lost station - Page 5

Jim5506 · #41 (**permalink**) 11-29-2009, 11:46 PM

Sponsored Links

I am a little leery about splitting the output from the new antenna, inserting it into two lugs of the pre-amp and then getting the signal back out.

Won't splitting the antenna output change the output resistance and be detrimental to performance.

With a dual input pre-amp, you need two DIFFERENT antennas, one VHF and one UHF.

I would first try leaving your current UHF antenna up and putting the new one 4-5 ft below it and running seperate lines to the pre-amp' UHF and VHF inputs, this is the best solution.

The UHF section of the new antenna is probably not as good as the UHF antenna by itself, and certainly the UHF antennas VHF characteristics are much poorer that those of the new antenna.

Splicer · #42 (**permalink**) 11-30-2009, 01:28 AM

Quote:

I am a little leery about splitting the output from the new antenna, inserting it into two lugs of the pre-amp and then getting the signal back out.

Won't splitting the antenna output change the output resistance and be detrimental to performance.

Huh? I don't think anyone here is advocating the splitting of the output.

Quote:

With a dual input pre-amp, you need two DIFFERENT antennas, one VHF and one UHF.

Which is what I am trying to convince acamus of.

Quote:

I would first try leaving your current UHF antenna up and putting the new one 4-5 ft below it and running seperate lines to the pre-amp' UHF and VHF inputs, this is the best solution.

The UHF section of the new antenna is probably not as good as the UHF antenna by itself, and certainly the UHF antennas VHF characteristics are much poorer that those of the new antenna.

Yes, I am trying to save the man some money and get a dedicated VHF antenna instead of the combo. But jumpering the inputs could eliminate the need for an additional antenna. There is a strong enough chance that it will that it is worth trying.

Jim5506 · #43 (**permalink**) 11-30-2009, 11:58 PM

He was talking about putting up a Winegard 7696 and connecting 2 300 ohm taps off the 7696 to both the UHF and VHF lugs on the pre-amp or jumpering from the UHF to VHF - that is not a good way to connect that antenna to that pre-amp.

As a matter of fact that antenna is not functionally compatible with that pre-amp.

Houston · #44 (**permalink**) 12-01-2009, 06:28 AM

Jim5506,

You said, "that antenna is not functionally compatible with that pre-amp".
I'm inclined to agree with you, but, why do you say that, other than the obvious 300/75 Ohm difference.

Have a good Day !

S.W.

Splicer · #45 (**permalink**) 12-01-2009, 01:56 PM

Has it been established yet about the connection type? If the connection is 75ohm, can it be removed for 300ohm use? I guess in a worse case scenario, a balun can be installed in reverse to connect to the pre-amp.

Quote:

He was talking about putting up a Winegard 7696 and connecting 2 300 ohm taps off the 7696 to both the UHF and VHF lugs on the pre-amp or jumpering from the UHF to VHF - that is not a good way to connect that antenna to that pre-amp.

I guess I missed that as I don't recall that being said, nor do I feel like going thru all the posts to find it.

But as for the jumpering the VHF & UHF inputs, that was my suggestion, and I agree it is not the ideal method, but in the KISS priciple it is the best with what he has. And on that note, the way I have joined my antennas is highly regarded as the wrong way to do things, but it works, and works well in the situation I using it now.

It is certainly possible that jumpering will not help, but I'm willing to wager that it will be more of a help than a hindrance.

Jim5506 · #46 (**permalink**) 12-01-2009, 11:42 PM

The antenna has a single output that carries both UHF and VHF signals, whereas the pre-amp needs seperate UHF and VHF 300 ohm inputs. The conversion 75-300 ohm can be handles with some loss with a balun, but how do you split the combined UHF/VHF signal to seperate components without some sort of chicanery.

Splicer · #47 (**permalink**) 12-02-2009, 06:21 AM

You have splitting on the brain Jim. As I said a few times already, and this will be the last time, a short jumper is all that should be required.

As for the 'loss' of the balun, the pre-amp will (should) make up for it nicely.

acamus · #48 (**permalink**) 12-02-2009, 02:04 PM

Click image for larger version

Name: IMG_0668.JPG
Views: 13
Size: 635.7 KB
ID: 45052

Click image for larger version

Name: IMG_0670.JPG
Views: 12
Size: 636.8 KB
ID: 45053

Good Day Houston & Splicer,
I had some success today. The Winegard 7696P arrived yesterday and I couldn't wait to get off work to get on that project. I feel like a kid at Christmas. So anyway, I tried the antenna without the Blonder Tongue preamp, reception was poor, only 4 UHF channels and 0 VHF. So I called a local electronics store to ask about an amp which has a single coax input and a single coax out, to accomodate my new antenna which has only a single coax antenna connection. Even though it is a combo UHF/VHF antenna. Well they didn't reconize my voice and tried to sell me a Blonder Tongue, haha. Anyway, I decided to experiment. First I jumpered the 300 ohm UHF/VHF connections on the Blonder inputs in parellel then attached the 300 ohm to coax adapter. Next I attached a short coax from the adapter to the antenna out male connector. It looks like the Tunerville Trolley but the bugger worked. I stood the mast back up, with the help of my amxiously waiting wife-Days of Our Lives-is coming on at 1 pm. After a few moments of scanning by the Samsung tuner we have TV again. This time we have 20 channels. There is a channel 12-1,12-2 in addition to 28 which is clear as this here empty beer glass. So Mama bear is happy once again and Papa bear didn't have to spend any more cash. Thanks for all the input guys! I'm sending along the pics you asked about. They were taken with an inexpensive digital at a distance so I could give you an idea of scale. There is a before, with the Channelmaster chicken fence type, then the Winegard arrow type. Let me know if you were able to view them. Be well.

Splicer · #49 (**permalink**) 12-02-2009, 02:39 PM

Congratulations! Glad the suggestions worked out for you. And thanks for the pictures. Excellent for seeing what we were dealing with.

Houston · #50 (**permalink**) 12-03-2009, 09:07 AM

acamus,

I second the congratulations !

I'm very happy to hear of your good results.
Unfortunately, my DialUp didn't let me open the pictures, but, I've good a good imagination.

Have a good Day !

S.W.