Increasing Cable TV signal strength

[amdx]

Hi All,
I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
signal to work 100% of the time.
I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
strength.
Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
Any ideas to get a better signal?
Mikek


PS.

When the signal fails it seems channel 41 is ok and above 42 it breaks up.
Curious to know if there is an unusual frequency jump between those two
digital channels.

[Ian Jackson]

In message <b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET>, amdx
<am...@knology.net> writes

Despite your long 170ft drop cable, were you getting good analogue
signals before the change to digital? If so, it could be that something
is not right. Normally, even if you have had only fairly mediocre
analogues, the digitals are good.

Otherwise....
It sounds like your signals are just too weak. As things are, and if you
can, the obvious fix would be to overcome the substantial loss of the
170ft drop cable by fitting an amplifier at or near the utility post
(not at your end), and power it with low voltage via the coax from your
end (ie similar to a line-powered masthead antenna amplifier). However,
you would need to consult with the cable company to see if they were OK
with letting you do this. It could be that they might be able advise you
on the most suitable amplifier to use. It's not rocket science, but you
have to be a little careful not to break any of their rules and
generally do anything they don't approve of.
--
Ian

[Fred Bloggs]

On Feb 8, 2:00 pm, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.

That's about 10dB loss at midband for RG6.

> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.

That was just a 3dB boost.

>   That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.
>    I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
> out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?

Really? There are such things a power inserters and compatible drop
amps that allow you to power the amplifier over the cable from the
user end. For RG6 18ga stranded that is about 0.6V loss at 250mA and
therefore doable,

> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.

Forget it.

>   Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
>    Any ideas to get a better signal?
>                 Mikek
>

Use a 15dB gain drop amp with power inserter, but that's just a guess.
Would help if you actually knew signal levels like what the receiver
requires for optimum reception and what the cable co sources. Putting
the amplifier at source gives you a typical system noise figure of
3dB, but putting it at your end limits your NF to 10dB minimum from
the start.

[Don Y]

Hi Mike,

On 2/8/2012 12:00 PM, amdx wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable

I assume you couldn't drag your cable box (electrically) closer to the
drop "for test purposes" (e.g., even if you needed a small inverter
to power the kit)

> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the

Why? Are there other clients feeding off the same drop? I.e., 86
the splitter completely.

> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.
> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is out.
> Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?

No. The signal is already lost when it gets to that end.
But an inline amplifier that you can power downstream (from *your*
end of the cable) with a power injector. Find something that is
reasonably weatherproof (unless you have a nice dry place to
install it at the post -- remember, salt water/spray is hell!).
And, consider how much risk of THEFT there might be...

(they aren't expensive but if others have the same problem
as you, they might opt to "borrow" your solution!)

> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.

Nope.

> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
> Any ideas to get a better signal?

Watch prerecorded movies off DVD -- there's nothing on TV
worth watching! :>

[Dave Platt]

In article <b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET>,

amdx <am...@knology.net> wrote:
>I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
>suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
>company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
>this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
>utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
>cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
>signal to work 100% of the time.
> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
>out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
>I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
>strength.
> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
> Any ideas to get a better signal?

Adding an amp at the cable box isn't all that likely to work... you
can try it, but don't get your hopes up. Unless the amp has a
significantly lower "noise figure" than the RF front end in the cable
box, all you'll be doing is adding noise... the desired signal will be
stronger, but the noise will be stronger yet.

Something you could do, is add a single-port RF amplifier right at the
utility post splitter, where your tap comes off of the feed. You can
buy amplifiers of this sort which are designed to receive "phantom
power" through the coax cable... you'd install a "power injector" at
your boat, which feeds a DC voltage up the coax to the amplifier.
This is probably your best bet:

- It would amplify the signal before it's attenuated by the 170-foot
cable run.

- It won't require a power supply at the post... just at your
boat, where you already have power.

- It shouldn't interfere with the other taps on the
splitter, even when the amplifier is not receiving power from your boat.

You'd be looking for an "antenna mast" type of preamplifier. The
Channel Master 0068DSB or 7777, Winegard AP-8700 or AP-8275 or
HDP-269, AntennaCraft 10G212, or one of the Blonder Tongue Galaxy III
models might do the job for you. You'll probably want a "75 ohm in,
75 ohm out" model, which would connect directly to the 75-ohm coax.

--
Dave Platt <dpl...@radagast.org> AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

[Robert Macy]

see URL:
<http://www.dbsinstall.com/broadcast/vhf_uhf_freq_list.asp>
41 is 324 - 330MHz and 42 is 330-336 MHz
cables attenuate more at higher frequency.

By ALL means, if you're going to add an amplifier, add it at the
source location, not at the receiver location
Cheap, but good, ones are available from microcircuits. Can you buy a
line driver from your CATV company?

I suspect the 'better' cable is only marginally better. What is the
EXACT cable you're using? what is its attenuation per foot per MHz?
You can buy extremely low loss coax, but you may have to send in your
first born. Go to a local NRTL [EMC Test Lab] and see if they can
(are willing to) order a length for you.

Find the highest channel you wish to receive and the frequency
associated with that. Now you can balance the amplifier gain with the
cable loss to determine if it will work. Note you already know that
170 ft of ?? cable gets you up to channel 41, so from that number you
can estimate just how much drop your receiver can take before it stops
receiving.

[mike]

Are you sure it's a signal strength problem?
The cable guy should have been able to measure the signal at your cable box.
Are the people using the other taps having problems?
If you're on a boat, you might be at the end of the cable run.
In that case, you might be able to get them to crank up the gain in their
distribution amp.
Power at the pole is not a problem. You can get amps that are powered
through the signal cable to your cable box. Getting them to let you
install it
is another matter.
You can get MUCH better wire, for a price.

Signal strength is not the only problem with digital TV.
Reflections in the system can confuse the decoder. Are there
any unterminated cables on the other taps?

I have OTA antenna digital TV. Plenty of signal, but reflections
cause significant drop outs on some channels. More signal won't fix
that. In fact, I have a variable attenuator to REDUCE signal strength.
I tweak the signal level for fewest dropouts.


Might be electrical noise coupled in thru the ground system.

Bottom line is that you pay the cable company for TV reception.
It's their responsibility to provide you with a watchable signal.
You shouldn't have to tell them what to do. They should just FIX it!!

[amdx]

But, analog can be snowy but very watchable, digital an be pixalated
and stuttering without no sound or often no picture at all.

> Otherwise....
> It sounds like your signals are just too weak. As things are, and if you
> can, the obvious fix would be to overcome the substantial loss of the
> 170ft drop cable by fitting an amplifier at or near the utility post
> (not at your end), and power it with low voltage via the coax from your
> end (ie similar to a line-powered masthead antenna amplifier). However,
> you would need to consult with the cable company to see if they were OK
> with letting you do this. It could be that they might be able advise you
> on the most suitable amplifier to use. It's not rocket science, but you
> have to be a little careful not to break any of their rules and
> generally do anything they don't approve of.

I had not thought about a coax powered amp, Thanks.
Mikek

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 2:36 PM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2:00 pm, amdx<a...@knology.net> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>
> That's about 10dB loss at midband for RG6.
>
>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
>> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
>> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
>> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
>> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
>> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
>
> That was just a 3dB boost.

But that 3bd did get me a more consistent picture.

[Ian Jackson]

In message <9a54a$4f32e7bc$4b4c116f$32...@KNOLOGY.NET>, amdx
<am...@knology.net> writes

You are quite correct. However, digital is generally capable of working
to lower signal levels than analogue. It's amazing how rubbishy digital
signals can be, yet still give perfect pictures - but don't expect
miracles!

>> Otherwise....
>> It sounds like your signals are just too weak. As things are, and if you
>> can, the obvious fix would be to overcome the substantial loss of the
>> 170ft drop cable by fitting an amplifier at or near the utility post
>> (not at your end), and power it with low voltage via the coax from your
>> end (ie similar to a line-powered masthead antenna amplifier). However,
>> you would need to consult with the cable company to see if they were OK
>> with letting you do this. It could be that they might be able advise you
>> on the most suitable amplifier to use. It's not rocket science, but you
>> have to be a little careful not to break any of their rules and
>> generally do anything they don't approve of.
>
> I had not thought about a coax powered amp, Thanks.
> Mikek
>

I see that several others have also suggested a coax-powered amplifier.
[If the cable company can't give you more signal level, it's the only
solution.] As suggested, they should be able to provide a suitable
amplifier and power unit - or at least advise you what to use.
--
Ian

[amdx]

Hey thanks for the part numbers, I'll look into these.
Mikek

[ne...@jecarter.us]

The cable company probably has amplifiers that can be powered over the
cable run. If not, those amps can be found on ebay. Be sure to get a
bidirectional amplifier because some systems send the control signals
back up the cable to the cable company (Comcast in the southeastern
US, for example.)

John

[amdx]

That's helpful. however, I do receive channels up to 484!
Dang, just noticed "Lesbo Euro Trash: Big Boobs" is on 502, but, it's
pay per view. :-)

> 41 is 324 - 330MHz and 42 is 330-336 MHz
> cables attenuate more at higher frequency.

I thought there might be a bigger jump between 41 and 42
because when 42 was pixelating 41 was always perfect.

> By ALL means, if you're going to add an amplifier, add it at the
> source location, not at the receiver location
> Cheap, but good, ones are available from microcircuits. Can you buy a
> line driver from your CATV company?
>

> I suspect the 'better' cable is only marginally better. What is the
> EXACT cable you're using? what is its attenuation per foot per MHz?
> You can buy extremely low loss coax, but you may have to send in your
> first born. Go to a local NRTL [EMC Test Lab] and see if they can
> (are willing to) order a length for you.
>

I think I'll try the amp, before spending for better cable.

I think I just found a work around, The station I wanted, 42
is repeated on 428 in HD and it doesn't pixelate when 42 does.
The pixelating problem is rare, only a spall percentage of the time,
but very annoying. Ah, the wonderful world if Digital TV.
Mikek

[amdx]

Yes, it is the loss in the cable.

> The cable guy should have been able to measure the signal at your cable
> box.
> Are the people using the other taps having problems?

No other problems, I'm just way down the dock from them.

> If you're on a boat, you might be at the end of the cable run.
> In that case, you might be able to get them to crank up the gain in their
> distribution amp.

Next time they are around I'll ask.

> Power at the pole is not a problem. You can get amps that are powered
> through the signal cable to your cable box. Getting them to let you
> install it
> is another matter.
> You can get MUCH better wire, for a price.
>
> Signal strength is not the only problem with digital TV.
> Reflections in the system can confuse the decoder. Are there
> any unterminated cables on the other taps?
>

Yes that is possible, There are transients in and out so sometimes the
taps are used and sometimes not. I suppose I could make a bunch of 75
ohm terminations, and put on a new one every time it's needed.
However I never noticed a correlation between boats in and boats out.

> I have OTA antenna digital TV. Plenty of signal, but reflections
> cause significant drop outs on some channels. More signal won't fix
> that. In fact, I have a variable attenuator to REDUCE signal strength.
> I tweak the signal level for fewest dropouts.
>
>
> Might be electrical noise coupled in thru the ground system.
>
> Bottom line is that you pay the cable company for TV reception.
> It's their responsibility to provide you with a watchable signal.
> You shouldn't have to tell them what to do. They should just FIX it!!

Ya, but no. It's in a marina and the marina has a deal with the cable
company.
At this point there is talk about putting up an antenna.
The marina has ten cable boxes for transients that need to be plugged in
and connected (I guess keep them updated). So it has become a hassle for
the marina handle the boxes. I just want to lay low and not rock the boat.

[Ralph Mowery]

"amdx" <am...@knology.net> wrote in message
news:b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET...

> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At this
> point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the utility
> post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the cable guy
> put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.
> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is out.
> Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.
> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
> Any ideas to get a better signal?
> Mikek
>

At only 170 feet, that should not be a problem. My cable runs down a
utility post, then over 200 feet to my house. It goes to a 2 way spitter
and then about 30 feet to a cable modem. The other end goes to anotehr two
way splitter, one side to a regular TV and the other to a digital box.

No problem with the TV signal at my house, and the internet is around 7 MB
or however they measuer it. That is by my test on the internet and what
they say I am paying for in the speed./


Sounds like they need to send more signal from the main cable to the taps to
your line.

[nesesu]

>                  Mikek- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

FWIW, our local cable system just converterd to digital and after
installing the cable boxes I noticed that there were usually about 4-6
drop-outs between 6PM and 11PM. I suspected that the problem was at
their end but they sent out a tech who re-terminated the cables at the
demarcation box outside then changed that splitter from 3 output to 2
output. Inside he trimmed about 2m of excess cable from the wall jack
[inside the wall space] and re-terminated that and installed a new
jumper from there to a splitter [replaced] feeding the two cable
boxes, one feeding the TV the other the VCR. He then measured the
levels and the incoming signal was -10dB [just on nominal] and the
back feed level [at the cable office] was -15dB, again just on
nominal. He said that performance was good down to at least -20dB
incoming. My run is about the same length as yours from the
distribution pedistal and is of lower performance that RG-6.
The number of drop-outs is perhaps slightly less, but a new PVR seems
to handle the drop-outs much better than the cable boxes did so they
are less noticable than before. I have also noted that one particular
commercial has a drop-out in it and it is the same everytime it is
run, again pointing to the problem being at their end.

Neil S

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:00:12 -0600, amdx <am...@knology.net> wrote:

>I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.

Ok, 200ft of coax. Presumably RG6a/u.

>Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>Digital TV.

You have been assimilated. Resistance is futile.

>I got the new digital converter and had no picture.

Something is wrong. The nominal signal from the cable drop is suppose
to be 0dBm. If there's a splitter involved, they like to crank it up
to about 10dBm. Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end. Your set
top box is suppose to operate with a 10dB margin. If you would kindly
disclose the maker and model, it might be possible to find the specs.
Typically, you'll have at least 10dB margin. Even with 200ft of coax,
you should have 4 to 6dB margin.

Drag your cable box and TV over to the splitter and try it on the
incoming drop. If that works, move to the ports on the splitter. Make
sure that the unused ports are terminated properly. If that doesn't
work, call your unfriendly cable company and ask them why they don't
have sufficient level to operate your set top box without the 200ft
cable. If it does work, find a 200ft RG6a/u cable that isn't
saturated with water. Try to get some compressing fittings instead of
the crappy crimp type.

Your unspecified cable set top box may also have some user accessible
diagnostics which include per channel signal levels. You may want to
check those.

I'm not familiar with Knology, but I suspect they do the same thing as
Comcast. With Comcast, the lower 72 channels are still analog in my
area. If so, you can probably plug your TV directly into the cable,
set the TV for cable frequencies, not broadcast, and see if that still
plays.

Hint: Troubleshoot by substitution.

Drivel: I spent about an hour troubleshooting my TV distribution
system, only to find a brand new Type F "barrel" connector, with no
center connections. That which is most obviously correct, beyond any
need of checking, is usually the problem.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com je...@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

[Sal]

"amdx" <am...@knology.net> wrote in message
news:b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET...

> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV.

< snip >

> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.

I take respectful exception to that last sentence. My digital cable box is
about 130 cable-feet from the pole. My signal is tapped enroute for digital
telephone, tapped enroute for Internet and then split (by me) so I can feed
analog signals via a disttribution amp serving bedrooms, kitchen and shack.
I get enough from the pole tap to do the job.

Somebody is treating you badly -- maybe the cable company, maybe the marina.
Yes, the approach for you to buy and install an inline, remote-power amp at
the pole is entirely valid, technically. However, that's not in keeping
with reasonable expectations. You needn't roll over so easily. It's
supposed to work.

What -- Are you worried you might offend somebody? That "somebody" seems
quite okay with kicking you in the ankle. Or elsewhere.

"Sal"

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:41:08 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
>between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end.

Some better numbers for RG6a/u:
Freq Atten
MHz -dB
10 0.8
50 1.4
100 2.9
200 4.3
400 6.4
1000 11.0

The CATV band is approximately 50 to 800MHz. With 200ft of cable, you
should see 2.8 to 16dB of loss. While there may be problem at the
high channels, all the lower channels should work.

The 4 way splitter has a loss of about -7dB.

Picking a random set top box:
<http://www.zoran.com/IMG/pdf/Simplify_NextGen_STBs_Solutions.pdf>
See Page 3. Sensitivity is -18dBm for 256QAM and -24dBm 64QAM.

At the low end, you have 0dBm in, 7dB loss in the splitter, 2.8dB loss
in the coax, resulting in -9.8dBm to the box. That's much more than
the -18dBm/-24dBm needed.

However, at the high end, things are not so wonderful. 0dbm in, 7dB
loss in the splitter, and 16dB loss in the coax, which delivers
-23dBm. That's 1dB of margin, which is not very good. Still, it
should work on the lower channels.

[Joerg]

amdx wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.

Looks like the cable guys screwed up.

a. They should be putting enough signal on that cable to overcome the loss.

b. They should be able to measure the amplitude of pilot signals at your
end of the cable and tell you how much above minimums they are.

> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
> out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.
> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
> Any ideas to get a better signal?
> Mikek
>
>
> PS.
>
> When the signal fails it seems channel 41 is ok and above 42 it breaks up.
> Curious to know if there is an unusual frequency jump between those two
> digital channels.
>

If all else fails you may need an amp. What Fred means with drop amp is
usually called a "mast preamplifier", like this:

http://www.amazon.com/Uhf-Vhf-Antenna-Pre-Amp/dp/B0018CDGEQ/ref=sr_1_20?ie=UTF8&qid=1328748729&sr=8-20

I don't know this particular one but essentially it should be
weather-proof. It gets its DC voltage via the coax, from a wall wart
that would plug in at your boat. So no need to run a power supply cable
up there.

Don't go for too much gain. This dreaded DTV falls apart rather easily
on the slightest distortion or cross-modulation. Not sure if the above
amp can handle that. You might need a more expensive one. Michael
Terrell might know which ones are good. What matters is dynamic range.

Also, make sure you have a perfect 75ohms match at your end. The cable
box from the cable company should provide that. if you have Internet
and/or phone through them as well check that connection so it doesn't
cause reflections. On a boat at sea stuff can corrode quickly.

Oh, and don't dare to watch that boobs channel while your wife's on the
boat :-)

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 5:41 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:00:12 -0600, amdx<am...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>
> Ok, 200ft of coax. Presumably RG6a/u.
>
>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>> Digital TV.
>
> You have been assimilated. Resistance is futile.
>
>> I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>
> Something is wrong. The nominal signal from the cable drop is suppose
> to be 0dBm. If there's a splitter involved, they like to crank it up
> to about 10dBm. Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
> between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end. Your set
> top box is suppose to operate with a 10dB margin. If you would kindly
> disclose the maker and model, it might be possible to find the specs.
> Typically, you'll have at least 10dB margin. Even with 200ft of coax,
> you should have 4 to 6dB margin.
>

Now remember the problem is quite intermittent, but seems to be
happening almost daily for short periods.

> Drag your cable box and TV over to the splitter and try it on the
> incoming drop. If that works, move to the ports on the splitter. Make
> sure that the unused ports are terminated properly. If that doesn't
> work, call your unfriendly cable company and ask them why they don't
> have sufficient level to operate your set top box without the 200ft
> cable. If it does work, find a 200ft RG6a/u cable that isn't
> saturated with water. Try to get some compressing fittings instead of
> the crappy crimp type.
>

There should be no water in the cable, it's only a couple of months
old and both ends have crimp on connectors and are located in a box or boat.

> Your unspecified cable set top box may also have some user accessible
> diagnostics which include per channel signal levels. You may want to
> check those.

It does have diagnostics, I'm not sure if it is each channel though.
But I can get some info out of the box. I'll be there Friday and I'll
get that info and the model of the cable set top box.

> I'm not familiar with Knology, but I suspect they do the same thing as
> Comcast. With Comcast, the lower 72 channels are still analog in my
> area. If so, you can probably plug your TV directly into the cable,
> set the TV for cable frequencies, not broadcast, and see if that still
> plays.
>

I'm using Comcast at the boat. We are lucky here (I think) in that
we have a choice of two cable companies.

> Hint: Troubleshoot by substitution.
>
> Drivel: I spent about an hour troubleshooting my TV distribution
> system, only to find a brand new Type F "barrel" connector, with no
> center connections. That which is most obviously correct, beyond any
> need of checking, is usually the problem.

Drivel is good.

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 6:38 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:41:08 -0800, Jeff Liebermann<je...@cruzio.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
>> between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end.
>
> Some better numbers for RG6a/u:
> Freq Atten
> MHz -dB
> 10 0.8
> 50 1.4
> 100 2.9
> 200 4.3
> 400 6.4
> 1000 11.0
>
> The CATV band is approximately 50 to 800MHz. With 200ft of cable, you
> should see 2.8 to 16dB of loss. While there may be problem at the
> high channels, all the lower channels should work.

Any idea where channel 428 would be in that frequency range?
That's a duplicate of 4,2 but in HD, and it works when 42 doesn't.

>
> The 4 way splitter has a loss of about -7dB.

Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
(or 4) and it did make a difference.

[amdx]

Been trying to think of something funny to say about that...
Best I got is, she would say, "mine look better than those!

[Joerg]

amdx wrote:
> On 2/8/2012 6:38 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:41:08 -0800, Jeff Liebermann<je...@cruzio.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
>>> between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end.
>>
>> Some better numbers for RG6a/u:
>> Freq Atten
>> MHz -dB
>> 10 0.8
>> 50 1.4
>> 100 2.9
>> 200 4.3
>> 400 6.4
>> 1000 11.0
>>
>> The CATV band is approximately 50 to 800MHz. With 200ft of cable, you
>> should see 2.8 to 16dB of loss. While there may be problem at the
>> high channels, all the lower channels should work.
>
> Any idea where channel 428 would be in that frequency range?
> That's a duplicate of 4,2 but in HD, and it works when 42 doesn't.

I believe that's entirely up to the cable company, you'd have to ask an
engineer there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cable

Quote "For example, a cable company might call channel 5-1 "channel 732"
and channel 5-2 "channel 733"".

>>
>> The 4 way splitter has a loss of about -7dB.
>
> Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
> 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
> (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>

Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
properly terminated?

[...]

[Chairman Meow]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:00:12 -0600, amdx <am...@knology.net> wrote:

>Hi All,
>I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
>suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
>company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
>this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
>utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
>cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
>signal to work 100% of the time.
> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
>out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?

You could make a battery operated amp. They do not draw that much
power.

>I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
>strength.

Nope. You want RG-6 for the run, and you want anti-oxidant paste in
the fittings. You also want to ask the cable guy what the power is at
the tap, and then you can figure out what your losses are at your end,
and know what level of amplification you need from that info.

> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.

They are obligated to put the right amount of energy at the taps.
If you are more than -14dB down at your end, you will not be happy and
they may not be pushing hard enough.

If you use a battery amp, place it at the mid span point, if possible.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:24:06 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

>Now remember the problem is quite intermittent, but seems to be
>happening almost daily for short periods.

Monitor the signal levels at the set top box and see if it coincides
with something nearby changing, such as the dock lights or operation
of heavy machinery. Maybe shove a DVM (digital voltmeter) into the AC
power and see if it moves around.

> There should be no water in the cable, it's only a couple of months
>old and both ends have crimp on connectors and are located in a box or boat.

I don't like crimp type connectors. Push on connectors are MUCH
better. Also, if the coax came from Radio Shack, all bets are off as
to the quality.

>It does have diagnostics, I'm not sure if it is each channel though.
>But I can get some info out of the box. I'll be there Friday and I'll
>get that info and the model of the cable set top box.

Digital set top box diagnostics are different from analog. Instead of
per-channel levels, it might have levels for specific channels.

> I'm using Comcast at the boat. We are lucky here (I think) in that
>we have a choice of two cable companies.

If it's Comcast, you will probably still have the lower 72 channels
doing analog. Remove the set top box and plug in your TV directly.

> Drivel is good.

The story of my life.

[Mark]

>
> > Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
> > 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
> > (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>
> Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
> properly terminated?
>
> [...]
>
> --
> Regards, Joerg
>
> http://www.analogconsultants.com/

right good question...OP, when you had the analog signal, was there
significant ghosting?

digital boxes might tolerate a WEAK signal but they are intolerant of
reflections.

Mark

[Phil Hobbs]

And you know what you'd better reply!

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

[Michael Coslo]

On 2/8/12 7:27 PM, Sal wrote:
> "amdx"<am...@knology.net> wrote in message
> news:b7625$4f32c758$4b4c116f$23...@KNOLOGY.NET...
>> Hi All,
>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>> Digital TV.
>
> < snip>
>
>> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
>
> I take respectful exception to that last sentence. My digital cable box is
> about 130 cable-feet from the pole. My signal is tapped enroute for digital
> telephone, tapped enroute for Internet and then split (by me) so I can feed
> analog signals via a disttribution amp serving bedrooms, kitchen and shack.
> I get enough from the pole tap to do the job.

I respectfully agree! 8^)

I don't know exactly how it's done now, but when I worked in the Cable
industry many moons ago, we had a lot of adjustment we could make. Even
more, we had variable by frequency attenuators so we could ensure that a
flat signal showed up. There was a lot of signal at the amplifiers, and
if we really needed more oomph, we could put in a distribution amp.
Another amp was really rare.

> Somebody is treating you badly -- maybe the cable company, maybe the marina.
> Yes, the approach for you to buy and install an inline, remote-power amp at
> the pole is entirely valid, technically. However, that's not in keeping
> with reasonable expectations. You needn't roll over so easily. It's
> supposed to work.
>
> What -- Are you worried you might offend somebody? That "somebody" seems
> quite okay with kicking you in the ankle. Or elsewhere.

Yeah, there is something wrong there. For as much as people hate
Comcast, when I had cable internet put in, they replaced all the cable
from the pole to the house, and a lot inside the house. I did talk them
out of replacing the new cable I had put in, but insisted on putting new
connectors on them. The measured all the levels and set them high enough
that I'd be able to add more televisions if I liked.


Time to call the cable company and tell them you want your MTV.


- 73 de Mike N3LI -

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:21:19 -0800 (PST), Mark <mako...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>>
>> > Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
>> > 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
>> > (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>>
>> Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
>> properly terminated?
>>

Cable installers terminating things? You must be fucking joking.
They would have to have an IQ above 25 for that.

>> [...]
>>
>> --
>> Regards, Joerg
>>
>> http://www.analogconsultants.com/
>
>right good question...OP, when you had the analog signal, was there
>significant ghosting?
>
>digital boxes might tolerate a WEAK signal but they are intolerant of
>reflections.

Why would there be a reflection in a closed cable run?

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:52:10 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra
<GeorgeT...@drmemory.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:21:19 -0800 (PST), Mark <mako...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> > Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
>>> > 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
>>> > (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>>>
>>> Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
>>> properly terminated?
>>>
>
>
> Cable installers terminating things? You must be fucking joking.
>They would have to have an IQ above 25 for that.

*WAY* above your pay grade.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:30:07 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

>Any idea where channel 428 would be in that frequency range?
>That's a duplicate of 4,2 but in HD, and it works when 42 doesn't.

Ummm... it's ugly. There are up to 10 standard definition or 2 HD
channels crammed into a 6 MHz wide RF slot. In order to untangle
this, you would need to run a PSIP decoder and extract the CVCT
record:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSIP>
to figure out where digital CH 428 fits. It could literally be
anywhere. However, if you happen to have an tuneable notch filter
(which I happen to have), you can stuff it in series with the cable,
and spin the dial until the signal disappears. Then, just read the
dial. (Comcast seems to be putting well paying and popular channels
on the lower frequencies, and obscure junk on the higher frequencies.
I'm not sure if this is intentional, accidental, or my imagination).

>> The 4 way splitter has a loss of about -7dB.
>
>Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
>2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
>(or 4) and it did make a difference.

Yeah, I saw that. I guess I wasn't too clear. The input signal can
vary over a 10-16dB range, and it still should work. The 3dB
difference between a two port and a 4 port splitter isn't going to
make much difference, exept at the higher channels.

[tom]

On 2/8/2012 8:52 PM, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:21:19 -0800 (PST), Mark<mako...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>>> Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
>>>> 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
>>>> (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>>>
>>> Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
>>> properly terminated?
>>>
>
>

> Cable installers terminating things? You must be bleeping joking.

> They would have to have an IQ above 25 for that.
>

Which would obviously be considerably greater than yours.

tom
K0TAR

[tom]

Sorry I posted mine before I updated inbound posts and saw yours.

Yours is better.

tom
K0TAR

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

I know about "cable trash" cable installers that used to go around to
different cities, working for different cable companies. I know what
corners they cut, and what responsibilities they shirk off. I know the
difference between them and me. It is way below my pay grade and way
above YOURS. Compared to you, I am the FADM, and you don't even rate 4-F.
Take your stupidity back to your left hand, putz!

I post-wired thousands of ports, and that was over 30 years ago, you
fucking retarded twit. I have done 350' runs through the woods when they
were unable to get the hard line trucks into the area. That's what
happens when the Bengals GM has his house all the way back in the corner
of an Indian Hills cul de sac. Mr Brown was a big dude too. There were
deep wear tracks in his carpet where the big fucker roamed. Outside the
tracks, it looked new.

Did lots of pre-wire too. Worked for General Instrument for the first
year I was out here in Ca as well. That was almost twenty years ago,
asswipe. I was performing instruction for them by the time I left.
The gear FEEDS the cable companies, AND the broadcasters.

You lose. As usual... again.

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:15:51 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

> However, if you happen to have an tuneable notch filter
>(which I happen to have),

Are you left handed? :-) (It's a movie joke)

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

Said the *TOTAL* fucking retard who doesn't know me, or a goddamned
thing about me.

I did more last week to make the world a batter place than a putz like
you ever has or ever will in your entire, pathetic life.

And it was ALL absolutely telecommunications related.

Yeah, yer battin' 1000 there bub. NOT!

I'd bet cash at Vegas that you've never even seen what a 10Gb/s optical
port looks like, much less anything about its operation.

The only thing about "10" you have familiarity with is YOUR IQ.

You must be some cable trash asswipe residential hole popper
"installer" wanna be fucktard.

Yeah, you got the fucktard part right. Fits you to a "T".

Stick that up you TAR, K0 boy! You FUCKING RETARD! FOAD!

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

More mental masturbation. You must be a mere fucking cable installer.

Bwuahahahahahahaahahahahahahaa!

You and the KiethKeithStain are nothing more than mental masturbating
dumbfucks. Yer gonna get TARred and feathered, K0 boy.

[Sal]

"Michael Coslo" <mj...@psu.edu> wrote in message
news:jgvb3o$jg4c$1...@tr22n12.aset.psu.edu...

< snip >

> Time to call the cable company and tell them you want your MTV.

No way to know from here, but they may not be able to add another amp.

While I was looking for something else, I lurched into this page:

<http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/cable/ps2217/products_white_paper0900aecd800fc94c.shtml>

While its intended audience is Internet modem designers, the noise
discussions are informative with regard to other signals, too.

My point: When you try stringing too many amps in line, the signal-to-noise
ratio (SNR) eventually becomes unacceptable. (Remember the acceptable SNRs
cited for 256 QAM and 64 QAM.)

"Sal"

[Sal]

"Sal" <sob...@aol.com> wrote in message news:jgvoub$fet$1...@dont-email.me...

> My point: When you try stringing too many amps in line, the
> signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) eventually becomes unacceptable. (Remember
> the acceptable SNRs cited for 256 QAM and 64 QAM.)
>
> "Sal"
>

Sorry. I should have said carrier to noise ratio (CNR), not SNR. SNR
applies to post-detection signals. i joined the digital world late in life.

"Sal"

[Robert Baer]

amdx wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of

> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.

> I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
> out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.

> Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.

> Any ideas to get a better signal?
> Mikek
>
>
> PS.
>
> When the signal fails it seems channel 41 is ok and above 42 it breaks up.
> Curious to know if there is an unusual frequency jump between those two
> digital channels.
>

Well, you could add an amplifier at the splitter where (nominally)
there is no power.
Use the coax center conductor for power; inline capacitors allow
signal to pass and feeding center via small choke allows DC but no signal.
Once upon a time there were little adapters that did this AC/DC thing...

[Ian Jackson]

In message <l916j7hrlnslf403b...@4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann
<je...@cruzio.com> writes

>

>
>Something is wrong. The nominal signal from the cable drop is suppose
>to be 0dBm. If there's a splitter involved, they like to crank it up
>to about 10dBm.

Careful! Don't get your dBm mixed up with your dBmV. There's around 48dB
difference! 0dBm is a massive 48dBmV. That would certainly make most
set-top boxes wake up and pay attention!

>

--
Ian

[amdx]

They go to two other outlets, that are used for transient boaters.
sometimes they are used and sometimes they sit unterminated.
I have not seen my problem better or worse when boats are in or out.
But I have several 75 ohm F connector terminations. It's worth a try.
Mikek

[Pomegranate Bastard]

On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:35:51 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra
<GeorgeT...@drmemory.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:17:05 -0600, tom <news...@taring.org> wrote:
>
>>On 2/8/2012 8:52 PM, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
>>> On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:21:19 -0800 (PST), Mark<mako...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
>>>>>> 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
>>>>>> (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
>>>>> properly terminated?
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cable installers terminating things? You must be bleeping joking.
>>> They would have to have an IQ above 25 for that.
>>>
>>
>>Which would obviously be considerably greater than yours.
>>
>>tom
>>K0TAR
>
> Said the *TOTAL* fucking retard who doesn't know me, or a goddamned
>thing about me.
>
> I did more last week to make the world a batter place than a putz like
>you ever has or ever will in your entire, pathetic life.

A batter place? Quite appropriate for a batty man.

>
> And it was ALL absolutely telecommunications related.

Would you please supply some evidence of your claims?

[amdx]

Never noticed any ghosting with the analog.
Mikek

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 8:18 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:24:06 -0600, amdx<am...@knologynotthis.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Now remember the problem is quite intermittent, but seems to be
>> happening almost daily for short periods.
>
> Monitor the signal levels at the set top box and see if it coincides
> with something nearby changing, such as the dock lights or operation
> of heavy machinery. Maybe shove a DVM (digital voltmeter) into the AC
> power and see if it moves around.
>
>> There should be no water in the cable, it's only a couple of months
>> old and both ends have crimp on connectors and are located in a box or boat.
>
> I don't like crimp type connectors. Push on connectors are MUCH
> better. Also, if the coax came from Radio Shack, all bets are off as
> to the quality.
>

I'm sorry I got that wrong, they are F compression connectors.
Coax was from the cable company.

My drivel:

At my home, knology recently upgraded there system for faster internet.
A cableman said he heard me radiating a block away. he came in and
changed 7 crimp type connectors in my attic a couple of cable runs.
Speedtest.com went from 6 Mbps to over 11 Mbps with just those changes.

>> It does have diagnostics, I'm not sure if it is each channel though.
>> But I can get some info out of the box. I'll be there Friday and I'll
>> get that info and the model of the cable set top box.
>
> Digital set top box diagnostics are different from analog. Instead of
> per-channel levels, it might have levels for specific channels.
>
>> I'm using Comcast at the boat. We are lucky here (I think) in that
>> we have a choice of two cable companies.
>
> If it's Comcast, you will probably still have the lower 72 channels
> doing analog. Remove the set top box and plug in your TV directly.
>

Oh, if that is the fact, I may get me some browny points, If I can
get the signal up to snuff, then put the vcr back in the line, my wife
could record her soaps again.
That would get me 15 seconds of hero status!
Mikek

[amdx]

Just an addition to the termination debate, the marina has about 150
taps, I'd be surprised if 30 of them are connected to a tv and the rest
are unterminated. The line generally goes to the utility pedestal into
a 2 way splitter and then about 1 ft of cable connects it to the 2 taps
for the boat owners.
Mikek

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:12:15 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
<pom...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

>Would you please supply some evidence of your claims?

You don't even know what a 10Gb/s optical port looks like either,
jackass.

You are truly pathetic, and a total loser.

The only response a retard like you knows is "stalk and jab".

[amdx]

Hey Rat,
Please quietly leave my thread!
Thanks, Mikek

[Joerg]

Yup, try it. Transient boaters will most likely not carry the required
set top box around but use the lower analog channels or nowadays maybe
UHF digital. Sort of "basic cable". Then the TV is connected directly
and those rarely have a true 75ohms input.

[Pomegranate Bastard]

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:54:19 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

>> My drivel:
>>
>> At my home, knology recently upgraded there system for faster internet.
>> A cableman said he heard me radiating a block away. he came in and
>> changed 7 crimp type connectors in my attic a couple of cable runs.
>> Speedtest.com went from 6 Mbps to over 11 Mbps with just those changes.

Yep, that's the way it works. Compression type F connectors work
well. Crimp type are junk. The catch is that there are probably 100
different types of connectors, each with their own compression tools,
intended to fit about 8 different types of 75 ohm coax (RG6a/u,
RG59/u, single shielded, double shielded, quad shielded, direct
burial, etc). Mixing connector types and cables doesn't work. I got
fed up and "obtained" a 1000ft roll of double shielded RG6a/u, a big
of matching F, BNC, and phono connectors, a compression tool, a
stripping tool, and replaced all the junk cables in the house.

>>> If it's Comcast, you will probably still have the lower 72 channels
>>> doing analog. Remove the set top box and plug in your TV directly.
>>>
>> Oh, if that is the fact, I may get me some browny points, If I can get
>> the signal up to snuff, then put the vcr back in the line, my wife could
>> record her soaps again.
>> That would get me 15 seconds of hero status!
>> Mikek

I'm sure it's true for Comcast in Santa Cruz, CA. No clue on other
areas. The grand plan is to move all the analog channels to digital
area by area:
<http://www2.insidenova.com/news/2011/jun/22/comcast-removes-scores-channels-analog-cable-ar-1126652/>
<http://www2.newsadvance.com/business/2011/nov/09/comcast-switching-analog-digital-ar-1448489/>
Unfortunately, your area may be one of those that have moved to all
digital. Hard to tell from here.

>Just an addition to the termination debate, the marina has about 150
>taps, I'd be surprised if 30 of them are connected to a tv and the rest
>are unterminated. The line generally goes to the utility pedestal into
>a 2 way splitter and then about 1 ft of cable connects it to the 2 taps
>for the boat owners.
> Mikek

Can you determine if the marina is using a distribution amplifier
driving a big splitter, or is using a single cable trunk snaked
through the marina, with taps (directional couplers) at various
points? If taps, it's easy to install too many taps, or miscalculate
the tap type, resulting in level variations along the trunk.
<http://www.doityourself.com/forum/entertainment-center-tvs-stereos-vcrs-dvds-8-track-tape-players/334706-difference-between-tap-splitter.html>



--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:01:21 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

How to Check Comcast Signal Levels
<http://www.ehow.com/how_7777024_check-comcast-signal-levels.html>
I'm not sure if this works on the newer set top boxes, but give it a
try.

[Jeff Liebermann]

Oops. All my mentions of dBm should be dBmV. Thanks.

Range of acceptable signal levels. They're similar for DTV.
<http://www.dslreports.com/faq/16085>

How to check signal levels with a Motorola set top box:
<http://www.ehow.com/how_12186368_check-signal-strength-comcast-digital-cable-motorola.html>

[JIMMIE]

On Feb 8, 2:00 pm, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
>   That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> signal to work 100% of the time.
>    I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
> out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
> I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> strength.
>   Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
>    Any ideas to get a better signal?
>                 Mikek
>
> PS.
>
>   When the signal fails it seems channel 41 is ok and above 42 it breaks up.
> Curious to know if there is an unusual frequency jump between those two
> digital channels.

Google your cable box model. You should able to find ifo on how to
pull up a menu that shows signal strengh. -60dbm is about where my
sigal starts droping out

Jimmie

[Michael A. Terrell]

amdx wrote:
>
> On 2/8/2012 7:50 PM, Joerg wrote:
> >
> > Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
> > properly terminated?
> >

> They go to two other outlets, that are used for transient boaters.
> sometimes they are used and sometimes they sit unterminated.
> I have not seen my problem better or worse when boats are in or out.
> But I have several 75 ohm F connector terminations. It's worth a try.

Not really. If there are long unterminated 75 ohm cables after the
splitter, they are a crude termination. The splitter's backmatch
eliminates ghosting from reflections from the unterminated end.

--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Michael Coslo wrote:
>
> I don't know exactly how it's done now, but when I worked in the Cable
> industry many moons ago, we had a lot of adjustment we could make. Even
> more, we had variable by frequency attenuators so we could ensure that a
> flat signal showed up.


Those are 'Equalizers' and used to cancel the cable losses. There is
some adjustment in the trunk amplifiers, but some brands just used a
plug in equalizer marked with the rolloff in dB while others had both.
The coarse plugin, and a variable equalizer to level the trunkline for
'Proof of Performance' tests.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Joerg wrote:

>
> amdx wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> > Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> > Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> > I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> > suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> > company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> > this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> > utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> > cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> > That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> > signal to work 100% of the time.
>

> Looks like the cable guys screwed up.


In your opinion. If they are delivering the level called for in
their franchise, they didn't screw up. It has always been up to the
customer to pay for or provide extra equipment for non standard
installs.

[Michael A. Terrell]

A power inserter is used to put 9-28 volts DC on the coax, depending
on the amplifer you use.

[Michael A. Terrell]

"k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wrote:

>
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:52:10 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra
> <GeorgeT...@drmemory.org> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:21:19 -0800 (PST), Mark <mako...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>>

> >>> > Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
> >>> > 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
> >>> > (or 4) and it did make a difference.
> >>>

> >>> Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
> >>> properly terminated?
> >>>
> >
> >

> > Cable installers terminating things? You must be fucking joking.

> >They would have to have an IQ above 25 for that.
>

> *WAY* above your pay grade.

Makes you wonder what they paid him for at Time Warner, if he wasn't
smart enough to install a terminator.

[Sal]

"JIMMIE" <JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message
news:490a9f32-61ad-49bf...@m7g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...

=====================================================

Yes, but be mindful of the difference between dBm and dBmV. The cable
industry often deals in levels on the dBmV scale.

There are places like this ...

http://www.maxim-ic.com/app-notes/index.mvp/id/808

where you can see some conversion equations. Jimmie's -60dBm equals -11.25
dBmV. Same power level -- different scale.

I have long known level requirements for the TV tuner's cousin, the cable
modem. The common DOCSIS 2 cable modems are usually spec'ed for -15dBmV to
+15dBmV and the smart operators try to keep inside +/- 12. Thus, you can
see that Jimmie's -11.25dBmV is near the low limit and that dropouts become
more likely in that neighborhood.

I little bit of google snooping revealed that DTV cable boxes would like
0dBmV and will usually be okay with -10dBmV to +10dBmV. Almost the same.

i hope this helps.

"Sal"

"Sal"

[Joerg]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
>> amdx wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>>> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>>> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
>>> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
>>> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
>>> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
>>> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
>>> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
>>> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
>>> signal to work 100% of the time.
>> Looks like the cable guys screwed up.
>
>
> In your opinion.

If their company cable box doesn't deliver a useful and reliable signal
I call that screwed up. One pays for a service and expects to either get
it delivered as promised or money back.


> ... If they are delivering the level called for in

> their franchise, they didn't screw up. It has always been up to the
> customer to pay for or provide extra equipment for non standard
> installs.
>

Mike's install does not sound non-standard. 170ft cable drop towards
premises which is fairly normal, plus the cable company's set-top box.

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:38:13 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net> wrote:

>On 2/9/2012 8:44 AM, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:12:15 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
>> <pom...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Would you please supply some evidence of your claims?
>>
>> You don't even know what a 10Gb/s optical port looks like either,
>> jackass.
>>
>> You are truly pathetic, and a total loser.
>>
>> The only response a retard like you knows is "stalk and jab".
>
> Hey Rat,

Hey jerk off!

>Please quietly leave my thread!

This is NOT *your* anything, you retarded fuck. You have ZERO
ownership of anything here in Usenet, you fucking total retard.

> Thanks, Mikek

Fuck you, jackoff. Please die and quit wasting oxygen.

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:56:35 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Makes you wonder what they paid him for at Time Warner, if he wasn't
>smart enough to install a terminator.
>

I was fine you fucking retard. Learn to read. My remarks were about
the fucktards all around me, not myself. I actually learned about what
things one does NOT do as a cable installer, and cutting corners on
policy was high on the list.

Makes me wonder why anyone would have ever paid a retarded presumptuous
asswipe like you, if you cannot even read a simple Usenet post.

[amdx]

Oh darn, that didn't work. :-)

>
> Fuck you, jackoff. Please die and quit wasting oxygen.

Have a nice day, I'm sure you deserve it.

Mikek

[tom]

On 2/8/2012 11:38 PM, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:20:13 -0600, tom<news...@taring.org> wrote:

>
>> On 2/8/2012 9:44 PM, k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
>>> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:52:10 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra
>>> <GeorgeT...@drmemory.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:21:19 -0800 (PST), Mark<mako...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
>>>>>>> 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
>>>>>>> (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
>>>>>> properly terminated?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cable installers terminating things? You must be fucking joking.
>>>> They would have to have an IQ above 25 for that.
>>>
>>> *WAY* above your pay grade.
>>

>> Sorry I posted mine before I updated inbound posts and saw yours.
>>
>> Yours is better.
>>
>> tom
>> K0TAR
>
> More mental masturbation. You must be a mere fucking cable installer.
>
> Bwuahahahahahahaahahahahahahaa!
>
> You and the KiethKeithStain are nothing more than mental masturbating
> dumbfucks. Yer gonna get TARred and feathered, K0 boy.

Nice to have amusing idiots back again.

And I am way above your paygrade. But that is obvious to anyone that
graduated any grade, even first, which you obviously have not.

tom
K0TAR

[tom]

On 2/8/2012 11:35 PM, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:17:05 -0600, tom<news...@taring.org> wrote:

>
>> On 2/8/2012 8:52 PM, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
>>> On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:21:19 -0800 (PST), Mark<mako...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Just a point. I may not have made it clear. I had the tech put in two
>>>>>> 2way splitters and connect me to the first one. Hoping to gain 3db.
>>>>>> (or 4) and it did make a difference.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where does the other leg of that splitter go to? And is that end
>>>>> properly terminated?
>>>>>
>>>
>>>

>>> Cable installers terminating things? You must be bleeping joking.

>>> They would have to have an IQ above 25 for that.
>>>
>>

>> Which would obviously be considerably greater than yours.
>>
>> tom
>> K0TAR
>
> Said the *TOTAL* fucking retard who doesn't know me, or a goddamned
> thing about me.
>
> I did more last week to make the world a batter place than a putz like
> you ever has or ever will in your entire, pathetic life.
>

> And it was ALL absolutely telecommunications related.
>

> Yeah, yer battin' 1000 there bub. NOT!
>
> I'd bet cash at Vegas that you've never even seen what a 10Gb/s optical
> port looks like, much less anything about its operation.
>
> The only thing about "10" you have familiarity with is YOUR IQ.
>
> You must be some cable trash asswipe residential hole popper
> "installer" wanna be fucktard.
>
> Yeah, you got the fucktard part right. Fits you to a "T".
>
> Stick that up you TAR, K0 boy! You FUCKING RETARD! FOAD!

Interesting how little you bother to learn about the people you swear
at. At least I can put a sentence together.

And I was leading 10M$ engineering projects while you were installing cable.

There is nothing you can spout that would denigrate me.

tom
K0TAR

[tom]

On 2/8/2012 11:35 PM, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:

>> K0TAR
>
> Said the *TOTAL* fucking retard who doesn't know me, or a goddamned
> thing about me.
>
> I did more last week to make the world a batter place than a putz like
> you ever has or ever will in your entire, pathetic life.
>
> And it was ALL absolutely telecommunications related.
>
> Yeah, yer battin' 1000 there bub. NOT!
>
> I'd bet cash at Vegas that you've never even seen what a 10Gb/s optical
> port looks like, much less anything about its operation.
>
> The only thing about "10" you have familiarity with is YOUR IQ.
>
> You must be some cable trash asswipe residential hole popper
> "installer" wanna be fucktard.
>
> Yeah, you got the fucktard part right. Fits you to a "T".
>
> Stick that up you TAR, K0 boy! You FUCKING RETARD! FOAD!

You seem to be trying to compensate for some serious low self esteem
issues. I'd suggest you get some professional help.

tom
K0TAR

[tom]

On 2/8/2012 11:35 PM, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
>
> Said the *TOTAL* fucking retard who doesn't know me, or a goddamned
> thing about me.
>
> I did more last week to make the world a batter place than a putz like
> you ever has or ever will in your entire, pathetic life.
>
> And it was ALL absolutely telecommunications related.
>
> Yeah, yer battin' 1000 there bub. NOT!
>
> I'd bet cash at Vegas that you've never even seen what a 10Gb/s optical
> port looks like, much less anything about its operation.
>
> The only thing about "10" you have familiarity with is YOUR IQ.
>
> You must be some cable trash asswipe residential hole popper
> "installer" wanna be fucktard.
>
> Yeah, you got the fucktard part right. Fits you to a "T".
>
> Stick that up you TAR, K0 boy! You FUCKING RETARD! FOAD!

I was lead at the first fiber campus install in the US. 1985.

Top that pal.

You got nothin.

tom
K0TAR

[tom]

On 2/9/2012 9:18 PM, tom wrote:
>
> I was lead at the first fiber campus install in the US. 1985.

And that would be college campus. Don't know about other types.

tom
K0TAR

[Michael A. Terrell]

Grow up. That is an excessive length drop. A standard drop is under
100 feet. You think you know everything, and that the world has to live
by your rules. You don't, and it doesn't. I'll bet you've never even
seen a CATV franchise, or the dozen of pages of specifications agreed to
by both the CATV company and the local government. The CATV company
isn't a Santa Clause machine, and local governments know why there are
limits to the service provided. If there were't, no one could afford to
build or operate a CATV system. You've never designed a headend, or a
physical plant If they build to supply higher port levels, it has to
start at the headend, and requires closer spaced trunk amplifers. The
system noise goes up from all of the cascaded amplifers, and the
equipment runs hotter, withj a very reduced service life. When you can
design an RF distribution system of more than 500 MHz bandwidth and has
over 10,000 output ports, with the gain stabilized to a couple dBmv 20
miles from the headend and over a range from sub zero F to + 100 F then
you can tell me I'm wrong.

One headend I designed and built was only off by .1 dBmv at the test
port on the first trunk amp which was a half mile from the head end. If
you can do better than that, I'll listen to you and your opinions

[tom]

On 2/9/2012 9:35 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
>
> Grow up. That is an excessive length drop. A standard drop is under
> 100 feet. You think you know everything, and that the world has to live
> by your rules. You don't, and it doesn't. I'll bet you've never even
> seen a CATV franchise, or the dozen of pages of specifications agreed to
> by both the CATV company and the local government. The CATV company
> isn't a Santa Clause machine, and local governments know why there are
> limits to the service provided. If there were't, no one could afford to
> build or operate a CATV system. You've never designed a headend, or a
> physical plant If they build to supply higher port levels, it has to
> start at the headend, and requires closer spaced trunk amplifers. The
> system noise goes up from all of the cascaded amplifers, and the
> equipment runs hotter, withj a very reduced service life. When you can
> design an RF distribution system of more than 500 MHz bandwidth and has
> over 10,000 output ports, with the gain stabilized to a couple dBmv 20
> miles from the headend and over a range from sub zero F to + 100 F then
> you can tell me I'm wrong.
>
> One headend I designed and built was only off by .1 dBmv at the test
> port on the first trunk amp which was a half mile from the head end. If
> you can do better than that, I'll listen to you and your opinions
>
>

Cool! You seem to know what you are up to.

Can you put rough numbers around what you mentioned? Like what are
providers legally required to deliver at the far end of the drop?

Thanks.

tom
K0TAR

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:02:35 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard

<pom...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:44:45 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra
><GeorgeT...@drmemory.org> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:12:15 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
>><pom...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Would you please supply some evidence of your claims?
>>
>> You don't even know what a 10Gb/s optical port looks like either,
>>jackass.
>>
>> You are truly pathetic, and a total loser.
>>
>> The only response a retard like you knows is "stalk and jab".
>
>Would you please supply some evidence of your claims?

You wouldn't know what a constellation measurement was if one bit you in
the ass, much less understand it. Nuff said.

[tom]

On 2/9/2012 10:27 PM, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
>
>
> You wouldn't know what a constellation measurement was if one bit you in
> the ass, much less understand it. Nuff said.

Holy crap! He's made it to the 1970s!

tom
K0TAR

[Michael A. Terrell]

We were required to deliver 0 dBmv at the end of 100 feet of RG-59 or
RG-6 for two sets per the franchise. The system was designed at +10
dBmv at the tap to allow for three or four TVs at the 100 foot range.
That was on a 36 channel system with RCA modulators & HST. It was done
for two reasons. To have a little extra signal available when the
system was built, and for conversion for a 300 MHz plant to a 450 MHz
plant without respacing the trunk amplifiers.


I build a headend & interface to tie two incompatible community loops
together. Ours was a sub split loop, and the other CATV company used
mid split. We used 2 & 12 for pilots, so we fed them Channel 2 into
their return, and down converted their feed to T-9 for our return. That
headend had two RCA HSP and a combiner. The interface was another HSP
in a large stainless steel NEMA box mounted to a power pole at the
boundary of the two systems. A pair of two way splitters were used to
route the signals between the systems, as well as into and out of the
HSP. The other company wanted us to install a modulator and a
demodulator at the boundary to give us audio & video, and another pair
from our side so the interface would be baseband. Their design was over
$15,000 in hardware alone. My design was under $3000 for all the
hardware & labor to install. I had system designers from both sides
telling me it wouldn't work, but it did the job with no problems. :)

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:29:01 -0600, tom <news...@taring.org> wrote:

>Nice to have amusing idiots back again.

Actually, asshole, folks here would like it if you would leave.

Bad enough seeing dopes like SkyBuck here, now we have to see idiots
like you and krw as well. No, dumbfuck, you are not amusing, idiot.

Did ya catch the FOAD in that, boy?

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:34:43 -0600, tom <news...@taring.org> wrote:

>
>Interesting how little you bother to learn about the people you swear
>at.

Interesting how fucktards like you make presumptions about people (and
include insults), and then forget that you even did it, and act as if I
am some kind of offender against you because I called you the fucktard
you are for doing it..

You are as fucking retarded as it gets, boy. Your mother should be
jailed.

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:34:43 -0600, tom <news...@taring.org> wrote:

> At least I can put a sentence together.

Is that what you call that?

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:34:43 -0600, tom <news...@taring.org> wrote:

>And I was leading 10M$ engineering projects while you were installing cable.

Yes, and now I am leading $400M (yes, idiot, the dollar sign goes in
front) telecom projects which include spaceborne elements and the fastest
gateways on the planet and put Americans to work all over the nation in
support, and you get to type stupid shit in Usenet and on your facebook
facetard account and wither away like the old, dead fuck you are.

Soon enough, you'll be as senile as krw is and you won't even be able
to cut a cable fitting, and I will be still taking cross country tours
and racing on my bike and barefoot water skiing and living until 2110.
Hell, I'll set records. I am just getting started.

Yes, idiot... you are amusing, sometimes. Bwuahahahahahaha!

[tom]

On 2/9/2012 10:34 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
> tom wrote:
>>
>> On 2/9/2012 9:35 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote: >>
>> Cool! You seem to know what you are up to.
>>
>> Can you put rough numbers around what you mentioned? Like what are
>> providers legally required to deliver at the far end of the drop?
>
>
> We were required to deliver 0 dBmv at the end of 100 feet of RG-59 or
> RG-6 for two sets per the franchise. The system was designed at +10
> dBmv at the tap to allow for three or four TVs at the 100 foot range.

> That was on a 36 channel system with RCA modulators& HST. It was done

> for two reasons. To have a little extra signal available when the
> system was built, and for conversion for a 300 MHz plant to a 450 MHz
> plant without respacing the trunk amplifiers.
>
>

> I build a headend& interface to tie two incompatible community loops

> together. Ours was a sub split loop, and the other CATV company used

> mid split. We used 2& 12 for pilots, so we fed them Channel 2 into

> their return, and down converted their feed to T-9 for our return. That
> headend had two RCA HSP and a combiner. The interface was another HSP
> in a large stainless steel NEMA box mounted to a power pole at the
> boundary of the two systems. A pair of two way splitters were used to
> route the signals between the systems, as well as into and out of the
> HSP. The other company wanted us to install a modulator and a

> demodulator at the boundary to give us audio& video, and another pair

> from our side so the interface would be baseband. Their design was over
> $15,000 in hardware alone. My design was under $3000 for all the

> hardware& labor to install. I had system designers from both sides

> telling me it wouldn't work, but it did the job with no problems. :)
>
>

Very nice. We were much more constrained on the install I mentioned up
the thread a ways. The fiber was fed at E1 speed, which probably didn't
work it very hard.

We had an issue at one point.

This was a distributed proc/data system, one of the first. Each cabinet
was a standalone PBX. And you could make 126 of them look like one.
And each could survive on its own.

First fiber campus we'd done. Staggered cut to the new infrastructure.
Fun stuff.

At one point we had to do the cutover to the other large pice of the
system. Each end connected the fiber. 0 signal.

TDR from A end showed 700 meters from A end, 800 meters from end B.
Length from A to B is 1500 meters.

The work that occurred because of that was not fun. Had to go get the
guy doing fusion splicing.

Joy. Midnight trip to Pittsburgh with the salesman.

Actually it was fun. Not much traffic at night.

Landing pattern at 160mph in between DC9s into Pittsburgh at about
midnight. And they didn't like 160 at all. This was scary.

Quickest turnoff onto a taxiway I've ever experienced. Of course the
taxiway may not have been one. We didn't care.

tom
K0TAR

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

Yes, and the fiber was obsolete within a few years after installation,
and is not compatible with the standardized cabling and I/O methodology
in use today. Even modern copper Ethernet is faster than that 20 year
old 100Mb/s obsolete fiber and that number was before the overhead.

Whoopie doo, the ditz knows how to polish a face. Not even required
any more.

[tom]

Yup, he's amusing.

tom
K0TAR

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

Hardly,retard boy.

They didn't do 10Gb/s, and neither did you... ever.

http://www.defensetechbriefs.com/images/stories/RFM/2012/FEATURES/40430-541_fig2.png

http://www.defensetechbriefs.com/component/content/article/12855

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:07:01 -0600, tom <news...@taring.org> wrote:

>Very nice. We were much more constrained on the install I mentioned up
>the thread a ways. The fiber was fed at E1 speed, which probably didn't
>work it very hard.

Bwuahahahahahahahahahaahha!

You are too stupid to even know how to say OC-192!

[VWWall]

http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/units/data_transfer_rate/data_transfer_rate.dOCont.en.html

I can Google too!

--
VWW, P.E. ,K6EVE

[Hellequin]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:47:31 -0800, VWWall <vw...@large.invalid> wrote:

>The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:07:01 -0600, tom <news...@taring.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Very nice. We were much more constrained on the install I mentioned up
>>> the thread a ways. The fiber was fed at E1 speed, which probably didn't
>>> work it very hard.
>>
>>
>> Bwuahahahahahahahahahaahha!
>>
>> You are too stupid to even know how to say OC-192!
>

It wasn't from google, idiot. It is what I work with daily. More than
an order of magnitude more, in fact. Over 300Gb/s

Here's another link for you, dork:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_band

Oh, and did I say FUCK YOU, Wall boy?

[VWWall]

Hellequin wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:47:31 -0800, VWWall <vw...@large.invalid> wrote:
>
>> The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
>>> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:07:01 -0600, tom <news...@taring.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Very nice. We were much more constrained on the install I mentioned up
>>>> the thread a ways. The fiber was fed at E1 speed, which probably didn't
>>>> work it very hard.
>>>
>>> Bwuahahahahahahahahahaahha!
>>>
>>> You are too stupid to even know how to say OC-192!
>
> It wasn't from google, idiot. It is what I work with daily. More than
> an order of magnitude more, in fact. Over 300Gb/s
>

Tell us more about your work. You must not be doing much, since you're
always on Usenet. Do you work the graveyard janitorial shift?

> Here's another link for you, dork:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_band
>
> Oh, and did I say FUCK YOU, Wall boy?

Wikipedia is also handy for things you know nothing about!

What's Ku got to do with anything. I was designing and using Ku TWTAs
over twenty years ago. I was system engineering director for several
military satellites systems, including those for the UK and NATO. These
did not use Ku because of the problem with rain attenuation.

P.S. How about a reply using one of the many Linux systems you mention?

--
VWW

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:18:53 -0800, VWWall <vw...@large.invalid> wrote:

>
>Wikipedia is also handy for things you know nothing about!

Yes. So people like you can give a cursory glance to a given term or
subject.

As for me, the things I mentioned are things I *do* know something
about.

Sorry, you fail. Just like the others. This group is full of dopes
like you, who know nothing about people, and even less about the world.

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:18:53 -0800, VWWall <vw...@large.invalid> wrote:

>Tell us more about your work.

How many personalities did the doc say you have?

> You must not be doing much,

I do a lot.

> since you're
>always on Usenet.

How many mistakes can you make in one post? I post here during the
period in which I am at home. Can you really be that retarded?

> Do you work the graveyard janitorial shift?

Graveyards do not have janitors, idiot. They have groundskeepers.

Any idiot with half a brain could figure out that I work during the
day, dumbfuck.

[The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:18:53 -0800, VWWall <vw...@large.invalid> wrote:

>

>Wikipedia is also handy for things you know nothing about!

For idiots like you who visit it, that is always the case.

>
>What's Ku got to do with anything.

It has to do with a lot of things. Most folks refer to them as
"packets".

> I was designing and using Ku TWTAs
>over twenty years ago.

Good for you. Now, you are an old, jack brained fucktard who jumped on
the s.e.d jack brained fucktard bandwagon, and*I* am working with modern,
advanced ku systems.

> I was system engineering director for several
>military satellites systems,

And now you are a withering old fuck who comes in here mouthing petty
horseshit about someone as if you know them, when you, in fact, have no
clue about anything about them. What you are doing is jumping on the
petty, immature asshole bandwagon. You are a special case type asswipe.

> including those for the UK and NATO.

Oh boy! Mine are mobile! You're a joke!

> These
>did not use Ku because of the problem with rain attenuation.

Not as bad as other bands and worse than some others. Easy enough to
get around.

>P.S. How about a reply using one of the many Linux systems you mention?

WTF does Linux have to do with any fucking thing, and why would I go
out of my way to do a goddamned thing for a mouthy punk fuck like you?

Then, there is the fact that I could be running this very "agent"
session from within a DOS vdm from within a Linux base session, and a
dopey fuck like you wouldn't know the difference and couldn't tell the
difference.

[JIMMIE]

On Feb 9, 6:35 pm, "Sal" <sob...@aol.com> wrote:
> "JIMMIE" <JIMMIEDEE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message
>
> news:490a9f32-61ad-49bf...@m7g2000vbw.googlegroups.com...

> On Feb 8, 2:00 pm, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi All,
> > I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
> > Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
> > Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
> > I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
> > suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
> > company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
> > this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
> > utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
> > cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
> > That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
> > signal to work 100% of the time.

> > I don't has access to electricity at the utility post, so an amp is
> > out. Although I could try an amp at the cable box end. Is that reasonable?
> > I would run two cables if there was a way to make it increase signal
> > strength.
> > Getting anymore from the cable company is not an option.
> > Any ideas to get a better signal?
> > Mikek
>
> > PS.
>
> > When the signal fails it seems channel 41 is ok and above 42 it breaks up.
> > Curious to know if there is an unusual frequency jump between those two
> > digital channels.
>
> Google your cable box model. You should able to find ifo on how to
> pull up a menu that shows signal strengh. -60dbm is about where my
> sigal starts droping out
>
> Jimmie
>
> =====================================================
>
> Yes, but be mindful of the difference between dBm and dBmV.    The cable
> industry often deals in levels  on the dBmV scale.
>
> There are places like this ...
>
> http://www.maxim-ic.com/app-notes/index.mvp/id/808
>
> where you can see some conversion equations.  Jimmie's -60dBm equals -11.25
> dBmV. Same power level -- different scale.
>
> I have long known level requirements for the TV tuner's cousin, the cable
> modem.  The common DOCSIS 2 cable modems are usually spec'ed for -15dBmV to
> +15dBmV and the smart operators try to keep inside +/- 12.  Thus, you can
> see that Jimmie's -11.25dBmV is near the low limit and that dropouts become
> more likely in that neighborhood.
>
> I little bit of google snooping revealed that DTV cable boxes would like
> 0dBmV and will usually be okay with -10dBmV to +10dBmV.  Almost the same.
>
> i hope this helps.
>
> "Sal"
>
> "Sal"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Sal, A relative number by any other name would smell as sweet. The
reccomendations for my box is about the same but it works well below
that at least according to what I measure withe the cable box. BTW it
just says 'db'. dBm was an assumption on my part..


Jimmie

Jimmie

[JIMMIE]

On Feb 9, 12:01 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:54:19 -0600, amdx <a...@knologynotthis.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> My drivel:
>
> >> At my home, knology recently upgraded there system for faster internet.
> >> A cableman said he heard me radiating a block away. he came in and
> >> changed 7 crimp type connectors in my attic a couple of cable runs.
> >> Speedtest.com went from 6 Mbps to over 11 Mbps with just those changes.
>
> Yep, that's the way it works.  Compression type F connectors work
> well.  Crimp type are junk.  The catch is that there are probably 100
> different types of connectors, each with their own compression tools,
> intended to fit about 8 different types of 75 ohm coax (RG6a/u,
> RG59/u, single shielded, double shielded, quad shielded, direct
> burial, etc).  Mixing connector types and cables doesn't work.  I got
> fed up and "obtained" a 1000ft roll of double shielded RG6a/u, a big
> of matching F, BNC, and phono connectors, a compression tool, a
> stripping tool, and replaced all the junk cables in the house.
>
> >>> If it's Comcast, you will probably still have the lower 72 channels
> >>> doing analog. Remove the set top box and plug in your TV directly.
>
> >> Oh, if that is the fact, I may get me some browny points, If I can get
> >> the signal up to snuff, then put the vcr back in the line, my wife could
> >> record her soaps again.
> >> That would get me 15 seconds of hero status!
> >> Mikek
>
> I'm sure it's true for Comcast in Santa Cruz, CA.  No clue on other
> areas.  The grand plan is to move all the analog channels to digital
> area by area:
> <http://www2.insidenova.com/news/2011/jun/22/comcast-removes-scores-ch...>
> <http://www2.newsadvance.com/business/2011/nov/09/comcast-switching-an...>
> Unfortunately, your area may be one of those that have moved to all
> digital.  Hard to tell from here.
>
> >Just an addition to the termination debate, the marina has about 150
> >taps, I'd be surprised if 30 of them are connected to a tv and the rest
> >are unterminated. The line generally goes to the utility pedestal into
> >a 2 way splitter and then about 1 ft of cable connects it to the 2 taps
> >for the boat owners.
> >              Mikek
>
> Can you determine if the marina is using a distribution amplifier
> driving a big splitter, or is using a single cable trunk snaked
> through the marina, with taps (directional couplers) at various
> points?  If taps, it's easy to install too many taps, or miscalculate
> the tap type, resulting in level variations along the trunk.
> <http://www.doityourself.com/forum/entertainment-center-tvs-stereos-vc...>
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann     je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

Jeff, I installed TVRO systems for several years and used a lot of F
connectors. Suprisingly the ones I found that worked best were the
ultra cheap ones that only took a pair of pliers to fasten These were
the ones with the separate crimp rings. Used with some good quality
heat shrink tubing this eliminated most of the problems you mention. I
dont know why these connectors went away, my only guess is that
someone wasn't making enough money on them.

Jimmie

Jimmie

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:17:03 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE
<JIMMIE...@YAHOO.COM> wrote:

>Jeff, I installed TVRO systems for several years and used a lot of F
>connectors. Suprisingly the ones I found that worked best were the
>ultra cheap ones that only took a pair of pliers to fasten These were
>the ones with the separate crimp rings. Used with some good quality
>heat shrink tubing this eliminated most of the problems you mention. I
>dont know why these connectors went away, my only guess is that
>someone wasn't making enough money on them.
>
>Jimmie

Yech...

Please try this test. Insert such a crimp type F connector and cable
into some useless piece of equipment with a type F jack. Pull on the
cable hard. In my experience, it doesn't take much to make the cable
and connector part ways. Repeat with a screw on connector. Now,
repeat the experiment using a properly assembled compression type F
connector and cable. It takes considerably more brute force to break
the connection. I think the official minimum pull test is 55 lbs, but
I'm too lazy to Google for it now.

Hiding the workmanship under shrink tube is not very functional. It
will have little effect on the pull test.

Most of the cable leakage problems I've seen (and found) were due to
crimp type F connectors coming apart or badly crimped. That includes
both the hex shaped crimp, and ones held together with a crimped ring.

Bad:
<http://www.fconnector.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/F-Connector2.jpg>

Worse:
<http://www.showmecables.com/images/catalog/product/F-connector-RG59.jpg.ashx?format=jpg>

Good:
<http://images.lowes.com/product/converted/783250/783250926510lg.jpg>

--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com

Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Pomegranate Bastard]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:27:00 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:52:31 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra
<GeorgeT...@drmemory.org> wrote:

>> I was system engineering director for several
>>military satellites systems,
>
> And now you are a withering old fuck who comes in here mouthing petty
>horseshit about someone as if you know them, when you, in fact, have no
>clue about anything about them. What you are doing is jumping on the
>petty, immature asshole bandwagon. You are a special case type asswipe.

I tend to judge people by their willingness and abilities to learn new
things. You fail.

You may know something about CATV and fiber, but it doesn't show.
Instead of taking the time to educate those whom you suspect of being
in error, you waste our time with insults and unsubstantiated
opinions. Your command of profanity is truly impressive, but
misplaced. If someone presented you with your comments, what you
would think of the author?

I can't imagine what personal tragedy has occurred in your life, that
you find it necessary to demonstrate your competence at the expense of
others. If you're truly competent, such a crutch is not necessary. If
you clean up your act, there may be hope for you remaining.

[Pomegranate Bastard]

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:43:14 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra
<GeorgeT...@drmemory.org> wrote:

>On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:29:01 -0600, tom <news...@taring.org> wrote:
>
>>Nice to have amusing idiots back again.
>
> Actually, asshole, folks here would like it if you would leave.

Speak for yourself, Nymbecile.

Everyone here would love to see you leave. You have polluted this and
other groups far too long.

[Joerg]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
>> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>>> Joerg wrote:

>>>> amdx wrote:
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>>>>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>>>>> Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>>>>> I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I
>>>>> suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable
>>>>> company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At
>>>>> this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the
>>>>> utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the
>>>>> cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap.
>>>>> That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the
>>>>> signal to work 100% of the time.

>>>> Looks like the cable guys screwed up.
>>>
>>> In your opinion.
>> If their company cable box doesn't deliver a useful and reliable signal
>> I call that screwed up. One pays for a service and expects to either get
>> it delivered as promised or money back.
>>
>>> ... If they are delivering the level called for in
>>> their franchise, they didn't screw up. It has always been up to the
>>> customer to pay for or provide extra equipment for non standard
>>> installs.
>>>
>> Mike's install does not sound non-standard. 170ft cable drop towards
>> premises which is fairly normal, plus the cable company's set-top box.

>
>
> Grow up. That is an excessive length drop. A standard drop is under
> 100 feet. You think you know everything, and that the world has to live

> by your rules. You don't, and it doesn't. ...


http://www.starvision.tv/lineup_res.htm

Quote "Maximum Drop Length 300 Feet"

Now that's what I call good service.


> ... I'll bet you've never even

> seen a CATV franchise, or the dozen of pages of specifications agreed to
> by both the CATV company and the local government. The CATV company
> isn't a Santa Clause machine, and local governments know why there are
> limits to the service provided. If there were't, no one could afford to
> build or operate a CATV system. You've never designed a headend, or a
> physical plant If they build to supply higher port levels, it has to
> start at the headend, and requires closer spaced trunk amplifers. The
> system noise goes up from all of the cascaded amplifers, and the
> equipment runs hotter, withj a very reduced service life. When you can
> design an RF distribution system of more than 500 MHz bandwidth and has
> over 10,000 output ports, with the gain stabilized to a couple dBmv 20
> miles from the headend and over a range from sub zero F to + 100 F then
> you can tell me I'm wrong.
>
> One headend I designed and built was only off by .1 dBmv at the test
> port on the first trunk amp which was a half mile from the head end. If
> you can do better than that, I'll listen to you and your opinions
>

See above. Obviously others can. And yes, I have designed RF broadband
power amps. Lots of them. Not just lashing up boxes but the actual
transistor level circuitry including layout guidance for the nasty stuff.

Fact is, if a cable company isn't competent to do a 170ft drop they
should decline the job. Otherwise it is a screw-up, plain and simple. In
our area they'd lose their shirts to the satellite guys because there
are many houses like ours where there is no reasonable way to get from
the street to the house with a 100ft limit. We have around 200ft that's
still there from the early 90's and the previous owner said cable TV
worked just fine for them. We are not subscribed because TV ain't that
important to us.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[amdx]

On 2/8/2012 5:41 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:00:12 -0600, amdx<am...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>> I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post.
>

> Ok, 200ft of coax. Presumably RG6a/u.

>
>> Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of
>> Digital TV.
>

> You have been assimilated. Resistance is futile.

>
>> I got the new digital converter and had no picture.
>

> Something is wrong. The nominal signal from the cable drop is suppose
> to be 0dBm. If there's a splitter involved, they like to crank it up
> to about 10dBm. Your 200ft of RG6a/u will drop the signal from
> between 4dB at the low end, to about 6dB at the high end. Your set
> top box is suppose to operate with a 10dB margin. If you would kindly
> disclose the maker and model, it might be possible to find the specs.
> Typically, you'll have at least 10dB margin. Even with 200ft of coax,
> you should have 4 to 6dB margin.
>


The Box is a CISCO RNG100
Only data I know how to get is;
Tuner 537.00 Mhz 2dbmv
TDC 75.25 Mhz 5dbmv
RDC 20.00 Mhz 30.0dbmv Yes 30.0

On the road, will check in this evening.
Mikek

[Pomegranate Bastard]

Go on, Nymbecile, finish your favourite joke off. It's ages since we
heard it!

[VWWall]

He really needs to create a new file from which to cut and paste. Like
most comedians', his jokes get stale after awhile.

--
VWW, K6EVE