![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:16:25 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
wrote: On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:02:37 +0100, Scott wrote: Have you tried without the booster? I thought boosters were a bad idea for digital and also that the connection from aerial to decoder should be uninterrupted. Both are myths spread by the ignorant. I am happy to accept that I am ignorant, but there are others on the group who have also expressed concerns about the use of aerial amplifiers. As you clearly regard yourself as an expert, would you care to enlighten us all on the subject? |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott" wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:16:25 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe wrote: On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:02:37 +0100, Scott wrote: Have you tried without the booster? I thought boosters were a bad idea for digital and also that the connection from aerial to decoder should be uninterrupted. Both are myths spread by the ignorant. I am happy to accept that I am ignorant, but there are others on the group who have also expressed concerns about the use of aerial amplifiers. As you clearly regard yourself as an expert, would you care to enlighten us all on the subject? AFAIK the main concern with amplifiers is the noise they introduce to the signal path - I asked about this in an earlier post but the only reply I got was someone answering my question with a question. |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:39:21 +0100, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:16:25 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe wrote: On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:02:37 +0100, Scott wrote: Have you tried without the booster? I thought boosters were a bad idea for digital and also that the connection from aerial to decoder should be uninterrupted. Both are myths spread by the ignorant. I am happy to accept that I am ignorant, I wasn't necessarily meaning you. You are probably just repeating what you heard from a bloke who "knows" about these things. but there are others on the group who have also expressed concerns about the use of aerial amplifiers. Properly used they are a benefit and in some cases an absolute necessity. Wrongly used they make virtually no difference or in some cases make things worse. As you clearly regard yourself as an expert, would you care to enlighten us all on the subject? See my other post. To summarise, you need to get the most signal out of the sky you can, to give adequate margin before distribution, using an appropriate aerial. When distributing, you need to take account of the losses involved in doing so and amplify BEFORE you lose the signal. Amplification adds noise and amplifies the noise that is already there as well as the signal. |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in message ... On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:46:38 +0100, ian field wrote: Its a single house installation specifically ordered from the rigger to be DVB-T compatible, an 8.6dB 6 way splitter/booster was added at the bottom of the downlead to serve several rooms. There is no point putting a booster at the bottom if the problem is lack of signal. It needs to go at the top. If you just need to split, then you must have adequate signal level first. A second booster was added some months ago when there was poor signal on the multiplex carrying the ITV channels, that was left in place after the signal improved again, but more recently the multiplex carrying Five and Virgin1 has become weak, the booster was then replaced with one having higher gain (16.8dB) that improved reception slightly but it varies from perfectly OK one day to fluctuating wildly the next. Added where? Increasing gain doesn't generally increase receive margin, especially if put in the wrong place. You need to get levels measured at the top and then work out where to go from there. The aerial riggers that put up the freeview aerial damaged the roof which then leaked causing extensive water damage indoors - I'm very reluctant to send anymore expensive cowboys up there! A few months ago there was a problem with the multiplex carrying the ITV channels, that cleared up so I must have a magic aerial that goes bad (but only for one multiplex at a time) for a few weeks then comes good again, now its the multiplex carrying Five that's fine one day and flaky the next - maybe there's a gremlin up there with a box of wave traps deciding which multiplex to pick off next. People are still asking me about the trees in the signal path days after I pointed out there are none. |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in message ... On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:46:38 +0100, ian field wrote: Its a single house installation specifically ordered from the rigger to be DVB-T compatible, an 8.6dB 6 way splitter/booster was added at the bottom of the downlead to serve several rooms. There is no point putting a booster at the bottom if the problem is lack of signal. It needs to go at the top. If you just need to split, then you must have adequate signal level first. A second booster was added some months ago when there was poor signal on the multiplex carrying the ITV channels, that was left in place after the signal improved again, but more recently the multiplex carrying Five and Virgin1 has become weak, the booster was then replaced with one having higher gain (16.8dB) that improved reception slightly but it varies from perfectly OK one day to fluctuating wildly the next. It sounds increasingly dreadful. Bill |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:39:21 +0100, Scott wrote: On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:16:25 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe wrote: On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:02:37 +0100, Scott wrote: Have you tried without the booster? I thought boosters were a bad idea for digital and also that the connection from aerial to decoder should be uninterrupted. Both are myths spread by the ignorant. I am happy to accept that I am ignorant, I wasn't necessarily meaning you. You are probably just repeating what you heard from a bloke who "knows" about these things. but there are others on the group who have also expressed concerns about the use of aerial amplifiers. Properly used they are a benefit and in some cases an absolute necessity. Wrongly used they make virtually no difference or in some cases make things worse. As you clearly regard yourself as an expert, would you care to enlighten us all on the subject? See my other post. To summarise, you need to get the most signal out of the sky you can, to give adequate margin before distribution, using an appropriate aerial. When distributing, you need to take account of the losses involved in doing so and amplify BEFORE you lose the signal. Amplification adds noise and amplifies the noise that is already there as well as the signal. I'll give you an example that I saw this very day. The scene is a communal OAP centre with 40 bungalows on the site. The communal ae is on Emley, and had perfect LOS until a large steel framed building started to go up about 100 yards away. It's one of those new polyclinics. The steel frame being complete, the contractors started on Friday to install wire mesh safety barriers on each level. These almost reach each ceiling. The movement of the crane gave the problem an interesting dynamic quality. Unsurprisingly reception at the centre was affected. In fact signal levels dropped by about 28dB. This meant that the levels available at each bungy were about 20dB below threshold and were also covered in amplifier noise. There was also some multipath. The residents had no real reception, just very snowy analogue. On Saturday the son of one old lady came round for his weekly visit. Seeing the telly he went off somewhere and bought one of those dreadful set-back amps with the curious curved case and the variable gain control. This had no beneficial effect whatsoever. With the gain down the snowy analogue picture was slightly more snowy; with it up it had a strange grainy pattern. He took it back to the shop and they tested it, and refused a refund, saying that it was unsaleable as he had destroyed the bubble pack (how else to get it out?). He re-installed it at mother's. I went along today (called out today) and discovered what the problem was with the system. Whilst I was on the phone discussing things with the landlord this chap came and asked me to check his mother's reception. I'd added enough amplification to get the levels correct at the bungys (though not at the head-end input of course) as a temporary measure. At mother's the analogue was present but a bit snowy, and it kept fading. The digi was hopeless. I explained the problem and said that we would be either bringing in the signal from elsewhere by underground cable, or possibly using a different transmitter, but that either would not happen overnight. At this he said that he wanted the landlord to reimburse him for the cost of the splendid booster. I advised him to write to them, but expressed the view that he was wasting his time. Once the signal/noise ratio is poor you can't improve it by amplification. In fact you can only make it worse. If amplification appears to improve reception is is because the device following the 'booster' is 'deaf' -- insensitive or noisy. Bill |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
"ian field" wrote in message ... People are still asking me about the trees in the signal path days after I pointed out there are none. You have to be patient with us. Some of us are getting on a bit you know. "I said there aren't any trees!" "Fleas? No, there aren't any fleas. Not on me anyway." Bill |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
Something is not right up there, it could be water in the co-ax cable,
an open circuit cable, a short circuit cable .. something frequency selective. What you need is a good well equipped experienced rigger to put this balls up right!.. People are still asking me about the trees in the signal path days after I pointed out there are none. OK .. well that rules out the number one cause then. Any large buildings or things like cranes around?.... -- Tony Sayer Nope. Well in the absence of any further info and the reluctance to get a proper rigger to have a look I don't quite know what else to advise. Except adding amplification is very likely to make this worse. In fact where we live some 18 miles from the 'heath we've had to put a small attenuator (device for reducing the signal) into the line to the distribution amplifier input this was so as to stop the much stronger analogue signals causing intermodulation and spurious signals across the band!.. -- Tony Sayer |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| multiplex A dead | leon | UK digital tv | 1 | September 13th 05 09:13 PM |
| Freeview - no Multiplex C & D | Jonathan Pearson | UK digital tv | 13 | June 30th 05 11:58 AM |
| Multiplex D | Ian | UK digital tv | 8 | February 16th 04 12:20 AM |
| Multiplex D | Ian | UK digital tv | 0 | February 13th 04 10:18 PM |
| Freeview in Ely (Cambs.) & surrounding areas? | Clem Dye | UK digital tv | 2 | January 7th 04 07:46 PM |