On May 1, 12:17=A0am, G-squared <stratu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> =A0On Apr 30, 5:31=A0pm, BH <bha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> =A0> On Apr 30, 8:24=A0pm, rlew...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Cass Lewart)
wrote:=
> =A0>
> =A0> > BH (bha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
) wrote:
> =A0>
> =A0> > : Can anyone tell me if this amp will work with HD? Thanks!
> =A0> > : Bruce
> =A0>
> =A0> > Try it or check the specs that it covers UHF, I am using a RS in
> =A0> > line RF amplifier for around $30 and it works great.
> =A0> > Cass
> =A0>
> =A0> Hello again:
> =A0>
> =A0> It is obvious that I asked my question poorly. The installation in
> =A0> question was done by me 4 years ago and consists of ~ 10 outlets.
> It
> =A0> has performed quite well with excellent picture quality. The owner
> got
> =A0> a new Panasonic 42" plasma last week and pix breaks up on the HD
> =A0> channels often. Initially it was a HDMI set up with a Audio Video
> =A0> receiver in the system. Initially we pulled out the receiver and
> got
> =A0> no improvement. It is now just the cable line direct to the TV and
> =A0> seems to be OK. The cable co. says the amp will not pass the HD
> signal
> =A0> (????) and that is why I asked about this model amp. Their
> statement
> =A0> was that it was fine for analog but not for digital.
> =A0>
> =A0> Thanks,
> =A0>
> =A0> Bruce
>
> Actually analog is more difficult than digital. Once you get more than
> 15 dB signal-to-noise you're pretty much home free with digital. 15 dB
> in analog is the PITS. Perhaps Elmo would find it OK since he can
> still see the story. That amp is good from channel 2 (50MHz) to
> channel 83 (950MHz) and fine for analog and digital. Cable folks are
> mistaken.
>
> GG
Thanks for you responses. This is what I thought but having retired a
few years ago and not fully up on current products I needed the help.
Thanks again.
Bruce
|
