RCA VH48 Splitters (3-way) by RCA
|
List Price: Our Price: $1.63 You Save: $2.86 (64%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.75 (click here) Category: CE See more digital camera details and other models |
|---|
Digital camera reviews of RCA VH48 Splitters (3-way)
Digital camera Review: Not what i needed
Summary: 3 Stars
Its really my fault for not inquiring about the mhz. It works fine however the splitter could not produce hd picture through one television if three were connected. It does however work. I just need a 2 ghz splitterDigital camera Review: Ok splitter
Summary: 3 Stars
The first splitter arrived defective as one of the three outputs didn't work at all and you could hear something rattling inside. Return was very simple through Amazon's policy. Second splitter arrived with another slight rattle but still works ok. Image quality is reduced even with only one output connected but I'm ok with that since this is only for a secondary hook-up. Overall, it's an ok splitter especially for the price.Digital camera Review: Poor Packaging
Summary: 2 Stars
It is kind of hard to mess up on a splitter and, in fact, the splitter was probably fine but I ordered a 3-way splitter which the packaging did indicate but it contained a 2-way splitter. Somebody goofed.
Digital camera Review: This splitter does not work with the new digital cable.
Summary: 1 Stars
This splitter is not high quality enough to handle the new digital cable that our cable company is requiring everyone to switch to. I was told that when you purchase a splitter (from the Cable guy whom I had to call when I couldn't get it work) that you should not be able to squeeze it and have the back of it squish in. This splitter is not that kind. You can crush it in your hand. If you are using to split a digital signal then look for something else it will not work well enough.Digital camera Review: Very low signal loss
Summary: 5 Stars
In order to evaluate splitters, it is important to understand how they work. A splitter is not an amplifier. It takes a signal and divides it, so the sum of all the outputs must be less than 100% of the original signal strength, assuming even the slightest bit of signal loss. The goal is to have as little signal loss as possible.
Splitting a signal is like splitting a bowl of cake batter. If you split it in two, each new bowl would have 50% of the original, but some of it sticks to the original bowl, and some sticks to the mixing blades or spatulas. You might get 48% in each bowl, but if you were hoping for 76%, it's impossible. If you split one of the two new bowls, you will get two more with less than 25% each. A "78% batter loss" in one of the new bowls would be reasonable and is 88% of the maximum that is theoretically possible. (22 out of 25) Those who claim to be getting an 80% signal loss with splitters are in reality getting 80% of the theoretical maximum, and getting only a 20% loss, if the signal had been split twice. If they needed to add a new cable to use the splitter, it could also be part of the signal loss.
Some reviewers got a stronger signal from the port closest to the input. That means that internally, the signal is split once, half going to port one, and split again for the next two. A 7 db drop would be in the expected range for the second and third. My testing confirmed that the first port had a signal strength in the expected range for a two way split. The other two ports can do nothing more than divide what is left.
My setup consisted of an attic antenna with a two way Monster Cable splitter. It had very low signal loss. Replacing it meant that if the first port of the RCA splitter worked as described, the best I could expect from it was a signal level close to what I was already getting. I connected the first port to a cable that went to the family room, which is the farthest connection. I measured the signal before, and again after I changed splitters. I found that the signal strength was essentially the same as before for each TV channel. Any differences were within the margin of error caused by atmospheric conditions.
The signals remained within a percentage point in most cases, some higher than before. The signal to noise ratios were in about the same range as before, but there was a measurable difference in the AGC (Automatic Gain Control) levels. They were consistently about 1% higher (bad) but it's unlikely to be relevant for digital signals unless you start off near a 50% AGC level. You don't need to know what AGC is, only that the splitter does not cause a major problem for it.
The family room cable goes through a two way splitter before getting to the TV. That meant that the TV really got the same signal level as the other two outputs from the RCA splitter, just as it did with the previous splitter. The two way splitter also fed a media center PC, giving it the same signal level as the other outputs. Windows 7 Media Center allows users to measure signal strength, but does not give numbers. Each channel showed the same number of bars as before the change, as expected. In both cases, I got the maximum number of bars, all green.
Since the circuitry to split the other two ports is identical to that used with the first port, and since the connectors are the same on all ports, it's reasonable to assume that the quality is equally good for all ports. I don't have hard measurements from the other two ports but my bedroom TV now works the same with half the signal, and my office PC now has a strong connection.
In my case, nothing but the splitter changed between the antenna and the family room for these tests. If you have a cable going to your TV and you add a new splitter, you end up with three cables instead of one, and four more connectors. Unless you know how much signal loss there is from the cables and connectors, you can't tell how much is from the splitter. My signal loss dropped significantly when I stopped using the RG-59 coax that came with the house, and ran more direct RG-6 quad shielded cable throughout the house, both inside the walls and out. I used Steren Permaseal-II connectors, which minimized signal loss.
If you get this splitter and it does not perform to your satisfaction, getting a better one may not be the answer. Make sure that your cables are all of top quality and have top quality connectors. Don't use cables with twist-on connectors. Make sure that all your connections are tightened with a wrench. Make sure that you don't have splitters anywhere with more outputs than you need. And if that still does not work, look into getting a signal booster.
Some reviewers have criticized this splitter for its frequency range. TV frequencies go from 54 MHz to 890 MHz. This splitter goes from 5 to 1000 MHz and covers the entire spectrum. There are many uses for splitters, but if you are not splitting a TV signal, this may not be what you need. Cables that go into your set top
box might not be carrying TV signals at all but carrying digital data that the set top box can decode. Some data may be in higher frequencies. If you have cable TV, check with your provider. They might even give you splitters and cables for free rather than risking signal leakage.
Overall, this splitter worked almost as well as a much more expensive one, and the "almost" part was so small that it did not make a difference. If you need a three way splitter for TV frequency signals, I'd recommend this one.