uusgta@swbatl.UUCP (4237) (11/15/89)
I'm getting ready to write a scathing letter to my cable television company. The problem is "ghost" images on network channels, when viewed through the cable connection. After talking to the company, they explain that the downlink site is miles from my house, and local signals overpower the cable carried signals. My suspicion is that this is indicative of poor shielding on their part; Isn't coax awfully close to a faraday cage? It also seems that they could move local channels to another freq on the cable, or boost signal levels at diffrent points in the city. They say I should "just connect the antenne" to watch local channels, a wholly unacceptable answer, especially during unattended videotaping. Am I reasonable in my irritation? Are there other solutions I could suggest? Is there some minimum quality of service they are required (by whom?) to provide? Should I wrap my house in tin foil :) ? -- # ---Tom Adams--- | uunet!swbatl!uusgta or uusgta@swbatl.swbt.com # I collect pre-1930 wireless, electrical and scientific books. # opinions... Opinions? I don't think I'm allowed to have opinions.
illgen@hq.af.mil (Keneth..Illgen) (11/15/89)
In article <938@swbatl.UUCP> uusgta@swbatl.UUCP (Tom Adams 5-4237) writes: >I'm getting ready to write a scathing letter to my cable television company. >The problem is "ghost" images on network channels, when viewed through the cable connection. For the sake of your CATV company, I hope they gave you the wrong info. If the same problem exists for everyone on the system then the CATV people either need to move their antenna location or take a good look at their cable plant. Normally ghosts that appear to the left of your picture indicate strong reception of an off-the-air station at the same frequency. Ghosts to the right indicate multiple paths to the receiving antenna and an impedance mismatch on the cable plant. Either case should be fixable by your CATV company. If only people in your neighborhood have this problem then my comments below are worthy. Otherwise they're not. >Am I reasonable in my irritation? Absolutly! If the CATV signal is allowing that much signal to penetrate their cable they have a serious problem. >Is there some minimum quality of service they are required (by whom?) to >provide? The quality of the service they have to give you could be enforced by whoever licensed them (the local government for example). You could report them to BBB and hope that others have complained. At least that's what I think. The fact that their signal is being distorted by outside elements should concern them a lot if the FCC finds out. Because what comes in goes out. i.e radiated emissions. Particularly those frequencies that ride the cable that could effect aeronautical frequencies. If you have an airport near your house call the CATV company and remind them of their respons- ibilities to the FCC for leakage. For most signal level requirements a CATV system won't worry about FCC enforcement; but when it comes to radiated emissions they'll be all over their cable plant looking for the fault (If they're smart; which they don't seem to be.) >Should I wrap my house in tin foil :) ? Nah!
matthew@sunpix.UUCP ( Sun Visualization Products) (11/16/89)
In article <938@swbatl.UUCP> uusgta@swbatl.UUCP (Tom Adams 5-4237) writes: }I'm getting ready to write a scathing letter to my cable television company. } }The problem is "ghost" images on network channels, when viewed through the cable }connection. After talking to the company, they explain that the downlink }site is miles from my house, and local signals overpower the cable carried }signals. My suspicion is that this is indicative of poor shielding on their }part; Isn't coax awfully close to a faraday cage? It also seems that they }could move local channels to another freq on the cable, or boost signal }levels at diffrent points in the city. They say I should "just connect the }antenne" to watch local channels, a wholly unacceptable answer, especially }during unattended videotaping. } }Am I reasonable in my irritation? Are there other solutions I could suggest? }Is there some minimum quality of service they are required (by whom?) to }provide? Should I wrap my house in tin foil :) ? }-- }# ---Tom Adams--- | uunet!swbatl!uusgta or uusgta@swbatl.swbt.com }# I collect pre-1930 wireless, electrical and scientific books. }# opinions... Opinions? I don't think I'm allowed to have opinions. Had the same problem with a local cable company. (Alert Cable of Cary, NC). MTV was broadcast on the same channel as a local TV station. Enough people got together and complained about this kind of problem and the cable company redistributed their selections. If the cable company complains that they don't have the available free frequencies to move a channel to, tell them to suffle the bulletin board channels to the frequencies used by local TV stations. Typically BB channels use Computer generated graphics with colors that are driven so far into saturation, that ghosting won't be a problem. Also impress upon them the goodwill value of a Cable company trying to improve their services. If this all fails, take up the problem (and these solutions) with your local goverment. Most Cable companies are under contract with the local goverment to provide a specified level of service. If your local company doesn't meet those standards, your local goverment will work on your behalf to force correction of those problems. -- Matthew Lee Stier | Sun Microsystems --- RTP, NC 27709-3447 | "Wisconsin Escapee" uucp: sun!mstier or mcnc!rti!sunpix!matthew | phone: (919) 469-8300 fax: (919) 460-8355 |
myers@hpfcdj.HP.COM (Bob Myers) (11/17/89)
>site is miles from my house, and local signals overpower the cable carried >signals. My suspicion is that this is indicative of poor shielding on their >part; Isn't coax awfully close to a faraday cage? It also seems that they First minor point: coax may or may not be viewed as a "Faraday cage", depending on whether or not a balanced drive scheme is used (i.e., if the signal return current is carried over the "shield", than it's not stricly a "Faraday cage.") Now, major point: regardless of how well the cable company keeps undesired signals off their cable, they *can* and likely *will* enter either at the converter box or in your tuner (you don't mention whether you use an external converter or use a "cable ready" TV). Consumer electronics are notorious for poor shielding. >could move local channels to another freq on the cable, or boost signal >levels at diffrent points in the city. They say I should "just connect the >antenne" to watch local channels, a wholly unacceptable answer, especially >during unattended videotaping. If the local channels are on their proper frequency on the cable, then I'm assuming that your set's tuner is doing all the work - the above comments apply. Connecting the external antenna for the local channels may in fact be the only solution. Is this really a problem for taping? How often do you tape shows from both local stations (which are not available from other stations on the cable) and cable-only stations, in the same "unattended" period? >Am I reasonable in my irritation? Are there other solutions I could suggest? >Is there some minimum quality of service they are required (by whom?) to >provide? Should I wrap my house in tin foil :) ? Unfortunately, some type of shielding may be the only answer outside of pulling the antenna swap - wrapping your house in tin foil is, I presume, unacceptable. :-) Bob Myers KC0EW HP Graphics Tech. Div.| Opinions expressed here are not Ft. Collins, Colorado | those of my employer or any other myers%hpfcla@hplabs.hp.com | sentient life-form on this planet.
derek@hppad.HP.COM (Derek Schuurman) (11/18/89)
I had the same problem but I found it was on my end - the cable is shielded very well but my TV's enclosure is far from a faraday cage! ( it's plastic in fact! ) and the 300 ohm line that runs from the back connection on the TV to the pre-amp/tuner is a perfect antenna for any local broadcasts! In my case there was nothing wrong with the cable company but merely the poorly shielded chasis on my own TV. I have not yet solved the problem - the only solution I can see is to watch your TV in a "faraday cage" :^) :^) Derek.
adams@swbatl.UUCP (4237) (11/20/89)
In article <17660035@hpfcdj.HP.COM> myers@hpfcdj.HP.COM (Bob Myers) writes: > >use an external converter or use a "cable ready" TV). Consumer electronics >are notorious for poor shielding. TV and VCR are cable ready. But if these devices are commonly ("notoriously") poorly shielded why would the cable company not use another frequency for the local signals? Seems a problem designed to occur.o Several other people have mentioned gathering groups of dissatisfied cable customers. I wonder if someone could explain just how that occurred? Are there already appropriate advocate groups? >apply. Connecting the external antenna for the local channels may in fact be >the only solution. Is this really a problem for taping? How often do you >tape shows from both local stations (which are not available from other >stations on the cable) and cable-only stations, in the same "unattended" >period? Actually, quite often, I'm often grabbing stuff from the local PBS station as well as all those weird channels that offer scintillating material on the mating habits of the Iguana but only at the most *inconvenient* hours. Always wondered why, Iguana seem at least as interesting as Dougie Howser. :) Plus, I forget to reconnect, it's inconvenient, and I feel as though I'm paying for something I don't receive (no pun intended). >Unfortunately, some type of shielding may be the only answer outside of >pulling the antenna swap - wrapping your house in tin foil is, I presume, >unacceptable. :-) Where to shield; with what? I guess it would be easier to just get the whole house. Hmmm, perhaps Christmas tinsel... illuminated by flashing multicolored spotlights in colors appropriate to each holiday. -- # ---Tom Adams--- | uunet!swbatl!uusgta or uusgta@swbatl.swbt.com # I collect pre-1930 wireless, electrical and scientific books. # opinions... Opinions? I don't think I'm allowed to have opinions.