Rick Denney wrote:Chuck's place is a lot like mine, only worse. It isn't a tree or two, but a forest of them. The land to the north slopes away. The trees are TALL (i.e., you'd need a 100-foot ladder and quite a tower). And Chuck lives in northern latitudes, meaning the bird is a lot closer to the horizon.
The north slope could be a problem. Not insurmountable, but it add a level of difficulty. Qnd the low elevation angle doesn't help. Still, I'll be it could be done for less than you think. Would need the topolopy to figure out just how high, and would probably need a non standard dish. High gain, larger diameter, and mesh(not solid) to reduce wind resistance.
My dish looks through some trees, with the resulting marginal reception. It works fine, but it's marginal enough so that fairly routine rain and snow attenuation causes me to lose the signal.
Rain fade is due ti the dish size and frequency. Try getting a larger dish, say 24-26"
In a year or two, I'll either have to abandon the dish or construct a wife-prohibited tower (or, I could run several hundred feet of underground wire to the edge of my lot, but that causes other problems, not least of which the work involved). I'm hoping the cable company will get out here by then, and perhaps I'll also be able to get high-speed Internet.
I'd go the long cable if possible. You migh need a powered amplifier to make the run, but it's cheaper than going up. I thing the normal limitation on lengt is the DC resistance of the coax. It powred the LNBF and controls the polarity switching. It also powers the switches. DishNetwork now has a quad output LNBF, which is really 2 dual output LNBFs and a switch so any output can be either LNBF and either polarity. That takes a low of power from the coax. Multiple outputs and the switch cause a loss in signal strength too.
I don't like DirectTV. They alway seamed behind Dish on the technology side. Be it DolbyDigital, HDTV, or PVR. Or how about the JVC D-VHS (digital VHS recording from the sat.) back in '98 or 99. I wish the merger had happened though. All that extra bandwidth would have been great for HD and internet access.
I'll not let a cable company in my house. Around here the selection sucks, price is high, and service noexistant(based on my last dealings with them and what I hear from otyhers). I suffered more outages with them than rain fade cause now. And I could get stereo, surround signals. Cable didn't even give stereo on MTV, or HBO. And forget about the other HBO (Cinemax, Showtime) channels or "late feeds".I think they have a digital plan now, but the choice still suck, and it's expensive.
It seems to me that nothing degrades faster than rear projection displays. CRT's degrade pretty quickly, too, especially when they are run full-bore in bright rooms. Are plasma displays really just as bad? I bought a 36" CRT television six years ago thinking it would last until I was ready to make the HDTV jump, but I'm finding that the TV is already becoming flaky. Oh, well. It was cheap. I may have to buy another big CRT--they are a fifth the price of a similarly sized flat panel.
Rear projection breaks sooner becaue of the LCD instestead of CRTs than most now use. It's cheaper and lighter, but ask any laptop owner about LCD life. Plasma, based on what I've read, is worse than LCD. It's brighter sure, but heavy, hot, and short lived.
As to the CRT, you bough a cheap set? Did you reall expect much?
I bough my 36" CRT in '99. Got a deal on it, but it typically sold for $1200 at the time. It's adjusted for a low light room, which is how I watch movies. I try to adjust it every 6 months, using the
"Video Essentials" DVD. It's hasn't changed much over the 5 years I've had it. It may not be as bright, but I can't tell. Same for the 10yr old 27" monitor in the bedroom that the 36" replaced. Never use the RF inputs much though, so I don't know if the tuner section would hold up as well.