Digital TV and coax tech questions

[JDemaris]

I've got a fairly techincal question as it relates to hooking up some antennas to TVs.

I live in an area where there was NO over-the-air TV reception for 30 years. Since the digital changeover, there are now many available. That because of several factors. Many transmitters got moved when they went to digital. Many also changed from VHF to UHF, or vice-versa. Many also changed their KW output.

So, here's what I'm trying to find out. I mapped out my property, measuing signal strength. Then installed two antennas. One is UHF only and 500 feet from my house. The other is a combo VHF/UHF and is 150 feet from my house. Both are the highest gain available and both with preamps.

I've got them both working great, independently. But, is there a way I can join those two RG-6 coax leads into one common lead?

I tried using a conventional coax splitter, i.e. one into two, or two into one. It loses half the UHF signal when connected. So, I temporarily put in a manual A-B switch and all works fine. But final hook-up will require a lot of extra wire. I'd like to find a way to have all in one coax. This would also enable one TV to pick up all stations without flipping an A-B switch.

I'll add that I am aware of the available "signal combiners." But, every one I've looked at, has one UHF input, one VHF input, and one combined output. So, I figure my UHF-only antenna would work fine. But, my combo VHF/UHF, when plugged into that VHF only port, would get its UHF portion filtered out?

Does anyone know of another alternative?

 

[buickanddeere]

Two antenna that far apart will suffer some time lag in the combined signals.All depending this could range from negligible to a total loss of signal.
There are low loss combiners used for satellite systems using multiple feed horns/multiple dishes with a single feed back to the tuner/decoder.
The price of RG-6 cable is going to hurt but two runs are the simplest and most reliable.
How did you end up with a two tower/two antenna system?
Any luck with AM810?

 

[Coloken]

You say looses half the signal, I say losses 3 DB. Have you so small a signal that that is important? Usually a 3 DB is just noticable. I think that any combiner or isolation trans. will introduce at least a 3 DB loss or more. Usually made up for with amplifiers. But I have had bad experiences with boosters, They can cause other problems. I think what you got is the best you are going to get with two antennas.

 

[caterpillar guy]

Sounds like the old CB thing about 2 antennas half the gain and twice the trouble.
Since this change I have just forgot about TV nothing will come in so quit watching. OH well nothing but the government run media anyway. Just Bamster propaganda anyway.

 

[Anonymous-0]

On runs that long using RG-11 or Belden 8213 will increase the signal a great deal, more on UHF. RG-6 isn't that great a coax.

An ordinary two way signal splitter (not the UHF/VHF splitter) used in reverse should combine the signals, but with some loss and that little problem of phase mismatch between the two antenna locations on some signals that are see by both antennas. And that phase mismatch will not be constant.

Gerald J.

 

[Joe Ferguson]

You may put an VHF/UHF line amplifier added to already installed amps near the TV set it will compensate for the loss in the coax lenght and the loss in the splitter.

A wideband line amplifier amplifies the signal and also the noise but we don't know the result in advance.

Two separate antennas may/may not cause gosts in the picture especially in UHF caused by the time delay that the signal takes from the transmitter to the nearby and farthest antenna.


Good luck !

Joe Ferguson

 

[Anonymous-0]

ANY amplifiers work much better near the antenna. Once the signal is lost below the noise level of the amplifier by a long coax run, its not going to be recovered by the amplifier.

Gerald J.

 

[JDemaris]

I had to use two antennas to get all the available signals. My house is on the side of the mountain, near the top. I'm 60 miles from the closest city with a TV transmitter. Actually there are three cities, each 60 miles away, and each a different direction.

I spent a week reading signals and mappping things out. Kind of a Rube-Goldberg setup to do, but it worked. In the analog days, you could walk around with a small portable TV and watch the picture come in, or fade/snow out. Now, you can't do that. Digital is "all of nothing." Either the picture is perfect, or there is none. So, even when it IS perfect, you cannot tell if it's fringe/weak signal, or very strong. Thus the need for a signal-strength meter. I used my Chevy Blazer motorhome that has a digital TV and a antenna that extends 20 feet. This TV has a great signal-strength meter. So, put it in 4WD, and drove all over the mountain above my house, and the valley below. Mapped out all the UHF and VHF signals.
Ended up getting 2/3 of the channels with the VHF/UHF antenna pointing to the valley and the city of Binghamton (NY). Then, got a few more channels by installing a UHF-only antenna up on the mountain and pointing the other direction towards Albany (NY). And, with a rotator, can catch one more when it points yet another direction towards Utica (NY).
So that's why I've got two antennas. Can't get those channels any other way.
Both antennas have high-gain, low-noise preamps. I tried RG-11 and RG-6 coax and it made no difference in signal strength, so I used the cheaper RG-6.
Put rotators on both antennas. The listed max wire run was 200', and my longest run is 500'. So I buried some 14/3 UF wire, instead of the standard 20 gauge rotator wire, and it's working fine.
I'm not worried so much about extra coax wire-runs. Was just wanting to be able to access all channels at each TV without flipping the A/B switch back and forth.
When I first joined the two coax cables with a passive splitter/joiner, all worked together OK. But later, it seems the UHF from one antenna was nullifying the UHF from the other, and we lost most of the signal. Some sort of phasing problem maybe? So, hooked in the A/B switches intead, along with dual coax to each TV in the house.
Funny thing is, neither my wife and I watch much TV. But, we wanted it working for when we do, and once I started on this, I figured I might as well get the most I can. It was a pleasure to cancel out $100 per month satellite TV bill. Now, if I could rid of my Internet uplink-downlink dish, I'd save even more. But, I'm not too eager to start using dial-up again.
I've found that many people who lost all the signal when the digital change came, actually have more then ever available now. Just have to make a few changes. I lost all my signal at my other place in Northern Michigan. Got four good channels when it was analog with rabbit ears. Then, when digital came, got nothing. Now get over a dozen. Just had to find out who swapped transmitter towers to where, and who swapped VHF to UHF, or vice-versa - and then target those signals. Even getting Canadian TV now.
By the way, about the AM radio loss, i.e. 810 WGY? It slowly started gaining strength, week by week. They must have been fine tuning and tweaking it. After a month, it was back, pretty much as strong as before. So, I guess it wasn't the liberals trying to shut down AM conservative talk radio. Or maybe it was, and they totally screwed it up??

 

[buickanddeere]

I'm kicking around the concept of those USB cellular sticks for high speed wireless internet.
I'm on the fringe of DSL here and my parents farm is slow for even dialup access.

 

[Sam#3]

Three DB loss is half power!

 

[IH2444]

Check online for Sprint broadband coverage.
They have a good coverage map. You may not be covered but it will tell ya.

Also the sprint USB wireless broadband "stick" I have (not using anymore got DSL) has a connection for an external antenna which I got. Mounted outside and helped things since I was on the edge of their coverage.

Perhaps the other brands also offers ext ant connections too?

Neither ATT nor Verizon wireless broadband would work here.

 

[IH2444]

Ohh also forgot, just because you have good cell service from a provider does not mean you will get good wireless broadband from them. All cell towers are not equipped with wireless broadband and if it downshifts to use the cell band it is slower than dialup.

 

[JDemaris]

I've been thinking of doing the same. I've got Hughesnet satellite Internet access. It's expensive, and very slow with uploads. In fact, most of the time with sending files out, it's worse then dial-up. Download is better, except it craps out, now and then - when a cloud comes by, when a bird chirps, etc.

My neighbor got Internet access as part of his cell-phone plan. Verizon, I think. He said so far, it's working much better then his Hughesnet service did. And, his place is more remote then mine. I assume that once you have the wireless Internet account, it is also portable. You can travel with a laptop and use it anywhere as long as you can get a signal.

 

[bc]

I've got sprint cell service with samsung instinct phones. Just cause the map says you have service, doesn't mean it is always there. Seems to be hit or miss in places and then it comes and goes when there is a hit. Whatever service you get, I'd have someone bring their stick over so you can try it from your place. Having been on the fringe alot, the same goes for cell phones. Some get better signals that others. Wasn't a problem with the 3 watt bag phone.