On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 10:44:23 +0100, Colin Blackburn
Another option could be a mast head type of amplifier, but not fitted
at the mast head, then followed by a splitter. These can be powered
with 12v and at a few tens of milliamps. Would that be more suitable
than a mains type of device?
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 11:05:27 +0100, Colin Blackburn
I was thinking that you could use something like a Labgear CM7274 or
an Antiference UX4. These are masthead amplifiers with 4 outputs
which can go directly to your sockets and can be powered over the
co-ax with 12v DC. Normally they are powered from a distribution
amplifier run from the mains or a separate 12v power supply like the
Labgear PSM112 - these need <3W from the mains.
If you were going to run from a battery, you need a passive device
that sits in one of the co-ax cables and allows you to inject 12v DC -
basically the same as one of the power supply units but without the
mains, rectification, smoothing and regulating pieces. I would
suggest calling Labgear and Antiference and asking if they make
anything like that. Another useful place is Teldis, who distribute
all kinds of TV, satellite and FM distribution equipment. I found
them to be pretty knowledgable on what is on the market..
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Thanks for the names and ideas (everyone else too.) I think I will
initially wire in a splitter---I get a strong signal, hell I can see
Pontock Pike from the bedroom window with a pair of binoculars---then
look at masthead amplifiers and possibly DAs with fancy wiring!
If you can see the Pike from your window then don't bother with an amp a
splitter will do with those sort of levels around. Don't bother with a
masthead type amp as it will overload and cause more grief than what its
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:03:35 +0100, Colin Blackburn wrote
I was going to ask that :(
I had a look at some CT100 today and it looked like it would take the "usual"
type of connector okay, but I defer to Tony Sayer's reply. I'm going to use F
type connectors throughout myself except where I have to use the "usual" type
such as my tuner. The F type connector seems a lot more secure to me.
Makes no difference.
The problem is to achieve reflectionless splitting. In real terms this
can only be done with matched resistive pads on each end of every
cable,. This is totally impractical - who is goindg to put 75ohm
terminators in every socket in the hose that is not in use? AND that
results in losses, degrading the signal anyway.
Distrubution amplifiers isolate each cable from all the others, That's
what they are there for. Use them.
Er, that bit is easy. I only use one socket at a time and all the
sockets are accessible. All I need to do is terminate every socket and
then switch the cable to the TV for the terminator for the room I am
I have said elsewhere why I am not minded to use this route if at all
possible. It is more impracticable for me than having a terminator in
the unused sockets.
"Colin Blackburn" wrote
| On the general theme of aerial installations is there a reasonable
| way to wire in several aerial points off one aerial without a
| distribution amplifier, ie just using a splitter or splitters.
| Say I want four sockets, should I split near the aerial or run
| a single co-ax as far as possible before splitting? There would
| only ever be one socket in use at once but I can appreciate that
| long 'stubs' may cause various problems on the line as a whole.
You could just wire your aerial to one central point with a socket, have the
cables to the room sockets terminating there on plugs, and plug in whichever
room is required. If you have a strong signal and use good quality
connectors there should be negligible effect on the signal. If,
subsequently, you want to try passive splitters or a distr. amp., the
cabling is already in place.
Thats true if the front end receiver noise figure is no better than the
boosters which is likley on a decent tuner.. However it is good for crap
radios - as you point out - and does no harm and may overcome
interference pickup in the cable if the local signals are weak.
I tried with and without a 10db booster - no audible difference ona good
tuner - but the 10 db booster does at least feed the 10 coaxial
cables...whereas a passive splittter to do that would have introduced
I thimk you meant as well with, as without..
I';d say the labgear amp I am using is pretty neutral. Doesn't make it
better, doesn;t make it worse. Its there to buffer and distribute not to
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 9:43:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote
My clock radio is surprisingly good actually :)
If you go here:
and then click on the "Model 3" button on the left.
I've had it for a couple of days now and I'm becoming rather evangelical
I think it suits classical much better than rock/pop, but I listen to Radio 3
all the time so it suits me fine. There are still some classical shows on
Having really rather good sound quality at night is lovely. It can interfere
with sex life however...
as memorably explicated by the (then) young Mr Danny Thompson acting as
disreputable company to the guitar-genius and soak whose stage name is
John Martyn on the "Live at Leeds" album ;-)
ob.d-i-y: well, it's a genuine *live* album, so they were "doing it themselves"
(echoplex notwithstanding) rather'n all post-produced...
So do you think this is a fairly good product? I'm looking for a
good quality bedside radio and also really only listen to classical
I am slightly concerned that there are no technical specs given,
although a lot that are published are, admittedly, somewhat
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 0:43:24 +0100, Andy Hall wrote
Yes, I am very pleased with the Tivoli clock radio. In fact I bought it at
the end of a surprisingly long search when which started a few months ago
when I came to the realisation that I really like good quality sound at night
before going to sleep.
I had been using a Roberts R9939 for ages, which is fine for the money but
really limited in terms of reproducing music with any real detail.
The Tivoli clock radio has a stereo tuner and on the back is quite a range of
outputs all from 1/8 stereo jacks. There is a mono output for a subwoofer, so
you could run a comprehensive sound system from it!
I do use the stereo headphones socket occasionally on it, if there is
something really good on the radio, but I find the single speaker on top of
the unit to be quite excellent. Having the speaker on top gives an
omnidirectional output which suits bedside listening very well.
The Tivoli does not sound particularly good when absolutely brand new, it
takes a few days to "run in" but over that period the sound quality continues
to improve in leaps and bounds. I find sometimes at night the quality can be
so good it sort of takes me by surprise. For chamber music it can be really
amazing capturing nuances etc. extremely vividly.
For some time I had been considering getting a second-hand mini system on
ebay, before the Tivoli clock radio was introduced just in the last couple of
weeks. The problem though with the mini system idea for me is that even a
mini-system is a complicated thing to have in the bedroom IMHO, and I don't
know where I'd put the speakers. Also the mini systems I've heard tend to be
fine for rock/pop, but for classical the Tivoli is hugely superior I think.
Other things I looked at were the Pure radios and the Bose Acoustiwave. The
Bose is lovely to look at but far too expensive, and I can't see the point in
stereo by the bedside. I prefer the upward facing omnidirectional Tivoli. The
Bose might be very good in a small office situation or something. The Pure
radios didn't offer me very much because I don't feel any desire for the DAB
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.