I'm looking for a good budget antenna to receive local channels on a non-HD tv. This is for my mother-in-law who is still old school and doesn't have cable or satellite.

Any recommendations?

Thanks for the replies.
Michael- I used http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/welcome.aspx so it was just my adress/zip code. How can I figure out my latitude / longitude and compass offset?
So I take it that an amp would not help my situation?
I really don't want the hassle of mounting anyhting on the roof or outside. If the best i cna do is one channle, I'll just have to live with it.
It just seems if I get the one channle so clear I shoud get the other since the distance is so close and the degrees are the same.

Thanks again for any help.

That possibility was eliminated when, after the storm, I replaced the transformer and used a different cable (that's used for satellite otherwise, so it's fine). And that cable has weatherproof connectors (instead of me sealing them) -- not that it matters, as I've taken it in from outside between tests anyway...

That cable is 50' BTW. During the very first tests, it was going to the amp, through the house coax, etc. when it was working fine. Now it doesn't work (well very poorly I mean), whether connected through amp or directly to the tuner. :(

Every part in the chain has been checked and eliminated. There's also 2 separate receivers with the same result, so it's not that either... The only thing different from when it all worked (with ZERO antenna placement effort) is the leaves being off the trees from here to horizon. Could that have a negative impact? You'd think the opposite, but has anyone seen bare trees cause a problem, or is that absolutely not possible?

I didn't get to take a picture from the roof since it's been raining...

I read back through some of your previous posts and IMHO you have too little metal in the air for UHF,you need a better preamp like a CM7777,and you've made changes during the late Fall weather transition(usually about the time the leaves fall) which wrecks havoc on the signals when you're in the fringe.You just need more margin.I would suggest an 8-bay for UHF strategically placed for best performance on all St Louis UHF's,the above mentioned preamp,and a highband or VHF antenna placed below the UHF.The equipment should be roof mounted on a tripod,or on a tower at least 30ft above ground level.

Greg B

T... The only thing different from when it all worked (with ZERO antenna placement effort) is the leaves being off the trees from here to horizon. Could that have a negative impact? You'd think the opposite, but has anyone seen bare trees cause a problem, or is that absolutely not possible?

I didn't get to take a picture from the roof since it's been raining...
Dr Larry,

Yes, I have seen it but it was not caused by the leaves, it's caused by the seasonal change in the weather. When people are out past the edge of 'normal' reception, the signal from the transmitter tends to wander up & down with the seasons and/or the weather. While temperature and pressure do affect this bending, the biggest change comes from the dew point temperature. When the dew point is high, there is more water vapor in the air and the signal tends to follow the curve of the earth. When the dew point is lower (autumn/winter) atmosphere is has less water vapor, the signal does not bend, and fringe reception changes. Folks see the leaves drop and think what you are thinking. In the spring, they see the leaves come back and think the opposite.

If memory serves me right, you are in a deep valley or canyon also. If the signal has indeed lifted, then there will be less diffraction and there will be less signal in your valley.

Again, this scenario would only be true in what we used to call the 'fringe' reception areas (out past the old grade B contour).

Bob Chase

Good question should be

What channels is she interested in?

How far is she from the transmitters?

An antenna does not care if its a digital, analog, HD signal. Its only interested in the resonant frequency. This HD antenna talk is basicly marketing BS. Now the UHF only antennas are sold as HDTV ready because most digital TV stations are on the UHF range (14-69). But some UHF antennas (such as the Channel Master 4228) can receive high vhf channels 7-13 quite well, but are useless on 2-6.

Haley

radio amateur and TV dxer (WTFDA member).

Thanks Greg and Bob. That's some stuff I was thinking, but it helps to see someone else confirm. :)

Bob, regarding the weather: from the last time I checked and everything worked to when the first channel (highest frequency one, others were still OK) started getting lost was 2 days and the weather seemed to be generally the same during most of my trials. (Had been unusually warm [60s, even 70s], now it's cold for trying to do any more. :() Although it's possible that the amount of moisture in the atmosphere was decreasing anyway... I already knew about dewpoint being an indicator of absolute humidity, but I think it was a post of yours I read saying that wator vapor is the biggest (?) factor. :)

So now I started looking at trying a better antenna -- CM 4228 or Antennas Direct 91XG. Even though it costs more, I'm thinking the 91XG. It weighs less, has less wind load I think, and it sounds like from the posts in this thread that it performs as well or better than the 4228 8-bay. Oh, and looking at the graphs on HDTV Primer (www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html), it has more gain on channel 56, which was the first one to go for me, and looks to be the weakest now (0 to 20-30% on my meter, attic and outside first had it in the 60s at least). And that channel is the furthest, BTW, by a couple miles at 47.

I don't think I'm in too much of a "valley," according to holl_ands when he checked my location in Google Earth. Trying to picture it now, as a rough guess, I'd say the horizon is maybe a 1/3-1/2 mile away (hard for me to judge :confused: ) and almost 10 degrees up.

Problem is, I don't know what the gain is on my Radio Shack antenna, and how many dB difference there is between the reception I had and what's getting here now. I'm estimating that the RS is a little worse than the CM 3018, according to the HDTV Primer page above, since its UHF portion is 7" longer; although its corner reflectors, which I know are for low UHF, appear to be shorter. So, going by that, I hope the 91XG would be 3-4dB better anyway (maybe 2-3x more signal). However, I don't know what that means for the tuner! :confused: How much dB difference could there have been to cause the change I've seen? Or maybe the better question is to just ask if a 91XG/4228 should perform "a lot" better than a RS? ;)

I'd go ahead and order the 91XG, but I'm wondering about shipping cost and returning it if it doesn't work or something. I saw that Solid Signal has it with free shipping, but it looks like they have a restocking fee. Does anyone know if it's possible to return it to Antennas Direct, using their 90 day guarantee, if it wasn't purchased directly from them?

Problem is, I don't know what the gain is on my Radio Shack antenna, and how many dB difference there is between the reception I had and what's getting here now. I'm estimating that the RS is a little worse than the CM 3018, according to the HDTV Primer page above, since its UHF portion is 7" longer; although its corner reflectors, which I know are for low UHF, appear to be shorter. So, going by that, I hope the 91XG would be 3-4dB better anyway (maybe 2-3x more signal). However, I don't know what that means for the tuner! :confused: How much dB difference could there have been to cause the change I've seen? Or maybe the better question is to just ask if a 91XG/4228 should perform "a lot" better than a RS? ;)

Get the 91XG and sleep easy. It is a top-notch performer, and I'd guess it is at least 6dB better than anything from Radio Shack, if not more. I had a U120 for a while and the 91XG is... um... ahem.... not even in the same league. I can't imagine the UHF section on any of their combos is longer.

The problem with digital is that it can be very hard to know just how much weaker the signal has become. I've often been frustrated by being "right on the edge" of reliable reception. I got a huge improvement by going to a 54' tower from my 24' roofline, but the difference between the Winegard HD8200P I had and the 91XG was still phenomenal. Not quite as big an improvement, but the 91XG was noticably better.

What you get with the 91XG is a more directional, "hotter" antenna, which means that the signal should be cleaner than it's been. That should translate into a better signal at the tuner, which may or may not make a difference when it comes time to decode the ATSC 8VSB stream.

At least when I don't get a particular station these days, I know it isn't the antenna that's at fault. You just can't buy that kind of peace of mind. (Okay, you can, and it's from AntennasDirect for $79 + shipping.) :)

When the dew point is lower (autumn/winter) atmosphere is has less water vapor, the signal does not bend, and fringe reception changes. Folks see the leaves drop and think what you are thinking. In the spring, they see the leaves come back and think the opposite.

Well, maybe my situation is atypical, but I have the opposite occur. In the summers, dew points in Minnesota can get very high. In the winter, by virtue of the fact that the temperatures get so low, dew points also get low.

While I have some stations that I am in the Grade B contours for, most of my desired stations are beyond deep fringe, over the horizon, and beyond what any models have projected I would be able to receive.

In the daytime in the summer, it is a rare day that I can get any stations from the Twin Cities to lock, and if they do lock, they break up constantly. In the evenings, things are variable - some days everything comes in (including 20kw stations) and other evenings, nothing comes in.

Now we're into November, and the trees are bare. Suddenly, stations lock during the daytime. They're usually reliable at night, too (although there are those evenings...) Once the ground gets snow covered, it will be rare to see an artifact on many of those distant stations.

I am above the local trees, but there is a ridge about 1/2 mile away that is taller than my antenna that is covered in trees. So I know I'm shooting through them. But even without the leaves, I'd need another 1000 feet or so to get line-of-sight. Somehow, that kind of tower has failed to pass the WAF.

Good question should be

What channels is she interested in?

How far is she from the transmitters?

An antenna does not care if its a digital, analog, HD signal. Its only interested in the resonant frequency. This HD antenna talk is basicly marketing BS. Now the UHF only antennas are sold as HDTV ready because most digital TV stations are on the UHF range (14-69). But some UHF antennas (such as the Channel Master 4228) can receive high vhf channels 7-13 quite well, but are useless on 2-6.


We need channels 2-69.

Would something like the Terk TV5 or Radio Shack 16-1880 be good?

We need channels 2-69.

Would something like the Terk TV5 or Radio Shack 16-1880 be good?

Now, see, you didn't answer his other question: how far are you from the transmitters?

Generally speaking, no the TV5 and the 16-1880 are not good. They're horrible. Maybe you'd get something with them, but more likely you wouldn't.

Now, see, you didn't answer his other question: how far are you from the transmitters?

Generally speaking, no the TV5 and the 16-1880 are not good. They're horrible. Maybe you'd get something with them, but more likely you wouldn't.

Her zip code is 23229.

According to AntennaWeb, she's between 5 miles and 20 miles from the stations.

Antenna
Type Call Sign Channel Network City State Live
Date Compass
Orientation Miles
From Frequency

yellow - vhf WTVR 6 CBS RICHMOND VA 121° 5.2 6
yellow - vhf WRIC 8 ABC PETERSBURG VA 210° 6.0 8
yellow - uhf WRLH 35 FOX RICHMOND VA 240° 9.6 35
yellow - uhf WCVE 23 PBS RICHMOND VA 210° 6.0 23
green - uhf WUPV 65 UPN ASHLAND VA 69° 19.8 65
green - vhf WWBT 12 NBC RICHMOND VA 161° 6.9 12
lt green - uhf WCVW 57 PBS RICHMOND VA 210° 6.0 57
blue - uhf WRID-LP 48 DAY RICHMOND VA 156° 12.9 48

Forgive me if this question has been asked before - I did a search and didn't see any related topics.

What is the maximum distance for reception of digital UHF broadcasts - assuming of course no blockage of line of sight?

I'm moving to rural SE Arizona. Antennaweb shows that for the zip code (85606), I'll only get 3 analog stations from Tucson, at a distance of 50 miles from the transmitters. But in looking at "Deep Fringe Reception" antennas such as the CM 3020 and Winegard HD7082P, they indicate a max UHF reception of 60 miles. Shouldn't they to the trick in receiving digital broadcasts? There are mountain ranges between my property & Tucson, but if Antennaweb indicates I should be able to recieve the analog broadcasts, then I should be able to receive the digital broadcasts, with the proper antenna, directional orientation, position of the antenna (outdoor, as high as possible), and some good luck?

Thanks

According to AntennaWeb, she's between 5 miles and 20 miles from the stations.


I'd try something like this: http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=2153141

If that doesn't work, then she'll need to put something outside, preferably on her roof.

What is the maximum distance for reception of digital UHF broadcasts - assuming of course no blockage of line of sight?

There are mountain ranges between my property & Tucson, but if Antennaweb indicates I should be able to recieve the analog broadcasts, then I should be able to receive the digital broadcasts, with the proper antenna, directional orientation, position of the antenna (outdoor, as high as possible), and some good luck?

There is no such thing as a maximum distance. Go out into space and you can get UHF reception for billions of miles. Back here on terra firma, a good "average" distance is 60 miles over average terrain. Mountain ranges between you and the broadcasting towers, however, is not average terrain. All bets are off.

Antennaweb is giving you "deep fringe" results for VHF signals. VHF bends more readily around objects like mountains, so it reaches further than UHF, on average. If the Tuscon stations were broadcasting their digital signals on VHF frequencies, you might have a shot. With UHF, I'd be extremely pessimistic.

However, there is such a thing as knife-edge diffraction, which may save you if you're some distance (say more than 10 miles) away from the mountains. You might get something that way, but there are no guarantees. The only way to know is to try an antenna and find out. However, don't bother going as high as possible once you've cleared local roof and tree clutter by about 10 feet. Beyond that, the deciding factor is going to be those mountains, and I'm guessing you're not going to put something up tall enough to clear those.

I'd try something like this: http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=2153141

If that doesn't work, then she'll need to put something outside, preferably on her roof.

Wow, that's pretty cheap. More expensive ones won't provide a better signal? I'm willing to go up to $50.

The Silver Sensor is extremely directional.


If you look at http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/silver.html, you will see the silver sensor is not very directional at all, in fact signal remains relatively unchanged in an arc of 40 degrees.

Wow, that's pretty cheap. More expensive ones won't provide a better signal? I'm willing to go up to $50.

What makes an antenna perform? Is it the price? No. Is it the fancy packaging? No. It's the design, and to a lesser extent, the materials. Since we're dealing with indoor antennas, there are only a few basic designs out there. For VHF, there's really only one: rabbit ears. Anything else will not perform as well. See this page for how to get the most out of them: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/RabbitEars.html#Getting

For UHF, there's a bunch of antenna styles and designs. The most basic is the UHF loop. Nothing fancy about it. A slight step up the scale is the bowtie. Basically, it's a loop that has been bent inwards from the top and bottom. Beyond that, a double-bowtie with screen or the Zenith Silver Sensor are the only antennas that perform better.

Manufacturers, knowing that unwitting consumers will equate a more expensive antenna with better performance, have to justify the added cost and they do so by adding amplifiers to the package, KNOWING FULL WELL that their noisy amplifiers almost never do anybody any good indoors. They do, however, require electricity, and sound impressive (why settle for rabbit ears when you can have rabbit ears that plug into the wall... but wait! there's more... if you act now, we'll throw in an extra 20dB of gain for free!)

The antenna I pointed you to is going to do as well as (or better than) any other VHF indoor antenna on the market. You could do better on the UHF (channels above 13) side, but the odds are good that the picture will be "good enough" for grandma.

You can read more about indoor antennas here: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/GlossaryG.html#indoor

Thanks for the detailed info.

The article seems to be saying that for different channels, the rabbit ears should be extended certain lengths. I always assumed that extending the rabbit ears as long as possible would provide the best signal. Seems like it would be a pain for grandma to have to change the lengths depending on the channel. I guess I'll leave it at around 60"-70" for best overall signal?

Well, maybe my situation is atypical, but I have the opposite occur. In the summers, dew points in Minnesota can get very high. In the winter, by virtue of the fact that the temperatures get so low, dew points also get low.

While I have some stations that I am in the Grade B contours for, most of my desired stations are beyond deep fringe, over the horizon, and beyond what any models have projected I would be able to receive.

In the daytime in the summer, it is a rare day that I can get any stations from the Twin Cities to lock, and if they do lock, they break up constantly. In the evenings, things are variable - some days everything comes in (including 20kw stations) and other evenings, nothing comes in.

Now we're into November, and the trees are bare. Suddenly, stations lock during the daytime. They're usually reliable at night, too (although there are those evenings...) Once the ground gets snow covered, it will be rare to see an artifact on many of those distant stations.

I am above the local trees, but there is a ridge about 1/2 mile away that is taller than my antenna that is covered in trees. So I know I'm shooting through them. But even without the leaves, I'd need another 1000 feet or so to get line-of-sight. Somehow, that kind of tower has failed to pass the WAF.
sregener,
Well, what I said was true but over simplified. More water vapor in the atmosphere increases the K-factor. Usable transmission distances increase directly with K-factor. (K-factor is the ratio of the true earth radius and the radio earth radius.)

Perhaps your broadcasters use a shorter tower than we Houstonians do and perhaps they use the same angle of negative beam tilt. (-0.75 degrees is the most common antenna angle.) That would mean that their beam comes down to the ground sooner than ours does. Now autumn comes to you and the beam lifts, so you get more signal over the horizon. Addionally, there is a reduction in ground clutter loss. I really don't have a handle on how the loss would change from leaves to no leaves but I would imagine that it's no more than a couple of dB.

Does any of this sound plausible?

Bob

sregener, thanks for the additional comments on the 91XG. It's actually only $78 with free shipping from Solid Signal. :) (Hopefully SS is a good place to use?) And yeah, I was just reading your Web page the other day about your different antenna trials. ;)



... a highband or VHF antenna placed below the UHF.

Can I still use the current RS antenna for VHF? (I may like to have those analogs available sometimes...)

The CM 7777 pre-amp, on its separate VHF input does it have like a low-pass filter to block the UHF, that would cause problems I assume, from a combo antenna like the mine? i.e. is the combining part more "active" than a simple reversed splitter?

And I'd guess if I can use the RS for VHF, that its corner reflectors could be removed to reduce the height, and as to not be close to the path of the 91XG? As far as placement, would it need to be more than 2-3 feet below on the mast? Or isn't the spacing an issue when they're not being used for the same frequencies? (Assuming the 7777 removes any UHF that the RS's Yagi picks up.) Hope that makes sense!

Thanks. :)


Edit: Besides the 7777 being a pre-amp, how does this Antennas Direct UHF/VHF combiner (www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?CAT=&PROD=ANTDRCT-COMBNR) compare? More loss if it's passive?? And I notice it says:

Example: Joining a VHF/UHF antenna with a UHF antenna will pull the VHF portion of the UHF/VHF combo and combine it with the VHF only antenna.

Assuming that last VHF is supposed to say UHF, then I guess it answers my question?? :rolleyes:

)
Can I still use the current RS antenna for VHF? (I may like to have those analogs available sometimes...)

:)

Yes, the 7777 will diplex it for you. It won't hurt the vhf performance to remove the corner reflector on the uhf section.

Provide around 48 inches spacing between the two antennas on the mast for all but low band vhf. It may still work for low band but it's more likely you'll have an effect on the performance. 60 inches would be better but it may not be practical for you.

Well, what I said was true but over simplified. More water vapor in the atmosphere increases the K-factor. Usable transmission distances increase directly with K-factor. (K-factor is the ratio of the true earth radius and the radio earth radius.)

Perhaps your broadcasters use a shorter tower than we Houstonians do and perhaps they use the same angle of negative beam tilt. (-0.75 degrees is the most common antenna angle.) That would mean that their beam comes down to the ground sooner than ours does. Now autumn comes to you and the beam lifts, so you get more signal over the horizon. Addionally, there is a reduction in ground clutter loss. I really don't have a handle on how the loss would change from leaves to no leaves but I would imagine that it's no more than a couple of dB.

Does any of this sound plausible?

Bob

Things become more *consistent*for me in the fall/winter. I don't think it has a thing to do with leaves. I believe it's due to the decreased frequency of tropospheric ducting conditions in the cold weather months. This makes the reception that should be consistent more so. It also decreases the frequency of those exciting "tropo events" though.

Thanks. So you're saying being too close would affect the VHF performance? I don't mind some degredation of that :), as long as the UHF one is fine.

Perhaps your broadcasters use a shorter tower than we Houstonians do and perhaps they use the same angle of negative beam tilt. (-0.75 degrees is the most common antenna angle.) That would mean that their beam comes down to the ground sooner than ours does. Now autumn comes to you and the beam lifts, so you get more signal over the horizon. Addionally, there is a reduction in ground clutter loss. I really don't have a handle on how the loss would change from leaves to no leaves but I would imagine that it's no more than a couple of dB.

Does any of this sound plausible?

Why would the beam lift in the autumn?

The Minneapolis towers seem to be around 430m HAAT, while Houston's are at nearly 600m HAAT. But once you reach the radio horizon (which, granted would be further for the higher transmitting antenna), does it really matter how high the broadcasting tower was?

If my antenna theory is correct, I am getting nothing but tropospheric scatter for my desired stations. On those hot, humid, calm nights of summer, things really sizzle for reception, as one would expect. But I get nearly as strong (and sometimes stronger) signals constantly in the winter months. Now the ground clutter makes some sense, since snowpack makes things better.

Thanks for the replies.
Michael- I used http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/welcome.aspx so it was just my adress/zip code. How can I figure out my latitude / longitude and compass offset?
So I take it that an amp would not help my situation?
I really don't want the hassle of mounting anyhting on the roof or outside. If the best i cna do is one channle, I'll just have to live with it.
It just seems if I get the one channle so clear I shoud get the other since the distance is so close and the degrees are the same.

Thanks again for any help.
There are links on http://www.2150.com/broadcast/default.asp that will help you find your exact latitude and longitude. I used the first one, which in 9 clicks will zoom into your neighborhood (you start out in space, click on the part of North America where your state is and zoom in from there). There are no street names, just the various roadways in the neighborhood, so you would have to recognize your neighborhood map by the shapes of the streets.

As far as antenna choices, amplified is not always the best choice unless you are very far from any transmitter. If you are trying to get a distant station but have a close transmitter, the close signal may overload the amplifier.

I live less than a mile from the closest transmitter and there are many more within 2 miles or less. I have to aim the Silver Sensor out a window for best results. My home has aluminum siding which I believe impedes the signal through the walls. Even with the transmitters that close, going through walls (as opposed to windows) weakens the signal enough to lose the lock on a digital signal.

Hey gang,

I have an old ChannelMaster single screen (not double put together like they do today) 4228 UHF antenna that's been on a roof for 15 years. It's rusty, but the
balun is in very good shape. The dipoles and screen are rusty. How much will that affect reception, how can or should I get the rust off, and should I "paint" it?
If so, with what? Specific recommendations?

I've posted these question in a few different Forums but it looks like this forum is the most appropriate. I am hoping to start the install process this weekend.

I have a CM 4228 UHF and CM 3671B VHF/FM/UHF Antenna that I plan to install on my roof. I will be combining them using a Channel Master VHF/UHF Joiner that I was told would filter out the UHF from the 3671B.

I bought the Channel Master 3671B because of the fact that some channels including local NBC and ABC are already transmitting their DTV in VHF frequencies or will be after the analog transmitters are shut down.

Questions:

1) I plan on installing the 3671B on top of a 15-20 ft mast and mount the 4228 below it. Will the 2 antennas cause signal interference with each other? Do I need to space them at a minimum spacing to prevent possible interference? Any recommendations as to how far I should space them?

2) The Channel Master 3671B is a double boom truss construction Size: 173 inch by 110 inch (L x W) (I haven't received it yet and don't know the weight). Will the weight of this and 4228 on the same pole be a problem? I am going to double guide wire the pole. One about 9 ft and the other just below the 4228.

1) I plan on installing the 3671B on top of a 15-20 ft mast and mount the 4228 below it. Will the 2 antennas cause signal interference with each other? Do I need to space them at a minimum spacing to prevent possible interference? Any recommendations as to how far I should space them?

2) The Channel Master 3671B is a double boom truss construction Size: 173 inch by 110 inch (L x W) (I haven't received it yet and don't know the weight). Will the weight of this and 4228 on the same pole be a problem? I am going to double guide wire the pole. One about 9 ft and the other just below the 4228.

1) Yes, they could interfere with each other. Minimum to eliminate interference? About 16 feet. Oh, and you should put the 4228 above, not below, the 3671 because UHF is much more height sensitive. (Realistically, if you get them more than 3-4' apart, the interference shouldn't be much.)

2) Yowza! I hope you're not using a rotor. I don't know what you're guying this thing to, but it's going to be one heck of a wind load. The 4228 is 16lbs by itself, and the 3671 ain't light. If this thing is going to be exposed to much wind, I'd say double-guying would be a minimum. I hope your mast is strong enough.

I have an old ChannelMaster single screen (not double put together like they do today) 4228 UHF antenna that's been on a roof for 15 years. It's rusty, but the balun is in very good shape. The dipoles and screen are rusty. How much will that affect reception, how can or should I get the rust off, and should I "paint" it? If so, with what? Specific recommendations?

A good rule of thumb is that you lose 50% of performance every ten years your antenna is exposed to the elements. You can't get that back by removing the rust, though. I'd replace the 4228. They're not terribly expensive and if you get 15 years out of the next one, you'll be doing very well. (Average life span of an outdoor antenna is only 10 years.)

Hey gang,

I have an old ChannelMaster single screen (not double put together like they do today) 4228 UHF antenna that's been on a roof for 15 years. It's rusty, but the
balun is in very good shape. The dipoles and screen are rusty. How much will that affect reception, how can or should I get the rust off, and should I "paint" it?
If so, with what? Specific recommendations?
Get a new antenna and paint it with rustoleum if you want to.

Both of my rotor failures (I had a CM that failed as well) exhibited themselves as "freezing up" or refusing to move from one point.

I had a monster antenna array for a day or two with the Channel Master rotor. No more than that. Other than that, the largest "array" I had was a Winegard HD8200P. The biggest thing on the "Made in China" rotor was a Winegard HD7084P. Right now, I'm using just an AntennasDirect 91XG. So I think you're remembering incorrectly.

This is what I thought I remembered from your web page (http://www.geocities.com/Figbert/antennasdirect91xg.html)
"I also tried a vertical stack of Channel Master 3021s (4248's with a split-boom for shipping) but due to rotor issues and no real improvement in reception, I pulled it back down."

You didn't mention any rotor failure other than that, and no rotor name, so I don't think I recalled incorrectly. So it was the CM rotor that failed in two days. That's a pretty good warning not to stint on the rotor if you are going with an array or an ultra antenna.

Maybe it is worth elaborating on the problem. It is not so much that the rotor is likely to break off or anything like that. There is a shaft that goes through a couple of bearings. Long before the shaft might break, it will bend. That will make the shaft bind in the bearings, making it stick or harder to turn. A long top mast increases the leverage on the shaft. Putting a big wind load on the mast increases the force applied to the shaft. Recall that they used to move huge ships using just the normal wind. All you need is enough sail. Once you've bent the shaft beyond the elastic point, beyond where it will return to its normal shape, you get a permanent bend. You can take the leverage off the rotor shaft by using a thrust bearing, but they are kind of expensive.

That's not the only problem. They use a motor in rotors that is geared down. The motor spins fast and turns a small grear against a large gear that may take 90 seconds to make one turn. That gives the motor tremendous mechanical advantage. You can use a wimpy motor to turn a large load. As far as I can tell there is no brake in normal home rotors. If you consider the system working backwards, where the big grear tries to turn the little, it takes a very large force. It is simply the magnified resistance of the big gear trying to turn a small frictional resistance in the motor which keeps the antenna from rotating in the wind. For really large antenna loads, and the longer antennas are worse, you can break the gears, or an least a tooth or two. When the grear gets to the spot where the teeth are gone, it won't turn past that point, unless possibly there is enough momentum in the antennas rotation to carry it through. If it doesn't make it through that spot, a little shift in the wind can move it enough for it to grab.

Cheap shafts and bearings are not well machined, or critically straight either. They depend on "wearing in" to complete the fit, or alternatively are sloppy to begin with.

As for items being made in the same factory, it is very often the case that the same basic item can be ordered to different specs from the same factory. If you are willing to pay for the better machining, qualty bearings, or hardening, you can get it. In the earlier days of Taiwan, importers and rebranders would do their own final inspection because Taiwan was so apt to cut corners. The first run would be just fine. Then they'd send crap; the same item made badly. Today Taiwan and China are pretty reliable. But you can always order things with low specs if you like.

Even when items have had problems, manufacturers often develop a fix as the years pass. Otherwise they can't sell the product, and their investment is down the tubes. If an importer has an item with too many warranty returns, driving down the profit, they know it all too well, and use their buying power to force manufacturers to a fix. This is one reason I was very unhappy with the Magnavox rotor that had a 1998 date label. I figure it was from a factory run that was dumped on the cheap because it was unsaleable. It WAS in unused condition. The Zenith antenna motor looks the same but the controller has a 2005 date. It is not very believable to me that Magnavox is still getting 1998 rotors from the factory, while Zenith is on 2005!

Probably your installer put in a garbage rotor. That's the way installers normally do things. They charge for first quality, and deliver trash, when they can at all make it pass. I have hardly had an experience with installers, where I was able to crosscheck, where that was not the case. It is to the point where I hate to check. I know I'll find something that should be fixed or replaced.

You can take the leverage off the rotor shaft by using a thrust bearing, but they are kind of expensive.

.


Not that expensive. A little hard to find maybe. Many installations don't lend themselves to guying, though, or people just don't want to deal with it. Illustration of typical installation with guyed thrust bearing: http://www.astrosurf.org/lombry/Radio/rotator-bearing.gif
The CM 9523 alignment bearing in use: http://www.coyotecreekranch.com/DTV/receiving_portland%20DTV/P0001449.JPG
There is a design which attaches to the mast above the rotator and doesn't require guying. I picked one up around a year ago. It's tricky to get it to line up properly with the rotator, though, and I abandoned it after several frustrations with my rotor hanging up. The most sturdy way to do it is to attach it to a plate at the top of a tower with the rotator installed inside the tower.

If you want a significantly more robust rotor than the 9521 you'll need to go with a ham rotor. I've not seen one that is remote controlled, though. PC-controlled, yes, but none remote controlled that I'm aware of. See http://www.eham.net/reviews/products/24

Hey gang,

I have an old ChannelMaster single screen (not double put together like they do today) 4228 UHF antenna that's been on a roof for 15 years. It's rusty, but the
balun is in very good shape. The dipoles and screen are rusty. How much will that affect reception, how can or should I get the rust off, and should I "paint" it?
If so, with what? Specific recommendations?

Here is my take. The rust that you can get at is probably doing very little harm. What will be a problem, and one that is hard to do much about, is at the connections, the parts riveted together or screwed together.

Here's the reasoning: Electromagnetic waves have these properties: They pass through nonconductive substances as if they were not there. Electrically conductive materials re-broadcast them (or reflect), but this happens by means of a created current flowing in the surface of the conductor. It is the flowing current that antennas make use of. Both of these phenomena are nearly lossless for receiving antennas, unless the conducting material is intermediately resistive; good but great. To the extent that rust conducts rather poorly, or not at all, there is not much current, and therefore not much loss. The underlying metal will be primarily where the current flows. So unless you are in a low signal area, I would not get worked up about the surface rust.

One problem with the reasoning is that dampness will create ions in the rust and become fairly conductive. Painting should stop that.

The serious problem is where the parts are connected together. The original contact was created by pressure, which also seals off the area and protects it. But corrosion gradually creeps in. Without disassembling and cleaning, there are liable to be bad connections. You can't expect the antenna to work as designed without its parts being connected.

OTOH, any chunk of metal can be an antenna. You never know. My UHF only Winegard PR9032 brings in just about a perfect picture on analog channel 2, 4, 7 and 9 where its gain should be nil. (I am in a good signal area, at least for VHF, so negative gain over a half wave dipole may still be a pretty decent level. )

The kind of primer I like for rusty metal are ones that claim to dissolve it or reform it into something ready for painting, such as often found in automobile parts stores. The reddish primer that is for use on "heavy rust" has the problem that it doesn't stick so well to the areas that are not rusted. Galvanized steel in particular does not hold that primer or paint very well. The rust reformers convert iron oxide to iron phosphate (which is then dissolved) and zinc oxide to zinc phosphate, which does hold paint well.

"I also tried a vertical stack of Channel Master 3021s (4248's with a split-boom for shipping) but due to rotor issues and no real improvement in reception, I pulled it back down."

You didn't mention any rotor failure other than that, and no rotor name, so I don't think I recalled incorrectly. So it was the CM rotor that failed in two days. That's a pretty good warning not to stint on the rotor if you are going with an array or an ultra antenna.

The rotor didn't fail in two days. In fact, the rotor issue had more to do with the guy ring that was "slipping" during rotation that made me nervous. Maybe it damaged the rotor, the few times I spun it around. I don't know. It worked flawlessly with the Winegard HD-7084P for another 6 months, and then worked flawlessly with the Winegard HD-8200P for about 9 months after that. Then it stuck. So if, 15 months after I did my little two-day experiment, the rotor failed because of some weakening, then I suppose I got what I deserved.

The "made in China" rotor that failed before that one lasted less than two years, and I never put anything larger than the 7084P on it.

Hi guys I need help!
I hope this is the right place to ask. I am about 53 miles from my knoxville TN stations (according to antennaweb). I'm pretty high here where I live so I don't think line of sight is a big problem.
I just placed a CM 3020 in my attic. I am getting between 45 to 60 on my signal meter on my D* reciever. Will a preamp help me or am I just out of luck. I get the locals on satallite but I want the HD reception. Anything you would suggest?

I just placed a CM 3020 in my attic. I am getting between 45 to 60 on my signal meter on my D* reciever. Will a preamp help me or am I just out of luck. I get the locals on satallite but I want the HD reception. Anything you would suggest?

Well, the first thing to do is the famous "analog test." What do analogs that come from the same locations (and are on the same band, comparing UHF-to-UHF, hi-VHF to hi-VHF and lo-VHF to lo-VHF) look like? What does WTNZ-43 look like, for instance? Are there ghosts? Is there a lot of "snow" in the picture? Neither? Both? If you've got ghosting, skip the preamplifier - it will only make things worse. If you've just got snow though, a preamplifier (Channel Master 7777) would be a good next step.

The 3020 is a monster, but it isn't the world's best UHF antenna. You might want to try a 4228 for the UHF stuff, as the 4228 is a top performer inside attics. Then you can combine it with the 3020 (since I see you have at least one VHF digital station) with a Channel Master #0549 or, if you get a Channel Master 7777 preamp, use the separate VHF and UHF inputs on it.

If neither of these things work, then you're just going to have to bite the bullet and put your antenna outside, where God intended it to be.

Anyone have experience/info on WN-PR 8800 UHF 8 bay which Home Tech online says is "electrically virtually identical to Channel Master 4228" that is easier to mount in attics

Thanks Sregener

Anyone have experience/info on WN-PR 8800 UHF 8 bay which Home Tech online says is "electrically virtually identical to Channel Master 4228" that is easier to mount in attics
Here is the HomeTech ad:
http://www.hometech.com/video/antennas.html#WN-PR8800

Obviously, it's the Windgard PR8800 (the part number is a dead give away):
http://www.winegard.com/offair/pdf/pr-8800.pdf

So is it "electrically virtually identical" to the CM4228?
No way, they are entirely different antennas:
http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=ANC4228&xzoom=zoom#xview

The CM4228 has much better hi-band VHF and significantly better UHF performance:
http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html
Be sure to look at NET GAIN vs Raw Gain.
Also note Antenna Direct DB-8 does not suffer from high freq loss.

FYI: Note that these NEC simulation runs were recently updated on 10/28/05.
The Winegard SS-3000 SharpShooter (aka Terk HDTVlp) is a new addition.
The CM4228 model has been changed, changing the results to reveal
some significant nulls on CH8 and between CH11/12 and almost no response for CH3-6.

I didn't order the 91XG yet... What does anyone (sregener? :)) think about the 43XG? According to Antennas Direct, its gain is just 1dB less than the 91XG, but unfortunately there's no graph of its response throughout the UHF range on HDTV Primer (www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html). However, since the designs are similar, I would think (hope) there'd be only about that much difference at any channel...?

Yesterday I found a post by holl_ands (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5876909&&#post5876909) about measuring balun loss -- and I see the Radio Shack ones are bad!! :eek: So, besides the antenna (91/43XG) itself having more gain, the balun will probably be 3dB better. (Maybe you were including that difference, sregener, when you said 6dB better than R-S?)

And if I get a CM 7777 or 7778 to combine the R-S VHF, its boosting would overcome the maybe 3-4dB loss from ~40' RG-6 + VSWR before my R-S amp (a pre-amp hasn't been used w/ R-S ant.).

So, considering that channels had been strong enough to come in using R-S antenna (again, don't know how much weaker the signals became though :confused: :(), and taking into account the 6dB+ could be gained with pre-amp and better balun, the 1dB difference between the 43XG and 91XG doesn't seem like much. And I can apply the $20 difference to the pre-amp. :) BTW, if I had the 91XG and didn't want the VHF combined, I wouldn't even use the pre-amp if I didn't need to, so its additional 1dB would be lost anyway. :)

Hi guys I need help!
I hope this is the right place to ask. I am about 53 miles from my knoxville TN stations (according to antennaweb). I'm pretty high here where I live so I don't think line of sight is a big problem.
I just placed a CM 3020 in my attic. I am getting between 45 to 60 on my signal meter on my D* reciever. Will a preamp help me or am I just out of luck. I get the locals on satallite but I want the HD reception. Anything you would suggest?

Where are you exactly?

I'm 65 miles from Knoxville. In all likelihood you need to quit wasting time/effort in the attic and get your antenna outside. The 3020 is decent but any combo vhf/uhf can be bettered by going with separates. For Knoxville, you'll need uhf and high band vhf. If you arent' planning on a rotator, a CM 4228 with the CM 7777 preamp would be a good start and you could add a separate high band vhf antenna later if necessary. If you want to use a rotator, I'd go with a yagi/corner reflector for uhf on the rotator and the high band antenna fixed below the rotator.

I have two Televes DAT 75's (uhf) as well as two Funke psp 1922's (high band vhf) in case you are interested.

Hi,
This is Rich. Im in W.N.Y. Ive been in Tv antennas and satellite since 1982 and iD be willing to help any of you out there with your reception Problems.
I am a distributor for Ch MAster/Andrews Winegard-Antennacraft-Delhi-Blonder tongue. I ave extensive experience in building cable headends as well as simple home installs. We are currently doing alot of HD antenna designs around the country. If you have any questions you can e-mail me direct or ask on the forum
My e-mail is:rwantsat@verizon.net
Phone # is 716-434-9216

I didn't order the 91XG yet... What does anyone (sregener? :)) think about the 43XG?....And I can apply the $20 difference to the pre-amp. :) BTW, if I had the 91XG and didn't want the VHF combined, I wouldn't even use the pre-amp if I didn't need to, so its additional 1dB would be lost anyway. :)The 43XG would be a fine antenna if that is all you need. Personally, I live beyond the fringe of most of the stations I want (70-73 miles), so alway look at the highest antenna gain I can get. Antenna gain is always better than a pre-amp, because it is clean gain. A pre-amp will always add at least a little noise. And noise is not good for digital signals. That said, if you can't get enough antenna gain to make it work, a low noise pre-amp can be the answer (I use one).

I didn't order the 91XG yet... What does anyone (sregener? :)) think about the 43XG? According to Antennas Direct, its gain is just 1dB less than the 91XG...

I'd bet that the 43XG is identical or nearly so for channels below 35 or so. Above channel 35, the 91XG is going to start making a difference, and the higher you go, the more difference it's going to make. I haven't personally tried the 43XG, but I haven't heard anything bad about them, either.

The most important factors for any antenna are design and location. The 43XG doesn't seem much inferior to the 91XG, but I'd bet the difference is more than 1dB on channels 40+.

Thanks for both of your replies. :) sregener, Antennas Direct gain figures are the peak gain, which on the 91XG, like most I guess, occurs at the highest channels, so I figure THAT is where the difference should be 1dB. :confused: I guess I'll go for the 43 though...

Thanks for both of your replies. :) sregener, Antennas Direct gain figures are the peak gain, which on the 91XG, like most I guess, occurs at the highest channels, so I figure THAT is where the difference should be 1dB. :confused: I guess I'll go for the 43 though...

Well, based on this page (http://www.starkelectronic.com/del937.htm) I'm guessing that 2-3dB is more likely, since the power zoom adds 8 elements (32 equivalent for the 91XG) and adds 2dB to the Delhi's gain figure.

Thanks for both of your replies. :) sregener, Antennas Direct gain figures are the peak gain, which on the 91XG, like most I guess, occurs at the highest channels, so I figure THAT is where the difference should be 1dB. :confused: I guess I'll go for the 43 though...

I think that's probably pretty close.Here's a link to CPC's website showing comparison specs on the 43 and 91 element Funke Quad-X antennas that are identical to the XG91-43,except for the driven element.In some cases,1db can make all the difference.I'd go for the 91 element model.

http://cpc.farnell.com/jsp/endecaSearch/moduleDisplayPopup.jsp?moduleId=cpc/253268.xml

Greg B

I think that's probably pretty close.Here's a link to CPC's website showing comparison specs on a 43 and 91 element Funke Quad-X antennas that are identical,except for the driven element.In some cases,1db can make all the difference.I'd go for the 91 element model.

Interesting the F/B ratio is 1dB higher for the 91 (and the higher, the better.) And the big difference is on the low end (8.9 to 10.2) rather than the high end (15.7-16.7.)

I agree with you, though, MAX HD. The best route is always to get the best antenna in "borderline" situations and then, when the reception isn't the best, you're never kicking yourself wondering if just a little more antenna would have made the difference. I know I went through a couple of years of angst because of reception, but once I bought the best, I never thought, "Gee, maybe I should have tried antenna such-and-such instead."

Well, based on this page (http://www.starkelectronic.com/del937.htm) I'm guessing that 2-3dB is more likely, since the power zoom adds 8 elements (32 equivalent for the 91XG) and adds 2dB to the Delhi's gain figure.

I've installed alot of Delhi antennas up here and have used the powr zoom but i havent noticed much of an increase in gain. I do usually notice a slight improvement in directivity thou. Another good example is My winegard 9032 yagi. I extended it and now its a super yagi. !50" from apx 100 " .With that i seen an increase of apx 2 db fro ch 40 -50 but really ended up with much more directivity.
There are few antennas out there in my mind that will ever compare to a uhf parabolic. I own 3 of them. one is on a tower at 80' with a winegard preamp ,I can watch erie pa from north of buffalo regularly as well as Toronto. Im currently trying to buy the build specs from Ch Master on the 4250 6' and 4251 7 ' model. They will not build them anymore even if i ask for 200 to be built. I have a guy who does aluminum fabrication and he will build if i supply specs. I have a standing order from a Canadian dealer for 100 of them.
B.T.W. Ive been in antenna/sat business since 1982
My 2 cents worth

There are few antennas out there in my mind that will ever compare to a uhf parabolic.

Your results would be more impressive if they were strictly over land. Being near such a large body of water (even if the shortest path doesn't necessarily go over it) queers the deal somewhat.

The knock on the UHF parabolics is their front-to-back ratio. Since the active element is "pointed" backwards, the antennas tend to have a lot of bleed through from signals in the opposite direction from the intended signals. I suppose a better reflector would be a major plus. Still, that adds wind load to an already heavy antenna.

Technically, there's no difference between a satellite dish and a parabolic, so you could buy a mesh dish (or a solid one if you have the guts) and replace the LNB with a UHF bowtie, put some type of screen behind it to block the signal coming in, and you'd have your parabolic antenna. There are 20' mesh dishes. Somehow, though, I think the law of diminishing returns would get you long before you'd see any benefit from an antenna that size.

Hi all I live on the third floor of a 12 floor condo in the Philadelphia area. I have been trying like mad to find a good indoor antenna. Please Help, I've already try a few rabbit ears without any success.

Thanks for that link with the specs MAX HD. :)

So does anybody have the slightest idea how much the signal level reaching here could have changed, dB-wise, between seasons or atmospheric conditions? I couldn't find anything with Google... Could they have gotten more than, say, 6dB (4x) weaker? I don't know what certain dB-differences look like on analogs, but my UHFs are just barely worse, I'd say -- only a bit more snow.

Well, I guess if my receiver displayed S/N, I'd have a great idea of the dB-difference. :( :mad: Any of you guys with dB readouts compare how much change there is under different conditions?

So does anybody have the slightest idea how much the signal level reaching here could have changed, dB-wise, between seasons or atmospheric conditions?

I've heard that tropospheric enhancement can make a difference of 22-45dB. A few dB can make a huge difference with digital reception. Analogs seem to be more subtle in their changes.

Holy. :eek:

Well, yesterday after seeing the extra replies, I was back to thinking I should go ahead and get the 91. Now I guess I'll have to see if even IT is enough. :D

Well, yesterday after seeing the extra replies, I was back to thinking I should go ahead and get the 91. Now I guess I'll have to see if even IT is enough. :D

That was kind of my point all along. If you get the best, then you know you've done everything that can be done. If you don't, you'll always wonder as your favorite show turns into a pixelated - or black - mess.

Having seen how good UHF reception looks with tropospheric enhancement, I think 45dB might even be a little low. I've had analog UHF look *BETTER* than some digital (480i) signals. And that's on stations that are so snowy normally that I can't read big text on the screen.

Granted, your differences may not be so great. But don't assume that you're only 3dB away...

Thanks for that link with the specs MAX HD. :)

So does anybody have the slightest idea how much the signal level reaching here could have changed, dB-wise, between seasons or atmospheric conditions? I couldn't find anything with Google... Could they have gotten more than, say, 6dB (4x) weaker? I don't know what certain dB-differences look like on analogs, but my UHFs are just barely worse, I'd say -- only a bit more snow.

Well, I guess if my receiver displayed S/N, I'd have a great idea of the dB-difference. :( :mad: Any of you guys with dB readouts compare how much change there is under different conditions?

I'd say what you're seeing is about right for the seasonal change.The lower power analog UHF's that I receive here are around 5-10db lower now than they were in warmer weather.We call it "winter deadband cx".

Another factor that has more influence on solid reception than any particular antenna is the location of the antenna itself.When you're in the fringe,with possible terrain issues,there can be large differences in signal strength.If it's feasible,mount a UHF antenna on a broom handle or whatever,and do a site survey before making a permanent mounting location.

Greg B

I am trying to get OTA of HDTV.

I have a samsung TV with a built-in tuner. A ~120inch antenna with a channelmaster 7777 pre-amp. The FM trap is switched on.

I am having various results receiving HD in one direction. some stations are good. A couple are ok if I tweak the antenna direction and some are missing altogether or pixalated 70% or more of the time.

I think the problem is multipath or FM interference because I get good reception on a number of channels in the other direction, even though they are further away.

Some large buildings are directly in the direction of the problem channels, and one has the broadcast antenna for a college FM radio station. The problem channels may be coming in with some strong signals anywhere from 2-9 on the strength meter. Often times the meter is fluctuating, 6 or 8 bars for 5 seconds then 0, or the last bar or 2 are off-on. Some times I have no picture and no signal indication, then move the antenna a few degrees and have a 9! The good channels are in the same direction, and I think on the same broadcast antenna.

Does anyone know how I could diagnose this as multipath or FM, and if so, what should I do? Could it be anything else?

Any help is appreciated.

Dave

Technically, there's no difference between a satellite dish and a parabolic, so you could buy a mesh dish (or a solid one if you have the guts) and replace the LNB with a UHF bowtie, put some type of screen behind it to block the signal coming in, and you'd have your parabolic antenna. There are 20' mesh dishes. Somehow, though, I think the law of diminishing returns would get you long before you'd see any benefit from an antenna that size.

Your idea intrigues me. I have a 10.5 foot parabolic mesh dish that I was thinking of taking down since I no longer view C-band much. But the idea of trying a small UHF antenna instead of a feedhorn sounds like a good idea. What antenna do you think would work best? A bowtie, a SquareShooter, an XG 91 in reverse (shortened to proper focal length with all but the last 6 directors removed)?

PGDave,
Those old CM parabolics had what looked like a double bowtie antenna (including rear screen) facing the dish. Parabolic have considerably more gain that other antennas, that is why they are used for satellite reception. They can pick up a relatively weak signal from a very long distance (how far away are the satellites?), when you have a line-of-sight path. It would be nearly impossible to mount a large dish 50ft up on a tower. That is why we all use light weight antennas out here in the fringe. Here, getting your antenna up above obstructions, like trees, hills and buildings, is more important that antenna gain. If the signal never reaches the antenna, it won't matter if you have a 30dB gain antenna, you still won't get a picture.

Your idea intrigues me. I have a 10.5 foot parabolic mesh dish that I was thinking of taking down since I no longer view C-band much. But the idea of trying a small UHF antenna instead of a feedhorn sounds like a good idea. What antenna do you think would work best? A bowtie, a SquareShooter, an XG 91 in reverse (shortened to proper focal length with all but the last 6 directors removed)?
http://www.qsl.net/n1bwt/chap4.pdf
Be sure to check out the pages with the illumination and spillover loss diagrams.

This may have been asked/answered before but I didn't see it in a search.

Can I run one continuous 6 gauge bare copper ground wire from the grounding block, then to the mast, then to a secondary 8' ground rod and finally to the primary electrical ground rod about 100' feet away (bonding the two rods)?

If this is OK should the grounding wire be connected to the mast higher up first and then to the cable grounding block?

More Info on Setup:

I have a 30' channel master mast attached to the side of the house. A DB4 antenna is attached about 8' above the roof line. The cable enters the side of the house under the eaves (about 20' above the ground) so that is where the grounding block and 1st attachment to the mast is at. The ground wire is attached to the mast at two other spots lower down before connecting to the ground rod.

From the ground rod the grounding wire (now acting as a bonding wire) would snake around the outside of the house, attached to the concrete block foundation, to the primary grounding rod.

Thanks for any help,

Bryant

Ken, I finally realized why every time it rained that I would get pixilation and drop outs when viewing OTA HD. The antenna was swaying in the wind! I have a rotor which elevates the antenna making it more vulnerable to sway. I had changed the antenna, cable and amplifier...never giving any consideration for the pole that supports the antenna and rotor! I realized that it was not the rain, but the wind that was causing the problem. I presume antenna movement is more critical with ATS vs NTSC reception because of the digital character of the data.

Can I run one continuous 6 gauge bare copper ground wire from the grounding block, then to the mast, then to a secondary 8' ground rod and finally to the primary electrical ground rod about 100' feet away (bonding the two rods)?
I think that you've got the idea. Tie everything together.
If this is OK should the grounding wire be connected to the mast higher up first and then to the cable grounding block?
As long as everything is tied together, I don't think that it matters.

I have 2 grounding rods. 1 at a short tower, and another a short distance away. The 1 at the tower is connected to the tower, and also connected to the other grounding rod. From the grounding block at the house entry, a #4 cable is run(under ground) to the 2nd rod. From the 2nd rod, a 6 gauge wire is run around the house to connect with the house ground. Again, everything tied together.
....jc

Ken, I finally realized why every time it rained that I would get pixilation and drop outs when viewing OTA HD. The antenna was swaying in the wind! I have a rotor which elevates the antenna making it more vulnerable to sway. I had changed the antenna, cable and amplifier...never giving any consideration for the pole that supports the antenna and rotor! I realized that it was not the rain, but the wind that was causing the problem. I presume antenna movement is more critical with ATS vs NTSC reception because of the digital character of the data.

Bad guess. It was the rain.

Can I run one continuous 6 gauge bare copper ground wire from the grounding block, then to the mast, then to a secondary 8' ground rod and finally to the primary electrical ground rod about 100' feet away (bonding the two rods)?

If this is OK should the grounding wire be connected to the mast higher up first and then to the cable grounding block?

I'd do it, but if we are splitting hairs here, the coax ground wire has to be insulated. (I didn't write the code, and personally don't care whether it is or not.)

The only benefit of having the coax entry point ground wire going down instead of up is that it is SLIGHTLY more efficient at shunting off lightning, but believe me, if you get hit directly by lightning, that slight theoretical advangage isn't likely to make any perceptible difference.

Bad guess. It was the rain.

I have not changed the pole supporting the antenna, but I could not help notice the antenna swaying in a windy rain and watching the signal strength meter on the LG 3410 receiver move abruptly into the "poor" range.

To prove my theory, I am going to experiment and place a UHF antenna in the attic. This a location that will be unaffected by wind. I will then compare the signal strength between inside and outside antennas to verify if both antennas experience the sudden drop in signal strength during a rain storm.

AntAltMike, what makes you believe otherwise?

Living in an area where half the DTV stations broadcast on VHF, I currently receive the vhf broadcasts on an old Radio Shack ultra-fringe UHF yagi; however the ABC affiliate will soon begin broadcasting on CH. 8, the NBC affiliate is on CH. 13....I'm moving about 1 mile away and would like to get feedback from users of a Winegard 7082P vs. an Antennas Direct V21...I will 82 channel pre-amp into my headend as I have been with the old UHF fringe antenna.

I too had a very difficult time "tuning" my antenna system. I live in a suburb of New York City and every time it rained, I would receive pixelation. The solution was to replace the entire system: Channel Master high gain antenna and outdoor amplifier, passive splitters and variable attentuators. The LG tuner is the only tuner that required the additional variable attenuator to bring the signal level to the optimum setting.
Sr's Forest Hills zip code indicates that he may be about 8 miles from the towers. The first thing he should do is get rid of his preamp. The signals are irreparably damaged by that preamp, and this cannot be undone my downstream attenuation.

If that doesn't solve his reception problems, but if he believes he has a clear, line-of-site path to the towers, then he needs to experiment with different mast locations to stumble across the one with the least multipath signal strength. There is no easy way to do this, and for many people, it is actually easier to try different, temporary mast locations in an attic than on a rooftop.

I live about 60 miles from ATL towers and have the4228/7777 amp combo, I get all digitals clearly except ABC 2.1, it fades in and out and I've moved the antenna around a bit, would raising it help or even move it to another location on the roof help OR what about a DB8, would it out perform a 4228??

Thanks for finding my earlier posting. Prior to installing the new antenna system with an outdoor amplifier, I had a completely passive system and I would experience the same problem I am having now. Originally, I believed I had a poor connection that was allowing water to enter a connector, but I changed all the connectors, and that did not solve the problem. That is when I changed the entire system, except for the mounting pole.

So you could be correct. It could be a multipath issue. But before I relocate the antenna, I want to test the signal strength with an indoor antenna. Now that the leaves are off the trees, multipath should be less of an issue. Antenna sway is still a form of distortion, and I will replace the mast with a more rigid pole if the temporary attic antenna signal strength remains steady during the next windy rain.

Sr doesn't have any means to measure signal strength. The so-called signal strength indicator incorporated into his tuner is actually displaying a contrived indication of signal quality.

Every Channel Master preamp boosts signal power by over a hundred fold, but the difference in "signal strength" indicated by the tuner's internal signal strength meter does not in any way correlate with that fact.

The multipath signal component that likely is interfering with sr's reception is off a solid object. If there is more vegetation on the intended signal path than the unintended one, then seasonal exfoliation will tend to result in a slight improvement in signal quality. If there is more vegetation on the unintended path, then it will tend to result in reduced quality.

A directional antenna located eight miles from the towers will develop over a thousand times the signal power needed for the receiver to operate reliably. More likely, it will develop ten thousand times as much, and when it is amplfied, it will be over a hundred thousand times as strong as the receiver needs.

If a directional antenna twists 30 degrees offline in the wind (doubtful), it would lose no more than 10dB (one tenth) and the unamplified signal would still be over a hundred times as powerful as needed.

I've installed a few thousand antennas. If I have to take one down for some reason and then put it back up, I generally don't care if it is five degrees off the bearing on which I previously had it targeted, because in most cases, such a deviation won't make any difference, and in cases where it does, I have an unstable multipath situation that I will have to address but which won't get reliably remedied by cambering the antenna a degree or two.

Check post #2414 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5946459) in this thread for a further discussion of multipath and the means to remedy it.

Sr should look at analog UHF transmissions from the same tower to see if there is a visible ghost image to the right of the primary analog image. If there is just one ghost, then he might improve the quality of his digital signals from the same tower by positioning the antenna in such a way as to minimize that ghost image's intensity, but this method is not one hundred percent reliable.

I've installed a few thousand antennas. If I have to take one down for some reason and then put it back up, I generally don't care if it is five degrees off the bearing on which I previously had it targeted, because in most cases, such a deviation won't make any difference, and in cases where it does, I have an unstable multipath situation that I will have to address but which won't get reliably remedied by cambering the antenna a degree or two.

All bets are off, however, when you're 75 miles away and aiming over the horizon. In that case, 5 degrees is more than enough to make-or-break you with a highly directional antenna.

But at 30 miles, I have to get 60 degrees off-axis to lose digital locks with the same direction antenna.

Hi. Newbie to the HD world with a couple of Qs:

I installed the following this weekend: Mitsu 52628 1080P DLP, DISH 942, Dish HD Pak and a Terk 5 Bowtie which I set-up on top of the TV to trial antenna reception. I am 30 miles from the towers according to anntennaweb and so far so good, am picking up all of the local digital channels including 4-1, 5-1, 8-1, 11-1 and several others. Watched Desperate Housewives last night while recording the Jets game on ESPNHD - incredible picture!

1. My signal strength is 67-73 as-is. Can I move the Terk 5 to the attic and expect any signal improvement? I am on a south facing hill North of Dallas (where towers are located) with one tree in the front yard so I am speculating that another 20 ft or so in elevation will help a bit.
2. Is there another indoor UHF/VHF antenna to try in the attic? Winegard Sharpshooter? Radio Shack?
3. Or consider an amp?
4. Also, may be OT, but have seen a few threads about Dallasites qualifying for CBS-HD from Dish. Does anyone have the scoop on how to do this? Is there a cost for this feed? Or, just the cost of adding a 2d Dish for the 148 satellite? And, if I need a 2d Dish should I try for the Dish 1000 upgrade? Any cost info?

Thanks in advance!

1. My signal strength is 67-73 as-is. Can I move the Terk 5 to the attic and expect any signal improvement?

Maybe, but if you're not seeing any artifacting and the screen never blacks out, there's no point in doing anything. With digital, once you achieve a stable lock, the picture will never look any better, no matter how much better the signal strength gets,

All bets are off, however, when you're 75 miles away and aiming over the horizon. In that case, 5 degrees is more than enough to make-or-break you with a highly directional antenna.

But at 30 miles, I have to get 60 degrees off-axis to lose digital locks with the same direction antenna.

Also don't assume that full power DTV is available either. I am picking up a signal 45 miles away in UHF and the transmitter erp power is 12Kw.

Hi,

I have two separate attic spaces that I can use an antenna in. I'm getting a Channel Master 4228. I can fit it in one space easily, but the antenna would be pointing toward the gable, which is brick. The other attic space is a little higher and the antenna would be pointing toward a standard shingle roof, but the attic access would have to be modified to allow me to fit the 4228 up and into the attic. Once in the attic, space is not a problem. Will the brick front on my gable totally clobber the reception? It does have a small gable vent, but that is it. I know from reading the forum that higher is generally better, but it would be easier to try the antenna in the first attic, if the brick doesn't mess things up too much.

Any advice would be appreciated.

I have two separate attic spaces that I can use an antenna in. I'm getting a Channel Master 4228. I can fit it in one space easily...

The solution seems obvious to me. Try it in the space where it fits easily and see how it works. If it works good enough, great, you're done. If not, then it's no big deal to take it out of the easy to reach attic.

Trying to predict what will happen in an attic with reception is a little like trying to predict the weather; there's an 80% chance that something you hadn't expected will impact your results.

The solution seems obvious to me. Try it in the space where it fits easily and see how it works. If it works good enough, great, you're done. If not, then it's no big deal to take it out of the easy to reach attic.


I kind of figured that, but I wanted to make sure that a brick front didn't automatically mean no chance at all. I'll see how it goes tomorrow.

Thanks.

How small is your attic access? The CM 4228 is only 36" high and easily went thru my access on the diagonal. Furthermore, each mesh segment has gold colored clips that hold it to the frame. The 4 clips have little 'tabs' that are bent out to capture the mesh. You can carefully bend the tabs away from the mesh and remove it and then reattach once in the attic.

I'm still analog, have a Radio Shack VU-190XR VHF/UHF combo antenna, and am having trouble pulling in channel 2 or 3. I'm in Connecticut, about 55 miles from NYC(ch2) and 55 mile from Hartford(ch 3) with a rotor on the roof.

At times I can get either channel by turning the antenna to the correct direction. Other times I can't get either one. Most of my other channels are UHF which come in fine.

When I look at the net gain for the VU-190XR (listed as a VHF antenna), it shows a gain of around 4.5 for channel 3, while the ChannelMaster 4248/3023 (listed as a UHF antenna) shows a net gain of around 11.

How can that be? A UHF antenna has more gain on channel 3 than a VHY antenna? Is it just that the CM is that much better? And does it make sense to try a CM4248/3023? It seems to have better gain across all channels. Am I reading the chart correctly or am I missing something?

Where did you see a CH3 gain spec for the CM 4248/3023?
I think you got your facts mixed up.

Channel Master and their distributors only provide UHF gain numbers for this antenna.
And www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html NEC simulation results for CM4248 were only for UHF gain, not VHF.

I looked at the net gain chart for UHF antennas and the plot for the CM4248 (line C on the chart). Although the chart has the channels in increments of 10, it starts at 0 and though most of the antennas have a steep climb from channel 2 to channel 20, the 4248 starts around 11 and then levels off up to channel 68. Then it drops off.

f:/data/cm4248.bmp

I just got a HD tuner today and after it scanned for channels, I checked out the signal strength on several of them using the tuners meter. One is showing a strength that switches between 66% and 72%. It isn't showing any picture quality issues, but I was wondering if there is a general guideline for how low it can go before problems develop. I imagine it might fluctuate in the future due to weather or tree foliage. I'm currently using a Radio Shack (model 75 I think - 4ft long with multiple vanes) combo UHF-VHF antenna. I got a Channel Master 4228 antenna, thinking that my existing antenna wouldn't be sensitive enough to pull in the stations. Now I'm wondering if I should return the Channel Master or put it up to see if my strengths get higher. I'm not sure what kind of headroom 66% or 72% gives me. All I have to go by is the signal strength indicator. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Also, is the Channel Master 4228 more directional than the RS antenna? If so, then I might not get all the channels that the RS gets, since the broadcasting stations are separated by about 15 degrees.

Thanks.

I looked at the net gain chart for UHF antennas and the plot for the CM4248 (line C on the chart). Although the chart has the channels in increments of 10, it starts at 0 and though most of the antennas have a steep climb from channel 2 to channel 20, the 4248 starts around 11 and then levels off up to channel 68.

Check it again, it starts at 14. The 0 is on the y axis.

All UHF-only antennas have negative gain on lo-VHF.

Check it again, it starts at 14. The 0 is on the y axis.

All UHF-only antennas have negative gain on lo-VHF.If you go to the bottom of the same page, there is a chart showing UHF antenna gain on VHF. The 4228 has surprising gain in upper VHF, but ALL UHF's are abysmal in the lower VHF range (worse than rabbit ears).

Your idea intrigues me. I have a 10.5 foot parabolic mesh dish that I was thinking of taking down since I no longer view C-band much. But the idea of trying a small UHF antenna instead of a feedhorn sounds like a good idea. What antenna do you think would work best? A bowtie, a SquareShooter, an XG 91 in reverse (shortened to proper focal length with all but the last 6 directors removed)?

Ok Here is the pooh on using a c/ku sat dish for uhf. Yes it can be done. Yes I have done it with a 10 footer!!!! And what a signal. Ok You have to do some re designing of the dish. 1st you get rid of the big heavy mount on it, Then you remove all the current mesh because its too much of a wind catcher. Second you make bracket out of steel stock at the top and bottom of dish if its standing vertical. you want to connect them at the point where 2 of the 4 panels are joined. Then you attach 2 for top 2 for bottom u bolt assemblies. Now for the feed.
I tool another piece of flat steel and mounted in the center of the dish and put 2 more u bolts to hold a square stock tubing. This held my feed and sub reflector. I used a folded dipole design like the old delhi /antennacraft p-7 parabolic used.
For the mesh i got 1" chicken wire type mesh and replaced it on the dish. I put it on my tower at 20 ft and was amazed!!! I currently have 2 7' parabolics 1 at 85' 1at 25' The 10 ft unit blew both away and the beamwidth was super tight. F/B ratio was better as the reflecter surface area was smaller not letting uhf pass thru it to well. I had to take it down though because i want to try some new ideas. B.T.W. Its alot easier to do this with a 6 or 7 ft mesh dish due to weight. The best dishes to use weight wise are the perfect ten dishes. Usually grey in color.
I spoke in depth today on the phone to Channel Master about buying the build specs for the old parascope uhf antennas. They are in a mess there. They assured me they would find the specs and sell them to me. Im hoping to start re manufacturing a 6 or 7' parabolic based on the old Ch Master Ideas. The have no intention of ever building it again since the co. was sold. Its ashamed what has become of that Company. Ive been in the antenna business since 1982 and i have not seen any antenna that can compare to a prabolic in gain/beamwidth and f/b If someone wants to bring one here to do comparison's im game. Antennas direct is sending me 2 of they're most fringe models to test. If i like i will start selling and become a distributor?????
I have lined up a friend i the aluminum business to start turning out the parabolics once i get the plans. I have 1 on my tower but at 85 ft i really dont want to pull it down. So i am waiting for C.M. to come thru or to borrow one from somebody to copy the layout. B.T.W. by screening a parabolic it increases the f/b and gain. You can see tips of this at WTFDA.com Of which i am a member and have been now for well over 25 years. The guys in that club take tv dxing to a whole new level. As far as tropo enhancement hows this one for you. I live near Bufalo .N.Y. and have watched ch 34 kgmc from oklahoma city Ok. 1200 miles on uhf. :eek: So that is what can be done with a great antenna in enhanced conditions.
TAke care all
Rich

If you go to the bottom of the same page, there is a chart showing UHF antenna gain on VHF. The 4228 has surprising gain in upper VHF, but ALL UHF's are abysmal in the lower VHF range (worse than rabbit ears).

But the 4228 has horrifically poor flatness across the channel on every VHF highband channel except 10 and 13. It varies by about 10dB within the channel on 7, 8, 11, and 12. With NTSC signals, this would result in uneven coloration. With 8VSB, it probably would result in a less reliable signal lock than one could get from the signal developed by a dipole and reflector crudely fashioned from scrap metal.

My friend bought a new sony Bravia for his apartment in north Naples Florida. He lives on the 14th floor of a condo with a clear view of all the networks within 35 miles. The range is between 6 and 10 degrees. Will an indoor or outdoor HDTV directional antenna work for him? David

How small is your attic access? The CM 4228 is only 36" high and easily went thru my access on the diagonal. Furthermore, each mesh segment has gold colored clips that hold it to the frame. The 4 clips have little 'tabs' that are bent out to capture the mesh. You can carefully bend the tabs away from the mesh and remove it and then reattach once in the attic.

It's less than 36" on the diagonal. I was thinking about doing what you described. If a tab happens to break, can the mesh be attached in place using other means? (zip ties maybe?) The mesh is there to only reflect - right?

On a different topic, once I get it in the attic, if the 4228 can't pull in the 1 vhf station I need, could I use my combo UHF/VHF antenna and send it to the vhf input of a uhf/vhf combiner without messing up the UHF signals coming from the 4228?

Thanks for all the good help.

The Solid Signal order came yesterday, and they sent the Terrestrial Digital brand 91XG (indicated on box and instructions). :confused: I realize they're the same exact antennas sold under different brands, but what is the point of having both on the Solid Signal site if they are just going to send whatever, ignoring what you ordered?? Antennas Direct is in St. Louis, so I thought I was "supporting" them... But I did notice that the phone number on the TD instructions is the same as at the AD site, so who knows. :)

Problem is, as far as I can tell, I didn't get the "thumb screw" to attach the balun box to the boom. :mad: I'll have to tell them about that. I can use something else to hold it on for testing, but I should have the correct part. I wonder if the missing part and being the wrong brand would be enough reason for them to let me return it, without being out return shipping and restocking fee, and get the 43XG instead, IF after testing I find that the 91XG is working so well that its extra 1-2 dB isn't necessary. :D

There is no such thing as a maximum distance. Go out into space and you can get UHF reception for billions of miles. Back here on terra firma, a good "average" distance is 60 miles over average terrain. Mountain ranges between you and the broadcasting towers, however, is not average terrain. All bets are off.

Antennaweb is giving you "deep fringe" results for VHF signals. VHF bends more readily around objects like mountains, so it reaches further than UHF, on average. If the Tuscon stations were broadcasting their digital signals on VHF frequencies, you might have a shot. With UHF, I'd be extremely pessimistic.

However, there is such a thing as knife-edge diffraction, which may save you if you're some distance (say more than 10 miles) away from the mountains. You might get something that way, but there are no guarantees. The only way to know is to try an antenna and find out. However, don't bother going as high as possible once you've cleared local roof and tree clutter by about 10 feet. Beyond that, the deciding factor is going to be those mountains, and I'm guessing you're not going to put something up tall enough to clear those.

Thanks for the reply to my poorly worded question. I remember (probably from sci-fi movies) that TV/Radio signals go billions of miles out into space :p

After more research, I'm going to give it a shot. The Tucson TV transmsit from atop Mt. Bigelow, at 8500'. Mountains immediately to the east reach 6000'. I'm at 4000', with nearest mountain range reaching 5000' are 20-25 miles away. I MIGHT get that "knife edge diffraction". I decided it was worth investing in a Winegard HD 9095P UHF only antenna. Once hooked up I can check signal strength on my Fusion5 digital TV card on the PC to see if I get adequate signal strength worth investing another $60 in a good preamp.

Everyone else in the area uses satellite. Dish Network does offer the local Tucson TV stations, but only in SD. After enjoying OTA HD programming for several years in the city, I know I'll be unhappy paying $40/mo.+ to watch the Superbowl and "24" in SD.
Keeping my fingers crossed.

rwantennasat: I'l be first in line if you manufacture a line of CM 4251 replicas.

My friend bought a new sony Bravia for his apartment in north Naples Florida. He lives on the 14th floor of a condo with a clear view of all the networks within 35 miles. The range is between 6 and 10 degrees. Will an indoor or outdoor HDTV directional antenna work for him? DavidDavid, send your "friend" here - antennaweb.org - simply input your friend's address, and follow the instructions/directions on type of antenna best suited for him. That seems to be a great starting point for these types of issues.

Thanks, I am familiar with the site and it shows that an outdoor antenna (directional) will pick up all the network stations easily. But I wanted insight from someone in the area who could confirm that it would work and which unit would they recommend. Also will the picture be any different than the comcast box in terms of quality? I ordered a comcast box for him after the direct guy said it would not work. I was surprised because he has a clear site to 218 and being on the 14 floor has nothing in front of him. David

So I am currently using a Terk HDTVi little indoor antenna that gets a few stations but am also missing a few. I was looking into the Terk TV55, but can't find it anywhere and was directed in a new direction now. Can anyone suggest a good antenna such as a channel master or wineguard that is around the same range as the TV55. I was looking into some of these anvantage series channel masters which look pretty good. Here is my reception info
www.humannart.com/fresnodtv.jpg

Can anyone suggest a good antenna such as a channel master or wineguard that is around the same range as the TV55.

Hard to find a good antenna with negative gain (http://www.laaudiofile.com/images/tv55sig.jpg) these days...

Any of the advantage antennas is going to be better (http://www.starkelectronic.com/cmg4.htm).

Don't buy into the amplified hype. You can add a preamplifier if it will make you feel better, but the preamplified stats are the only ones that matter.

Those violet stations will require a good-sized antenna. I'd try a Channel Master 4228 myself. It might be enough for channels 7 and 9, and is a top-notch performer for UHF. If that's too big, the 4221 should be enough for almost all the UHF channels.

Hard to find a good antenna with negative gain (http://www.laaudiofile.com/images/tv55sig.jpg) these days...

Any of the advantage antennas is going to be better (http://www.starkelectronic.com/cmg4.htm).

Don't buy into the amplified hype. You can add a preamplifier if it will make you feel better, but the preamplified stats are the only ones that matter.

Those violet stations will require a good-sized antenna. I'd try a Channel Master 4228 myself. It might be enough for channels 7 and 9, and is a top-notch performer for UHF. If that's too big, the 4221 should be enough for almost all the UHF channels.

Thank you for all the info, that is very helpful. This looks like a great antenna but doesn't do VHF. I have a couple of channels in VHF that I need to pickup. I found the Channel Master CM 3018 for a good price. This seems like a good antenna that will do both UHF/VHF with long range.

I don't think the Terk55 antenna active reception element has negative gain. I think that when you shut the power inserter off, the preamplifier becomes a dead semiconductor circuit that still leaks through a little signal.

I serviced a commercial establishment located halfway between Baltimore and Washington, DC that was sourcing 47 TVs off one of those stupid things and it worked well for them, since it is bi-directional. They also had six Channel Plus monstrosities that I think combined DA500 amplifiers with 8-port vertical spitters, and four of the six wall-wart power supplies had severe hums, so I threw them all out and replaced them with a single TA-36 amplifier.

Thank you for all the info, that is very helpful. This looks like a great antenna but doesn't do VHF. I have a couple of channels in VHF that I need to pickup.

Check this page (http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html) under the section "Using a UHF antenna for VHF". I'm not 100% sure, but fairly confident the 4228 will work just fine on channels 7 and 9 for you.

I don't think the Terk55 antenna active reception element has negative gain. I think that when you shut the power inserter off, the preamplifier becomes a dead semiconductor circuit that still leaks through a little signal.

Hey, not to argue with a master installer, but how is this thing going to do any better than a dipole? If it were as good as an isotropic dipole, it would have 0dB of gain. Since it isn't the ideal length for almost every channel, it only stands to reason that it will get less signal than an isotropic dipole, hence negative gain.

Check this page (http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html) under the section "Using a UHF antenna for VHF". I'm not 100% sure, but fairly confident the 4228 will work just fine on channels 7 and 9 for you.

So the 4228 looks pretty good in the charts, but if it could pick up VHF stations why don't they lable it as being able to do so?

So the 4228 looks pretty good in the charts, but if it could pick up VHF stations why don't they lable it as being able to do so?

All "UHF-only" antennas pick up some signal on hi-VHF. But as that chart shows, they get next to nothing on lo-VHF and if they advertised it as a VHF/UHF antenna, people would be upset, and Joe Public has no idea what "hi-VHF" means. My guess is that it wasn't designed to receive VHF so they don't advertise it as such. My AntennasDirect 91XG does a pretty good job on hi-VHF, but my Winegard 8200P was better.

If you get the 4228 and it fails for those channels, you could get Winegard's hi-VHF antenna and combine the two. But the 4228 is going to outperform the Terk TV55 by a lot.

Hard to find a good antenna with negative gain (http://www.laaudiofile.com/images/tv55sig.jpg) these days...

Any of the advantage antennas is going to be better (http://www.starkelectronic.com/cmg4.htm).

Don't buy into the amplified hype. You can add a preamplifier if it will make you feel better, but the preamplified stats are the only ones that matter.

Those violet stations will require a good-sized antenna. I'd try a Channel Master 4228 myself. It might be enough for channels 7 and 9, and is a top-notch performer for UHF. If that's too big, the 4221 should be enough for almost all the UHF channels.
What was plotted was NOT negative antenna gain (note the units are dBmV...not dBd or dBi...or even dB).
If you read the review articles for the Terk TV55 (amplified dipole) and the Terk TV38 Combo Antenna (VHF LPA + UHF Corner Yagi),
you'll find that what they measured was actually the received signal strength, using a Sencore Signal Level Meter at the end of 100 foot of RG-6.
Hence the curve is mislabeled as "GAIN" and should actually be "RECEIVED SIGNAL LEVEL AFTER 100 FEET OF RG-6":
http://www.laaudiofile.com/prodrev.html

If you compare the amplified Terk TV55 to the unamplified TV38, you'll see that the TV55 resulted in only a few dB lower
received signal level than the TV38 over the range of UHF channels tested and provided a "stronger" signal for the VHF band.
Of course, simply inserting an amplifier will boost the signal level (so, why not insert two amps...or even three????),
but that may also be accompanied by lots of other problems, such as intermod products, which were not measured.
So it is very difficult to draw conclusions strictly from received signal level.

All "UHF-only" antennas pick up some signal on hi-VHF. But as that chart shows, they get next to nothing on lo-VHF and if they advertised it as a VHF/UHF antenna, people would be upset, and Joe Public has no idea what "hi-VHF" means. My guess is that it wasn't designed to receive VHF so they don't advertise it as such. My AntennasDirect 91XG does a pretty good job on hi-VHF, but my Winegard 8200P was better.

If you get the 4228 and it fails for those channels, you could get Winegard's hi-VHF antenna and combine the two. But the 4228 is going to outperform the Terk TV55 by a lot.

I think I am going to give it a shot. I am confident on the high VHF stuff it will work, the only problem I forsee is I have 2 different directions to point it and I don't want to have to deal with a rotator. There is 53 degrees between them, so maybe I can point it in the center and get lucky. If not there is only 2 stations at one of them PBS and FOX

Hey, not to argue with a master installer, but how is this thing going to do any better than a dipole? If it were as good as an isotropic dipole, it would have 0dB of gain. Since it isn't the ideal length for almost every channel, it only stands to reason that it will get less signal than an isotropic dipole, hence negative gain.

I haven't ripped one apart, but I would figure it has three dipoles in it: one for low, high and UHF. Maybe it doesn't. I just meant that the graph to which you linked, showing a negative gain of 10 or more dB, did not do justice to this product. It is a cosmetically attractive dipole that will serve some people well.

I don't think the Terk55 antenna active reception element has negative gain. I think that when you shut the power inserter off, the preamplifier becomes a dead semiconductor circuit that still leaks through a little signal.

I serviced a commercial establishment located halfway between Baltimore and Washington, DC that was sourcing 47 TVs off one of those stupid things and it worked well for them, since it is bi-directional. They also had six Channel Plus monstrosities that I think combined DA500 amplifiers with 8-port vertical spitters, and four of the six wall-wart power supplies had severe hums, so I threw them all out and replaced them with a single TA-36 amplifier.

Ah glad t see im not the only smatv installer who runs into these kind of abortions!!!!
Like the 200 room motels that have satellite modulated on uhf instaed of using proper rack mounted cable quality Mods??? Then they go and stick thes piece of **** dist amps from Walmart for 19.00 all over the place because the uhf modulated channels cant make the long cable Runs????? HMMMMMM nothing a few rack mods in the cable frequency and a few good hca30 's on each floor didnt help!!!!!!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I haven't ripped one apart, but I would figure it has three dipoles in it: one for low, high and UHF. Maybe it doesn't. I just meant that the graph to which you linked, showing a negative gain of 10 or more dB, did not do justice to this product. It is a cosmetically attractive dipole that will serve some people well.

They claim it has some kind of "helical" element.

I would expect this antenna to have negative gain, but as holl_ands pointed out, the chart is not dBi or dBd.

Reading the reviews on amazon, it looks like many people have had better results indoors with rabbit ears. That matches my experience with a similar product from Radio Shack. VHF performance was poor, UHF "performance" was a joke.

You strip coax to the right length, it will work with strong enough signals. You arrange it horizontally and perpendicular to the source signals, and you'll get performance approaching a dipole.

The only thing the TV55 has going for it is its weather-proof exterior. Beyond that, it's just another gimmick antenna that isn't worth the price of admission. The amplifier only masks how terrible this antenna is.

...the only problem I forsee is I have 2 different directions to point it and I don't want to have to deal with a rotator. There is 53 degrees between them, so maybe I can point it in the center and get lucky. If not there is only 2 stations at one of them PBS and FOX

If you really want to avoid the rotator, you might do better with the 4221 - it will accept signals over a wider range. Not as good on VHF, but probably would still work okay.

Consider getting a Channel Master 7777 preamplifier, too. It may help with the VHF reception, and shouldn't hurt you any with the UHF.

I live about 35 to 40 miles south from stations in the Cleveland area. Just recently got the Sony 42" A10 hdtv and the Directv R-10/ DVR combo. I have an old rat-shack antenna and pre-am (about 20 yrs. old) mounted on a 30' tower with a rotor. Pleased with the HD pics fom channels : vhf 3.1,5.1 uhf 19.1,43.1,50.2. I would like to get a new UHF/VHF antenna with a pre-amp if neccesary.
Called up a local installer, they suggest a CM 3679 UHF/VHF combo with the CM 7777 Titan 2 pre-amp. Reading that some stations may move to VHF in the future, is one reason that I would prefer a UHF/VHF combo. Zip code is 44646. Antennaweb.org has antenna type violet for the 19.1 vhf at 39 miles and UHF channel 41 at 47.2 miles for the stations most distant. I am long in the tooth(74) so I don't want to handle the
installation myself, climbing the tower.
Any suggestions if I should get the above combo? Also how can I measure signal strenght for signals received OTA on my Sony HDTV?

Called up a local installer, they suggest a CM 3679 UHF/VHF combo with the CM 7777 Titan 2 pre-amp. Reading that some stations may move to VHF in the future, is one reason that I would prefer a UHF/VHF combo.

For the Cleveland market, you've got a lo-VHF now, so no need to justify the combo.

The 3679 looks good. The 7777 is best in class.

If you really want to avoid the rotator, you might do better with the 4221 - it will accept signals over a wider range. Not as good on VHF, but probably would still work okay.

Consider getting a Channel Master 7777 preamplifier, too. It may help with the VHF reception, and shouldn't hurt you any with the UHF.

Thanks for all the info. I have a crazy thought, can I put two signals into my receiver (HDTV PC card) by using a splitter before they enter. So I could buy say the 4228, point it in one direction (28 degrees) and use my indoor antenna to pick up the stations (85 degrees) from the other direction which it does fine? Maybe this is crazy thinking but worth asking I guess. Maybe the tuner can only tune from one antenna at a time or something.

Could this be good or just hype?

http://www.antennasdirect.com/lacrosse.html

Could this be good or just hype?Good? Yes. Looks like it would be excellent at making ones wallet thinner. But, equal or better performance can be obtained for much less money. Then again, the ad copy promotes how the antenna looks, so if it's looks are worth one fitty to you...then it's perfect for your decor. :D

Looks almost like the Winegard Sharpshooter!

I have a crazy thought, can I put two signals into my receiver (HDTV PC card) by using a splitter before they enter.

You can do it, but the results will be unpredictable. At best, it will work like you want it to. At worst, you will get zero reception on any DTV signal.

You could try it and then use an A/B switch if it doesn't work out the way you want. Not quite automated, but cheaper than a rotor.

Could this be good or just hype?

http://www.antennasdirect.com/lacrosse.html

I agree that it looks like the Squareshooter. But the advertised gain is nothing like the Squareshooter. 10.8db would be impressive indeed, and would be more than many people would need. More than likely, this is just a DB2 in a plastic case. But it sure will look nice on the outside of the home...

I agree that it looks like the Squareshooter. But the advertised gain is nothing like the Squareshooter. 10.8db would be impressive indeed, and would be more than many people would need. More than likely, this is just a DB2 in a plastic case. But it sure will look nice on the outside of the home...

So until proven effective we can safely say that it is designed for HOA's approval... ;)

BTW, anybody out there knows the reception pattern of the DB4? I've got to find stations in 36, 135, 178 and 360 degrees.

BTW, anybody out there knows the reception pattern of the DB4? I've got to find stations in 36, 135, 178 and 360 degrees.

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/DB4.html

Hard spread for you to get without a rotor. Maybe if you removed the screen, but then your front-to-back ratio is 0dB, which could cause multipath problems (and cost you 3dB of gain.)

You can do it, but the results will be unpredictable. At best, it will work like you want it to. At worst, you will get zero reception on any DTV signal.

You could try it and then use an A/B switch if it doesn't work out the way you want. Not quite automated, but cheaper than a rotor.

Well I finally got around to setting up the living room. I crawled under the house to run the coax into the garage where I put the small indoor antenna in the rafters of the garage and I am picking up every station I want to with over 90% strength except 1 channel. So I am going to try and rotate a few degrees counter-clockwise and I think I will have everything I need off a terk HDTVi cheap-o antenna.

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/DB4.html

Hard spread for you to get without a rotor. Maybe if you removed the screen, but then your front-to-back ratio is 0dB, which could cause multipath problems (and cost you 3dB of gain.)

Thanks for the info. I am now looking at the Wingard PR-4400 which is similar but has lower front gain but better rear gain. The towers are only about 13mi at the back and 21mi & 29mi at the front. The farthest is 35mi @ 135 degrees but not a must have channel anyway.

That's a good website.

Thank you for all the info, that is very helpful. This looks like a great antenna but doesn't do VHF. I have a couple of channels in VHF that I need to pickup. I found the Channel Master CM 3018 for a good price. This seems like a good antenna that will do both UHF/VHF with long range.

I have the CM 3018 in my attic with a 7777 preamp due to the long cable run and it does reasonably well for not a lot of money. Distance to most towers is about 25 miles. It does drop out digital signals with some regularity (worse, surprisingly in the winter) but I attribute this to being in the attic and with a treeline nearby that is taller than the house.

I will be putting in a CM 4228 in the next few months (expecting one for Christmas) and can report on a head to head comparison then.

Considering Terk TV-38.
Stats:

60+ miles from transmitters (Mt. Wilson - LA, CA)
Decent Line of Sight.

Is this a decent enough antenna or is there something else I don't know about?

Considering Terk TV-38.

Is this a decent enough antenna or is there something else I don't know about?

Sure, but it's just a 12' VHF/UHF combo, and the Channel Master and Winegard models will do just as well (or better) for half of Terk's price.

Which models do you recommend? It seems all the pertinent channels are at 270-272 degrees so I'll probably only need to aim it in one direction.

OK, now I'm looking at CM CrossFire 3671 and the Winegard Platinum 8200P HD. The Channel Master is half the price and seems to have all the bang as the winegard.

OK, now I'm looking at CM CrossFire 3671 and the Winegard Platinum 8200P HD. The Channel Master is half the price and seems to have all the bang as the winegard.
Do you need any VHF stations? Most of the size of a combo antenna is for the VHF-Low band which you don't need for your DTV signals. If you only need UHF then a Channelmaster CM-4228 with a CM-7777 pre-amp is a better UHF antenna system then a combo antenna would give you. If you need to receive in the VHF-high band you could add a Weingard YA-1713.

OK, now I'm looking at CM CrossFire 3671 and the Winegard Platinum 8200P HD. The Channel Master is half the price and seems to have all the bang as the winegard.

I love the Winegards for their build quality, but a Channel Master can perform just as well.

Given the Mt Wilson elevation and decent line of sight, I think either of those antennas is overkill. The Channel Master 3677 or Winegard HD7080P would most likely do the job with plenty of room to spare.

I'm basing those antennae on my distance. Is overkill bad? Would I get some kind of compensation if I have dropouts from a longer distance antenna? I'd like to keep from having to place an amp or am I'm just being dumb?

I'm basing those antennae on my distance. Is overkill bad? Would I get some kind of compensation if I have dropouts from a longer distance antenna? I'd like to keep from having to place an amp or am I'm just being dumb?

Distance ratings are over "average" terrain. Mount Wilson is not "average"! While most locations only have line-of-sight for 60 miles because the curvature of the earth gets in the way, Mt. Wilson's extends for over 110 miles. If you're not blocked by buildings or trees, an indoor antenna could even work for you at your distance.

Overkill can be bad, but it usually won't hurt you with reception. The supports might fail because of the added weight, and it will hurt your wallet more, but other than that, it's not too big of a deal.

Nothing "wrong" with using a larger antenna than necessary. It will generate a little move voltage than a smaller one, that is all. It's possible that the big antenna will generate double the voltage of the smaller one for the same RF situation. But that isn't going to hurt any receiver. Some folks that are using pre-amps, are putting 100 times the voltage into their receivers than they would need, with no harm done...usually. :D

Still, I agree with sregener that you don't need such a big antenna. I used to live in southern LA and it doesn't take a big antenna to get a good signal from 60 miles when you have the transmitter as high up as Mt. Wilson.

I currently have a CM4228. I had it in the attic, but had problems with my ABC affiliate so I installed it on the roof. ABC is flawless, but now all of my other channels have a lower signal strength. Fairfas Antenna came out and said I had it installed perfectly and said that they have had better luck with the CM4221. The guy across the street has a CM4221 and his signal is in the 90% range. Should I try the CM4221 or DB4?

Should I try the CM4221 or DB4?

Save the $$$, get the better antenna, and listen to the experts at Fairfax. CM4221.

I'm very curious as to why the 4221 would be better since the 4228 is basically 2 4221's. Does the 4221 have a wider field with shorter range? Lastly, why would my 4228 get better reception in my attic pointing directly into a neighbors house rather than on my roof with no obstructions?

Folks,

I've got my plasma, my HD DirecTiVo and OTA antenna all working. Things look great.

Yet, KLRU (UHF 22) has a sometimes highly variable signal strength (normally 75 - 80, variable down to 10 - 20 for short periods, all other channels appear stable). This variability results in frequent audio dropouts and some pixelation. I am 2.7+ miles from the KLRU antenna. My antenna is an external Winegard PR4400 and mounted about fifteen feet up on the side of the house. I need a 20 degree beam width, which the Winegard exceeds with a 45 degree beamwidth. The KLRU antenna is not on either extreme edge of the beam width (bearing 255 degrees from my home). It is 6 degrees south of the northern most antennas (KXAN [UHF 21] and KNVA [UHF 49], bearing 261 degrees, 90+ on SS meter). And it is 14 degrees north of the southern most antenna (KTBC [UHF 56], bearing 241, 90+ on SS meter). All of the signals from the other stations are stronger than the KLRU signal (confirmed on both the plasma and DirecTiVo signal strength meters). While the antenna is not pointed exactly at KLRU (the house wall keeps me from centering on it), KLRU is well within the range of angles above the half power amplification levels (KLRU looks to be 5 - 10 off axis). The antenna is mounted well. I cannot cause it to wobble by hand.

Any advice? A preamp seems over kill since most of the other channels are booming in at 90+ in the signal meter. Or is this a multipath problem? Is there an answer for multipath?

I was looking at the Antennas Direct DB4 because it is three inches narrower to focus directly on KLRU. But this seems like a foolish action when the PR4400 is already working well, is paid for and has similar performance to the DB4. With an extended mount, I could get the PR4400 a few feet higher. Or go overkill with a Winegard PR8800. I can't take it to the roof because that would shade the solar panels. Any thoughts?

Thanks in Advance,
Andrew

I've got my plasma, my HD DirecTiVo and OTA antenna all working. Things look great.

Yet, KLRU (UHF 22) has a sometimes highly variable signal strength (normally 75 - 80, variable down to 10 - 20 for short periods, all other channels appear stable). This variability results in frequent audio dropouts and some pixelation.

Try a variable attenuator from Radio Shack. The HD DirecTivos seem to be sensitive to overly hot signals.

I'm very curious as to why the 4221 would be better since the 4228 is basically 2 4221's. Does the 4221 have a wider field with shorter range? Lastly, why would my 4228 get better reception in my attic pointing directly into a neighbors house rather than on my roof with no obstructions?

I'm sure someone with a waveform analyzer could explain the whys, but reception isn't an exact science - it's more of an art form.

The 4221 does have a wider field and shorter range.

You didn't say if you tried changing the elevation of your antenna on the roof, but moving it up or down by 12" could yield very different results.

I assume you're messing with this not just because of lower signal strength meter readings, but due to actual reception problems (dropouts, pixelization.) If you're worried about the absolute number, though, don't. Digital reception can be perfect even with errors.

I'm very curious as to why the 4221 would be better since the 4228 is basically 2 4221's. Does the 4221 have a wider field with shorter range? Lastly, why would my 4228 get better reception in my attic pointing directly into a neighbors house rather than on my roof with no obstructions?

From what I read, the 4228 is an array of 2 4221s. It creates a narrower but longer beam if you think of it like a flashlight. So the 4221 casts a wider but shorter light.

What I really don't understand is that no tower is further than 32.1 miles away and they only range from 79-81 degrees. That's not much varience, but if I move the antenna just a 1/4 inch it will kick at least 1 of the channels out. The 4221 should take care of that varience. I ordered a 4221 from Warren Electronics for $20 just to try it. Could the CM7775 preamp be causing the problem?

Hi there,

I have the basic package from Comcast and I would like to get the local HDTV stations via an antenna, of course to keep the costs down. Is it possible just to combine both the cable signal and antenna signal on one cable ?

Thanks

What I really don't understand is that no tower is further than 32.1 miles away and they only range from 79-81 degrees. That's not much varience, but if I move the antenna just a 1/4 inch it will kick at least 1 of the channels out. The 4221 should take care of that varience. I ordered a 4221 from Warren Electronics for $20 just to try it. Could the CM7775 preamp be causing the problem?

It can be tricky because of so many variables. In my case, ever since the leaves fell I cannot get all the hd channels I used to get. I'm assuming multi-path problems. Putting the antenna outside probably solves my problems but I want to try the attic one more time. And I don't want to climb the roof just yet specially this time of year. I'm going to try the winegard 4-bay because it has better rear reception than 4221. What can you except trial and error... :confused:

Hi.
I am a newbie to the forum. I am from Lincoln, NE(68504). I dont have cable TV in my house and planning to get a good antenna for local channels. I dont want to settle with the cheap 7 bucks walmart antenna . i have had bad experiences with that. I live in a apartment complex in 2nd floor. I have a balcony with a clear view to the east and south sky.

according to antennaweb the distance I need is abt 35 miles or less.


what antenna should i buy for getting good reception. I saw people talking about The Channel Master 4221 and Winegard models but i dont know what to buy as i dont have a house but live in an apartment.
I also saw "Terk Indoor HDTV Antenna with VHF/UHF HD Reception" . its portable and cost abt $23 and says HD reception. reviews are mixed in circuitcity site. if I can mount and use 4221 or Winegard i would go with them if they are more advantageous.

Also where to buy economically. any help is appreciated. thanks

Rajaijah.

Could the CM7775 preamp be causing the problem?

Yes. Remove the preamp (both indoor AND outdoor units) and see if the problem goes away. You really shouldn't be using a preamp at your distance and in such a signal-rich environment.

what antenna should i buy for getting good reception. I saw people talking about The Channel Master 4221 and Winegard models but i dont know what to buy as i dont have a house but live in an apartment.

Also where to buy economically. any help is appreciated. thanks


A 4221 or Winegard PR-4400 would be excellent choices. I'd put a little dirt or concrete in a pot and put a mast section in that. Then attach the antenna to the mast. You could also tie it in place with rope.

Many good places exist online to buy antennas from including SolidSignal, Stark Electronic, and Warren Electronics.

Hi all,

After trying an indoor antenna, Ive decided i should do the outdoor antenna, Im not sure what exactly I would need, im 30 miles or less from most stations, and they are a mix of UHF and VHF, i was wondering if this one from radio shack would work, Of if there is something else i should be looking for?
Model: VU-75 XR | Catalog #: 15-2151
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103084&cp=&kw=antenna+outdoor&parentPage=search

Also with this will i need anything else? Like a preamp?

Yes. Remove the preamp (both indoor AND outdoor units) and see if the problem goes away. You really shouldn't be using a preamp at your distance and in such a signal-rich environment.

I used a preamp because it's a 80 or so ft run. I can shorten it up considerably by about 25-30 ft as it's just excess wire I left to try different roof locations.

I used a preamp because it's a 80 or so ft run. I can shorten it up considerably by about 25-30 ft as it's just excess wire I left to try different roof locations.

80 feet? You're using a 28dB preamp for 80' of cable loss for stations 30 miles away? "Hello, pest control? I have a mosquito in the house." "We'll send a backhoe right on over."

Remove the preamp. Sell it on eBay. Shorten the cable if you want, but you probably don't need to.

i was wondering if this one from radio shack would work, Of if there is something else i should be looking for?
Model: VU-75 XR | Catalog #: 15-2151

Looks like it's worth trying. You can always return stuff to Radio Shack if it doesn't work the way you want it to. Just say no to the preamp. *DO* ground it properly.

Looks like it's worth trying. You can always return stuff to Radio Shack if it doesn't work the way you want it to. Just say no to the preamp. *DO* ground it properly.


Any advice on the proper way? what extra stuff will i need to pick up? Remember im new/dumb to this whole outside antenna thing

Any advice on the proper way? what extra stuff will i need to pick up? Remember im new/dumb to this whole outside antenna thing


Look for install guide here, its what I used;

http://www.channelmaster.com/home.htm

A 4221 or Winegard PR-4400 would be excellent choices. I'd put a little dirt or concrete in a pot and put a mast section in that. Then attach the antenna to the mast. You could also tie it in place with rope.

Many good places exist online to buy antennas from including SolidSignal, Stark Electronic, and Warren Electronics.

thanks sregener.I have decided to get Winegard PR-4400 based on your suggestion. One more doubt I had was whether I need to rotate the outdoor antenna everytime i am switching between channels broadcasted in different angles. It would nt be a problem with indoor antenna but since its outdoor I am wondering what to be done.

thanks

One more doubt I had was whether I need to rotate the outdoor antenna everytime i am switching between channels broadcasted in different angles. It would nt be a problem with indoor antenna but since its outdoor I am wondering what to be done.


How big of a spread are we talking? 5-10 degrees isn't going to matter. 20-30 probably wouldn't, either. But if we're much beyond that, you'll need to rotate the antenna. The easiest way to do this is with a rotor - a device designed to turn antennas. It uses its own 3-wire cable, so there'd be the issue of running wire for it.

I come across a type of dish mounted antenna in RadioShack. I currently have SuperDish from Dish Network, post mounted. Does anyone have experience with dish mounted antenna, i.e., does it work? Will it interfere with satellite signals? I am about 30 ~ 60 miles away from different transmitters. Attic installation is an option, but I would rather not to go through those drilling jobs.

The Solid Signal order came yesterday, and they sent the Terrestrial Digital brand 91XG (indicated on box and instructions). :confused: I realize they're the same exact antennas sold under different brands, but what is the point of having both on the Solid Signal site if they are just going to send whatever, ignoring what you ordered?? Antennas Direct is in St. Louis, so I thought I was "supporting" them... But I did notice that the phone number on the TD instructions is the same as at the AD site, so who knows. :)

I found out that AD used to be TD... :) Must've been thinking of another company. :o


Problem is, as far as I can tell, I didn't get the "thumb screw" to attach the balun box to the boom. :mad:

I got the missing thumb screw sent to me (directly from AD, not Solid Signal).

They put a 43/91XG "assembly tips" sheet in the envelope, and at the bottom it says, "Performance may be improved by facing the metallic side of the director elements towards the transmitters." Crap! :eek: I already put the directors on the opposite way, because it looked "right" and that's how it is in the picture on HDTV Primer (www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/XG91.html). :( I wonder, in their wording, does "may be" mean "will be" or that it's unknown, but possible (might/could be)? :confused:

The metal is centered on the directors, so spacing from the driven element wouldn't change and I assumed the plastic being in front wouldn't affect signals... Thoughts? sregener? :) If there could be any improvement I will switch them, expecially since the directors influence the higher frequencies more and I'm still having problems with channel 56 (don't have it mounted yet, just took it out once).

I already put the directors on the opposite way, because it looked "right" and that's how it is in the picture on HDTV Primer (www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/XG91.html). :( I wonder, in their wording, does "may be" mean "will be" or that it's unknown, but possible (might/could be)? :confused:

I started with the elements facing the wrong way, but realized my mistake after I put two or three on and reversed them. In theory, the ABS plastic should have no impact on the performance of the metal, since the plastic is supposed to be a nonconductive material. In practice, the plastic probably does have some impact on the performance. I doubt that the antenna manufacturer tested the antenna in anything other than the "correct" assembly pattern, so they may not even know for sure. What they do know is that they designed it precisely and anything else isn't optimal.

If you'd looked very closely at the director plastic, you would have seen an arrow pointing in one direction.

You should have followed the pictures on my site: www.geocities.com/figbert/antennasdirect91xg.html :)

Oh wow, I just looked and you're right! (Of course.) :) Just thought that was some molding texture and didn't ever notice the arrow. And since the original instructions didn't mention direction... :o I do see now that the indentation in the metal also makes them non-symmetrical.

Hopefully I can remove them without breaking anything. They were pretty stiff to snap on, even after discovering that I needed to bend the upper plastic part to spread the "clips" apart.

Thanks for all your help. :D

Hopefully I can remove them without breaking anything. They were pretty stiff to snap on, even after discovering that I needed to bend the upper plastic part to spread the "clips" apart.

Remove them the same way - spread the clips. They should come off fairly easily if you do it that way. Twisting, pulling and chain saws are not recommended.

I bought the cable with the connectors on and they are too large to go thru the boot and I don't want to compromise the boot by forcing and tearing it.

I bought the cable with the connectors on and they are too large to go thru the boot and I don't want to compromise the boot by forcing and tearing it.
I recommend that you forget the boot and just use coax seal instead:
http://www.solidsignal.com/search_results.asp?main_cat=0&search_crit=coax+seal&SiteREF=SSCOM
You should also use silicone grease (that you can buy in an auto parts store- it's used for spark plug connections) inside the connector.

Recommendation...

Long Beach (Biloxi), MS zip 39560

According to antennaweb I'll need a medium directional for the 15° spread and maximum of 31 miles to pick up my locals. Should I go with the CM 4221, 4228 or DB4? I would like to mount in the attic but can mount on the outside facing the North if possible.



.....................................comp miles freq
yellow-uhf WLOX-DT 10° 26.1 39
red - uhf WXXV-DT 20° 10.6 48
red - uhf WMAH-DT 25° 30.9 16

Do you mean to put the silicone grease on the connection and then cover with coax-seal?

Or were you referring to putting the silicone on only if I use a weather boot?

Channel Master 4248
Antenna Direct 91XG

Trying to pull in HD signals 60+ miles.

Having owned both of these, don't bother with the 4248.

If you haven't read my review of the 91XG, it's here: www.geocities.com/figbert/antennasdirect91xg.html

Generally speaking, an outdoor antenna will lose at least 50% of its performance over 10 years due to corrosion. This does not apply if the attic is kept indoors.

Channel Master 4248
Antenna Direct 91XG

Trying to pull in HD signals 60+ miles.

Thanks for your feedback.

I have both of these antennas. The 91XG is MUCH better for long distance but (in my opinion) not great for an all around antenna unless all of your desired stations are in the same direction. In my case, I found that the 4248 is much better at pulling in everything in a 45 degree range but can't come close to the range of the 91xg. Also, beyond 50 miles, I got nothing with either of them without a preamp.

The 4228 is $39.50 from Warrenelectronics.com. Both Solid and Warren delivered my antenna within 2 days and their customer service has been excellent.

Generally speaking, an outdoor antenna will lose at least 50% of its performance over 10 years due to corrosion.
Sorry, but that sounds like BS. Can you provide a link or other explanation?

Ron

You switched on me.
sirchadwick asks about 4248, gets reply from sregener on 4248, also mrmolding.
Then sirchadwick switches to 4228.
Which one are we comparing to the 91xg?

This does not apply if the attic is kept indoors.

I always try to keep my attic indoors and my antenna outdoors.

I am always looking to improve channel reception OTA. A friend of mine told me that since that I have Comcast cable, I could run RG6 cable from my splitter from it to my antenna and connect it some where to my OTA antenna and it would give a 50 % DB gain. I have channel Master 4228 UHF antenna Channel Master 777 amp and a Channel Master rotator( CM 9521A)

I recommend that you forget the boot and just use coax seal instead:
www.solidsignal.com/search_results.asp?main_cat=0&search_crit=coax+seal&SiteREF=SSCOM

You should also use silicone grease (that you can buy in an auto parts store- it's used for spark plug connections) inside the connector.

Just so he knows, you can get Coax Seal at Radio Shack (www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2062667) for only $2. :) Good thing I looked it up, I was gonna say $4, which is still less than Solid Signal's... :eek:

And I also didn't think you'd need silicone grease in the connector with Coax Seal. I thought any of these methods were OK on their own:

Weatherproof connector (silicone-filled ferrule + O-ring)
Weather boot
Coax Seal around the whole thing


BTW, in case anyone is interested, Solid Signal has an open-box CM 7777 pre-amp (www.solidsignal.com/search_results.asp?main_cat=03&search_crit=ANC777) right now for $35 -- half the regular price. I just ordered one the other day, since I assume open-box should be OK... They had one a few weeks ago and I didn't get it before it disappeared. I'm surprised it's still there this time, so if someone misses it, just keep checking back at that page till they have one again. That's what I did. :) And it looks like I got free shipping too, contrary to what the shopping cart said!

I am doing some analysis with the gain charts to help make a better decision. The fault with the 91XG is that it ONLY begins to get decent gain above channel 48.

You've got some pretty tough standards if that's what you think. The chart here shows that the gap between the 91XG and the 4228 (*NOT* the 4248 that was mentioned elsewhere) is less than 2dB at its worst: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

Somewhere in the ancient history of this thread, someone did a side-by-side comparison of the two and had shocking results; the 91XG was better on the lower channels, and inferior on the higher ones! I've had great reception of low UHF channels with my 91XG, far outclassing the UHF section of my Winegard 8200P.

I highly recommend the 91XG to anyone seeking long-distance reception. I find it has a wide acceptance angle on my UHF channel 46 station about 30 miles distant (at 55kw) and is very narrow on long-distance stations (70 miles and further) where a 2-degree shift makes a huge difference. I do use a 28dB preamp with a 2.7dB noise figure.

The 91XG is what it is; a top-of-the-line corner-reflector/yagi hybrid. The reflector screen on the 91XG seems to be really well designed. It isn't perfect, but no antenna is. If long-distance reception is what you want, and you're siting your antenna outdoors, I don't think you can do much better, and you can do much, much worse.

Guys,

Sorry for the confusion, I am only interested in the 91XG. I was always used to the American made Channel Master products (Diamond Quantum 4257 & their Parabolics).

I am doing some analysis with the gain charts to help make a better decision. The fault with the 91XG is that it ONLY begins to get decent gain above channel 48.


Oh, yes, the CM parabolics. Back in the 70's I had the 6-foot unit @ 40 feet with a Winegard preamp on the line. Worked quite well for area reception and TV DXing.

Moving back to 2005, I'd have to agree with sregener's comments about the gain charts. It's a great starting point, but in real situations the info is not always that accurate. My main antenna setup includes two Triax Unix 100's stacked horizontally (picture attached) @ 30 feet (must keep the HOA happy!) with the CM 7775 on the line. These Triax antennas (http://www.brymar.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Aerials_12.html) are virtually identical to the 91XG. I'm located 3-5 miles from most of my local TV towers so I have way too much RF around but I'm still able to get some decent out-of-town reception for DXing purposes. Also, I've spent a lot of time comparing the reception abilities of the Triax stack to single units of the 91XG, CM 4228 and CM 4221.

For whatever reason, whenever I'm able to receive stations from Louisville (approx. 110 miles) the single 91XG seems to be better than the Triax stack. Meanwhile, Cincinnati stations (approx. 100 miles) are always better with the Triax stack than the single 91XG. I think some of these results are due to the strong RF interference from my nearby antenna farm.

Anytime I'm able to receive one of three distant analog stations on ch. 34 (South Bend, IN @ 116 miles; Columbus, OH @ 164 miles; Campbellsville, KY @ 171 miles) I seem to get better reception from the single 91XG. My tests have shown the two CM antennas to do okay sometimes but usually the 91XG has outperformed them. I've tested in the same location as well as various locations for the results.

Locally I have a low-powered DTV station on ch. 48 (4 kW @ about 1000 feet) @ 36 miles. My strongest reception is from the Triax stack. The next strongest signal is from the 91XG. The next strongest signal is not from the CM 4228, which the test graph would lead you to believe, but rather for me it's from the CM 4221. Sometimes when I've tested this station with the 4228 it's been very difficult to receive.

Over the years I've certainly found that no one antenna is perfect or the best for all locations. Sometimes you just have to try one out and see for yourself. Your reception and mileage results may vary...... :-) Just my 2 cents.

Steve

Mr. Goldrich,

First of all, I would like to compliment you for the plethora amount of information provided.

The details of your experiments will help me make a better decision. As we both are aware, what we often see on the specifications things that do not apply to the real world, as it really boils down to our location and terrian.

I am jealous of your antenna combination, and believe you have outstanding results! However, I have a couple of take-aways:

1) If you were doing this from scratch, would you purchase two of the 91XG's and mount them in same fashion as identifed in your picture?

a) Stick with only one 91XG, due to windloading?

2) If I mount a pair, where would you recommend to get the hardware without paying an arm and a leg?

3) Do you feel that much is at stake to run 100 foot of the RG-6 Vs RG-11?

And the last question.

4) If mounting a pair, would you puchase an amp for the sole purchase of amping each antenna into the CM 7777 and then down. At present, I have the CM 0064 amp for the existing UHF (CM 4257) and VHF (CM 3610). Signal is mixed together on the tower.

Thanks,

Chad

Any inputs on a good indoor OTA that someone has used as a HDTV antenna??

I'm getting a JVC Pro 1080P soon and would like to be able to access local HDTV (so my wife doesn't think I'm out of my mind on getting this unit) until I understand TWC's digital new (more $) tiers and decide whether to go digital cable or Dish.

Sounds like the Silver Sensor would do it, but has anyone used something else with good results? I live in SW Beavercreek.

Any inputs on a good indoor OTA that someone has used as a HDTV antenna??

I'm getting a JVC Pro 1080P soon and would like to be able to access local HDTV (so my wife doesn't think I'm out of my mind on getting this unit) until I understand TWC's digital new (more $) tiers and decide whether to go digital cable or Dish.

Sounds like the Silver Sensor would do it, but has anyone used something else with good results? I live in SW Beavercreek.
The JVC Pro 1080P series appears to be Digital Cable Ready (DCR), which means that it has a CableCARD slot for decrypting digital cable channels.

Adding the encrypted premium HD channels, as well as the other SD digital channels will require using either
1) a CableCard (does not support Navigator Guide and PPV/VOD) or 2) a digital HD-STB or 3) a digital HD-PVR.

However, for the price of Basic Cable, the QAM tuner in your set should be able to watch the unencrypted local HD channels without the extra cost of digital service.

Do you mean to put the silicone grease on the connection and then cover with coax-seal?

Or were you referring to putting the silicone on only if I use a weather boot?
You put the grease inside the connection and coax seal around the outside. I think RadioShack has a close out sale on coax seal but I couldn't find it at my local store.

Chad,

Great questions but without knowing more about your location, terrain, power/tower height of the stations you are trying to receive and the channels those stations represent, I'm not really sure how to accurately answer some of them. First, I have been happy with the results of the Triax and 91XG antennas (Yagi/Corner-Reflector design) for my location. If I were to do it over again, I'd probably still do it the same way with either the Triax Unix 100 or the Antennas Direct 91XG. These antennas are very directional, and the horizontal stacking makes them even more directional, so it helps me in my location to cancel or null the local/area stations to help me find the more distant stations (100+ miles) for DXing purposes. Are you trying to receive stations over 60 miles away for everyday viewing and/or for DXing purposes?

I would do another stack, too. There seems to be little windloading with these antennas. That has not been a factor for me in Central Indiana.

As for the hardware, I'd have to check on that. A DXing buddy designed, assembled and helped install my Triax stack.

BTW, my setup also includes an Antennacraft high-band VHF antenna (included in the picture) for a couple of local/area DTV stations between channels 7 and 13. Because one of these stations is 40 miles away, I boost the signal with a Motorola Signal Booster. Due to my proximity to my local stations, VHF preamps overload too much but this unit doesn't do that. It also works quite nicely with UHF antennas, too. I bought mine from Ebay.

I'm not sure whatelse to say at the moment. Maybe some others here can make some suggestions.

Steve

Mr. Goldrich,

First of all, I would like to compliment you for the plethora amount of information provided.

The details of your experiments will help me make a better decision. As we both are aware, what we often see on the specifications things that do not apply to the real world, as it really boils down to our location and terrian.

I am jealous of your antenna combination, and believe you have outstanding results! However, I have a couple of take-aways:

1) If you were doing this from scratch, would you purchase two of the 91XG's and mount them in same fashion as identifed in your picture?

a) Stick with only one 91XG, due to windloading?

2) If I mount a pair, where would you recommend to get the hardware without paying an arm and a leg?

3) Do you feel that much is at stake to run 100 foot of the RG-6 Vs RG-11?

And the last question.

4) If mounting a pair, would you puchase an amp for the sole purchase of amping each antenna into the CM 7777 and then down. At present, I have the CM 0064 amp for the existing UHF (CM 4257) and VHF (CM 3610). Signal is mixed together on the tower.

Thanks,

Chad


I have a few questions,before making any specific recommendations.

Is the 4257 a 6' parabolic? Do you know the specs for this antenna?
How old is this install? The 0064 has a single 300 ohm input.How are the antennas joined[before] the preamp? 300 ohm twinlead combiner? Is there a rotor for these antennas mounted inside the tower?

Now to the reception of what you are seeing now.I'd be more interested in knowing what the Detroit analogs look like individually.

Ch 20,38,50,56,62

Also,do you see any interference/intermod effects from the local Toledo stations?

The exact distance and azimuth headings from your location to the tower farms in Detroit and Toledo may be helpful also.

I live in Akron, OH, but my roommate is from Youngstown, OH, 50 miles east. We can recieve Youngstown DMA stations quite well, if we aim a rooftop antenna east. I always watch the Cleveland/Akron/Canton DMA stations but my roommate wants to get his Youngstown stations, mainly for news. I am buying an HD-ready TV w a combo DirecTV/HDTV tuner. I already plan to get a large fringe directional HDTV antenna (I'm < 20 mi from most of the local transmitters but in a crappy area). Instead of using an antenna rotator to be able to watch Youngstown stations (which are all UHF), could I just get a seperate antenna to mount on the tower to point to the Y-town transmitters, and then splice the two downleads together into the house, for seamless reception of both?

Also, I might replace the pre-amp with the Wineguard AP2275 for the gain improvement. However, this would require adding baluns on the antennas, so this could be a wash.
It's doubtful that more gain would help you. If I replaced the preamp, I would look for less noise. Check out the CM 777* series.
....jc

Help needed. I have a 4221 and a 4228. For whatever reason, I have horrible reception of channel 9 out of DC on my roof no matter what way I face the 4228. While the 4228 was in the attic it had 90% signal and late at night I can get sporatic 80%, but normally it so sporatic I can't keep a signal. I put the 4221 in the attic and it's way too week on FOX, but channel 9 is again in the 90% range. I also have a CM7775 preamp on the 4228 on the roof. How can I combine these two antennas signals?

Why would my channels be OK in the morning but not later in the day? I spent the past 2 mornings aiming in my attic since outside didn't seem to get the height I needed. I got 4 networks in OK then trying to get the last 2 (ch 42 and 54), got them to an acceptable 60s range. Around 3 this afternoon i checked and those 2 were unwatchable.

no amount of aiming at the same location would get those channels back.

3) Do you feel that much is at stake to run 100 foot of the RG-6 Vs RG-11?
Chad
Chad,

RG-11 has two downsides for the average consumer. 1st, most RG-11 sold locally is not quad shielded cable. In fact, you are lucky if you can find one that has a foil shield in addition to the 60% braid. We use RG-11 for the medium length satellite runs at our station (>100' and <400'). Some folks will try to tell you that quad shield is not important for TV. It is important and becomes more and more so and the run lengthens. That's because the return loss of quad shield tends to be significantly better than a single shield cable. Return loss causes reflections that become another source interference for your tuner to try to deal with.

The 2nd problem with RG-11 for the consumer is the connector. Most consumer grade RG-11 connectors use the center conductor of the RG-11 to make the connection. The center conductor of RG-11 will permanently damage any F-connector that it is pushed into because F-connectors are designed for a 22ga wire. LRC, Gilbert, and others make proper F-connectors for RG-11 that have a 22ga center conductor. However, they all require an expensive crimping tool to crimp them.

Bob Chase
KHWB-TV

RG-11 is a waste of money for a 100' run of preamplified signal. It saves a dB or two at 700Mz, but the signal has already been boosted well above the receiver's input threshold.

I don't think anyone is actually making RG-11 connectors that use the center conductor for the pin. I think that any you might buy now will be "new, old-stock", as they will be sitting on shelves forever.

A Tru-Spec RG-11 crimping tool costs about $35, or you can use an RG 6 tool and do an ugly job. If you use a Tru-Spec tool, shim the crimper surfaces with a few layers of paper because the die is too large for most crimp connectors.

Why would my channels be OK in the morning but not later in the day?
Lemme guess, you are 30 or more miles from the transmitter? If so, I would guess that it's an atmospheric/tropospheric situation.
....jc

Hi, I was wondering if the Winegard GS-2000 is a good antenna for my location. It's the one TitanTV recommends, with most stations being in the "excellent" (btw, what do they define as "excellent", like no probelms with picture?) range, except for WDCA-DT, which appears in the "good" range.

AntennaWeb recommends a:
red grade antenna for ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX
a blue for PBS and The WB,
and a Violet for UPN (which is low-power).

I live about 20 miles from most of the towers

They're all within 16 degrees of each other.

The channels I want all have a frequency of 27-51

Thank you!

Mr. Anitbodies, (Virus)

My first response would be to purchase an antenna for the VHF band, as the 4221 and 4228 are for UHF channels. They are tuned for these channels.

As for combining these signals, I would recommend NOT too. If you want to improve the gain, I would purchase an additonal 4228 and stack them. However, this will improve the UHF channels, while your main objective is Channel 9.

On another note, if you really want to capture Channel 9, I would purchase the Blonder Tongue Antenna that is pre-cut to this frequency. This will provide the best gain at this channel.

http://www.starkelectronic.com/btb1-1.htm

Good Luck,

Chad

Sorry, I didn't mean channel 9, CBS is channel 9 in DC. It's UHF counterpart is channel 34.

I purchased a Directv HD-DVR.

In need to purchase an off air HD antenna to receive local channels in HD.

Any advice on where to buy it, which brand/model, and if I should have it installed professionally would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

RG-11 is a waste of money for a 100' run of preamplified signal. It saves a dB or two at 700Mz, but the signal has already been boosted well above the receiver's input threshold.

I don't think anyone is actually making RG-11 connectors that use the center conductor for the pin. I think that any you might buy now will be "new, old-stock", as they will be sitting on shelves forever.

A Tru-Spec RG-11 crimping tool costs about $35, or you can use an RG 6 tool and do an ugly job. If you use a Tru-Spec tool, shim the crimper surfaces with a few layers of paper because the die is too large for most crimp connectors.

I have about a 125 ft. run for which I used RG-11 quad shield. I'm sure you're right in that it wouldn't make a difference for most, but for me a few db here and there matters. It obviously can matter more if you plan to leave part or all of the signal unamplified.

I haven't seen the connector that uses the rg11 center conductor either. With the connector that downsizes it, there's probably around .2db loss so it's really best to only use it for the single long run between grounding block and first indoor connection and use rg6 for the rest of the connections.

It's also large, stiff, and somewhat difficult to work with.

If you want to purchase the equiptment yourself either www.warrenelectronics.com or www.solidsignal.com are fantastic sights. warren is generally a little cheaper, but both have great customer service and ship things fast.

Lemme guess, you are 30 or more miles from the transmitter? If so, I would guess that it's an atmospheric/tropospheric situation.
....jc

So can you change the atmosphere for me? :)

Yes 40 miles and was thrilled to get all the channels. Now I guess I"m forced to hire someone to do a chimney mount (no guarantee that will be ok though) or else spend a few more hours in the attic hoping to get a more solid lock.

One thing I didn't say is that I got a firm 71 on the meter for 3 of the channels with only slight blips a few higher even when the other channels took a dive. This is just such a pain.

Team,

First of, thanks for all of your feeback with your responses. I made a mistake with some information on the amp.

I have the CM 0264C preamp which has two 300 ohm inputs. One from the CM 3610 (VHF) and the other CM 4257 (UHF). The bottom VHF antenna is 48 feet above the ground, while the UHF is 53 feet. The rotator is mounted inside the Rohn 20 tower. Approximately 80 feet of RG-6 cable is used inbetween the preamp and power supply. After the power supply, 50 feet of additional RG-6 is ran to the television. The reason for the break in the line, is the distribution center in the basement, in case I want to split the signal to other televisions. At present, no splitters are used in the system, thus not to allow futher degragation of the signal.

The 4257 is not a parabolic. I have requested the gain charts from CM, as they are not posted on their web as they are retired models. When I get this information, I will post it.

The Toledo stations will not block or hinder the Detroit stations as they are on the other side of town, and I do not have to penetrate thru them.

For a baseline, I am able to view 38, 56, and 62 with the antenna frozen. No issues with interference/intermod effects from the local Toledo stations. During my testing the rotor FAILED, and now I am stuck a couple degrees off. What a pain, especially this time of the year.

The Detroit stations average from 63.71 miles to 76.95 miles. At present, I can view the analog station 38, which is 76.95 miles away and viewing is OK. Digitally, it is NOT there. I am unable to view ANY Detroit station in HD, maybe because I cannot fine time the antenna exactly, or not enought signal. However, back to channel 38, it is viewable in the analog domain, not in digital.

Helpful facts:
Channel 38.2 - Broadcast on Channel 39
Height 171m
Power 1,00Kw
76.95 Miles
30 Degrees

Channel 7.2 - Broadcast on 41
Height 295m
Power 770Kw
Distance 63.81
18 Degrees

Channel 2.2 - Broadcast on 58
Height 274 Kw
Power 1,000Kw
Distance 63.81 Miles
20 Degrees

The antenna install was about 15 years ago, and they look in excellent condition. No obvious corrosion, or broken elements. Only issue identifed, is that the rotator just froze up and is preventing rotation of the antennas. (Not good!)

The first job is to replace the rotator. Then, I will verify the signals and make a decision if I will purchase the 91XG to replace the existing CM 4257. I do not think the age of the antenna will hinder the performace as some people think.

Ideas? Do you really think the age will hinder the performance?

Also, I might replace the pre-amp with the Wineguard AP2275 for the gain improvement. However, this would require adding baluns on the antennas, so this could be a wash.

http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?main_cat=03&CAT=&PROD=SAP8275

More to follow.


Google brought this up on the 4257.Likely a precursor to the 4248 with similar specs.

Edit: Upon closer scrutiny of that pic of the 4257,it has 5 or 6 more director bays than the 4248.This was the largest corner reflector made by Channel Master.It probably has a little more gain on the upper channels (60 and above) which may have been needed years ago.

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:oXZRqacvCu0J:www.weisd.com/store2/CM%25204257.html+channelmaster+4257&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Provided everything with this 15 yr old install is working as good as it did when new,I doubt it will help that much to change to a different UHF antenna-unless you go all-out(see below post).However,with 15 yrs on the twinlead and connection points,there's a chance it's not performing as well as it did when new.Also,if the coax from the preamp is that old,it may need to be changed out too.

You didn't mention reception on ch20 and 50.I suspect local DT-19 and DT-49 are bleeding over snow on these channels.

I have about a 125 ft. run for which I used RG-11 quad shield. I'm sure you're right in that it wouldn't make a difference for most, but for me a few db here and there matters. It obviously can matter more if you plan to leave part or all of the signal unamplified.

I think the argument goes that the amplification at the source (i.e. a preamp) boosts the signal beyond what line loss would be (and then some) of RG-6, so using RG-11 is overkill because the dB you save by using it are not "real" dB of antenna performance, but rather the "extra" gain of the amplifier.

So if you don't use an amplifier, RG-11 may save you some real signal. But if you use a preamp, you'd need a very, very long run before the loss of RG-6 would come into play.

Provided everything with this 15 yr old install is working as good as it did when new,I doubt it will help that much to change to a different UHF antenna.

Hi Greg. I completely agree with you about the antenna. Almost 30 years ago I helped a friend install a Channel Master 6-ft. parabolic antenna and he's still using it. His reception of stations 65-85 miles away is still as good as it was then. Over the years he has replaced the rotor and the preamp, but I believe that is it.

Steve

Hi Greg. I completely agree with you about the antenna. Almost 30 years ago I helped a friend install a Channel Master 6-ft. parabolic antenna and he's still using it. His reception of stations 65-85 miles away is still as good as it was then. Over the years he has replaced the rotor and the preamp, but I believe that is it.

Hi Steve,
I think this tall tower and antenna setup of Chad's was likely put in the air to receive out of market(Detroit?) stations,hence the 4257 for CBS-62?

A nice contemporary setup for that tower now and in the future would be a Band A for a possible WB and UPN DT out of Detroit(14 and 21),a Group B for all the rest and a Triax A/B combiner to combine the two.Then under those one of my PSP 1922's for VHF 7-13.Total windload would be less than 6sq.ft. so the tower should hold up,and a CM rotor would be good enough to turn it all.

Greg B

I was wondering if anyone here can recommend a good indoor HDTV antenna for a city area with lots of buildings. I am kind of stuck because I am on the 2nd floor and my landlord will not let me put an out door antenna on this 6 story roof. I would appreciate any information. Thanks.

I think the argument goes that the amplification at the source (i.e. a preamp) boosts the signal beyond what line loss would be (and then some) of RG-6, so using RG-11 is overkill because the dB you save by using it are not "real" dB of antenna performance, but rather the "extra" gain of the amplifier.

So if you don't use an amplifier, RG-11 may save you some real signal. But if you use a preamp, you'd need a very, very long run before the loss of RG-6 would come into play.


I believe it can still make a difference. Small, but a difference nontheless. My total run is around 150 ft with about 125 ft RG 11.
See http://www.geocities.com/toddemslie/UHF-TV-DX.html
My preamps are 20 db gain .4 db NF and I use a 15 db gain 2db NF in-line amp right before the receiver.

My preamps are 20 db gain .4 db NF...

How much did you pay? The Research website lacks a price.

I wonder how much difference I'd see if I replaced my 2.7dB NF Winegard preamp...

Sregener,
I got the Reasearch preamp last summer for $150 with shipping. I used in place of an AP 4700. It made a noticeable improvement with signal qualities going up from 5 to 15 points on weak stations. Also a snowy analog station became much less snowy. John

How much did you pay? The Research website lacks a price.

I wonder how much difference I'd see if I replaced my 2.7dB NF Winegard preamp...


Unless they have lowered their prices recently,this was the pricing last summer when I purchased one.

9250...75gbp...LNA
9251...43gbp...recommended power supply
9252...20gbp...weatherproof case
shipping...25gbp

If you make your own weatherproof case,at current conversion rates the cost is $253 for the LNA and power supply shipped.

This is a very "clean" preamp which sets the system noise floor at a nice low level.With very weak distant signals I also noticed that additional amplification could be used for further improvements on certain channels.

Be forewarned,these types of preamps are subject to failure caused by voltage spike transients.A very good surge protector would be in order(I'm talking from first-hand experience).

When I purchased mine I only got the 9250. I did not realize that they had the power supply but at that price I would still not have bought it from them. I addapted an old Channel Master unit that feed AC to a preamp by adding rectifier diodes, caps, and a 7812 voltage regulator. The preamp has been running a few months now with no problems. Also it is mounted in an upside down coffee can. John

Well, after doing all the research it looks like the gain (on paper) achieved with replacing the CM 4257 with a new 91XG will be at best 3.10dB.

Any feedback, and would this be noticable?

By rule, the dB scale is logarithmic, and 3.0dB is equal to exactly double. Whether you would notice an improvement or not depends entirely on whether any of your signals are within 3.0dB of coming in. If, for instance, you need a 20dB improvement, a 3.0dB one isn't going to make a dent. If you only need 2.0dB, though, the 3.0dB would be significant.

Without a dBmv meter, though, it's hard to guess how close you are, or even if signal level is your biggest issue (for which you'd need a spectrum analyzer.)

How much did you pay? The Research website lacks a price.

I wonder how much difference I'd see if I replaced my 2.7dB NF Winegard preamp...

Greg quoted the prices. That's what I paid if I remember correctly. I think the 9248 is still available, too, and should be slightly cheaper or comparable in price to the 9250. I have the 9248 which I use for *high band vhf* with the CM power supply that comes with the 7777. It will operate anywhere between +7.5 to +30 V DC . The 9248 is designed as a *uhf* amp but it performed less well for uhf than the 7777 for me. You must use an FM trap (at least where I am) to get it to work in this application. I use the high side of a high/lo combiner.

I use the 9250 with the RC power supply for UHF. They recommend their PS due to "decreased intermod distortion at higher current levels" for the 9250 if I recall.
A front-end filter is also necessary for the 9250. A uhf/vhf diplexer works well for me.

My reception was slightly better overall for uhf compared to the 7777 using the 9250. An in-line amp then improved things a little more (noticeable decrease in snow on analogs but with no major change in digital locks). In turn, the Channel Vision CVT15 line amp is slightly better in this application than the CM 3042 line amp was. I didn't find the 3042 line amp was any help when using the 7777 with it's higher gain.

Performance is significantly better for high vhf using the 9248. DT 13 would barely even lock for me with the 7777 but now I have a stable lock probably 75 percent of the time.

As you probably already know, whether the difference would be significant for you is difficult to say; it just depends on how marginal things are for you.

As Greg said, if you fork out the bucks be sure to protect your investment with a surge protector and you'll either need the weatherproof case from RC or to build/purchase one of your own. I don't think these amps are quite as hardy as a good CM or Winegard would be. I think of them more like SETI equipment which could fail if you breathe on them too hard. :)

As you probably already know, whether the difference would be significant for you is difficult to say; it just depends on how marginal things are for you.

Oh, things are marginal for me, sometimes, on some channels.

It seems that the colder it gets, the better my desired channels get. We just had a cold snap where daytime highs didn't reach 10, and I was getting solid locks on distant stations during the day. In the evenings, things were really smoking.

Then it warmed up and we're near 30 now, and things are back to "normal" where few if any of them come in. In the summer, things get dramatically worse during daylight hours, and I'm lucky to get stable locks at night.

It seems that I'm experiencing the inverse of Bob Chase's observation: when dewpoints drop (as dewpoints are rarely above actual temperatures) my reception improves, and when dewpoints soar, my reception dies.

I suspect that I could invest in a 0.0dB NF preamp and I'd still have reception problems. I'm also not a TV addict, so I think I'll pass on the $250-$300 preamplifier (+ installation since I'm deathly afraid of heights, and my 54' tower qualifies.)

I was wondering if anyone here can recommend a good indoor HDTV antenna for a city area with lots of buildings. I am kind of stuck because I am on the 2nd floor and my landlord will not let me put an out door antenna on this 6 story roof. I would appreciate any information. Thanks.

The silver sensor is good if all you want is UHF channels. I was using one very successfully. Since I needed a VHF-lo channel (curse you WBBM-DT) I went with a stealthtenna on a tripod which sits in my bedroom. It works surprisingly well for me with no noticeable dropouts. As with all things antennae, however, YMMV.

Good luck, Chad. I hope you do see some improvement in signal strength. And, yes, please let us know how things go after it's installed.

Steve

I would like to thank all of those who help contribute to my antenna purchase. Below is a listing of new products purchased:

Antenna's Direct 91XG
Channel Master 7777
Channel Master 9521A

Replacing:

Channel Master 9515 Rotor
Channel Master 4527 Yagi
Channel Master 0264 Pre-Amp

Spent more than I wanted to. However, when trying to get fringe signals it may have some impact with upgrading to the NEW Titan 7777 Pre-amp. As for the antenna replacement, this is a big unknown if there will be an improvement or not.

I will post my findings, when all is intalled!

Chad

I would be interested in the 0264 and the 9515 when you get them down.Maybe the 4257 if you can make it small enough to UPS.Contact me thru my website or pm me here.
http://community-2.webtv.net/GregBarker/DXPHOTOS/

Any way to post a pic of your tower?

Are you going to climb it?

I hope you see some substantial improvements.

Greg B

So folks, which is the best antenna 91XG or 4228

FYI

Solid Signal has several more CM 7777 pre-amps for $35, as open-box. I was going to purchase one of these, but I did not want to take a chance on getting a defective one, so I ordered a "virgin" model.

Solid Signal does an excellent job!

So folks, which is the best antenna 91XG or 4228
That's an easy question. The answer, however, isn't. :)

As others have pointed out, the 4228 gets best reception from channels 20-48
or so. I generally trust an engineer measurement over anything I or anyone else does, and the KHOU Chief Engineer came out with a brilliant antenna comparison
a while ago. Gosh, I wish I could see that link again. In his test, pointing at the same tower on a pole, the CM 4228 beat out the XG-91, overall. Suprisingly, however, he found that the CM 4248 yagi antenna beat 'em all, overall.

It seems that the 4228 does better than all of them in attics. I have one; in a river valley 60 miles from the towers, I can lock a station that's only running
15.1 kw!

If you have it outside and you tend to get high wind and have it on a rotor, I'd go with the XG-91. But I'm very happy with my 4228. I say that both are excellent
antennas, and my opinion of saying that the 4228 gives better reception is
based on the engineering study from Bob Chase alone, not from manufacturer
claims or my reception. With the reception sregener gets though, it's obvious the XG-91 is no slouch.

...the KHOU Chief Engineer came out with a brilliant antenna comparison a while ago. Gosh, I wish I could see that link again. In his test, pointing at the same tower on a pole, the CM 4228 beat out the XG-91, overall. Suprisingly, however, he found that the CM 4248 yagi antenna beat 'em all, overall.

...But I'm very happy with my 4228. I say that both are excellent
antennas, and my opinion of saying that the 4228 gives better reception is
based on the engineering study from Bob Chase alone, not from manufacturer
claims or my reception. With the reception sregener gets though, it's obvious the XG-91 is no slouch.

Here's the link: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6245872&highlight=Bob+Chase#post6245872

I'd be hesitant to extrapolate from a single test done at a single location. Mr. Chase had stated he planned to do further tests from more distant locations, but I suspect time is a valuable commodity for him and it may take a while before we get any more results.

At 9-10 miles, I would expect a lower-gain antenna to outperform a higher gain one, especially for measured signal strength. With a lot of reflections available, the less directional the antenna, the more of these the antenna will accept. For long-distance reception, the 4248 is far removed from the top tier antennas.

For true comparative purposes, this link is probably the most definitive, since the comparison is not based on temporary, "real-world" situations, but computer modeling that is repeatable over time: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

As others have pointed out, a steep change in performance within a channel is detrimental to reception, so the 4228 is not so great below channel 20 (item A on the chart) while the 91XG has a nice, steady line of improvement (item T.) It appears that below channel 22, the 4248 is actually the best of the bunch, but beyond that point, the other antennas begin to separate.

I think the stacked bowtie design is wonderful for people who need high gain and a relatively wide angle of acceptance. This is almost always the case in attics. I think the yagi/corner reflector hybrid is the best for people who need high gain and strong directivity (aka long-distance, over-the-horizon, tropospheric scatter) and can place their antenna outdoors.

Hmm.. This looks just like the 91XG.

Hmm.. This looks just like the 91XG.

The JBX21WB has a dramatically different rear deflector. I'd put good money on the 91XG having a better corner reflector. The connecting hardware on the Funke is different - the 91XG has a curved support beam instead of a square-edged one. Looking at the low-rez picture I don't see any other significant differences.

It's no secret that AntennasDirect doesn't make all of their antennas - but they do provide good designs at great prices to the US domestic market. Try buying a JBX21WB or the Funke in the US for under $100 shipped.

Here's the link: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6245872&highlight=Bob+Chase#post6245872

I'd be hesitant to extrapolate from a single test done at a single location. Mr. Chase had stated he planned to do further tests from more distant locations, but I suspect time is a valuable commodity for him and it may take a while before we get any more results.

At 9-10 miles, I would expect a lower-gain antenna to outperform a higher gain one, especially for measured signal strength. With a lot of reflections available, the less directional the antenna, the more of these the antenna will accept. For long-distance reception, the 4248 is far removed from the top tier antennas.

For true comparative purposes, this link is probably the most definitive, since the comparison is not based on temporary, "real-world" situations, but computer modeling that is repeatable over time: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

In the engineering world I live in, the simulation is the starting point, not the end result. The measurements taken by Bob Chase with a $10,000 (refurbished price) spectrum analyzer should not be discounted. They are telling us something that exists in the real world (possibly that the 4248 has a much better match to 75 ohms than the 4228 or 91XG).

Also, an estimate of multipath can be made by examining the "flatness" of the channel response in the plots published by Bob. The 4248 looks to be as flat as the 4228, so your assertion that multipath is making the 4248 outperform seems invalid.

Ron

With all of these discussions on these antennas, I really warrant if I am making the correct decision with taking down a CM 4257 to replace it with the 91XG, that is almost 2 feet smaller, just because it is reflecting a higher gain on paper. Also, changing out the 0264 pre-amp for the new Titan 7777. Again, this could be a lost cause and perhaps throwing money into the wind.

CM 4257 Gain listed from our friends at Channel Master:
Channel Gain (This gain is in dB)
14 - 10.5
19 - 11.0
27 - 11.5
35 - 11.6
43 - 12.2
52 - 13.0
60 - 13.8

91XG Gain from Antenna's Direct
Channel Gain (This gain is in dBi)
14 - 11.6
20 - 12.8
30 - 14.2
40 - 14.8
50 - 15.8
55 - 16.7
60 - 16.4
65 - 16.2

Old Pre-Amp 0264
VHF Gain - 16 Noise 3.0
UHF Gain - 23 Noise 2.2

New Amp - CM 7777
VHF - Gain - 23 Noise 2.8
UHF - Gain - 26 Noise 2.0

Analyzing the spec. sheets reveals that both of these companies are recording the gain in differenct values (dBi & dB). After this comparison, you will see that the 4257 in fact has the edge on the 91XG.

With all of these discussions on these antennas, I really warrant if I am making the correct decision with taking down a CM 4257 to replace it with the 91XG, that is almost 2 feet smaller.

I hope I am putting my time and energy into a decent antenna design and not something that is just "smoke and mirrors."
I hate to say this, no I don't, all of the analyzation in the world will not overcome a bad location. And, it's possible that your 4257 is mounted in a bad location. Even your 4257 moved a bit may provide you with the signals you desire.

As far as I'm concerned, a good location beats out a superior antenna, hands down.
....jc

Is the Radio Shack 15-1868 indoor antenna (sorry, can't post links yet) antenna comparible to the RCA ANT145 recommended earlier in the thread? The dipoles on the RCA were sprayed or something, so I get black stuff on my hands every time I touch them.

In the engineering world I live in, the simulation is the starting point, not the end result. The measurements taken by Bob Chase with a $10,000 (refurbished price) spectrum analyzer should not be discounted. They are telling us something that exists in the real world (possibly that the 4248 has a much better match to 75 ohms than the 4228 or 91XG).

Also, an estimate of multipath can be made by examining the "flatness" of the channel response in the plots published by Bob. The 4248 looks to be as flat as the 4228, so your assertion that multipath is making the 4248 outperform seems invalid.

Ron
When the relative lag between paths in a multipath situation is short which is the case for nearby reflections like ground bounce the result is that the response can be quite flat over a channel with the overall gain either increased or decreased by the path interactions. Real world engineering antenna measurements can be greatly affected by this multipath. For that reason the ARRL only accepts advertising with real world tests if the tests are performed on a test range (expensive) or simulated free field results after they have verified the model. [ edited with correction that ARRL does allow range test results per the link provided by ctdish ].

I agree that simulation models do need to be verified with real world measurements though. To do this verification for antennas it is necessary to control and account for such things as ground bounce. This is easiest to do when performing the real world test at a test range where all the relevant geometry can be controlled. The basic models for standard antenna types like multibay dipoles, Yaggis, and log periodics have already been verified. These antennas are not too difficult to model for raw free field gain and there are some checks that can be performed like verifying the average raw gain to catch the most common errors. The modelling of impedance match is much more difficult than raw gain and so it requires a real world check of each detailed model.

Since Bob Chase did not control for ground bounce effects his results should be treated as just one sample of real world results that do not necessarily represent the typical relative performance of the antennas that he measured. Note that not only might the relative lag of the ground bounce have changed between antennas if the height of the antenna phase centers (not mounting points) were not carefully matched; but that since the effective vertical aperture of the various antennas is different the amount of ground bounce attenuation by the vertical beampattern will vary between antennas anyway.

In the engineering world I live in, the simulation is the starting point, not the end result. The measurements taken by Bob Chase with a $10,000 (refurbished price) spectrum analyzer should not be discounted. They are telling us something that exists in the real world (possibly that the 4248 has a much better match to 75 ohms than the 4228 or 91XG).

Also, an estimate of multipath can be made by examining the "flatness" of the channel response in the plots published by Bob. The 4248 looks to be as flat as the 4228, so your assertion that multipath is making the 4248 outperform seems invalid.

The problem, as you are well aware, is that reception can change, second-to-second and minute-to-minute in the real world. And since it is physically impossible for two objects to occupy the same space at the same time, real-world tests cause some serious problems when it comes to verification and repeatability. All we can really say from a real-world test is that, at one location, at one point in time, antenna A was inferior to antenna B's results measured a few minutes later. Even if you could come up with a general rule that antenna B outperformed antenna A in 20 locations, it wouldn't prove that antenna B wouldn't be better in hypothetical point 21. It is my assertion that real-world testing, while interesting, is not sufficient to establish the superiority of one antenna over another. If it were, the number of people (including myself) who have found the 4248 inferior should outweigh one test at one location, no matter how expensive the equipment used to do the test.

I'm not 100% certain, but I think at 8-9 miles, you would still be dramatically below the plane of the broadcasting antenna's aim (the shadow effect) and the greater acceptance angle vertically of the 4248 would come into play. I have heard of people at that distance getting better reception using an indoor bowtie than their rooftop antenna for just this reason.

As for multipath, instantaneous multipath (say, from a building 20-30 feet away) would not necessarily be visible on a spectrum analyzer, yet would still impact performance.

The problem, as you are well aware, is that reception can change, second-to-second and minute-to-minute in the real world. And since it is physically impossible for two objects to occupy the same space at the same time, real-world tests cause some serious problems when it comes to verification and repeatability.
This is a good point that I missed in my reply.

Is the Radio Shack 15-1868 indoor antenna (sorry, can't post links yet) antenna comparible to the RCA ANT145 recommended earlier in the thread? The dipoles on the RCA were sprayed or something, so I get black stuff on my hands every time I touch them.

If you wipe them with a wet one or alcohol swab, does it help the situation? The antennas aren't identical, the 1868 comes with a clunky looking plastic loop instead of a metallic looking loop but since loops seem to be loops, it should be OK. The Radio Shack site unhelpfully doesn't seem to mention the length of the dipoles (longer the better IMHO). There is a person here (http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/living/home/ask_expert_front.htm?forumId=1535&mode=display&action=&type=list&pageNo=7) recommending the RS model.

I suppose you could buy it and if it's not to your satisfaction return it.

The Radio Shack site unhelpfully doesn't seem to mention the length of the dipoles (longer the better IMHO).

Not so. See here: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/RabbitEars.html#Getting

But if you want channel 2 with max gain, you need 109" of rabbit ears which is why I said the longer the better as most settop antennae on the market now come with 38" ears (for a 76" dipole). That's why I said longer the better. But you're correct, if you just want channel 6 and up, shorter will work fine.

Originally Posted by dr1394

"In the engineering world I live in, the simulation is the starting point, not the end result. The measurements taken by Bob Chase with a $10,000 (refurbished price) spectrum analyzer should not be discounted. They are telling us something that exists in the real world (possibly that the 4248 has a much better match to 75 ohms than the 4228 or 91XG).

Also, an estimate of multipath can be made by examining the "flatness" of the channel response in the plots published by Bob. The 4248 looks to be as flat as the 4228, so your assertion that multipath is making the 4248 outperform seems invalid. "

I am inclined to agree with dr1394 that a measurement is worth more than a simulation is. The ARRL does allow properly determined range measurements of antenna gain. See: http://www.arrl.org/ads/antenna/
My look at the measurements when looked at for SNR show the the 4228 to be the clear winner for the lower UHF channels and it, the 4248 and 91x all very similar for higher UHF channels.
The change in noise level for different antennas suprises me, since the noise temp of the measureing system is much higher than the atmospheric noise picked up by the antennas. So I wonder if it might be a measurement artifact. John

FYI

Solid Signal has several more CM 7777 pre-amps for $35, as open-box. I was going to purchase one of these, but I did not want to take a chance on getting a defective one, so I ordered a "virgin" model.

I received my open-box 7777 and it looks fine (haven't hooked it up yet ;)). Besides, if you have problems with an open-box item, they should take care of it, since it's supposed to be like new. I wouldn't even know it WAS "open-box." The box wasn't taped or anything, but I don't know that new ones are either.

Does anyone know what hardware the 7777 is supposed to come with? In this photo on Solid Signal (www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=ANC7777&xzoom=zoomB#xview), I noticed there are 4 nuts and lock washers (mine came with 2) and 2 machine screws/bolts in addition to the 2 screws I got -- like an alternate mount for the power supply. Just wondering, I have all I need. Also in that picture, there is a plastic cover thing on the separate VHF input, which I don't have either. Seems good if you're not using the 2nd input.


Finally, I was wondering about the 3 included F-connectors (also in photo)... are they supposed to be crimped?? The ferrule part that goes outside the cable isn't as long my Radio Shack ones... not much crimp area. The instructions just say "attach," so maybe they're supposed to be removable? I figured one of you guys would know. :)



BTW, I will post about my 91XG results after I have it all completely finished, etc. :cool:

Could anyone help me with following questions?


Is getting too much digital singal strength a bad thing?
What are some of the symptoms of very strong digital signals?
What can be done with stations that multicast?

I was told I should install an attenuator and connect it to my OTA antenna.

Thanks

Everything it the picture is supposed to be included as well as the plastic hood. The bolts are for an alternative non-mast mounting for the preamp, not the power supply. The power supply screws are thinner. The F-conns are the fairly worthless crimp type that are meant for a stamped steel crimper. Use the better ones you have.

Could anyone help me with following questions?


Is getting too much digital singal strength a bad thing?
What are some of the symptoms of very strong digital signals?
What can be done with stations that multicast?

I was told I should install an attenuator and connect it to my OTA antenna.

Thanks
I am not an expert.
But I am not afraid to offer opinions <vbg>.
You can indeed overamplify digital signals. My intuition is that overamplification isn't as much of a problem as the fact that when you amplify you are also amplifying noise, which causes problems.
When I overamplify, I get what looks like a weak signal, lots of blocking up, etc.
I would defer to experts in this forum, but I'm not sure a OTA signal can be too strong in its unamplified form. I think troubles come when you add noisy amplifiers to a marginal signal.
I don't think multicasting has anything to do with the problem.
If you don't have an amp in the process, I find it hard to believe that you would need an attenuator unless multipath is the actual problem.
Multipath is a whole different animal from excess signal, and I'll bet it is far more often a problem in receiving digital signals than is too strong a signal.

With all of these discussions on these antennas, I really warrant if I am making the correct decision with taking down a CM 4257 to replace it with the 91XG, that is almost 2 feet smaller, just because it is reflecting a higher gain on paper. Also, changing out the 0264 pre-amp for the new Titan 7777. Again, this could be a lost cause and perhaps throwing money into the wind.

CM 4257 Gain listed from our friends at Channel Master:
Channel Gain
14 - 10.5
19 - 11.0
27 - 11.5
35 - 11.6
43 - 12.2
52 - 13.0
60 - 13.8

91XG Gain from Antenna's Direct
Channel Gain
14 - 11.6
20 - 12.8
30 - 14.2
40 - 14.8
50 - 15.8
55 - 16.7
60 - 16.4
65 - 16.2

Old Pre-Amp 0264
VHF Gain - 16 Noise 3.0
UHF Gain - 23 Noise 2.2

New Amp - CM 7777
VHF - Gain - 23 Noise 2.8
UHF - Gain - 26 Noise 2.0

I hope I am putting my time and energy into a decent antenna design and not something that is just "smoke and mirrors."

I see a lot of publicity on this antenna from various members on this forum. Oftentimes, companies manipulate the dBi values to their advantage. I see they list the F/B ratio, however, it is not identifying the channel at which this value was recorded.

Perhaps, I am just trying to split atoms on this whole issue, and may not even warrant the cost of these new toys.

Hopefully, I am not beating a dead horse. I think there are other people on this forum that are also curious if we would "really" see any difference in real world applications with this upgrade.

Well after reading all the talk on this guys antenna system And what he decided to change to im quite suprised. I've been in antenna and satellite since 1982 and I have sold all Brands of antennas Winegard Ch.Master Delhi Antennacraft Blonder Tongue Kay Townes -Lance etc. The 4257 that you had is a super antenna. It was the largest Diamond Quantum uhf antenna ever built. I think you'll be slightly dissapointed seeing the constrruction of the 91xg. I had Antennas Direct Send me a 91Xg To rate its quality. The shipped one to me for free and i just put it together. I must admit Im not impressed with its construction! It uses a flimsy 1/2" aluminum tubing design for the boom? Then instead of having one nice length of boom ,or at most 2 I had 3 small pieces to assemble. The way it assembles i can see it would probably not survive the ice storms we get here to long. I can see the end of the antenna drooping already.
The entire assembly just seems cheap. I know they are trying to make it easier to ship by doing this but this is a joke! The mast mounting clamps are very odd in that it only supports the lower boom? and not upper support? The reflector grids look nice but again its assembly to the boom is a joke? It looks to me like a cheaply built item from hong kong! I cannot rate its performance yet because we are having heavy snow here and i need to get it up in the air. I honestly think it might perform similar to a winegard prostar uhf yagi, They both use a folded dipole feed. It might be as good as a 9022 But i doubt it will be as good as a 9032. And the construction of a winegard prostar yagi blows it away. Not to mention it takes you a half hour to assemble and the winegards take 5 miniutes.
I cant see where they can come up with the prices they want for these. You can buy a winegard 9022 or 9032 for 75.00 or less depending on model. I will report back to all of you on performance. From The western N.Y. area A.S.A.P.
B.T.W. Those of you who have been running the Winegard HD platinum antennas like the 8200 and the 9095 9085 uhf yagis. These antennas use a log periodic type of feed VS the prostar UHF yagis that use the Tetrapole folded dipole design. I have found over 30 years that the folded dipole feed on a cor ref yagi seems to perform better. I have spec sheets on almost any antenna built if you need to see them. I serve the allegheny mountain region here and i have had some really hard to receive areas. The 3 antennas that worked best were the CM Parabolics #1 The winegard prostar YAgi #2 and the Ch.Master 4228 8 bay #3. This was in a side by side using a winegard ap 4800 preamp. Now every situation is different. I find a yagi works better in congested areas and where you want the most signal and dont mind a rotor turning now and then. The 4 +* bay antennas work better in a wider view less turning. but also in a more open area. The best preamps ive found are the winegards. They seem to resist lightning better. They have very little noise and offer numerous models to satisfy the overloading and ranges of most reception. Channel masters amps never turned me on. HERE's Why Inthat same poor location we tried to pull uhf stations out of Grand Island. N/W of buffalo and apx 60 miles thu the hills from our location. Even the Super titan C.M. could just barely give us a usable signal. THen we tried the Winegard ap-4727 at 22db. It did a bit better than the C.M. However we then instaled the ap-4800. That is where we really seen a difference. The most usable signal measured witha FSM came from the winegard. Now all of this talk is based on the most extreme area reception. But it gives you an idea of what really performs when your really out there.
TAke care All
Rich Wertman
R.W.Antenna Service Inc
Lockport,N.Y.

1) The way it assembles i can see it would probably not survive the ice storms we get here to long. I can see the end of the antenna drooping already.

2) I honestly think it might perform similar to a winegard prostar uhf yagi, They both use a folded dipole feed.

3) Not to mention it takes you a half hour to assemble and the winegards take 5 miniutes.

4) The best preamps ive found are the winegards. They seem to resist lightning better. They have very little noise and offer numerous models to satisfy the overloading and ranges of most reception.

5) Now all of this talk is based on the most extreme area reception. But it gives you an idea of what really performs when your really out there.


1) Mine has been up for over a year, survived 80+ mph wind gusts, ice and heavy snow. It does 'flex' a little at the ends under its weight, but it is a very lightweight antenna.

2) Predicting reception is difficult to do. Yet many have reported great results replacing other antennas with the 91XG. The similarity in appearance to top performers like the JBX21 and the Triax Unix 100 suggest it is much better than you claim.

3) Taking my time and being careful, it took me less than 1/2 hour to assemble the 91XG. It took me far longer to put a Winegard HD7084 together, in part because of confusing directions. I suspect with a little practice, you'd have no trouble putting one together in 5-10 minutes.

4) What do you mean by resisting lightning? The noise figure on the Winegard preamps is 2.7dB for UHF, while the Channel Masters are 2.0. As others have posted here, there are preamplifiers with 0.4dB of noise. According to the experts, S/N only improves when the noise figure is 2.0dB or lower. The Winegards are better at handling overload than the Channel Masters, which may explain your testing results. I have a Winegard myself, and I'm not saying they're bad.

5) I think my situation qualifies as extreme, and I'm always keeping an eye out for better antennas. I live in a "bowl" area of a city with no nearby transmitters. The "local" stations range from 30-55 miles away, all physically blocked from line-of-sight. Worse, I'm shooting through trees within a half mile in all directions, because I can't get much higher than the 54' tower I have now. Most of my desired stations are blocked not only by hills and trees, but also the horizon, as they are more than 75 miles distant and have transmitter heights no greater than 1600'. I've been reading this forum for a long time, and I'm still waiting for the post where someone says, "I replaced my 91XG with Antenna X and my reception improved." I've read a lot of posts that say, "I replaced my Antenna X with a 91XG and things are dramatically better."

You seem to have a vested interest in Winegard products. Is it possible you're not being entirely objective?

Well after reading all the talk on this guys antenna system And what he decided to change to im quite suprised. I've been in antenna and satellite since 1982 and I have sold all Brands of antennas Winegard Ch.Master Delhi Antennacraft Blonder Tongue Kay Townes -Lance etc. The 4257 that you had is a super antenna. It was the largest Diamond Quantum uhf antenna ever built. I think you'll be slightly dissapointed seeing the constrruction of the 91xg. I had Antennas Direct Send me a 91Xg To rate its quality. The shipped one to me for free and i just put it together. I must admit Im not impressed with its construction! It uses a flimsy 1/2" aluminum tubing design for the boom? Then instead of having one nice length of boom ,or at most 2 I had 3 small pieces to assemble. The way it assembles i can see it would probably not survive the ice storms we get here to long. I can see the end of the antenna drooping already.
The entire assembly just seems cheap. I know they are trying to make it easier to ship by doing this but this is a joke! The mast mounting clamps are very odd in that it only supports the lower boom? and not upper support? The reflector grids look nice but again its assembly to the boom is a joke? It looks to me like a cheaply built item from hong kong! I cannot rate its performance yet because we are having heavy snow here and i need to get it up in the air. I honestly think it might perform similar to a winegard prostar uhf yagi, They both use a folded dipole feed. It might be as good as a 9022 But i doubt it will be as good as a 9032. And the construction of a winegard prostar yagi blows it away. Not to mention it takes you a half hour to assemble and the winegards take 5 miniutes.
I cant see where they can come up with the prices they want for these. You can buy a winegard 9022 or 9032 for 75.00 or less depending on model. I will report back to all of you on performance. From The western N.Y. area A.S.A.P.
B.T.W. Those of you who have been running the Winegard HD platinum antennas like the 8200 and the 9095 9085 uhf yagis. These antennas use a log periodic type of feed VS the prostar UHF yagis that use the Tetrapole folded dipole design. I have found over 30 years that the folded dipole feed on a cor ref yagi seems to perform better. I have spec sheets on almost any antenna built if you need to see them. I serve the allegheny mountain region here and i have had some really hard to receive areas. The 3 antennas that worked best were the CM Parabolics #1 The winegard prostar YAgi #2 and the Ch.Master 4228 8 bay #3. This was in a side by side using a winegard ap 4800 preamp. Now every situation is different. I find a yagi works better in congested areas and where you want the most signal and dont mind a rotor turning now and then. The 4 +* bay antennas work better in a wider view less turning. but also in a more open area. The best preamps ive found are the winegards. They seem to resist lightning better. They have very little noise and offer numerous models to satisfy the overloading and ranges of most reception. Channel masters amps never turned me on. HERE's Why Inthat same poor location we tried to pull uhf stations out of Grand Island. N/W of buffalo and apx 60 miles thu the hills from our location. Even the Super titan C.M. could just barely give us a usable signal. THen we tried the Winegard ap-4727 at 22db. It did a bit better than the C.M. However we then instaled the ap-4800. That is where we really seen a difference. The most usable signal measured witha FSM came from the winegard. Now all of this talk is based on the most extreme area reception. But it gives you an idea of what really performs when your really out there.
TAke care All
Rich Wertman
R.W.Antenna Service Inc
Lockport,N.Y.

Rich,

I am leading to believe that your input is correct. The Channel Master 4257 is considered to be the "best" yagi produced. The next best antenna was the 4251 parabolics. Channel Master has been in the business for a very long time.

I ordered the 91XG antenna to test. Based on your feedback, it may be in my best interest to stay with the 4257. Again, I am a man that heavily reseaches products and tests them unbiased. At the beginning, I was a little nervous with this antenna, due to its size and shape. Now, hearing additional feedback on the construction makes me think I made the wrong purchase.

Again, most people on this forum might not be as intimate with the 4257 as we are, and know that this antenna rocks! However, we were looking for something that will outperform it, and may end up with a disatisfied look on our faces when the 91XG is put to the test. Comparing this antenna to the 115 inch 4257, will yeild some good facts in the field.

In an above listed note, I broke down the specifications between the two antennas for comparison.

Again, most people on this forum might not be as intimate with the 4257 as we are, and know that this antenna rocks!

A search on "Channel Master 4257" and "DX" turned up zero antenna related hits on the first page.

Searches on the 4251 and the Winegard PR-9032 turned up many more hits.

Do you know something the DXers don't? Or is there a reason why they favor products like the Triax Unix 100 and JBX-21WB?

I'm all new to this HDTV stuff, but I just bought a Sony 50" LCD Projection as a christmas surprise for my husband (We had been researching together, and then I convinced him he is NOT getting one until next year). I know that he has been looking into TV antennas to receive OTA HDTV channels from Kansas City. He had been eyeing a Terk HTVO, but I wanted to check before getting one to go with his TV since I have read about Channel master and Wineguard which seem less expensive. Our Zipcode is 66046, and we definitely want to receive Kansas City WB.

Thanks!

Oh - and I am also clueless as to what kind of surge protector to get for the TV so he can turn it on when I surprise him. I've seen ones that are supposed to clean the signal and cover up to 6000 joules, but they seem soooo expensive. Could you point me in the right direction?

I'm all new to this HDTV stuff, but I just bought a Sony 50" LCD Projection as a christmas surprise for my husband (We had been researching together, and then I convinced him he is NOT getting one until next year). I know that he has been looking into TV antennas to receive OTA HDTV channels from Kansas City. He had been eyeing a Terk HTVO, but I wanted to check before getting one to go with his TV since I have read about Channel master and Wineguard which seem less expensive. Our Zipcode is 66046, and we definitely want to receive Kansas City WB.
Since most of the stations in KC are about 40 miles NE of you, I wouldn't recommend anything but a good external antenna.
Oh - and I am also clueless as to what kind of surge protector to get for the TV so he can turn it on when I surprise him. I've seen ones that are supposed to clean the signal and cover up to 6000 joules, but they seem soooo expensive. Could you point me in the right direction?
I am partial to ISOBAR surge surpressors, they are < $100 and will pay for any damages up to something like $50k. Protect not only the AC but also the antenna lead.
....jc

I'm all new to this HDTV stuff, but I just bought a Sony 50" LCD Projection as a christmas surprise for my husband (We had been researching together, and then I convinced him he is NOT getting one until next year). I know that he has been looking into TV antennas to receive OTA HDTV channels from Kansas City. He had been eyeing a Terk HTVO, but I wanted to check before getting one to go with his TV since I have read about Channel master and Wineguard which seem less expensive. Our Zipcode is 66046, and we definitely want to receive Kansas City WB.

Thanks!

Oh - and I am also clueless as to what kind of surge protector to get for the TV so he can turn it on when I surprise him. I've seen ones that are supposed to clean the signal and cover up to 6000 joules, but they seem soooo expensive. Could you point me in the right direction?
What type of antenna does www.antennaweb.org say you need? Antennaweb is usually too pessimistic for digital TV (and too optimistic for analog TV) but it is still a good place to start.

Our Zipcode is 66046, and we definitely want to receive Kansas City WB.

I have bad news for you. The odds are that you're not going to receive KCMO-DT at this time. They're broadcasting with a scant 9kw (1000kw is the maximum, for comparison.) The FCC projects coverage, which you can sometimes beat by a little, but rarely by a lot: http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/FMTV-service-area?x=DS601641.html

Some day, they will have a stronger signal (the FCC is demanding no later than 12/31/06.) But that day isn't today. Sorry to disappoint you.

I agree with the other poster who says you need an outdoor antenna to get the KC stations. 40 miles is really pushing it for an indoor antenna. You might get something, but more than likely, you're going to get nothing more than an unwatchable picture. I recommend a Channel Master 4228, which should run you about $50.

I hope the Sony LCD you got was not "HD Ready" and was instead "HD Built-In" or something like that. "HD Ready" sets do not have tuners, meaning you would need an external tuner box to receive over-the-air digital signals. These can be had for about $150, but that's probably not what you want to hear after spending $2K on a new TV.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

Thanks for the advice. I'm sure my husband will understand. The TV does have a built-in tuner. For outside antennas, does anyone have experience with the Terk amplified HDTV antenna at solidsignal on their off-air television page? I just wanted to check since that was the model my husband scoped out, even though I have been reading about Channel Master and Wineguard. According to anntennaweb org we will need a large directional with preamp, but according to checkhd com we would need a medium directional with preamp to get KC stations. I guess we can just wait and try them out. I just wanted to know if I should spend $80 on the Terk or $50 on the Channel Master.

Thanks!

For outside antennas, does anyone have experience with the Terk amplified HDTV antenna at solidsignal on their off-air television page? ...I just wanted to know if I should spend $80 on the Terk or $50 on the Channel Master.

While some people have success with Terk's antennas, most do not. For those who do have success, they could have purchased a much cheaper antenna and gotten the same or better results. Mostly, Terk makes pretty-looking antennas, which doesn't help you when you want a pretty-looking picture. The Channel Master is at least twice as good, and quite probably on the order of 10 times as good as the Terk.

If you want to add an amplifier, you can do so later; the Channel Master 7777 is an excellent choice and will do far more for your reception than the Terk's built-in amplifier would.

But at 40 miles, I think the 4228 by itself is enough antenna, especially if you're not blocked by a lot of hills (we are talking Kansas here, right...?) or tall buildings.

Thanks for all your help guys!

1) Mine has been up for over a year, survived 80+ mph wind gusts, ice and heavy snow. It does 'flex' a little at the ends under its weight, but it is a very lightweight antenna.

2) Predicting reception is difficult to do. Yet many have reported great results replacing other antennas with the 91XG. The similarity in appearance to top performers like the JBX21 and the Triax Unix 100 suggest it is much better than you claim.

3) Taking my time and being careful, it took me less than 1/2 hour to assemble the 91XG. It took me far longer to put a Winegard HD7084 together, in part because of confusing directions. I suspect with a little practice, you'd have no trouble putting one together in 5-10 minutes.

4) What do you mean by resisting lightning? The noise figure on the Winegard preamps is 2.7dB for UHF, while the Channel Masters are 2.0. As others have posted here, there are preamplifiers with 0.4dB of noise. According to the experts, S/N only improves when the noise figure is 2.0dB or lower. The Winegards are better at handling overload than the Channel Masters, which may explain your testing results. I have a Winegard myself, and I'm not saying they're bad.

5) I think my situation qualifies as extreme, and I'm always keeping an eye out for better antennas. I live in a "bowl" area of a city with no nearby transmitters. The "local" stations range from 30-55 miles away, all physically blocked from line-of-sight. Worse, I'm shooting through trees within a half mile in all directions, because I can't get much higher than the 54' tower I have now. Most of my desired stations are blocked not only by hills and trees, but also the horizon, as they are more than 75 miles distant and have transmitter heights no greater than 1600'. I've been reading this forum for a long time, and I'm still waiting for the post where someone says, "I replaced my 91XG with Antenna X and my reception improved." I've read a lot of posts that say, "I replaced my Antenna X with a 91XG and things are dramatically better."

You seem to have a vested interest in Winegard products. Is it possible you're not being entirely objective?

I do not have a vested intrest in Winegard. In fact I used to like Channel master 's stuff alot better . That is until they went el Chepo El crapo!!!! They did away with all the good antennas like the most famous Quantum line. ALso they did away with many antennas like the PArascopes (which I have just bought the build specs for to reproduce since they will not) My simple reckoning is that if you compared a winegard pr-9032 to the 91xg the construction blows it away. It also has a longer 2 piece 80% constructed boom. Im looking at the gain and curve cahrts for the 9032 now and its 16.3 db on ch 32 its lowest is 14.9 on ch 14 and drops off at ch 69 considerably. WHich is normal beamwidths avg is 35 degrees And the f/b is apx 20 db across the band. Its design and feed is very similar to the 91xg. but the construction is not and neither is price. A 9032 can be had pretty chaeap if one looks. I have one on my house at 25 feet and it kicks. I can watch Erie Pa on digital on good days. On average i can see Toronto Canada which is apx 65 miles as crow flies And that is Hd. I also have a 4251 at 85 ft which see's alot more. Re: preamps. I dont care what these guys put in a book as rated specs. It all comes down to perfomance in the field!!!! And as i said before I have tried the Channel master amps and the winegard and Winegard wins in a side by side. I have always noticed more snow in a uhf picture using the C.M. But they were suppose to be .7 db less noise. I have placed bothe the Titans and the Winegards on a spectrum analyzer and i can see some distinct differences. Im not tooting a horn for anyone I had Antennas Direct send me an antenna to test And this is what i feel. I use antennas commercially as well on multi story buildings. I would never see myself putting the 91xg on a 10 story building , However i could see a Winegard there. Channel masters quality is also something to be spoke of. They no longer do any anodizing of any antennas. The 8 bay is still a good antenna ,but the cheapened it up by not using a 1 piece reflector they now use 2 4221's with a phasing bar and 2 reflectors in the rear. Just stupid crap like that.
Many of us in the antenna business (as I for over 25 years) boycotted C.M when they're quality went to crap and they dropped the good constrution and quality lines the use to handle. Winegard at least still builds a decent antenna.
In regards to comparing construction of an 8200P antenna to a 91xg!!! Thats like comparing a volkswagen To a cadillac. The 8200 is a full line vhf/uhf antenna that is apx 170" and has over 100 elements. Its also not a fair comparison to the 91xg Its gain pattern is an average of only 13 db gain. You should have tried a 9032 prostar which would have been more of a comparison. If you get the chance to try one do it you may be suprised? Thats just my 2 cents anyhow. I'll let everyone know how the 91xg performs once i get it up in the air.One thing to note is that Antenna Direct did not send me a gain and curve chart on the antenna as i requested so i cant see how they actually tested it. I do have specs on every channel master and winegardand antennacraft antenna as well as some of the delhi line too.
Rich

A search on "Channel Master 4257" and "DX" turned up zero antenna related hits on the first page.

Searches on the 4251 and the Winegard PR-9032 turned up many more hits.

Do you know something the DXers don't? Or is there a reason why they favor products like the Triax Unix 100 and JBX-21WB?

Sounds to me like we're just a couple of old school boys who dont believe all the hype that some of the micro antenna companies boost about the're antennas. Ths HDTV thing is a new source of revenue for the unexpecting and un schooled person. The best antenna ever built for uhf was the Parabolics. I still have 3 of them and Their is nothing on the market that will. I,ve actually taken both the winegard yagi's and the channel master yagi's and modified them.( made them longer and put larger reflectors ) they improved slightly in gain and in directivity,but never better than a parabolic. Alot of people toting the new antennas havent ever used the stuff we are talking of. So YA just gotta see what happens. If i had alot of money i would start my own antenna mfg business. I am going to remarket the parabolic uhf antenna thou. I have a vested intrest in doing so and have a friend who is going to do all the aluminum fabrication. Its nbeen an ongoing project.
Rich

I've done extensive testing with the Winegard PR-9032. It's inferior when used as a single antenna or a stack vs. the Televes DAT 75 pretty much up and down the band. The CM 4228 also outperformed the PR-9032 for me. The XG91 is a clone of the Funke 91 element model and MaxHD would tell you the Funke 91 element is at least comparable to the DAT 75. The Winegard 8200p combo is significantly inferior (for uhf) in performance to any of the above mentioned uhf antennas.

Winegard is notorious for exaggerating their numbers for antenna performance.
I'd still say they're a good value, but you get what you pay for.

If I connect two TVs to an OTA will the signal be reduced to each tv? I am assuming there is a type of splitter to accomplish this.

If I connect two TVs to an OTA will the signal be reduced to each tv? I am assuming there is a type of splitter to accomplish this.
Yes. Using a standard splitter, by about 1/2(of the signal strength).

If you connect the lead to an amplifier prior to splitting you'll be fine. Now if you have a mast mounted preamp, there is usually enough output to overcome the splitter.
....jc

I am interested in obtaining a low cost RF field strength meter to align the azimuth and tilt angle of my UHF antenna. Something around $50 bucks would be the sweet spot.

Ideally, it would be more like a very simple spectum analyzer with a graphical display that can be used on a Windows laptop. That would be sweet. Thanks.

bt-rtp

I thought you guys/gals might enjoy seeing some pictures of an antenna project my partner and i are working on. We currently have a self-designed parabolic up approx. 100' on a R25G tower with a Yaesu 800 rotor. The new project is a Quad CM 2228 that is modified to improve feed design and will consist of 4 (32 Bay total) 4228s each with 7775 preamps. A BT BTY-HB-HP Hi-band VHF with a CM7777 will be below the bowties and will handle the VHF duties. On the UHF side, the 4 CM 2228 (Modified) each with 7775 Amps .. will have individual 7916 Belden downleads. This way we can stack in any manner we wish, by simple selecting the desired antenna(s) Performance was excellent on the parabolic and we are optimistic that this will exceed it.... We consistently lock on HD stations 100-175 miles. When we get this up, maybe i can share some data with you. Happy Holidays from East Texas.....

Here are a few more pictures for those of you that are interested.....

I have a DirecTV H10-250 STB and suspect that some of my OTA frequencis levels are over driving the tuner, resulting in degraded performance and bouncing signal lock.

I live 15 miles from the tower site that has all of the major networks and each are transmitting at 1000 kW except:

NBC at 244 kW
UPN at 225kW

I am using a CM 4228 in my attic.

Up in the attic my 19" portable color TV receives all the analog UHF stations clearly clearly with no antenna connected at all!

What is the appropriate signal level to have entering the STB ?

bt-rtp

I thought you guys/gals might enjoy seeing some pictures of an antenna project my partner and i are working on. We currently have a self-designed parabolic up approx. 100' on a R25G tower with a Yaesu 800 rotor. The new project is a Quad CM 2228 that is modified to improve feed design and will consist of 4 (32 Bay total) 4228s each with 7775 preamps. A BT BTY-HB-HP Hi-band VHF with a CM7777 will be below the bowties and will handle the VHF duties. On the UHF side, the 4 CM 2228 (Modified) each with 7775 Amps .. will have individual 7916 Belden downleads. This way we can stack in any manner we wish, by simple selecting the desired antenna(s) Performance was excellent on the parabolic and we are optimistic that this will exceed it.... We consistently lock on HD stations 100-175 miles. When we get this up, maybe i can share some data with you. Happy Holidays from East Texas.....


What are you going to use to combine the 4 8-bays?

How about a pic of the custom parabolic,and what feed did you use?

I do not have a vested intrest in Winegard. In fact I used to like Channel master 's stuff alot better . That is until they went el Chepo El crapo!!!! They did away with all the good antennas like the most famous Quantum line. ALso they did away with many antennas like the PArascopes (which I have just bought the build specs for to reproduce since they will not) My Re: preamps. I dont care what these guys put in a book as rated specs. It all comes down to performance in the field!!!! And as i said before I have tried the Channel master amps and the winegard and Winegard wins in a side by side. I have always noticed more snow in a uhf picture using the C.M. But they were suppose to be .7 db less noise. I have placed bothe the Titans and the Winegards on a spectrum analyzer and i can see some distinct differences. Rich

Rich,

Great posts. Can you elaborate on a few things for me?

I have a ChannelMaster 7777 preamp in my attic, 60 miles away from Chicago and I lock all but one channel, on channel 3 (WBBM-DT). I have 3 friends who have one, and it works wonders. What Winegard are you using that will produce less
noise but with similar or better gain? I am all ears! The CM 7777 to me is a tough one to beat. I have heard that the Winegard preamps take lightning hits much better than the ChannelMasters. What do you see on a spectrum analyzer that is "distinct"? Which Winegard with similar high amplification would you recommend?
Would the Winegard AP8275 beat out the CM 7777? I have both VHF and UHF I must worry about.

I agree that CM has gone the "el cheapo" route. I have 3 4228's, one of them is the old 1-screen design, and they do perform, though I like the older design better. You are right about the Winegards. Maybe they exaggerate their gain, but those things are built to LAST.

A quick story. Growing up in the very near southeast suburbs of Chicago, the Chicago Bears decided that if a game wasn't a sellout, it was blacked out on WBBM-TV. Since they weren't selling out, many games were decided at the last minute (and I do mean last minute) to be carried or not. Well, along and east of I-94 in Chicago and south, the bars said "the heck with this!". They purchased a 50'
tower, a ChannelMaster parabolic UHF antenna, pointed it east to get WSBT-TV 22 in South Bend, IN...and the rest is history. I bet the north/northwest sides got them to point towards Milwaukee/Rockford, respectively. The bars spent $700, including an ad on their door that said something like "we ALWAYS have the Bears games"...and they made their investment back many, many, many times over. Those antennas rocked! Unfortunately, South Bend doesn't carry Chicago Blackhawk home games. :(

Anyway, if you do reproduce the old parabolics, let us know. Put a mesh screen on them, and the gain may be insane...

I have a DirecTV H10-250 STB and suspect that some of my OTA frequencis levels are over driving the tuner, resulting in degraded performance and bouncing signal lock.

I live 15 miles from the tower site that has all of the major networks and each are transmitting at 1000 kW except:

NBC at 244 kW
UPN at 225kW

I am using a CM 4228 in my attic.

Up in the attic my 19" portable color TV receives all the analog UHF stations clearly clearly with no antenna connected at all!

What is the appropriate signal level to have entering the STB ?

bt-rtp

-10 to 10 db is fine, and yes, it sounds like you are way overdriving your tuner.
You can go to Radio Shack and buy a signal attenuator. You can knock it down up to 20dB, or steps down to I think around 7 dB, but don't quote me on that.
In any case, get that, and see what attenuation level works.

I have bad news for you. The odds are that you're not going to receive KCMO-DT at this time. They're broadcasting with a scant 9kw (1000kw is the maximum, for comparison.) The FCC projects coverage, which you can sometimes beat by a little, but rarely by a lot: http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/FMTV-service-area?x=DS601641.html

Some day, they will have a stronger signal (the FCC is demanding no later than 12/31/06.) But that day isn't today.

Sregener,

I think you have a typo. Full power has to be on by 7/1/06 for all digital TV stations.