It seems there are a half dozen sub-threads (discussions buried within other threads) that pertain to the trials and tribulations of Low-Band VHF reception: Channels 2 through 6.

It makes sense to pull those discussions together. Perhaps if everyone from these different markets who were blessed with a VHF-Low allocation shared their issues and solutions, we could either make VHF-Low viable for everyone, or start a grass-roots effort to eliminate it.

At the least, it will serve as a place to rant and keep the "noise" down in other threads!

Here is a quick listing of the Low-Band VHF frequencies...
Channel 2: 54 to 60 MHz
Channel 3: 60 to 66 MHz
Channel 4: 66 to 72 MHz
Channel 5: 76 to 82 MHz
Channel 6: 82 to 88 MHz

To get things started, here is one advantage of Low-Band VHF (and yes there are more):
- Lower transmitter power required for similar VHF-High or UHF coverage

and, one disadvantage:
- Considerably larger antennas needed, especially for channels 2, 3 and 4

My personal reception issue is with WBBM-DT Channel 3 Chicago. I have only two specific (and inconvenient!) locations indoors, with amplified rabbit-ears fully extended, where I can get this station. I am 33 miles SSW of Chicago in Monee, IL, in a townhome. From the roof of my townhome, the tops of the Sears and Hancock buildings are visible. There are some days where I simply cannot get reliable reception of this station anywhere. Several different household appliances completely kill the signal.

I've read threads about WKYC-DT Cleveland, WWMT-DT Kalamazoo, a station in Fort Wayne, IN (on ch. 4, I believe), and WCTX-DT New Haven. How about other markets? What are your troubles? What have you done to remedy the problem? Are you "pro-VHF-Low" or "pro-VHF-High/UHF?"

I'm only 11 miles from the Hancock. WBBM still has is a problem for me because of impulse noise. If it sparks, it kills, so to speak. With CBSE on available on D*, I have a choice during thunderstorms of either rain fade on CBSE or lightning on WBBM to kill the signal. The most effective change to lower impulse noise problems I made was to keep the antenna outside so the RFI from throwing a light switch inside has to travel farther and through walls to get to the antenna. An experiment with an attic antenna made WBBM intolerable while all UHF stations were fine. There may be a good use for the low VHF band but digital TV isn't it.

Originally posted by PhilJSmith67
To get things started, here is one advantage of Low-Band VHF (and yes there are more):
- Lower transmitter power required for similar VHF-High or UHF coverage

and, one disadvantage:
- Considerably larger antennas needed, especially for channels 2, 3 and 4


While both of these are true, it also takes more transmitter power than is currently allocated to overcome man made noise, which is what most people are dealing with now. If you see sparkles in a fairly strong analog signal, chances are real good that there is localized man made noise that will make make DT reception tougher than one might think (and computers are just one source of localized man made noise). Enough of these instantaneous bursts will destroy any hopes of a watchable picture.

http://www.antennasdirect.com/VHF%20channel%20listings.htm
I think one of the goals of this thread is to actually get antennasdirect to acknowledge that channels 7 and 8 aren't in the VHF-lo band. :)

How long are the dipoles on your rabbit ears, Phil? Before I got DTV, I shopped around for the longest rabbit ears I could find, so I could get to the 93" needed for a channel 3 dipole. I found a few that had 44" dipoles, but none longer than that. With the 5 inch separation between the ears, I just made it (probably passed it due to end effects).

It's curious that you're using an amp with your rabbit ears. VHF-lo's frequencies are so low that the noise from such an amp would surely be more than the cable losses:
http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/basics.html (under transmission cable)
Maybe the tuner also has some noise in it. My experiments with the CM7777 at my old house with my rabbit ears didn't yield any more signal quality. I was expecting just a little improvement since the Fusion 2 isn't the most sensitive of tuner cards.

Then again, I had great reception on channel 3 from 32 miles. The secret, I'm realizing now, is antenna height. If you're not 8 feet off the ground, you're not going to get anything, it seems, just 0% signal strength. In addition to that, my old house was at 710 ft of elevation, just past the crest of a gentle hill in the area. Lake Michigan is at 580 feet, give or take, so that's 130 feet above the lake, with just the top of the gentle hill (no more than 15 feet higher than my elevation and half a mile away) in the way all the way to the tower. If you drive (or move to a new house) 2 miles closer to the towers, you drop 60 feet in elevation, and it's all downhill to the lakeshore. So it was like being at the top row of a stadium, reception-wise. I only needed to put the rabbit ears in the attic, and at 723 ft of total elevation, 75% signal quality was a snap (only needed 55% to lock on the Fusion 2).

Now, with the antenna in the living room around 655 ft of elevation at the new house, I get about 35-40% signal quality here on WBBM-DT, which is which way short of a lock or even PSIP data. Analogs are all fuzzy (they used to be obscenely clear for the most part with just a UHF loop, and powerful enough to dominate the fixed-pattern noise on the Fusion 2's analog half.), and there are 2 2-story houses in my signal path that are graded 5-10 feet above this house to boot (it's just a very tall ranch here, about a 24 foot roofline). For the time being, I aim a silver sensor in between the gap the 2 roofs leave to get the best signal quality on my UHF station, but for channel 3, I need more definitely more height and probably more gain. I'm thinking 5 element cut-to-channel minimum with my current signal quality. I still haven't totally figured out why the signal quality is so low. It could be from multipath, in which case, I'd need a new Fusion card with a 5th-generation tuner. I don't think I can overcome it with gain alone, but I'd love to be wrong. :)

Ah yes, I almost forgot about impulse noise. I had various electronic gear that would be worth 5-10% (1-2dB) in noise. Things like my fixed wireless transceiver, CRT monitors, old computers and the occasional blender would all hack off enough signal all by their lonesome to break up my signal or at least take it to the threshold at my old house. Put any two together and it was lights out WBBM-DT. Putting the ears in the attic helped, and I'm sure getting them outside would have helped more.
I guess it's a good thing that WBBM-DT is petitioning to go to 4.4kW from their current 3.7kW, I'm sure it'll help such matters.

Originally posted by Rack
... get antennasdirect to acknowledge that channels 7 and 8 aren't in the VHF-lo band. :)
LOL!

How long are the dipoles on your rabbit ears, Phil? Before I got DTV, I shopped around for the longest rabbit ears I could find, so I could get to the 93" needed for a channel 3 dipole. ...
I haven't measured them, but they're pretty long, which is why I bought this RCA/Thompson antenna. Maybe 6 to 6½ feet? But 72" is probably only 30-50% effective for Channel 3.

It's curious that you're using an amp with your rabbit ears.
It's a built-in amp; I have it dialed down to the minimum. Unfortunately there is no "bypass" setting. I was tempted to open it up and bypass it myself! I really only need the "ears" not the amp.

With the gain turned all the way down, there doesn't *appear* to be any cross-modulation or other nasty products on any of the analog VHF or UHF channels, but there could still be some noise I can't visually measure.

Maybe the tuner also has some noise in it. ...
The tuner I am using is a Sasem OnAir USB HDTV tuner. Originally this tuner indeed was generating its own noise, and lots of it, up to about 150 MHz. I eventually traced it down to the stock power supply. Powering the tuner with a regulated 5VDC 3A power supply on my bench completely eliminated the noise. Now, the Sasem tuner seems to be almost as sensitive as my portable "DXing" TV for both VHF and UHF.

The PC I am using is a new Dell laptop. I've probed around it with a portable on channels 2 and 5 and it seems that the noise emissions are low. The USB cable seems to emit nothing, either.

Then again, I had great reception on channel 3 from 32 miles. The secret, I'm realizing now, is antenna height. If you're not 8 feet off the ground, you're not going to get anything, it seems, just 0% signal strength.
Bingo. I get zero zilch on the first floor (coincidentally, ch2 on a watchman gets very little, too). On the second floor, I get reception (about 2dB above lock) at the open area of a center staircase, and weaker reception about 1dB over lock near the raise ceiling in one bedroom. Everywhere else on the second floor yields "signal" around 5dB; basically the tuner is "getting something" but the bit-error rate is extreme. In both of the "hotspots" WBBM-TV ch2 and WMAQ-TV ch5 are clear, and surprisingly have little to no 60Hz static, and no multipath. Sometimes I even snag WTMJ-TV ch4 and WITI ch6 in those hotspots.

Fortunately, my townhome is in a slightly elevated area of Monee, with the Sears/Hancock sticks visible from the roof. My prior house was another 15 miles south in Manteno, where the faint signal of WCIA Champaign was usually stronger than the whisper of WBBM-DT.

On most of the second floor, all UHFs are strong. WXFT-DT and WCIU-DT are the most finicky, but still far easier to get than WBBM-DT. On the first floor it's tough to find a hotspot common to all the UHF stations.

I'm thinking 5 element cut-to-channel minimum with my current signal quality. I still haven't totally figured out why the signal quality is so low. ...
You can't beat an antenna cut to size! After reading your post, I'm considering putting a dipole in the attic. The formula I had was for a dipole cut to 90", and a 95" reflector 38" behind it. I won't get around to that for a few weeks though. The easiest thing to do is hack that RCA antenna to bypass the amp.

This sure seems like a lot of work for one channel, when for UHF all I have to do is stick a bowtie right on the tuner and aim it north!

The problem is that the FCC is assigning powers far too low to the
low VHFs.


If the digital station was at the same power as the standard
low VHF analog (i.e. 30 kW, as they are rated differently) it would
work better. If it were truly adequate power, say 100 or 200 kW
(rated as digital always is) it would work fine. Sure, this would
require a bunch of power out of the transmitter, but it is
doable.

Doug McDonald

I agree, and 30kW from WBBM-DT would sure be nice. But, my guess is that the FCC would never let that happen with a HAAT of around 1500', not without completely revamping the rules by which they assign ERP levels to these stations.

Imagine if BPL were to get a green light! Put THAT in the big "disadvantages" column!

I watch WCTX-DT almost every day, and it has always been on Channel 39, for as long as they have been on the air! Connecticut Public Television has proposed to place a DTV station in New Haven on Channel 6, but, so far as anyone can tell, it hasn't materialized yet, and WEDW-DT from Bridgeport is strong enough to cover the New Haven area, anyway.

I'll be curious to see how low band VHF will do if allocated reasonable power levels.

The problems of large antenna size, undesirable propagation (ie E-skip and tropo) leading to co-channel interference, and sensitivity to impulse noise IMO outweigh the slightly better propagation of UHF over VHF to outlying areas and power advantages. Better to have good reception in a 55 mile radius than lousy reception in a 70 mile radius.

Of course those living 70 miles from the transmitters are free to disagree with me. :)

I will wager that very few stations with low VHF analog assingments and UHF digital assignments will choose their VHF station after the analog shutoff.

http://www.usahardware.com/inet/shop/item/30770/icn/20-900449/gemini/mant250.htm
This is the antenna I used for WBBM-DT 3. Nice 44" ears, 93.5" max end-to-end when fully horizontal, no amp, and inexpensive. Just make sure to twist the UHF portion around a couple times to get some common-mode rejection in the internal twin-lead, if you're going to use it for UHF, too.

Then again, twin-lead dipoles are very cheap to make, too. :)
I was thinking of trying some steel tape measurers as a very temporary director and reflector. It's crazy enough to work, right? :p

Off topic, what kind of signal meter does the Sasem have? That's the one thing that kept me from buying it; I have no idea if it has a signal meter. Screenshots preferred. ^^

I have WBRA-DT on 3 here. It's 79 miles from me at 7.25 kW (but it's directional, so I only wind up getting 3 or so in my direction).

My biggest problem is e-skip. I'm so far from the transmitter, that any co-channel interference at all just wipes it out. It's my weakest signal to begin with. I don't seem to have the electrical noise problems (though I do have them with the Raleigh analogs).

I've been told that WBRA-DT actually has a 30 kW ERP transmitter sitting on Poor Mountain, but they're running it at 1/4 power. I'm told they'd love to put it up to 30 kW, but that the FCC wouldn't give them more than 7.25 kW directional.

They seem to want to stay on 3 simply because it's cheaper, but people won't be able to get WBRA-DT if it stays on 3. Failure to move to a high-VHF or UHF will hurt them in the end.

- Trip

I'm glad this thread was started. Last week I ordered a 10-element cut antenna for Channel 5 (10dB gain) and a Winegard AP-3800 (VHF only pre-amp, 29dB). I installed it on the peek of my tallest roof with a 3 foot tripod on a 5 foot mast. The peek of the roof is about 30 feet. The total RG6 run from the preamp to the power source is 50 feet. The station I'm pulling in is WCFT-DT in Tusculoosa with a ERP of 10kW, and I'm 94 miles from the tower.

During the day, the signal fluxes a lot. It goes from 0% - 32%, back and forth. I've been testing it the past 4 days, and it seems to be watchable after 5-6pm, it then fluxes from 21%-36%, which does drop the signal for about a half a second, a little annoying. After 7-8pm, things get a lot better. The signal fluxes from 32%-54%, with occasional glitches in the picture, but the sound is fine. To me, this is totally acceptable since I have no other way to pick up ABC-HD, and I've done all this for MNF which won't start until 8pm for me.

But I'm the type of person who will keep tweaking it until it's perfect. So far, I've tried a RS FM-trap (though the pre-amp has a FM trap built-in), and I've tried a RS varible attuenator. Both did absolutely nothing to my signal. I thought it was a little strange that the signal stayed the same with the attuenator in-line maxed, at it's lowest setting, or taken out of line.

I wasn't aware of all the man-made interference regarding low-band VHF signals, and I do have my HTPC (MPD-120 MyHD) is right where all my AC outlets are, which of course is where almost everything is connected.

If anyone has any hints or tips, I'd appreciate it.

BTW, I'm located in Florence, AL, and the VHF antenna is not combined with my UHF antenna, they are both connected to the MyHD card serperately. Also, with my Fox affiliate at 60 miles out, channel 41, it's signal fluxes all the time with the MyHD card. It fluxes between 25%-40%, but I very rarely get a glitch in the picture, and and never drops the signal. I though it was strange the VHF channel gets a higher signal percentage and doesn't register to drop below 25% in the evening, but I get more glitches.

I can't provide a screen shot because I'm not home where the tuner still is!

It's very simplistic though... The tuner itself has a red LED on it, which I whimsically call the "idiot light." When the LED is on, there is either no signal or it's too weak to lock. If it's off, the tuner is locked. If it's flickering, the tuner is at the threshold of locking.

There is a signal reading in dB shown with Sasem's controller program, but I'm guessing it's an inverse calculation based off the bit-error rate. The program will either read "No Signal" if nothing at all is detected, or it will read something between 2dB all the way up to about 32dB, with approximately 16dB being the level at which a lock occurs.

The LED is the most responsive, in real-time. It allows me to rotate a bow-tie to see the "edges" of a usable signal and center it in between. It's also the quickest way to search for a hotspot. The dB readout tells me how "hot" the hotspot is.

There are several things I wish the tuner had. First, I wish it had a multi-LED meter in place of the single "idiot light." Second, I wish the signal readout was similar to what some wireless 802.11 cards have, where they read the true signal level and either "quality" or "noise." I also wish the software could output sound, like a Geiger counter, so I could hear it from another room or set a phone near it while listening with a cell phone at the antenna.

The tuner's primary intended purpose is for laptop users to be able to tune DTV signals and record shows, with portability in mind, which is probably why the signal instrumentation is simplistic. It sure is nice to be able to record SD or HD shows in a hotel room on a business trip, and watch them later on the return plane trip, or in the evening after Day #2 of a dry, week-long conference. I've been to hotels in cities where the local WB, UPN or even Fox station wasn't on the hotel TV, too, and had to miss shows. For Spanish-speaking travellers, fat chance that the local Univision, Telefutura, Telemundo or Azteca America affiliates are carried.

That brings me to another disadvantage about VHF-Low. Portability. I don't have a problem stuffing a tuner and bowtie into my laptop bag. I even have a pocket-sized amplified "rabbit ears" antenna from a few years ago at RatShack that works *great* for VHF-Hi and UHF. But, its three-foot wingspan is inadequate for channels 2 through 4 or 5. I am certainly not going to pack an antenna the size of a 4-slice toaster into my luggage, only to find out that the VHF-Low signal I want can't punch through the hotel walls anyway. 80 MHz seems to be the bottom of what gets into a lot of today's buildings, and it's also about the lowest frequency for which a TV antenna remains "portable."

10kW on Channel 5 with a distance of 94 miles is really pushing the limits.

I'm guessing the VHF amp doesn't have adjustable gain. 29dB is a bit on the hot side. But then, if the antenna is cut specifically for 5 and playing with an attenuator has no effect, you're probably not getting any cross-modulation or interference. You're just getting the station you want with a fixed signal-to-noise ratio.

Without any of those other parasitic products, the s/n ratio will remain the same no matter what you do along the feedline; it's a direct result of the antenna itself. The only thing I could possibly suggest is getting another antenna exactly like the one you have and stack it. That will give you a tighter directional vertex, effectively increasing the signal of WCFT-DT. It would also be a costly experiment, though.

BTW Rack, that's a nice little antenna for $15. I opened up my RCA amplified antenna and, unfortunately, I would have to do serious surgery on this thing to bypass the circuit board. The coax connectors are actually edge-soldered right onto the board with LOTS of solder, and there isn't room to mount an extra connector.

Quote from one of my other postings.
"The V4 Low Band VHF antenna was purchased from these guys "http://www.antennasdirect.com". This antenna is channel 2 - 6 specific. It is shipped with a balun box to combine this antenna with an existing antenna. I stacked the V4 on top of my current VHF/UHF antenna using a 12" pole extension. Balun box splits and combines the two antennas to prevent overlap."

I installed the second antenna a several months ago on top of my primary one (120 mile Radio Shack). This combo is working very nicely feeding the entire house through a one - in - four out amplifier (~32db gain) serving NTSC and ATSC sets.
During stormy weather there are still dropouts even after optimizing antenna direction. I have had discussions with many people regarding ATSC (NTSC also) and there are some common denominators here.

Multipathing and actual antenna location (yours).

An old TV repairman mentioned a technique they used to find a good location on the roof for a customer's antenna. "Using a portable TV connected to the antenna in question (long enough lead-in), walk around the roof until you get the most channels and strongest strength".

He said there will be "dead spots" with little or no reception (stay away from those). I have not tried this because I already installed my antenna in the logical spot (chimney). At this location I could move the antenna to any of the four (4) corners. This though would be alot of work but, I'm out of choices.

Martin

I've used that technique to search for hotspots and it works very well. It's also an excellent way to rule out feedline/amplifier problems.

taz, with your Channel 5 antenna, have you already surveyed where the hottest signal is on your roofline? Unfortunately, it will be considerably more difficult with a DTV station unless you wait five years until the first handheld ATSC TV.

Phil:

Could you get me some pictures of the tuner and its idiot light, as well as caps of the signal meter when you get a chance? Also, does it have any outputs on it other than the USB? Like, could I attach it to my TV?

- Trip

Originally posted by PhilJSmith67
I've used that technique to search for hotspots and it works very well. It's also an excellent way to rule out feedline/amplifier problems.

taz, with your Channel 5 antenna, have you already surveyed where the hottest signal is on your roofline? Unfortunately, it will be considerably more difficult with a DTV station unless you wait five years until the first handheld ATSC TV.

I moved it around to about 5 different places, thank God it's on a tripod, it's much easier to move around. Where I have it now was the only place I could get a good enough signal for picture/sound (at around 5pm). I have two very large trees in the front yard and this position was the only place I could get the antenna to aim between the two trees.

Like I said, I'm very satisfied, but I'm also more than willing to tweak it. Our spectrum-analyzer at the station is being repaired right now, but I don't know if that would help any even if I had it.

Not easily... I'm di-cam-impaired!

Basically, the "idiot light" is a red LED in the front panel, at the opposite edge from the green "power" LED visible in this pic:

http://www.usbhdtv.com/image/main/main_image.gif


Here is a snapshot of the tuner controller software. Of course, without having the tuner connected right now, it says "No Signal"; I am playing back a recorded transport stream of WTTW-DT. In place of "No Signal" it would say 30.45dB or whatever the signal level is.

http://208.15.41.137/tv/OnAirTunerFace.jpg

USB 2.0 is the only output. Basically, the unit sends the raw ATSC transport stream via USB to the Sasem software (which uses InterVideo's MPEG-TS decoder).

Originally posted by PhilJSmith67
Imagine if BPL were to get a green light! Put THAT in the big "disadvantages" column!
I presume you're referring to "broadband over power lines," and low-band TV viewers aren't the only ones complaining. When the utility in Cedar Rapids experimented with BPL recently, Ham radio operators screamed bloody murder and threatened to sic the FCC on them.

I never noticed any appreciable effect on the analog Channel 2 we have in town, but I've never really got that channel very well in the first place -- and since getting DT equipment in April, I watch their DT 51 instead.

Testing has proven to be a mixed bag as far as the service itself, too. Any system that relies on unshielded lines to transmit digital signals is going to be quirky, especially over a power grid that is riddled with faulty insulators and transformers spewing noise from DC to daylight.

Pro-BPLers mock the naysayers by classifying them as tiny group of shortwave and amateur radio zealots experimenting with an ancient technology. Of course it's amateurs' research that has put much of today's communication technology in place. And, even beyond that, there is a heck of a lot more going on between 2 and 80 MHz than just a few old farts shooting a QSO via CW.

Originally posted by PhilJSmith67
Testing has proven to be a mixed bag as far as the service itself, too. Any system that relies on unshielded lines to transmit digital signals is going to be quirky, especially over a power grid that is riddled with faulty insulators and transformers spewing noise from DC to daylight.

Pro-BPLers mock the naysayers by classifying them as tiny group of shortwave and amateur radio zealots experimenting with an ancient technology. Of course it's amateurs' research that has put much of today's communication technology in place. And, even beyond that, there is a heck of a lot more going on between 2 and 80 MHz than just a few old farts shooting a QSO via CW.

ProBPL people also tend to have no access to high-speed internet--such as me for example--and will probably not have access to it anytime soon.

- Trip

I was told back in the 90s that local phone companies would have to provide DSL at competitive prices to all customers by the end of 2005. What ever happened with that? Is it still a mandate? I don't even know who mandated that originally, and haven't heard anything about it for years.

Originally posted by PhilJSmith67
I was told back in the 90s that local phone companies would have to provide DSL at competitive prices to all customers by the end of 2005. What ever happened with that? Is it still a mandate? I don't even know who mandated that originally, and haven't heard anything about it for years.

Go tell that to Verizon for me. I'm out in the sticks and BPL appears to be the only chance of getting anything in the next 2 years outside of satellite, which is far too expensive and has too much lag for webcam, etc.

Unless there are drastic changes soon, I'll be in college before broadband is readily available to me.

- Trip

KVBC-DT (3-1) in Las Vegas broadcasts their digital signal on channel 2. Some people have reception with bunny ears, but I had to get an outdoor antenna as it was the ONLY station an indoor absolutely would pull in no matter how I contorted many antennas. If you can't get an antenna on your roof it's been suggested to make some very large home made dipoles preferably at the wavelength of the signal you're tring to receive. For channel two you're looking at over seven feet horizonally across which is very impractical, but what is necessary to get the gain and multipath rejection for a signal lock.

GeorgeLV, how far are you from the KVBC-DT transmitter?

BTW, last night with a never-ending lightning storm that literally lasted three hours, my tuner spent as much time "unlocked" from WBBM-DT Chicago than otherwise. All this, after finding a spot in my house where I get 21dB signal (over 16dB threshold), as opposed to 18dB in the old spot.

Even with the closest lightning strikes, I had only three hiccups, which amounted to very brief pixelation, on the UHF stations using an indoor bowtie.

Phil, a mere 16 miles from the tower farm smack in the center of the city. Skyscrapers tear up low-band vhf forcing me to use a fringe antenna to get a watchable digital signal. There have been t-storms, flash flooding, and monsoon winds this past week in Vegas, but the dropsouts I've seen obviously originated at the network (because they repeat in the same spot when NBC loops their olympics coverage).

I realized my grammar might be confusing, so to clarify, I'm in the center of the city, the tower is on a mountain range 16 miles away.

Originally posted by PhilJSmith67
Testing has proven to be a mixed bag as far as the service itself, too. Any system that relies on unshielded lines to transmit digital signals is going to be quirky, especially over a power grid that is riddled with faulty insulators and transformers spewing noise from DC to daylight.

Pro-BPLers mock the naysayers by classifying them as tiny group of shortwave and amateur radio zealots experimenting with an ancient technology. Of course it's amateurs' research that has put much of today's communication technology in place. And, even beyond that, there is a heck of a lot more going on between 2 and 80 MHz than just a few old farts shooting a QSO via CW.

Two of the larger BPL test markets have been shutdown and the associated power companies have stated they do not plan on going with BPL. Just too many technical issues to overcome with leakage and such, even though the FCC has been looking the other way when people complain.

The nail in the coffin came from an engineer in Raleigh, NC who documented all the short falls of the BPL system in his area over the course of the testing, and the power company nor FCC could deny the data, so the power company pulled the plug (pun intended) on it and then a week or so later a system in the midwest pulled the plug. (smaller system in New England had already decided to not go with BPL three months ago.)

It would appear that BPL is dead unless some miracle cure for it's ills are found.

As far as taz's channel 5 adventures, there isn't a whole lot to do. Low frequencies are a blessing, and a curse. A blessing since it carries well through coax, and a curse since there's not a lot of room for improvement by eliminating the small cable losses.
Coming off the 10-element yagi's terminals, you have a choice to make. Either twin-lead or a balun to the pre-amp. Most people pick the balun, and go coax the rest of the way. With twin-lead, you'd need a twin-lead pre-amp, which has a balun already (the Spartan 3, a twin-lead input pre-amp, has an internal balun), so you might as well find a good one and then go with some good well-terminated RG-6 or RG-11 if you want to go all out (twist-on connections don't cut it here). Then there's a choice of balun. Usually, you go with a nice outdoor balun, like the Channel Master outdoor balun. The loss is about 0.6dB in the VHF band, which is pretty good. You could also make a coax balun:
http://www.kyes.com/antenna/balun.html
http://www.atechfabrication.com/products/coax_baluns.htm
But I don't know if the loss would be more or less than outdoor balun, but it's probably worth a shot.
Then there's the pre-amp. You already have a good one at 2.9dB of noise, but the CM7777 at 2.8dB might be able to squeak out a bit more signal, depending on how solid the actual numbers are, or maybe even be worse. According to this:
http://www.geocities.com/toddemslie/bf981_preamp.html
Getting down to under 2.0dB of pre-amp noise will get you down to the local background noise, and you won't see any improvement over that (unless you live out in the country, where it's "quieter").
If you happen to still need more signal, there's always stacking a pair of your channel 5 yagis together that Phil suggested, and connecting them with matched coax baluns or a good phasing harness:
http://www.atechfabrication.com/products/phasing_harnesses.htm
and a good combiner:
http://www.lindsayelec.com/v-u-combiners.html
This should add about 2.5dB give or take a tenth to the signal when stacked at the correct separation and phasing (hopefully 0 degrees out of phase!).
If that's *still* not enough signal, then it might be time to go pro:
http://www.simplicitytool.com/catv-matv.htm
The quad array is especially impressive. Since these are for cable head-ends, so they don't come cheap. In addition to being huge, they are mighty heavy, not for the faint of heart (or tower).

As far as hotspots, you're usually lucky if you find them on VHF, since they are so far apart:
http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/16bay.html
Check out the bottom, Two Equal Overlapping Fields.
For a given angle, a bigger wavelength (lower frequency) is going to have more distance between hot spots.
Clearly there are other factors like sight lines and local terrain that make this hard to figure out without just moving the antenna around.
Hopefully you'll find a spot big enough to get a stack of 10 elements inside it.

Originally posted by foxeng
Two of the larger BPL test markets have been shutdown and the associated power companies have stated they do not plan on going with BPL. Just too many technical issues to overcome with leakage and such, even though the FCC has been looking the other way when people complain.

The nail in the coffin came from an engineer in Raleigh, NC who documented all the short falls of the BPL system in his area over the course of the testing, and the power company nor FCC could deny the data, so the power company pulled the plug (pun intended) on it and then a week or so later a system in the midwest pulled the plug. (smaller system in New England had already decided to not go with BPL three months ago.)

It would appear that BPL is dead unless some miracle cure for it's ills are found.

Then Verizon better get their act together and deliver some DSL. I've got a wireless network sitting in this house relaying a 26.4k connection to three computers. If I can upgrade to something faster here, I should think Verizon could do the same.

What really irks me though is that I know that when it finally arrives on this side of the county, the towns will get it first, followed by the major areas. AKA, the people who already get a decent dialup speed. Meanwhile, I'll be stuck 4 miles from town with a connection so slow I could walk to the ISP and get the data faster.

- Trip

Originally posted by Rack
As far as taz's channel 5 adventures, there isn't a whole lot to do. Low frequencies are a blessing, and a curse. A blessing since it carries well through coax, and a curse since there's not a lot of room for improvement by eliminating the small cable losses.
Coming off the 10-element yagi's terminals, you have a choice to make. Either twin-lead or a balun to the pre-amp. Most people pick the balun, and go coax the rest of the way. With twin-lead, you'd need a twin-lead pre-amp, which has a balun already (the Spartan 3, a twin-lead input pre-amp, has an internal balun), so you might as well find a good one and then go with some good well-terminated RG-6 or RG-11 if you want to go all out (twist-on connections don't cut it here). Then there's a choice of balun. Usually, you go with a nice outdoor balun, like the Channel Master outdoor balun. The loss is about 0.6dB in the VHF band, which is pretty good. You could also make a coax balun:
http://www.kyes.com/antenna/balun.html
http://www.atechfabrication.com/products/coax_baluns.htm
But I don't know if the loss would be more or less than outdoor balun, but it's probably worth a shot.
Then there's the pre-amp. You already have a good one at 2.9dB of noise, but the CM7777 at 2.8dB might be able to squeak out a bit more signal, depending on how solid the actual numbers are, or maybe even be worse. According to this:
http://www.geocities.com/toddemslie/bf981_preamp.html
Getting down to under 2.0dB of pre-amp noise will get you down to the natural background noise, and you won't see any improvement over that (unless you live out in the country, where it's "quieter").
If you happen to still need more signal, there's always stacking a pair of your channel 5 yagis together that Phil suggested, and connecting them with matched coax baluns or a good phasing harness:
http://www.atechfabrication.com/products/phasing_harnesses.htm
and a good combiner:
http://www.lindsayelec.com/v-u-combiners.html
This should add about 2.5dB give or take a tenth to the signal when stacked at the correct separation and phasing (hopefully 0 degrees out of phase!).
If that's *still* not enough signal, then it might be time to go pro:
http://www.simplicitytool.com/catv-matv.htm
The quad array is especially impressive. Since these are for cable head-ends, so they don't come cheap. In addition to being huge, they are mighty heavy, not for the faint of heart (or tower).

You're absolutely correct about the quality of a balun. The one I originally put in line was the best (well, most expensive) that Lowes had. I finally found someone whom sold the same one CM uses, and it helped a lot.

I think my little problem is interference, due to the properties of my other stations I receive. Even when they are low in signal (around 28%) or fluxing, they rarely cause any glitches in the audio or video. The VHF signal will still give me garbage on the screen even when the signal is above 32%, though fluxing. Maybe one day they'll come out with some kind of filter I can put inline.

Also, I was using a A/B switch box to get the best signal possible, but yesterday I decided to connect the UHF and VHF antennas via a splitter (opposite direction). The splitter is in-line just before the MyHD input. To my surprise, it didn't effect the signal for any channel, though I thought it would lower the signals some. I'm going to see if the antenna will pick up Channel 6 analog to see if there is any interference or multipath.

If all else fails, I may just purchase another cut antenna and stack 'em.

Before you get to that, it might be pre-amp swapping time or time for the coax balun. It might be better to look at it from a signal-to-noise ratio standpoint (I hope I get close on this).
You have your channel 5, signal strength x dB above the local noise floor y dB which is z dB above the cosmic noise floor, which I'm guessing is the noise floor if all the technology was wiped off the face of the earth. So say that the signal is you see with the 10 elements is 18dB above the local noise floor (Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR)), and that there's 2 dB of man-made noise around.
Your balun is going to cut off say 0.6dB of that, so you're down to 17.4dB SNR. Say you get from the balun to the pre-amp and are still holding 17.0dB SNR. Now via amplication, your signal level is 29dB higher, but now, since the pre-amp has a noise level of 2.9dB, you lose another 0.9dB of SNR since your amp's noise factor is 0.9dB greater than the local noise floor (2.9dB - 2.0dB). So we're riding at 16.1dB SNR. From this point, it doesn't matter, since that extra 29dB of cushion will just stud through 50 feet of RG-6, a 3dB splitter/combiner, the noise factor of the receiver and even a 20dB variable attenuator. :) You'll still have the same 16.1dB SNR, since you can't create more ratio out of thin air, you can only try to not lose it, and with that 29dB of amplification, it's more or less set. So I lost almost 2dB of good signal there, where did it go?
It all came from the losses from the 300 ohm posts to the pre-amp. That's why the right balun, coax, coax ends, and pre-amp are critical to saving all the signal you can.

As I said, I'm currently using the same balun that CM uses. I make my own cables. I have a 4 foot length of RG6 (I don't believe it's quad-shield) going from the balun to the pre-amp with outdoor coax ends I bought from Lowes. They're like $2 a piece and require a special tool to put them on, I didn't see them on their website.

I guess it might be a good idea to try the coax balun and/or a different pre-amp.

http://www.simplicitytool.com/preamplifier.htm
These look like good pre-amps on paper for low-band VHF. Hopefully, they aren't too expensive.

I was poking around in the attic, and I decided to play with my CM7777 and my rabbit ears, to see if I could get some sort of signal on WBBM-DT 3. I fired everything up and was greeted with a 50% signal strength! Woohoo! I was able to get a few more points out of it, and get it just past the threshold for viewing. Even the analogs looked good. I pulled off the preamp and checked again, and with more fiddling and lifting the ears up a bit, I was able to find a spot with 60% signal strength. There must be a lot of noise around here if a 2.8dB noise factor pre-amp doesn't make a difference on channel 3 here. :/ I guess signals don't like to go through dry-wall or something.
This at least bodes well for a nice outdoor installation here. Should easily be able to get over 75% signal quality with a nice antenna.

My experience with VHF (especially VHF-Low) is that even a good preamp has a negligible effect when used with an indoor antenna. There is simply too much other crud coming from conduit, appliances, computers, dimmers, etc. for an amp to amplify along with the desired signal.

Originally posted by PhilJSmith67
My experience with VHF (especially VHF-Low) is that even a good preamp has a negligible effect when used with an indoor antenna. There is simply too much other crud coming from conduit, appliances, computers, dimmers, etc. for an amp to amplify along with the desired signal.
I wanted to check out some US Open action on WBBM-DT, so I busted out the rabbit ears again. After accidentially pulling out one of the links and then shoving it back together and taping it, I started looking around my room for a signal. I had the pre-amp on, since I was also watching some of the initial WFLD-DT HD football games and wanted the best possible signal.

So I'm walking around toward the exterior wall, and I get a signal, 35%, and the antenna's only like 3 feet off the ground. That's very odd for channel 3 since I've always had to be up higher than that to get anything, even a 2% blip. So I start looking and I find this one spot, like a foot and a half off the ceiling, and with an end few inches off the exterior wall, and perpendicular to it. It's almost pointing at the tower, but not quite, and it's more aligned with my room. I can't seem to twist it like I should a dipole, either, without losing reception, nor can I move it back and forth. It's like the only spot in the entire room that gets good reception, and it seemed too small to be a hotspot. Then I looked behind me. My closet, which ended up parallel with the dipole, has a shelf. One of those painted-white metal wire grate ones, almost 9 feet long I'm guessing, which would probably make a great reflector for an 8 foot dipole driven element. :)
Basically, I found a spot that made my rabbit ears into a 2 element yagi.
Got up as high as 64% signal quality, which is more than watchable.

On a whim, I took the preamp off and checked the signal quality. 45% max. I put it back on, back up to as high as 64% again. I guess my CM7777 really is working. :) I'm guessing my Fusion 2 has a bunch of noise in the tuner itself (it has some fixed-pattern noise on the analog half), and the pre-amp was helping with that. I also noticed that I had to be more or less centered on the shelf, or I would start losing signal quality. I guess it really is working as a reflector.

It just so happens that the hatch to the attic is right above that wire shelf. I'm guessing it had some sort of effect up there as well.

Thanks for the detailed account of your experimentation and solution! You've basically disproven one of the statements I made on another thread that a signal amplifier is essentially useless in an indoor environment. Of course, the CM7777 is a great amp, which probably helps.

For the most part, I can use a handheld TV on ch.2 (or the ATSC/NTSC tuner actually tuned to analog ch.2) to get an idea of what my ch.3 DTV reception will be like. But, like your oddness with finding a signal near the floor, I have a few places where ch.2 has absolutely zero visible signal, yet ch.3 comes close to locking -- 10dB with 16 needed to lock. There are a few spots where the opposite is true, too, where ch.2 has a fair picture and ch.3 yields "No Signal."

Now, last night, I tried something *really* off the wall. I hooked up one of those cheesy FM dipoles to see what it would do if I stretched it out on one wall, then ran it directly to the tuner with a balun, similar to how I connect a UHF bowtie. Analog channel 2 was rather snowy, but channel 3 was partially locking! The %-efficiency is for an FM dipole at 63 MHz has to be awful. If anything, this tells me to quit wasting my time with the RCA rabbit-ears unit, and cut my own channel-3 dipole already.

I should probably try that CM amp, too. Sounds like a winner, even for noisy indoor use.

Here in Atlanta, we have Fox on 5 and ABC on 2. Turns out that while their digital channels are called 5.1 and 2.1, they are actually channels 27 and 39. The only unlucky station to have their digital in the VHF band here is NBC (11 analog, 10 digital). So turns out I can leave low VHF behind once I get an HDTV.

But that's not the case yet. So still having to try and get 2 in decent for Monday night football. I hoisted up a new Terk TV36 and pointed it out the south window (I'm in Roswell, 20 miles north of most of the towers) on the second story of the two-story living room in this condo I'm renting. I can actually see ABC now.

But it has these diagonal light/dark lines. See attached pic.

Are these something I can do anything about? My TV36 is currently running straight into a 2-way splitter, one out going to my TV and the other to my receiver for FM (best my FM has ever sounded :-) ). Would an amp or "pre-amp" (I don't understand why two terms, both are simply amplifiers) help, or is this kind of problem not an issue with signal strength? The lines are still there if the antenna is run straight into the TV (Panasonic CT-27SF31, from '95).

Note, the edges of the diagonals are very clean on screen. The resizing to 640x480 really makes the picture look poor. And the lines don't move or anything. They just sit there.

Thanks,
Scott

So turns out I can leave low VHF behind once I get an HDTVNot so fast... In two or three years when the analogs go dark and the DTV channel elections are complete, there is a chance that WSB and WAGA could elect to move back to their original VHF-Low assignments.

Wow. Those diagonal lines look like analog video! Either that was actually being sent in the video on WSB-DT, or your tuner defaulted back to 2-0 (analog) instead of 2-1. With a digital signal, there is no way that any type of interference to the signal could cause "herringbone" or lines in the video, which are exclusively an analog effect. I'm curious, since you claim the lines are still there when you run the antenna straight into your 1995 TV, which would obviously only tune the analog signal directly on 2.

My take is that SMac770 is talking about analog since he doesn't have an HDTV yet and reported the problem on channel 2 which he needs to use until he gets an HDTV. The herringbone pattern is the result of interference. Low VHF is especially susceptible to interference from the sound carrier of an adjacent channel for example. Filters or traps are the usual cures for herringbone. A more directional antenna or adjustment to aim may help too.

Thanks guys. Yeah, dealing with channel 2 analog (didn't see any OTA forum for non-HD talk). So "herringbone" and "interference" are the keywords I should be thinking when seeing this phenomenon. I'll see what google can dig up for me.

Thanks,
Scott

greywolf, can you recommend a trap to reduce inteference from emergency services signals? Whenever the police drive by (which is often because I live on the corner lot of a major cross street) I get breakups on most channels, but they are worst on KVBC 3-1 (DTV frequency 2). If this info helps, when watching on analog 3 and 5 exhibit the herringbone pattern.

Sorry, I have no experience finding such a beast. If you can use a more directional antenna with a higher placement, that could help.

If the herringbone pattern is constant (never goes away and never "dances" like an FM signal would), then the interference is most likely not from a 2-way radio or paging system. I would venture to say that from judging the "cleanness" of that interference, it's not from a complex device like a computer, either.

Do you have a handheld receiver to use as a "probe" on channel 2? You might be able to locate a noisy power supply (computer's printer, portable DVD player, etc.) that is causing the interference. You could also try shutting off circuits one by one in your home's fusebox to see if the interference goes away. That's a fairly quick way to nail down what room a "dirty" device is located in.

Phil, the herringbone on low vhf analog (which I don't really care about) is an unrelated issue. I just noted it in case it would help diagnose a solution. Anyhow, I know it's the police that cause most of my breaksups because my old set of computer speakers would pick up on their radio calls (you know a signal is too strong when speaker wire spontaneously tunes it). Usually they'll drive by fast enough that the breakup doesn't ruin what I'm watching, but every once in a while they'll be stoped at the light for several seconds and using their radios for mundane procedural matters or telling a joke.

Got it...

Do you know what frequency or set of frequencies their radios use? There are tunable notch filters available that might help. I used a tunable notch filter to stop a local paging system from desensitizing my scanner radios.

Phil, I assume they're somewhere between 700-900mhz, I'll have to ask someone to find out the actual frequency range they're using. A while back the newspaper made a minor issue about the fact that their eqipment wasn't licensed by the FCC and that they'd need to spend millions of dollars to get new radios. I'm not sure if or how that was resolved.

Originally posted by taz291819
I'm glad this thread was started. Last week I ordered a 10-element cut antenna for Channel 5 (10dB gain) and a Winegard AP-3800 (VHF only pre-amp, 29dB). I installed it on the peek of my tallest roof with a 3 foot tripod on a 5 foot mast. The peek of the roof is about 30 feet. The total RG6 run from the preamp to the power source is 50 feet. The station I'm pulling in is WCFT-DT in Tusculoosa with a ERP of 10kW, and I'm 94 miles from the tower.

But I'm the type of person who will keep tweaking it until it's perfect. I wasn't aware of all the man-made interference regarding low-band VHF signals, and I do have my HTPC (MPD-120 MyHD) is right where all my AC outlets are, which of course is where almost everything is connected.

If anyone has any hints or tips, I'd appreciate it.

BTW, I'm located in Florence, AL, and the VHF antenna is not combined with my UHF antenna, they are both connected to the MyHD card serperately. Also, with my Fox affiliate at 60 miles out, channel 41, it's signal fluxes all the time with the MyHD card. It fluxes between 25%-40%, but I very rarely get a glitch in the picture, and and never drops the signal. I though it was strange the VHF channel gets a higher signal percentage and doesn't register to drop below 25% in the evening, but I get more glitches.

Low band antennas interact with the ground in a way that causes lobes in the vertical antenna pattern. If the land within 500' of your antenna is flat, or rises, extra antenna height will help. If it drops off, there will be an optimum height for maximum signal. The best height will vary with the channel and amount of down slope.

Originally posted by GeorgeLV Phil, I assume they're somewhere between 700-900mhz ...I wouldn't necessarily assume that. 700-800 MHz is hardly being used anywhere yet, and interference from 806-823 and 851-868 would most likely not interfere with Low-Band VHF. I'm not saying never (I've witnessed an 879 MHz cellular data channel being received on VHF channel 8!), but it's rare.

Some police departments still have their older VHF radios and use them quite often. Here in Will County IL they've been using a new 860 MHz trunking system for about five years, but once in a while the officers will still talk car-to-car on their old simplex frequencies of 39.22, 39.5 and 39.62. The first harmonic of those frequencies kill channel 5. Another local PD liberally uses 155.025 even though they have a reliable system on 470.7625. Usually TV interference occurs from harmonics which are all above the primary frequency, but if they're close enough you could start getting other products such as the difference between the first harmonic and a local paging channel, or the primary signal and a local ham, etc.

If you own a scanner or know someone with one, it wouldn't hurt to try it for a few days on "search" until you eventually stumble across the offending signal, using a fully-collapsed antenna and highest squelch setting. That's how I found the offending paging system in my area. Every time I heard that data stream, the picture would get herringbone and snow on one channel.

I know that it makes general sense that if a DTV station on channel 3 is being transmitted from the same antenna as it's analog counterpart on channel 2, that you can get a rough idea of what your DTV reception will be like on 3 by monitoring the signal on 2. However, I stumbled across what I would deem an "odd phenomenon" for which I have little explanation.

Last night I rigged up my indoor rabbit-ears antenna in the usual "Channel 2 and 3 hotspot" in another room. In that spot, WBBM-DT Channel 3 was coming in with the usual 3dB above the threshold of 16dB to get a clean lock.

I decided to switch from the rabbit ears to a bowtie (at the same location at the end of 25' of coax) so I can get all the UHF stations. While doing so, I left the tuner on ch.3 in the other room. As expected, when I disconnected the coax from the rabbit ears, I could hear the audio fall silent.

When I connected the bowtie, however, the audio immediately returned. The tuner was now showing only 15dB of total signal, but the audio and video were stable with only slight dropouts. 15dB is usually below the threshold to get a lock on VHF-Low on this tuner.

I theorized that the signal was being coupled between the rabbit ear radial and the 2ft. of bowtie twinlead along it. So, I got the rabbit ears out of there and propped up the bowtie with a wood dowel. The signal had dropped to between 13.75 and 14dB, but the video was dropping out only a slight bit more. When I tried tuning in analog ch.2, the picture was awful.

Moving the antenna in any location from where it was appeared to kill the signal. Is it possible that a unique hotspot could exist for channel 3 that is so strong that the UHF antenna is picking up a "low-noise version" of the VHF-Low station? Has anyone had a similar experience where a grossly inefficient antenna was still producing a usable signal-to-noise ratio for DTV reception? This situation surprised me.

BTW, I tried moving the coax around, as well as grounding the opposite end, just to make sure the coax wasn't acting as an antenna. It was not.

EDIT: Thanks Mods for the move... Guess my search terms where the correct ones...

Original Post:
---------------------------------

In my installation, my attic mounted antenna works fantastic for the UHF band (90+ signal).

However, CBS here in Chicago (WBBM-DT) broadcasts at VHF-3.

VHF itself is hard to get, but when you are 30 miles away, even harder..

I would like to add a small, VHF specific (even frequency specific) antenna to the outside of my house, and then blend it back in to the other antenna signal.

So:

1) Does this work ? (Searching for Two antenna, dual antenna threads came up with a TON of irrelvant hits)

2) If so, any suggestions on the the VHF antenna
2b) Any suggestions on a good signal joining method...


I really don't want to install the big boom antenna on the house, as the roof is very exposed to public view, and i would be the first one (and probably only one, as this is a new subdivision) to have such a beast.

I just would like to get my local CBS feed, vs the tempermental DirecTV CBSHD-E feed all the time...

Antenna size requirement is one of the problems with low VHF. Read the first few posts on page one of this thread. Small just doesn't work well.

ebonovic, you might want to consider making your own antenna just to see if there is adequate signal at all.

An antenna specifically cut for 60-66 MHz (channel 3) will perform surprisingly well, perhaps even well enough to work in an attic. Off the top of my head, I think the calculation for 63 MHz results in a 95 inch long dipole element. Experimentation in my own attic with 80" rabbit ears revealed that at 33 miles south of Chicago, solid reception of WBBM-DT is possible without going on the roof.

I have considered just tacking up a twin-lead dipole from the roof rafters (like the horizontal line in the letter "A"). Check out this article; it will give you the information and exact calculations.

A simple, efficient TV antenna (http://www.wfu.edu/~matthews/misc/dipole.html)

Tonight I went to RatShack and picked up some 300-ohm twin lead. In 15 minutes, I had it cut exactly as described in the link from my prior post, at 89 inches for channel 3. I tacked up the makeshift single-channel antenna in the attic, attached a balun, then went back downstairs and fired up the tuner.

Wholla! Signal. Lots of signal. More WBBM-DT on channel 3 than I ever had before. With 16dB of signal needed to lock, I used to get about 19dB with amplified rabbit-ears. Now I get a rock-solid 25dB with no amplifier (screen shot of tuner) (http://208.15.41.137/tv/OnAirTunerFaceWBBM-DT.jpg). And just look at that crappy installation job! Imagine how well this might work if I tacked it up level and insulated my twisted wire junctions!

Yes, that's a hunk of ceiling insulation separating the balun's wires! tsk tsk... But hey, I was in a hurry to watch the Cowboys/Steelers game on CBS, which turned out to be great.

Attic picture #1http://208.15.41.137/tv/THM_1374.jpg (http://208.15.41.137/tv/AUT_1374.jpg)
Attic picture #2http://208.15.41.137/tv/THM_1375.jpg (http://208.15.41.137/tv/AUT_1375.jpg)
Attic picture #3http://208.15.41.137/tv/THM_1376.jpg (http://208.15.41.137/tv/AUT_1376.jpg)

We have two VHF digitals in our area. One is in the lowband on ch 5 and the other on highband ch 12.

I've had great success with homemade VHF coat hanger wire or twin lead antennas cut to various channels. They look like crap, but they have nearly always worked where other antennas didn't. And when installed in the attic, who cares what they look like, as long as they work. Here's one cut to channel 12, made from straightened out coat hanger wire screwed to a balun on a wooden block.
http://home.swbell.net/arxaw/tv/channel12.jpg

For cut-to-channel lengths, see this site:
http://kyes.com/antenna/rabbitear.html


ebonovic,
If you need amplification and want to join a VHF antenna to a UHF antenna on only one coax, the CM 7777 VHF/UHF preamp (http://www.warrenelectronics.com/antennas/7777.htm) works great. It has separate VHF/UHF inputs for combining 2 antennas on one downlead.

Originally posted by taz291819
... I thought it was strange the VHF channel gets a higher signal percentage and doesn't register to drop below 25% in the evening, but I get more glitches. taz,
Lowband VHFs (chs 2-6) suffer from all sorts of electrical interference. Power pole transformers, electric motors, computers, autos, lightning. These channels also travel much farther at night than other channels, all things being equal. In the evenings, you may get wildly fluctuating signals due to distant stations on the same channel, hopping hundreds of miles via e-skip or tropo (http://home.cogeco.ca/~dxinfo/tropo.html) and interfering with the channel you're trying to receive. This problem changes with atmospheric conditions and is worse in different areas of the country and at different times of the day and year.

My best results receiving our local lowband low power VHF digital (ch 5 @ only 1kW ERP (http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/tvq?state=&call=&arn=&city=little+rock&chan=&cha2=69&serv=&type=0&facid=&list=2&dist=&dlat2=&mlat2=&slat2=&dlon2=&mlon2=&slon2=&size=9)) have been with cut to channel antennas, CM baluns (http://www.warrenelectronics.com/antennas/splitters.htm) and CM 7777 VHF/UHF preamps. YMMV, of course.

arxaw, I like that antenna. As far as most people are concerned these days, antennas are esthetically unpleasant... But, if it's hidden in an attack it doesn't matter. Yours looks clean and efficient.

I like the coathanger idea; I might try that for VHF-High. I don't have any DTV stations on VHF-High at the moment, but I'm sure that in a few years my analogs on 7, 9 and 11 will return from UHF. I should be able to use a combiner to add separate VHF-High and UHF antennas to the same line.

First, I need some old-fashioned wire coathangers. Mine are all of the new variety that won't conduct much RF. :-)

Originally posted by PhilJSmith67
... First, I need some old-fashioned wire coathangers. Mine are all of the new variety that won't conduct much RF. :-) LOL, stop by any laundry/dry cleaners.....

Originally posted by arxaw
LOL, stop by any laundry/dry cleaners.....

I can't even get the same quality wire hangers that I used to, even from the dry cleaner! I mean, since when did the no-slip paper tube become a substitute for wire? I'm sure some number cruncher saw dollar signs when he realized that 10" of wire could be eliminated inside the tube...

The Hepburn forecast looks good for Thursday. I want to be ready for the DX hunt! I almost snagged what I believe was WRTV Indy last night (something on 25) but it wasn't strong enough to lock.

I can understand how you can easily combine a low-VHF and UHF antenna together with a splitter/combiner, but what if you want to add a single channel dipole to a full range VHF/UHF Winegard? Is it also as simple as using a combiner? What about the potential differences in transmission line lengths? Or something else I don't know about?


Thanks,
Mike

Originally posted by MikeGus
... what if you want to add a single channel dipole to a full range VHF/UHF Winegard? Is it also as simple as using a combiner? Use a ChannelMaster single-channel "Jointenna" combiner (http://www.dishplace.com/default.php/cPath/1_52).

Originally posted by PhilJSmith67
ebonovic, you might want to consider making your own antenna just to see if there is adequate signal at all.

An antenna specifically cut for 60-66 MHz (channel 3) will perform surprisingly well, perhaps even well enough to work in an attic. Off the top of my head, I think the calculation for 63 MHz results in a 95 inch long dipole element. Experimentation in my own attic with 80" rabbit ears revealed that at 33 miles south of Chicago, solid reception of WBBM-DT is possible without going on the roof.

I have considered just tacking up a twin-lead dipole from the roof rafters (like the horizontal line in the letter "A"). Check out this article; it will give you the information and exact calculations.

A simple, efficient TV antenna (http://www.wfu.edu/~matthews/misc/dipole.html)
I finally got around to building one of these today, and it seems to work quite well. I'll have to compare it to my rabbit ears, but it seems to be able to pull in a usable signal in more locations in my room over the ears. The peak signal quality seems to be about the same. More A-B testing is needed.

I did more A-B testing, and it seems that the rabbit ears are still winning, if just by a slight margin. Beats me on why; maybe I was off on the velocity factor.

I was just reading this, and it looks like there's about a month before stations will have to start making decisions on where they want to stay. This is of note because there's an option for stations with 2 VHF-lo channel assignments (like WBBM-TV 2/WBBM-DT 3) to give up both of their assigned channels and roll the dice for channels in the second round of elections which become available after this round:
http://www.tvtechnology.com/dlrf/one.php?id=691

I'm hoping that VHF-Low stations such as WBBM and WMAQ shoot for higher frequencies. WMAQ will probably stick with 29 instead of moving back to 5, although with 5 being centered near 80 MHz, it isn't as a much of a reception nightmare as 2 or 3. I would hope that if WMAQ sticks with 29, WBBM will follow suit and opt for a vacated UHF assignment, instead of being the only straggler on VHF-Low.

Odds are that WLS, WGN and WTTW will hop back to their VHF-High assignments. VHF-High doesn't require a monstrous antenna like VHF-Low, it penetrates into buildings quite well, and doesn't demand high TX power like UHF. VHF-High signals don't tend to suffer from multipath as much as UHF, either. It's prime DTV spectrum. That would leave 19 and 47 open for WBBM, of which I would hope WBBM goes for 19. From what I've read, WBBM would continue to be allowed usage of "2-1" for their PSIP channel designation.

The Sitco PA-24 looks like a good pre-amp for VHF (low noise/high output) I emailed megahz.com who sells CATV equipment and they want 387.99 for just the preamp without the power supply. Damn

I have a Lindsay 9RY6C cut to channel yagi with cantilever mount if anyone needs a high gain Ch.6 antenna. And I do mean HIGH GAIN - 12.7dbi / I also have a Wade WL 2-4/S Log Periodic for channel 2-4 with 9dbi and 25db f/b ratio. PM me if interested

I just wanted to say a big THANK YOU to all of the folks who have participated in this thread.

I've read every post and followed most links and learned more about possible solutions to my problems from reading in over the past couple of days than I have for the past year.

I have a lowly Channel 2 DTV signal and all the rest are UHF. Due to grounding issues and WAF a big antenna outside isn't an option. It looks like a low band VHF or even a home-made diplole combined with a UHF bowtie or yagi in the attic might just be the ticket for me.

Thanks again!

(btw, zipcode 32312, two story asphalt shingle house with LOTS of 40'+ trees if anybody wants to look at my 'challenge')

Just as an update, WBBM-TV has decided to enter the second round of the channel election, giving up their dibs on channels 2 or 3. I guess the noise and low ERP was too much for them, so they are moving on to greener, higher frequency pastures.

Let's hope that WMAQ-TV Chicago sees the light and sticks with UHF 29, instead of returning to 5, which would make them the only VHF-Low straggler in the market!

Hi folks.

I live on the far west Side of Chicago (Austin neigborhood) about 8-10 miles from the Sears and Hancock towers.

I have an amplified StealthTenna in my attic, and am able to drag in all the digitals that antennaweb says I can except for WBBMDT. On that one, which is on real channel 3, I get either low signal to noise or high bit errors depending on where I move the antenna to. I never successfully get a lock for long. So I'm guessing EMI is killing me somewhere along the way, especially since I've got diagonal interference on 2 and 5 analog. I get a fairly strong power level on the wbbmdt so gain doesn't appear to be the problem.

I will need to pay an installer to put an antenna on the roof if that is necessary (and around here, the neighbors don't have issues with aerials) so 1. Is that likely to help and 2. If that is necessary, should a better antenna be obtained as it seems silly to pay someone to put this wimpy little antenna up?

Thanks,

Amy

http://www.starkelectronic.com/winp12.htm#TACO
It might be easiest to get a nice little 5 element single-channel, or a 4 element from that covers channels 2-6 here:
http://www.antennasdirect.com/VHF%20channel%20listings.htm
Oooh, an outdoor VHF/UHF combiner, nice.

There are also VHF antennas that cover 2-13 for around the same price, give or take.
Then again, maybe this is a bit too much gain for like 10 miles. Maybe the V15 from antennadirect or an antenna like it would work better. It's 95" wide, which is slightly bigger than the channel 3 dipole width.

Getting the antenna outside it a good way to put walls/roofing between your antenna and whatever noise you have inside your house. Here, I have computers and monitors that put out a dB or two of noise into the VHF-lo band. Getting antenna away from these sources helps the signal to noise ratio (turning the electronics off also helps. :) )

If you don't happen to have anything that's too noisy on VHF-lo, you can try your luck with indoor antennas. I have two that I use here, the MANT250 (though anything with 44-inch ears will do):
http://www.usahardware.com/inet/shop/item/30770/icn/20-900449/gemini/mant250.htm
And an 89inch twin-lead dipole antenna taped to a long piece of wood:
http://www.wfu.edu/~matthews/misc/dipole.html

Greetings once again low-band lovers. :)
The first-round channel election deadline is almost here (the 10th), and I skimmed the apps for other low-band results. I saw a few channels opting not to go back to their low-band NTSC assigned stations, and 1 station so far opting to stick with the low-band digital they already have, WDKY-TV 56/-DT 4 out of Danville, Kentucky.

There's more than one, though most are in the mountains out west. I imagine that some of them might try to get a hold of a better channel in round 3.

KYES-5/6 Anchorage, AK chose 5
KJNP-4/20 North Pole, AK chose 4
KTNL-13/2 Sitka, AK chose 2
WDIQ-2/11 Dozier, AL chose 2 (I have no idea why)
KIEM-3/16 Eureka, CA chose 3 (again, no idea why)
KRMA-6/18 Denver, CO chose 6 (see above comment)
KGTF-12/5 Agana, GU chose 5
WDKY-56/4 Danville, KY chose 4 (see Note 1 at the bottom)
WGVK-52/5 Kalamazoo, MI chose 5
WSKY-4 Manteo, NC chose to stay put
KBJN-3 Ely, NV chose to stay put
KVBC-3/2 Las Vegas, NV chose 2
KOTA-3/2 Rapid City, SD chose 2
KUSD-2/34 Vermillion, SD chose 2 (no idea why)
WMC-5/52 Memphis, TN chose 5 (see Note 2 at the bottom)
WTVF-5/56 Nashville, TN chose 5 (see Note 2 at the bottom)
WBRA-15/3 Roanoke, VA chose 3
WDTV-5/6 Weston, WV chose 5
KJWY-2/14 Jackson, WY chose 2

Note 1: Sinclair has only elected to return to VHFs or stay with a VHF in two cases: WLOS-13/56 in Asheville, and WDKY. My guess is they want to get a better allotment in round 3.

Note 2: My guess is that these will try to move off in round 3, but I'm not sure.

There's still 900 elections left to be made in the next two days. I'll update with them when they show up on the FCC site.

- Trip

With just over 500 stations that will be making elections today, here's the list of low VHF elections so far:

Elected Channel 2:

KTNL-13/2 CBS/PAX Sitka, AK
WDIQ-2/11 PBS Dothan, AL
KNAZ-2/22 NBC Flagstaff, AZ
KREX-5/2 CBS Grand Junction, CO
WCES-20/2 PBS Wrens, GA
WLBZ-2/25 NBC Bangor, ME
WWMT-2/3 CBS Kalamazoo, MI
KNOP-2/22 NBC North Platte, NE
KVBC-3/2 NBC Las Vegas, NV
KOTA-3/2 ABC Rapid City, SD
KUSD-2/34 PBS Vermillion, SD
KBEJ-2 UPN Fredricksburg, TX
KJWY-2/14 NBC Jackson, WY

Elected Channel 3:

KIEM-3/16 NBC Eureka, CA
WDLP-22/3 IND Key West, FL
KYUS-3/13 NBC Miles City, MT
KBJN-3 NBC Ely, NV
KDLO-3/2 CBS Florence, SD
WBRA-15/3 PBS Roanoke, VA

Elected Channel 4:

KJNP-4/20 Rel. North Pole, AK
WHBF-4/58 CBS Rock Island, IL
WDKY-56/4 FOX Danville, KY
WSKY-4 Ind. Manteo, NC
WOAY-4/50 ABC Oak Hill, WV

Elected Channel 5:

KYES-5/6 UPN Anchorage, AK
WABW-14/5 PBS Pelham, GA
KGTF-12/5 PBS Agana, GU
WOI-5/59 ABC Des Moines, IA
WBKP-5/11 ABC Calumet, MI
WGVK-52/5 PBS Kalamazoo, MI
KXLF-4/5 CBS Butte, MT
KHAS-5/21 NBC Hastings, NE
WLMB-40/5 Rel. Toledo, OH
KOBI-5/15 NBC Medford, OR
WMC-5/52 NBC Memphis, TN
WTVF-5/56 CBS Nashville, TN
WCYB-5/28 NBC Bristol, TN
WDTV-5/6 CBS Weston, WV

Elected Channel 6:

KRMA-6/18 PBS Denver, CO
KBSD-6/5 CBS Ensign, KS
KTVM-6/33 NBC Butte, MT
WRGB-6/39 CBS Albany, NY
NEW-6 PBS Casper, WY

I'll update this list tomorrow.

- Trip

Final Low-VHF list posted.

I want to note that in many of the areas with Low-VHF elections, especially in the eastern US, there are other high-VHF frequencies that are open. It is my guess that in round 2 or 3 some of them (KNAZ, KREX, WLBZ, WWMT, KVBC, KOTA, KIEM, WDLP, WSKY, KYES, KXLF, KTVM, WRGB) will attempt to acquire these frequencies.

Again, that's just my guess.

- Trip

I'm in process of making a folded dipole antenna to try to pick up WWMT (Freq Assing. 2) from about 31 miles. Is there anything I can do to improve my chances? How precise does the length have to be? Am I better to error on the side of too short or too long?

Originally posted by Rack
... and 1 station so far opting to stick with the low-band digital they already have, WDKY-TV 56/-DT 4 out of Danville, Kentucky.

Because they have no other choices until all of the analogs are turned off. They tried (twice) to get their original allotment (Ch4) changed to Ch22 and were denied. So, I suspect they'll tough it out in the mire until the dust settles.

PS: They are also one of the few Sinclair owned DT stations be carried on a cable system.

Originally posted by SteveMSU
I'm in process of making a folded dipole antenna to try to pick up WWMT (Freq Assing. 2) from about 31 miles. Is there anything I can do to improve my chances? How precise does the length have to be? Am I better to error on the side of too short or too long?

It needs to be fairly close, but not critical. For a half wave dipole for channel 2 (54-60 MHz) , each leg needs to be around 50 inches.

Originally posted by SteveMSU
I'm in process of making a folded dipole antenna to try to pick up WWMT (Freq Assign. 2) from about 31 miles. Is there anything I can do to improve my chances? How precise does the length have to be? Am I better to error on the side of too short or too long?
http://www.wfu.edu/~matthews/misc/dipole.html
Seems they've already done the work for you. :)
I didn't find it that hard to make my channel 3 dipole 89 inches long, but me, if I had to err, I would err on the dipole being too long rather than short, though an inch plus or minus shouldn't matter a great deal.

Originally posted by Trip in VA

WDKY-56/4 Danville, KY chose 4 (see Note 1 at the bottom)

Note 1: Sinclair has only elected to return to VHFs or stay with a VHF in two cases: WLOS-13/56 in Asheville, and WDKY. My guess is they want to get a better allotment in round 3.


Channel 56 is out of core. All elections must be in the 2-51 range.

RabbitEars, since you seem to know a lot about the FCC and dtv channel elections I wonder if you could shed some light on why KVBC couldn't get their allotment changed, especially since in the same market KVVU sucessfully petitioned to have their allotment changed from 24 to 9. Why couldn't they just ask for channel 24 since it should be available? Also, do you know when Class A's get their digital assignments?

Originally posted by GeorgeLV
RabbitEars, since you seem to know a lot about the FCC and dtv channel elections I wonder if you could shed some light on why KVBC couldn't get their allotment changed, especially since in the same market KVVU sucessfully petitioned to have their allotment changed from 24 to 9. Why couldn't they just ask for channel 24 since it should be available? Also, do you know when Class A's get their digital assignments?

My guess is that KVBC intends to move to a 7-13 allocation at the end of the transition and thus made their choice for a low-VHF (so in Round three they could move).

If you're referring to why they didn't get one DURING the transition, it's likely to save as much money as possible. I saw several stations do that.

- Trip (RabbitEars, lol, makes me feel respected)

Trip, well I don't think that will be possible if the FCC wants a channel seperation between DT stations(even though they work fine without them) as KLAS will be at 7, KVVU on 9, KLVX 11, and KTNV(the only station returning to it's analog in Vegas) on 13.

Originally posted by GeorgeLV
Trip, well I don't think that will be possible if the FCC wants a channel seperation between DT stations(even though they work fine without them) as KLAS will be at 7, KVVU on 9, KLVX 11, and KTNV(the only station returning to it's analog in Vegas) on 13.

The FCC doesn't need spacing between channels. It could go 7-8-9-10-11-12-13 without a problem, as long as they transmit from within a few miles of each other.

- Trip

Right now, Chicago has an analog channel on 50 and digital channels on 51, 52, and 53.

Yeah, I was just wonder if they wanted to restore seperation after the transition. Right now VHF in Las Vegas has channels on low-vhf 2 (DT), 3, 5. And a completely full high-vhf on 7(DT), 8, 9(DT), 10, 11(DT), 12(DT), and 13.

The FCC likely doesn't care. I don't see why they should. It's not like VHF will have the same huge advantage over UHF that it used to have anymore.

- Trip

I've had a couple days to mess with my folded dipole antenna and I have to say I haven't had much luck receiving WWMT (Freq Assign 2; channel 3.1). I'm hoping somebody in this forum may know the answers....

1) The max % I can get is 41 (Sony 34XS955 diagnostics screen). If I move the antenna around, the % will drop, but for the most part it just holds at 41. I haven't seen it going any higher. The thing is I don't even get flashes of picture or sound. When I switch to the analog version of the channel, I get a pretty fuzzy picture, but it's easy to make out what's going on, and in some cases doesn't look horrendous (not watchable, but somewhat discernable). Is there a significance to the 41% number? If I'm getting that decent of an analog signal, wouldn't it stand to reason that I should at least get glimpses of the digital picture?

2) I'm going to go buy a $30-40 big outdoor style antenna and give that a shot. I live alone in an apartment so while my mounting options are limited, I don't mind having the thing in my dining room or anything like that. Should I expect better results, or do I need to look into pre-amps and stuff like that?

Background story: I'm about 31 miles southeast of the only local CBS channel. I'm desperate for March Madness in HD and the CBS won't let Comcast carry their HD feed. My major problem is I'm in an apartment that faces Southeast, so I'm having to go through a few walls, etc.

Well, nothing is working for me. The weird thing is I'm unable to get any VHF digital channels even though I'm locking on to the analog stations pretty easily.
I'm really starting to wonder if somehow my tuner is broken or something because I'm getting zero blips of digital. I'd assume if I was getting the analogs pretty easily I'd at least get random instances of digital picture or sound. No such luck. And my diagnostic screen still maxes out at only 41% no matter what. I bought a somewhat large outdoor antenna with no improvement. I'd hit the 41% much easier and the position of the antenna mattered little to stay at 41%.
Thanks for everybody's help, it looks like no HD march madness for me.

SteveMSU, your antenna is probably picking up household electric noise. A pre-amp won't help. The only solution is to mount the antenna on the roof (which you can't do) where it will face less inteference.

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html
Scroll on down to raw gain and net gain for VHF antennas. You might notice that the VU-75XR and VU-90XR aren't very good on channel 2. In fact, they are about equal in gain to your folded dipole, oddly enough. It's only when you get up to the VU-120XR or above that you'll actually start beating your tuned dipole. The only thing left to try is a reflector and a director for your dipole. It's not as easy getting all the parts lined up as it sounds, though. :/

There's an outside chance that a pre-amp might help, if the tuner itself is the source of the noise. I have a PCI card tuner that isn't all that quiet electrically, and the CM7777 helps out quite a bit, strangely enough. But if some source of RFI nearby, the pre-amp will just amplify that, too. :(

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=516298
BenCJedi gets the "whatever it takes to get VHF-lo" award for the day. :)

Originally posted by Rack
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=516298
BenCJedi gets the "whatever it takes to get VHF-lo" award for the day. :)

I didn't even know this thread existed. I could have spared the Lexington thread my troubles in picking up WDKY-DT on VHF4 and bitched to you all over here. :)

In a twist of fate the property management hired a tree cutting service to remove a whole slow of trees off the rental property I live at a week ago. They completely chopped down a couple trees in front of my apartment that were making satellite reception difficult (I created the 'ol 10' water pipe in a 5-gallon bucket of cement mount to get around that for satellite TV, at least temporarily year by year). Now that those trees are gone I am hitting as high as 69% signal tonight with the fog outside. Who said fog is evil?

Initially for me that 18" ride/crash cymbal you see in my pictures made a HUGE signal difference for me. I put it on the director side. In combination with the shaped relfectors the cymbal gave me about a 15% signal boost and a much more stable lock. With those trees gone, I am rock solid now on VHF channel 4 for WDKY-DT. The shape and level of the reflectors and director also improved the reception. I found bending the first reflector into a 'U' shape increased my signal. The second reflector is parallel to my wireloop, but about 12" below it on a different plane. The single director behind the cymbal on the wall is probably around 30" lower than the wireloop on a different plane. The wireloop is nearly against the roof of the attic at the highest possible point.
I tried so many other combinations of height/shape/position of the directors and reflector and the current configuration is the best. Perhaps this 'lop-sided' antenna is taking advantage of what happens when two antennas are stacked. I found some happy medium I think.

I was poking around in some other nearby DMA threads, and jdmcdonald mentioned that he used a cut-to-channel antenna and a 0.6dB preamp tuned to the particular channel to aid his digital TV reception. I poked around, and came across this page:
http://www.advancedreceiver.com/page12.html
Seems they have a lot of single-channel, ultra low noise preamps for every VHF channel. The background noise would probably wipe out any gain over a CM7777 or the like in most places, but out in the country, this could help.

http://www.mstv.org/docs/techinfo.pdf
Came across this pdf titled "Impact of Impulse Noise on DTV Reception at Low VHF". Seems to be relevant to the thread.

Isn't the FCC goint to kill the TV VHF low band and reassign the frequencies as part of the shift to DTV? In any case, don't hold you breath for the FCC to do something to improve the situation.

Currently, channels 2-51 are the channels to be used for DTV after analog shut off. Originally, they'd planned to use UHF only for DTV after analog shut off, then they added 7-13 back in, then by early 1998 they added ch 2-6 to the "core" channels as well. Ch 52~69 are the frequencies to be reassigned for other uses after analog shut off, with 24MHZ going to public safety uses, and 84MHZ being auctioned off.

If very few stations end up on 2-6 by the time Channel election process is complete(which seems like may be the case at this point in channel election process), however, I'm not sure I see the point of FCC continuing to allocate 54~88MHZ to OTA DTV broadcasters, as basically, there will be noone(or hardly noone in U.S.) transmitting there .... Also With FCC setting a limit of 300Watts ERP for LP DTV on ALL VHF channels 2-13 in their LP DTV report and order last fall, I can't imagine why many LP's would want to use low-VHF, but maybe I'm missing something ....

http://community-2.webtv.net/GregBarker/NewTowerAntennas/
That FM dual-stack looks awfully tasty. Just a bit wider with some 10-element antennas and it should be great for VHF-lo.

Ok all I have a brand new outside antenna mounted on the second story addition and Im 10.5 miles SW of downtown by Midway airport, channel 2 is all snow and HD 2-1 on my Hughes E86 receiver doesnt get anything. 0 signal. Any ideas? 5.7,9 etc are all good. Except analog channel 5 is a little snowy but not as bad as channel 2

So it's Thanksgiving, and that means football! Unfortunately for me, the CBS affiliate, WBBM-DT, is on VHF-lo 3. So I rig up the usual setup with the rabbit ears on an 8-foot pole in my bedroom, and run the coax to the STB (an Accurian, AKA Radio Shack special). I was getting a pretty good signal, in the high 60s, but I was getting some break-up, which is odd for that signal quality. I tried with the amp and without, and even though I got the signal up to 75 with a straight run to the CM7777, I would still get break ups.
The Accurian has an idiot LED where it'll indicate that it doesn't have enough good bits to fully reconstruct the digital stream by lighting up red for as long as the condition persists. Most times, with a good signal, you'll only get the occastion blip if you're watching the LED. The only catch is that the LED is surface mounted to the circuit board, and inside the STB. :( Since the only way to sight the LED is to look through the vent holes, off the cover came!
So I watch CBS for a while, and wait, and in blasts the interference, for a solid moment, and then it's gone. Waited more, another blast, and gone again. This doesn't seem natural, so I get out the stopwatch. Duration of each blast was just under 1.00 seconds (as well as I could hand-time it). The period was practially 40.00 seconds. This kept going on, and on, and on. It's pretty strong, so I'm thinking it's something electrical in the house.
I work in residental home construction, so I have lots of tools. Some of them being cordless drills, with batteries that need to be charged. Turns out the charger polls a fully charged battery every 40 seconds to see if the battery is still charged or something. So I popped the battery off, and the blasts seem to go away.
Just to be sure, I plugged the battery back in, and the charger seemed to think it needed more juice, so it went into its charging routine. About 2 minutes later, while I'm watching the game, the idiot light goes nuts. A solid stream of interference is coming from the charger, all but knocking out the digital signal. I pull the battery again, and all is hunky-dory. Damn you VHF-lo!
At least I figured out the problem before Sheryl Crow came on. :)

http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/On-RF/2006.01.25-f_doug.shtml
Make sure to check out the "huge VHF TV antenna", a rhombic design. When they mean huge, they aren't kidding!

anyone use the winegard sharpshooter or the terk equivilent HDTVLP for low VHF channels? I dont see how that would work but I am trying to get channel 2 digitally. I only live 17 miles from the tower but i got some tall trees in the yard.

anyone use the winegard sharpshooter or the terk equivilent HDTVLP for low VHF channels? I dont see how that would work but I am trying to get channel 2 digitally. I only live 17 miles from the tower but i got some tall trees in the yard.

Wow! This thread is rather dead but I got an email notification for this message.

Anyways, I have tried them both. I get everything except channel 3 digitally with the Winegard Sharpshooter. (I started with the Terk HDTVlp but returned it b/c the Winegard was cheaper online.) I have to make a disclaimer in that the antenna is only 2 ft. above ground. Rotating it around gets 27-33% signal strength but nowhere near enough. You can see a very long post by me at this link.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6945389&highlight=hebner#post6944902

To summarize, I use a twinlead for Channel 3 and the Sharpshooter for everything else.

Hebner

Well has anyone used the Stealthtenna? I read that it did real well with low VHF channels. Maybe i can have success getting the channel with that. Anyone got any expirience?

Whatever you get, don't invest too much into it. I'm guessing the station you're trying to get is WTWC-DT 2 in Tallahassee?

They will be returning to channel 40 after 2009.

- Trip

EDIT: Thanks Mods for the move... Guess my search terms where the correct ones...

I would like to add a small, VHF specific (even frequency specific) antenna to the outside of my house, and then blend it back in to the other antenna signal.

So:

1) Does this work ? (Searching for Two antenna, dual antenna threads came up with a TON of irrelvant hits)

2) If so, any suggestions on the the VHF antenna
2b) Any suggestions on a good signal joining method...


I really don't want to install the big boom antenna on the house...

Hi ebonovic,

Below is one of my earliers posts reinforcing one members concern about being a long way from the signal source and using a big antenna (maybe in your attic?).

Also of note, recently I picked up a new ATSC tuner in a HP z555 Digital Entertainment Center. This Tuner has the best reception of any I have tried thus far. I believe it's a ATI All-in-Wonder. Newer tuners are offering better image rejection (less multipathing).

Sincerely,
Martin

Quote from one of my other postings.
"The V4 Low Band VHF antenna was purchased from these guys "http://www.antennasdirect.com". This antenna is channel 2 - 6 specific. It is shipped with a balun box to combine this antenna with an existing antenna. I stacked the V4 on top of my current VHF/UHF antenna using a 12" pole extension. Balun box splits and combines the two antennas to prevent overlap."

Multipathing and actual antenna location (yours).

An old TV repairman mentioned a technique they used to find a good location on the roof for a customer's antenna. "Using a portable TV connected to the antenna in question (long enough lead-in), walk around the roof until you get the most channels and strongest strength". He said there will be "dead spots" with little or no reception (stay away from those).

I think I have finally got my OTA set up figured out pretty good. I live about 17 miles from the towers in the tallahassee market. I have really tall trees in the yard so multi-path interference can be a problem. I use zenith silver sensor hooked to a small 12 db amp i got from walmart. I also have a standard pair of rabbit ears I bought at Radio Shack and is laid on my big curtain bar with the rabbit ears laid out completely horizontally (like an antenna element). This is done to pick up WTWC-DT which is NBC HD on channel 2. Both of the antennas are then hooked to a special combiner than combines one low VHF signal and one UHF signal. I use this special combiner (which i got at Radio Shack part# 15-2586) to combine the signals from both anteannas while at the same time, filter out the signals they both pick up but aren't supposed to because I found a standard combiner will cause those signals to interfere with each other and make it impossible to pick up the channel. This is especially true with channel 2. The setup works well, I get CBS and ABC with the silver sensor (and soon FOX as well), while the rabbitt ears gets NBC. The only thing that still interferes with the low vhf station is when lightning is in the area it will momentarily mess up the signal. Other than that, it works well.

It seems there are a half dozen sub-threads (discussions buried within other threads) that pertain to the trials and tribulations of Low-Band VHF reception: Channels 2 through 6.

It makes sense to pull those discussions together. Perhaps if everyone from these different markets who were blessed with a VHF-Low allocation shared their issues and solutions, we could either make VHF-Low viable for everyone, or start a grass-roots effort to eliminate it.

At the least, it will serve as a place to rant and keep the "noise" down in other threads!

Here is a quick listing of the Low-Band VHF frequencies...
Channel 2: 54 to 60 MHz
Channel 3: 60 to 66 MHz
Channel 4: 66 to 72 MHz
Channel 5: 76 to 82 MHz
Channel 6: 82 to 88 MHz

To get things started, here is one advantage of Low-Band VHF (and yes there are more):
- Lower transmitter power required for similar VHF-High or UHF coverage

and, one disadvantage:
- Considerably larger antennas needed, especially for channels 2, 3 and 4

My personal reception issue is with WBBM-DT Channel 3 Chicago. I have only two specific (and inconvenient!) locations indoors, with amplified rabbit-ears fully extended, where I can get this station. I am 33 miles SSW of Chicago in Monee, IL, in a townhome. From the roof of my townhome, the tops of the Sears and Hancock buildings are visible. There are some days where I simply cannot get reliable reception of this station anywhere. Several different household appliances completely kill the signal.

I've read threads about WKYC-DT Cleveland, WWMT-DT Kalamazoo, a station in Fort Wayne, IN (on ch. 4, I believe), and WCTX-DT New Haven. How about other markets? What are your troubles? What have you done to remedy the problem? Are you "pro-VHF-Low" or "pro-VHF-High/UHF?"

Dead thread what the heck. I'm using a home brewed 4 bay DB4 clone combined with a AntennaCraft Y5-2-6 yagi for WBBM-DT channel 3 VHF, both in my attic at aprox. 710' elev. aimed 33* tword transmitters in Chicago. They are combined with a inexpensive UVSJ UHF/VHF combiner seperator that has only .3db loss. Using quad RG-6 I get all the local DT channels, channel 10 WWOT-DT 16kw transmitted from 260*( 133* from the direction the antennas are pointed), very impressed with both these designs. I would say I'm at a fringe distance, 38 miles SW of Chicago transmitters and I believe either VHF high band or UHF should be used after the anolog shutdown. :p

Not dead, just resting... :)

... The only thing that still interferes with the low vhf station is when lightning is in the area it will momentarily mess up the signal....That, plus the fact that huge antennas are often needed, are reason enough that the FCC should've abandoned chs 2 thru 6 for digital television.

Sorry to join the party so late!!

I'm in the same boat as a lot of you. I'm trying to pick up WMAZ-DT in Macon Georgia. Right now they're broadcasting on VHF 4 and will switch to channel 13 in 2009. I've driven myself crazy trying to solve my channel 4 problems.

I've been through two antennas trying to up my signal strength. The first antenna I used was a Channel Master 3671. Even with signal strengths in the 60's-70's, I was getting constant break-ups. I then decided to go with separates...a 91XG for UHF and a Wade VIP306 for VHF.

After installing the Wade 306, my signal strength jumped to mid 70's-mid 80's. And yet I still get constant break-ups. When I check the diagnostic screen, I'm getting a ton of errors.

I'm thinking there's some type of impulse noise screwing with my signal. I first checked everything in the house to make sure it wasn't there. No joy. I did a drive-thru of the neighborhood with my AM radio tuned to an unused low channel. Turns out I found a power company pole about a block away that was putting out a heck of a hum over the AM radio and was in the direction my antenna is pointed. I've got an engineer from the power company coming next week to help me figure this out. I do know the interference disappears when it rains.

I've tried all kind of solutions. I've tried picking up channel 4 without a pre-amp, with different model pre-amps, and different model antennas. No luck. I'm thinking my final solution if the engineer can't help me is to just tough it out until 2009.

I've pretty much documented everything in a thread here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=821875). Maybe one day I can beat this channel 4 problem.

try installing the vip 306 vhf on top. I reversed my setup in july and noticed a greater decrease in vhf reception (ch3 and 5) than an increase in uhf reception after I made the switch .

raising the vhf antenna will place the antenna farther away from ground level interferences and at the same time increase affective gain.

the am radio find was a good catch,

try installing the vip 306 vhf on top. I reversed my setup in july and noticed a greater decrease in vhf reception (ch3 and 5) than an increase in uhf reception after I made the switch .

raising the vhf antenna will place the antenna farther away from ground level interferences and at the same time increase affective gain.

the am radio find was a good catch,

I tried the 306 on top and the 91XG on bottom. VHF strength stayed the same (complete with constant breakups) while UHF strength dropped. Had to switch them back.

2009 can't come soon enough.

my parents have drop out problems with ch 4 too. signal is mid 90's with good line of site. the station transmits at 1.2kw.

I wonder if something is interfering in the frequency range of 67.25 mhz nearby.

for example...The MSFC meteor radar is tuned to 67.25 MHz, which allows the system to record echoes from an array of Channel 4 TV transmitters around the southeastern USA ...

So is there anything left of this dead horse to be beat?

US stations are cutting over soon, but I'll still have 2+ years of Canadian stations and I'm 40 miles from the border and 65 miles from transmitters.

I'm receiving Ch 7, 9, and 11 on a VHF-Hi antenna (Funke PSP.1922) and a Research Communications Pre-amp.

So I'm hoping I can figure out an inexpensive antenna for CH 2 and 6 out of Montreal. It's 110 miles, so there are no exectations of super clear analog, but still, snow isn't bad. It'd be good enough for Hockey. It'll probably be 2011 before the Sherbrooke transmitters even consider Digital, then I'll get hockey that way.

I've cancelled cable TV and the antennas have paid for themselves already, so it's time for another antenna. It'll be mounted 10' above ground level on a pole, but not on the rotator. This will be 15' below the VHF-Hi and 21' below the UHF yagi's on the same pole (I have guy wires, so it's not an issue).

Any Ch 2-6 decent performers under 15'? Or just a Ch 2 or Ch 6 cut yagi that I could build up?

I've tried rabbit ears and I had success 1 evening when the planets were aligned. Though the snow was too much.

Thanks,

~ryan

Any Ch 2-6 decent performers under 15'? Or just a Ch 2 or Ch 6 cut yagi that I could build up?

The best value for a 2-6 antenna is the Antennacraft Y5-2-6. That covers all low-band channels. (That is not the same as a Y5-6 which is a single channel yagi for channel 6.) The best affordable combo antenna with good low band specs is the Winegard HD-7084P. The best VHF only performers are the Wade Delhi VP-306 or VP-307.

Unfortunately your biggest problem is only 10' of antenna height. You'll gain about 1 db for each 5' that you raise the antenna.

I have designed a 4 element channel 6 antenna that you could build yourself. It is optimized for low VSWR. (<1.04:1 from 82.5 to 87.5) The boom length is 4'. The gain is 7.33 dbi; 5.19 dbd. The elements are 3/4" diameter aluminum. (Surplus CATV hardline) The feed is 75 ohm direct with no balun.

To see the design, download the attached file, change the .txt file extension to .ez, and analyze it with this demo software.
http://www.eznec.com/demoinfo.htm

The antenna actually works better than the demo can calculate.

The best value for a 2-6 antenna is the Antennacraft Y5-2-6. That covers all low-band channels. (That is not the same as a Y5-6 which is a single channel yagi for channel 6.) The best affordable combo antenna with good low band specs is the Winegard HD-7084P. The best VHF only performers are the Wade Delhi VP-306 or VP-307.

Unfortunately your biggest problem is only 10' of antenna height. You'll gain about 1 db for each 5' that you raise the antenna.

I have designed a 4 element channel 6 antenna that you could build yourself. It is optimized for low VSWR. (<1.04:1 from 82.5 to 87.5) The boom length is 4'. The gain is 7.33 dbi; 5.19 dbd. The elements are 3/4" diameter aluminum. (Surplus CATV hardline) The feed is 75 ohm direct with no balun.

To see the design, download the attached file, change the .zip file extension to .ez, and analyze it with this demo software.
http://www.eznec.com/demoinfo.htm

The antenna actually works better than the demo can calculate.


I'd like to try and build the one you've designed, but the archive is corrupt:-(. A 4' long yagi would be perfect for what I need.

I've got 100' of scrap 1/2" (500 series) commscope and 245' of 5/8 (650 series) P3 commscope. Both are 75 ohm CATV transmission/trunk line. So it'd just be a matter of stripping the insulation off and leaving the center conductor and dieletric intact? Both are aluminum shield cables with copper clad aluminum cores.

I'm all set for VHF-Hi. I would have gone with a Wade VIP306/307, but I couldn't find any at a reasonable price and then Midwest DX'er let me buy a couple of the Funke PSP.1922 VHF-Hi with 13+ db gain.

I would go higher, but I don't want to overload my antenna mast. It's just 1.25" steel pipe from the homedepot with a couple couplers and guy wires at 9' and at 24'. So as long as I get the VHF-Lo antenna in the middle somewhere it'll be fine. I could probably go to 15'.

I have a Research Communications preamp and 95'+- 7/8" (875 series) hardline from the top of the mast to the house. Very tough stuff, have to use a pipe bender to keep from kinking it.

The Y5-2-6 seems promising. But I'd rather not buy another antenna if I have the parts/supplies to build one that may perform just as good.

What would it take to make it a Ch 2 yagi? I am interested in Ch 2 and Ch 6, but I do have quite a bit of FM in the area, so I'll have to get an FM trap before it goes into the pico Macom HLSJ then to the UVSJ into the RC pre-amp.

Thanks,

~ryan

I'm sorry for the corrupt file. It should be OK now.

The actual VSWR cannot be calculated properly with the demo software.

I'm sorry for the corrupt file. It should be OK now.

The actual VSWR cannot be calculated properly with the demo software.

Got the file open. Wasn't paying attention, had to rename it to *.ez due to file upload type limitations.

But would I be able to build this antenna with 500 or 650 series hardline? Do you have a picture of the one you built?

Thanks,

~ryan

Oh boy, this is the place for me...I love low band! When it comes to DX, no other band is better. My saying is, "Its low band or no band!". :D

There is nothing like DXing a station 300 to 3,000+ miles away. With digital, station ID, DX is a snap. DX is fun! The best!

If the FCC was doing it's job, it would clean up all of the power line crap that has gotten out of control. I have had results complaining to my power company around my area, but mobile low band is real bad. The power company knows they are leaking all over the place, but it takes a little pressure from someone who knows they are in violation to get it fixed. Not enough people around to press the issue. That is the problem and they know it. So they get away with most of it.

Still, most of my best DX memories are long distance Low Band confirmations. Long live Low Band! :)

So how many low band stations are still around? Tell me about your low band stations!

Phil :cool:

Low band. Great for DXing. Terrible if you actually want to watch something.

I love skip. I've spent days solid watching skip. But when I want to watch The News Hour, I don't want signals from Nebraska stomping on it. I've been fighting this since 2003.

When the transition is over there will be fewer than 50 stations on low-VHF. I don't know how many of those will figure out it's a bad idea and move somewhere else, hopefully most of them will.

- Trip

No No NO!

Low band must live!

It is the best band with the longest range. Remember the days of Mayberry RFD and the long low band antenna on the squad car? It worked fine back then and it would still work fine today if interference noise sources were controled and enforced like they should be. I can't wait to DX some digital low band.

Long live LOW BAND!:D

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/633/mayberrylowbandsquadcarvy6.jpg

I'm 20. I don't remember too much!

I've already DXed digital. Got KOTA-DT 2 to decode for a few seconds. 1370 miles or so. I've also seen a carrier for KPXB-DT 5.

Unlike with analogs, digitals just go away when there's interference. WBRA-DT (my local PBS on channel 3) goes away an hour before any observable analog skip. That's how flaky it is.

I love skip as much as the next person, and on analog, I have no issue with it. I just think that the public interest is better served to have no digital signals on low-VHF.

- Trip

No No NO!

Low band must live!

It is the best band with the longest range. Remember the days of Mayberry RFD and the long low band antenna on the squad car? It worked fine back then and it would still work fine today if interference noise sources were controled and enforced like they should be. I can't wait to DX some digital low band.

Long live LOW BAND!:D

http://tvdxexpo.com/dtvhall.html

I probably hold the DTV DX distance record now, but can't claim it since I don't have a picture or TSReader data to prove I received KOTA-DT. Maybe there'll be some skip when I get home, it's getting close to the weaker E's that pop up in December. I'm not giving up on it.

- Trip

http://tvdxexpo.com/dtvhall.html


Cool! :cool:

Too bad I'm late in the game. But I never felt I had to show a QSL card (or picture) as proof I logged a station. Just knowing what I have received was good enough for me. Can't wait to get my new antenna up and start DXing. :)

Low-VHF belongs in the realm of enthusiasts, not for the general public to use (at least not 2-4). E-skip is great fun for some I suppose (never seen any here), but Low-VHF is not reliable enough for general, everyday use.

As for DX'ing DTV Low VHF stations, there won't be that many to chase after. The current count for ~mid 2009 is as follows:

2: 7
3: 7
4: 2
5: 16
6: 8

As I recall, E-skip rarely gets up to channel 5.

This is subject the change and at least two stations have pending requests to leave Low-VHF. Two stations also have pending requests to go there, however (both in Nebraska).

I would gladly trade the 5 VHF-Lo stations for 5 more UHF stations. I'm keeping my large antenna just in case some new station in the Denver area starts up with one of those frequencies. If VHF-Lo went away for TV, then I could replace the large antenna with a much smaller one and reduce the wind and snow load.

Like Sofa King, I like (liked) to DX for the sheer fun of it...didn't take pictures though I wish I had.

I remember the years E-skip would pound in. Our only CBS station in our part of SE Iowa was on channel 2 (WMT-TV, now KGAN Cedar Rapids), and we were on the fringe. Back in the early 70s, channel 2, in programming and news, was arguably the best TV station in Iowa, but come summertime, watch out! (more like watch not:rolleyes:) Between tropo with nearly every weather front that came through and E-skip, there would be mild to severe interference nearly every other day. There were times it would be so bad, channel 2 would put up a super, in the crude electronic graphics of that time, saying something to the effect of "Atmospheric conditions causing reception problems."

However, I remember spectacular DX especially channels 2 and 3. Garden variety tropo usually brought only the 200-300 mile range...but E skip could really do the damage. As a kid, would remember seeing channel 2s from places like Florida and Quebec. More recent times my best luck was with channel 3s, as channel 2 had so much interference during E-skip that I couldnt make anything out. Only using rabbit ears didn't help. Although at our last house in IA we had a typical suburban swept wing V-U pointed north, and the PBS station on Ch 3 in Clovis? NM came in once fairly strong from the back side. Times like that I wished I had a rotor..

Shouldn't make predictions, but I will anyway...low banders in the future might only be in rural areas out west where the tropo and the man made noise isn't such an issue.

I'm keeping my large antenna just in case some new station in the Denver area starts up with one of those frequencies.

Hi, Mike: There's actually one already -- K05MD-LD, licensed to Cripple Creek, broadcasting an ERP of 300 watts on channel 5 from the foothills southwest of Sedalia. Shows up in my TVFool reports, and it has an FCC license to cover. Might actually get a whiff of it after the analog broadcasts from KOAA and KGWN go dark.

When the transition is over there will be fewer than 50 stations on low-VHF. I don't know how many of those will figure out it's a bad idea and move somewhere else, hopefully most of them will.

Or they will learn that Low Band works much better after the high power 2-6 analogs are gone.

Or they will learn that Low Band works much better after the high power 2-6 analogs are gone.

Unfortunately, I doubt the higher power analogs going away will stop all thunderstorms, electric motors, power lines, and massive antennas.

- Trip

Unfortunately, I doubt the higher power analogs going away will stop all thunderstorms, electric motors, power lines, and massive antennas.

- Trip

It will certianly stop OTA reception alltogether in Some terrain challenged locations where distant lo-VHF signals get "around" the hills but even nearby UHF signals do not ....

I've seen it first hand in areas around Portsmouth, OH. There are folks in the "hollers" receiving (only) stations like WLWT 5 Cincinnati, WSAZ 3 Huntington from 70+ miles away -- But the UHF Portsmouth(such as WPBO) signals 12 miles away? Forget it if they're blocked by nearby steep terrain ...

The good news is, I think the numbers of these viewers are relatively small ... The bad news is, some of these folks do depend on OTA broadcasts from these stations, including for news and emergency information ... I know I (and neighbors who actually live there) did from WLWT at at friend's cabin near Blue Creek,OH during one weekend and what is known around here as the "flood of 97" ...

I've seen it first hand in areas around Portsmouth, OH. There are folks in the "hollers" receiving (only) stations like WLWT 5 Cincinnati, WSAZ 3 Huntington from 70+ miles away -- But the UHF Portsmouth(such as WPBO) signals 12 miles away? Forget it if they're blocked by nearby steep terrain ...

This is what I refer to as the "Low-VHF crutch." Instead of building out an adequate translator system in the US (outside of perhaps Utah), some areas have relied on Low-VHF for areas well beyond "normal" reception range, e.g. 35-45 miles or so.

The fact that adoption of DTS rules has occurred so late and the fact that 52-69 were auctioned off does not make for an easy problem to solve.

It may come down to sacrificing rural viewers vs. sub-urban/urban viewers or vice-versa. I doubt such wording will make people happy, but it's the reality staring at TV stations and Congress in 2+ months.

Another option I just thought of would be to dual run UHF and VHF stations, but broadcasters would cry foul as only a few would be able to run both.

I've often thought about maybe having a low-VHF informational analog station in each market wouldn't be a bad move. Air emergency information whenever needed, otherwise air PBS or C-SPAN or something. Or if a local station wants to keep themselves on the air in analog, they could air their own programming.

But I doubt that would fly in any circumstance.

- Trip

This is what I refer to as the "Low-VHF crutch." Instead of building out an adequate translator system in the US (outside of perhaps Utah), some areas have relied on Low-VHF for areas well beyond "normal" reception range .....

.... The fact that adoption of DTS rules has occurred so late and the fact that 52-69 were auctioned off does not make for an easy problem to solve.


Localized terrain(steep/rugged) blockage is the issue I was addressing, it can even happen well within a stations predicted/noise-limited service contour, not just beyond it. In such cases, UHF signals (or even some cases hi-VHF) often aren't receivable/useable but lo-VHF is. I wouldn't call it a crutch, I would call it an advantage (in these circumstances) for VHF vs. UHF and in some cases VHF-HI.

It's just the way it is. VHF signals, Lo-VHF particularly, due to the longer wavelengths involved have propagation characteristics such that when nearby terrain blockage issues are significant enough, there are cases when Lo-VHF signals are usuable when signals on higher frequencies are not. In these cases, Take away the lo-VHF signals, which is what is going to happen, then those folks are going to lose OTA reception, it's as simple as that.

I don't think stations are likely to build out multiple translators in cases when potentially they will only serve a handful of households with each translator in each "holler".

For those in such circumstances, even for DTV signals, obviously this advantage outweighs the advantages of UHF regarding issues such as various types of interference which effect VHF moreso than UHF, such as impulse noise - Issues which often something can be done about, other than as it pertains to natural cause - nearby lightning strikes, Eskip if the interference is coming from same direction as the desired local signal, and when the desired local signal isn't necessarily a strong one. Of course, the latter is going to be much, much less of an issue for the most part beginning in a couple of months ..... Unless of course your Es pest to local reception is mexican or canadian ....

I do believe the biggest overall, general, problems for VHF DTV(both Hi and Lo) are: #1). Folks trying/wanting to use UHF Only antennas, and retailers selling them "UHF only so called "HDTV" antennas, and #2). folks attempting to use indoor/attic antenna antennas(often near various devices or household applicances, or near A/C wiring which are creating interference issues, especially on lo-VHF) : Receive antenna installations which don't even come close to meeting FCC planning factors for DTV reception.

#2). folks attempting to use indoor/attic antenna antennas(often near various devices or household applicances, or near A/C wiring which are creating interference issues, especially on lo-VHF) : Receive antenna installations which don't even come close to meeting FCC planning factors for DTV reception.

This is certainly a very serious problem with the transition. I have heard that 75% of OTA households are using set-top antennas, which are simply terrible, especially on top of a major noise-source (CRT TV's).

I have my 3 separate band antennas in the attic, with good results. It's far better than set-top (especially for VHF), but still not up to FCC planning factors, which is impossible where I live (I don't own the roof).

Most store bought antennas have minimal VHF capabilities (e.g. rabbit ears stuck onto a UHF antenna) and I have yet to see any rabbit ears long enough for 2-4.

It will certianly stop OTA reception alltogether in Some terrain challenged locations where distant lo-VHF signals get "around" the hills but even nearby UHF signals do not ....

I've seen it first hand in areas around Portsmouth, OH. There are folks in the "hollers" receiving (only) stations like WLWT 5 Cincinnati, WSAZ 3 Huntington from 70+ miles away -- But the UHF Portsmouth(such as WPBO) signals 12 miles away? Forget it if they're blocked by nearby steep terrain ...

The good news is, I think the numbers of these viewers are relatively small ... The bad news is, some of these folks do depend on OTA broadcasts from these stations, including for news and emergency information ... I know I (and neighbors who actually live there) did from WLWT at at friend's cabin near Blue Creek,OH during one weekend and what is known around here as the "flood of 97" ...

This 100% correct! That is the Low Band advantage. It works over hills where UHF does not.

And those who use rabbit ears...Rabbit ears? Pffft! Please...Get a real antenna! Antennas too big? Pffft! Please...You should see my ham antennas! :D Low Band works better than any other band. :mad:

You should see my ham antennas!

Attached is pic of one of mine -- the 20M reflector is about 30 Feet long or so .... This pic is from when I put it up in 1988, the closest trees(cottonwoods) are at least 25~30 feet taller now --- I used it(mainly enjoyed CW on 10+15 when I was active) had it up for about 12 years - And, someone else used it between late 60's when it was new and then -- I'm currently using the CDE 44 rotor seen in pic with my TV ants, and it's probably even older than the antenna in pic, and probably a bit older than I am for that matter!) --- BTW, you can't tell it from the pic but that is one HEAVY gin pole ...... :

Attached is pic of one I mine (This pic is from when I put it up in 1988, I used it for about 12 years - And, someone else used it between late 60's when it was new and then -- I'm currently using the CDE 44 rotor seen in pic with my TV ants, and it's even older than the antenna in pic!) --- BTW, you can't tell it from the pic but that is one HEAVY gin pole ...... :

Now THAT is a low band antenna! Very nice. No mamby pamby "low band antennas are to big" whining there! :D

I moved a couple of years ago and still did not get around to putting my antenna farm back up. It is all in the garage. I have reels of LDF-5 and big sections (100' +) of LDF-7 ready to go. Lots of hardline connectors too. I need to get a bunch of ground rods and put a halo around the house for lightning protection (Florida is bad). When my house was built I put LDF-4 in the walls and a big feedthrough plate on the shack wall next to where I plan on putting the tower. I just need to get myself motivated to just do it. ;)

Came across this in a Google search, thought this thread needed a bump, and Trip, looks like you could be a prophet:)...

I've often thought about maybe having a low-VHF informational analog station in each market wouldn't be a bad move. Air emergency information whenever needed, otherwise air PBS or C-SPAN or something. Or if a local station wants to keep themselves on the air in analog, they could air their own programming.

But I doubt that would fly in any circumstance.

- Trip