what coax should I use for OTA ?
- Thread starter Snipr4x4
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 6
- Views 4K
If you are doing it new go for the RG-6.
If you are getting such a deal for the RG-59 it will work.
If you are getting such a deal for the RG-59 it will work.
I second al's recommendation. Use the best RG-6 coax you can afford and use compression fit connectors.
OTA signals do not need RG-6. If it were me I would use RG-6 if I had it but would use RG-59 if I had it. If I had to go buy some, I would get the RG-6 as you might want to use it for something else later.Snipr4x4 said:
I tried a comparison with my OTA as I get rather flakey signals some of the time and it made no difference either way.
Grandude,
Quad-shielded RG-6 may sound like overkill for OTA, but the extra shielding is critical in areas where strong OTA signals exist. If you want some ugly multipath situations, try using a 50-70% shielded RG-59 cable, which will let in the same signal being pulled in by your antenna, but smeared-out over several nanoseconds.
How much money are you saving by using RG59 vs. RG6U? $10? $30? I'd spend the money, even if I had RG59 sitting around (which I don't 'cause I throw that $#&^ out!)
Quad-shielded RG-6 may sound like overkill for OTA, but the extra shielding is critical in areas where strong OTA signals exist. If you want some ugly multipath situations, try using a 50-70% shielded RG-59 cable, which will let in the same signal being pulled in by your antenna, but smeared-out over several nanoseconds.
How much money are you saving by using RG59 vs. RG6U? $10? $30? I'd spend the money, even if I had RG59 sitting around (which I don't 'cause I throw that $#&^ out!)
Roland,
My point was that the typical UHF signal doesn't have the stringent requirements of the satellite signals now in use. Your point about multipath in strong signal environments is well taken and worth considering. I stand by my comments though and take note, I said if I were going to buy cable I would go with RG-6 and not waste my money on RG-59.
I should add, that if it was a difficult run of cable from my antenna to the receiver I would certainly not bother even trying the 59, even if I had some laying around.
My point was that the typical UHF signal doesn't have the stringent requirements of the satellite signals now in use. Your point about multipath in strong signal environments is well taken and worth considering. I stand by my comments though and take note, I said if I were going to buy cable I would go with RG-6 and not waste my money on RG-59.
I should add, that if it was a difficult run of cable from my antenna to the receiver I would certainly not bother even trying the 59, even if I had some laying around.
