Aerial right way up, no better
 

You may remember my recent query about an aerial that had appeared to
deteriorate. Well I have 'fixed' everything about it, it has all F
connectors (where there are any) on the way down, it has better co-ax
for the couple of bits that weren't good quality, it's now the right
way up and I have cleaned up the balun and tied the downlead to the
mast etc.

..... and it has made very little difference at all. In fact the
performance on ITV (channel 56) has improved quite a bit, but the
performance on BBC1, BBC2 etc. (channel 49) is now absolute crap.

I get the feeling my aerial must be sitting in an area full of
reflections, second path, etc., etc.

I found that sticking a rubbish 'contract' aerial out of a window
lower than the 'proper' aerial gave better BBC1 reception.

I suspect that the recent significant deterioration may be due to new
leaves growing and that the better BBC1 reception lower down may just
be 'looking through' less leafy areas.


AAaaaarrrrgggghhhhh!!!!

--
Chris Green

Aerial right way up, no better
 

wrote in message
...
You may remember my recent query about an aerial that had appeared to
deteriorate. Well I have 'fixed' everything about it, it has all F
connectors (where there are any) on the way down, it has better co-ax
for the couple of bits that weren't good quality, it's now the right
way up and I have cleaned up the balun and tied the downlead to the
mast etc.

.... and it has made very little difference at all. In fact the
performance on ITV (channel 56) has improved quite a bit, but the
performance on BBC1, BBC2 etc. (channel 49) is now absolute crap.

I get the feeling my aerial must be sitting in an area full of
reflections, second path, etc., etc.

I found that sticking a rubbish 'contract' aerial out of a window
lower than the 'proper' aerial gave better BBC1 reception.

I suspect that the recent significant deterioration may be due to new
leaves growing and that the better BBC1 reception lower down may just
be 'looking through' less leafy areas.


AAaaaarrrrgggghhhhh!!!!

--
Chris Green

It's probably been said already, but the location and height plays such a
big role in obtaining good reception through trees. You'd be much better off
getting someone in with proper test equipment, or hire a meter if you want
to have a go yourself. Otherwise you're just flying blind.

Aerial right way up, no better
 

In article , -
GB-Carpy scribeth thus

wrote in message
. ..
You may remember my recent query about an aerial that had appeared to
deteriorate. Well I have 'fixed' everything about it, it has all F
connectors (where there are any) on the way down, it has better co-ax
for the couple of bits that weren't good quality, it's now the right
way up and I have cleaned up the balun and tied the downlead to the
mast etc.

.... and it has made very little difference at all. In fact the
performance on ITV (channel 56) has improved quite a bit, but the
performance on BBC1, BBC2 etc. (channel 49) is now absolute crap.

I get the feeling my aerial must be sitting in an area full of
reflections, second path, etc., etc.

I found that sticking a rubbish 'contract' aerial out of a window
lower than the 'proper' aerial gave better BBC1 reception.

I suspect that the recent significant deterioration may be due to new
leaves growing and that the better BBC1 reception lower down may just
be 'looking through' less leafy areas.


AAaaaarrrrgggghhhhh!!!!

--
Chris Green

It's probably been said already, but the location and height plays such a
big role in obtaining good reception through trees. You'd be much better off
getting someone in with proper test equipment, or hire a meter if you want
to have a go yourself. Otherwise you're just flying blind.



Why don't you just go freesat?..
--
Tony Sayer

Aerial right way up, no better
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , -
GB-Carpy scribeth thus

wrote in message
.. .
You may remember my recent query about an aerial that had appeared to
deteriorate. Well I have 'fixed' everything about it, it has all F
connectors (where there are any) on the way down, it has better co-ax
for the couple of bits that weren't good quality, it's now the right
way up and I have cleaned up the balun and tied the downlead to the
mast etc.

.... and it has made very little difference at all. In fact the
performance on ITV (channel 56) has improved quite a bit, but the
performance on BBC1, BBC2 etc. (channel 49) is now absolute crap.

I get the feeling my aerial must be sitting in an area full of
reflections, second path, etc., etc.

I found that sticking a rubbish 'contract' aerial out of a window
lower than the 'proper' aerial gave better BBC1 reception.

I suspect that the recent significant deterioration may be due to new
leaves growing and that the better BBC1 reception lower down may just
be 'looking through' less leafy areas.


AAaaaarrrrgggghhhhh!!!!

--
Chris Green

It's probably been said already, but the location and height plays such a
big role in obtaining good reception through trees. You'd be much better
off
getting someone in with proper test equipment, or hire a meter if you want
to have a go yourself. Otherwise you're just flying blind.



Why don't you just go freesat?..
--
Tony Sayer



I think he said he'd made an investment in Freeview equipment didn't he?

Otherwise Freesat would be a good choice....

Aerial right way up, no better
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , -
GB-Carpy scribeth thus

wrote in message
.. .
You may remember my recent query about an aerial that had appeared to
deteriorate. Well I have 'fixed' everything about it, it has all F
connectors (where there are any) on the way down, it has better co-ax
for the couple of bits that weren't good quality, it's now the right
way up and I have cleaned up the balun and tied the downlead to the
mast etc.

.... and it has made very little difference at all. In fact the
performance on ITV (channel 56) has improved quite a bit, but the
performance on BBC1, BBC2 etc. (channel 49) is now absolute crap.

I get the feeling my aerial must be sitting in an area full of
reflections, second path, etc., etc.

I found that sticking a rubbish 'contract' aerial out of a window
lower than the 'proper' aerial gave better BBC1 reception.

I suspect that the recent significant deterioration may be due to new
leaves growing and that the better BBC1 reception lower down may just
be 'looking through' less leafy areas.


AAaaaarrrrgggghhhhh!!!!

--
Chris Green

It's probably been said already, but the location and height plays such a
big role in obtaining good reception through trees. You'd be much better
off
getting someone in with proper test equipment, or hire a meter if you want
to have a go yourself. Otherwise you're just flying blind.



Why don't you just go freesat?..
--
Tony Sayer

Perhaps he too has more than one TV and recorder?

I'm a fan of satellite, but for the foreseeable future they'll have to be an
aerial on this house.

Aerial right way up, no better
 

wrote in message
...
You may remember my recent query about an aerial that had appeared to
deteriorate. Well I have 'fixed' everything about it, it has all F
connectors (where there are any) on the way down, it has better co-ax
for the couple of bits that weren't good quality, it's now the right
way up and I have cleaned up the balun and tied the downlead to the
mast etc.

.... and it has made very little difference at all. In fact the
performance on ITV (channel 56) has improved quite a bit, but the
performance on BBC1, BBC2 etc. (channel 49) is now absolute crap.

I get the feeling my aerial must be sitting in an area full of
reflections, second path, etc., etc.

I found that sticking a rubbish 'contract' aerial out of a window
lower than the 'proper' aerial gave better BBC1 reception.

I suspect that the recent significant deterioration may be due to new
leaves growing and that the better BBC1 reception lower down may just
be 'looking through' less leafy areas.

All this is quite normal when there are trees in the way. Anyone with an
analyser and half a brain could find the best location for the aerial for
you in no time.

Bill

Aerial right way up, no better
 

In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus

wrote in message
. ..
You may remember my recent query about an aerial that had appeared to
deteriorate. Well I have 'fixed' everything about it, it has all F
connectors (where there are any) on the way down, it has better co-ax
for the couple of bits that weren't good quality, it's now the right
way up and I have cleaned up the balun and tied the downlead to the
mast etc.

.... and it has made very little difference at all. In fact the
performance on ITV (channel 56) has improved quite a bit, but the
performance on BBC1, BBC2 etc. (channel 49) is now absolute crap.

I get the feeling my aerial must be sitting in an area full of
reflections, second path, etc., etc.

I found that sticking a rubbish 'contract' aerial out of a window
lower than the 'proper' aerial gave better BBC1 reception.

I suspect that the recent significant deterioration may be due to new
leaves growing and that the better BBC1 reception lower down may just
be 'looking through' less leafy areas.

All this is quite normal when there are trees in the way. Anyone with an
analyser and half a brain could find the best location for the aerial for
you in no time.

Bill



Indeed.. except that might be where the aerial can't readily go!...
--
Tony Sayer

Aerial right way up, no better
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Bill Wright
scribeth thus
All this is quite normal when there are trees in the way. Anyone with an
analyser and half a brain could find the best location for the aerial for
you in no time.

Bill



Indeed.. except that might be where the aerial can't readily go!...

The 'through the roof' mounting method can save the day. See
http://www.wrightsaerials.tv/ourwork...ckets.htm#img1

Bill

Aerial right way up, no better
 

Bill Wright wrote:

wrote in message
...
You may remember my recent query about an aerial that had appeared to
deteriorate. Well I have 'fixed' everything about it, it has all F
connectors (where there are any) on the way down, it has better co-ax
for the couple of bits that weren't good quality, it's now the right
way up and I have cleaned up the balun and tied the downlead to the
mast etc.

.... and it has made very little difference at all. In fact the
performance on ITV (channel 56) has improved quite a bit, but the
performance on BBC1, BBC2 etc. (channel 49) is now absolute crap.

I get the feeling my aerial must be sitting in an area full of
reflections, second path, etc., etc.

I found that sticking a rubbish 'contract' aerial out of a window
lower than the 'proper' aerial gave better BBC1 reception.

I suspect that the recent significant deterioration may be due to new
leaves growing and that the better BBC1 reception lower down may just
be 'looking through' less leafy areas.

All this is quite normal when there are trees in the way. Anyone with an
analyser and half a brain could find the best location for the aerial for
you in no time.

See my long follow-up to my original posting. It didn't need a signal
analyser it needed a bit of thinking and a realisation that the
original aerial was pointing in the wrong direction.

Actually *some* STBs do give enough diagnostics to use as a cheap
signal strength meter at least. I used a Philips STB which gives bar
graphs of signal strength and quality, it refreshed frequently enough
to be usable though obviously not as nice as an analogue meter. Set
up so the TV screen can be seen from where you are playing with the
aerial and with the remote to change channels as necessary it worked
quite well.

Once I'd twigged that our location really *isn't* marginal it all
became a lot easier! :-)

--
Chris Green

Aerial right way up, no better
 

wrote in message
...
Bill Wright wrote:

wrote in message
...
You may remember my recent query about an aerial that had appeared to
deteriorate. Well I have 'fixed' everything about it, it has all F
connectors (where there are any) on the way down, it has better co-ax
for the couple of bits that weren't good quality, it's now the right
way up and I have cleaned up the balun and tied the downlead to the
mast etc.

.... and it has made very little difference at all. In fact the
performance on ITV (channel 56) has improved quite a bit, but the
performance on BBC1, BBC2 etc. (channel 49) is now absolute crap.

I get the feeling my aerial must be sitting in an area full of
reflections, second path, etc., etc.

I found that sticking a rubbish 'contract' aerial out of a window
lower than the 'proper' aerial gave better BBC1 reception.

I suspect that the recent significant deterioration may be due to new
leaves growing and that the better BBC1 reception lower down may just
be 'looking through' less leafy areas.

All this is quite normal when there are trees in the way. Anyone with an
analyser and half a brain could find the best location for the aerial for
you in no time.

See my long follow-up to my original posting. It didn't need a signal
analyser it needed a bit of thinking and a realisation that the
original aerial was pointing in the wrong direction.

Actually *some* STBs do give enough diagnostics to use as a cheap
signal strength meter at least. I used a Philips STB which gives bar
graphs of signal strength and quality, it refreshed frequently enough
to be usable though obviously not as nice as an analogue meter. Set
up so the TV screen can be seen from where you are playing with the
aerial and with the remote to change channels as necessary it worked
quite well.

Once I'd twigged that our location really *isn't* marginal it all
became a lot easier! :-)

--
Chris Green

Although don't forget you need to check reception of every mux, not just the
one which is indicated on the STB signal bar.

Aerial right way up, no better
 

wrote in message
...
Bill Wright wrote:
See my long follow-up to my original posting. It didn't need a signal
analyser it needed a bit of thinking and a realisation that the
original aerial was pointing in the wrong direction.

Not long ago I was asked to have a look at a problem where reception had
'always been terrible. It's the power station chimneys, they block the
signal.' In fact the signal came from Emley Moor, which was at least 10deg
to one side of the power station, and when I replaced the large high gain
Group A aerial for a much smaller Group B one (!) reception became perfect.

Bill

Aerial right way up, no better
 

"-GB-Carpy" wrote:

Actually *some* STBs do give enough diagnostics to use as a cheap
signal strength meter at least. I used a Philips STB which gives bar
graphs of signal strength and quality, it refreshed frequently enough
to be usable though obviously not as nice as an analogue meter. Set
up so the TV screen can be seen from where you are playing with the
aerial and with the remote to change channels as necessary it worked
quite well.

Once I'd twigged that our location really *isn't* marginal it all
became a lot easier! :-)

--
Chris Green

Although don't forget you need to check reception of every mux, not just the
one which is indicated on the STB signal bar.

Oh yes, I checked all the MUXs, they now do much as one would expect
in terms of signal versus frequency whereas before (when presumably I
was receiving a refracted/reflected signal) their strength had very
little relationship to their frequency.

--
Chris Green

Aerial right way up, no better
 

On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 11:56:11 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
Bill Wright wrote:
See my long follow-up to my original posting. It didn't need a signal
analyser it needed a bit of thinking and a realisation that the
original aerial was pointing in the wrong direction.

Not long ago I was asked to have a look at a problem where reception had
'always been terrible. It's the power station chimneys, they block the
signal.' In fact the signal came from Emley Moor, which was at least 10deg
to one side of the power station, and when I replaced the large high gain
Group A aerial for a much smaller Group B one (!) reception became perfect.

Bill


So someone installed a group A aerial for Emley? They should bring
back the death penalty for that! Incorrect aerial usage = instant
death. That should shake up the aerial erectors market a bit :-)

Marky P.

Aerial right way up, no better
 

Marky P wrote:
On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 11:56:11 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
Bill Wright wrote:
See my long follow-up to my original posting. It didn't need a
signal analyser it needed a bit of thinking and a realisation that
the original aerial was pointing in the wrong direction.

Not long ago I was asked to have a look at a problem where reception
had 'always been terrible. It's the power station chimneys, they
block the signal.' In fact the signal came from Emley Moor, which
was at least 10deg to one side of the power station, and when I
replaced the large high gain Group A aerial for a much smaller Group
B one (!) reception became perfect.

Bill


So someone installed a group A aerial for Emley? They should bring
back the death penalty for that! Incorrect aerial usage = instant
death. That should shake up the aerial erectors market a bit :-)

Marky P.

I think the death penalty is a bit harsh, maybe life in prison.
--
^..^ This is Kitty. Copy and paste Kitty into your signature to help
her wipe out Bunny's world domination.

Aerial right way up, no better
 

Adrian wrote:
Marky P wrote:
So someone installed a group A aerial for Emley? They should bring
back the death penalty for that! Incorrect aerial usage = instant
death. That should shake up the aerial erectors market a bit :-)

I think the death penalty is a bit harsh, maybe life in prison.

Where they'll likely have the benefit of TV system installed by
you-know-who. Provided they learn from that how it should be done, of
course!

André Coutanche

Aerial right way up, no better
 

"Marky P" wrote in message
...
So someone installed a group A aerial for Emley? They should bring
back the death penalty for that! Incorrect aerial usage = instant
death. That should shake up the aerial erectors market a bit :-)

I think the installer had assumed that he'd have to use Belmont. Apparently
there's been a session of 'trying it the other way'. Having failed with
Belmont he'd just swung it round to Emley and buggered off.

Bill