Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

OTA Transition - Xmit Power


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   krock918316

krock918316

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,499 posts
Joined: Mar 05, 2007

Posted 15 September 2008 - 03:24 PM

Since you'd have to purchase one of these for each channel you want on the 2nd antenna, I don't see that as a 'realistic' option.. maybe 1 or 2 stations, but not all the stations from another city. For example, I use one of my antennas for my local stations (Harrisburg/Lancaster, PA) with a pre-amp and then another antenna for the Phily stations (5 or 6 stations in all).


How are you doing this now? If it works, then you don't need one. The join-tennas are particularly useful when trying to avoid multipath. In my setup, my CBS and FOX stations are to the NE at about 55 miles. However, the ABC station is on a mountain about 5 miles to my west.

Since my antenna is pointed NE, I tend to get some multipath from the other mountains in the area. Getting 2 antennas and using the join-tenna eliminates the multipath problem from the ABC station.

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#22 OFFLINE   SE_Sooner

SE_Sooner

    AllStar

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 52 posts
Joined: Aug 12, 2008

Posted 15 September 2008 - 08:08 PM

Krock918316, In my case this would work for me, maybe. All my locals except for one come from the North. The exception is one channel almost due East. The only issue is that it says on their website:

There is significant attenuation on either side of the channel the JoinTenna is tuned for. We do not recommend using a JoinTenna if you have a channel immediately adjacent.

So what does mean? I want a jointenna for broadcast channel 40 - real channel 21
Are the adjacent channels 20 and 22 or 39 and 41?

If it's 20 and 22, then it won't work because 22 is my fox channel.

Anyone have an idea? This new real channel fake channel, broadcast channel business has be confused!
Definition of Broke - Worked yesterday, doesn't work today!
VIP 622 L6.18 RBGD-N Bootstrap 1718RBGD
Dish Customer since Nov. 1997

#23 OFFLINE   Kansas Zephyr

Kansas Zephyr

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,489 posts
Joined: Jun 29, 2007

Posted 15 September 2008 - 08:50 PM

Krock918316, In my case this would work for me, maybe. All my locals except for one come from the North. The exception is one channel almost due East. The only issue is that it says on their website:

There is significant attenuation on either side of the channel the JoinTenna is tuned for. We do not recommend using a JoinTenna if you have a channel immediately adjacent.

So what does mean? I want a jointenna for broadcast channel 40 - real channel 21
Are the adjacent channels 20 and 22 or 39 and 41?

If it's 20 and 22, then it won't work because 22 is my fox channel.

Anyone have an idea? This new real channel fake channel, broadcast channel business has be confused!

RF channels may be susceptible to adjacent channel interference, not virtual ones.

But, in the digital world, there's only been limited real world experience to see how much of a problem it is.
5 LNB Slimline & SWM-16
SWM1 2 HR20s & HR21 via SWS-4 "green label" 4-way splitter w/power pass one leg for PI - SWM2 2 HR20s & HR21 after SWS-4 "green label" 4-way splitter
2 HR20-700 Wireless network for DoD
HR20-700 eSATA Vantec NexStar CX w/ 2TB WD20EVDS
HR21-100/AM21 Wireless network for DoD
HR21-100/AM21
With diplexed OTA via an "out" on one SWS-4 4-way splitter, using a Winegard YA 1713 - Channel Master 4228 - Channel Master 7777 in the attic.
Yes, my market has HD LiLs...and I'm still not giving up OTA! No rain-fade, and all sub-channels 24/7/365.
Also, with diplexed Cox Internet on one leg, downstream of a SWS-4 4-way splitter, using a SWS-2 2-way splitter, as a combiner.
R10 via SWM-16 Legacy 1
In boxes HR10-250, HDVR2 & (2) D10-300

#24 OFFLINE   krock918316

krock918316

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,499 posts
Joined: Mar 05, 2007

Posted 16 September 2008 - 08:49 AM

Krock918316, In my case this would work for me, maybe. All my locals except for one come from the North. The exception is one channel almost due East. The only issue is that it says on their website:

There is significant attenuation on either side of the channel the JoinTenna is tuned for. We do not recommend using a JoinTenna if you have a channel immediately adjacent.

So what does mean? I want a jointenna for broadcast channel 40 - real channel 21
Are the adjacent channels 20 and 22 or 39 and 41?

If it's 20 and 22, then it won't work because 22 is my fox channel.

Anyone have an idea? This new real channel fake channel, broadcast channel business has be confused!


The adjacent channels would be the "real" channels. So in your case it would be 20 and 22.

I agree, the virtual channels are a nightmare. Especially for the stations that are not going back to their original frequencies after the analog cut off.

#25 OFFLINE   From The Fray To The Grav

From The Fray To The Grav

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 6 posts
Joined: Sep 19, 2008

Posted 09 October 2008 - 11:58 AM

There is a good chance you will actually lose some channels from 80 miles away. The only thing I know to suggest is that you try out a converter box with an enhanced digital tuner. I'm not really sure what the range it on them though. I know I have heard a lot of complaint about people losing channels that were further away once they hooked up their converter box.

#26 OFFLINE   Jim5506

Jim5506

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,490 posts
Joined: Jun 07, 2004

Posted 09 October 2008 - 04:16 PM

Virtual channels are probably the stupidest thing the FCC has done in this whole mess (well, maybe their choice of encoding schemes is up there also).
Tuners: Hopper 2000; Hopper w/Sling; 3 Joeys; Samsung SIR-T351; Accurian 6000;2 X HD TiVo; 2 X TiVo Series 2 Stand alone; Panasonic Showstopper 2000
Dish 1000.2 @ 110, 119, 129; dish 500 @ 61.5
Antennas - CM4228; RS U75-R; coathanger; Funke PSP.1922 (stillin the box); paperclip
Displays: Sony VPH D50Q with HD Fury HDMI input; Hitachi 57F59; Sony Bravia LCD;Sanyo 32" LCD; Panasonic 42" plasma
Sony 80GB PS3; Toshiba HD-DVD

Give me a Finco colinear array and I'll rule the world - HA-HA-HA-HA!

#27 OFFLINE   Scott in FL

Scott in FL

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 427 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2008

Posted 09 October 2008 - 06:19 PM

Virtual channels are probably the stupidest thing the FCC has done in this whole mess (well, maybe their choice of encoding schemes is up there also).


It wasn't the FCC that came up with the virtual channel idea, it was the tv stations and the NAB. They wanted the stations to keep their identity. As an engineer, I agree with you. When I first heard about the proposal my immediate reaction was: why? Move on, use your new channel allocation. But I guess normal Joe and Jane viewer need to see they're still watching Channel 6 in Philly, even though it's now way up on channel 64. And my daughter in the mountains of Central PA, where she can only receive a very few OTA digital signals, is sure glad that she can receive both ABC and FOX on one RF channel. Plus a lot of people like the weather sub-channels. So we as informed technical types have to deal with it. It is confusing, I admit.

The encoding isn't a bad choice. It's the modulation the FCC chose, despite last minute efforts by Sinclair to convince them it was a mistake. Nothing new there... the FCC has a history of choosing the wrong standard (for example, NTSC).

#28 OFFLINE   Scott in FL

Scott in FL

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 427 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2008

Posted 09 October 2008 - 06:30 PM

RF channels may be susceptible to adjacent channel interference, not virtual ones.


Adjacent channels are not a problem in the digital world, as long as their signal strengths are equal (or very nearly so). There are several markets where adjacent channels are assigned, broadcasting from the same tower at the same eirp. Philadelphia has two pair of adjacent channels operating (26/27 and 66/67). The key is they must be received at the same power level (or very nearly so). Two adjacent channels, transmitting from the same tower at the same eirp will meet this requirement. Two separate adjacent channels from different markets/directions may or may not.

If you want to know what real channels are in your area, go to tvfool.com.




Protected By... spam firewall...And...