Newbie questions on using splitters for coax cables...

On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 05:56:07 +0000, Alan wrote:

In article "Jim Wilkins"
writes:

At the digital transition the government took away the lowest VHF and
highest UHF channel frequencies to sell for other uses.

Actually, they didn't take away the lowest VHF channels, though their
use is uncommon nowdays.


Once upon a time TVs had a tuner (dial) for the original VHF channels
2-13, with government-required click stops so people wouldn't have to
fine-tune them (much), and a separate tuner (dial) for the newer UHF
channels 14-83 that tuned continuously like a radio.

As I recall, the click stops were required on UHF. VHF had them from
the way back days because that was how one built frequency stable tuners
then.

Early UHF tuned like a radio dial, and later ones had discrete
channels.


Alan

Once upon a time TV's didn't have uhf tuners at all. The vhf tuners
varied, with some having stops and an outer ring to fine tune, and some
had no stops at all. I had both styles in my earlier years.The first TV I
remember (early 1950's RCA Victor), had click tuner with outer ring. In
the late 60's or possibly early 70's I had an Emerson 4" BW portable with
non click tuner that was a pita to tune because of the small dial. I had
the emerson until a few years ago when I gave it away. It was still
working some 30 years after purchase.

On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 21:16:59 -0700, Ant wrote:

Sorry. I am still a newbie with these TV things.

Hey, we're all here to learn! And to teach.

BTW, I do *much* more of the former in these NGs :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 21:47:18 -0700, Ant wrote:

On 7/21/2012 8:27 PM PT, Gene E. Bloch typed:

Sorry, I couldn't find one with five ports, as Ant would describe it.
Maybe there aren't any :-)

Sorry, I meant to say four ports (outputs for tuners) which I said
incorrectly. I said five because it was four outputs + 1 input
(antenna). I am still a newbie with this TV stuff.

Yes, I posted about this above and you replied in a nice friendly manner
:-)

Don't worry about it, it's all part of the learning process.

Anyway, in a way, I was only kidding in the previous post - but also,
because of the trend of the discussion, it actually seemed to be a
clearer way to refer to the configuration.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 07:32:54 -0400, Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Gene E. Bloch" wrote in message
...
...
As a physicist with a lifelong interest in radio (inter alia) I
don't
find your discussion at all helpful in this instance.
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Fine, I'll stop wasting my time.

jsw

And mine. Thank you.

I posted my remarks in spite of having a pretty clear idea how you might
respond; you didn't disappoint.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 08:25:23 -0400, TJ wrote:

On 07/21/2012 10:06 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:


Sorry if I don't have a better explanation in common, intuitive terms
but electrical resonant phenomena don't relate to everyday experience.

jsw


Hey, what do I know? I'm just a simple farmer - with a degree in
electrical engineering.

TJ

I have a friend X who referred to farmers as bumpkins (or some equally
flattering term) in front of my good friend Y, whose family is a bunch
of those bumpkins - *very smart* ones.

We haven't forgotten X's remarks, to her detriment...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 21:17:38 -0700, Ant wrote:

On 7/21/2012 1:41 PM PT, Jim Wilkins typed:

...In that photo., I wrote down its texts (RadioShack, 4 sets
(output ports); UHF, VHF, and FM; hybrid splitter combiner, and
made
in China) that I saw on it. It did not give any details like that
old RMS three ports splitter I found in my goodies bag.

If the ports are "UHF", "VHF" and "FM" then it's not the kind of
splitter you want, it's meant to combine separate UHF, VHF and FM
antenna sections which receive different frequency bands.

Well, that is what the engraved letters said on the center piece
with the ports that I showed in the blurry photo. It doesn't specify
if all ports are all three or not though.

If it is not the right splitter, then I am surprised it even gets
anything through the antenna to three TVs/tuners (one tuner is weak
with lots of drops on some channels like KTTV's 11.x channels [VHF]
though) at original home in my room with short coax cables)! I
thought they were the same for cable, satellite, and OTA video feeds
especially when they mention UHF and VHF!

So, what splitters are we supposed to get? Just for OTA only?

Maybe this will help:
http://www.howstuffworks.com/radio-spectrum.htm

"FM", "VHF" and "UHF" are bands of TV and radio frequencies. They need
antennas of different physical sizes to match their wavelengths, which
decrease as the frequency rises. VHF is the old analog channels 2-13,
or the OTA digital 7-13. UHF is all the higher TV channels, analog and
digital.

At the digital transition the government took away the lowest VHF and
highest UHF channel frequencies to sell for other uses. To avoid
consumer confusion stations pretend to use their old analog channel
number while they may actually transmit on a different frequency that
your TV finds by auto-scanning. Channels 2 through 6 are definitely on
higher frequencies. My local channel 9 went to a higher one for the
digital signal during the transition, then reverted to physical
channel 9 after they removed the analog transmitter.

Once upon a time TVs had a tuner (dial) for the original VHF channels
2-13, with government-required click stops so people wouldn't have to
fine-tune them (much), and a separate tuner (dial) for the newer UHF
channels 14-83 that tuned continuously like a radio.

The combiner you have would mix the signals from the large VHF and
separate, much smaller UHF antennas onto a single downlead, and a
second one behind the TV separated them back into connections for the
VHF tuner, the UHF tuner, and a lead to your FM radio which VHF
antennas receive. That's why it is called a combiner/splitter, it can
be used on either end.

Does that mean that's bad for OTA TV and the wrong type of splitter?

Not at all. I have the impression that Mr Wilkins is a bit confused on
this issue, and some others in this thread seem to agree.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 7/22/2012 4:04 PM PT, Gene E. Bloch typed:

On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 21:16:59 -0700, Ant wrote:

Sorry. I am still a newbie with these TV things.

Hey, we're all here to learn! And to teach.

Yep. I am learning a lot for sure even if it is confusing as heck! :O


BTW, I do *much* more of the former in these NGs :-)

A former newbie? When?
--
"Better (to be) an ant's head than a lion's tail." --Armenian and Maltese
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 7/22/2012 4:11 PM PT, Gene E. Bloch typed:

Sorry, I couldn't find one with five ports, as Ant would describe it.
Maybe there aren't any :-)

Sorry, I meant to say four ports (outputs for tuners) which I said
incorrectly. I said five because it was four outputs + 1 input
(antenna). I am still a newbie with this TV stuff.

Yes, I posted about this above and you replied in a nice friendly manner
:-)

Don't worry about it, it's all part of the learning process.

Anyway, in a way, I was only kidding in the previous post - but also,
because of the trend of the discussion, it actually seemed to be a
clearer way to refer to the configuration.

I did mention (4 output ports + 1 input port) so hopefully that made
sense when I said five ports splitter.
--
"Remember, ants are only waiting for you to die..." --unknown
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On 7/22/2012 4:16 PM PT, Gene E. Bloch typed:

I have a friend X who referred to farmers as bumpkins (or some equally
flattering term) in front of my good friend Y, whose family is a bunch
of those bumpkins - *very smart* ones.

Heh. I thought that was related to pumpkins!
--
"A marvelous creature. A model of specialization... Who else could suck
an ant up his nose and enjoy it?" --About anteaters, "B.C." strip by
Johnny Hart
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.

On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 16:25:45 -0700, Ant wrote:

On 7/22/2012 4:11 PM PT, Gene E. Bloch typed:

Sorry, I couldn't find one with five ports, as Ant would describe it.
Maybe there aren't any :-)

Sorry, I meant to say four ports (outputs for tuners) which I said
incorrectly. I said five because it was four outputs + 1 input
(antenna). I am still a newbie with this TV stuff.

Yes, I posted about this above and you replied in a nice friendly manner
:-)

Don't worry about it, it's all part of the learning process.

Anyway, in a way, I was only kidding in the previous post - but also,
because of the trend of the discussion, it actually seemed to be a
clearer way to refer to the configuration.

I did mention (4 output ports + 1 input port) so hopefully that made
sense when I said five ports splitter.

Yes, you were quite clear. The only problem was that the old habits
sometimes led me (& possibly others) to misinterpret. But a couple of
seconds of thought was enough to get over that...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)