multiple scanner one antenna

[SCPD]

was almost ready to purchase the antenna share device advertised on this side. was at local home depot pick up antenna cable/ satellite split and was considering going through some adapters to make it work....
wend to the nearby radio shack to pick up the needed adapter when i picked up a UHF M-358 T-adapter.(Two So-239 jacks to one PL -259 plug) part # 278-198
anyway hocked my pro 96 and my 2096 with almost the same frequency split them up 0-3 and 4-6 and it seem to do very well.
before i had an radio shack glass mount on my window with a lot interference on that setup. and now it comes in very well without any expensive spliters

anyone has any input or concern on this set up ?

 

[W4KRR]

A company called Stridsberg Engineering makes splitters that are designed to split one antenna between more than one scanner. They work very well. They are designed to compensate for the loss in splitting the signal. If the setup you are using works for you, fine. The setup you are using can cause unwanted interaction between the radios in the setup. I have tried that method myself years ago, and I would only use the Stridsberg multicoupler to feed more than one scanner with a single antenna.

www.stridsberg.com

 

[N_Jay]

was almost ready to purchase the antenna share device advertised on this side. was at local home depot pick up antenna cable/ satellite split and was considering going through some adapters to make it work....
wend to the nearby radio shack to pick up the needed adapter when i picked up a UHF M-358 T-adapter.(Two So-239 jacks to one PL -259 plug) part # 278-198
anyway hocked my pro 96 and my 2096 with almost the same frequency split them up 0-3 and 4-6 and it seem to do very well.
before i had an radio shack glass mount on my window with a lot interference on that setup. and now it comes in very well without any expensive spliters

anyone has any input or concern on this set up ?

I can not tell exacty what you are doing from your description, so it is hard to provide any input on the set up.

 

[K8PBX]

When connecting multiple receivers to one antenna, both the method you use to split the signal and port-to-port isolation are very important. I suspect you'll find using T-connectors a bad choice.

If you're using 75 ohm CATV type coax for your receive antenna, I've found an economical alternative that, for me, works just as well as a Stridsberg multi-coupler.

I use a Electroline model 2802 drop-amp connected to one of my outdoor NilJon Super-M antenna that's fed with quad-shield RG-6 coax. The drop amp provides 8 outputs (they make a 4-port version too), of which I'm using 5 to feed various types of scanners and receivers. Works like a champ. The unit is a 0dB gain, so over amplification is not an issue. It internally equalizes each output port to be at the same level as the input. Output port-to-port isolation is 25dB, so that's pretty impressive as well.

I also have a Stridsberg multi-coupler and having compared them both, the Electroline 2802 does just as good as the more expensive alternative. It's actually more convenient for me being that it uses F type connectors. No funky BNC adapters needed.

You can check out the specs and see a picture of the 2802 here:
http://electroline.com/en/products/drop_amplifiers/eda_ug/index.html

I bought mine on eBay for $35 including shipping.

You might have to be patient in finding the exact models you're looking for, but if you take your time you'll find them at a good price. Just do an eBay search on "Electroline" or "drop amp" and read the listings carefully. The 0dB gain models are: EDA-UG 2402 and 2802.

Note: I'm not at all dogging the Stridsberg multi-coupler. I think they make a fine product that's ideally suited for applications that use 50-ohm coax and BNC connectors. It's just that it seems a lot of folks do indeed use 75-ohm coax and F-connectors for their setups.
My only intention is to pass along my experience with an alternative solution that provides ease of connectivity and has proven to work well for me. As they say: "Your mileage may vary".

Steve - K8PBX
http://home.comcast.net/~k8pbx/

 

[N_Jay]

http://electroline.com/en/products/drop_amplifiers/eda_ug/index.html

Just to clear up a misconception.

They don't ADJUST the gain to keep the output equal to the input.
They simply have the same amount of agin as teh splitter has loss.

They also have a noise figure of 5dB, which is a bit high for a receive preamp.

I would bet you will see some degradation of weaker signals. It sould work fine for stronger signals. Of course, you don't need an amplifier for stronger signals.

 

[smokeyspapa]

Just curious, but what sort of radios do you have that uses F connectors? Seems all the scanners I've seen in the past 20 or so years use BNC connectors.

 

[K8PBX]

As far as connections to radios, of course they vary. Most of mine have either BNC or PL-259. At the radios, I use the appropriate adapter to go from F-type to whatever the connection might be. I strive to minimize the use of adapters wherever possible.

In my application, my using the Electroline device is simply to compensate for splitting the signal multiple times. I don't seek pre-amp type signal amplification, just compensation for the inherent loss that occurs when splitting.

I have not experienced any perceptible degradation of weak signals as a result.

I'm not suggesting that this is the solution for everybody. It works great for me and was pretty economical. I just wanted to share my results in hopes that others may also find this setup works as well for them as it does for me.

Steve - K8PBX
http://home.comcast.net/~k8pbx/

 

[N_Jay]

As far as connections to radios, of course they vary. Most of mine have either BNC or PL-259. At the radios, I use the appropriate adapter to go from F-type to whatever the connection might be. I strive to minimize the use of adapters wherever possible.

In my application, my using the Electroline device is simply to compensate for splitting the signal multiple times. I don't seek pre-amp type signal amplification, just compensation for the inherent loss that occurs when splitting.

I have not experienced any perceptible degradation of weak signals as a result.

I'm not suggesting that this is the solution for everybody. It works great for me and was pretty economical. I just wanted to share my results in hopes that others may also find this setup works as well for them as it does for me.

Steve - K8PBX
http://home.comcast.net/~k8pbx/

Would be an interesting experiment to check for either improvement or dedradation with a weak signal (near the noise floor) in each band.

 

[SCPD]

i guess here in healssburg we have a big problem receiving tv signal with an regular antenna.
my setup was having an antenna on the roof about 4.5" up, as soon weather improves i'll rise it an other 5'
before i had this new set up no matter what i connected to the roof antenna i had not to hit the "att" on any of my scanners
all the scanner set up to the glass antenna i had to turn on "att"
after my new setup i had my 2096 and 96 run both the full setting and i was getting the same receive on it even if i started both scanner at differed times most of the times.
so i slit up the banks between the scanner and i seem not to have any differed reception as before running them by them self
so i guess if i try to monitor the same frequencies on both the scanner it will more likely to stop on the same.
if i split them up between the two of them so far i do not seem to have any bad impact.

 

[SCPD]

one more thing

my feed coming down from the roof antenna has an pl-259 connector so i have to use a adapter to connect it to my scanner

 

[N_Jay]

i guess here in healssburg we have a big problem receiving tv signal with an regular antenna.
my setup was having an antenna on the roof about 4.5" up, as soon weather improves i'll rise it an other 5'
before i had this new set up no matter what i connected to the roof antenna i had not to hit the "att" on any of my scanners
all the scanner set up to the glass antenna i had to turn on "att"
after my new setup i had my 2096 and 96 run both the full setting and i was getting the same receive on it even if i started both scanner at differed times most of the times.
so i slit up the banks between the scanner and i seem not to have any differed reception as before running them by them self
so i guess if i try to monitor the same frequencies on both the scanner it will more likely to stop on the same.
if i split them up between the two of them so far i do not seem to have any bad impact.

Find a signal that is noisy.

Then you can hear which is better.