AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 62 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
694 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Currently 3G and 4G may require a filter to stop OTA interference depending on your locality.
Will 5G possibly stir up interference like 3&4G?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,527 Posts
Millimeter wave 5G will be far removed from television frequencies. The current bands are 24, 28 and 39 GHz. For those bands, no filter would be required.

T-Mobile will be using their 600 MHz spectrum for 5G, so you may need a filter. Most likely you'll see 4G transmitters first that get upgraded to 5G later (although it doesn't matter, at those frequencies the 5G signal will look the same as 4G).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,282 Posts
It would be best not to refer to filters as "5G" (or "3G" or "4G") since filters are frequency-specific and all of those services can be offered over any compatible cellular band. 5G services will also be able to use the microwave frequencies that dr1394 highlighted.


Given the dearth of reported OTA reception problems that have been explicitly identified as having been caused by 700 MHz signals, I'd expect that interference caused by the usage of 600 MHz wireless signals is probably going to also be pretty rare. Unless one has an antenna aimed pretty much point blank at a cell tower and with a pre-amp in use, the cell signals simply aren't all that strong once you get more than a half km (or less) from the tower. You'd be more likely to get interference from in-home devices like hotspots and phones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
It would be best not to refer to filters as "5G" (or "3G" or "4G") since filters are frequency-specific and all of those services can be offered over any compatible cellular band. 5G services will also be able to use the microwave frequencies that dr1394 highlighted.


Given the dearth of reported OTA reception problems that have been explicitly identified as having been caused by 700 MHz signals, I'd expect that interference caused by the usage of 600 MHz wireless signals is probably going to also be pretty rare. Unless one has an antenna aimed pretty much point blank at a cell tower and with a pre-amp in use, the cell signals simply aren't all that strong once you get more than a half km (or less) from the tower. You'd be more likely to get interference from in-home devices like hotspots and phones.

My old school Sadelco meter reports crazy high signal readings on the old hi-uhf bands. I assume they're now cell frequencies. And yet I don't have any trouble getting UHF stations I'm not supposed to. Don't even use an LTE filter. I agree 100% with the above assessment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,899 Posts
The main use I've found for LTE filters is in-home video distribution. For 99% of cases there's very little chance of LTE signals causing problems receiving OTA TV. But you may find an LTE filter useful to "clean out" higher-frequency cell signals received by your TV antenna, so you can use those frequencies for your own in-home TV channels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
The main use I've found for LTE filters is in-home video distribution. For 99% of cases there's very little chance of LTE signals causing problems receiving OTA TV. But you may find an LTE filter useful to "clean out" higher-frequency cell signals received by your TV antenna, so you can use those frequencies for your own in-home TV channels.

I never even thought of that, but it makes perfect sense.
I've been able to use VHF for my "home channels."
Good catch!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
The main use I've found for LTE filters is in-home video distribution. For 99% of cases there's very little chance of LTE signals causing problems receiving OTA TV. But you may find an LTE filter useful to "clean out" higher-frequency cell signals received by your TV antenna, so you can use those frequencies for your own in-home TV channels.
What do you mean by "your own in-home TV channels"?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
What do you mean by "your own in-home TV channels"?

Not sure about Brandt's setup. His is likely a lot more complicated!
My in-home TV channels are modulated signals I add "backwards" into the incoming OTA signal. It works fine for me.
That allows me to watch stuff all over the house through their OTA tuners or set top boxes.
It's kind of a pain to get everything balanced, especially with the one analog modulator I use. They seem to all play well together if you fiddle around and measure a lot. I use low VHF for the digital modulated signals, and the analog is up at 55 and probably just blows by any UHF problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,855 Posts
Yet Another Way to Combine Two Antennas Aimed in Different Directions

What do you mean by "your own in-home TV channels"?
I measured the attenuation of my CM-3201 LTE filter:



This is one way to use it with your TV distribution system when combining the signals from two UHF antennas aimed in different directions when combining with a splitter in reverse doesn't work, which often happens:



An inexpensive NTSC modulator will give you analog quality. If you want HD, you will need a more expensive ATSC or QAM modulator.

The added channel can be used for any other source, like a video camera.

The analog image quality, which we watched for many years, can be quite acceptable:



certainly better than compressed 480i digital OTA:

 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,855 Posts
It's kind of a pain to get everything balanced, especially with the one analog modulator I use. They seem to all play well together if you fiddle around and measure a lot. I use low VHF for the digital modulated signals, and the analog is up at 55 and probably just blows by any UHF problems.
I adjust the output of the analog modulator to about +10 dBmV. I don't start to see snow until -15 dBmV at the TV tuner input.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
I measured the attenuation of my CM-3201 LTE filter:



This is one way to use it with your TV distribution system:



An inexpensive NTSC modulator will give you analog quality. If you want HD, you will need a more expensive ATSC or QAM modulator.

The added channel can be used for any other source, like a video camera.

The analog image quality, which we watched for many years, can be quite acceptable:



certainly better than compressed 480i digital OTA:

Not sure about Brandt's setup. His is likely a lot more complicated!
My in-home TV channels are modulated signals I add "backwards" into the incoming OTA signal. It works fine for me.
That allows me to watch stuff all over the house through their OTA tuners or set top boxes.
It's kind of a pain to get everything balanced, especially with the one analog modulator I use. They seem to all play well together if you fiddle around and measure a lot. I use low VHF for the digital modulated signals, and the analog is up at 55 and probably just blows by any UHF problems.
I don't think I know enough about modulators, modulated signals, attenuation, blocks, or filters to fully grasp what you guys are saying. It sounds to me as though you're taking non-OTA signals (cable/satellite, DVD, etc.) and broadcasting them with low-power RF modulators over coaxial cable to the rest of your house. Is that right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,855 Posts
I don't think I know enough about modulators, modulated signals, attenuation, blocks, or filters to fully grasp what you guys are saying. It sounds to me as though you're taking non-OTA signals (cable/satellite, DVD, etc.) and broadcasting them with low-power RF modulators over coaxial cable to the rest of your house. Is that right?
I think you understand it pretty well.
It can do all of those things, but the example I used is a way to combine the signals from two UHF OTA antennas aimed in different directions when using a splitter in reverse as a combiner doesn't work, because the signals would otherwise interfere with each other.

So, a solution to that problem is to move the signals from the 2nd antenna to a high UHF channel that your TV tuners can receive.

A similar way to do it as shown in the CBS sports images is to move the signals to channel 3, which is an output of the converter box. In that case, a modulator isn't needed because there is one built in the converter box. But, since the topic of this thread is about cellular interference, I used the LTE filter example.

I edited my previous post for clarification this way:
This is one way to use it with your TV distribution system when combining the signals from two UHF antennas aimed in different directions when combining with a splitter in reverse doesn't work, which often happens:
Thank you for letting me know that I didn't make it clear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
I think you understand it pretty well.
It can do all of those things, but the example I used is a way to combine the signals from two UHF OTA antennas aimed in different directions when using a splitter in reverse as a combiner doesn't work, because the signals would otherwise interfere with each other.

So, a solution to that problem is to move the signals from the 2nd antenna to a high UHF channel that your TV tuners can receive.

A similar way to do it as shown in the CBS sports images is to move the signals to channel 3, which is an output of the converter box. In that case, a modulator isn't needed because there is one built in the converter box.
Thanks - I didn't understand before why there were two antennas in your diagram.

Most all of the available OTA channels in my area are coming from the same direction, so that's not really a need for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,899 Posts
What do you mean by "your own in-home TV channels"?
Not sure about Brandt's setup. His is likely a lot more complicated!

My in-home TV channels are modulated signals I add "backwards" into the incoming OTA signal. It works fine for me.

That allows me to watch stuff all over the house through their OTA tuners or set top boxes.
My setup is basically the same. I have two analog modulators and later added one ATSC digital modulator. The ATSC modulator was originally part of a "whole-home" kludge with a Channel Master DVR+ DVR. Coupled with a remote-control extender, it let me watch the DVR+ (in 720p) from any room. At the time, the DVR+ also had a Sling TV app, which I could also watch from any room using that setup.
It's kind of a pain to get everything balanced, especially with the one analog modulator I use. They seem to all play well together if you fiddle around and measure a lot. I use low VHF for the digital modulated signals, and the analog is up at 55 and probably just blows by any UHF problems.
I put my ATSC signal up at RF 69. The analog signals were at 62 and 64.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,855 Posts
Thanks - I didn't understand before why there were two antennas in your diagram.

Most all of the available OTA channels in my area are coming from the same direction, so that's not really a need for me.
Good. Many people are not as lucky as you are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
944 Posts
I adjust the output of the analog modulator to about +10 dBmV. I don't start to see snow until -15 dBmV at the TV tuner input.

It's been a while since I set mine up, but I think my initial aim was +10 dBmV at the TV.
Just checked, and it is -1.5 at the TV!
I seem to recall that if I turned it down, I had better results overall.

Oh well, it looks fine on everything in my house except for one Panasonic plasma so it will have to do for now. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
Good. Many people are not as lucky as you are.
Yeah. Pretty much all the channels worth receiving are broadcast from essentially the same mountain top about 20 miles from my home. I installed a large antenna in the attic when I first moved in about 12 years ago. It gets a solid signal from most all of the stations - even one or two independent stations broadcasting from distinct locations. I haven't even used the OTA tuner in quite some time - mostly been using DirecTV and OTT solutions like Amazon Prime and BYUtv (got to have my BYU sports).

I was recently spurred to contemplating a Tablo or Plex DVR system (again) for when I finally say goodbye to DirecTV for good, prompting another round of internet research and subsequent inquiries with the experienced AVS forum participants.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
This is old thread. But I will give you an update. The new 600 and 700 Mhz bands are meant to help close the internet divide where internet access is limited. (rural, mountain and areas lacking the fiber infrastructure) T-Mobile and Dishnetwork bought the 600 and 700 bands and are using the bands to do this. Pros: The lower frequencies provide longer range and less signal blockage from obstacles like buildings and trees. Witch is best for these areas. Cons: Slower internet speeds. (up to 50 Mbps speed) The higher the frequency the faster the speeds. (at 23 Mhz speed could be up to 1 Gbps)

Most tv signal problems are caused by the tv channel it on (2-36), station transmitter power (0.25-1000 kws), distance from the transmitters, (1- 60 miles) Antenna size (indoor or outdoor, 15 - 100 mile rage/size) and obstacles in the line of the transmitters, (buildings, trees, mountains) and other interferences like Police/Fire/City radio and Ham radio which are in between the vhf tv bands (low vhf below TV ch 2, mid vhf between tv ch 6 and ch 7 and hi vhf between tv chls 13 and 14) The uhf tv chls 14-36 are mostly in the clear and that’s why most tv stations are using the uhf band. The tv filters may or may not help you with your signal problems. (typical filters used for vhf tv: blow 54 Mhz / tv 2, FM radio / 80-108 Mhz and 3G to 5G cell / 609 Mhz to 800 Mhz) One good use for the 5G filter is to combine ota TV with sat tv on one cable. Works good with Dishnetwork Hopper and Joeys. Works with old and new Dish swm systems. The Dish Hopper and Joeys use the 675 to 875 Mhz Moca F band that work with the 5G filter to block the band from the ota tv signal being combined on to the one cable. DirecTV Genie and Minis might not work because they use the 475 to 700 Mhz Moca E band to work.
 
1 - 20 of 62 Posts
Top