Poor ITV/Channel 4 Digital Reception
Ali
ITV and Channel 4.
We installed a wideband aerial, but were still unable to receive ITV and
Channel 4 channels. Therefore, we employed a professional company to fix
the problem, who are CAI certified. They installed a 'DMX10' aerial on a
10ft mast on the gable end (which goes into a masthead amplifier). The
installer was still having problems receiving these channels on both TV's,
therefore he realigned the aerial more precisely, however this still didn't
cure the problem. Therefore, he changed the aerial coax for a new one. Not
cheap all in all.
At the time, the reception seemed OK, however looking at the signal strength
and quality on the box, it still wasn't at the same level as the other
channels, but he said it would be OK. Despite this, these stations have
been unwatchable as they are pixilated and the sound keeps cutting out.
Furthermore, it also keeps displaying error messages saying no or bad
signal.
We are getting our TV reception from the Oxford transmitter and according to
the postcode check, we are able to receive all channels. However, the
transmission of Multiplex 2 (which is on channel 68) is ridiculously poor.
As this contains two of the main terrestrial channels, I find this
unacceptable. There are TV ads broadcasted telling people that they need to
switch to digital, but when you do, you can't get all the channels! We have
no reception problems with the other 5 multiplex's at all.
I am not sure whether it was the fault of the installation company, so I've
complained to OFCOM as I find this ridiculous, however I am not expecting a
quick response. What else can I do, except go to satellite (although I
don't want to pay subscription fees)?
Owain
> Really struggling on this one. I am getting very poor digital reception
> on ITV and Channel 4.
> ridiculously poor.
Channel 68 rings alarm bells - is there a video recorder / tv game /
even the digibox itself outputting something on c68.
Owain
Bill Wright
"Owain" <owain...@stirlingcity.coo.uk> wrote in message
news:120436062...@proxy00.news.clara.net...
I once had a problem with the ch68 mux from Belmont. This was in a place
where Belmont reception was a bit iffy anyway, but the ch68 seemed
proportionately worse than I would expect. Anyway, I suspected local
interference, so at ground level I connected an aerial to the analyser and
swung it round, and was rewarded with a very faint analogue picture. It
turned out that granny, who lived in an upstairs flat at one end of the
house, had a Sky box with the RF output set (as they usually are) to ch68.
Granny's aerial was on Emley Moor. The output from the box went to a one-in
one-out 'booster' which fed into a 'one-in four-out' booster, and then from
that to two bedrooms and the kitchen. In one of the loft bedrooms, which was
near the aerial I was working on, was a home made flylead which had the
outer not connected to the plugs. I replaced the flylead and moved Granny's
skybox output to ch67 which pleased her massively because the Sky picture
had been snowy before, due to the Belmont mux. This also resored a normal
ch68 BER to the feed to her son's IDTV. I asked about the 'boosters' and it
turned out that the man from the local TV shop had originally fitted the
four way one, together with the cables. When the results were poor he had
responded by ordering and fitting the additional booster, which of course
made no difference. He then blamed the trees, which were in the way of the
signal apparently, and departed. The total gain of the boosters was about
30dB, so the signal in the flylead would have been about 37dBmV.
Bill
Agamemnon
"Ali" <m...@privacy.com> wrote in message
news:psWdnSmZk9je7VXa...@pipex.net...
> Really struggling on this one. I am getting very poor digital reception
> on ITV and Channel 4.
>
> We installed a wideband aerial, but were still unable to receive ITV and
> Channel 4 channels. Therefore, we employed a professional company to fix
> the problem, who are CAI certified. They installed a 'DMX10' aerial on a
> 10ft mast on the gable end (which goes into a masthead amplifier). The
> installer was still having problems receiving these channels on both TV's,
> therefore he realigned the aerial more precisely, however this still
> didn't cure the problem. Therefore, he changed the aerial coax for a new
> one. Not cheap all in all.
>
> At the time, the reception seemed OK, however looking at the signal
> strength and quality on the box, it still wasn't at the same level as the
> other channels, but he said it would be OK. Despite this, these stations
> have been unwatchable as they are pixilated and the sound keeps cutting
> out. Furthermore, it also keeps displaying error messages saying no or bad
> signal.
>
> We are getting our TV reception from the Oxford transmitter and according
> to the postcode check, we are able to receive all channels. However, the
> transmission of Multiplex 2 (which is on channel 68) is ridiculously poor.
Ah, that would be the stupid arse fuckers broadcasting Channel 4 and ITV on
almost the same frequency as Sandy Heath are broadcasting BBC4 and Cbeebies
BBC in exactly the same region, Channel 67. Bloody ignorant tossers.
> As this contains two of the main terrestrial channels, I find this
> unacceptable. There are TV ads broadcasted telling people that they need
> to switch to digital, but when you do, you can't get all the channels! We
> have no reception problems with the other 5 multiplex's at all.
>
> I am not sure whether it was the fault of the installation company, so
> I've complained to OFCOM as I find this ridiculous, however I am not
> expecting a
Good. OfCom should have never allowed this to happen. No wonder my reception
of BBC4 is always crap from Sandy Hearth since it's being jammed from Oxford
and vice versa.
ktype
"Agamemnon" <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote in message
news:qKCdnVVa0b7gfFfa...@eclipse.net.uk...
.
>
> Ah, that would be the stupid arse fuckers broadcasting Channel 4 and ITV
> on almost the same frequency as Sandy Heath are broadcasting BBC4 and
> Cbeebies BBC in exactly the same region, Channel 67. Bloody ignorant
> tossers.
<snip>
> OfCom should have never allowed this to happen. No wonder my reception of
> BBC4 is always crap from Sandy Hearth since it's being jammed from Oxford
> and vice versa.
>
Perhaps you should replace your obviously crap TV before slagging of OfCom
et al!
Any TV which cannot separate signals on adjacent channels is not even worth
switching on. Most transmitters have muxes on adjacent channels and/or muxes
and high power analogue on adjacent channels.
My local Tx, Crystal Palace has muxes on 28 & 29, the Ch 4 analogue on 30,
for example.
Sandy Heath has muxes on 42 & 43 and on 45 & 46, so your crap Tv won't very
happy with those either, one assumes, if it can't resolves the difference
between ch 67 & ch 68 from different sites!
Think before you rant - that way, occasionally, you might not come across as
such an ignorant plonker!
Terry
Agamemnon
"ktype" <k.t...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:2OTyj.25636$%W6....@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Agamemnon" <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote in message
> news:qKCdnVVa0b7gfFfa...@eclipse.net.uk...
> .
>>
>> Ah, that would be the stupid arse fuckers broadcasting Channel 4 and ITV
>> on almost the same frequency as Sandy Heath are broadcasting BBC4 and
>> Cbeebies BBC in exactly the same region, Channel 67. Bloody ignorant
>> tossers.
>
> <snip>
>
>> OfCom should have never allowed this to happen. No wonder my reception
>> of BBC4 is always crap from Sandy Hearth since it's being jammed from
>> Oxford and vice versa.
>>
>
> Perhaps you should replace your obviously crap TV before slagging of OfCom
> et al!
Maybe you should GET AN EDUCATION!
What does my TV have to do with this matter when it's my STB that picks up
digital and its a top of the range Sony. MORON!
ktype
"Agamemnon" <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote in message
Ah Sorry! I forgot you were as thick as two short planks! (I've just been
reading your RF bollocks on a different thread)
I was assuming a Tv with integrated Freeview tuner. If you are using a
separate Freeview tuner/STB, then it's your STB that's crap.
The fact remains that, whatever device you use to receive the signal in the
first place MUST be able to work with signals on either od both adjacent
channels. Yours obviously won't - you said so! Therefore it is crap - and
nothing to do with OfCom.
Terry
Bill Wright
"Agamemnon" <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote in message
> What does my TV have to do with this matter when it's my STB that picks up
> digital and its a top of the range Sony. MORON!
Mr Angrymadman, I think you should calm down.
Bill
Bill Wright
>> What does my TV have to do with this matter when it's my STB that picks
>> up digital and its a top of the range Sony. MORON!
Whay are you using at STB with a top-of-the-range Sony? All such TV sets
include DVB. Could it be that you have a very very old top-of-the-range
Sony? Or could it be that you have a top-of-the-range Woolworth's Special?
Bill
Agamemnon
IGNORANT IMBECILE!
C67 from Dandy Heat is on 10 times less power than every other multiplex.
DO SOME RESEARCH YOU MORON BEFORE MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF!
>
> Terry
Agamemnon
"Bill Wright" <insertmybu...@f2s.com> wrote in message
news:GI-dnY5sPai6CFDa...@pipex.net...
Another fool that can't understand English. The STB is top of the range.
>
> Bill
>
Bill Wright
"Agamemnon" <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote in message
> Another fool that can't understand English. The STB is top of the range.
Good English useage includes the avoidance of possible ambiguities, Mr
Angrymadman.
Bill
David Taylor
It's not English. "It is" is abbreviated to "it's", not "its".
--
David Taylor
ktype
>>
>> Ah Sorry! I forgot you were as thick as two short planks! (I've just been
>> reading your RF bollocks on a different thread)
>>
>> I was assuming a Tv with integrated Freeview tuner. If you are using a
>> separate Freeview tuner/STB, then it's your STB that's crap.
>>
>> The fact remains that, whatever device you use to receive the signal in
>> the first place MUST be able to work with signals on either od both
>> adjacent channels. Yours obviously won't - you said so! Therefore it is
>> crap - and nothing to do with OfCom.
>
> IGNORANT IMBECILE!
>
> C67 from Dandy Heat is on 10 times less power than every other multiplex.
>
> DO SOME RESEARCH YOU MORON BEFORE MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF!
>
>>
>> Terry
If you are so close to the Oxford Tx that its Ch 68 signal is swamping the
crap signal you're getting from Sandy Heath (you say) why aren't you using
the Oxford transmitter?
As for power ratios, Freeview receivers in the Crystal Palace area have to
be able to resolve puny DTV Muxes with ONE MEGAWATT analogue signals
adjacent channel to four of them.
Once again you are demonstrating that, based on your own evidence, your STB
is crap and that you are an ignorant, loud mouthed wanker who hasn't the
faintest idea what he's ranting on about but is obviously sufficiently
mentally deranged not to be able to notice it!
Terry
Agamemnon
>
>>>
>>> Ah Sorry! I forgot you were as thick as two short planks! (I've just
>>> been reading your RF bollocks on a different thread)
>>>
>>> I was assuming a Tv with integrated Freeview tuner. If you are using a
>>> separate Freeview tuner/STB, then it's your STB that's crap.
>>>
>>> The fact remains that, whatever device you use to receive the signal in
>>> the first place MUST be able to work with signals on either od both
>>> adjacent channels. Yours obviously won't - you said so! Therefore it is
>>> crap - and nothing to do with OfCom.
>>
>> IGNORANT IMBECILE!
>>
>> C67 from Dandy Heat is on 10 times less power than every other multiplex.
>>
>> DO SOME RESEARCH YOU MORON BEFORE MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF!
>>
>>>
>>> Terry
>
> If you are so close to the Oxford Tx that its Ch 68 signal is swamping
> the crap signal you're getting from Sandy Heath (you say) why aren't you
> using the Oxford transmitter?
>
> As for power ratios, Freeview receivers in the Crystal Palace area have to
> be able to resolve puny DTV Muxes with ONE MEGAWATT analogue signals
> adjacent channel to four of them.
Get an education you ignorant imbecile. If you live directly under a
transmitter then you are in no better a situation for receiving the signal
that if you were living 50 miles away since the beam from the aerial will
pass a hundred feet above your roof and your aerial will receive almost fuck
all of a signal from it. Learn the basics of aerial characteristics before
you open your ignorant mouth again. FOOL!
>
> Once again you are demonstrating that, based on your own evidence, your
> STB is crap and that you are an ignorant, loud mouthed wanker who hasn't
> the faintest idea what he's ranting on about but is obviously sufficiently
> mentally deranged not to be able to notice it!
You are showing once again that you are an ignorant piece of shit.
Andy Burns
> you ignorant imbecile
pot, kettle, black?
ktype
"Agamemnon" <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote in message
I really can't work out if you really are thicker than I already thought or
if it is just the way you twist everything that defeats your own argument
into an illogical rant in order to camouflage the fact. To suggest that I
was advocating camping out in Crystal Palace park is really ridiculous!
I was simply demonstrating that ALL Freeview receivers in the area covered
by the Crystal Palace Tx must be able to work with very much higher adjacent
power ratios than in the case you are having problems with - and I'm sure
you must have realised that (unless, of course, your dementia really is in
a very advanced state.)
Whilst generating a lot of meaningless flak to hide your crap STB behind,
you conveniently neglected to address the question of why you are not using
the Oxford Tx as, based on your own evidence, its signals are obviously
blasting Sandy Heath into oblivion at your location (at least, as far as
your crap STB is concerned!)
Woody
Perhaps because Oxford is a different TV region?
--
Woody
harrogate three at ntlworld dot com
ktype
Crystal Palace Park. Not being local to the area (it was a present from one
of our customers to aging relatives) we didn't know quite what to expect.
The house was about 700 metres from the transmitter and we'd been told that
nobody used anything except set top aerials in the area. However, BBC2 had
only just started and not many people had it so we judged that this
perceived wisdom did not extend to UHF reception - and we were right!
It is important to remember that the VHF antenna panels (Ch 1, 45MHz Vision)
extended right down the main part of the mast while the helical UHF antenna
initially used for BBC2 (Ch 33, 567.25MHz Vision) was perched right on the
top of the mast (as the current UHF array is today, of course)
This meant that if you looked directly towards the mast you were looking at
the bottom of the VHF array but to look at the UHF antenna you had to look
up!
A set top aerial gave perfect results on both BBC1 and ITV (from the Croydon
transmitter just down the road) but BBC2? No way! So up went the UHF aerial
and, for once, I had no reservations about it going in the loft!* The aerial
was pointed directly at the top of the mast and gave perfect results.
* Loft aerials were a definate no-no in the early days of UHF reception and
our aerial rigger was given strict instructions to only fit them outside.
However, unknown to us, many of our customers with existing loft aerials for
VHF asked for the UHF aerials to be installed there too, and our man agreed!
Early valve tuners had virtually no gain and everything was working flat out
but the results were good and, when BBC2 finally started, everthing was ok
and nobody was any the wiser...
... until the first lot of heavy rain! We had many complaints of grainy BBC2
pictures and a rather sheepish aerial rigger went back to move the aerials
from loft to chimney!
When transistorised tuners with plenty of gain appeared a year or two later,
there was a bit more latitude!
Terry
ktype
"Woody" <wo...@spamblock.com> wrote in message
news:Okuzj.34743$Ef1....@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
<snip>
>>
>> Whilst generating a lot of meaningless flak to hide your crap STB behind,
>> you conveniently neglected to address the question of why you are not
>> using the Oxford Tx as, based on your own evidence, its signals are
>> obviously blasting Sandy Heath into oblivion at your location (at least,
>> as far as your crap STB is concerned!)
>>
>>
>
>
> Perhaps because Oxford is a different TV region?
>
>
> --
> Woody
>
> harrogate three at ntlworld dot com
>
But if the Oxford signal is obviously so strong at his location, or the
Sandy Heath signal so weak (or both) presumably the regional programmes from
Oxford (what few there are these days) are actually intended for the region
in which he lives!
Terry
funkmish
> But if the Oxford signal is obviously so strong at his location, or the
> Sandy Heath signal so weak (or both) presumably the regional programmes
> from Oxford (what few there are these days) are actually intended for
> the region in which he lives!
Our friend Aggy lives in Northampton. Oxford and Sandy Heath are much of a
muchness depending on where in Northampton you are, for digital reception.
However many other people in Northampton have no problems of the type he
describes, so it would appear any problems he has are either of his own making
or beyond his ability to solve....
Agamemnon
I have 3 STBs. All of them experience dropout or total signal loss on the
Ch67 multiplex in bad weather. GET AN EDUCATION and learn how atmospheric
conditions affect signal propagation. Imbeciles placing two multiplexes from
different transmitters in the same direction right next to each other does
help matters. If it was possible to place two multiplexes next to each other
like that then the tossers running Sandy Hearth wouldn't need to broadcast
BBC4 on Ch67. They could have put it next to one of the lower frequency
multiplexes and saved people from having to replace their aerials.
FOOL!
Agamemnon
"funkmish" <funk...@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:fqm0vh$5g2$1...@south.jnrs.ja.net...
> ktype wrote:
>
>> But if the Oxford signal is obviously so strong at his location, or the
>> Sandy Heath signal so weak (or both) presumably the regional programmes
>> from Oxford (what few there are these days) are actually intended for the
>> region in which he lives!
>
> Our friend Aggy lives in Northampton. Oxford and Sandy Heath are much of a
> muchness depending on where in Northampton you are, for digital reception.
>
> However many other people in Northampton have no problems of the type he
NO PROBLEMS? NO FUCKING PROBLEMS. Almost 90% of Northampton can't pick up
Freeview at all.
> describes, so it would appear any problems he has are either of his own
> making or beyond his ability to solve....
Of course they are. There are the fault of Sandy Heath.
charles
Agamemnon <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> I have 3 STBs. All of them experience dropout or total signal loss on the
> Ch67 multiplex in bad weather. GET AN EDUCATION and learn how
> atmospheric conditions affect signal propagation. Imbeciles placing two
> multiplexes from different transmitters in the same direction right next
> to each other does help matters.
From Northampton the bearings of Sandy Heath & Oxford are pretty much at
right angles - not the same direction.
--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"
Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11
ktype
"charles" <cha...@charleshope.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4f7b4cd7...@charleshope.demon.co.uk...
What makes you think he understands compass bearings? Could be a bit beyond
him, methinks.
Terry
ktype
"Agamemnon" <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote in message
>
>
> I have 3 STBs. All of them experience dropout or total signal loss on the
> Ch67 multiplex in bad weather. GET AN EDUCATION and learn how atmospheric
> conditions affect signal propagation. Imbeciles placing two multiplexes
> from different transmitters in the same direction right next to each other
> does help matters. If it was possible to place two multiplexes next to
> each other like that then the tossers running Sandy Hearth wouldn't need
> to broadcast BBC4 on Ch67. They could have put it next to one of the lower
> frequency multiplexes and saved people from having to replace their
> aerials.
>
> FOOL!
>
They can, and do, place them on adjacent channels wherever possible.
(Which rather defeats your argument!)
This means that, in many areas, there is a very good chance that the 6 muxes
and the analogues can all be received using the original aerial - provided,
of course, that it was correctly installed and still working perfectly.
On the other hand, the UK UHF Channel Plan was devised on the basis of
providing 4 analogue signals all over the UK, and that is all. Nobody
envisaged over 40 years ago (probably closer to 50) that a further 6 signals
would be added nearly half a century later (albeit of lower power and
different characteristics.) Not to mention Channel 5!
Now, with your claimed superiority in all matters, including frequency
re-use, I'm surprised that you haven't redesigned the UHF Channel Plan to
suit. You could then jump into your TARDIS and go back and ensure they got
it right the first time.
Terry
funkmish
> "funkmish" <funk...@address.invalid> wrote in message
> news:fqm0vh$5g2$1...@south.jnrs.ja.net...
>> ktype wrote:
>>
>>> But if the Oxford signal is obviously so strong at his location, or the
>>> Sandy Heath signal so weak (or both) presumably the regional programmes
>>> from Oxford (what few there are these days) are actually intended for the
>>> region in which he lives!
>> Our friend Aggy lives in Northampton. Oxford and Sandy Heath are much of a
>> muchness depending on where in Northampton you are, for digital reception.
>>
>> However many other people in Northampton have no problems of the type he
>
> NO PROBLEMS? NO FUCKING PROBLEMS. Almost 90% of Northampton can't pick up
> Freeview at all.
I live there and I know quite a few people who have it...
>
>> describes, so it would appear any problems he has are either of his own
>> making or beyond his ability to solve....
>
> Of course they are. There are the fault of Sandy Heath.
Sandy Heath is a person or legal entity now eh?
funkmish
> In article <To6dnUkh3-5-E1Pa...@eclipse.net.uk>,
> Agamemnon <agam...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>
>> I have 3 STBs. All of them experience dropout or total signal loss on the
>> Ch67 multiplex in bad weather. GET AN EDUCATION and learn how
>> atmospheric conditions affect signal propagation. Imbeciles placing two
>> multiplexes from different transmitters in the same direction right next
>> to each other does help matters.
>
> From Northampton the bearings of Sandy Heath & Oxford are pretty much at
> right angles - not the same direction.
Exactly.
Some in Northampton use Sutton Coldfield, that's 180 degrees away from Sandy Heath.
The people in Northampton who have problems are the people who are in the TSA
for the Vertically Polarised Dallington relay. They are never going to get
reliable reception of any of the main stations, which is the reason the relay
is there.
But the majority of the population do not live in the "dip" that this relay
serves, and can receive from Sandy, Sutton Coldfield, Oxford or Waltham
transmitters a reasonable signal strength, assuming the correct aerial and
suitable cables etc.
Terry Casey
thoughts of a couple of other aerial related events.
When the first West Thurrock power station was being built we watched
with trepidation as two enormous pylons grew either side of the Thames,
in direct line between Crystal Palace/Croydon and the majority of our
customer base. Surprisingly, virtually nothing happened and when the
pylons reached their maximum height, we breathed a sigh of relief.
Time passed and then, one Monday morning, all hell let loose! Over the
weekend, the cables had appeared across the river (I've often wondered
how they did it) and they caused aerial problem you wouldn't believe!
We had a problem with one customer of severe patterning on BBC (I think
this was before BBC2 was invented!) The TV was absolved from all blame
and we wondered if the interference came from the hospital about half a
mile away in a different direction to the transmitter. (40.68MHz is an
Industrial & Medical frequency and adjacent to Channel 1, which was
suffering from the interference.)
The single dipole (which sufficed for the majority of Band I reception
locally) was replaced by an H aerial, to no effect. Our rigger tried
everything but nothing worked. Finally we suggested to the customer that
they contact the Radio Interference Department of the GPO, which they did.
The customer later told us that the problem had been traced to an RF
heating unit, used to dry paint on doors manufactured at a local timber
works. The strange thing is that although the factory is in direct line
of the transmitter, it is about 3 miles away on low lying land (the
customer was on high ground) and never caused a problem to anybody else
- including customers living virtually next door to the factory!
Cranes are always a source of trouble so we were probably lucky that,
although Tilbury Docks were in our back yard, the majority of people
lived side-on to them, from a signal point of view. One crane that did
cause a lot of problems, though, suddenly appeared a few miles away, not
far the afore-mentioned timber works. Unfortunately the majority of the
local housing is in a ribbon north of the Thames, looking through the
crane site towards the transmitters.
There was virtually no daytime TV in those days and what happened at
night depended exactly where the crane was left at the end of the
working day. Obviously there was no possible aerial solution so we could
only explain the situation and leave it that.
Then, suddenly and mysteriously, the complaints stopped - yet the crane
remained in situ and we would see it still working as we drove by.
I found out what had happened a couple of months later when I bumped
into an acquaintance in a bar who worked for another local firm. Put 2
engineers in a pub together and you know what happens ...!
In the course of time the subject of the crane crept into the
conversation. My friend told me he had visited a customer with problems
and he had explained that it was caused by the crane and he could do
nothing about it.
"Oh!", says the customer. "I'll soon put a stop to that!" Then she
explained that her husband was the crane driver and he was in for a
right talking to when he got home!
Thereafter the crane jib was lowered right down at the end of each day
and everybody got a bit of peace!
Terry
Bill Wright
> Agamemnon wrote:
>> "funkmish" <funk...@address.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:fqm0vh$5g2$1...@south.jnrs.ja.net...
>>> ktype wrote:
>>>
>>>> But if the Oxford signal is obviously so strong at his location, or the
>>>> Sandy Heath signal so weak (or both) presumably the regional programmes
>>>> from Oxford (what few there are these days) are actually intended for
>>>> the region in which he lives!
>>> Our friend Aggy lives in Northampton. Oxford and Sandy Heath are much of
>>> a muchness depending on where in Northampton you are, for digital
>>> reception.
>>>
>>> However many other people in Northampton have no problems of the type he
>>
>> NO PROBLEMS? NO FUCKING PROBLEMS. Almost 90% of Northampton can't pick up
>> Freeview at all.
I've did a job at a TV shop in the town and there was no particular problem.
Bill
Steve Terry
"funkmish" <funk...@address.invalid> wrote in message
> Agamemnon wrote:
>> "funkmish" <funk...@address.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:fqm0vh$5g2$1...@south.jnrs.ja.net...
>>> ktype wrote:
>>>
>>>> But if the Oxford signal is obviously so strong at his location, or the
>>>> Sandy Heath signal so weak (or both) presumably the regional programmes
>>>> from Oxford (what few there are these days) are actually intended for
>>>> the region in which he lives!
>>> Our friend Aggy lives in Northampton. Oxford and Sandy Heath are much of
>>> a muchness depending on where in Northampton you are, for digital
>>> reception.
>>>
>>> However many other people in Northampton have no problems of the type he
>>
>> NO PROBLEMS? NO FUCKING PROBLEMS. Almost 90% of Northampton
>> can't pick up Freeview at all.
>
Hence all the Astra 2 dishes, giving many more SkyFreeSat channels.
As long as I have a clear view to the south east, I regard a lack of
Freeview a bonus
Steve Terry
Paul Ratcliffe
<cha...@charleshope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> From Northampton the bearings of Sandy Heath & Oxford are pretty much at
> right angles - not the same direction.
Which genius planned Bath/Backwell relays to use exactly the same (analogue)
channels then? From a lot of the target area of Backwell, it is almost
directly in line with Bath and you get dreadful line pairing sometimes.
When Backwell suffers one of its many breakdowns you can often get a quite
watchable picture off Bath (locked, B&W anyway).
solar penguin
On 5 Mar, 12:20, "Agamemnon" wrote:
>
> NO PROBLEMS? NO FUCKING PROBLEMS. Almost 90% of Northampton can't pick up
> Freeview at all.
>
Yes, there are saver restrictions on the resources of the problems
involved in another.
>
> Of course they are. There are the fault of Sandy Heath.
Kaine fights back, knocking Ben unconscious. When Ben awakes, he's
pierced by a variety of shifter. It is believed to be caused by a
pentacle.
solar penguin
On 5 Mar, 05:18, "Agamemnon" wrote:
>
> Get an education you ignorant imbecile. If you live directly under a
> transmitter then you are in no better a situation for receiving the signal
> that if you were living 50 miles away since the beam from the aerial will
> pass a hundred feet above your roof and your aerial will receive almost fuck
> all of a signal from it. Learn the basics of aerial characteristics before
> you open your ignorant mouth again. FOOL!
>
They certainly can't be used as magical defences.
>
> You are showing once again that you are an ignorant piece of shit.
Not everyone was running around killing people.
solar penguin
On 4 Mar, 19:00, "Agamemnon" wrote:
>
> Another fool that can't understand English.
He would have done if he was a powerful page. He threw a tantrum. He
cried. He prayed.
> The STB is top of the range.
>
...and his genetic duplicate is also more explosive than coal.
solar penguin
On 4 Mar, 18:58, "Agamemnon" wrote:
>
> IGNORANT IMBECILE!
>
> C67 from Dandy Heat is on 10 times less power than every other multiplex.
>
> DO SOME RESEARCH YOU MORON BEFORE MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF!
>
There is little point hiding its artificiality. It is naturally a
finely divided powder, whereas coal tends to clump as larger
particles.
solar penguin
On 4 Mar, 15:03, "Agamemnon" wrote:
>
> Maybe you should GET AN EDUCATION!
He is a divine punishment for involving himself with studying famous
unsolved cases of sabotage of these machines. There is a trade
mission promoting British food in New Delhi somehow.
>
> What does my TV have to do with this matter when it's my STB that picks up
> digital and its a top of the range Sony. MORON!
Visitors contained the clip used in many ways, transcending the actual
or alleged limitations of its former days, but its importance is
rising fast.
Mark Carver
>
> Which genius planned Bath/Backwell relays to use exactly the same (analogue)
> channels then? From a lot of the target area of Backwell, it is almost
> directly in line with Bath and you get dreadful line pairing sometimes.
> When Backwell suffers one of its many breakdowns you can often get a quite
> watchable picture off Bath (locked, B&W anyway).
AIUI people living south west of the Redruth transmitter have similar problems
with Wenvoe. Using 39, 42, 45, 49 might have been a better option for Redruth,
but I suppose something in Eire or France prevents that.
--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.
adrianog...@hotmail.com
Hmm, after the kind of reaction I've read in this thread, I'm hoping
my comments will go down a bit better. I'm also having trouble with
the MUX2 channels and I live in Bicester. The signal quality seems to
have degraded over the past 2 months. Previously, I could get the MUX2
channels at a decent signal quality using my freeview box and a crappy
usb tv tuner for my pc. I was quite pleased. However, I now struggle
to get a picture with the freeview box and the usb tuner and my new
£60 digital tuner for my pc can't pick up anything on MUX2. Now, this
change in fortunes seems to have been related to the high winds that
occurred about a month ago. I'd honestly say it could be the aerial,
but ours is in the loft and there is no draft in there (and the aerial
is about 25 piece so it take more than a slight breeze to shift it).
At some point I'm going to take a trek upstairs and try to reposition
it, but I find it strange that nothing much else seems to have changed
but I'm having these problems.
I know the mux2 signal from Oxford is fairly weak, but could it
possibly be causing this bother? I'm only 20-odd miles away!
Terry Casey
Unless you live in a detached house, have you considered what your
neighbours might have been up to in their loft? Stored something large
and metallic up there, perhaps? Or a new water tank? (I know they're
plastic these days but the water could be a problem.)
There is an 18 element Belling aerial in my loft, it was there when I
moved in. I replaced the domestic downlead with CATV grade RG6 many
years ago and have never had any problems. As it points towards the
front of the house towards Crystal Palace about 10 miles away, I
wouldn't expect any - and the one time I measured the levels I was
getting around +17dBmV on analogues!
However, Im still conscious that it is only a couple of feet or so away
from my neighbour's loft, and they could unwittingly do something to
cause me problems, but I'm trusting to the very awkward access to that
part of the loft area to act as a deterrent!
The Belling aerial, by the way, is one of the original design with the
light blue connection box that first appeared in 1964 when BBC2 first
started!
--
Terry
To e-mail me replace example.invalid with ntlworld.com
adrianog...@hotmail.com
That's interesting. I can ask them. I'll double check the loft
connections as well, in case something has gone wrong.
Ali
It appears to be worse when atmospheric pressure is low, but is never very
good no matter what the weather. All the other muxes are OK.
<adrianog...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:400a0481-8ffe-4265...@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...