TV Antenna???

-

SleeperScamp

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
58
Location
Texas
Who all has just an antenna for TV reception? After several years of wasting my money for a satellite dish I have sent it back and have zero TV now... But I'm thinking of getting a digital signal antenna just so I can get some local news,weather, etc... The antenna in my travel trailer picked up several stations but you had to occasionally spin it around to get other stations. Is this the case with all digital antennas? Any thoughts, tips, or helpful advice is appreciated... Thanks...
 
Use a good digital antenna find out what direction your local broadcast station towers are and point it in that direction. You should pick up all local stations no problem.
 
First of all there is no such thing as a "digital antenna." TV antennas work the same as they always have, and depending on what stations transmit what channel frequencies in your area, you may or may not need a VHF or UHF antenna or both.

Generally, most TV stations "would like to be" on VHF. This is because VHF frequencies suffer less terrain attenuation, and because the transmitters are more efficient, which translates into broadcast dollars wasted in heat.

Also, channel numbers do not mean anything. In this area, the "channel number" which shows up on your selection has nothing to do with the actual RF frequency. Do some Googleing or even some time on the phone, to find out what's available in your area

Also, from time to time, you may need to "rescan" your channels, as some broadcasters have and still might be moving their transmit channel frequency. This is probably pretty much coming to an end as time goes by, but is still a possibility. Some in fact, have now moved from UHF to VHF as those channels became vacated.

In this area "there is a mix" of VHF/ UHF. I have a VHF/ UHF beam which is on a 14 ft boom, so it's a big antenna, which points to Spokane to get channel 7 on VHF, and 2 which is actually UHF

Some of the other channels, such as Idaho PBS is sent up here by direct link to a low power translater up on one of the local hills. It is UHF, and for that I have a small UHF "corner" reflector

Both antennas are left over from my "analog" days

DO NOT get sucked into this nonsense about a "digital" antenna. There is no such thing.

I've been involved with electronics since Junior High school in the early '60's, have been a radio amateur since then, and used to maintain RADAR systems in the US Navy.

This site:


is supposed to be able to give you a plot of signals in your area. Strongest signals are at top of list, weakest or not receivable at the bottom. If you live in a mountainous area as I do, this will not be completely accurate

http://www.tvfool.com/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29
 
Well Del, answer me this if you don't mind. We've had a regular TV antenna for years now. Even before the "digital" transition. When our local stations switched to their digital format, we no longer got reception. They all even said that as the transition took place, unless you had a digital antenna or a digital converter for your antenna, you would no longer receive their signal. They were right. We stopped receiving the signal until I got a converter box. It's just a little thing that mounts outside right under the antenna. I've since gotten a "digital" antenna and it's box is built in, but it is still there. So, what gives?
 
The huge aerial antennas made by Channel Master that everyone once used was VHF primary and UHF secondary. The UHF part was the -<- like end. They work OK. Any type will work better with a rotor. A more modern design UHF primary aerial with rotor can be had fairly cheap. I bought our through amazon.
 
I have had at the house before and the current house TV on a rabbits ears and converter box.

I get plenty of stations NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, antenna TV, this TV, so many sub channels, ALL FOR FREE

My last house I did need to put an outside antenna but it would work off rabbit ears, just sometime not as well as others.

I have cable now for Internet, phone and TV, but garage and barn isn't wired yet so still using converter box and rabbit ears.

If now Time Warner ( they just took overor cable company) jacks our rates I will drop them and go back to an outside antenna, booster and FREE TV, get different plan for Internet, like air card and drop. Home phone and go cell only.

I see no real difference in rabbit ears or cable for quality
 
So it sounds like since I already have a converter just any antenna will suffice... Thanks.. for all the help...
 
Might want to look into Netflix if you have a high speed internet service.

8 bucks a month and ZERO commercials.
 
So it sounds like since I already have a converter just any antenna will suffice... Thanks.. for all the help...

The converter is only needed if you (like me) have an analog TV. In a FEW areas, there still might be a few low power translators operating on analog channels, but I think even PBS gave up on that around here.
 
We still have some up on lookout mountain, but it's mostly radio.

I have an LCD in the bedroom with netflix. I have a console TV in the living room that is from about 1968 that goes with the deco in there that gets nothing, but movies and old video games played on it.

I play my electromechanical pinball machine and watch my fish more than I watch TV. I can't remember the last time I saw a commercial. It's nice. I kind of wish I knew what movies were playing in theatres at times, but if I really want to see something, it comes word of mouth, or I'll look at trailers on Youtube to take Amy out on a date.

I had DirecTV for a two year contract. Broke up with the ex, never watched TV myself, left it on minimal channels for 3 months and let the contract run out. Never looked back. They have sent some serious deals my way, though. They loved me as a customer. I love not paying for it and not watching commercials. It's Netflix, DVD collection with the stuff I want that is not on Netflix, or nothing for me.
 
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with 67Dart273 on this one. Most of the digital stations are on totally different frequencies than the old analog stations were. Now most stations are on UHF, whereas previously most of them were on VHF. Therefore, a digital TV antenna is totally different than an analog one. I know, because I've directly compared them when I had to replace my old analog antenna. Most of the elements on a digital TV antenna are really short due to the stations being on UHF rather than VHF, whereas an old analog antenna has a bunch of longer, VHF elements which do absolutely nothing when receiving digital TV. Due to the frequency change, an old-fashioned analog TV antenna will have approximately 20 db less gain on digital stations than it had on analog stations, and therefore it will work lousy on digital TV. The same goes for signal preamplifiers, if you need one due to living in a difficult reception area: an old analog preamp contains quite different circuitry than a digital preamp does, due to the frequency change. Then you must couple this with the fact that digital TV requires a much stronger signal than analog TV did in order to achieve the same level of signal "quieting". Conclusion: unless you live in a strong-signal area, you are going to need a new digital TV antenna and possibly a new digital TV preamplifier.
 
Whether the elements are long or short has nothing to do with whether it's "analog" or "digital." Do not confuse VHF with UHF.

Well analog channel 14 is (was) around 470 mhz, and the old 69 was around 800, so a UHF antenna, which are normally a very poor design anyhow, has to cover a lot of ground. But the frequency band HAS NOT CHANGED. UHF channels are still in the same range of frequencies that they always were. But there are MANY really poor, somewhat less than poor, nearly decent, almost good, and possibly just about good antenna designs. You DO have to get a good antenna if you are in a low signal area just as you always did.

A "Digital" antenna is no different, frequency band wise, than it ever was.

As I said, that's why you need to research what is needed for your area. In mine, the 3 Washington PBS digi channels are on VHF, and that is why I have a big 'ol yagi with a 14' boom hanging off the side of my tower. --currently not used. The other thing that can be confusing, is in some areas the big main bang of a station may be on VHF, but YOU may not be able to receive it, and instead are receiving a UHF translator.

(WA PBS 7 now has a relay on a local hill here on RF channel 26, but this is not the main transmitter on "Tower Mt" over in Spokane, and is the reason my VHF antenna is currently un needed)

In this area, for example, KXLY 4 (ABC) is transmitted on RF channel 13 as well as 40 and 41 (two UHF relay/ translators)
 
"A "Digital" antenna is no different, frequency band wise, than it ever was."

But when you compare an older, "analog" antenna to a new, "digital" antenna, both antennas having the same boom length and number of elements, the elements are totally different in length, reflecting the fact that digital stations are primarily on UHF rather than on VHF. Furthermore, empirically an old "analog" antenna works lousy on "digital" TV, while a new "digital" antenna works well, so the proof is in the pudding. As I said before, I measured the UHF signal input from an older "analog" antenna vs. a new "digital" antenna (both antennas having the same boom length and from the same manufacturer) and there was about a 20 db. difference.
 
I think most of the big boom antennas have been redisigned with more UHF capabilities, but as 67Dart273 says it depends what channels you have. 2-13 are still VHF (and need the long beams) but many have moved to the UHF range. I am currently on Dish, but have a Winegard 7084P on rotator. We used it with converter for a couple years. What you need depends on your location. If your channals are being broadcast within 45 miles and you can get it high enough in the air, this :
http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.as...rectional-tv-antenna-(ms-2002)&sku=1579830649
will work really well and you dont need a rotator.
Regardless which antenna you use - it is much more important with digital to have good wire and solid connections. Signal losses will kill channels much easier, where before you would just have a little snow in the picture. Thats why a lot of systems need an amp close to the antenna.
 
You cannot take two antennas and make such a conclusion, which is my point. The facts are that UHF digital still uses the same frequency range as the old ones, except that the old UHF channels had some channels abandoned (don't remember just when) for the old analog 800mhz phone service, and those channels pretty much became "cable only."

Frequency is frequency. It matters not what mode the transmission is, and the frequency band has not changed. As I said, there are really poor, and not so poor designs. UHF covers a very broad range of frequencies, so it's not surprising that antennas "vary."

Also, you cannot simply compare element length. Yagi, log periodic, and other parasitic arrays depend on many many factors, not the least of which is element spacing, boom construction, and whether in the case of a yagi, the elements are electrically apart from the boom.

Just because the signal from two antennas you happen to have compared is 20db different is hardly conclusive.

The thing is, an antenna advertised as "digital" may WELL HAVE been optimized better for UHF channels, and I freely admit that the LIKELYHOOD is that most will indeed be on UHF, but again that is an individual antenna to antenna design difference, not some general characteristic that can be pasted on by a "DTV" label.

According to this:

http://www.antennasdirect.com/faqs.html#faq1

currently (prior to June 2009), 91% of broadcasting DTV stations are on UHF. A few cities, such as Chicago and Las Vegas have DTV stations on VHF as well as UHF. While Many DTV stations are now occupying UHF broadcast channels, the plan will allow some broadcasters to move back to their original VHF or UHF TV channels once the transition to DTV is complete. After June of 2009: 74% of the DTV stations will be on UHF (14-51), 24% will be on high VHF (7-13) and less than 2% will be on Low VHF(2-6).

And according to the FCC:

http://www.fcc.gov/guides/antennas-and-digital-television

To receive digital TV signals from all stations, it is important that your antenna be able to receive both VHF channels (channels 2-13) and UHF channels (channels 14-51). Some antennas only provide good reception of VHF or UHF channels, but not both. For example, indoor &#8220;rabbit ears&#8221; usually need to be augmented with an additional &#8220;wire loop&#8221; or &#8220;bowtie&#8221; antenna (see pictures below) in order to pick up signals on UHF channels. Consumers should be aware that even if they use a digital-to-analog converter box, they will still need to use an antenna to receive DTV signals. Many of the antennas currently being sold as &#8220;HDTV Antennas,&#8221; perform best at receiving UHF signals; some of these models state that they provide reception of signals on channels 7-13 but actually perform less well receiving those channels. If you obtain one of these antennas, be sure it provides good reception of all the VHF channels as well as the UHF channels. The reception capabilities of TV antennas also vary considerably,

So I guess if you "read into" this, you can conclude that currently marketed antennas are being somewhat optimized for UHF. Again, this has nothing to do with the buzzword DTV.

I guess what I'm trying to get across here, is that the word "DTV" does not magically change an antenna. Antennas are still subject to good and bad design and marketing the same as they always have.
 
Why caint somebody just tell the poor man a frakken good antenna to get without all the pissin contest?
 
To clarify a little.. The converter box required is only a HD frequency tuner.
Analog signals were on numbers like 4. HD is transmitted on UHF via numbers like 4.1, 4.2 4.3 that your analog tv tuner couldn't dial in.
I hope this post separated the need for a tuner converter box from the need of a different antenna.
Now would anyone care to state why all our terrestrial microwave was changed to UHF and why it was a government mandate which meant the government would subsidize the cost of the converters ( which were mostly made in China ) ?
 
Wireless transmitted power/energy and
radio communication.

That theory sounds good but...
The millions of converter boxes are using energy. All their remotes result in more alkaline batteries in the landfills. We pay for both.
 
Why caint somebody just tell the poor man a frakken good antenna to get without all the pissin contest?

I did

Go here

http://www.tvfool.com/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29

This will tell you (if accurate) the channels in your area and their location, direction (azimuth) and relative signal strength.

He might need a VHF / UHF antenna, you might need a UHF antenna. If he lives (and we don't know where) he might need anything from a coathanger to a 50' tower and a huge ganged yagi array

Since I have no idea where he lives and the terrain, this is still a question. In my home town, (don't live there now) rabbit ears would get you zip. Some people out to the W of me "in the valley" have a direct shot at Spokane, and can get by with rabbit ears. In my case, I'm shaded from Tower Mt by a couple of other hills in the way, so a "direct shot" to the W - SW is poor, and a little antenna don't freekin' hack it.

This is my results from the above webpage

The "stuff" W and SW are in Spokane. That is where the big boom yagi and rotator are headed. The transmitters coming from the N - NE are all translators on a nearby hill, which is where my corner reflector / yagi is permanently pointed.

Channel 13, coming from the NW, is up on Mt Spokane and thunders in with nearly no antenna at all (Virtual / displayed channel 4)

Are you beginning to see that the answer is "not that simple?"
 

Attachments

  • TVCHANNELS.jpg
    73.5 KB · Views: 229
Let me say that this discussion must be taking place between electronics aficionados (nerds) and I mean that in no way derogatory. Otherwise by now it would have degraded into name calling and insults so bad the mods would have to shut it down. LOL
 
That theory sounds good but...
The millions of converter boxes are using energy. All their remotes result in more alkaline batteries in the landfills. We pay for both.

Think on a scale and in areas that are way beyond
the scope of this television conversation.
 
-
Back
Top