T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
140.1 | | LESLIE::LESLIE | New, improved, thinner model | Fri Jan 05 1990 13:06 | 2 |
| As far as I know, there are no good omnidirectional FM roof aerials. If
you ever find one, let me know!
|
140.2 | | FORTY2::SHIPMAN | | Fri Jan 05 1990 13:27 | 8 |
| Somewhat off the subject:
Has anyone any recommendations for aerial installers in the Reading area? I'd
like to get my FM aerial out of my loft and onto the roof, but it's the kind of
thing I could regret if it were done badly. Hate heights so I'm not doing it
myself...
Nick
|
140.3 | I know the problem.... | BAHTAT::SALLITT | Dave @RKG, 831-3117 | Fri Jan 05 1990 17:34 | 20 |
| re <<< Note 140.0 by IOSG::CARLIN "Dick Carlin IOSG" >>>
-< VHF aerial / antenna questions >-
Try the following:
Use a 3-element array, as high as possible, directed at the weakest/most
distant signal. More strong/local signals may (I say "may") give a strong
enough signal in the aerial side lobes for acceptable reception.
The more elements you have, the more directional the aerial, and the
higher its gain (front-to-back signal ratio), but it has smaller
side lobes which may not pull in the local stations enough. I have a
similar problem and get by very nicely with a 3-element, but as we have
a local "booster" for Radios 2, 3 and 4 the local signal can be had
with a piece of wet string anyway. The tuner is a NAD 4225.
If a 3-element won't deliver, you could always fork out for a rotating
DX type antennae.
Dav
|
140.4 | why is reception in reading so poor? | IOSG::LEVY | QA Bloodhound | Mon Jan 08 1990 10:36 | 17 |
| re .2
For aerial installations there are some recommendations in the
Reading notes file. See notes 103 and 323.
I also have problems getting a decent FM reception in Reading for
near enough all stations except 210. Radio 3 is particularly bad.
I wonder why the BBC serve Reading so badly?
Can you also elaborate more on what the local "booster" is. I thought
it was the job of the tuner to pick up the signal!
Malcolm
Malcolm
|
140.5 | | WIKKIT::WARWICK | Trevor Warwick | Mon Jan 08 1990 11:21 | 24 |
|
I may have mentioned this company in the Reading conference as well,
but I'll (re)post here anyway.
I've used Reading Aerial Services on the Wokingham Road twice now, and
been happy with the service.
We live in Sonning Common, and have a four element aerial that points
in the general direction of London. I did ask the bloke from RAS
whether it would be better to point at somewhere a bit more local, and
he said it wouldn't.
I can receive Radio 2, Radio 4, Radio 1 (98.8), Capital, GLR, 210, and
LBC well. Radio 3 is occasionally a bit hissy, but always OK in mono. I
can't get the 98.2 Radio 1 Oxfordshire frequency (presumably because
the aerial points the wrong way).
I did read an explanation somewhere about why Radio 3 is generally
worse than the other stations. I think it's to do with the dynamic
range of their usual music - because classical music has a wide range,
if they turned the power of the transmitter up so that there was less
problem receiving it, it would blow your radio up in the loud bits.
Trevor
|
140.6 | Confusion reigns..... | BAHTAT::SALLITT | Dave @RKG, 831-3117 | Mon Jan 08 1990 16:14 | 11 |
| re .4....
The "booster" I refer to is a low power, local transmitter on a
different frequency (but in the same band) as the "wide-area"
transmitter. It's often used in difficult fringe areas like valleys,
etc.
I didn't mean "booster" in the sense of a type of amplifier on the
aerial. Sorry to confuse!!
Dave
|
140.7 | The BBC recommendation | IOSG::LEVY | QA Bloodhound | Mon Jan 08 1990 16:20 | 19 |
| Hi,
I just spoke to a Radio 3 engineer. He recommended that from
Reading a 5 pole aerial is the minimum requirement. It should be
roof mounted, and set so that it points towards Routem which
is near Seven Oaks. He also stated that the aerial would pickup
LBC and Capital which come from the Crystal Palace.
Good makes of aerials are; antiference (~�25), fuba, jbeam and
triax (~�30).
Radio 2, 3, and 4 are all broadcast with the same signal strength.
Radio 1 is at half strength as the signal is compressed (making it
louder).
If you're fitting a new aerial he also suggested fitting new coaxial
cable.
Malcolm
|
140.8 | | LESLIE::LESLIE | New, improved, thinner model | Mon Jan 08 1990 19:40 | 5 |
| Radio 1 on 98.8 is significatly better than it was on 104.6.
FWIW in Sandhurst, Capital reception is crap but Radio 3 is wunnerful.
That's over 3 tuners, btw.
|
140.9 | | BURYST::EDMUNDS | $ no !fm2r, no comment | Tue Jan 09 1990 09:38 | 9 |
| .7� and set so that it points towards Routem which
.7� is near Seven Oaks.
Just for the record, the place name is "Wrotham" (pronounced "rootem"),
and "Sevenoaks" is one word (it's actually near Brands Hatch).
I too can recommend Reading Arial Services.
Keith
|
140.10 | The biter bit? | SPYDER::BARKER | Do not fold, spindle or mutilate | Tue Jan 09 1990 10:01 | 16 |
| .9�< Note 140.9 by BURYST::EDMUNDS "$ no !fm2r, no comment" >
.9�
.9�
.9�.7� and set so that it points towards Routem which
.9�.7� is near Seven Oaks.
.9�
.9� Just for the record, the place name is "Wrotham" (pronounced "rootem"),
.9� and "Sevenoaks" is one word (it's actually near Brands Hatch).
.9�
.9� I too can recommend Reading Arial Services.
.9�
.9� Keith
Just for the record the word is "Aerial". Sorry I couldn't resist.
Nigel
|
140.11 | ...and an aerial to use in S.Oxfordshire?.. | PEKING::GERRYT | | Thu Feb 15 1990 13:42 | 14 |
| Ref 140.7
Does your BBC engineer friend know what number of poles aerial I
will need to pick up Radio 1,2,3,4 and BBC radio Oxford from Faringdon
in Oxfordshire ?
Would it be better to point the aerial towards Swindon for the national
network transmissions ?
Where are the transmitters located ?
Thanks,
Tim
|
140.12 | ask the BBC | IOSG::LEVY | QA Bloodhound | Thu Feb 15 1990 15:30 | 24 |
| Hi,
I just phoned up Radio 3 and spoke to an engineer. I'm not
exactly on first name contact!
The engineer said that there are no hills between Reading
and London so there should be no difficulty in getting a good
reception. I doubt if you'd be better pointing your aerials
between Swindon but for an authorative answer I'd suggest
you give them a phone call as well (and post the answer in here as
well).
I would not be surprised if you actually need 2 aerials, unless
Radio Oxford is quite strong where you live.
I still wonder about the merits of expensive tuners over middle range
ones and if they make a noticable improvement in reception in those
more distant places.
I also wonder about the aerial amplifiers like are seen for TVs. Can
these makeup for any loss in a not so good aerial?
Malcolm
|
140.13 | | FORTY2::SHIPMAN | | Fri Feb 16 1990 14:27 | 5 |
| Aerial amplifiers in general won't help. They're OK if you really have a
problem with weak signals but that's rarely the case. Often an amplifier will
just increase noise.
Nick
|
140.14 | < Radio Oxford on reduced power > | PEKING::GERRYT | | Thu Mar 08 1990 13:43 | 16 |
| ref 140.12
I rang up BBC Radio in London and Radio Oxford as well. (keen)
Both say my house is well within the Oxford transmitter's range,
and either an omni-directional or 3 element array should work OK.
Apparantly, the transmitted power of Radio 1 and Radio Oxford is
far lower than it will be after the summer, when output will be
boosted. Radios 2,3 and 4 are at full power now.
Has anyone any experience with an omni-directional aerial ?
Tandy do one with a -2db gain, and I presume it's the same as the
one advertised in Argos, except you get 10 meters of co-ax cable
with the Argos one for less than the Tandy price of the array alone
!
|
140.15 | Why so many frequencies for Radio 4? | LARVAE::BARKER | Do not fold, spindle or mutilate | Wed Aug 01 1990 16:24 | 13 |
| After the last great storm my TV aerial was blown down so while the guy
was up there putting up a new one I got him to put up a VHF radio aerial as
well. It's improved my radio reception no end. Radio 1 was always hissy on my
internal little bit of wire but now comes through sharp & clear.
Can anyone explain to me why there are so many different frequencies
for each BBC station. Why isn't Radio 4 broadcast on for example 93.5 Mhz
throughout the country instead of a whole variety of frequencies? I find that
just around Basingstoke I have to use about three different frequencies (and
presumably 3 different transmitters) while driving around in the car listening
to Radio 4.
Nigel
|
140.16 | | BURYST::EDMUNDS | $ no !fm2r, no comment | Thu Aug 02 1990 10:06 | 12 |
| The reason why there are separate frequencies for different
transmitters: if you were in an area which could receive signals from
more than one transmitter, and they were both on the same frequency,
inevitably one signal would reach you before the other (there may only
be a few microseconds difference, but it would exist). Therefore, the
two signals would be slightly out of phase, and thus would interfere
with each other. Specifically, they would tend to cancel out at some
frequencies and "double up" on others.
Does this make sense?
Keith
|
140.17 | | LARVAE::BARKER | Do not fold, spindle or mutilate | Thu Aug 02 1990 10:16 | 11 |
| re .-1
I suspected that it was something like that. Maybe in Basingstoke we
are just in a bad position and no one transmitter gives really good reception
while on the move.
It does seem to be worse with Radio 4 though. I need to use 92.9 93.9
or 93.5 depending on where I am. Radio 3 seems perfectly happy on 91.7 and also
Radio 1 on 9n.n (I've forgotten the exact frequency).
Nigel
|
140.18 | RDS is great! | STKHLM::LIDEN | G�sta Lid�n, SWAS Manuf. Stockholm/Sweden | Thu Aug 02 1990 15:08 | 26 |
| Re: .17
Isn't Radio Data System (RDS) used in the UK? It would make your search for
the strongest signal unnecessary.
RDS has been around a while in Sweden (and other European countries as well).
RDS means that the station sends out an identifying message along with the
normal signal, letting the receiver (mostly in-car units) know what station it's
receiving. The station name is shown in the display on the radio. For example:
Radio Stockholm is 'RA STKHLM' and our third nation-wide channel is 'P3'
Now, the good thing about RDS is that once you've selected a station you want
to listen to, RDS automatically selects the strongest frequency that is
available for that station. If you drive from one area to another, RDS
continuously selects the strongest frequency, so that you can listen to P3 all
the way from northern Sweden to southern Sweden without having to change
the frequencies at any time.
Another good thing is that - if you're listening to a tape in the car - traffic
announcements will mute the sound of the tape for the duration of the
announcement.
I haven't had an RDS unit a long time. It's a replacement for the unit that
was stolen recently. I love it though!
Rgds, G�sta
|
140.19 | Aerial for cheapskates ? | WIKKIT::WARWICK | Trevor Warwick | Wed Dec 19 1990 11:04 | 13 |
|
I know someone who wants to improve his radio reception, but not to the
point of putting an real aerial up.
So, is there anything available on the market between the "crappy
T-shaped bit of wire that comes with the tuner" and a loft or roof
mounted FM aerial ? For example, something like an indoor TV aerial ?
I suppose it might just not be technically possible, given the required
dimensions of the dipole, or something.
Any suggestions ?
Trevor
|
140.20 | Cobras!! | HAND::LARSEN | Rob Larsen @BST | Wed Dec 19 1990 12:23 | 5 |
| How About The COBRA Ariel bout 30 quid,
I used one on my NAD tuner until I got my outdoor one.
Rob.
|
140.21 | AUDIO magazine (U.S.) | TIS::GRUHN | | Wed Dec 19 1990 17:16 | 5 |
| Get a copy of the current issue of the U.S. audio magazine AUDIO.
There is a decent article on FM aerials.
Bill
|
140.22 | Aerial update? | SQGUK::LEVY | The Bloodhound | Mon Mar 29 1993 11:48 | 27 |
| Hi,
I was asked over the weekend if a 20 year old aerial (roof mounted)
that is used for listening to Radio 3 should be replaced.
Some background:
The Lady that asked is a professional musician who's main interest is
listening to Radio 3 and to record students of piano/voice.
Her real problem is that the sound of her system (old German receiver
and Celestian speakers) often breaks up. I'm convinced that the
receiver is at fault as I managed to play my CD player through it
and the same problem could be heard. (But that was going through
the 20 year old Sony tape deck as there were only DIN connections
on the back of the receiver...)
So back to the original question, assuming the Lady gets a modern
amp/tuner, do you thing it wold be worthwhile for her to get a new
aerial. What has changed in the last 20 years of broardcasting/aerial
technology? Do aerials wear out?
Malcolm
PS: She also asked about replacing the tape deck/speakers but that
probably belongs somewhere else...
|
140.23 | Wait and see.... | BAHTAT::SALLITT | Dave @LZO 845-2374 | Mon Mar 29 1993 14:48 | 14 |
| Aerials don't wear out, but they do corrode, get damaged or blown
off-signal by the wind, and so on. Technolgy hasn't changed, except at
the enthusiast end of the market with the 30-plus element DX models.
As copper can work-harden with flexing and vibration, the down lead
coax may have become brittle, and maybe oxidised from being outside for
years.
Then again, it could all still be in good nick. If the tuner is being
replaced anyway, I would suggest your friend waits until then before
looking at the aerial. Using a professional rigger to do the job is
also worthwhile.
Dave
|