Increasing Cable TV signal strength
 

"VWWall" wrote in message
m...

The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:


If you had any clue at all, you would be familiar with where the name
comes from. So you fail there too, asshole. No surprise that you are a
cultureless twit as well.

That pretty much means that *I* have YOU calibrated. You are a total
loser, or you would remember the art. The fact that you do not means that
you were a drab loser ****tard back then as well. My fingernail
clippings have more on the ball than you do, idiot.

Bwuahahahaha!

Which one are you?

http://www.forward.com/articles/127941/

"A schmuck is, in short, someone who lacks not intelligence, but all
insight into what is humanly appropriate and what is not. This makes his
condition remediable. A schlemiel, a schlimazel and a schmendrik are
irredeemably what they are. A schmuck can be enlightened. He can
acquire, through a painful process of self-examination, the moral and
social understanding that he has been missing. He can become, to revert
to Wex’s dichotomy, a mentsh."

VWW, P.E., K6EVE
Using PCLOS
-
My money is on him being a schlimazel...the guy the schlemiel spills the
soup on.
Wayne
W5GIE
/W6

Increasing Cable TV signal strength
 

"tom" wrote in message
. net...

On 2/11/2012 2:08 AM, Sal wrote:
wrote in message
. net...

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:52:31 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra
wrote:



nuclear snippage


tom
K0TAR



I plonked the guy days ago. It would be so-o-o-o great if people quoted
him
back little or none. I have no objection to appropriate profanity (and
have
been known to howl the unprintable on occasion, myself.) But when
overused
to no good end, ****/****ing,****er/****ed-up/****wad get tedious.

"Sal"



I was just making sure he was really the badass he's convinced that he is.

He's not. He's actually kind of pitiful.

Sooo, Plonk anyway!
-
Guess if you are going to plonk him, I'll have to do it also... :)
Wayne
W5GIE
/W6

tom
K0TAR

Increasing Cable TV signal strength
 

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...

But the only time there might be an issue was if the system was
over-amped, then there could be problems with proof of performance
certification.

I saw a case of that twenty years ago in Key West, Florida. I suspect the
authorities had to look the other way because affordable technology to do it
better didn't exist. The Florida Keys were served out of a headend that was
close enough to the mainland to get decent OTA signals. however, by the
time those Miami signals got to Key West, they were pretty bad. I have no
idea how many amps were used. (IIRC, local origination channels were OK.)

I think five amps is about the limit due to added noise and cross-mod.

"Sal"

Increasing Cable TV signal strength
 

In message , Sal writes

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...

But the only time there might be an issue was if the system was
over-amped, then there could be problems with proof of performance
certification.

I saw a case of that twenty years ago in Key West, Florida. I suspect the
authorities had to look the other way because affordable technology to do it
better didn't exist. The Florida Keys were served out of a headend that was
close enough to the mainland to get decent OTA signals. however, by the
time those Miami signals got to Key West, they were pretty bad. I have no
idea how many amps were used. (IIRC, local origination channels were OK.)

I think five amps is about the limit due to added noise and cross-mod.

"Sal"

In practice, without serious and constant TLC, the length of cascades of
amplifiers is usually limited by the frequency response flatness (or
lack of it), and the ability to maintain it. I think that the maximum
I've been involved with was a cascade of about 20 normal trunk
amplifiers plus three or four distribution amps / line extenders on the
end. Thank heavens these days for optical.
--
Ian

Increasing Cable TV signal strength
 

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message , Sal writes


snip

I think five amps is about the limit due to added noise and cross-mod.


In practice, without serious and constant TLC, the length of cascades of
amplifiers is usually limited by the frequency response flatness (or lack
of it), and the ability to maintain it. I think that the maximum I've been
involved with was a cascade of about 20 normal trunk amplifiers plus three
or four distribution amps / line extenders on the end. Thank heavens these
days for optical.

20! Wow! That would have to be some high-grade stuff. Thanks.

"Sal"

Increasing Cable TV signal strength
 

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:29:35 -0800, VWWall wrote:

but all
insight into what is humanly appropriate and what is not.

So, you think his retarded suppositions were "appropriate"?

You really are a ****ing total retard. THAT was an appropriate
assessment.

Increasing Cable TV signal strength
 

Joerg wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Joerg wrote:

You do it because they wouldn't hire you if you couldn't meet specs,
just like every other consultant, engineer or tech. They might even
jail you for your incompetence for not meeting the specs.


Correct. And the spec for a competent cable company is typically 300ft,
as I have shown in the link. Plus the one below.


Believe it or not but I like to have to meet specs in medical because
they protect people. Including you.


Believe it or not, most technical people have that same standard.
You're nothing special.


Never said I was. Except that I do exceed standards at times where I
believe it is necessary. In the case of med electronics that has likely
saved lives. I do not subscribe to the idea that a standard is always
good enough. Because sometimes they are not.

... Would you like to pay
an extra 20% to 30% just so a very few locations can get better
service?
Out here we do not pay extra. Our cable companies out tend do use modern
technology, not cheap stuff from the 70's. A cable company that isn't
competent enough to do more than a measly 100ft would lose their
franchise rather quickly.


Once again the all knowing Jeorge shows his ignorance.


No. I suppose you know what MoCA is. Do you consider them ignorant?
Because they say the very same thing that I said. What matters is
today's state-of-the-art. Nobody cares about what it was in the 80's.
Today this is state-of-the-art:

http://www.cablefax.com/ct/sections/...ier_44237.html


Did you miss: "IN THE NEXT DECADE"?


Quote "The Multimedia Over Coax Alliance (MoCA) provides a standard ..."

then

Quote "The maximum cable distance supported between the root and the
last outlet is 300 feet, with a maximum attenuation of 25 dB". And this
is for MoCA, not just cable TV.


1: You don't know what you're talking about, about the cost of
service. Any extra operating costs become part of the basic service
that everyone pays. You won't work for nothing, and the utilities don't
give them free electricity. The service companies don't repair the
equipment for free. Do you have any idea how many amplifiers, taps and
set top boxes are needed for 10,000 active ports? To provide hotter
ports require more amplifiers, and raises the system noise floor. You
'designed an amplifier'. Big deal. A lot of engineers 'designed and
amplifier' and those companies are long out of business. ...

So how many linear RF amplifiers above 1W have you personally designed
and guided through layout?

Hint: All my clients are still in business and I am sure will be for a
long time to come.

... Current CATV
amplifiers use hybrids designed specifically for the application and
they use them for many reasons. That just leave the design of the 60V
modified sine wave to DC power supplies, equalizers, gain control,
equalization and remote switching. Some locations also have remote
monitoring so the headend can check system status on a continuous
basis. It can also report outages when some of the equipment doesn't
respond. They can even detect power failures and monitor the battery
status in the standby power supplies to give them time to get a portable
generator to the area if it is an extended outage. The local
Brighthouse system remained in operation here for over four weeks after
a hurricane even though the only way to watch TV or access broadband was
with battery power or a generator.


If that company can't do more than 100ft they'd fail miserably in our
market. It's not just our house, it's also the neighbor to the west, and
the one after that, and ...

2: '70s CATV tech was 12 channel with no return path. It was crude,
discrete point to point designs that looked like a ham put together from
junk TVs while drinking cheap beer. They were touchy as hell, their
tempco sucked, and they were impossible to service without a fully
equipped test bed. the power supplies were simple, poorly regulated
linear supplies with 85 C electrolytics that died quickly in the
southern sun. The large diecast aluminum housing ran hot to the touch
without the sun hitting them. That stuff was pretty well all scrapped
out by the mid to late '80s by 36 or more channels with return
capability. There was so much construction of upgraded systems that
there was a severe shortage of new hardware through most of the mid
'80s.

That '80s tech was gone in all but the smallest systems by 2000.
Today most systems are 450 MHz or higher, and are 'Fiber Enhanced' to
provide telephone, broadband, movies on demand and pay per view services
by breaking the system into cells that cover a few hundred homes, or
less.

3: You know nothing about CATV franchises. 'A measly 100 feet' is
more than adequate for a hell of a lot of drops & house wiring. ...

No, it is not. If you don't believe me check out Cameron Park, CA,
especially the area of the Estates. Then tell me how you want to do that
with 100ft drops.

... If that
is what the franchise calls for, THAT IS THE SPECIFICATION, ...

And the franchise would get kicked out of the market around here. You
can't serve this market with a sub-par spec. The big automotive
companies had once exhibited a "Well, this is the spec and that's that"
attitude like you do in this thread. Then they learned, the hard way. In
part by essentially going on welfare which was embarrassing.

... no matter
how much you whine like Sloman. A city or county won't pull a franchise
over one or two people complaining about weak signals. ...

They will if there's a whole big crowd showing up at the next meeting.
Now I won't because I only watch the evening news via antenna. But I
know a whole lot of folks who would be miffed to be declined service
because they are literally addicted to the sports channels. Many would
just get satellite though, they market that quite aggressively these days.


A big crowd is what percentage of their customer base?


... They receive a
fixed percentage of the system revenue every month, and the percentage
was set when the economy was up. If they pull the franchise, another
provider will offer a much lower percentage. It also involves legal
fees, and causes the rates to go up for the users.

The county folks have one much more important thing on their mind: How
to get re-elected. That's what'll matter most to them. They know that
seeing complaints about what many people perceive as a utility service
they have "rights to" in the paper is not the way to get re-elected.


No one has a 'right to' cable TV. I was at one meeting where a
citizen was demanding that they revoke our franchise. They told him
that one complaint out of 10,000 customers wasn't enough reason to
revoke. he was as arrogant as you. Everything had to be his way. He
got really ****ed when they told him to buy a satellite dish and go
away. His demand was a s ignorant as yours. He was demanding that he
bring back CBS ARTS, and wouldn't listen that CBS had dropped the
service. One other complaint was from a woman demanding that our
franchise be pulled because CSPAN was down for a couple days during the
modification of a 5 meter dish to multiple feeds.


... Why put up with all
that for a fraction of a percent of problems. Like people who built a
private road a mile long and want to pay the standard install fee when
it will cost about $15,000 to run a feeder for that one house. Or like
that marina. It isn't a street. It's private property. If they want
better service, let them pay for upgrades with .500 cable to each boat,
with a .500 to 'F" connector for each boat. That would only cost a few
hundred dollars a boat for materials. More if the cable is jacketed.
If it isn't it won't last long in salt air. Double that for the
hardware and labor to get a good idea of the costs.


Then answer a question I asked you before but you did not comment on it:
Why did Mike's cable provider not decline service? Obviously it worked
reliably in the analog days and now with DTV it doesn't. If they can't
handle the 170ft drop after the digital switch, why did they not inform
Mike, cancel the service on their part and send someone out to pick up
the set-top box?


Sigh. Just because there is a new agreement for the industry doesn't
mean that all existing have to comply. Some companies are FIOS. By your
standards, everything else should be replaced overnight. Then the
distance won't matter at all. I doubt that the income from that marina
will ever pay back the construction costs. the system worked for
analog, when it was installed. There are no guarantees in life. Stop
trying to walk on water, you'll drown.


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

Increasing Cable TV signal strength
 

In message , Sal writes

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message , Sal writes


snip

I think five amps is about the limit due to added noise and cross-mod.


In practice, without serious and constant TLC, the length of cascades of
amplifiers is usually limited by the frequency response flatness (or lack
of it), and the ability to maintain it. I think that the maximum I've been
involved with was a cascade of about 20 normal trunk amplifiers plus three
or four distribution amps / line extenders on the end. Thank heavens these
days for optical.

20! Wow! That would have to be some high-grade stuff. Thanks.

I think the equipment was fairly typical of its type.
--
Ian

Increasing Cable TV signal strength MoCA
 

Joerg wrote:

http://www.cablefax.com/ct/sections/...ier_44237.html

Quote "The Multimedia Over Coax Alliance (MoCA) provides a standard ..."

then

Quote "The maximum cable distance supported between the root and the
last outlet is 300 feet, with a maximum attenuation of 25 dB". And this
is for MoCA, not just cable TV.


MoCA is home networking, hence the 300 foot figure. A drop at +10
dBmv already allows a 25 dB loss for the cable modem, since they are
designed to work to -15 dBmv. That webpage also mentions verifing that a
"drop amplifier does not block Moca". In other words, it's home
networking for multimedia devices and has nothing to do with the length
of the cable drop. It is to allow customers to stream audio and video
within their home, and use services like Netflix & Hulu on their TV
sets.


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

Increasing Cable TV signal strength
 

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

You do it because they wouldn't hire you if you couldn't meet specs,
just like every other consultant, engineer or tech. They might even
jail you for your incompetence for not meeting the specs.

Correct. And the spec for a competent cable company is typically 300ft,
as I have shown in the link. Plus the one below.

Believe it or not but I like to have to meet specs in medical because
they protect people. Including you.

Believe it or not, most technical people have that same standard.
You're nothing special.

Never said I was. Except that I do exceed standards at times where I
believe it is necessary. In the case of med electronics that has likely
saved lives. I do not subscribe to the idea that a standard is always
good enough. Because sometimes they are not.

... Would you like to pay
an extra 20% to 30% just so a very few locations can get better
service?
Out here we do not pay extra. Our cable companies out tend do use modern
technology, not cheap stuff from the 70's. A cable company that isn't
competent enough to do more than a measly 100ft would lose their
franchise rather quickly.

Once again the all knowing Jeorge shows his ignorance.

No. I suppose you know what MoCA is. Do you consider them ignorant?
Because they say the very same thing that I said. What matters is
today's state-of-the-art. Nobody cares about what it was in the 80's.
Today this is state-of-the-art:

http://www.cablefax.com/ct/sections/...ier_44237.html


Did you miss: "IN THE NEXT DECADE"?


Where do you live? The parts of FL I have seen were are technologically
advanced, I guess. This stuff is rolled out here in CA, big time. Things
like the DCX3200M box and their DVR are MoCA.

In case you've missed it, MoCA has already release 2.0. More than a year
ago ...

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/