Currently in my house i have 4 tvs plus the internet. The way it is set up now it utilizes two splitters. Similar to this below



************/-------- Main TV
LineIN--------X
*********** \--------\ /--------TV
****************** X --------TV
***********Tv --- ---/ \-------Internet


Would i benefit at all from purchasing 1 splitter that will do the job as opposed to using 2. Will doing so degrade the quality much of my main tv? I ask this because i am having some slight signal quality. I ran the test online (http://192.168.100.1/diagnostics_page.asp) from my computer to determine signal strength its getting and it shows.

Forward Path
SNR: 36.5dB
Received Signal Strength: 4.0 dBmV
Modulation: 256 QAM

Return Path
Frequency: 29.5 MHz
Power Level: 47.0dBmV

Does this look right?

 

One tip...internet line should never be after more than one split. Currently you are connected after 2 splits. This could cause problems with noise or interference for internet.

As for all other connections..it is how you want to work it. Each extra split introduces signal loss.

It almost looks like you have a similar situation as I do..here is what I did.

Main line->3 way split
Line 1 ->Main TV
Line 2 -> Internet
Line 3 -> Two way split for 2 bedroom TVs

I believe the first splitter loses 3.5 dB of signal. The second is another 3.5 or such loss. I figured the main TV and the internet were the most important. I can deal with a little less quality on the secondary sets.

 

Every time you double the number of feeds you cut the power by 3dB, plus .5dB for the insertion loss of the device. A two-way will cut the signal 3.5dB to each port. A four-way = -7dB, etc. This happens even if you don't use all the output ports on a splitter.

I would split the incoming line with a two-way. One output feeds the cable modem, the other feeds a 4-way for the TVs. If the TVs suffer, add an amplifier between the output of the first splitter and the input of the second.

Also make sure the splitters are capable of 5MHz to 1GHz (1,000MHz) bandwidth.

 

I just went out with my tax money and decided to spoil myself this year and got a new 42" lcd HDTV for my main television and a 22" flat screen HDTV for the kitchen. Upon hooking them up noticed it isn't as clear as the old tvs. I spoke with my cable company about it and they said it is because im not receiving the HD signal. Does this sound right to everyone? Or is the cable company just trying to get me to pay the extra ten a month for HD.

 

Actually, I think thats pretty common. Same thing occured when we upgraded from a 27" CRT to a 50" plasma. DVD's and HD programming look much better of course, but most regular programming doesn't. Don't remember the exact explanation. Some of it can be compensated for by making some adjustments to the appearance settings. The default settings on HDTV's are rarely optimum for your home.

Are you using the componant or HDMI outputs on your cable box, if you have one?

It's also important to remember, you should probably be sitting further away than with the old TV, unless it was approx the same size.

 

That's a common complaint. The picture isn't what we're used to, but there's nothing wrong with the new TVs.

Fact is, your new TVs are much clearer than your old ones. You're now seeing all of the flaws in the old standard-def system that were masked by the limitations of the old TVs. That's the main reason why a digital conversion was mandated by the guv'mint in the first place: The old NTSC TV system in the USA was designed roughly 80 years ago.

For an extra $10 a month you'll see the full-quality capabilities of the new TVs, but it probably won't stop there. A DVR will cost a few more $$ a month. Additional boxes for the additional TVs will cost more $$ a month. And so on.

If you plan to upgrade to HD, do some comparison shopping between the cable company, Dish Network, DirectTV, and a fiber optic service like FIOS if available.