Re: 52 dB any good?
- From: Chris Isbell <chris217_NOSPAAM@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:32:39 +0100
On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 06:32:16 +0100, Stewart Pinkerton
<stewart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The trouble here of course is that Keith is obsessed with
measurements. What really matters is how the signal *sounds*! Is it
clean, with no multipath distortion and no noticeable hiss? Then you
have enough signal strength. :-)
Yes, up to a point.
I noticed a matterable improvement going from an adequate to a very
good aerial signal. This observation was not validated using a
double-blind level matched test, so it may be a consequence of the
effort expended optimising the aerial, or possibly down to reducing
multipath. ;-)
It would be interesting to hear from those who know about RF whether
there might be an engineering basis for this observation.
--
Chris Isbell
Southampton, UK
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 52 dB any good?
- From: Serge Auckland
- Re: 52 dB any good?
- References:
- 52 dB any good?
- From: Keith G
- Re: 52 dB any good?
- From: Serge Auckland
- Re: 52 dB any good?
- From: Chris Isbell
- Re: 52 dB any good?
- From: Stewart Pinkerton
- 52 dB any good?
- Prev by Date: Re: Baking open-reel tapes: hub question
- Next by Date: Re: 52 dB any good?
- Previous by thread: Re: 52 dB any good?
- Next by thread: Re: 52 dB any good?
- Index(es):