Tips pilih dan pasang Antena TV yang baik - Gambar jernih bersih tidak berbintik suara jelas dan tidak ada gemuruh, Gambar TV kabur / buram tidak jelas, suara stereo kadang muncul kadang menghilang, tidak semua chanel bisa ditangkap dikarenakan sinyal yang telah diterima lemah.

Mempunyai pesawat televisi dirumah bisa dikatakan kebutuhan sebagai media elektronik untuk bisa mendapatkan informasi seperti berita, hiburan seperti mendengarkan lagu-lagu dan juga menyaksikan film-film seru, komedi dan lain sebagainya sedikit mengurangi stress, nah bagaimana jika ada acara tv favorit kita tiba-tiba tidak bisa ditonton dengan sempurna dilayar tv banyak bintik-bintiknya alias semutnya, suaranya seperti ada hujan atau gemuruhnya, dibilang tvnya rusak tidak juga tetapi rusaknya ada di antena yang tidak tepat, apapun penyebabnya anda pasti akan jengkel dan kesal disaat anda ingin menyaksikan acara kesayangan favorit anda siarannya bermasalah.

postingan kali ini sedikit berbagi seputar tips memasang memilih antena tv yang benar, untuk bisa mendapatkan kualitas gambar serta suara yang bagus jernih dan bersih, sebelum ke tips memasang dan memilih antena tv yang bagus buat anda sedikit celotehku pandangan dari saya seputar antena.

Antena

Sebelum membeli antena sebaiknya ketahui terlebih dahulu antena yang hendak digunakan, Secara umum antena yang sering digunakan pada televisi antena,antena indor dan outdor, perbedaan dari kedua antena terletak dari penempatan dan bentuknya, untuk antena indor biasanya ditempatkan didalam ruangan tidak jauh dari pesawat televisi itu sendiri, seperti contoh antena bawaan televisi yang bisa ditarik-tarik atau yang berbentuk lingkaran, sebagai tambahan informasi saja seputar polaradiasi untuk antena.

Antena outdor karena penempatannya diluar rumah dan bentuk antena outdor umumnya besar membutuhkan tiang penyanggah yang tinggi guna untuk mendapatkan sinyal yang sangat lebih kuat.

Sebenarnya untuk antena tv bisa dibuat sendiri dengan menggunakan bahan bekas, dimana antena tv indor dibuat dengan menggunakan bahan bekas plat (nopol motor).

Peyebab kualitas gambar dan suara tidak bersih pada pesawat televisi.
kualitas gambar dan suara yang tidak sempurna disebabkan karena penerimaan sinyal pancaran dari relay stasiun tv lemah,

terlepas dari faktor penyebab secara teknis (kerusakan dari pesawat tvnya), peyebab umum dari antena, karena antena telah memiliki perenan sangat penting untuk bisa menangkap frekuensi yang diterima.

Untuk Pesawat televisi LED juga LCD biasanya bintik dan suara gemuruh akan lebih terlihat dan terdengar jelas, jika dibandingkan dengan pesawat televisi dengan menggunakan tabung crt, mungkin disebabkan besar resolusinya yang berbeda, agar gambar yang dihasilkan jernih setara kualitas dvd, bahkan ada yang menggunakan jaringan tv kabel atau menggunakan antena parabola untuk gambar yang jernih.

Ketahui posisi letak sebelum mememilih antena.
Antena yang dapat dipergunakan umumnya antena indor, antena outdor (yagi) antena parabola, untuk penggunaan antena indor seperti antena bawaan tv bisanya bisa dipergunakan didaerah yang dekat dengan pemancar tv atau relay tvnya, dikota-kota, sedangkan antena outdor seperti antena arahan yagi untuk posisi jauh dari pemancar pesawat televisi dan mengarahkan buntut / ujung antena ke stasiun relay tv. untuk indor dan outdor tergantung jarak juga posisi letak antena, sedangkan antena parabola tidak harus mengarahkan antena secara horizontal, melainkan mengarahkan antena ke satelit langsung tanpa melalui relay pemancar stasiun tv lagi.

Memilih antena outdor yang bagus.
Kita sudah menggunakan antena luar dipasang tinggi hingga 10 meter lebih tapi ada beberapa siaran tv yang tidak jernih atau hanya satu dua siaran saja yang bersih, hal tersebut disebabkan jaraknya mungkin jauh juga bisa posisi arah antena tidak tepat disiaran tv yang tidak jernih tersebut. untuk dapat mensiasatinya sebaiknya gunakan antena yang mengunakan rotor hingga posisi antena bisa diarahkan.

antena tv rotator bergerak berputar
Gambar antena yagi yang dapat digerakkan / berputar

Gunakan penguat sinyal Boster TV
Seperti gambar antena yagi diatas yang dapat digerakkan untuk dapat menyesuaikan posisi arah antena agar tepat kestasiun relay tv, beberapa tahun sebelumnya gambar tv akan jernih jika antena dilengkapi dengan boster guna untuk menguatkan sinyal yang ditangkap oleh antena sebelum dikirim kepasawat televisi.

Kabel Coaxial Antena
Terkadang kita anggap remeh dengan media hantar kabel yang digunakan untuk antena, umumnya kabel antena menggunakan impedansi 75 ohm untuk pesawat televisi sedangkan untuk pesawat radio biasanya menggunakan impedansi 50 ohm kabel coaxial. gunakanlah kabel coaxial yang baik, kabel coaxial yang baik akan mengurangi lose sinyal, dan lebih tahan dengan cuaca hujan dan panas saat dipasang diluar ruangan, 

WASHINGTON — The former deputy director of the C.I.A. asserts in a forthcoming book that Republicans, in their eagerness to politicize the killing of the American ambassador to Libya, repeatedly distorted the agency’s analysis of events. But he also argues that the C.I.A. should get out of the business of providing “talking points” for administration officials in national security events that quickly become partisan, as happened after the Benghazi attack in 2012.

The official, Michael J. Morell, dismisses the allegation that the United States military and C.I.A. officers “were ordered to stand down and not come to the rescue of their comrades,” and he says there is “no evidence” to support the charge that “there was a conspiracy between C.I.A. and the White House to spin the Benghazi story in a way that would protect the political interests of the president and Secretary Clinton,” referring to the secretary of state at the time, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

But he also concludes that the White House itself embellished some of the talking points provided by the Central Intelligence Agency and had blocked him from sending an internal study of agency conclusions to Congress.

Photo

 

“I finally did so without asking,” just before leaving government, he writes, and after the White House released internal emails to a committee investigating the State Department’s handling of the issue.

A lengthy congressional investigation remains underway, one that many Republicans hope to use against Mrs. Clinton in the 2016 election cycle.

In parts of the book, “The Great War of Our Time” (Twelve), Mr. Morell praises his C.I.A. colleagues for many successes in stopping terrorist attacks, but he is surprisingly critical of other C.I.A. failings — and those of the National Security Agency.

Soon after Mr. Morell retired in 2013 after 33 years in the agency, President Obama appointed him to a commission reviewing the actions of the National Security Agency after the disclosures of Edward J. Snowden, a former intelligence contractor who released classified documents about the government’s eavesdropping abilities. Mr. Morell writes that he was surprised by what he found.

“You would have thought that of all the government entities on the planet, the one least vulnerable to such grand theft would have been the N.S.A.,” he writes. “But it turned out that the N.S.A. had left itself vulnerable.”

He concludes that most Wall Street firms had better cybersecurity than the N.S.A. had when Mr. Snowden swept information from its systems in 2013. While he said he found himself “chagrined by how well the N.S.A. was doing” compared with the C.I.A. in stepping up its collection of data on intelligence targets, he also sensed that the N.S.A., which specializes in electronic spying, was operating without considering the implications of its methods.

“The N.S.A. had largely been collecting information because it could, not necessarily in all cases because it should,” he says.

The book is to be released next week.

Mr. Morell was a career analyst who rose through the ranks of the agency, and he ended up in the No. 2 post. He served as President George W. Bush’s personal intelligence briefer in the first months of his presidency — in those days, he could often be spotted at the Starbucks in Waco, Tex., catching up on his reading — and was with him in the schoolhouse in Florida on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, when the Bush presidency changed in an instant.

Mr. Morell twice took over as acting C.I.A. director, first when Leon E. Panetta was appointed secretary of defense and then when retired Gen. David H. Petraeus resigned over an extramarital affair with his biographer, a relationship that included his handing her classified notes of his time as America’s best-known military commander.

Mr. Morell says he first learned of the affair from Mr. Petraeus only the night before he resigned, and just as the Benghazi events were turning into a political firestorm. While praising Mr. Petraeus, who had told his deputy “I am very lucky” to run the C.I.A., Mr. Morell writes that “the organization did not feel the same way about him.” The former general “created the impression through the tone of his voice and his body language that he did not want people to disagree with him (which was not true in my own interaction with him),” he says.

But it is his account of the Benghazi attacks — and how the C.I.A. was drawn into the debate over whether the Obama White House deliberately distorted its account of the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens — that is bound to attract attention, at least partly because of its relevance to the coming presidential election. The initial assessments that the C.I.A. gave to the White House said demonstrations had preceded the attack. By the time analysts reversed their opinion, Susan E. Rice, now the national security adviser, had made a series of statements on Sunday talk shows describing the initial assessment. The controversy and other comments Ms. Rice made derailed Mr. Obama’s plan to appoint her as secretary of state.

The experience prompted Mr. Morell to write that the C.I.A. should stay out of the business of preparing talking points — especially on issues that are being seized upon for “political purposes.” He is critical of the State Department for not beefing up security in Libya for its diplomats, as the C.I.A., he said, did for its employees.

But he concludes that the assault in which the ambassador was killed took place “with little or no advance planning” and “was not well organized.” He says the attackers “did not appear to be looking for Americans to harm. They appeared intent on looting and conducting some vandalism,” setting fires that killed Mr. Stevens and a security official, Sean Smith.

Mr. Morell paints a picture of an agency that was struggling, largely unsuccessfully, to understand dynamics in the Middle East and North Africa when the Arab Spring broke out in late 2011 in Tunisia. The agency’s analysts failed to see the forces of revolution coming — and then failed again, he writes, when they told Mr. Obama that the uprisings would undercut Al Qaeda by showing there was a democratic pathway to change.

“There is no good explanation for our not being able to see the pressures growing to dangerous levels across the region,” he writes. The agency had again relied too heavily “on a handful of strong leaders in the countries of concern to help us understand what was going on in the Arab street,” he says, and those leaders themselves were clueless.

Moreover, an agency that has always overvalued secretly gathered intelligence and undervalued “open source” material “was not doing enough to mine the wealth of information available through social media,” he writes. “We thought and told policy makers that this outburst of popular revolt would damage Al Qaeda by undermining the group’s narrative,” he writes.

Instead, weak governments in Egypt, and the absence of governance from Libya to Yemen, were “a boon to Islamic extremists across both the Middle East and North Africa.”

Mr. Morell is gentle about most of the politicians he dealt with — he expresses admiration for both Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama, though he accuses former Vice President Dick Cheney of deliberately implying a connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq that the C.I.A. had concluded probably did not exist. But when it comes to the events leading up to the Bush administration’s decision to go to war in Iraq, he is critical of his own agency.

Mr. Morell concludes that the Bush White House did not have to twist intelligence on Saddam Hussein’s alleged effort to rekindle the country’s work on weapons of mass destruction.

“The view that hard-liners in the Bush administration forced the intelligence community into its position on W.M.D. is just flat wrong,” he writes. “No one pushed. The analysts were already there and they had been there for years, long before Bush came to office.”