Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Decent Comcast tech
12 views
Skip to first unread message
Adam H. Kerman
Mar 17, 2013, 11:47:29 AM3/17/13
to
There was intermitent interference on a number of television channels. A
Comcast tech couldn't find it simply by running the test on the coax leg
that provided input to the box. He went to the splitter and tested there
with various runs connected.
There are two runs of coax in use, left over from one of the satellite
installations (the previous people were subscribers to both satellite
services) when they were doing inside wiring with dual runs of coax.
There's a third run of coax in use, to the EMTA in the office.
There's just the one splitter, where the coax from outside comes through.
Fortunately the entire mess of coax comes through to one ugly wiring closet.
As there are dual coax runs available at the tv, one is hooked up to the
tv. It's not a CableCARD host, so it can tune in the few remaining
unencrypted channels. The other provides the input to the set-top box, a
rented dual-tuner Motorola DVR.
I had a surge protector on the input to the tv.
Because this tech did proper troubleshooting, he proved that the surge
protector was the source of the intermittent signal interference. I didn't
known it was backfeeding through the splitter and interfering with the
signal going to the set-top box. Now I know.
No other Comcast tech ever pointed to the surge protector as a potential
source of interference. Other techs have been out here, especially during
that period in which squirrels kept chewing through the drop and it had
to be replaced for the second time.
Because the inside wire is from the previous occupants, it's not quad
shielded RG-6 but RG-59. However, it's got thermoplastic insulation, so
as long as it's not failed, I'm leaving it be.
When I was shoving aside tiles in the drop ceiling on the lower level to
look at how the cable had been installed, I discovered to my horror that the
satellite installer had simply drilled through the floor from above, instead
of following the electrical conduit in wall to install a proper outlet box
there. I knew that they'd drilled through the floor, but I hadn't noticed
that in the process they damaged the top of the floor joist, the bastards.
Comcast tech couldn't find it simply by running the test on the coax leg
that provided input to the box. He went to the splitter and tested there
with various runs connected.
There are two runs of coax in use, left over from one of the satellite
installations (the previous people were subscribers to both satellite
services) when they were doing inside wiring with dual runs of coax.
There's a third run of coax in use, to the EMTA in the office.
There's just the one splitter, where the coax from outside comes through.
Fortunately the entire mess of coax comes through to one ugly wiring closet.
As there are dual coax runs available at the tv, one is hooked up to the
tv. It's not a CableCARD host, so it can tune in the few remaining
unencrypted channels. The other provides the input to the set-top box, a
rented dual-tuner Motorola DVR.
I had a surge protector on the input to the tv.
Because this tech did proper troubleshooting, he proved that the surge
protector was the source of the intermittent signal interference. I didn't
known it was backfeeding through the splitter and interfering with the
signal going to the set-top box. Now I know.
No other Comcast tech ever pointed to the surge protector as a potential
source of interference. Other techs have been out here, especially during
that period in which squirrels kept chewing through the drop and it had
to be replaced for the second time.
Because the inside wire is from the previous occupants, it's not quad
shielded RG-6 but RG-59. However, it's got thermoplastic insulation, so
as long as it's not failed, I'm leaving it be.
When I was shoving aside tiles in the drop ceiling on the lower level to
look at how the cable had been installed, I discovered to my horror that the
satellite installer had simply drilled through the floor from above, instead
of following the electrical conduit in wall to install a proper outlet box
there. I knew that they'd drilled through the floor, but I hadn't noticed
that in the process they damaged the top of the floor joist, the bastards.
Harvey Specter
Mar 17, 2013, 12:43:50 PM3/17/13
to
On 3/17/2013 11:47 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Because the inside wire is from the previous occupants, it's not quad
> shielded RG-6 but RG-59. However, it's got thermoplastic insulation, so
> as long as it's not failed, I'm leaving it be.
If it was my house, I'd rip out that RG-59 and replace it with some RG-6
> Because the inside wire is from the previous occupants, it's not quad
> shielded RG-6 but RG-59. However, it's got thermoplastic insulation, so
> as long as it's not failed, I'm leaving it be.
quad shield. The difference in signal loss is huge!
http://www.dslreports.com/faq/cabletech?text=1
cameo
Mar 17, 2013, 8:17:32 PM3/17/13
to
old R-59 produces adequate signal. It would be like running your car on
premium gas when it was designed to run on regular.
Adam H. Kerman
Mar 17, 2013, 8:51:13 PM3/17/13
to
Given the thermoplastic insulation (versus the short-lived plastic they
used to use), I'll leave it alone. If the insulation had been bad, I'd
have yanked it. That's what I did where I live.
Message has been deleted
meagain
Mar 18, 2013, 10:19:49 AM3/18/13
to
Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Because this tech did proper troubleshooting, he proved that the surge
> protector was the source of the intermittent signal interference. I didn't
> known it was backfeeding through the splitter and interfering with the
> signal going to the set-top box. Now I know.
>
> No other Comcast tech ever pointed to the surge protector as a potential
> source of interference.
Did the coax go through the surge protector or only AC power?
> Because this tech did proper troubleshooting, he proved that the surge
> protector was the source of the intermittent signal interference. I didn't
> known it was backfeeding through the splitter and interfering with the
> signal going to the set-top box. Now I know.
>
> No other Comcast tech ever pointed to the surge protector as a potential
> source of interference.
Adam H. Kerman
Mar 18, 2013, 10:50:16 AM3/18/13
to
ethernet protection, too, but they weren't in use. I don't know how there
could have been an issue if it were merely the house current.
cameo
Mar 18, 2013, 3:02:00 PM3/18/13
to
On 3/17/2013 8:09 PM, Bill wrote:
> For a car that doesn't need it, premium gas doesn't offer any benefits other
> than a lighter wallet,
The RG-6 also does not offer any benefits if the existing RG-59 already
provides all the signals adequately.
so that's not a good comparison.
So you didn't get the analogy.
> For a car that doesn't need it, premium gas doesn't offer any benefits other
> than a lighter wallet,
The RG-6 also does not offer any benefits if the existing RG-59 already
provides all the signals adequately.
so that's not a good comparison.
So you didn't get the analogy.
Message has been deleted
Adam H. Kerman
Mar 19, 2013, 12:35:06 AM3/19/13
to
Harvey Specter
Mar 19, 2013, 6:03:58 PM3/19/13
to
On 3/17/2013 8:17 PM, cameo wrote:
> No doubt. But what's the point of the extra work and cost where even the
> old R-59 produces adequate signal.
Simple.
> No doubt. But what's the point of the extra work and cost where even the
> old R-59 produces adequate signal.
Let's say that every house on the block, except mine, is wired with
RG-59. And let's suppose that the output of the neighborhood Comcast
node starts slowly going south. Because my house is wired with RG-6 QS,
naturally my signal levels would be 5 dBmV higher than all my cheap lazy
neighbors. As the condition of the node worsens, all the neighbor's
equipment will be dropping off-line. Furthermore, my cheap lazy
neighbors will be furiously calling Comcast and setting up service
appointments. Obviously they will be further inconvenienced by having
to take time off work.
I, on the other hand, will be enjoying my Comcast services, totally
oblivious that the rest of the neighborhood is down.
(All because I'm smarter than my cheap lazy neighbors.)
cameo
Mar 19, 2013, 6:19:53 PM3/19/13
to
On 3/19/2013 3:03 PM, Harvey Specter wrote:
> On 3/17/2013 8:17 PM, cameo wrote:
>
>> No doubt. But what's the point of the extra work and cost where even the
>> old R-59 produces adequate signal.
>
> Simple.
>
> Let's say that every house on the block, except mine, is wired with
> RG-59. And let's suppose that the output of the neighborhood Comcast
> node starts slowly going south. Because my house is wired with RG-6 QS,
> naturally my signal levels would be 5 dBmV higher than all my cheap lazy
> neighbors. As the condition of the node worsens, all the neighbor's
> equipment will be dropping off-line. Furthermore, my cheap lazy
> neighbors will be furiously calling Comcast and setting up service
> appointments. Obviously they will be further inconvenienced by having
> to take time off work.
Or maybe they can upgrade their wiring then, if they haven't moved in
> On 3/17/2013 8:17 PM, cameo wrote:
>
>> No doubt. But what's the point of the extra work and cost where even the
>> old R-59 produces adequate signal.
>
> Simple.
>
> Let's say that every house on the block, except mine, is wired with
> RG-59. And let's suppose that the output of the neighborhood Comcast
> node starts slowly going south. Because my house is wired with RG-6 QS,
> naturally my signal levels would be 5 dBmV higher than all my cheap lazy
> neighbors. As the condition of the node worsens, all the neighbor's
> equipment will be dropping off-line. Furthermore, my cheap lazy
> neighbors will be furiously calling Comcast and setting up service
> appointments. Obviously they will be further inconvenienced by having
> to take time off work.
the meantime.
Your Name
Mar 20, 2013, 9:15:24 PM3/20/13
to
On 3/19/2013 6:19 PM, cameo wrote:
>
> Or maybe they can upgrade their wiring then, if they haven't moved in
> the meantime.
>
Exactly! If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
>
> Or maybe they can upgrade their wiring then, if they haven't moved in
> the meantime.
>
>
Harvey Specter
Mar 21, 2013, 2:10:28 PM3/21/13
to
On 3/19/2013 6:19 PM, cameo wrote:
doing a nude scene.
cameo
Mar 21, 2013, 7:13:56 PM3/21/13
to
On 3/21/2013 11:10 AM, Harvey Specter wrote:
> With my luck, cable service would drop out just as Piper Perabo started
> doing a nude scene.
Well, she didn't do it in Coyote Ugly, so why should she do it now when
> With my luck, cable service would drop out just as Piper Perabo started
> doing a nude scene.
she is much older?
Harvey Specter
Mar 22, 2013, 12:25:32 AM3/22/13
to
make sure my RG-6 cox is up to the task.
B...@bob.net
Mar 22, 2013, 5:49:22 PM3/22/13
to
Harvey Specter
Mar 22, 2013, 9:19:41 PM3/22/13
to
0 new messages