JohnM Posted August 1, 2011 Author Share Posted August 1, 2011 I understood that bit of your more recent post and hope I've answered it for you by saying that you will need to compare the technical specs. What I didn't understand was the in the post prior to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin963 Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 I think ppp needs to call in a professional. Only a qualified local dealer with experience of these things, *and who actually tests individual aerials themselves*, can make such a judgement, based in this particular case on the channel allocations for Parthenay.Having said that, these tri-nappe aerials actually don't have a great reputation for ruggedness of build, there are lots in Britain that have fallen apart fairly quickly. Their claimed superior performance may (as in a lot of aerial cases) be advertising hyperbole. If terrestrial signal strength is that poor the recommendation to go with satellite is indeed the right one. A well designed conventional single beam aerial may be just as good.In a closed group elsewhere we've been having a discussion about whether toe-ing in receiving log periodic aerials (groups of four) or leaving them parallel provides the best polar diagram and unwanted channel rejection at BBC UHF relay sites, where they are commonly used to provide the programme feed from the parent station. The debate has been fierce but in the final analysis we can't agree on an answer. The convergent or divergent nature of these trinappes is not dissimilar and I doubt you could measure much difference on versions *made by the same manufacturer*.I can't help thinking that ppp is trying to spin out this discussion for reasons known only to himself. As I say, a quick call to an aerial installer is your next step ppp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Sam Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 Sound words and good advice Martin.[quote]these tri-nappe aerials actually don't have a great reputation for ruggedness of build, there are lots in Britain that have fallen apart fairly quickly. Their claimed superior performance may (as in a lot of aerial cases) be advertising hyperbole. If terrestrial signal strength is that poor the recommendation to go with satellite is indeed the right one. A well designed conventional single beam aerial may be just as good.[/quote]Very true. I've had two of the tri-nappe variants, both of which disintegrated within a relatively short period of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 [quote user="JohnM"]I understood that bit of your more recent post and hope I've answered it for you by saying that you will need to compare the technical specs. What I didn't understand was the in the post prior to that.[/quote]Agh, yes! In technical jargon you meant the penultimate post; or perhaps now as time has moved onward my antepenultimate post.[:P] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 [quote user="Salty Sam"] Sound words and good advice Martin.[quote]these tri-nappe aerials actually don't have a great reputation for ruggedness of build, there are lots in Britain that have fallen apart fairly quickly. Their claimed superior performance may (as in a lot of aerial cases) be advertising hyperbole. If terrestrial signal strength is that poor the recommendation to go with satellite is indeed the right one. A well designed conventional single beam aerial may be just as good.[/quote]Very true. I've had two of the tri-nappe variants, both of which disintegrated within a relatively short period of time. [/quote]Useful information duly preventing PPP making the mistake of being hyperbolised.[:)] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted August 1, 2011 Author Share Posted August 1, 2011 Well said Martin. For what it is worth, I have chosen to believe that PPP posts "obscure" comments in a quest for humour. I say this because some of his posts are very very helpful so I can not put him in the Troll category. Sadly, I do not get his humour, so I don't bother reading many of his comments. I am now ruing the fact that I responded to him on this subject. My excuse is that I was very annoyed by Comet and not thinking straight. Talking of Comet, on Friday just gone, their customer services promised to talk with their online team today.... I'm still waiting for a reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 [quote user="JohnM"]Well said Martin. For what it is worth, I have chosen to believe that PPP posts "obscure" comments in a quest for humour. I say this because some of his posts are very very helpful so I can not put him in the Troll category. Sadly, I do not get his humour, so I don't bother reading many of his comments. I am now ruing the fact that I responded to him on this subject. My excuse is that I was very annoyed by Comet and not thinking straight. Talking of Comet, on Friday just gone, their customer services promised to talk with their online team today.... I'm still waiting for a reply.[/quote]PPP is always happy to engage in the context of French Satellite TV, French Internet and Telephone in rollicking Comet Warehouses anecdotes.[:D] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted August 2, 2011 Author Share Posted August 2, 2011 I realise that this bit isn't really France related unless you planned to buy a TV in the UK and take it over... Comet have admitted that they were in error:-Having identified a number of answers in our Q&A section that are in error, I have arranged for these to be removed or amended accordingly. Having investigated this with our Q&A team, it is clear that the intention was to recommend a better aerial to customers (with a higher gain), rather than promote a service we offer. Indeed, none of the answers I have found mention our aerial installation service. However, I apologise for any misrepresented information.I have also identified one other instances of this wording being used in another part of our website but, again, is not sales-orientated. I am currently discussing this with our Internet team in order to amend or remove the wording as appropriate. Therefore, I trust this matter has been resolved for you.Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience caused.Kind RegardsKevin MorganComet Customer ServicesEven Comet now admit that there is no such thing as a digital aerial! :) (I'm not sure why I made so much fuss, I can't afford a new TV at the moment!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Sam Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Well done John. At least you got a reply, and even better - they acknowledge the fact they haven't a clue;-).Least they could have done was to provided you with a discount voucher, or a new telly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 All those people living on the Côte d'Azur watching Canal + with VHF aerials will be most pleased about that clarification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Sam Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 [quote user="pachapapa"]All those people living on the Côte d'Azur watching Canal + with VHF aerials will be most pleased about that clarification.[/quote]Well in that case, perhaps it would be better coming from you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin963 Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 Oh dear, I do so hate having to nit pick with ppp but....No one on the Cote d'Azur is watching Canal + with a VHF aerial. The whole Band I/Band III network was shut down last November.AFAIK the only SECAM version of Canal + still going is on AB3 analogue, it was scheduled to be turned off with the terrestrial network (which it fed) and indeed disappeared for 48 hours on cue, only to re-appear..... I haven't checked in the last two weeks but it was still on the satellite before then.Sorry ppp, but you do come up with the odd error! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 [quote user="Martin963"]Oh dear, I do so hate having to nit pick with ppp but....No one on the Cote d'Azur is watching Canal + with a VHF aerial. The whole Band I/Band III network was shut down last November.AFAIK the only SECAM version of Canal + still going is on AB3 analogue, it was scheduled to be turned off with the terrestrial network (which it fed) and indeed disappeared for 48 hours on cue, only to re-appear..... I haven't checked in the last two weeks but it was still on the satellite before then.Sorry ppp, but you do come up with the odd error![/quote]Sorry about fallibility.[:D]I'm pretty sure AB3 is still carrying analogue, but I have removed the AB3 dish (one on right) already last year, after I successfully installed a jaggi aerial, see below. Living next to the river the height of the aerial was main factor; a 6 metre length of chromed pipe proved adequate.[IMG]http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk244/pachapapa/S1050069.jpg[/IMG][IMG]http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk244/pachapapa/S1050074.jpg[/IMG] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnOther Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 Life was so easy when all you needed to pick up everything was an H+4 [:D][:D][:D] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin963 Posted August 27, 2011 Share Posted August 27, 2011 Comet have changed tack. They're now offering an "HD aerial" at £34.95 special price when purchased with certain flat screen TVs.The funny part is that the TVs concerned don't have DVB-T2 tuners so are not capable of receiving HD channels via an aerial.You can imagine I had a field day at the Reading branch recently...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted August 28, 2011 Author Share Posted August 28, 2011 Oh really??????? I feel that a trip to Comet is coming on when I get back to the UK!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Sorry to bring this up again, but it seems to be spreading, if two adjacent postings from a certain other forum are anything to go on...http://normandy.angloinfo.com/forum/topic.asp?topic_id=86751Can anyone recommend someone French or English to replace an old analogue TV aerial with a digital aerial. We have tried some of the advertisers on Angloinfo Normandy without response. We are close to Domfront.Many thanks.http://normandy.angloinfo.com/forum/topic.asp?topic_id=87447Digital TV Aerial for sale posted on 02/09/2011 at 11:48Tv Aerial for sale. Suitable for house or caravan etc. Easy to install - it's the white 'box' type - just pop it into your attic space and plug the other end in next to your tv. Selling as we no longer have any cable from aerial to tv - dog chewed it. Think we've still got the box for it too, will have to check.Was connected to our TV and TNT box, picked up all digital channels fine.40e Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 I am happy with the term "Digital Aerial" provided it is understood to be a short form of "Aerial suitable for digital TV reception". Like I said elsewhere, the 5 or so channels you got on analogue were usually quite tightly bunched in frequency so you might be in a place where the frequencies were around 800MHz and the yagi was about 8 inches wide. Next big transmitter in next region may well be at 300MHz and for that the yagi was 20 inches. You bought a shortish aerial matched to your area.With digital the channels are less bunched in frequency and so the "digital antennas" are all wide band compromise affairs - and with more elements.So let's say you have a 300MHz analogue aerial (and the installer 15 yrs ago put in crap 300MHz cable) and now you have 800MHz digital signals to receive. Your aerial will do a very bad job and the cable will finish off what dregs remain.I'd go an get a "Digital Aerial" which is what I did. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Sam Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 The ‘digital aerial’ myth - [url]http://www.paras.org.uk/02-myths.shtml[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin963 Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 Robin - you might be happy with the term but it's sloppy nomenclature and leads to misunderstanding and possible unnecessary purchases by the public. It's best avoided. As has been extensively discussed already on this thread.It's similar to the term "HD READY" which has led to a lot of problems and disappointment in Britain with the DVB-T2 HD channels coming along and not working on all those "HD Ready" TVs.Incidentally, no TV transmitters use frequencies anywhere near 300 MHz. The UHF band (ie ch 21 in Europe) begins at 470 MHz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pachapapa Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 [quote user="Salty Sam"]The ‘digital aerial’ myth - [url]http://www.paras.org.uk/02-myths.shtml[/url][/quote]Which one should I buy from a seller on BonCoin?[IMG]http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTiSefFxeE-H-OTRwGKLYSPhjxNSj5JNaQFpdO4b5bcffdibFl7ZA[/IMG] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Sam Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 [quote user="pachapapa"][quote user="Salty Sam"]The ‘digital aerial’ myth - [url]http://www.paras.org.uk/02-myths.shtml[/url][/quote]Which one should I buy from a seller on BonCoin?[IMG]http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTiSefFxeE-H-OTRwGKLYSPhjxNSj5JNaQFpdO4b5bcffdibFl7ZA[/IMG][/quote]The one just out of camera shot should be fine![geek] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnM Posted September 28, 2011 Author Share Posted September 28, 2011 [quote user="Martin963"]Robin - you might be happy with the term but it's sloppy nomenclature and leads to misunderstanding and possible unnecessary purchases by the public. It's best avoided. As has been extensively discussed already on this thread.[/quote]I agree wholeheartedly (but then, I suppose I would). Last year I worked on a number of Digital Switch Over roadshows in the West (UK) and I lost count of the number of people who were 1, angry about the fact that they would have to get a new Digital TV aerial or 2 (even worse) were even angrier (is that a real word?) at having already bought one when the old one might have worked OK. The term "Better aerial" is a much better way of describing the aerials that some folk might need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 I agree entirely with the concerns that some sellers will seek to exploit the sloppy nomenclature.But I still maintain that as a descriptive term,Digitial Aerialis a more reasonable description of what is being described than for example, my two fav oxymorons:English TennisandGreek WinePeople are repeatedly conned and scammed by both of these. 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