Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21   Report Post  
Old March 16th 14, 04:42 PM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 568
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?

In message , Jerry Stuckle
writes





HDTV requires a stronger signal than the old NTSC.


It really depends on how good your old analogue NTSC was. For a
noiseless picture, you would need around 43dB CNR, but pictures were
still more-than-watch-able at 25dB, and the picture was often still
lockable at ridiculously low CNRs (when you certainly wouldn't bother
watching it). Digital signals can work at SNRs down to around 15dB for
64QAM and 20dB for 256QAM (although if it's a little below this, and you
will suddenly get nothing).


--
Ian

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---
  #22   Report Post  
Old March 16th 14, 05:05 PM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,067
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?

On 3/16/2014 11:42 AM, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Jerry Stuckle
writes





HDTV requires a stronger signal than the old NTSC.


It really depends on how good your old analogue NTSC was. For a
noiseless picture, you would need around 43dB CNR, but pictures were
still more-than-watch-able at 25dB, and the picture was often still
lockable at ridiculously low CNRs (when you certainly wouldn't bother
watching it). Digital signals can work at SNRs down to around 15dB for
64QAM and 20dB for 256QAM (although if it's a little below this, and you
will suddenly get nothing).



That has not been our experience. We had a number of customers here in
the DC area who had great pictures on NTSC sets, but got either heavy
pixilation or no picture at all when the switchover occurred. We sent
them to a company which does tv antenna installations (we do a lot of
low voltage, including tv - but not antennas). In every case,
installing a better outdoor antenna solved the problem.

No one said the NTSC had to be noiseless. But the 43dB is a bit high,
even for older sets. Input from the cable tv company to our equipment
was 10-20dB; we tried to push 10dB to all of the outputs but never had a
problem even down to 7dB (the lowest we would let it drop to).

I don't know what the current specs the techs are using now; I don't get
into the field much any more. But I would be surprised if it were less
than 15-20dB.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================
  #23   Report Post  
Old March 16th 14, 06:26 PM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jan 2014
Posts: 250
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?


It really depends on how good your old analogue NTSC was. For a
noiseless picture, you would need around 43dB CNR, but pictures were
still more-than-watch-able at 25dB, and the picture was often still
lockable at ridiculously low CNRs (when you certainly wouldn't bother
watching it). Digital signals can work at SNRs down to around 15dB for
64QAM and 20dB for 256QAM (although if it's a little below this, and you
will suddenly get nothing).


That has not been our experience. We had a number of customers here in
the DC area who had great pictures on NTSC sets, but got either heavy
pixilation or no picture at all when the switchover occurred. We sent
them to a company which does tv antenna installations (we do a lot of
low voltage, including tv - but not antennas). In every case,
installing a better outdoor antenna solved the problem.

No one said the NTSC had to be noiseless. But the 43dB is a bit high,
even for older sets. Input from the cable tv company to our equipment
was 10-20dB; we tried to push 10dB to all of the outputs but never had a
problem even down to 7dB (the lowest we would let it drop to).


That makes no sense; a 7dB CNR would be pretty much unwatchable on
analogue, it would be a very very noisy picture, if it even locked at all!

Jeff

  #24   Report Post  
Old March 16th 14, 08:43 PM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 568
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?

In message , Jeff writes

It really depends on how good your old analogue NTSC was. For a
noiseless picture, you would need around 43dB CNR, but pictures were
still more-than-watch-able at 25dB, and the picture was often still
lockable at ridiculously low CNRs (when you certainly wouldn't bother
watching it). Digital signals can work at SNRs down to around 15dB for
64QAM and 20dB for 256QAM (although if it's a little below this, and you
will suddenly get nothing).


That has not been our experience. We had a number of customers here in
the DC area who had great pictures on NTSC sets, but got either heavy
pixilation or no picture at all when the switchover occurred. We sent
them to a company which does tv antenna installations (we do a lot of
low voltage, including tv - but not antennas). In every case,
installing a better outdoor antenna solved the problem.

No one said the NTSC had to be noiseless. But the 43dB is a bit high,
even for older sets. Input from the cable tv company to our equipment
was 10-20dB; we tried to push 10dB to all of the outputs but never had a
problem even down to 7dB (the lowest we would let it drop to).


That makes no sense; a 7dB CNR would be pretty much unwatchable on
analogue, it would be a very very noisy picture, if it even locked at
all!

I'm also not sure what the figures mean. From distant memory, the NCTA
minimum RF input level (for NTSC) was 0dBmV (into a TV set - it might
have been a bit more for set-top boxes), and the CNR 43dB.

The UK cable TV level (for PAL set-tops) was 3dBmV to 15dBmV, with no
more than 3dB between the levels of adjacent channels, and when digital
signals came along, these were run around 15dB below the analogues.

[Note that for both the US and the UK, one of the reasons for these
obviously high signal levels is because cable set-top boxes have
relatively appalling noise figures compared with your modern TV set.]

UK off-air transmissions were somewhat similar, with digitals being run
at 10, 16 and even occasionally 20dB below the analogues. However, when
all the analogues were turned off, the digitals were turned up to
typically 7dB below what the analogues had been. This would suggest that
digital receivers (including HD) are at least perfectly happy with 7dB
less signal than analogue - and in practice, all other things being
equal, digital receivers work down to much lower signal levels than
would be considered satisfactory for analogue. The only obvious proviso
is that while (so far) UK SD transmissions are 64QAM, HD transmissions
are 256QAM, and therefore need maybe 6dB more signal (which will only be
apparent where reception is marginal).
--
ian

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---
  #25   Report Post  
Old March 16th 14, 09:32 PM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 137
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?

"Jeff" wrote in message ...

The programming and distribution companies are separate, so there is no
issue with receiving different programmes from different directions.
(all transmitters transmit all TV programmes available on the system)
This is probably the same as in the UK.

With the exception of regional "opt-outs", this is true.


Not really, many of the low powered relays do not carry the full set of
programmes, they only carry the 3 public service multiplexes not the full
set.

See
:http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/tv-research/no3factsheet.pdf

Jeff

True, but I thought the topic was the advantage, if any, of receiving more
than one high power main station. Even in the analogue days not all relays
carried Channel 5, for instance.
--
;-)
..
73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint.
..
http://turner-smith.co.uk



  #26   Report Post  
Old March 16th 14, 11:26 PM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,067
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?

On 3/16/2014 1:26 PM, Jeff wrote:

It really depends on how good your old analogue NTSC was. For a
noiseless picture, you would need around 43dB CNR, but pictures were
still more-than-watch-able at 25dB, and the picture was often still
lockable at ridiculously low CNRs (when you certainly wouldn't bother
watching it). Digital signals can work at SNRs down to around 15dB for
64QAM and 20dB for 256QAM (although if it's a little below this, and you
will suddenly get nothing).


That has not been our experience. We had a number of customers here in
the DC area who had great pictures on NTSC sets, but got either heavy
pixilation or no picture at all when the switchover occurred. We sent
them to a company which does tv antenna installations (we do a lot of
low voltage, including tv - but not antennas). In every case,
installing a better outdoor antenna solved the problem.

No one said the NTSC had to be noiseless. But the 43dB is a bit high,
even for older sets. Input from the cable tv company to our equipment
was 10-20dB; we tried to push 10dB to all of the outputs but never had a
problem even down to 7dB (the lowest we would let it drop to).


That makes no sense; a 7dB CNR would be pretty much unwatchable on
analogue, it would be a very very noisy picture, if it even locked at all!

Jeff


I'm not talking CNR - I'm talking signal strength. 7dbm is plenty of
signal. Most later TV's would work even at 0dbm.

HDTV, not so much.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================
  #27   Report Post  
Old March 17th 14, 12:17 AM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Nov 2007
Posts: 568
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?

In message , Jerry Stuckle
writes
On 3/16/2014 1:26 PM, Jeff wrote:

It really depends on how good your old analogue NTSC was. For a
noiseless picture, you would need around 43dB CNR, but pictures were
still more-than-watch-able at 25dB, and the picture was often still
lockable at ridiculously low CNRs (when you certainly wouldn't bother
watching it). Digital signals can work at SNRs down to around 15dB for
64QAM and 20dB for 256QAM (although if it's a little below this, and you
will suddenly get nothing).


That has not been our experience. We had a number of customers here in
the DC area who had great pictures on NTSC sets, but got either heavy
pixilation or no picture at all when the switchover occurred. We sent
them to a company which does tv antenna installations (we do a lot of
low voltage, including tv - but not antennas). In every case,
installing a better outdoor antenna solved the problem.

No one said the NTSC had to be noiseless. But the 43dB is a bit high,
even for older sets. Input from the cable tv company to our equipment
was 10-20dB; we tried to push 10dB to all of the outputs but never had a
problem even down to 7dB (the lowest we would let it drop to).


That makes no sense; a 7dB CNR would be pretty much unwatchable on
analogue, it would be a very very noisy picture, if it even locked at all!

Jeff


I'm not talking CNR - I'm talking signal strength. 7dbm is plenty of
signal. Most later TV's would work even at 0dbm.

HDTV, not so much.

7dBm is an absolutely colossal signal for a TV set. Even 0dBm is an
absolutely colossal signal!
--
Ian

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---
  #28   Report Post  
Old March 17th 14, 02:16 AM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,067
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?

On 3/16/2014 7:17 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Jerry Stuckle
writes
On 3/16/2014 1:26 PM, Jeff wrote:

It really depends on how good your old analogue NTSC was. For a
noiseless picture, you would need around 43dB CNR, but pictures were
still more-than-watch-able at 25dB, and the picture was often still
lockable at ridiculously low CNRs (when you certainly wouldn't bother
watching it). Digital signals can work at SNRs down to around 15dB for
64QAM and 20dB for 256QAM (although if it's a little below this,
and you
will suddenly get nothing).


That has not been our experience. We had a number of customers here in
the DC area who had great pictures on NTSC sets, but got either heavy
pixilation or no picture at all when the switchover occurred. We sent
them to a company which does tv antenna installations (we do a lot of
low voltage, including tv - but not antennas). In every case,
installing a better outdoor antenna solved the problem.

No one said the NTSC had to be noiseless. But the 43dB is a bit high,
even for older sets. Input from the cable tv company to our equipment
was 10-20dB; we tried to push 10dB to all of the outputs but never
had a
problem even down to 7dB (the lowest we would let it drop to).

That makes no sense; a 7dB CNR would be pretty much unwatchable on
analogue, it would be a very very noisy picture, if it even locked at
all!

Jeff


I'm not talking CNR - I'm talking signal strength. 7dbm is plenty of
signal. Most later TV's would work even at 0dbm.

HDTV, not so much.

7dBm is an absolutely colossal signal for a TV set. Even 0dBm is an
absolutely colossal signal!


Not in the United States. It was the minimum that the cable industry
provides to the TV set.

We are talking a signal 4.25Mhz wide signal, not SSB or CW.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================
  #29   Report Post  
Old March 17th 14, 08:38 AM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jan 2014
Posts: 250
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?


No one said the NTSC had to be noiseless. But the 43dB is a bit high,
even for older sets. Input from the cable tv company to our equipment
was 10-20dB; we tried to push 10dB to all of the outputs but never had a
problem even down to 7dB (the lowest we would let it drop to).


That makes no sense; a 7dB CNR would be pretty much unwatchable on
analogue, it would be a very very noisy picture, if it even locked at
all!

Jeff


I'm not talking CNR - I'm talking signal strength. 7dbm is plenty of
signal. Most later TV's would work even at 0dbm.


Well the "43dB"that you were stating "was a bit high" was expressed as
CNR, so it is reasonable to think that your other figures were also CNR
as you did bot state otherwise.

Also 7dBm (5mW) is a very high signal and would cause most sets to
intermod like crazy. Perhaps you meant 7dBmV.

Jeff

  #30   Report Post  
Old March 17th 14, 08:45 AM posted to uk.radio.amateur,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jan 2014
Posts: 250
Default Quad shield coax & dielectric?


7dBm is an absolutely colossal signal for a TV set. Even 0dBm is an
absolutely colossal signal!


Not in the United States. It was the minimum that the cable industry
provides to the TV set.

We are talking a signal 4.25Mhz wide signal, not SSB or CW.


dBm is not a bandwidth dependant measurement such as CNR which is.
Putting +7dBm into a tv receiver is madness, it would cause severe
overload and inter mods. +7dBm is 50mW and that equates to about 61mV in
a 75 ohm system which is an enormous signal.

Jeff
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Connecting coax shield to tower near top Rick (W-A-one-R-K-T) Antenna 3 July 19th 07 06:57 AM
High Quality {Low Noise} Coax Cable for Shortwave Listening (SWL) Antennas ? - - - Why Not Quad-Shield RG6 ! RHF Shortwave 0 December 25th 06 07:22 PM
soldering coax shield Tam/WB2TT Equipment 11 March 23rd 04 12:05 PM
soldering coax shield Tam/WB2TT Homebrew 10 March 23rd 04 12:05 PM
soldering coax shield Tam/WB2TT Homebrew 0 March 20th 04 04:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:09 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017