Cable TV and coax splitters

Page 2 of 2  


Thanks all for your input. Now you've really confusing me with the facts. Guess I just need to buy a new house.
Kidding :)
Cable in --> 2-way-splitter . One leg of that goes to the cable modem. Use whatever I decide size splitter on the other leg
Done deal.
tku
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wouldn't an amp be reasonable in the following situation?
Cable comes in, and there is a splitter in the attic. Signal is fairly good coming into this splitter.
One branch goes to the computer room. The signal there is fine.
Other branch goes to the living room, where it goes to another splitter which I have not located, and the cable guy also failed to locate, and from there goes to two outlets in the living room.
This second splitter seems to be a not particularly good splitter, so the signal is borderline between fair and good in the living room.
Couldn't an amp be used between the two splitters, to boost the good signal coming out of the first splitter to compensate for the loss in the second splitter?
Not that I actually need it. Although the cable box reports the signal as fair most of the time, bordering on good, and occasionally dipping to poor, and the cable installer thought, when he used his meter, that it was too low to work and was surprised when I got a picture, in fact it has worked flawlessly for the 3.5 months I've been in this place. All channels are fine, including HD channels and channels using surround sound, and on-demand is fine, and my modem gets up to 20 mbit/second with PowerBoost. When watching the signal monitoring page, I've never seen an uncorrectable error reported, and only see an occasional correctable error reported. So my inclination is to just leave things as they are.
--
--Tim Smith

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No... Either find the splitter and replace it, or pull a new piece of cable.
I don't know about your cable company, but mine would come in and do all the troubleshooting necessary to fix this for free.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 12:43:18 -0000, Brent Bolin

Not the best idea. Comccast gave you the splitter, right, and is responsible for the quality of your computer feed.
Also iirc I think the output for the computer is different from the output for the tv's and you'd have to find one that had the special comnputer output.

Any splitter reduces signal strenght, but all tv's and radios have Automatic Gain Control (In radios, where this was first invented, it's called Automatic Volume Control). If the signal is stronger than it should be, the AGC reduces the amplification anyhow. So a weaker signal with more amplification inside the tv is just as good as a stronger signal with less amplification inside the tv.
You only have to be concerned AFTER you look at the tv and the picture is not as good as it used to be.
All you need is a simple two in one splitter, which you can put just past the splitter you have now, or closer to the two tvs.
You can generally get two splitters in a row before the signal is too weak. The third splitter in series usually has to be an amplifier (which must be plugged in and which uses electricity). But if the second splitter, the one you are about to add, makes the picture inferior, you can replace it with an amp. Don't worry, you'll still be able to watch it until you get to Radio Shack.

I thought you were worried about output.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.