Deleted member 40681
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2004
- Messages
- 142
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 79
I suspect the answer is that 'there will be no noticeable difference and you have waaaay overthought this...' But I'd rather do it 'right' since it's a purchase that'll be there for years, and it'll give you techy guys a chance to show off.
I need a 15m run of cable from the aerial socket in one room into another room, with lots of wall to 90 degree angle itself against along the way, which may be a factor if the cable is too stiff to cater for that. Currently I'm using lengths of RG59 which are connected with a F-F connector.
I am wanting to minimise the signal attenuation to make sure that the Humax freeview box at the end gets maximum strength&quality. With the cheap old cables I have cobbled together I get 1 bars and 'no signal found' on all HD channels, and some SD channels get through.
Looking at the webro HD100 and WF100 datasheets, they say the same signal lose figures BUT looking at online stores, the WF100 specification listed in those actually gives figures for loss at about 6-10% better. Other forum posts confirm this and say that the WF100 is pure copper vs copper-allow in the HD100 and has less signal loss.
However, the HD100 is supposed to have better shielding, so perhaps that will overall lead to a better signal that the WF100 overall? I get the impression its also a 'tougher' cable too.
ARGH! Which do I go for?
Many thanks
Nick
I need a 15m run of cable from the aerial socket in one room into another room, with lots of wall to 90 degree angle itself against along the way, which may be a factor if the cable is too stiff to cater for that. Currently I'm using lengths of RG59 which are connected with a F-F connector.
I am wanting to minimise the signal attenuation to make sure that the Humax freeview box at the end gets maximum strength&quality. With the cheap old cables I have cobbled together I get 1 bars and 'no signal found' on all HD channels, and some SD channels get through.
Looking at the webro HD100 and WF100 datasheets, they say the same signal lose figures BUT looking at online stores, the WF100 specification listed in those actually gives figures for loss at about 6-10% better. Other forum posts confirm this and say that the WF100 is pure copper vs copper-allow in the HD100 and has less signal loss.
However, the HD100 is supposed to have better shielding, so perhaps that will overall lead to a better signal that the WF100 overall? I get the impression its also a 'tougher' cable too.
ARGH! Which do I go for?
Many thanks
Nick