The only problem I am having with Tablo is the throughput disconnect between Tablo @1080 60fs and Roku 3. In order to avoid the mind-numbing “loading… please wait” messages, I have switched the Tablo to 720p, but the picture quality is not very nice on our large-screen TVs. I am trying to decide whether to be patient a little while longer or just bit the bullet and get a FireTV box to interface with the Tablo.
My husband – who is not tech-savvy and has less patience with crappy picture quality than I do – will be returning from a business trip soon, and I’d like to be able to have a solution by the time he returns.
Thoughts? Experiences with the new FireTV as interface for Tablo? Thanks!!
I haven’t used Tablo on a FireTV, but I did switch from Roku 3 to Android TV and it is a significantly better experience in terms of loading and buffering. Because FireTV is built on Android, the app on FireTV and Android TV are almost identical (at least from my understanding). However, it seems like the FireTV app has more bugs compared to the Android TV app. However, you should still have a better buffering/loading experience compared to the Roku 3.
I bought the FireTV about a month ago due to the Roku reboot issues. I’m able to play 1080 through all my devices (1 wired Roku, 2 wifi Rokus, and 1 wired FireTV) but live TV on the FireTV is jittery, smooth on the Rokus. So the FireTV may not fix your problem and may be a network issue.
Thank you for your thoughts, TabloTom. I have resolved all network issues. I believe that the persisting “loading … please wait” is related to the 2.2.2 firmware issue which is well documented on this forum.
Interesting. I won’t say it’s impossible that I have misdiagnosed the situation, since I’m learning this as I go.
At the 720p setting (the standard one, not Roku/Chromecast), my Roku is receiving from the Tablo 1.5 Mbps on a 13.0 Mbps network (or 15.1 Mbps, depending on what moment I check). (Tablo is wired, Roku is wireless but less than 20 feet from network booster.) I would think that the 13.0+ Mbps network is fast enough to handle Tablo at 1080 60fps, so I have concluded that the Roku is not able to process the 60fps. (Roku 3 4200X firmware 6.2 build 3672)
Would you draw a different conclusion?
Roku is set to “automatic” bitrate. What else should I be checking?
(Had to go hunt up a longish ethernet cable.) Done. Performance wired and wireless was almost the same – 16 Mbps with the wire, and up to 15.1 Mbps wireless. Either way, the Roku said it was receiving 1.5 Mbps.
And here’s the really weird part – I reset the Tablo to 1080p, power-cycled it, power-cycled the Roku, and ran both wired and wireless at 1080p. The Roku still said it was receiving 1.5 Mbps @16 to 13 Mbps (or as low as 10 Mbps wireless)… but no “loading please wait” messages either wired or wireless! What magic is this?! Two weeks ago Live TV and anything recorded at 1080p was simply unwatchable. NOTHING has changed in my setup other than resetting the Tablo to 720p. Possibly daytime TV is not as ‘rich’ as evening TV? We deleted the old recordings at 1080p after we watched them on the labptops, so I can’t test with those.
I guess. I don’t quite trust it. Any clue why the Roku is receiving only 1.5 Mbps?
I set the Roku to select an automatic bitrate. The Tablo was set to 720p but is now set to 1080.
Roku is set for 1080p resolution. It was previously set to 720p. Are you saying that could have created a conflict if the Tablo was sending 1080 and Roku set to 720?
At either resolution setting, the Roku says that it is receiving at 1.5 Mbps bitrate. Earlier you had said that the 720p setting (presumably the Tablo setting) is encoded at about 5 Mpbs, so I am wondering why the Roku isn’t receiving at that bitrate, and why what the Roku reports it is receiving did not change when I reset the Tablo to 1080.
I’m happy that it seems to be working, but I would trust it more if I understood it. Thanks!
He/she is likely using a secret menu in the Roku, which for years now has not been accurate at reflecting the wireless throughput nor the stream bitrate.
The “Display type” setting on the Roku is separate from the Tablo recording quality setting. I would leave this as “1080p HDTV” regardless of the recording quality setting you use on Tablo.
The 1080p recording setting on the 2.2.2 firmware records 1080i 30 fps source content as 1080p 30 fps h.264 video, which the Roku 3 has no problem playing. The 1080p recording setting on the 2.2.2 firmware records 720p 60 fps source content as 720p 60 fps h.264 video, which SOME Roku 3’s have problems playing which results in the “loading… please wait” messages.
The solution for this until Tablo Support releases the 2.2.5 firmware is to drop down to the 720p recording setting. Or you can contact Tablo directly and have them release the beta to you for the 2.2.5 firmware. The new recording quality you will want is the ‘1080p 8 Mbps’ setting which does not record in 60 fps.
Yes, “she” is using the secret menu on the Roku, but I did not realize that it did not give accurate results. That’s disappointing.
I had dropped down to the 720p recording setting on the Tablo, but I was very unhappy with the video/picture quality at that setting. I am anxiously awaiting the release of 2.2.5, but I really don’t have time or expertise to be a beta tester. So the point of my original post was to see if I could get a better Tablo experience sooner by moving off of the Roku interface onto the FireTV (or maybe the new Apple TV) interface.
The “loading … please wait” message seems to be gone from the Roku 3 setup in the TV room. I’ll see how it does with a football game this weekend. The Roku stick on the bedroom setup is still not handling input well, and I still get the “loading … please wait” message there, but I rather expected that. Now that I think on it, getting a FireTV or AppleTV to replace the Roku stick may be a good way to compare Roku to something else. On the other hand, I’m not sure the hubster is going to like having to figure out a different menu structure on a new device. It warrants more thinking.
Thank you all for your input. It is very much appreciated!
I would expect a live 2.2.5 within the next week or two but that’s just pure speculation on my part.