The Official AVS 'Smart Antenna' topic - Page 5

Well, it's not a smart antenna (which is the subject of this thread)....

Should I wait for the transition (June 12th) to find out which stations I will be able to pick up?

No. Your local stations have been broadcasting in digital for some time - months or years. Many of them are likely on their final frequency assignments now, although some may be changing on June 12th. If you get set up and do testing now, you'll have a chance to work out at least some problems while you still have analog to fall back on. If you wait until the 12th, and then discover you have problems... well then you'll have no TV at all until you solve the problems.

See http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1#post16479651

IOW, it is NOT a smart antenna.

I'd seen it and wondered how it could be a smart antenna. Smart antennas are directional. How can the smart antenna "steer" those rabbit ears? It can't.

You have the wrong concept of Smart Antennas (at least in relation to the 909 standard). The 909 standard only refers to the interface between the 16(or 32 with polarization) "virtual antennas" and a controlling controller/ATSC tuner box/chip.

There are two possibilities...
1. Most probable... In this case they may have slaved the rabbit ears portion (not electronically steerable) to the internal antenna portion (Should be steerable), and the 16 channels are as follows
Virtual Antenna 1 = VHF + UHF (position 1)
Virtual Antenna 2 = VHF + UHF (position 2)
...
Virtual Antenna 16 = VHF + UHF (position 16)

OR

2. They specifically assigned VHF to one of the Virtual Antennas and you get the following...
Virtual Antenna 1 = VHF
Virtual Antenna 2 = UHF (position 1)
...
Virtual Antenna 16 = UHF (position 15)

There is NO requirement as to how the antennas need to be designed, only as to how they communicate (control and info) and provide switching (16/32 channels) and preamplification (4 levels).

A 'almost perfect' Smart Antenna design would be to look at the channels you want to recieve then select up to 16(/32*) specifically designed antennas for your selections (single channel VHF/single band UHF antennas http://www.blondertongue.com/reception/bty.pdf) and have an interface that would allow you to plug all of them into a Antenna to 909 converter box (I picture a box with up to 16/32* F-ports in with a 909 F-port out. This gives you a 16-32 directionally tuned antenna array that assumes it (and the antennas themselves) will never move out of alignment.

A 'god like' perfect Smart Antenna (or a Super Smart Antenna ) design is if you add the idea above (limited to 16) with the idea of using the RF channel number (per CEA-542-B) and polarization to control a Antenna box additionally with any number of F-ports for every 6Mhz channel (one for each polarity) in the acceptable range. You have an antenna controller inside the box that constantly measures it's own antennas for each frequency to find the best antenna to assign to each channel and polarity (this does take a bit of control AWAY from the STB) and then the STB asks for that RF channel and polarity the Antenna controller selects the one it thinks is the best to recieve that spcefic RF channel & polarity. This gives you an virtually unlimited number of antennas that does not care if you or the antennas move because it constantly updates its own opinion of which channel is best (not the STB deciding which Virtual Antenna is best) and gives it to you.

*Note: 32 not sure if you could use a polarization bit as a just another 16 antennas or if any tuner that askes for the alternate polarization can astually use RF tuning algorithims of different polarities to get better signals.
In other words
1. is there something that can be done on the STB side that when working on one specific channel can you fine tune the tuner so that moving to a different polarizaion of the same signal will help in the tuning process
OR is it just information so that
2. IF the SA uses the Direction modifiers THEN the polarization doubles its number of directions AND if the SA uses the channel RF channel number then the polarization bit will help describe the position of the specific real channel assignment.

PS I do not think I have heard of anyone even conceptualizing this "Super Smart Antenna" until now, but I assume that this is reason the 909 standard incorperated sending the RF channel and polarity into it's spec, otherwise why bother? If this is the first idea of the Super Smart Antenna then you heard it here first, I only thought it up now. Please send royalty checks to ...

As an additional note...

Any antennas that are dedicated to a single channel could have a 6Mhz bandpass filter filter on that line to only allow that specific channel through i.e. http://www.tinlee.com/Graph_CFAL_8_5...618.php#graph5. This would eliminate the problem of adjacent and co-channel interference, but of course anything from harmonics and multi-path that resided in the pass range would still be there. You could even set up a 'multiswitch' to have 1 filter per channel and switch them to different antennas.

OR you could use just this idea on a 'traditional' Smart Antenna to get a Smart Antenna WITH PER CHANNEL FILTERING(where the Set top box still controls everything), which I dub a Semi-Super Smart Antenna. (Thats what I'm going to call it, so )

I think the SSA controller could even have it's own control system for each antenna like to move it in and out of a node, physically if necessary, over to secondary(or more) identical antennas in physically different locations.

The posibilities are only limited by imagination (of course the reality has a list of many other limitations, cost being classified of high in importance on said list).

Is there any hdtv out yet that support and have a smart antenna connection?

Nope. Not a one.

OK I tried them both again on my DTA800B on main floor (4' AGL) The UFO can be easily aimed at Channel 41 in Big Lake 46 miles away and gets a great signal, but poor on the UHF based out of Shoreview (336deg instead of 7 and 10deg compass heading). The VHF channels come in great once properly adjusted. But the moving of aim point drives my family nuts. The RCA ANT2000 works great, can also pick up Channel 41 and others without doing a thing!

Situation: We have a nominal (more about the qualifier below) line of sight (LOS) to the transmitters of the local (Portland, Oregon) stations that are all located in two clusters within a very narrow segment of the compass rose, WNW of us, the closer one (per TVFool) at 1.6 miles and 284° and the further one at 2.5 miles and 291°. With our proximity to the transmitters and LOS, signal strength is not an issue at our location.

We have mounted an Eagle-Aspen two-bay antenna in the (unfinished) attic (approximately 30 feet above ground level) at the east end of the house pointed (through the attic) at about 287° in the direction of the transmitter farms; a digital television on the first floor of the house directly below the antenna is connected to the Eagle-Aspen. On the west end of the second floor of the house, approximately 20 feet above ground level, we have an analogue television set and a Tivax STB-T8 converter box, the latter attached (until last week) to a simple UHF loop, half of a rabbit-ears-plus-loop cheap antenna that we purchased long ago, probably in the early 1970s.

Our neighbors on a slight rise above us to the immediate west have a giant (probably more than 100 feet tall and more than 75 feet spread) sycamore tree, the trunk of which is about 20 feet due west of our house. In the summer, when the tree is full of leaves, our LOS is a virtual LOS, because the direct signal must pass through the leaves of the tree. Whenever a breeze ruffles the leaves, we have had -- on both the downstairs set connected to the Eagle-Aspen in the attic and the upstairs set connected to the UHF loop antenna -- break-up and freeze frame on the local ABC channel (KATU, virtual channel 2.1) which broadcasts on UHF channel 43, and the local PBS channel (KOPB, virtual channel 10.1) which pre-transition broadcast on a UHF frequency, but has returned to channel 10 post-transition. KATU broadcasts from the closer of the two transmitter farms at 284°, and KOPB broadcasts from the farther of the two transmitter farms, at 291°. As one might (or might not) expect, we have seen less break-up on KOPB and KATU on the downstairs set that is attached to the Eagle-Aspen in the attic than we did with the upstairs set that was attached to the simple loop antenna, but we have experienced some break-up on both, nevertheless.

We have had solid reception, both pre-transition and post-transition, from the NBC affiliate (KGW, virtual channel 8.1), which broadcast on channel 46 before the transition and now has returned to channel 8 post-transition, from the farther of the two transmitter farms at 291°. We have no explanation, not even a tentative one, why the signals from KGW (steady) and KOPB (occasional break-up), which are broadcast from the same location with the same power, should be received differently.

Last week, the day before the transition, we received delivery of an ANT2000, which we immediately placed in service on the upstairs Tivax STB-T8 in place of the ancient loop antenna. For practical and aesthetic reasons, mounting the ANT2000 horizontally (hanging from the ceiling) was not an option, and so it is mounted vertically on the wall, facing due west (270°), with its top edge perhaps six inches below the ceiling, located about two feet higher, and five feet to the north, of the converter box (which also places it about two feet higher and five feet farther north than the UHF loop was). The coaxial cable permanently attached to the ANT2000 is only about six feet long, so we needed to add a length of coaxial cable, using a splicer, to attach the antenna to the auxiliary connector box of the ANT2000, with its separate very short Smart Antenna cable connection to the Tivax converter.

The neighbor's sycamore now has its full complement of summer leaves. We have had some breezes in the past week. The downstairs set, attached to the Eagle-Aspen in the attic, continues to show the occasional break-up or freeze frame when the set is tuned to KATU or KOPB and a breeze blows through. On the upstairs set, attached to the ANT2000, the presumed multipath problem appears to be 100 percent solved. The Smart Antenna experiment has resulted in a resounding success at this location.

I'm glad it all worked out for you, but other people reading this, please don't think hanging the ANT2000 vertically is the solution. The smart antenna activates different elements, depending on the direction of the tower. Hanging it vertically would mean the antenna would be looking straight up and straight down for signals.

As I note in another the APEX 502 pages, this is not a truly compatible with Smart Antenna CECB. It will scan with the default setting of direction 1, gain 1, if you go to the 'Configuration Menu' and then select Smart Antenna, it will then change these setting to best bring in a channel, it will then leave the antenna at these settings if you switch to another channel.

Hate to say it but you'll need to repeat your Extreme range test with the RCA ANT 2000 with a more compatible box like the RCA DTA809. Another thing is the RCA ANT2000 will require the 'Full scan' to fully take advantage of its smart antenna capabilities; it will also need to be fixed in space, even a 2-5deg turn can make or break a signal, it can't be suspended.

So, it appears the upshot of all this is there are a number of Smart enabled CECBs (I just ordered one and need a compatible antenna), there are no Smart enabled DTVs, and the only two Smart enabled antennas (DTS-5000 & ANT2000), despite being successful, have both been discontinued. And as the final demolition, there's no apparent intention on the part of antenna manufacturers to make further use of the technology, even though there exists a formally standardized interface (EIA/CEA-909) and at least a modest demand.

Did I miss anything?

I did a Google search and you can still get new RCA ANT2000s. But it isn't listed on the RCA web page and SolidSignal has it listed as discontinued.

I wish the technology would have made a better showing. But the auto-tune algorithms were poor in my opinion. I was constantly manually tuning the antenna. Also, there is a posting about how poor the standard was implemented in some of the DTV converter boxes. Under a NAB contract, Antenna Direct had made a photo-type EIA/CEA-909A antenna and found a few boxes were not sending the commands correctly. NAB has been pushing this technologies but it doesn't look like manufactures backed it very well. Also, not enough consumers in the market that would have been best served by this technology were willing to spend the extra money.

As for your CECB, just want to clarify your comment. The smart antenna is optional not required on smart antenna enabled devices.

I realize the tuner will function properly with any antenna, but I would much prefer an antenna that was able to be at least near optimized via the STB included Smart technology.

I also ran Google searches, but all I found were listings for boxes that were no longer in stock (Amazon being just one example). Where did you find them to be actually available for purchase?

There have been problems with individual interface controllers correctly following the specifications ever since the introduction of interface controllers (regardless of specific application -- HDMI being just one example). The only way interface controller errors get corrected is through formal feedback, and that's heavily dependent on manufacturers developing associated products and discovering and communicating issues (frequently with end user "help"). For a manufacturer to throw up their hands due to discovery of an inconsistency simply signals a lack of genuine interest to begin with.

Also, there will always be a spread on percentage of potentially benefitting consumers who will avail themselves of any particular technology and its incarnations (unless, of course, forced). I see two particular problems in this case. One being the typical advertiser and "reviewer" of the Smart antennas who stupidly lead consumers to believe the Smart antennas self adjust, as opposed to pointing out the need for a Smart controller at the DTV or converter box (I just yesterday edited the ANT2000 product Wiki to correct this very stupidity -- far too late to help, of course). I find this stupidity practically everywhere I look -- a very effective way to go about discrediting what could be an excellent product -- severely misrepresent it.

The other problem being that without some meaningful participation on the part of the DTV manufacturers, it's near impossible to grow the population of potential buyers. So now, with the antennas discontinued, it becomes a chicken Vs egg situation. I see the fault being primarily on the antenna manufacturer side of the fence.

The funny thing about algorithmic development is it too tends to go hand-in-hand with perceived success of the functionality being developed. I don't think early implimentations being relatively primitive is even vaguely unusual in the technological world. It takes broadening acceptance to drive that development and from what I've read, many found the Smart interface to be a decided improvement over continually having to make manual adjustments. I've no doubt Smart antenna implimentation could and would have improved with time and growing acceptance. However, being cutoff barely out of the gate provides no opportunity for that to happen !

Why? If it were YOUR money at stake putting a new product into a market where the only controllers were "dead-end" devices whose communication protocols make the Tower of Babel look simple, would you spend the money?

Think carefully before answering...

Besides, a competent Smart Antenna implementation would probably retail for several hundred dollars initially. Would you be prepared to "eat" the returns when it doesn't work due to lack of a uniform interface?

Again, think carefully before answering...

Now, is it still the fault of the "antenna manufacturers?"

And what is the basis for this statement?

http://www.nabfastroad.org/NAB_Final...ev_Public2.pdf along with publicly posted comments from John Ross, the lead design engineer from that project.

Pay particular attentions to sections 3.3 & 3.4.

I took a closer look and nobody has stock. Looks like they are all gone.

Thanks for the link. Just started on the document and it's looking interesting.

Yeppers, my finding exactly.

In associated searching I ran across a link that predicts my OTA reception -- the results ere exceedingly depressing ! The discontinued external and internal Smart antennas appeared to be good as far as the "Light Green" zone. However, it seems that with the aid of trees 30ft or more tall (for reflections I suppose), I'm located in a "Blue" to "Purple" zone -- and even then I can't expect to pick up Baltimore, only Philadelphia (~35mi) . So, I'm not sure if playing with one of those two Smart antennas would have done me any good -- even with the external placed as high as I reasonably could. Sometimes, living in a hole is really annoying !

Wow, sad to see the DTA-5000 is no longer available. It has been my favorite antenna here and if it dies I'll be lost.

I just bought a 32" Vizio HDTV and the rabbit ears I saved from years ago are a nuisance. I'm thinking about an indoor smart antenna, but I don't know if my set is capable of controlling it. Following is the reply I got from a Vizio tech rep yesterday. He says I can use a smart antenna with my TV, but doesn't say the TV can exploit the antenna fully. I find nothing in the User Guide that even mentions this antenna. Can someone on the forum advise me?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Gary,

Thanks for your inquiry. Yes you would be able to use this with your current television. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact us at 877-698-4946.

Best Regards,

Nick Gengler

"America's Fastest Growing HDTV Company"
606 Gateway Drive Suite 200
North Sioux City, SD 57049

Phone 877-698-4946
EMail: nick.gengler@vizio.com


From: Customer Support [mailto:support@vizio.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2009 2:26 PM
To: Techsupp
Subject: Contact Form

First Name: Gary
Last Name:*****

Model Number: VO320E
Serial Number: LQKEADK2724380
Comment: Is my new TV compatible with any of the new "smart antennas?" If not, which of your 32" TVs are compatible?

Unless a set specifically calls out 'Smart Antenna', it will not be able to take advantage it. Yes, you can connect the RF antenna coax feed, but it will not work like a Smart Antenna.

In particular, look on the set for a 'Smart Antenna' interface on the set.

No Vizio to my knowledge has ever had a Smart Antenna interface.

Here is a device with a Smart Antenna interface, located to the left of the AC powercord:

If the TV provides support for a "smart antenna" it will have a jack that looks much the same as a LAN jack does on a computer -- only visible difference being the lock is offset to one side. Also, you can be sure the TV manual will mention it. In case you're unaware, the function of the jack is to provide control signals to the "smart antenna" to enable it to optimize its reception for the selected channel. Those control signals are what enable a "smart antenna" to be smart.