| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 49101 | 2004-09-10 05:09:00 | OT TV Aerial | Chris Randal (521) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 270891 | 2004-09-10 08:22:00 | > yes billy T you are right > Propogation is Propogation Propagation ??? Way back in the early days we used to make dipole antennas out of a piece of TV ribbon. A dipole is a length of TV ribbon joined electrically at the ends and cut in the middle of one part of the ribbon and another piece of TV ribbon joined at this junction and leading down to the set. If you experiment with the length of the main ribbon by cutting it until you get it resonant at the tv frequency then it should work better than rabbits ears. A bit hard to explain on a posting without drawing you a diagram. Perhaps a friendly Tv technician could help you. I agree with others that any form of amplification on rabbits ears is only going to amplify the noise as well as the signal. Cheers. |
heaton (3697) | ||
| 270892 | 2004-09-10 08:47:00 | > Anybody know about the "active" or "amplified" indoor > TV aerials? > Hi. I am using a DSE L4037 amplified rabbit ears type at the moment for the same reason you are inquiring. It is also using a 2nd rabbits ears wired through the amplifier, and it is adequate, definitely the amplifier is handy (and adjustable). From this time next week, they will be surplus to requirements, as I am moving north a bit, and there is an existing "Aerial farm" on the roof. the previous person was a sucker for a good sales pitch I suppose, but I definitely won't need any bunny lugs there. If you wish to come grab it some time close to next Friday, be my guest. > Do the do a better job than the normal rabbit's > ears? > Yep, they do for me, here. > We rent and can't replace the outdoor aerial. Nor me R2 |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 270893 | 2004-09-10 11:11:00 | Well in fact there have been teen aerial tests done and they show no resemblance to aerials at all, The fact is they look better than "just a wire up the wall" that's why people like them. | Earnie Moore (5918) | ||
| 270894 | 2004-09-11 02:06:00 | >Well in fact there have been teen aerial tests done and they show no resemblance to aerials at all, The fact is they look better than "just a wire up the wall" that's why people like them. Was that an "on air" performance test Earnie? If so it would be very dependent on the location/signal/frequency & environment. I'm not too sure what you mean by 'teen' either so I guess that was a typo. A "wire up the wall" is a very poor substitute for Rabbit Ears, which definitely do conform to dipole antenna theory. They work very well in prime signal areas, which is exactly what they are designed for. Whether ribbon feed to a balun on the TV, or with the balun in the head and coax to the TV, they behave in accordance with antenna/transmission line theory, and it you are able to match element lengths to the wavelength of the higher Band III channels they can perform quite satisfactorily. However, with zero front-to back ratio, they cannot cope with reflected signals at similar strength to the main signal, so at that point they are more ornamental than anything else. It's horses for courses really, and for those with zero choice they are an entirely acceptable option. Cheers Billy 8-{) |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 270895 | 2004-09-11 02:33:00 | Listen you jokers I don't care what you think or what you say, I talk to the aerial people in the trade (have you?), and quite fankly, I don't care as for I am considered this issue is over with me. | Earnie Moore (5918) | ||
| 270896 | 2004-09-11 03:13:00 | Aww, diddums LOL |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 270897 | 2004-09-11 03:17:00 | >I talk to the aerial people in the trade (have you?), Obviously that didn't help, - perhaps listening could do some good ? ;) R2 |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 270898 | 2004-09-11 04:08:00 | I've had a mission getting an adequate aerial for my TV tuner card in my PC, and have come back to standard rabbit ears as the signal is the best I gan get for the price. I tried a One-For-All non-amplified antenna with a UHF loop from Bond & Bond, but that actually had worse reception. I also tried an amplified antenna from Dick Smith's, but that was only marginally better than the One-For-All and had the inconvenience of an AC plug and no on/off switch. In the end the amplified ones were too expensive for what they could deliver, so I switched back to rabbit ears from DSE. It will be great when digital TV is broadcast over the airwaves - then (assuming I have a tuner card that can handle it) it would be much easier to get a clearer signal. Hope my experiences have been helpful for you. |
D. McG (3023) | ||
| 270899 | 2004-09-11 04:15:00 | You could go and buy an outdoor aerial if you already have a pole and a cord running form it to inside. They are only slightly more expensive than a amplified indoor aerial and easy to fit. When you leave the flat you can give the landlord the option to buy it off you or pull it down and take it away. | Rob99 (151) | ||
| 270900 | 2004-09-11 04:24:00 | > It will be great when digital TV is broadcast over > the airwaves - then (assuming I have a tuner card > that can handle it) it would be much easier to get a > clearer signal. Digital (if it was available) would require a very good aerial system as well (better than analogue), so I really don't see how you would be better off. The main difference would be that instead of a noisy picture, you would have no picture if the signal was below the required quality. A PC is a very noisy environment in which to try and decode TV signals. It requires a very good signal level, with the aerial located some distance from the PC. And before anyone "has a go" regarding the qualifications needed to make such statements, actually I do have them. And I agree with the comments above by Billy T on the subject of "rabbits ears". |
godfather (25) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||