I dunno about the quality of the various amps, but a simple RF amp can just
be 2-3 transistor circuit with a few other complimentary components added.

What I can recommend, would be that an RF amp be placed as close to the
actual antenna element(s) as practical, and not at the end of a long feed
line.
This type of setup requires power-thru-coax delivery of the voltage needed
by the amp, whether built-in, or near the antenna. This eliminates the need
for additional wires to be added for powering the amp. Most mast-mount amps
have this type of power adapter included.

However, there are some coax cable types that have two power leads attached
to the coax cable in a siamese fashion (cross-section looks like a figure
8), so using a variety of amps could be practical if everything is enclosed
in a weatherproof and UV resistant enclosure.

--
Cheers,
WB
..............


"mm" wrote in message
...
Not a repair question, so maybe this is OT, but...

Why do you suppose at solidstate.com, the Winegard MS 1000 antenna,
which doesn't include an amplifier, costs the same as the Winegard MS
2000 which does have a built-in amplifier 60 dollars. This is a
round omnidirectional antenna that looks like a flying saucer.

FWIW, the 2000 even includes 50 feet of cable that the one without the
amp doesn't include.

Does that mean the amp in the one with an amp is really cheap?

Does that in turn mean that one of the amps they sell for 50 or 60
dollars without an antenna is many times better?

Does that mean one should buy the one without the amp and then get a
separate amp if necessary?

Thanks.


I'm not asking you to look at the webpages, but I always get
criticized if I don't include links.
http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp...0Antennas&sku=
http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp...u=615798301705