Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE=&quot;tballister, post: 45346, member: 5087&quot;]I'll be having crow for dinner; medium well, thank you.I'm really shocked at this, but after my last skeptical post about the CM4228's claimed 9 dB Hi-VHF gain, I had a &quot;Boing.&nbsp; I should've had a V8!&quot; moment.I have both a CM4228HD and a Winegard HD7698P mounted 85' up in a Pine tree at the moment.&nbsp; The 4228 is about 4 degrees off the 7698's LOS, the later of which is optimally pointed for 7-13.So I dragged the analyzer up to the porch to capture both signals, and here is the resulting comparison.<img src="http://www.antennahacks.com/images/HD7698P_vs_YA10-7-3_HD9032/CM4228HD_vs_HD7698P_7-13_web.png" class="bbImage" alt="" data-url="http://www.antennahacks.com/images/HD7698P_vs_YA10-7-3_HD9032/CM4228HD_vs_HD7698P_7-13_web.png" />I have to say I'm chagrined.&nbsp; Moreover, I'm even more of a bing-bong because after sniffing around in a capture directory I found a similar set of captures done back on November 12, and they are quite similar.Now, I've previously compared the Y10-7-13 to the HD7698P and the Y10-7-13 is just 1 or 2 dB hotter at the ends of the band (7 &amp; 13); e.g., pretty close to the HD7698P.So, while there's a dramatically poorer envelope from the CM4228HD (much more significant multipath impact, in conflict with my theories about N-Bays vs Yagis) the absolute levels are within a few dB of each other.Two caveats.&nbsp; (1) The off-axis pointing of the CM4228HD may be having a slight effect on envelope flatness, but I would only expect a rather small change if re-pointed 4 degrees, not a dramatic one.&nbsp; (2) just to be up front, the amplifier in the CM42228 path has about 3 dB higher gain than the one in the 7698 path. But I corrected for that on the analyzer's level setting prior to capturing.&nbsp;&nbsp; I think any errors here are within a few dB.The point is, there's not an order of magnitude of difference between the two.&nbsp; Rather, poorer wave shape aside, the levels are actually pretty close![Could you pass the salt &amp; pepper please?][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE="tballister, post: 45346, member: 5087"][b]I'll be having crow for dinner; medium well, thank you.[/b] I'm really shocked at this, but after my last skeptical post about the CM4228's claimed 9 dB Hi-VHF gain, I had a "Boing. I should've had a V8!" moment. I have both a CM4228HD and a Winegard HD7698P mounted 85' up in a Pine tree at the moment. The 4228 is about 4 degrees off the 7698's LOS, the later of which is optimally pointed for 7-13. So I dragged the analyzer up to the porch to capture both signals, and here is the resulting comparison. [IMG]http://www.antennahacks.com/images/HD7698P_vs_YA10-7-3_HD9032/CM4228HD_vs_HD7698P_7-13_web.png[/IMG] I have to say I'm chagrined. Moreover, I'm even more of a bing-bong because after sniffing around in a capture directory I found a similar set of captures done back on November 12, and they are quite similar. Now, I've previously compared the Y10-7-13 to the HD7698P and the Y10-7-13 is just 1 or 2 dB hotter at the ends of the band (7 & 13); e.g., pretty close to the HD7698P. So, while there's a dramatically poorer envelope from the CM4228HD (much more significant multipath impact, in conflict with my theories about N-Bays vs Yagis) the absolute levels are within a few dB of each other. Two caveats. (1) The off-axis pointing of the CM4228HD may be having a slight effect on envelope flatness, but I would only expect a rather small change if re-pointed 4 degrees, not a dramatic one. (2) just to be up front, the amplifier in the CM42228 path has about 3 dB higher gain than the one in the 7698 path. But I corrected for that on the analyzer's level setting prior to capturing. I think any errors here are within a few dB. The point is, there's not an order of magnitude of difference between the two. Rather, poorer wave shape aside, the levels are actually pretty close! [Could you pass the salt & pepper please?][/QUOTE]

Name

Verification