Science and Technology news... :: View topic

Samuel M. Goldwasser · Guest

OK, so I>m one of the 6 people in the Universe who don>t have cable,
satellite, or fiber-optic TV.

With analog reception, the picture remains viewable even with a weak
signal, with increasing snow, but nonetheless, usable. The sound
would survive even lower signal levels.

A set of rabbit ears and loop antenna sufficed.

Now, as expected, with DTV, it>s either there or it isn>t, and even with
the built-in signal strength display on DTVs and converter boxes, it has
become a royal pain to tune in many channels.

The assumption today is that one will use a wired connection so DTVs
usually don>t even come with any sort of indoor antenna.

Now, this could probably start a lively discussion on the politics and
economics of the DTV conversion and that>s just fine. :)

But, what I would like input on is what sort of indoor antennas might be
best to use in what is basically an area which should have decent signal
strength for the channels I care about.

So far I>ve tried using old loop antennas and basic indoor antennas (loop+
rabbit ears) from Radio Shack, both unamplified and amplified (though I>m
not convinced the latter was even working properly).

This is a residential location with no high structures nearby. I believe
most of the transmitters are only a few miles away.

For a 10 year old TV with a converter box in one location, a simple loop
antenna seems to be fine. For a similar setup on the floor below,
reception is terrible on nearly all channels no matter how the
antenna is oriented.

For a new HDTV at the other end of the house, nothing I>ve tried seems to work
very well, with some channels requiring very careful fiddling with the
antenna orientation to be acceptable most of the time.
Reception on analog channels is fine and I believe the TV is working correctly.

According to http://www.antennaweb.org/ , for most of the channels I
care about, a "small multidirectional antenna" should suffice.
I haven>t yet tried an antenna like and would hoping for recommendataions,
or whether it would even work.

I realize this is insufficient information for anyone to suggest a
specific remedy other than "get a wired connection", but figured it
might be worthwhile to hear about others' experiences so far.

Thanks!

--
sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/
Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam>s Laser FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Sites: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/F_mirror.html

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is
ignored unless my full name AND either lasers or electronics is included in the
subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.

jakdedert · Guest

Samuel M. Goldwasser wrote:
[quote]OK, so I>m one of the 6 people in the Universe who don>t have cable,
satellite, or fiber-optic TV.

With analog reception, the picture remains viewable even with a weak
signal, with increasing snow, but nonetheless, usable. The sound
would survive even lower signal levels.

A set of rabbit ears and loop antenna sufficed.

Now, as expected, with DTV, it>s either there or it isn>t, and even with
the built-in signal strength display on DTVs and converter boxes, it has
become a royal pain to tune in many channels.

The assumption today is that one will use a wired connection so DTVs
usually don>t even come with any sort of indoor antenna.

Now, this could probably start a lively discussion on the politics and
economics of the DTV conversion and that>s just fine. :)

But, what I would like input on is what sort of indoor antennas might be
best to use in what is basically an area which should have decent signal
strength for the channels I care about.

So far I>ve tried using old loop antennas and basic indoor antennas (loop+
rabbit ears) from Radio Shack, both unamplified and amplified (though I>m
not convinced the latter was even working properly).

This is a residential location with no high structures nearby. I believe
most of the transmitters are only a few miles away.

For a 10 year old TV with a converter box in one location, a simple loop
antenna seems to be fine. For a similar setup on the floor below,
reception is terrible on nearly all channels no matter how the
antenna is oriented.

For a new HDTV at the other end of the house, nothing I>ve tried seems to work
very well, with some channels requiring very careful fiddling with the
antenna orientation to be acceptable most of the time.
Reception on analog channels is fine and I believe the TV is working correctly.

According to http://www.antennaweb.org/ , for most of the channels I
care about, a "small multidirectional antenna" should suffice.
I haven>t yet tried an antenna like and would hoping for recommendataions,
or whether it would even work.

I realize this is insufficient information for anyone to suggest a
specific remedy other than "get a wired connection", but figured it
might be worthwhile to hear about others' experiences so far.

Thanks!
[/quote]
FWIW, I>ve heard that most DTV transmitters are on reduced power until
the transition, which may improve things....

jak
[quote]
--
sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/
Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam>s Laser FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Sites: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/F_mirror.html

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is
ignored unless my full name AND either lasers or electronics is included in the
subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.[/quote]

Mike S. · Guest

In article <skr4sjbx.fsf@seas.upenn.edu>,
Samuel M. Goldwasser <sam@seas.upenn.edu> wrote:
[quote]
But, what I would like input on is what sort of indoor antennas might be
best to use in what is basically an area which should have decent signal
strength for the channels I care about.
[/quote]
You might find this thread interesting:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1037779

Ken Layton · Guest

What about those of us that live 75 miles (or more) from the
transmitter? I>ll damned if I>m going to pay for cable or satellite.

Rich Webb · Guest

On 10 Oct 2008 08:52:50 -0400, sam@seas.upenn.edu (Samuel M. Goldwasser)
wrote:

[quote]OK, so I>m one of the 6 people in the Universe who don>t have cable,
satellite, or fiber-optic TV.
[/quote]
Er <raises hand> seven.

[quote]With analog reception, the picture remains viewable even with a weak
signal, with increasing snow, but nonetheless, usable. The sound
would survive even lower signal levels.
[snip...snip...]
So far I>ve tried using old loop antennas and basic indoor antennas (loop+
rabbit ears) from Radio Shack, both unamplified and amplified (though I>m
not convinced the latter was even working properly).
[/quote]
Actually, I>ve been quite surprised at how well the old rabbit ears +
loop antenna has really worked. Aside from occasional episodes of
pixelation during stormy weather (relative motion between TX and RX?)
I>m getting everything that>s available, with very clear reception.

[quote]This is a residential location with no high structures nearby. I believe
most of the transmitters are only a few miles away.
[/quote]
Roughly the same here, except for the little issue of a major naval base
and air field between me and the antenna farm.

[quote]For a 10 year old TV with a converter box in one location, a simple loop
antenna seems to be fine. For a similar setup on the floor below,
reception is terrible on nearly all channels no matter how the
antenna is oriented.

For a new HDTV at the other end of the house, nothing I>ve tried seems to work
very well, with some channels requiring very careful fiddling with the
antenna orientation to be acceptable most of the time.
Reception on analog channels is fine and I believe the TV is working correctly.

According to http://www.antennaweb.org/ , for most of the channels I
care about, a "small multidirectional antenna" should suffice.
I haven>t yet tried an antenna like and would hoping for recommendataions,
or whether it would even work.

I realize this is insufficient information for anyone to suggest a
specific remedy other than "get a wired connection", but figured it
might be worthwhile to hear about others' experiences so far.
[/quote]
Take a look at http://uhfhdtvantenna.blogspot.com/

--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA

UCLAN · Guest

Samuel M. Goldwasser wrote:

[...snip]

[quote]But, what I would like input on is what sort of indoor antennas might be
best to use in what is basically an area which should have decent signal
strength for the channels I care about.
[/quote]
[...snip]

First of all, read:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1037779
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=611957
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=186

Secondly, converter boxes and TVs differ on their sensitivity. Some digital
TVs receive weak signals much better than others. Same story with converter
boxes. A good indoor antenna and a good, sensitive converter will work
wonders.

Finally, it>s true that *some* of the DTV channels are at reduced power now,
but not all. Things will improve *somewhat* come February, but not on all
channels. A good antenna and a sensitive converter box are your best bet.

Rich Webb · Guest

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:25:18 -0700 (PDT), Ken Layton
<KLayton888@aol.com> wrote:

[quote]What about those of us that live 75 miles (or more) from the
transmitter? I>ll damned if I>m going to pay for cable or satellite.
[/quote]
To a first order approximation, if you can get analog broadcast signals
now then you should be able to receive the corresponding digital
stations.

--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA

Charles · Guest

"Rich Webb" <bbew.ar@mapson.nozirev.ten> wrote in message
news:ndkve4192897280h7n1sjtis0ulnnkvas1@4ax.com...
[quote]On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:25:18 -0700 (PDT), Ken Layton
KLayton888@aol.com> wrote:

What about those of us that live 75 miles (or more) from the
transmitter? I>ll damned if I>m going to pay for cable or satellite.

To a first order approximation, if you can get analog broadcast signals
now then you should be able to receive the corresponding digital
stations.
[/quote]
So far, that>s not true here (Naples, FL). I>d guess the reduced power is
an issue ... only time will tell.

Jim Yanik · Guest

sam@seas.upenn.edu (Samuel M. Goldwasser) wrote in
news:skr4sjbx.fsf@seas.upenn.edu:

[quote]OK, so I>m one of the 6 people in the Universe who don>t have cable,
satellite, or fiber-optic TV.
[/quote]
count me in too.
apartment,2nd floor,stucco with metal mesh uunderneath,almost like a
Faraday cage.I lose channels when the upstairs neighbor moves around.

I use an old Gemini amplified rabbit ears with UHF disc antenna.Lost Ch.2
NBC completely(no great loss),but gained PBS Ch.15 out of Daytona Beach(55
miles away),a great benefit.
[quote]
With analog reception, the picture remains viewable even with a weak
signal, with increasing snow, but nonetheless, usable. The sound
would survive even lower signal levels.

A set of rabbit ears and loop antenna sufficed.

Now, as expected, with DTV, it>s either there or it isn>t, and even
with the built-in signal strength display on DTVs and converter boxes,
it has become a royal pain to tune in many channels.

The assumption today is that one will use a wired connection so DTVs
usually don>t even come with any sort of indoor antenna.

Now, this could probably start a lively discussion on the politics and
economics of the DTV conversion and that>s just fine. :)

But, what I would like input on is what sort of indoor antennas might
be best to use in what is basically an area which should have decent
signal strength for the channels I care about.

So far I>ve tried using old loop antennas and basic indoor antennas
(loop+ rabbit ears) from Radio Shack, both unamplified and amplified
(though I>m not convinced the latter was even working properly).

This is a residential location with no high structures nearby. I
believe most of the transmitters are only a few miles away.

For a 10 year old TV with a converter box in one location, a simple
loop antenna seems to be fine. For a similar setup on the floor
below, reception is terrible on nearly all channels no matter how the
antenna is oriented.

For a new HDTV at the other end of the house, nothing I>ve tried seems
to work very well, with some channels requiring very careful fiddling
with the antenna orientation to be acceptable most of the time.
Reception on analog channels is fine and I believe the TV is working
correctly.

According to http://www.antennaweb.org/ , for most of the channels I
care about, a "small multidirectional antenna" should suffice.
I haven>t yet tried an antenna like and would hoping for
recommendataions, or whether it would even work.

I realize this is insufficient information for anyone to suggest a
specific remedy other than "get a wired connection", but figured it
might be worthwhile to hear about others' experiences so far.

Thanks!
[/quote]
Google shows some homebrewed non-amplified antennas that might be
interesting,BUT,they might not be accepted by the SWMBO,not "fit in with
the decor" type problem.

Are you in a place where you can put in an outdoor antenna?
Preferably high up... (UHF antennas are pretty small and 'tolerable')
or put it in the attic.
then use a distribution amp and feed it to all your TVs.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Richard J Kinch · Guest

Samuel M. Goldwasser writes:

[quote]OK, so I>m one of the 6 people in the Universe who don>t have cable
[/quote]
You and me, pal.

[quote]This is a residential location with no high structures nearby. I believe
most of the transmitters are only a few miles away.
[/quote]
If you can fit a big outdoor antenna into the attic, just laying it on the
attic floor usually works quite well. Nothing small and convenient will
work very well, especially indoors. A mast and rotor outdoors are the
thing to have.

Mike WB2MEP · Guest

On Oct 10, 8:10 pm, Jim Yanik <jya...@abuse.gov> wrote:
[quote]s...@seas.upenn.edu (Samuel M. Goldwasser) wrote innews:skr4sjbx.fsf@seas..upenn.edu:

OK, so I>m one of the 6 people in the Universe who don>t have cable,
satellite, or fiber-optic TV.

count me in too.
apartment,2nd floor,stucco with metal mesh uunderneath,almost like a
Faraday cage.I lose channels when the upstairs neighbor moves around.

I use an old Gemini amplified rabbit ears with UHF disc antenna.Lost Ch.2
NBC completely(no great loss),but gained PBS Ch.15 out of Daytona Beach(55
miles away),a great benefit.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
[/quote]
Jim,

Both of those channels have relocated their DTV transmitter sites
quite a distance from their original analog sites. Chan. 2 (and chan.
55 when they were still on) broadcast analog from Orange City. Chan.
15
broadcast from west of Daytona Beach. Being a college-based station,
they don>t run much power or have a particularly tall tower. I get
snowy, but watchable, reception on 15 in the NE suburbs of Orlando
with a large
rooftop Yagi.

All the central Florida DTV stations have located their DTV
transmitters at the antenna farms east of Orlando, where the Orlando
analog TV and FM stations broadcast from. Channel 2>s DTV signal is
actually on Chan. 11, and Chan. 15>s DTV is on either 30 or 33. Chan.
68>s (college-based PBS out of Melbourne) DTV is on the other. One
advantage to this is that you won>t need a rotor to pick up all the
available DTV stations as they
are all broadcasting from the same location. The downside is that
Daytona and Melbourne are at the Northern and Southern ends of the
Orlando coverage area, and the analog stations gave folks in those
cities a strong local PBS signal. With DTV, they will lose the local
signal, and Orlando will end up with three PBS channels.

Mike
WB2MEP

hr(bob) hofmann@att.net · Guest

On Oct 11, 7:45 am, s...@seas.upenn.edu (Samuel M. Goldwasser) wrote:
[quote]Jim Yanik <jya...@abuse.gov> writes:
s...@seas.upenn.edu (Samuel M. Goldwasser) wrote in
news:skr4sjbx.fsf@seas.upenn.edu:

OK, so I>m one of the 6 people in the Universe who don>t have cable,
satellite, or fiber-optic TV.

count me in too.
apartment,2nd floor,stucco with metal mesh uunderneath,almost like a
Faraday cage.I lose channels when the upstairs neighbor moves around.

I use an old Gemini amplified rabbit ears with UHF disc antenna.Lost Ch..2
NBC completely(no great loss),but gained PBS Ch.15 out of Daytona Beach(55
miles away),a great benefit.

With analog reception, the picture remains viewable even with a weak
signal, with increasing snow, but nonetheless, usable. The sound
would survive even lower signal levels.

A set of rabbit ears and loop antenna sufficed.

Now, as expected, with DTV, it>s either there or it isn>t, and even
with the built-in signal strength display on DTVs and converter boxes,
it has become a royal pain to tune in many channels.

The assumption today is that one will use a wired connection so DTVs
usually don>t even come with any sort of indoor antenna.

Now, this could probably start a lively discussion on the politics and
economics of the DTV conversion and that>s just fine. :)

But, what I would like input on is what sort of indoor antennas might
be best to use in what is basically an area which should have decent
signal strength for the channels I care about.

So far I>ve tried using old loop antennas and basic indoor antennas
(loop+ rabbit ears) from Radio Shack, both unamplified and amplified
(though I>m not convinced the latter was even working properly).

This is a residential location with no high structures nearby. I
believe most of the transmitters are only a few miles away.

For a 10 year old TV with a converter box in one location, a simple
loop antenna seems to be fine. For a similar setup on the floor
below, reception is terrible on nearly all channels no matter how the
antenna is oriented.

For a new HDTV at the other end of the house, nothing I>ve tried seems
to work very well, with some channels requiring very careful fiddling
with the antenna orientation to be acceptable most of the time.
Reception on analog channels is fine and I believe the TV is working
correctly.

According tohttp://www.antennaweb.org/, for most of the channels I
care about, a "small multidirectional antenna" should suffice.
I haven>t yet tried an antenna like and would hoping for
recommendataions, or whether it would even work.

I realize this is insufficient information for anyone to suggest a
specific remedy other than "get a wired connection", but figured it
might be worthwhile to hear about others' experiences so far.

Thanks!

Google shows some homebrewed non-amplified antennas that might be
interesting,BUT,they might not be accepted by the SWMBO,not "fit in with
the decor" type problem.

Are you in a place where you can put in an outdoor antenna?
Preferably high up... (UHF antennas are pretty small and 'tolerable')
or put it in the attic.
then use a distribution amp and feed it to all your TVs.

Sure, but this entire DTV thing was supposed to be a step forward, not
back to the days where people had to have outdoor antennas!

I guess it is a step forward for the manufacturers of DTVs, antennas,
and other video equipment, and cable, fiber, and satellite content
providers!

--
sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ:http://www.repairfaq.org/
Repair | Main Table of Contents:http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam>s Laser FAQ:http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Sites:http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/F_mirror.html

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is
ignored unless my full name AND either lasers or electronics is included in the
subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
Sam:

It might help us if we knew approximately where you live, and the
directions/distances of the signals you are trying to pick up. A good
antenna in the attic with a distribution amplifier as suggested
earlier should work pretty well, especially if the antenna can point
out the gable end of the roof, and you do not have aluminum siding.
Getting a signal thru regular roofing shingles works ok when the roof
is dry, but there is a lot af attenuation when the roof gets wet or
snow-covered as it does here in IL where I live.

Bob Hofmann

Samuel M. Goldwasser · Guest

Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> writes:

[quote]sam@seas.upenn.edu (Samuel M. Goldwasser) wrote in
news:skr4sjbx.fsf@seas.upenn.edu:

OK, so I>m one of the 6 people in the Universe who don>t have cable,
satellite, or fiber-optic TV.

count me in too.
apartment,2nd floor,stucco with metal mesh uunderneath,almost like a
Faraday cage.I lose channels when the upstairs neighbor moves around.

I use an old Gemini amplified rabbit ears with UHF disc antenna.Lost Ch.2
NBC completely(no great loss),but gained PBS Ch.15 out of Daytona Beach(55
miles away),a great benefit.

With analog reception, the picture remains viewable even with a weak
signal, with increasing snow, but nonetheless, usable. The sound
would survive even lower signal levels.

A set of rabbit ears and loop antenna sufficed.

Now, as expected, with DTV, it>s either there or it isn>t, and even
with the built-in signal strength display on DTVs and converter boxes,
it has become a royal pain to tune in many channels.

The assumption today is that one will use a wired connection so DTVs
usually don>t even come with any sort of indoor antenna.

Now, this could probably start a lively discussion on the politics and
economics of the DTV conversion and that>s just fine. :)

But, what I would like input on is what sort of indoor antennas might
be best to use in what is basically an area which should have decent
signal strength for the channels I care about.

So far I>ve tried using old loop antennas and basic indoor antennas
(loop+ rabbit ears) from Radio Shack, both unamplified and amplified
(though I>m not convinced the latter was even working properly).

This is a residential location with no high structures nearby. I
believe most of the transmitters are only a few miles away.

For a 10 year old TV with a converter box in one location, a simple
loop antenna seems to be fine. For a similar setup on the floor
below, reception is terrible on nearly all channels no matter how the
antenna is oriented.

For a new HDTV at the other end of the house, nothing I>ve tried seems
to work very well, with some channels requiring very careful fiddling
with the antenna orientation to be acceptable most of the time.
Reception on analog channels is fine and I believe the TV is working
correctly.

According to http://www.antennaweb.org/ , for most of the channels I
care about, a "small multidirectional antenna" should suffice.
I haven>t yet tried an antenna like and would hoping for
recommendataions, or whether it would even work.

I realize this is insufficient information for anyone to suggest a
specific remedy other than "get a wired connection", but figured it
might be worthwhile to hear about others' experiences so far.

Thanks!

Google shows some homebrewed non-amplified antennas that might be
interesting,BUT,they might not be accepted by the SWMBO,not "fit in with
the decor" type problem.

Are you in a place where you can put in an outdoor antenna?
Preferably high up... (UHF antennas are pretty small and 'tolerable')
or put it in the attic.
then use a distribution amp and feed it to all your TVs.
[/quote]
Sure, but this entire DTV thing was supposed to be a step forward, not
back to the days where people had to have outdoor antennas!

I guess it is a step forward for the manufacturers of DTVs, antennas,
and other video equipment, and cable, fiber, and satellite content
providers!

--
sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/
Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam>s Laser FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Sites: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/F_mirror.html

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is
ignored unless my full name AND either lasers or electronics is included in the
subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.

Jim Yanik · Guest

sam@seas.upenn.edu (Samuel M. Goldwasser) wrote in
news:1vynb8rw.fsf@seas.upenn.edu:

[quote]Sure, but this entire DTV thing was supposed to be a step forward, not
back to the days where people had to have outdoor antennas!
[/quote]
C>mon;nobody ever claimed that DTV would only need simple indoor antennas.
DTV>s claim was for an improvement over NTSC..in picture quality,and for
better use of existing bandwidth(subchannels).

[quote]
I guess it is a step forward for the manufacturers of DTVs, antennas,
and other video equipment, and cable, fiber, and satellite content
providers!
[/quote]
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Roy Starrin · Guest

On 10 Oct 2008 08:52:50 -0400, sam@seas.upenn.edu (Samuel M.
Goldwasser) wrote:

[quote]OK, so I>m one of the 6 people in the Universe who don>t have cable,
satellite, or fiber-optic TV.

I realize this is insufficient information for anyone to suggest a
specific remedy other than "get a wired connection", but figured it
might be worthwhile to hear about others' experiences so far.
[/quote]
There might be something of interest here:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6647470#post6647470


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Electronics - Repair forum	Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 1 of 3