D&C GLug - Home Page

[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]

Re: [LUG] OT: Telly signal quality

 

James Fidell wrote:
> It's not actually our closest
> transmitter, but carries a larger selection of channels and broadcasts
> at higher power
That will do it.  Higher signal power will always get a better signal 
obviously.
> We do however have a new aerial, new cabling, and an amplifier as near
> to the masthead as possible.
There you go then.  One thing is that you can't *usually* get good 
reception from a passive TV aerial (when referring to a set-top one 
anyway).  My Dad has a (fairly old) powered aerial and the signal is 
crisp and clear.  The only time it wasn't was when I forgot to turn the 
aerial on, which proves the point.  YMMV with roof aerials which I know 
nothing about, but again I see them advertised as being 'suitable for 
digital signals'.  Is this just clever marketing[1], or is there 
actually a difference?

Admittedly we are line-of-sight to a 500,000W mast in St Hilary (S 
Wales) and I can get a clean signal on a normal portable TV with the 
aerial unplugged.  It seems the signal is so strong the socket picks it 
up :)  However having said that digital still suffers if not on a 
powered (internal) aerial.

Kind regards,

Julian

[1]  For a given value of 'clever' which isn't always. Examples:  
'Internet Capable' modems <?> and batteries being sold claiming 'Our 
batteries have Memory Effect!!' - as if this is a GOOD thing??

-- 
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html