In article VMKsi.27173$fJ5.17820@pd7urf1no,
"Noozer" wrote:
An amp is never desireable. If the signal in is really that bad then the
cable company should be troubleshooting it. THEY will install an amp if it's
needed.

Wouldn't an amp be reasonable in the following situation?

Cable comes in, and there is a splitter in the attic. Signal is
fairly good coming into this splitter.

One branch goes to the computer room. The signal there is fine.

Other branch goes to the living room, where it goes to another
splitter which I have not located, and the cable guy also failed
to locate, and from there goes to two outlets in the living room.

This second splitter seems to be a not particularly good splitter,
so the signal is borderline between fair and good in the living
room.

Couldn't an amp be used between the two splitters, to boost the good
signal coming out of the first splitter to compensate for the loss in
the second splitter?

Not that I actually need it. Although the cable box reports the signal
as fair most of the time, bordering on good, and occasionally dipping to
poor, and the cable installer thought, when he used his meter, that it
was too low to work and was surprised when I got a picture, in fact it
has worked flawlessly for the 3.5 months I've been in this place. All
channels are fine, including HD channels and channels using surround
sound, and on-demand is fine, and my modem gets up to 20 mbit/second
with PowerBoost. When watching the signal monitoring page, I've never
seen an uncorrectable error reported, and only see an occasional
correctable error reported. So my inclination is to just leave things
as they are.


--
--Tim Smith