Picture Break Up - Sutton Coldfield Transmitter

[Trev]

Put up a second aerial for a second set when you seem to have a good enough signal on your existing set? I've never heard anything so ridiculous as a first fix for what appears to be a fault on an existing set up especially when signal levels seem OK. A splitter with possibly an amp are the way forward, and the amp is only required if the splitter causes a problem. It is the easiest and most aesthetically pleasing.

 

[Black Hole]

Absolutely. Two aerials = two lots of external maintenance up ladders. I have two aerials, but they point at different transmitters (and have done so since analogue days). Judging by the reception I can now get on bleed from off-axis, I could probably manage on one - pointing in any direction!

 

[MikeSh]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on that. The economics and aesthetics may be marginal either way, but needing to find a suitable mains supply to feed an amplifier would certainly be a con.
I've seen many houses sprout a second aerial (same type and direction as the existing) over recent years, I'm guessing in order to serve a second TV, so it must be a viable option in some people's opinion.

 

[prpr]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on that. The economics and aesthetics may be marginal either way, but needing to find a suitable mains supply to feed an amplifier would certainly be a con.

Like I said, most devices will line power a suitable amp. these days. If not, you put the PSU behind the telly and power it from there.

I've seen many houses sprout a second aerial (same type and direction as the existing) over recent years, I'm guessing in order to serve a second TV, so it must be a viable option in some people's opinion.

Because it makes more money for installers that way - they can fleece the ignorant. Usually they put the second aerial within the capture volume of the first, thus worsening the response of both. Then they'll flog you 'boosters' (with massive amounts of unnecessary gain) to compensate (and put 'em in the wrong place in the system).

 

[Black Hole]

I've seen many houses sprout a second aerial (same type and direction as the existing) over recent years, I'm guessing in order to serve a second TV, so it must be a viable option in some people's opinion.

You sure it's not just what the aerial fitters say when non-technical people ring up?

 

[Leonthefixer]

Thanks a lot for all the replies. I have had a very enjoyable weekend of watching clear TV pictures, there continues to be no break up in the pictures (this is with the splitter and the booster removed and the cable joined where the splitter was by a straight inline connector.) I plan to carry on with this set up for the rest of the week to be sure it is not just coincidence as far as possible.

You don't know categorically whether he can afford the loss or not. Figures provided so far indicate that he can afford the loss.

Can I ask you to explain what figures it is you are referring to as I am trying to understand this point about the splitter better.

Like I said, most devices will line power a suitable amp. these days. If not, you put the PSU behind the telly and power it from there.

This is what I would recommend that the OP gets, if he needs an amp. If he doesn't, then he can just keep his splitter. He might even be able to get away without buying the PSU if he already has an appropriate device that will power the amp. (most tellies and PVR boxes will) and save another £10 or so.
https://www.blake-uk.com/masthead-a...psu-ampifier_with_propsu11f_power_supply_unit

I have the Humax HDR Fox T2 box and as far as I understand it is possible to send power back up the aerial cable by turning the option on within the box settings - does this not lead to increased interference as you are now running power up the aerial cable? As I understand things you want to keep the aerial cable away from power so this seems to go against that?

With regards to the amplifier you recommend, I assume there is no reason why I couldn't situate it in the loft rather than outside on the aerial? It would be much easier to install, would protect it from the weather and would allow me to place it where the existing break is in the cable, where I have had the splitter installed? This would mean about about 3 to 4 meters of aerial cable in addition to if it were situated on the aerial itself, hopefully not enough to cause a big issue?

Also I would still need the splitter after this amplifier wouldn't I if I understand correctly as all that item does is act as an amplifier, not both an amplifier and a splitter?

Edit: I have found the information about that specific amp on Aerials & TV (http://www.aerialsandtv.co.uk/onlinesplittersandamps.html#MastHeadAmps) which says it can be situated in the loft and that you can use a splitter in addition to feed more than one TV point:
"The weatherproof enclosure makes it equally suitable for mounting on the aerial mast, or on the wall, or in the loft. The plastic housing is removable, if required, so the amp unit can be screwed directly to any surface, e.g a loft joist."
....
"The amp can supply one TV point directly or a number via a splitter with power pass. As an example, if the amp were turned up to 22dB and then sent through an 8 Way splitter (with a through loss of 12dB) you would still have a “nett gain” of 10dB per output, less any cable loss."

Personally I think separate aerials is more sensible than an amplifier if only two feeds are required.

This would be a lost resort. I really don't want to install a second aerial unless absolutely necessary and there was no other option really. There are a few reasons for this, as I stated earlier in the thread I am having to use a long pole for the current aerial. I have witnessed the movement/strain that can be placed upon this when it is very windy so adding a second aerial will add more strain on the pole which is something I really want to avoid. There is the issue of maintenance but also the installation. The costs are not really an issue and it seems they are not going to be widely different whichever option I went for (assuming a self install) so I would definitely want to try the amp before having to resort to a second aerial.

 

[prpr]

Can I ask you to explain what figures it is you are referring to as I am trying to understand this point about the splitter better.

The very good table of figures you provided in post #27. You have roughly 50% readings without splitter/booster which is more than adequate to feed a 2 port splitter (in my experience!)

I have the Humax HDR Fox T2 box and as far as I understand it is possible to send power back up the aerial cable by turning the option on within the box settings - does this not lead to increased interference as you are now running power up the aerial cable? As I understand things you want to keep the aerial cable away from power so this seems to go against that?

Yes, the T2 looks as though it will power it. There is no risk of interference. It's only DC. Some people say keep mains away, but it really shouldn't be necessary. You already said you had decent cable.

With regards to the amplifier you recommend, I assume there is no reason why I couldn't situate it in the loft rather than outside on the aerial? It would be much easier to install, would protect it from the weather and would allow me to place it where the existing break is in the cable, where I have had the splitter installed? This would mean about about 3 to 4 meters of aerial cable in addition to if it were situated on the aerial itself, hopefully not enough to cause a big issue?

That will be perfectly OK.

Also I would still need the splitter after this amplifier wouldn't I if I understand correctly as all that item does is act as an amplifier, not both an amplifier and a splitter?

I believe the device I quoted has two outputs so you don't need the splitter.

I really don't want to install a second aerial unless absolutely necessary and there was no other option really.

It's stupid to have a second aerial (IMHO). Don't do it.

 

[Black Hole]

@Leonthefixer:

The "phantom power" sent from downstream on an aerial cable is DC, so there is no question of interference. However, if you have other means to power an amplifier I would use it in preference (eg mains power), as powering it from the Humax would mean the amp only works when the Humax is on - not much cop as the whole point is for you to feed another TV as well.

If you are committing to a loft-mounted amp, there is no need to fork out for a weatherproof one, and easy enough to choose one with two or more outputs rather than have a separate splitter. If there is no mains in the loft you can still run it from a separate phantom power supply rather than rely on the Humax (or anything else) having to be on to power it.

 

[MikeSh]

Because it makes more money for installers that way - they can fleece the ignorant.

I wondered who'd play the "dishonest fitters" card.

You sure it's not just what the aerial fitters say when non-technical people ring up?

Possibly, but since the cost of a second aerial vs booster seems to be similar they might just as well offer the booster (but see 4 below).

I feel there are good reasons for using a second aerial (in appropriate circumstances), despite the quite vigorous opinions given by others.
1. If you have a working system supplying a TV, why break into it when for roughly the same cost you can put a duplicate system in (and therefore expect the same performance)?
2. An amplifier is an active device and therefore probably more prone to failure than a passive one. It also provides a single point of failure, so you will lose both your feeds.
3. Powering an amp up the line from (eg) a PVR means that device has to be in a 'powering' state all the time so as to allow the other device access to the signal. The average punter is likely to go glassy-eyed at that point.
4. The law these days requires a qualified electrician to make changes to mains wiring. I suspect most aerial fitters are not so qualified and therefore perhaps cannot (legally) tap into wiring in the loft, which would mean they can't offer that solution.

Maintenance was mentioned. Fitting a second aerial or masthead amp both involve getting up there. If the job is done right it should be 10-20 years before needing another visit, basically until something fails, because there is no routine maintenance as far as I know.

In summary: KISS. Why introduce complexity when a simple solution will work.

There are a few reasons for this, as I stated earlier in the thread I am having to use a long pole for the current aerial. I have witnessed the movement/strain that can be placed upon this when it is very windy so adding a second aerial will add more strain on the pole which is something I really want to avoid.

And that is a good reason to use an amp rather than a second aerial. I completely agree with that choice.

 

[Trev]

@Leonthefixer If there is no mains in the loft ...

Upstairs lighting cct with the aid of an electrical if required?

I feel there are good reasons for using a second aerial (in appropriate circumstances), despite the quite vigorous opinions given by others.

But not two aerials on the top of a long pole surely? He did mention that quite a long time ago, which is probably why your suggestion was poo pooed. EDIT. Belay that. Just read your last post.

 

[prpr]

I wondered who'd play the "dishonest fitters" card.

It's perfectly legitimate. The profit opportunity on an external installation is much greater than on a 'booster'. Something that can be seen is always a greater driver than something that can't when stupid punters are spending their money unwisely.

since the cost of a second aerial vs booster seems to be similar they might just as well offer the booster (but see 4 below).

You can get a man to come and supply and install an aerial for about £15, which was my solution to the problem as described?
Dream on MikeSh, dream on.

1. If you have a working system supplying a TV, why break into it when for roughly the same cost you can put a duplicate system in (and therefore expect the same performance)?

Because it's very low risk; lower than messing about with extra metalwork, drills, ladders, cables etc.
If you had a single mains socket on your wall and you wanted a double, would you put in another cable all the way back to the consumer unit?
Of course not. It's stupid.

2. An amplifier is an active device and therefore probably more prone to failure than a passive one. It also provides a single point of failure, so you will lose both your feeds.

I think an aerial outside would rot before an amp. in the loft would fail.

3. Powering an amp up the line from (eg) a PVR means that device has to be in a 'powering' state all the time so as to allow the other device access to the signal. The average punter is likely to go glassy-eyed at that point.

You use a separate power supply. It's not difficult. In most cases you'd get away with a splitter anyway. For those that don't and who really don't understand, they'd get someone who does in to do it.

4. The law these days requires a qualified electrician to make changes to mains wiring. I suspect most aerial fitters are not so qualified and therefore perhaps cannot (legally) tap into wiring in the loft, which would mean they can't offer that solution.

Bullshit. Quote your reference please. You do not, except in specific parts of the house e.g. kitchen. Even then you are perfectly at liberty to get anyone to do the work, or do it yourself, and get it certified. Practically speaking for minor works you would probably get away with it anyway and you probably only need part P certification if you want to sell, otherwise you might struggle (allegedly).

Maintenance was mentioned. Fitting a second aerial or masthead amp both involve getting up there. If the job is done right it should be 10-20 years before needing another visit, basically until something fails, because there is no routine maintenance as far as I know.

Fitting a splitter or amp. in the loft is even less hassle and is even easier to get to should it go wrong. There is no routine maintenance there either.

In summary: KISS. Why introduce complexity when a simple solution will work.

Indeed. We just disagree about which is the simplest solution. But as I've already stated, mine is easiest and cheapest. Yours only scores on redundancy, but that is really a very minor plus compared to more major minuses.

 

[Black Hole]

The point about the requirement for certification to work on fixed electrical installations is perfectly valid, which is why I specifically didn't mention what I would do and have done (ie tap into the lighting circuit). Neither is there any need: by using a phantom power unit at the TV end of the downlink, it can all be done from an existing standard wall power point.

 

[MikeSh]

... by using a phantom power unit at the TV end of the downlink, it can all be done from an existing standard wall power point.

Yes, but it means another wall-wart or whatever and another socket required. Not always convenient/desirable. Aesthetically if I asked my wife whether to fit a second aerial or another blob in the living room I know for the certain the blob would be vetoed

You can get a man to come and supply and install an aerial for about £15, which was my solution to the problem as described?

And you can get a man to come and supply and install an amplifier for about £15?
Or are you comparing a professional price with a DIY price? In which case I give up.

But as I've already stated, mine is easiest and cheapest.

Actually, I give up anyway

 

[Trev]

Actually, I give up anyway

So now perhaps posts could be limited to those which actually purport to help the OP.

 

[Leonthefixer]

Sorry for not replying to all your useful comments sooner.

I am continuing to get clear TV pictures but I shall keep the current set up for a few more days just to be sure before reintroducing the splitter. It is a pleasure being able to watch TV without breakups again!

The very good table of figures you provided in post #27. You have roughly 50% readings without splitter/booster which is more than adequate to feed a 2 port splitter (in my experience!)

Many thanks for clearing that up and helping me understand.

Yes, the T2 looks as though it will power it. There is no risk of interference. It's only DC. Some people say keep mains away, but it really shouldn't be necessary. You already said you had decent cable.

That's excellent to hear that there is no risk of interference. When I was installing the set up I thought it best to use quality cable as the cost difference was not huge so opted for the Webro WF100 which seemed to be thought of as the best sort to go for, so hopefully a wise investment.

However, if you have other means to power an amplifier I would use it in preference (eg mains power), as powering it from the Humax would mean the amp only works when the Humax is on - not much cop as the whole point is for you to feed another TV as well.

If you are committing to a loft-mounted amp, there is no need to fork out for a weatherproof one, and easy enough to choose one with two or more outputs rather than have a separate splitter. If there is no mains in the loft you can still run it from a separate phantom power supply rather than rely on the Humax (or anything else) having to be on to power it.

That is a good point about having an independent power supply for the amplifier if I need to install one, I hadn't considered it before but it makes sense as as you say the idea is to feed a second TV. I have an electrician coming soon to do some other work so while he is here I will get him to put a double or triple socket in the loft where the ring main runs, one socket for the amp should I need one and the other one or two sockets to provide power should I ever need it in the loft. As they are coming anyway I doubt it will add much to the cost.

It also makes sense not to have an amplifier and a splitter separately and from looking on Aerials and TV site I see you can get them combined. I would think having separate ones would just add to potential interference/noise being introduced. Likewise there would be no need to get a weather proof one if I install it in the loft.

I shall update further once I re-introduce the splitter probably over the weekend.

 

[grahamlthompson]

A tad bemused, way back I told the OP to replace the splitter in his amplifier with a quality masthead type amplifier with two outputs and a variable gain. And a separate 12V power supply for it located at either end of the two downleads. Box built in power supplies are normally 5V only). If he adjusts the gain he can more than recover the now redundant passive splitter losses (the amp from memory goes up to 20dB gain). If he then wanted more TV's simply add passive splitters to the amp outputs. If a two way is added to each output simply tweaking the amp gain by an additional 5dB or so will mean all 4 outputs will be similar to the two. I have a log40 (not a high gain aerial) in the loft on Lark Stoke (a lower power full service relay from Sutton, it's about 30 mls away). I also have the Vision masthead linked to and it feeds two HDR FOX T2's and three smart TV's all with discrete feeds using just passive splitters (no loop throughs so all kit uses low power sby). Signal strength is set to about 60% and reception is rock solid

There is no need to put power in the loft, indeed it's better to have the power supply unit not in the loft space.

The fact that the masthead is waterproof isn't relevant, what is, is the performance of these way exceeds the crap you get from the likes of Labgear.

 

[Black Hole]

Masthead amplifier with two outputs and adjustable gain? Can't say I've come across such a thing, and how would you access it to adjust the gain? A loft amp is not the same thing as a masthead amp - are you sure that's what you mean?

 

[prpr]

It also makes sense not to have an amplifier and a splitter separately

Does it? Why is that? That gives you fewer options should things change in the future.

I would think having separate ones would just add to potential interference/noise being introduced.

Based on what knowledge? You're wrong.
I've already told you what to get (as has someone else), but you seem determined to do it differently. You'll probably end up getting something similar to what you've got now along with the same problems.

You asked for advice. Take it when it's given.

 

[Leonthefixer]

Thanks for the replies and the advice, to be quite clear I appreciate the advice, I am taking it on board and trying to act on it but it seems I am either misunderstanding what people are telling me or that what some people are saying is not correct.

To clear up a few points:

It also makes sense not to have an amplifier and a splitter separately.

Does it? Why is that? That gives you fewer options should things change in the future.

I would think having separate ones would just add to potential interference/noise being introduced.

Based on what knowledge? You're wrong.

The reason I said that it makes sense to not have a separate amplifier and splitter is I have been told in this thread that all connections introduce some reduction to the signal and are best kept to a minimum, (that was the knowledge upon which it was based, seeing as you ask). It seems that you disagree with this as you tell me that I am wrong. I have also read on Aerials & TV's website that all connections and joints should be kept to a minimum, it seems they are wrong as well?

all connections (however good) will introduce some reduction to the signal and are best kept to a minimum

If I had a separate amplifier and a splitter I would be introducing more connections than if I had a combined amplifier and splitter as I would have to run a length of cable from the amplifier to the splitter, maybe I am wrong here (quite possibly). This would mean 2 additional connections and thus two more areas for signal reduction. Well that was how I had understood it but I seem to have been wrong from what you are saying and that I need not worry about adding additional connections.

Furthermore, you yourself recommended to me that I do not need to get a separate amplifier and splitter:

I believe the device I quoted has two outputs so you don't need the splitter.

This is what I would recommend that the OP gets

So I am confused why you are now implying that I should now get a separate amplifier and splitter? I tried to take you advice but you now seem to be saying the opposite and that I shouldn't get the one you recommended but should in order to give me more options in the future get separate units??? But then later say I am not taking your advice - I am very confused.

Also the more items I introduce to the set up I would think there is more potential for me making poor connections and there is more potential for the items to go wrong and also there is the obvious additional cost of buying two separate units v 1 unit.

I've already told you what to get (as has someone else), but you seem determined to do it differently. You'll probably end up getting something similar to what you've got now along with the same problems.

You asked for advice. Take it when it's given.

I am not sure where you think I am determined to do it differently to how you suggested. I am doing it exactly as you suggested from what I understand you to have said:

This is what I would recommend that the OP gets, if he needs an amp. If he doesn't, then he can just keep his splitter.

So surely it makes sense to introduce the splitter back in first to see if I need the amp? Hence, why I said:

I shall keep the current set up for a few more days just to be sure before reintroducing the splitter.

I have also asked you about the amplifier to which you kindly answered various questions on which I plan to introduce into the system should I need to by placing it in the loft and not bother getting a waterproof one for this reason, on your advice. I have then gone on to say that I plan to get an electrician that is visiting for other work to place a socket in the loft to power it, again upon you advice about powering it from its own source and again you indicate I should just try the splitter first:

You use a separate power supply. It's not difficult. In most cases you'd get away with a splitter anyway.

So all in all I am totally confused as to why you think I have asked for advice and not taken it and why you think I seem determined to do it differently to what you have told me to do? I am planning to do it exactly to your recommendations? What am I missing and or misunderstanding as I don't want to get something similar to what I've got now along with the same problems.

 

[Leonthefixer]

A tad bemused, way back I told the OP to replace the splitter in his amplifier with a quality masthead type amplifier with two outputs and a variable gain. And a separate 12V power supply for it located at either end of the two downleads. Box built in power supplies are normally 5V only).

There is no need to put power in the loft, indeed it's better to have the power supply unit not in the loft space.

The fact that the masthead is waterproof isn't relevant, what is, is the performance of these way exceeds the crap you get from the likes of Labgear.

Thank you Graham - it seems if I am understanding correctly the suggestions to date are either the option you suggest:

1. Vision V20-22056 Two Way 8-20dB Variable Gain Masthead Amplifier With Antiference Power Supply Kit

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Vision-V20-22056-Variable-Amplifier-Antiference/dp/B00FSDNZNS

Which you suggest powering from the lounge in my case.

Or this one that prpr suggests:

2. 2 Way UHF Masthead Amplifier Gain 10dB

https://www.blake-uk.com/masthead-a...psu-ampifier_with_propsu11f_power_supply_unit

Can I ask:

1. If you know how you vary the gain on the one you suggest? As it doesn't state how to on the website link

(Edit: I have since read here about how you do it and that:
"There are two main types of variable gain control, front end (generally a variable attenuator on the input), and interstage, where the signal level is altered after initial amplification. The latter is preferable as it gives better noise figures at minimum gain settings." http://www.aerialsandtv.co.uk/ampsandsplitters.html#VariableGain)

Here is a video that shows how you vary the gain on an interstage amplifier such as this 4 way mast head amp (http://www.aerialsandtv.co.uk/onlinesplittersandamps.html#4WayMHamp):

2. Would it be okay to situate the one you suggest in the loft rather than on the aerial itself, this would mean it would be about 3 - 4 metres further along the cable run than if it were located on the pole

(Edit: I have since read here about this point:
"The other type of amplifier is the so called Mast Head amp although this can be something of a misnomer as they are also be mounted on the wall, or even used in lofts
...
The major advantage of the mast head amp is the improvement in "signal to noise ratio" as it can be situated close to the aerial (the ideal distance is about 1m) and therefore it does not amplify any noise introduced to the signal by the cable
...
That said even 3 or 4 metres is far preferable to a typical cable run of 15m, or more.
...
Note that many people fit the mast head amps in the loft instead, if this is a more convenient location for the cable runs
...
I am of the view that amps with variable gain capable of being decreased to a low level are more appropriate, and are more flexible in their application, than those with higher gain
" http://www.aerialsandtv.co.uk/ampsandsplitters.html#mastheadamps)

3. Can I ask why it is better to not have the power supply in the loft space?

Many thanks.