JohnM Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I know most of you know this (I know I've responded to a post about it) and many wont care because it concerns Terrestrial TV..... however, 2 mins on the keyboard may save somebody some money, so it's worth doing again, (I know I'm late but the Maurienne is switching in about 6 weeks which is why I was thinking about these things).I was looking at new TV's yesterday on the Comet web site. They have a question and answer service and there was a question about Digital Aerials, to which the Comet "Expert" had responded that Digital Aerials would improve the signal. Now, last year I spent a lot of time working with Digital UK experts and if I had a pound for every time I told punters that there is no such thing as a digital aerial, I would be very happy. So, I wacked a message off to them pointing out their error. Today, I received a reply saying that I was misinformed and if I'd care pop a URL into my browser I'd see that they do exist. It was a google results page. Well, bless my soul, 4th one down was Digital UK, bottom of their first paragraph....... "There is no such thing as a Digital Aerial". So if your bit of France has not converted yet and you are not sure if you will need a new aerial, have a look at Digital UK's web site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 If you got analogue with a VHF aerial, you should get TNT as well with the proviso that to get HD you may need an aerial with greater gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idun Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 I am not sure if I understood all of your post JohnM, but in England we had an ariel installed at our last house and then it linked to a digital box and that will work when analogue stops. Is that what you mean?If so, then an ariel can link to digital tv. My next question is, is the Maurienne well served by the TDF or whichever company is sending out the signals, would an ariel work? I have to say that our french dish wouldn't work when we tried to install it, as we had a big mountain in the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 29, 2011 Author Share Posted July 29, 2011 Sorry to have confused. Many companies are trying to sell digital aerials. However, aerials used for digital signals are exactly the same as for analogue signals. It annoys me that firms are trying to capitalise on the change over by... lying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 29, 2011 Author Share Posted July 29, 2011 Yeah, I am due to get a digital terrestrial signal. When I put the house aerial up I didn't even need to look at the map to point it in the right direction.... I could see the mast sticking up out of the tress about a mile away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idun Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 [:P]You lucky so and so. I had the man from the TDF round twice with his van and extending ariel.We could get some signals from one direction and others from a different ariel and all of them poor. So we had to buy two new ariels and something to increase the signal strength. We did end up with a better picture than our neighbours, and the TDF wouldn't come out and see them! We were not so lucky with french satellite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Sam Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 When we changed over to digital in the UK, despite the hype regarding new aerials being required, I waited and discovered my existing aerial combined with a signal booster continued to work adequately.I'd advise anyone to 'wait and see' rather than go to the additional expense of replacing an aerial which in all reality, will do the job perfectly well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 29, 2011 Author Share Posted July 29, 2011 Spot On Salty. That is the official advice from DigitalUK..... the only people pushing new aerials without checking are firms hoping to rip their customers off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin963 Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 [quote user="pachapapa"]If you got analogue with a VHF aerial, you should get TNT as well with the proviso that to get HD you may need an aerial with greater gain.[/quote]You did of course mean UHF there ppp. The propagation characteristics of VHF TV are somewhat different to UHF, and quite substantial areas were not covered by Canal +'s VHF network due to constraints vis a vis "rentabilité".Generally the HD MUX (R5) is transmitted at much the same power as the other multiplexes so I'm not sure that you need higher gain in an aerial just to receive an MPEG 4 signal.More generally (and no more nit picking, for which as always I apologise to ppp!) there's useful info herehttp://www.paras.org.uk/ and specifically here:http://www.paras.org.uk/02-myths.shtmlwhich confirms that there is of course - as has already correctly been pointed out - no such thing as a "digital aerial". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 [quote user="Martin963"][quote user="pachapapa"]If you got analogue with a VHF aerial, you should get TNT as well with the proviso that to get HD you may need an aerial with greater gain.[/quote]You did of course mean UHF there ppp. The propagation characteristics of VHF TV are somewhat different to UHF, and quite substantial areas were not covered by Canal +'s VHF network due to constraints vis a vis "rentabilité".Generally the HD MUX (R5) is transmitted at much the same power as the other multiplexes so I'm not sure that you need higher gain in an aerial just to receive an MPEG 4 signal.More generally (and no more nit picking, for which as always I apologise to ppp!) there's useful info herehttp://www.paras.org.uk/ and specifically here:http://www.paras.org.uk/02-myths.shtmlwhich confirms that there is of course - as has already correctly been pointed out - no such thing as a "digital aerial".[/quote]Yes UHF, but most houses around me have both VHF and UHF.[:)]Our local cinema in parthenay now has 3D equipment...not bad for a metropolis of 10,000 persons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 Thanks for posting the para site Martin, I will use that in my next round with the "experts" at Comet. They just will not concede that they are ........ misinformed. I wonder if I should pop into the local shop and try to get a heated debate doing on the shop floor. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Comet - that would be the same shop that insisted I needed a new dish for a Humax freesat receiver, because they said it wouldn't work with a dish set up for Sky? And couldn't explain their own fridge/freezer product labelling?Comet is, of course, under the same ownership as Darty in France.The aerial question isn't quite that clear-cut as I understand it. In Britain, at least, not all of the transmitters are transmitting at full power or with the full range of channels yet, so terrestrial digital signals may appear to be inadequate at present. Things are supposed to be improved at, or rather soon before, the digital switch-over so in most cases the existing aerial should work fine. In some areas (such as where we have our rented-out English house, right on the borders of two transmitter areas) an upgrade to a higher-gain aerial might be needed in order to get good reception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Théière Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 It may be easier and cheaper to fit an aerial amplifier that climb around on the roof (if you have to) to change the antenna. Worth replacing the coax cable while you are at it as that can get very dirty over the years and cause some signal loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 That is true Will, but the shops should be saying "You need a BETTER aerial (at the moment)". My beef is that they are saying "you need a Digital Aerial" which, to the less well informed, suggests that there is something different about them. It's not even as if they are selling a different type, the tuned Yagi (just rehearsing "pompous technical speak" for next time I speak with Comet) is the best type for domestic TV. So why can't these people be open and honest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 The amplifier is of course an option. The "best" solution is to ensure that the aerial is matched to ones situation, but there is no reason not to consider the easy solution. The trouble is, too many shops are pushing the "expensive and unnecessary aerial replacement option" because they are ly.... misinformed, about aerial types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 The Parthenay at Amailloux mast transmits R1,R4,R5,R6 at a approximately twice the power of R2 and R6 separately at around 6 kw.Accordingly the aerial should be aligned with either TF1 in MPEG 2 or possibly BFMTV on R2.In principle the HD transmissions on R4 and R5 should be optimised; nevertheless I have previously encountered problems with pixellation on Arte HD on R4 when reception in MPEG 2 on R1 has been perfect.About a month ago there was an autotune prompt via the Amailloux TNT transmission and the problem seems to have disappeared.P.S. I have a french lady neighbour up the road who has a Yagi pointing towards Amailloux which she says works poorly. She also has a Tri Nappe with the back facing towards Maissonay which she says works better.So there you have it, official, if reception is poor on TNT then fit a Tri Nappe the wrong way round and rotated for Vertical Polarisation.[:D] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make in most of your post. The only thing I can comment on is the reference to the Tri Nappe. As a Tri Nappe is essentially 3 layers of Yagi, it works in the same way. You'd get the same effect by just increasing the number of directors (and therefore the length). I think that by mentioning that variation on a theme you are diverting attention from the important fact .... You do not need a "special" aerial to get digital pictures. (But you might need a better one than you get in the DIY sheds). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 [quote user="JohnM"]I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make in most of your post. The only thing I can comment on is the reference to the Tri Nappe. As a Tri Nappe is essentially 3 layers of Yagi, it works in the same way. You'd get the same effect by just increasing the number of directors (and therefore the length). I think that by mentioning that variation on a theme you are diverting attention from the important fact .... You do not need a "special" aerial to get digital pictures. (But you might need a better one than you get in the DIY sheds).[/quote]Thanks looks like you will be able to help me in selecting a TriNappe.Will it be better for me to get an inverted TriNappe although it is more expensive. I live in an area with poor reception.[IMG]http://www.2galli.fr/site/medias/FLASHD.jpg[/IMG] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 Sorry to all of you who think that this is getting unnecessarily technical, just remember that Digital Aerials are a marketing ploy and that all you "may need" is a "better" aerial. Don't trust any salesman who tries to give a technical spin in order to sell one. It's not as simple as which shape. For the optimum reception you need to ensure thati) the directors and reflectors are the right distance from the antenna.ii) the antenna, director and reflectors are the right length for the frequency you are hoping to receive.iii) it is well constructed.After that you can consider the "shape" of the 3 layer, but the claimed gain (based on the above points) will probably be more important. I suggest that you compare the gain the manufacturers are claiming, then see if you can find any independent analysis that you can compare (I'm sure you'll enjoy that) and then measure the bars and do the sums to make sure that they are the optimum length for you transmissions (I'm sure you'll enjoy that as well). You may even consider getting them a bit longer than needed and filing them to exactly the right length. You strike me as being the sort of person who would get great satisfaction from knowing that they had a finely tuned aerial. But I wouldn't bother doing any of that, if reception is that poor, I'd get a Sat dish.Now, what was the point you were trying to make in your previous post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 In fact, to add to the salesmen and technical spin comment.... I'd say be very wary of anyone who uses too much technical jargon when it is not really necessary. I realise that I have used a lot in the second part of the post, but I'm not sure how I could have answered a PPP without using technical speak, so I hope you'll forgive me for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idun Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Don't apologise. I wish I could use technical jargon, un truc has been my word of choice so many times, and yet often it really is not sufficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted July 31, 2011 Author Share Posted July 31, 2011 I actually try very hard not to use it. When I first started work my father said about my chosen profession.... "Oh yes, those are the people who do their best to use long confusing language to try to make you feel inferior" and I vowed that I would always try to communicate well and use language that my "audience" would understand. I don't always manage it, but I do try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Sam Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 [quote user="JohnM"] ........ I vowed that I would always try to communicate well and use language that my "audience" would understand. I don't always manage it, but I do try.[/quote]Unlike some on here John[;-)] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idun Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 [:D][:D][:D] And just how confused people are with my 'machin truc' descriptions. It is good to know it and use it properly sometimes, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 [quote user="JohnM"]. Now, what was the point you were trying to make in your previous post?[/quote]Keeping the technical jargon to a minimum.Would the aerial picture in the previous post work better than one like this.[IMG]http://www.lamaisondevalerie.fr/img/produits/KE556_f.jpg[/IMG] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now