The Thor Petit RF Modulator is a solid entry-level HDMI→RF digital modulator, though. but when we stack it against the more expensive/more capable models from Thor Broadcast, we’ll show you where the compromises have been made. Knowing what those compromises are, you’ll be able to choose the right RF modulator for your particulkar purpose.
Here’s a breakdown of how the PETIT compares to the premium models — where it excels, where it falls short, and whether it’s the right fit.
Where the PETIT shines
- Input/format flexibility: The PETIT supports HDMI input, is HDCP compliant (so you can feed from standard HDMI sources) and supports output modulation standards like QAM, ATSC, DVB-T, ISDB-T.
- Support for up to 1080p input resolution: For many installs (hotel rooms, small commercial sites) 1080p is plenty.
- Compact, cost-effective: It offers HDMI→RF conversion in a small footprint, making it ideal when you only need a single channel or a few channels and don’t want to invest in a big rack. Price is ~US$469 (or thereabouts) for the PETIT.
- Remote network management: The PETIT supports 10/100 Ethernet NMS port for control/setup/monitoring via web GUI. That’s a plus in its class.
So if you have a simple need — one HDMI source → coax RF channel, small building, minimal infrastructure — the PETIT is very viable.
Where the PETIT compromises (compared to higher-end models)
When you move to the more expensive Thor models, you’ll see features and robustness you won’t get with the PETIT (or get in reduced form). Here are the major differences:
- Channel count & scalability
- The PETIT is essentially a single-channel unit (one HDMI in, one RF modulated output channel). You’ll need one unit per source. For large installations that means many units, more rack space, more power, more complexity.
- In contrast, higher-end Thor models (e.g., the 1-4 HDMI, 4-8 HDMI models, 8 HDMI/SDI models) offer multiple HDMI inputs in one chassis, multi-channel modulation, often shared management, and are rack-designed.
- Feature richness (outputs, integration, low latency, etc.)
- The PETIT uses MPEG-2 encoding for video (per spec sheet) with audio options like AC3/AAC/MPEG1 Layer2.
- Higher-end models may offer broader codec support (H.264, maybe even HEVC/4K depending on model), ASI/IP outputs, closed‐caption handling, low-latency modes, enhanced RF options. For example, the “Thunder” series mentions 1-8 HDMI + CVBS, low latency ~50-100 ms mode.
- The PETIT’s output resolution/fps is more limited: some specs show “output up to 1080p30” for certain config.
- Robustness & head-end features
- For large installations (hotels, campuses, commercial AV), you’ll want features like multi-program multiplexing, advanced RF leveling/equalization, ASI/IP outputs (for IPTV or hybrid RF/IP distribution), rack-mount design, redundant power options, higher quality management tools. These are more typical of the higher-end Thor gear.
- The PETIT is good for “point-solution” but is less tailored for large head-end environments where switching, combiners, lots of channels, heavy load, redundancy matter.
- Price vs cost per channel & infrastructure
- On a per-channel basis in a large setup, the higher-end models may offer better economies (e.g., 8-channel unit vs eight single-PETIT units).
- Also: when you scale up, costs for power, rack space, cooling, cable runs, management overhead all increase, so picking a more integrated solution often saves with scale.
- Latency and performance in motion heavy content
- While the PETIT is fine for signage, low-motion source, etc., for live events, camera feeds, switcher output, you may notice issues if encoding/decoding latency or compression artefacts are less optimized. Some comments on Thor gear in the field note latency and equalization limitations (see reddit threads)
So when should you choose the PETIT vs when should you go for the bigger model?
Pick the PETIT when:
- You only need 1 (or maybe very few) HDMI sources converted to RF, so scalability isn’t a major concern.
- Budget is constrained and you want “good enough” rather than “enterprise head-end.”
- The rest of your infrastructure is modest (a few TVs, one room, one building) and you don’t need ASI/IP output or heavy management.
- You’re okay with MPEG-2 encoding and maybe not the absolute lowest latency or highest feature set.
- You want a compact installation with minimal rack footprint.
Go for a higher-end Thor model when:
- You need multiple HDMI inputs/channels (4, 8, more) in one box.
- You want advanced features: IP/ASI output, multiplexing, closed captioning, robust remote management, low latency.
- You have a large building/campus/venue or expect to scale.
- You want better “head-end grade” reliability, ease of maintenance, centralized management, rack mount.
- Budget allows more investment and you’ll benefit from economies of scale.
Here’s a Side-By-Side Comparison of the Thor Petit RF Modulator vs Higher-End Thor RF Modulators
| Feature | H-HDMI-RF-PETIT (single-channel) | Multi-Channel Model (e.g., 1-4 or 4-8 HDMI Digital RF Encoder) |
|---|---|---|
| Product Name | H-HDMI-RF-PETIT – single HDMI input to RF modulator. | Example: “1-4 or 8 HDMI Digital RF Encoder Modulator – Full HD up to 1080p” |
| Number of HDMI Inputs / Channels | 1 HDMI input (one program) | Models support 1, 4, 8 HDMI inputs (depending on model) |
| Supported Video Resolutions / Input | Up to 1080p (720p, 1080i, 1080p) supported. | Up to 1080p/60 input supported. For example, spec list shows “1080p/60” etc. |
| Encoding / Codec | MPEG-2 video encoding. AC3 audio. | More advanced models may support MPEG-2 or H.264 video encoding (selectable) in some versions. |
| RF Output Standards / Modulation Flexibility | RF output supports QAM, ATSC, DVB-T, ISDB-T in one device. RF channel agile across ~57-1000 MHz/channel 2-135. | Similar standards (QAM, ATSC, DVB-T, ISDB-T) supported; multi-channel model offers each program on separate frequency. |
| RF Output Power / Level | RF output power ~ +24 dBmV (stated) for PETIT. | Multi-channel model spec lists RF output level “-35 dBm, 1 dB step” in sample spec sheet (but note head-end gear may have more flexible or higher power options) |
| Network Management / Control | 10/100 Ethernet NMS port for control/setup/monitoring. | Also network control. Some multi-channel models have more advanced features (IP/ASI outputs, multiplexing, etc) |
| Latency / Performance | Standard (no special low-latency claim beyond “HD up to 1080p”) | Some multi-channel models list “Low Latency (50~100 ms)” in specs for specific model versions. |
| Scalability / Density | Good for one channel only; to scale you’d need multiple units | Built to scale — multiple HDMI inputs in one chassis, better density and efficiency for larger installs |
| Use-Case Fit | Single HDMI source to coax RF for simple install | Multi-source, multi-channel deployment, larger head-end or multi-room/coax network |
| Cost / Value | Lower cost (~US$469 as listed) | Higher cost (multi-channel rack units cost significantly more) |
HDMI Guy Sez:
If you imagine your distribution system as a sound system: the PETIT is like a great‐quality stereo amplifier for one zone; the more expensive Thor models are like a full multi-zone professional audio mixer + power amp rack for the concert hall. Both make sound, but one is built for “lots of zones, flexibility, reliability” whereas the other is built for “one zone, simple install, lower cost.”
So yes — the PETIT is good and does a lot for the cost. But it doesn’t have all the bells, whistles, redundancy or scalability of the higher-end models. If your needs are modest, go PETIT. If you’re planning for growth or “big install,” invest in the bigger box.
