Lost channels? Look here for transmitter/reception issues

The Cush

Galway wrote: »

Maybe you need one of those new LTE aerials??

If it's LTE interference an LTE filter would be the cheaper option. It would be better to get someone in to diagnose the problem.

Galway

Peter Rhea wrote: »

Have to say though, use of words like 'contract piece of crap' makes me think you're just parroting someone else.

No need to get personal - I have not. You must like contract aerials so?

Very few 4G masts have been switched on as of yet. The extent of any interference is therefore not yet fully known. You are not going to need an LTE aerial unless you are close to a 4G mast and receive muxes in the affected frequency range. Urban areas are more likely to be affected as some rural parts are never likely to see 4G. The 4G effect was found to be greatly over exaggerated when 4G masts in the UK became active and was far less prevalent than expected.

I can receive both muxes from 6 separate main tx/relays – Castlebar & Tonabrucky group A, Cairn Hill group B; Maghera, Truskmore and Kilduff (group C/D) and at present have no reception issues on any mux. Some of these are received using (needed) masthead amps also.
Of course, an inefficient installation e.g. a contract so called 'WB' aerial and an unnecessary WB masthead amp is likely to be more susceptible to interference.

Galway

The Cush wrote: »

If it's LTE interference an LTE filter would be the cheaper option. It would be better to get someone in to diagnose the problem.

It would be than having an installer charge for a shiny new LTE aerial and nice call out plus labour.

Galway

Peter Rhea wrote: »

What kind of 'unwanted signals'? The troublemakers during 'tropo' conditions are other transmitters on the same channel: how does your grouped aerial discriminate against those?



Nobody here would dispute that group A aerials are better for receiving group A signals.

So they should be avoided for group A where 4G interference is less likely to be an issue. Any aerial which does not take in group A 21-37 is therefore not WB is it?

Peter Rhea

Galway wrote: »

You must like contract aerials so?

Most of them do the job fine. I can form my own views on their effectiveness, don't have to get them from websites.

Peter Rhea

Galway wrote: »

Peter Rhea wrote: »

What kind of 'unwanted signals'? The troublemakers during 'tropo' conditions are other transmitters on the same channel: how does your grouped aerial discriminate against those?

Nobody here would dispute that group A aerials are better for receiving group A signals.

So they should be avoided for group A where 4G interference is less likely to be an issue. Any aerial which does not take in group A 21-37 is therefore not WB is it?

Could you restate this question? It doesn't make any sense to me.

Galway

The Cush wrote: »

I'm surprised 2RN/RTÉNL aren't yet including the new LTE aerial group in their documentation even though they include an information note regarding full range wideband aerials - http://www.2rn.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/2RN-DTT-Television-Transmission-Network-Nov-2013.pdf

Interesting what 2RN themselves have to say:

Although Wideband Aerials can be used effectively in many situations, their poor out-of-band rejection of unwanted signals may require additional filtering, especially in fringe reception areas, or where mast-head / distribution amplification is employed.

Galway

Peter Rhea wrote: »

Could you restate this question? It doesn't make any sense to me.

Is an aerial that excludes group A channels 21-37 a WB aerial? Since group A is less likely to suffer LTE interference, what is the point of starting these aerials' coverage at channel 21? Unless of course, it is just cool to use a WB aerial, regardless of the performance?

Galway

Peter Rhea wrote: »

Most of them do the job fine. I can form my own views on their effectiveness, don't have to get them from websites.

I am beginning to get a clearer picture now. 'Most' and 'fine' are interesting words. I was told of an installer in the west who apparently put WB grids up regardless and just added an masthead amp each time instead of trying a higher gain correct group aerial first. Some older contracts don't even have a balun.

Peter Rhea

Galway wrote: »

Is an aerial that excludes group A channels 21-37 a WB aerial? Since group A is less likely to suffer LTE interference, what is the point of starting these aerials' coverage at channel 21? Unless of course, it is just cool to use a WB aerial, regardless of the performance?

'These aerials'? You mean the group T that will work fine in practically all situations except where more gain is needed at the low end of the band?

Galway wrote: »

I am beginning to get a clearer picture now. 'Most' and 'fine' are interesting words. I was told of an installer in the west who apparently put WB grids up regardless . . .

I'm not an installer & when I say 'do the job fine', I mean a job where they are capable of performing to a satisfactory level.

How exactly do you know a particular 'contract' aerial is any worse performance wise than its 'premium' equivalent?

Galway

Peter Rhea wrote: »

'These aerials'? You mean the group T that will work fine in practically all situations except where more gain is needed at the low end of the band?



I'm not an installer & when I say 'do the job fine', I mean a job where they are capable of performing to a satisfactory level.

How exactly do you know a particular 'contract' aerial is any worse performance wise than its 'premium' equivalent?

LTE aerials , yes. I did not say you are an installer. An LTE aerial is not a contract aerial - it will cost more as its stated purpose is to minimise LTE interference. Using a cheap contract WB (probably without a balun) when a grouped aerial provides better forward gain, directionality and rejection of out of band signals is cost cutting. Satisfactory = ok but it does not mean as good as can be achieved in all situations.

A ‘grouped’ aerial has a relatively narrow bandwidth, which allows higher gain and directivity. A wideband aerial will always perform much less well than its grouped equivalent.Even the better quality, properly designed wideband aerials don’t perform nearly as well as their grouped equivalent. Log-periodics are genuinely wideband, and they have good directional properties, but the gain is very poor. Many aerial installers who still use the cheapest possible ‘contract’ arrays are not going to suddenly start using good quality T aerials. They are going to use the cheapest possible wideband aerials.

A T group aerial is not really any longer a WB aerial as it designed to reject signals after channel 60. So fitting a T group is certainly better than fitting a 21-68 WB in future but still not the best for group A.

Peter Rhea

Galway wrote: »

Using a cheap contract WB (probably without a balaun) when a grouped aerial provides better forward gain, directionality and rejection of out of band signals is cost cutting.

You've mentioned baluns a few times: what will they do for me?

Peter Rhea

Galway wrote: »

A T group aerial is not really any longer a WB aerial as it designed to reject signals after channel 60.

It's wideband as far as the current UHF TV band is concerned.

Galway

Peter Rhea wrote: »

You've mentioned baluns a few times: what will they do for me?

Not a lot if you don't know what they are. I suppose.

Galway

Peter Rhea wrote: »

It's wideband as far as the current UHF TV band is concerned.

Yes but it is called T not WB, as the name implies. Im sure a T will be just 'fine' for reception of the UK muxes from Brougher or Divis in your part of the country (group A muxes at the moment).

Peter Rhea

Galway wrote: »

Not a lot if you don't know what they are. I suppose.

Oh, I have an idea what they do. (I know what bal-un means for a start.)

Just thought you might give us your own insights, while we're so privileged to have you here & all.

Ronnie Raygun

Galway wrote: »

Yes but it is called T not WB, as the name implies.

Doesn't "T" stand for "Total"? I don't think I've actually seen one of these ch.21-60 aerials referred to as group T yet anyway, so you could refer to them as "group W 21-60" or something, if it makes you happy. (There is/was no group WB, btw.)

The Cush

Ronnie Raygun wrote: »

Doesn't "T" stand for "Total"? I don't think I've actually seen one of these ch.21-60 aerials referred to as group T yet anyway, so you could refer to them as "group W 21-60" or something, if it makes you happy. (There is/was no group WB, btw.)

Yes, I've seen it referred to as "Total band".

Blake Aerials list them as Group T.

Oscarziggy

Galway wrote: »

I can receive both muxes from 6 separate main tx/relays – Castlebar & Tonabrucky group A, Cairn Hill group B; Maghera, Truskmore and Kilduff (group C/D) and at present have no reception issues on any mux. Some of these are received using (needed) masthead amps also.
.

Here across the water receiving signals from more than one transmitter causes all sorts of issues with Freeview-- signal break up etc.
People who live on the South coast of the UK get problems during tropo conditions from the transmitters in France --- East coast of the UK suffer the same from Holland etc.
How does your TV sort out the LCN with signals from 6 different transmitters ?
I have one set top box that during a first time install puts BBC 1 at CH1 and RTE1 at another CH1 ! Same with RTE2 at CH2.
Regards

Souriau

Galway wrote: »

You must have an issue with your aerial installation. Maybe you need one of those new LTE aerials??

Why would one need a LTE aerial?
Is there such an aerial for LTE?
Triax does a T band, that filter out LTE signal, to reject the frequency in the LTE band range;
811 MHz (LTE D1)
821 MHz (LTE D6)
832 MHz (LTE U1)
862 MHz (LTE U1)

Peter Rhea

Souriau wrote: »

Why would one need a LTE aerial?
Is there such an aerial for LTE?

He means the 'LTE protected' aerials. It was more a smartass comment, I think, as in: 'This is the latest thing they are trying to flog'.

I would say he is just trolling. More interested in attacking the credibility of others, than in providing useful information.

Galway

Peter Rhea wrote: »

He means the 'LTE protected' aerials. It was more a smartass comment, I think, as in: 'This is the latest thing they are trying to flog'.

I would say he is just trolling. More interested in attacking the credibility of others, than in providing useful information.

I don't think I was the one who started to make personal comments. "Shoulder - chip on" it seems. As you are obviously an authority on everything and cannot countenance contradiction of any sort. I don't think I am the one who lacks credibility.

Galway

Oscarziggy wrote: »

Here across the water receiving signals from more than one transmitter causes all sorts of issues with Freeview-- signal break up etc.
People who live on the South coast of the UK get problems during tropo conditions from the transmitters in France --- East coast of the UK suffer the same from Holland etc.
How does your TV sort out the LCN with signals from 6 different transmitters ?
I have one set top box that during a first time install puts BBC 1 at CH1 and RTE1 at another CH1 ! Same with RTE2 at CH2.
Regards

MY SONY TV has no problem with this - there is a function to disable the LCN.

Peter Rhea

Galway wrote: »

As you are obviously an authority on everything and cannot countenance contradiction of any sort. I don't think I am the one who lacks credibility.

I didn't say anything about your credibility, or lack thereof. Forgot the 'parroting' thing.

Answer me this: when you posted the statement below, 'avoid wideband aerials at all costs', was it just a bald, unqualified statement or, was it to be taken as referring to areas served by group A transmitters? Maybe I should have taken more notice of the fact that Mullaghanish is mentioned?

Galway wrote: »

A group B aerial is recommended for Woodcock Hill and a group A aerial (channels 21-37) for Mullaghanish. Avoid wideband aerials at all costs as they can provide unreliable reception except in strong signal areas.

Oscarziggy

Galway wrote: »

MY SONY TV has no problem with this - there is a function to disable the LCN.

Oh ok ----
Regards

Galway

Peter Rhea wrote: »

I didn't say anything about your credibility, or lack thereof.

Answer me this: when you posted the statement below, 'avoid wideband aerials at all costs', was it just a bald, unqualified statement or, was it to be taken as referring to areas served by group A transmitters? Maybe I should have taken more notice of the fact that Mullaghanish is mentioned?

Look frankly I don't give a **** what you do with WB aerials. Just google the research. I am not replying to anything else you raise.

Peter Rhea

Ah, was it the 'parroting' remark? I'll amend my previous post.

The Cush

Oscarziggy wrote: »

How does your TV sort out the LCN with signals from 6 different transmitters ?

Galway wrote: »

MY SONY TV has no problem with this - there is a function to disable the LCN.

I own 2 Sony TVs and there isn't an LCN disable function on them but if there was I couldn't see how it would prevent the TV storing the duplicate channels in any case.

I can receive Saorview from 2 transmitters but the TV will only store the muxes/channels from the strongest transmitter ignoring the weaker muxes. This from the Saorview specification explains better than I could, how it's done

4.1.1.4 .... The IRD shall only display a service once in the service list; there should be no duplicate of the same service, even if the same service triplet of original_network_id, transport_stream_id and service_id is received from multiple transmitters. If the same service can be received from several transmitters, the one with best reception quality shall be selected. The criteria for selection of the best received service shall be based on the signal strength and signal quality according to section 4.1.1.6 and section 4.1.1.7 in this document and as detailed in Annex D of NorDig v2.4

Source: Saorview Minimum Receiver Requirements (Irish DTT)

3.4.4.4 ....The IRD shall only display a service once in the service list (i.e. avoiding duplicate of the same services), even if the same service2 (same triplet original_network_id, transport_stream_id and service_id) is received from multiple transmitters. If the same service can be received from several transmitters, the one with best reception quality shall be selected. The criteria for selection of the best received service (i.e. best reception quality) shall be based on the combination of the signal strength and signal quality according to sections 3.4.4.6 and 3.4.4.7. An example of a possible selection algorithm is described in Annex D.

Source: NorDig Unified Requirements v2.4

Also see Annex D - NorDig Unified Requirements v2.4, page 178

Ronnie Raygun

Galway wrote: »

Just google the research.

Is there anything of a scholarly nature to be found, apart from stuff dealing with mobile phone aerials & the like? Would be grateful for a link.

Galway

Disable Digital Service Update and Service replacement. I did a Manual tune for each mux and then was given the option to store the new channels for each mux where I liked. The Saorview STBs however, will not store the same channel from different transmitters.