I thought I was either being stupid or going mad Wednesday afternoon & evening and this morning!

On Wednesday morning from 9am, I went to tune in the new higher powered and they were all showing very good strength and as well as my , and Wrexham-Rhos channels.

On Wednesday afternoon, went to put the TV on and the Wrexham-Rhos and lower powered Wrekin channels were suffering from signal drop-out though other channels were receivable but TV was displaying they had lower signal strength and quality compared to when I checked them after tuning the new channels earlier that morning.

Removed the 2(!) amplifiers and it improved the strength and quality of the higher powered WH, Wrekin and SC channels. Later that night probably due to the weather, I was experiencing signal drop-out or complete loss on Wrexham-Rhos and the lower powered Wrekin channels. (Yes I do know the lower powered Wrekin channels go to full power and transmit on new frequencies next Wednesday). Some of the other channels had dropped down in strength and quality too but were still receivable without drop-out.

This morning, I tried 1 and signal was now improved but only if my lead attached directly into the TV and not through my VCR, DVD recorder and + box.
When trying it through all those, it made every single channel weaker in strength and quality.
I checked the RF socket to plug cables that connect between them on a signal strength meter and on a multimeter and 1 was reading very low signal/open circuit so replaced that.

Checked signals again and they had improved to a degree but not as much as without an amplifier. Also I noticed at that point that the RF out pic of Sky+ had gone terrible

Luckily, the amplifier is fitted with a variable control so after knocking down the gain control 2 or 3 turns, everything had improved across all channels!

Just needed to find a new RF channel for Sky+ as Ch.67 was a little noisy so a channel in the mid 30's such as 34 looks better and now hopefully, fingers crossed, everything will be fine and stay fine!

I don't understand though why the amplified signal was weakened to such a degree going through a VCR, DVD recorder and a Sky+ that the TV was only receiving weak signals from 13 of the 17 different frequencies I received Wednesday morning with 4 frequencies unreceivable yet when the aerial was plugged directly into the TV, 13 signals had improved and then the unreceivable 4 were then receivable albeit still a bit weak.

My only guess is maybe when the signal is so high to begin with, connecting it through a VCR, DVD Recorder and Sky+ box must create a lot of signal noise and weaken the effective signal? Perhaps they amplify the noise of the weaker signals and make all signals look weak and poor?

If that is the case, then that's proof that it's no good to have too high a signal to your TV or box.

But it does make me wonder, over time, is it possible for your TV or box's tuner to get damaged with 100% Strength and 100% Quality always receivable on some of your channels?

link to this comment

S's Freeview map S's terrain plot S's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage

Sutton Coldfield (Birmingham, England) Full Freeview transmitte
Thursday 22 September 2011 9:02PM
Wrexham

JohnB: Like I said, I did have problems earlier but resolved them BEFORE posting on this page.

In the end, I did not need to turn off any loop-through with any of my recording devices. All I needed to do was to just use one of my two amplifiers I previously used at the same time, the one with the variable I needed to use which was previously set at maximum gain and lower it down a few turns so the gain was reduced to now probably giving out around one-half to two-thirds of the maximum gain.

This means it now has caused the very strong signals strengths to lower slightly and the signal of the very strong signals to increase.
Also the signals strengths of the weaker signals have now increased and the signal quality of the weaker signals have also increased.
And I no longer experience any caused on the RF out of my + box with removing one of the amplifiers and reducing the gain of the other one I still required.
So, all round a complete success.

But like I asked previously:
Over time, is it possible for your TV or box's tuner to get damaged with 100% Strength and 100% Quality always receivable on some of your ?

link to this comment

S's Freeview map S's terrain plot S's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage

Sutton Coldfield (Birmingham, England) Full Freeview transmitte
Thursday 22 September 2011 9:38PM
Wrexham

jb38: It's a perfectly reasonable question to have asked. No-one else ever seems to have asked and I feel people need to know.

Brian talks about how you can overload your TV and set-top box tuner with too high a but he never says anything about damage.
So I put 2 and 2 together and also quite reasonably assumed that a prolonged exposure to very high strong signals on a tuner of a TV or set-top box could eventually result in tuner damage.

So I would like Brian's view on this.
Thanks.

link to this comment

S's Freeview map S's terrain plot S's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage

Sutton Coldfield (Birmingham, England) Full Freeview transmitte
Monday 26 September 2011 11:28PM
Wrexham

Like I asked recently:
Over time, is it possible for your TV or box's tuner to get damaged with 100% Strength and 100% always receivable on some of your ?

Brian talks about how you can overload your TV and set-top box tuner with too high a signal but he never says anything about damage.
So I put 2 and 2 together and quite reasonably assumed that a prolonged exposure to very high strong signals on a tuner of a TV or set-top box could eventually result in tuner damage. After all, the word 'overload' in the normal sense suggests that a prolonged period of overload can result in component damage.

So if component damage is not possible, I'd like to know what prevents component damage.
So I would like Brian's view on this.
Thanks.

link to this comment

S's Freeview map S's terrain plot S's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage

Channel 5 HD will launch on Freeview | Blogs
Tuesday 1 November 2011 7:29PM
Wrexham

I don't have equipment to be able to receive HD but I for viewers that can, with hearing that news and the other news that BBC HD will become BBC TWO HD,then I hope the HD channels on and and the other platforms will be re-numbered appropriately.

Freeview Currently:
50 BBC ONE HD
51 ITV1 HD
52 Channel 4 HD
54 BBC HD (to become BBC2 HD)

Hopefully will change to:
51 BBC ONE HD
52 BBC TWO HD (from BBC HD)
53 ITV1 HD
54 Channel 4 HD
55 Channel 5 HD

Sky Currently:
140 Channel 4 HD
143 BBC ONE HD
169 BBC HD
171 Channel 5 HD
178 ITV1 HD

If DMAX and DMAX +1 doesn't mind moving EPG numbers to say 161 and 162 then hopefully the HD line-up will change to something like this:

141 BBC ONE HD
142 BBC TWO HD
143 ITV1 HD
144 Channel 4 HD
145 Channel 5 HD

link to this comment

S's Freeview map S's terrain plot S's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage

Channel 5 HD will launch on Freeview | Blogs
Tuesday 1 November 2011 8:28PM
Wrexham

I'm wondering then, Brian. Why have none of the broadcasters gone onto Ch. 53 () or Ch. 141/142 ()? If BBC HD came after Channel 4 HD on the Sky platform, why didn't they go on 141 rather than go on 143?
Those channel numbers have never been used.
Have they been bought by someone else that have yet to launch in HD or something?

And if BBC1, BBC2, ITV1, Channel 4 and Channel 5 are numbered 1-5 or 101-105 in SD, why can't they be re-numbered in the same way in HD? Surely regions shouldn't be a problem if they can do this for SD channels?

Why should the rules for HD be different for those of SD channels for the first 5 broadcasters? should set aside a *1-*5 or a **1-**5 numbering system just like they do for SD channels.

Just like I receive 101 for BBC One whereas viewers outside Wales would receive BBC One Wales on 972, then they should be able to offer a similar service to this with HD channels.

link to this comment

S's Freeview map S's terrain plot S's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage

Channel 5 HD will launch on Freeview | Blogs
Wednesday 2 November 2011 12:31AM
Wrexham

they work around this number and problem sometime in the future to be able to have the HD channel numbers in the order I first suggested.
If they do, perhaps you could have S4C HD on 54 in and Channel 4 HD on 54 outside Wales.

At least I now understand why there are so many gaps in the EPG.
But what is the point though in allocating channel numbers in threes?
It means no-one else can use those channel numbers.
And it makes the EPG numbers so messy.

For example:
The main Entertainment channels are allocated 101-239 and at present the last channel (Watch HD) ends on 233 but there are gaps at the following channel numbers:
134, 141-2, 161-3, 181-2, 185-6, 192, 194, 196-7, 202, 207-8, 210, 213, 216, 221, 223-4, 229-30. If they all budged up with no gaps, they could run from 101-208.

Likewise, there are numerous gaps, some of which are very big gaps in the Lifestyle, Film, Music, Sports (443-453; 457-479), Documentary, Shopping, Box Office (Channels run from 700-744; gap of 745-751, Box Office HD 752&753, Box Office 754-761. Would be better to run Box Office from 700-752 then Box Office HD on 753&754), Adult (big gap 937-947, last channel could end on 939 instead of currently ending on 967) and Radio (the whole radio channel EPG order needs a complete numbering revamp - it's a disgraceful mess with so many gaps and the order being all over the place!)

When it comes to radio channels, all (or at least, the majority) of the BBC stations could all do with being grouped together. Likewise for RTE, Absolute, UCB, all the commercial Pop stations and all the other foreign language and religious channels grouped together.

That way the last channel could end before 0180 instead of 0214 like present getting rid of gaps here, there and everywhere and making it easier and more enjoyable flicking through the radio channels to find stations that suit your genre and interest instead of (for example) if you are looking for modern pop music you don't have to go from 0109 to 0111 to 0113 to 0114 to 0120 to 0137 to 0146 etc. etc.

link to this comment

S's Freeview map S's terrain plot S's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage

What is the Inversion Effect and why does it effect my Freeview
Wednesday 16 November 2011 11:00PM
Wrexham

Just wanted to share my experience of the with other readers.

During high pressure in the days of in my , signals were always worsened from though appeared unaffected. Thick horizontal lines would appear on the screen and sometimes become so bad you would lose picture sync and be unwatchable.

Although I do not receive any analogue signals anymore, with the weather being damp and foggy recently, I wanted to see if my TV was able to tune in to any analogue .

I did a quick auto search and it found weak but not very watchable channels of ITV1 on 29, BBC1 on 33 and C5 on 35. I checked on this website where these were coming from and they appear to be from -all the way from the North York Moors near . These frequencies along with 23 and 26 are all the same frequencies as those that were used by The Wrekin (albeit different except for C5).

So this not only explains why The Wrekin became worse - because Bilsdale's signals were coming in stronger causing . But it is just one small indication of just how far signals can travel in certain weather conditions.

Just the other day I saw some videos on YouTube of BBC radio from near receivable in Germany. The screen on the persons radio were strong enough in that was very clear and the radio was displaying the RDS name.

link to this comment

S's Freeview map S's terrain plot S's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage

Mynydd Emroch (Neath Port Talbot, Wales) Freeview Light transmi
Tuesday 22 November 2011 2:29PM
Wrexham

I'm a little confused as to whether this () is actually part of the transmitter group as this website suggests it is or if it part of the transmitter group.
It's Digital Switch-Over date again according to this website says it was 23rd September 2009 which was the date for Carmel.
Kilvey Hill's DSO date was 2 weeks earlier, 9th September 2009.
Which is correct?

link to this comment

S's Freeview map S's terrain plot S's frequency data S's Freeview Detailed Coverage

Page 5

P10

P13