Antenna splitter

[SCPD]

Guys,Im looking to combine one antenna with two recievers but Im not sure why there is such a price difference between a common spliter $2.95 sold at Grove Enterprise and a combiner/splitter SP1300 sold at scannermaster for $50? Will the $3.00 splitter from Grove do the same job as the SP1300?

SP-1300 Combiner/Splitter

2 Way Splitter at

 

[CoolCat]

The SP-1300 looks like it is just a standard CATV splitter with BNC connectors. It may be no different internally.

That being said, many people use standard CATV type splitters and never have an issue. The problem with them is that most provide no isolation between outputs. This can cause interference issues with some scanners (and could even damage sensitive electronics).

The best way to go is always to use a quality multicoupler, but they are expensive (not always worth it unless you're using expensive scanners). But the bottom line is; you will probably be fine with cheap 2-way CATV splitter (same thing they sell at Lowes, Home Depot, Radio Shack, etc). To minimize loss and reduce cost, use F connectors on your coax cables (don't waste money on F-to-BNC adapters).

Good Luck and Happy Scanning

 

[jim202]

The SP-1300 looks like it is just a standard CATV splitter with BNC connectors. It may be no different internally.

That being said, many people use standard CATV type splitters and never have an issue. The problem with them is that most provide no isolation between outputs. This can cause interference issues with some scanners (and could even damage sensitive electronics).

The best way to go is always to use a quality multicoupler, but they are expensive (not always worth it unless you're using expensive scanners). But the bottom line is; you will probably be fine with cheap 2-way CATV splitter (same thing they sell at Lowes, Home Depot, Radio Shack, etc). To minimize loss and reduce cost, use F connectors on your coax cables (don't waste money on F-to-BNC adapters).

Good Luck and Happy Scanning

The down side to using a regular in line cable splitter is that it introduces 3 db of loss. This is half the power coming down the coax. If you look around and find an in line amp. You will be better off. Just look at the low end frequency it operates at. The down side of an in line amp is overload to the scanner from strong signals like paging transmitters and cellular sites. You don't need much gain here and with them your still not going to get a whole lot of isolation between the ports.

A true receiver mulicoupler provides both gain and isolation. The downside to them is that they are very expensive. We are talking on the order of $300 to over $1000 for one. It depends on the frequency range and number of ports.

This may not be the answer you were looking for, but they are the facts.

 

[LtDoc]

This is a 'S.W.A.G.' so take it as such.
The most apparent differences are the type of connector used, and both were built to use 75 ohm cable. If those two things are manageable for you, you "pays your money and makes your choice". Of course there will be some attenuation when using either 'splitter', but it may not be all that objectionable.
- 'Doc

 

[SCPD]

Thanks a lot guys for the input. I guess you get what you pay for and I certainly do not want to sacrifice signal loss. Thanks to your suggestion Im now looking at a rather inexpensive multicoupler for $70 that has port to port isolation.
Stridsberg MC102 Passive Multicoupler, 100 kHz - 500 MHz, 2 ports. at

What I want to do is run two scanners on three antennas,one muticoupler and two antenna switches. Scanner #1 will be fed through a switch that will be connected to a discone on the (A) side of the switch and a UHF Satcom antenna on the (B) side of the switch. Scanner #2 will also have a switch that will be again connected to the discone on the (A) side of the switch and a 800Mhz yagi on the (B) side of the switch. So in short the muticoupler will run the discone feed to the (A) side of both switches.

Thanks for your suggestions.
Rob
N1RGR

 

[prcguy]

I've tested lots of TV splitters and many have upwards of 5dB loss per port at 1GHZ and closer to 3.5dB loss at the low end. Isolation between ports can be poor and under 10dB and that comes into play if LO leakage from one receiver lands on a desired receive frequency on the other receiver.

Bottom line is if all the signals you are currently receiving are completely full quieting, adding a low budget 2-way splitter in the system may not cause any noticeable degradation. If some signals are noisy now its gonna get worse.
prcguy

 

[SCPD]

I've tested lots of TV splitters and many have upwards of 5dB loss per port at 1GHZ and closer to 3.5dB loss at the low end. Isolation between ports can be poor and under 10dB and that comes into play if LO leakage from one receiver lands on a desired receive frequency on the other receiver.

Bottom line is if all the signals you are currently receiving are completely full quieting, adding a low budget 2-way splitter in the system may not cause any noticeable degradation. If some signals are noisy now its gonna get worse.
prcguy

I do not want any heavy dB loss especially due to the fact I monitor a lot of Milair stuff on one of the two scanners, my BCT15X. So would you suggest the investment in the muticoupler with port isolation as the best option?

 

[Tech792]

If you can afford it, get the active splitter/multi-coupler with the preamp. That will overcome the loss from the splitter. My stridsburg didn't have the amp so I added a GRE Superamp on mine because I like the fact that its adjustable. I can adjust just how much gain I want. It seems to make a much better difference on UHF and 800 mhz (and milair bands).

 

[SCPD]

Nice..I actually happen to have one of those GRE Superamps kicking around the shack!

 

[gmclam]

My $0.015

I use both CATV type passive splitters and amplified "multicouplers". Each has a good and bad place.

First off, all CATV splitters are not equal. Get one that goes to at least 1GHz and has no more than 3.5dB loss per output. A negative of using them is they use F connectors, and adapters or special jumpers are needed. And while 3dB is half the signal, it is still only 3dB.

One problem with multicouplers is that they require power and have an active amplifier in them. If you have a strong signal nearby, it can play havoc. I used an RF meter to see what was the strongest signals from my antenna, and ended up removing all broadcast signals (AM, FM, TV) with inline filters BEFORE such an amplifier. It helps a lot.

There really is a lot more to this issue than I care to babble about here, but you are not really comparing devices that are the same. They may be used to perform the same function (connect two radios to a single antenna), but they are quite different.

Funny how most people use less than ideal coax that causes a loss of much more than 3dB from the good coax they should have purchased, and then spend $ for an amplifier because they don't want 3dB of loss. You are better off with a higher or better antenna, better downlead and a passive splitter than with an amp for the sake of the 3dB.

 

[ecollins11]

Here is what I use a Commscope splitter for my two antenna inputs 25 - 1300 Mhz (antenna 1) 806 -1900 Mhz (antenna 2) A RS FM Trap from the Splitter to the input of the CDAL 84N 4 Port 8db Drop Amp. Output to the PRO-197 and PRO 163 Scanner, This setup works really great with bot scanners. The Drop amp was free found it in the dumpster behind CableOne and it works..