Hello,

The answer is most likely 'no' but can a Sirius and OTA signal be combined and passed through the same RG6 cable? Possibly with diplexing?

Will be putting an OTA antenna up near a Sirius antenna and not having to run a new RG6 cable would absolutely make the install so much easier.

When I bought the Sirius antenna it was part of a kit that allowed for Cable TV and the sirius signal to be combined....

thanks

Ok so is it better then to put the pre amp power on first and then
do the split after? because the splitter is going to cause a 3.7db loss
and also I would have to run a 70 foot cable to a second TV which
is another 3.5db loss. Am I missing something here? The pre amp
is 19db for UHF winegaurd. Would the 19db compensate for the 7.2
db loss to the second TV even if I use the splitter after the power
source? also there will be runs from the antenna to make that 19db
into use.
I think you are implying that the 3.7 dB loss through an RF Splitter also affects the DC Voltage to the Preamp.
There is a very minimal drop in DC Voltage, so it doesn't matter WHERE you locate the Power Insertion Module.

Well, I tried the 3db and 6db attenuators and the results were a no go. I thought my one weak/inconsistent station (WNYO) would see a bump in strength, but no. I tried the attenuators in various spots- before distribution amp (CM3414), after, just before TV, before/after UVSJ, etc. Little difference last night, although it was a bad atmospheric night. Anyways, the next thing to be tried is the 91XG- I like the directionality of it- good in avoiding the flamethrower CHCH (11.0 and 18.1) that is 2.5 miles away and partially in the way of WNYO.

My TV Fool : http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...1da989eae0b38b

Take an hour of your life, and make/try a coax notch filter for CHCH.

There are excellent details/photos somewhere here in these forums.

You think that'll fix it?

It might, and it's easy enough to try.

goforit:
Your TVFool link is messed up....the dots in the middle don't belong....
How much stronger is local CITS on Ch35 than your desired WNYO on Ch34???
Good luck with that....you're gonna need it....ATSC A/74 "spec" allows only 33 dB stronger.
BTW: A Ch35 filter will also kill the desired Ch34 signal.

Horizontally Stacked antennas might help....but you only have 14-degrees of separation,
hence null depth will be small. See "Stacking for Interference" on pg62:
http://www.matchmaster.com.au/_literature_32103/Catalogue_-_Commercial_Section

It might help to construct a metal "screen" to reduce Ch35's signal....or if you have the
room, try an HIGH GAIN antenna INSIDE a big box....or a garbage can:
http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~wn17/
http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~wn17/Web%20bill%20page%202.htm
http://www.supernec.com/cavity.htm

You need to right click on that link.

Tried it....TVFool sez it doesn't make sense....cuz it's got extra dots in the link....

Guess again....

Try this:

http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29&q=id%3d7243c1e3436526

Thanks Holl_ands.

That garbage can antenna is hilarious- but if it works, who cares. My concern, beyond the icy stare from the wife, is it probably won't stand up to the elements- I can see the can come crashing down on my neighbour's car, or it being a nice home to some fowl or other critters. Anyways, thanks for the input, I didn't even think of channel 35 being a problem, but it does make sense. I'm also thinking that maybe I need an FM trap since the tower near my house probably has radio coming off it too. I'll be trying a 91XG soon, so will see..

No, wait a minute, WNYO is 49.1, not 34.1; so 35.1 can't be the problem.

TVFool was down so I was looking at your report from last March....which said Ch34.

Ch49 may be receivable with just the 91XG....but Ch47 is a potential problem.
TVFool calculates Ch47 (CFMT-TV) as being 60 dB stronger than Ch49 (WNYO-DT).
ATSC A/74 Receiver Guidelines indicate next adjacent should be no stronger than 44 dB.
The 91XG can provide more than the requisite 16 dB suppression of Ch49, esp. given
the 77-degree angle separation. It would be desirable to have 26+ dB suppression to
protect against weak signal fading.

If needed, a Notch Filter tuned to Ch47's video carrier can provide additional protection with
minimal attenuation on Ch49 (e.g. CR7-(Fo)-UHF HT, see Graph 9, except Fo=669.25 for Ch47):
http://www.tinlee.com/NotchTraps.php?active=3&category=table
PS: The 2nd frequency in a Dual Notch Filter (two singles) would target 673.75 MHz, the audio carrier.

The Horizontal Stacked Antenna nulling concept identified above should also be effective,
given the wide separation angle between Ch47 and Ch49.

=====================================================
If you check www.fmfool.com you'll see that you're surrounded by FM towers.
However, since you only have Ch7 (174-180 MHz) currently active (per TVFool),
you only have to worry about FM stations at half that frequency (87-90 MHz), plus
a few MHz to allow for next adjacent channel interference. An FM Notch Filter
would need to be ordered to attenuate the worst case interference source.
BTW: Ch7 also has a severe next adjacent channel problem with Ch11....

Nearby FM towers should normally not be a problem for UHF reception....

Would this channel interference be less of a problem when the stations in question (47.0) switch to digital (47.1)?

Digital allocations are "typically" 12 dB lower than Analog....but 7 dB of that is difference between
average measurement standard for digital and peak for analog. Hence Digital stations have 5 dB
lower PEAKs (which cause errors).
But actual power allocations may not follow the 12 dB "guideline"....they are usually EVEN LOWER. So YES!!!

I'll be trying a 91XG soon, so will see..

No, wait a minute, WNYO is 49.1, not 34.1; so 35.1 can't be the problem.
I think you'll see some improvement with the 91-XG. It really helps reduce adjacent channel issues & multipath in a strong signal environment. I have RF24 (-23db) & RF27 (-26db) only 5 miles away. RF26 (-80db) & RF28 (-60db) don't seem to be affected by these local powerhouse signals. The 91-XG is poor at signal rejection only directly behind the antenna from my experience.

I receive 99% of the signals in the red reliably with a 91-XG. No attenuators are used except an FM trap. There are 3 (+10db) stations a few blocks away.
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29&q=id%3d7243e040b3fa2d

holl_ands,

Very interesting read. My TVFool report is almost identical to goforit's. He is closer to the CH tower then I am. I would never have thought that 47 could be interfering with 49. It has given me something to really think about now. I just assumed that with how my antenna is installed, which may entirely still be the main issue, it would be nice to take out all variables...and this could be a big one for all I know.

There is a variable bandpass filter on the input of most tuners to reduce the signal strength of
strong signals other than the channel you want. But they are far from "perfect".
In order to cause no degradation to the desired channel, they provide little if any attenuation
on adjacent channels....and not very much for next adjacent...and a bit more for N+/-3, etc.

A strong signal on a nearby channel can force the tuner's AGC (Auto Gain Control) to turn
down the RF/IF Gain, making it more difficult/impossible to receive much weaker signals.

In tests of STBs and DTVs purchased in 2005/2006, FCC_OET 07-TR-1003 reported that some
DTVs were more susceptible to interference on next adjacent (N+/-2) than on adjacent!!!
And some were (less) susceptible to interference out to as many as 5-7 channels away. Hopefully,
more modern DTVs actually meet the A/74 "Guidelines", as was required for the CECB boxes:
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/documents/

I own a CM three way splitter. It is in use splitting the signal to three televisions. I have a CM preamp 7778 installed at the antenna to assist on signal loss. From the preamp the run is around 35-40 feet to the power source then a 10 foot run to three way splitter. On the 3.5 dB output I have a run to my furthest television around 70 feet. The other two are on outputs 2 and 3. These outputs are 7.5 dB loss. The run from these each is 10-15 feet respectively. I'm pretty sure the preamp is doing the job as all three televisions are displaying very close numbers in SNR.
I tried using a CM 3414 distribution amp but it with the preamp was to much.
I also had a bunch of attenuators while I tested things with the dis. amp
Just passing along my setup for others to see.

Mark, did you try the 3414 without the pre-amp?

Mark, did you try the 3414 without the pre-amp?

No, I did not. As a matter of fact this past summer before I picked up the preamp I tried both a Wingaurd distribution amp and a Kitztech amp

There just is no substituting for a decent low noise amp right at the antenna.