Originally Posted by be236
Ah.. much better.. yeah, those BC stations in light red (pink?) you definitely should be able to pick up with 91XG antenna and your pre-amp.
That's RF channels 22, 43, 32, 17, 26, and probably 20 too.
That's good programming/shows from our neighbours up north! (heh).
Thought you might like some more data.
Sites like TVfool are great for some info, like direction, number of possible channels, etc. They look impressive with charts and graphs that were created from the FCC sites and other places. What they don't take into consideration is the real world, like trees, hills, trees, buildings, trees, the type of antenna required to deal with obstructions, like, uh, trees........
One of the acid tests I use is to put in addresses I know won't work, like 2401 West Lake Samammish Parkway NE, or 3301 SW 172nd St, or 3401 Perkins Lane West. They will look just fine, yet they won't get channels 4-5-7-9-11-13-16-22 because of huge hills in the way. Trying to guess what could be received in flat world with nothing in the way is okay. Just realize there's a bit more to it.
As for the 91XG Euro style antennas, I tried several back in the late 90's. Seattle HD wasn't available on cable or satellite in 97 and 98, so I got swamped trying to find miracles for people in marginal areas. I dragged those antennas around for over a year, comparing them to Channelmaster, Antennacraft, Winegard, Blonder Tongue and many, many others. I use two meters, a Sadelco and gonzo Sencore with way too many signal results that I only use in the tough spots. They give a clearer indication of what's really going on, unlike the "strength" indicators in TV's and tuners.
What I found was the Channelmaster, Antennacraft, Winegard and Blonder Tongue usually performed better, size and type wise, and never worse. Obviously it depends on the site location, antenna, what direction the problem channels are and more,....
But, I wasn't impressed. They were overpriced, construction is a bit flimsy compared to the others, and just didn't measure up to all the hype.
What I think happens is someone in a tough location, that has tried a small antenna without much luck, goes for broke. Installs one of the 91XG's, or similar, and it works. They now think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. And that's okay, but if they had tried one of the ones I mentioned, it would have probably worked as well, if not better, cost less and been easier to mount.
Something else that drives people nuts is someone will use brand A, works great and tells his next door neighbor. Neighbor buys one, mounts it on his house 20 feet away, same height and direction, lousy reception.
It's okay to try it. Logic dictates it should work. Reality says not always.
And then you have people in another city, with completely different parameters of location, terrain, TV stations with different frequencies and power, recommending something that worked great there, so it should anywhere.
Which brings me back to the more data, in a very long winded way.
There isn't any one antenna that works fine, all the time, everywhere. Sure wish there was. Take all the numbers data you cull from various sites and manufacturers (don't even get me started on product stats!) with a large grain of salt. Add to that the experiences that others here on the forum have found with their results, which is real world, and you'll have a better idea of what's really going on in the crazy world of reception.
Need more info, something explained, curious about some device, ask away. There's a lot of interesting stuff to learn about on this forum.
And Thanks for your info, too!