What's Happening to My Recordings

For some reason the recording did not record on your local station and it did not auto search 4 the correct one .


When u set the recording did u set it up on 12?
Another option is to set a manual record .

I would call and or reset the box.

Similar Occourd for me I was recording a cw program , my guide shows 2 by mistake , but it recorded on correct channel .

Sent from my mobile device using Tapatalk

 

Happens to me ALL THE TIME.

The problem stems from setting a series recording from a search result. This will often result in a series link set to "all channels". The scheduler algorithm is too stupid to know that you don't receive the 39x channels and it usually gives satellite channels priority over local network channels. Result, no recording.

The "smart search" is equally broken. Search for a network show, and it will often come back with the 39x channel result while ignoring or hiding the local channel result. If you mistakenly pick the 39x to record - result, no recording.

Try to use the guide instead of the search whenever possible to set a recording. That almost always gets it right. Otherwise, be very very careful using search results. Try to never set a series link that points to "all channels". Try not to use "record this season" for the same reasons.

 

No, the new GUI will always try to record from all channels. It's a widely discussed issue. You can't fix it, we are all waiting on DirecTV for a solution.

 

Spend a few years with D*...it never ends.

Rich

 

Thought you were familiar. Yeah, the merger did little good for us. Wasn't the best customer experience before the merger but at least you could expect the Access Card folks and the Retention CSRs to be knowledgeable. Can't say that now. I've never seen a merger that made folks happy.

Rich

 

It's the default mode for new series being set up on the new GUI . Any series previously set up for a specific channel will still record only on that channel. In theory "all channels" would record properly, but in reality "all channels" causes serious recoding issues that did not exist before someone got the boneheaded idea to mess with what wasn't broken.

 

Yet another reason why I revert back to the old GUI on my HR54 for my series links, but get chastised by some on this site for doing so....

Sometimes I miss the old days of the DirecTiVo when we got upgraded to 6.2 from 3.1 software, as well as other releases, and they were rock solid in comparison. We anxiously awaited the ‘pending restart’ message after a dial in, without any fear of the upgrade. It’s almost like the beta testing was done/completed before it got released to the public!

 

No sign of the new GUI here.......long may it continue

 

I really liked the D* TiVos. Not nearly as interesting as what we have now, probably because they worked so much better.

Rich

 

Same issue here. X-Files last week recorded from the Distant-Network Fox feed, not my local. Then I noticed, all my series recordings are set to ALL CHANNELS with no way to change them. Come on...how stupid can DirecTV get? This is basic DVR functionality and there should be no hurry to rush out a new GUI when it isn't ready. Just more proof that yet another company doesn't put the customer experience first. I have been with DirecTV since the days of USSB and self installing your dish. Never before have I seen such a tone-deaf attitude toward it's customers. I like the new GUI, but to launch with such an obvious issue just shows contempt for customers.

 

The problem is the people who make the design decisions do not understand that the guide data and channels I get issues that can cause issues with their new designs and didn’t bother to make sure those things where rock solid first... the theory behind all channels is actually great. It just can’t be bullet proof because of other things it has to rely on, so making it the only way to record is a mistake. Hopefully they are getting enough feedback about this now to make a change.

 

You know, this whole issue could be easily solved by "pre-grandfathering" everyone for the distant network channels or whatever they're officially called.

Federal regs don't allow it, but so what. It was dumb to begin with, and all they could do (the feds) is sue I think. So that's years in the works, and all the while the problem would be solved, and people like me could watch actual network programming instead of hair on fire reports that it's raining.

Since someone will surely point out that the rule serves a purpose, that being to force the end user to view local commercials, I say, if the local affiliate can prove a correlation to the availability of distant channels reducing their viewership, then the solution is simply to make their affiliate more desirable to local viewers. They call it competition, and it's the concept most feared in the world of providers.

 

Actually they should completely get rid of dns imho and be done with it... that is the only true fix.

They could pull their license... and by they I mean fcc and their I mean DIRECTV. They can also charge them millions or more in fines and impose other things. Just ask dish how it went when they where not doing dns right...

And you do realize how locals work right? The networks license out their programming to one channel per market, and they agree not to license it out to anyone else as well, in addition to the rules... the point is to maximize their profits so the networks can make the most money. If they undercut how much money the station can make then they can’t charge as much to the local to carry the programming.. and networks can’t make additional money on dns channels since they wouldn’t be able to monetize the additional people outside the home market for advertising.

 

Spoken by someone I assume gets local channels?

 

If they got rid of the ability to have dns then DIRECTV would be forced to launch (market forces mind you) the remaining local markets they are missing or they couldn’t compete with dish etc. they have the physical ability to do it now, but haven’t felt any market pressure too, and one could argue that has to do with being able to offer dns feeds.

 

Thanks for making my point in greater detail To sum up, my point that is, I don't have a problem with billion dollar corporations screwing the end user/consumer so to maximize their profit. I have a problem with the government enabling the behavior.

This all started for me in the analog days. I grew up in the northern most town to receive the L.A. feed of California's CATV system. My dearly departed aunt who lived 20 miles north of us never got that (she was on the S.F. feed) and would always be confused by us getting different tv than her.

So I had double affiliates for the three main networks. Without that I never would have heard Connie Chung say "****" on the air, so it's useful (the only people who would have seen/heard it were those with local affiliates who were watching the L.A. channel.) Then the FCC intervened. I've been pissed about it for 40 years now.

 

Say what? If you can get multiple markets over the air that hasn’t changed.. you can still get it.. and you had cable in 1977? In the middle of California? Interesting...

And even if that rule wasn’t in place, networks wouldn’t sell their stuff to multiple stations in one market. The only people on the planet that would have the capacity to offer all locals everywhere is, no one... satellite never could do that.

You are really arguing for something that could never happen logistically anyway.. there’s a few slivers of space here and the that can get more than one market, but that’s not the norm... the government isn’t allowing or enabling anything really, the laws on markets are useless anyway really because the stations wouldn’t change much.

Actually the only thing the laws really make still happen is more local news. You’d be likely to see one channel from one place broadcast in all towns without any local news for most if it where not these rules... it’d be like turning local channels into a national channel...