From: "Dr.Dish" <email@example.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 22:36:08 +0100
From firstname.lastname@example.org Sun Nov 3 16: 37:56 1996
At 21:47 03.11.1996 +0200, you wrote:
>At 13.37 3.11.1996 +0100, you wrote:
>Dear Dr. Dish,
>The modified semi-British SCT versions of the Chaparral Monterey receivers
>are not outdated. Their IF range is just as wide as you need to watch all the
>channels there are, and the threshold extension IS adjustable.
>I know this because I have an SCT Monterey Classic 1000.
>I used to have an Echostar SR-8700 which got pretty hot while operating,
>its power supply after a few months, and generally was not as good as my
>present SCT Monterey.
>And to an SCT Monterey, one can also get a built-in sync inserter and both
>an internal MAC-decoder AND an internal Videocrypt decoder (not either/or).
>I've also heard that facilities for antenna elevation control are on the
>way as an update.
>And the SCT Monterey software is much better than that of the Echostar I used
>to have, at least.
>I think you perhaps meant that the original US versions of Monterey
>receivers are outdated?
>The only real drawback of the SCT Monterey models is their high price.
>As you wrote, there is no such thing as an ultimate receiver, but to me,
>the Monterey is the best I have seen.
Is Suomi Steve Chilver Country? Again, the SCT is not available in all
countries and no fast service can´t provided by Shilver. The price is
terrible high. Videocrypt AND Mac-decoder can be inserted in the LT8700 and
the Drake ESR2000XT. The Drake also controls satellites in inclined orbit.
As a serial receiver the Monterey is outdated and from Jan Jose /California
no good news is heard.
In our editorial offices of TELE-satellite we do exetensive testing and I
agree with you about the performance of the SCT, but please think about a
Dr.Dish (Christian Mass)
Editor of TELE-satellite magazine
Producer of drdish@tv, Europe´s first satellite info-channel
[Other mailing list archives]