche Qualität !

 

[stephan94]

on the 62° east the Diavolo is still better (Vertical) but finds one frequency less than the IBU twin and the reception difference which was with the single between 1.5 and 2 dB now rarely exceeds 1 dB with the twin.