What's the neatest way to run this cable?

[SUNRAY]

Ignore Winstons comments he can never make up his mind what he wants to say, on a previous thread he went overboard explaining why the splitter SHOULD BE installed.

 

[winston1]

Ignore Winstons comments he can never make up his mind what he wants to say, on a previous thread he went overboard explaining why the splitter SHOULD BE installed.

DON’T TELL PEOPLE TO IGNORE ME OR ANYONE ELSE.

 

[winston1]

What would you recommend?


It would give me more options

One day, I may want to add a TV to the room above or use the existing antenna point?

Is 4db loss significant?

Running an aerial and mains lead together may cause interference from the mains to be induced into the aerial. Best to keep the two feeds apart in separate trunking.

A 4dB loss should be tolerable with a good aerial system. I asked why you wanted it and you have explained. Don’t put an amplifier in it you don’t need it. All amplifiers add noise.

 

[SUNRAY]

Running an aerial and mains lead together may cause interference from the mains to be induced into the aerial. Best to keep the two feeds apart in separate trunking.

A 4dB loss should be tolerable with a good aerial system. I asked why you wanted it and you have explained. Don’t put an amplifier in it you don’t need it. All amplifiers add noise.

In an ideal world I'd agree to keep the cable separated but have a look behind the average TV setup of yesteryear with VCR, SKY, DVD, 5.1 amp etc and very possibly record dec, cassette machine, CD player, MD recorder etc and see the massive tangle of all sorts of cables not interfering with each other.

In practical terms running power, aerial, cat 5 in a single trunking for a metre or so will invariably cause no problems.

 

[SUNRAY]

DON’T TELL PEOPLE TO IGNORE ME OR ANYONE ELSE.

Not wanting to destroy another thread I'll reply elsewhere.

 

[bernardgreen]

All amplifiers add noise.

and a good quality front end to the receiver will remove / ignore most of the noise. The front end is itself an amplifier.

 

[winston1]

You cannot remove noise once it is added. Please go back to electrics that you understand and leave RF to those that know

 

[bernardgreen]

You cannot remove noise once it is added.

Have you never heard of filtering signal from noise

Quote from LINK

the radio strength of Voyager 1 is about 23 watts. This signal is directed toward Earth, but since Voyager 1 is about 15 billion kilometers from Earth, by the time Voyager 1's signal reaches us its power is less than an attowatt, or a billionth of a billionth of a watt.

Please go back to electrics that you understand and leave RF to those that know

You obviously do not know that 12 years of my career was in the design of radio communication systems.

What qualifications / experience in radio communications do you have ?

 

[winston1]

Nothing in that link about filtering signal from noise.

No I do not know about your career.

I spent 16 years at the BBC involved in RF distribution followed by 5 years at Cable and Wireless/NTL working on cable TV systems.

 

[FrodoOne]

Quite apart from the other "discussions" generated from this posting, I am quite surprised that there are persons who still choose to install a "set-up" whereby they just watch TV programs at the times at which broadcasters of those programs choose to transmit them.
Also, broadcasters tend to put the "good" programs on at the same time of day, resulting in the viewer having to choose and (possibly) miss programs which he/she might wish to watch.

While "catch-up" TV is available, via Chrome-cast (or other devices), recorders which can record programs from several Digital TV channels at the same time and then play them back at a time more suitable to the viewer are available - at about the same price (or less) than that of the wall mounted TV depicted in the first post.

One wonders if veedee has considered these options.

 

[GarethW]

Likely, the antenna cable will either come down inside the wall from above, or up the wall from below. If you can lift floor boards to gin access to the coax cable, you could then run it straight down from the ceiling (or floor). You could then chop it into the wall vertically, or in a vertical run of mini trunking. A single vertical run of trunking looks much better than an horizontal + vertical run I find.

Brilliant idea, I didn't think of that !

 

[winston1]

Quite apart from the other "discussions" generated from this posting, I am quite surprised that there are persons who still choose to install a "set-up" whereby they just watch TV programmes
Mat the times at which broadcasters of those programmes choose to transmit them.
Also, broadcasters tend to put the "good" programmes on at the same time of day, resulting in the viewer having to choose and (possibly) miss programmes which he/she might wish to watch.

While "catch-up" TV is available, via Chrome-cast (or other devices), recorders which can record programmes from several Digital TV channels at the same time and then play them back at a time more suitable to the viewer are available - at about the same price (or less) than that of the wall mounted TV depicted in the first post.

One wonders if veedee has considered these options.

Maybe, but he would still need an aerial for these recorders.

 

[SUNRAY]

Quite apart from the other "discussions" generated from this posting, I am quite surprised that there are persons who still choose to install a "set-up" whereby they just watch TV programs at the times at which broadcasters of those programs choose to transmit them.

3 of our 6 TVs are TV only and I can think of 4 households straight off the top of my head where the only TV is setup that way.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Quite apart from the other "discussions" generated from this posting, I am quite surprised that there are persons who still choose to install a "set-up" whereby they just watch TV programs at the times at which broadcasters of those programs choose to transmit them.
Also, broadcasters tend to put the "good" programs on at the same time of day, resulting in the viewer having to choose and (possibly) miss programs which he/she might wish to watch.

Other than the catchup, Prime and Netflix (which I rarely bother with), we have three TV's each able to record - but only record the one channel, the same as being watched. That more than satisfies our needs, we rarely record for later watching, there is just so much choice of live and on catchup.

 

[ericmark]

I seem to remember my sister buying boxes that allowed the TV to be in different place to aerial. However I used Sky Q so I did not need to fit cables to the rooms for TV signals, it is not perfect, but does work, I can get away without Sky, the free to air is good enough, but wife likes some of the pay for programs, there are others, Chromecast for example, she has a Chromecast dongle thing in her craft room.

The big question has to be are the other advantages of having one of the pay for systems worth abandoning Freeview, Freesat, or Free to air? I know where I live Freeview from Moel-y-sant is not worth having, so either internet or satellite system.

I seem to remember going to Curries PC world to get some thing for my mother to watch TV think it was called a firestick, or something like that, and it said there was a list of problems we could watch, however it needs a subscription even if watching free contact, and she did not have a credit card, so had to be returned.

And some of the old methods that worked A1 with a 22" or 14" cathode ray tube TV, are just not good enough for a 42" or 36" TV, I know using SCART is no longer good enough, we need HDMI today, and so many of the older systems were SCART.