or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Los Angeles, CA - OTA
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Los Angeles, CA - OTA - Page 296

post #8851 of 9442
@dj4monie, the two antenna models I suggested to you (the RCA and the Channel Master) are the smallest commercially available designs that are truly appropriate for hi-VHF Antenna Direct's C2V is also a possibility in a different form. So, someone DID try to answer your chief question. We're trying to help from a distance, so a few back-and-forth rounds of questions are unavoidable as we try the easiest/cheapest ideas first. Good on you for trying to do a little research (those hdtvexpert links were pretty good.)

First, please post the URL for your TVFool analysis, using the antenna height you expect to use. I understand what you're saying, but there sometimes is more information in that tables that can help us at a distance smoke out an unusual problem. At a minimum, doing so will ensure that those of us trying to help you are working from the same data.

One problem you may be dealing with is destructive interference caused by multiple paths between Mt. Wilson and you. This site has some pictures that show what can happen as a result - hot and dead spots in either/or horizontal and vertical directions. What I want you to take note of in general is that VHF hot/cold zones are much wider than UHF because of the wavelengths involved. You may not have moved any of your antennas around enough to get out of a VHF dead spot if that is indeed your problem.

I still believe that you have not tried a proper antenna for hi-VHF. Any of the flat-panel or other small indoor antennas are not physically large enough to capture enough VHF RF to work effectively, as you are finding out. You've got to use rabbit-ears or the log-yagi designs I've suggested.

Again, please post your TVFool report.
post #8852 of 9442
@phildaant, I think you're going to be stuck with highly variable reception conditions no matter what you do. Remember that you are DEEPLY shadowed from Mt. Wilson, so any signal you get is scattered over the hill - and the net effect of that scattering is highly dependent on the temperature profile near gound level (see this page for more information). A couple of other things to take away from your experience to date:

1) the Longley-Rice model used by TVFool (and the FCC), does not necessarily handle all diffraction situations well. In your case, the trend is correct - KCBS is your most difficult catch.

2) remember that the signal predictions have some statistics behind them. What TVFool is showing is what you should expect 9 times out of 10. You will see stronger signals 2 times out of 10.

3) you will certainly see hot/cold spots for signals. I pointed @dj4monie to this page to illustrate this problem.
post #8853 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Loudin View Post

@phildaant, I think you're going to be stuck with highly variable reception conditions no matter what you do. Remember that you are DEEPLY shadowed from Mt. Wilson, so any signal you get is scattered over the hill - and the net effect of that scattering is highly dependent on the temperature profile near gound level (see this page for more information). A couple of other things to take away from your experience to date:
1) the Longley-Rice model used by TVFool (and the FCC), does not necessarily handle all diffraction situations well. In your case, the trend is correct - KCBS is your most difficult catch.
2) remember that the signal predictions have some statistics behind them. What TVFool is showing is what you should expect 9 times out of 10. You will see stronger signals 2 times out of 10.
3) you will certainly see hot/cold spots for signals. I pointed @dj4monie to this page to illustrate this problem.
OK, KCBS can work sometimes depending where, what angles/directions, etc. Most of the times, it's just crap.

I guess it is time to give up (unless they decide to try on the top of the house's attic or mount it high above it. Yeah right. :P) and buy expensive TWC cable TV (with missing asian channels) with its cable Internet. We'll keep that unreturnable RCA antenna as a backup and for some working channels (e.g., channels 31.x that cable doesn't carry). frown.gif
Edited by phildaant - 6/25/12 at 11:54am
post #8854 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Loudin View Post


What I want you to take note of in general is that VHF hot/cold zones are much wider than UHF because of the wavelengths involved. You may not have moved any of your antennas around enough to get out of a VHF dead spot if that is indeed your problem.

True that...
Here is my gallery picture http://www.avsforum.com/image/id/481924
That antenna would not work outside the house mounted about 15 feet above ground. In the photo it's a little over 6 feet off the floor. Location characteristics are similar to an attic, except for elevation.

Since the change over that antenna is only good for CBS, NBC and KTLA.
post #8855 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post

The Leaf will tend to receive VHF edge-on rather than broadside. You definitely DON'T want an omni antenna, they're simply an invitation to more trouble. Trying to put a square peg in a round hole doesn't work very well. Use the right antenna and it's like putting the square peg in the square hole and the round peg in the round hole.
For the VHF reception, try a simple set of rabbit ears extended to 28-34 inches placed so the dipoles are horizontal and broadside to the direction towards Mt Wilson. Once you find a suitable location, use a UVSJ to combine it with the Leaf which will be used for UHF only.
Be advised that for Directv systems with a 5-LNB dish, you generally CANNOT diplex an antenna signal onto those cables.
None of the Monoprice antennas are particularly well matched to the Los Angeles market. You'd do best with a small 7-51 antenna whether indoors or outdoors.

There is no suitable place to have Rabbit Ears. I tired Rabbit Ears, but how they had to be mounted mean they were right in front of the thickness of the branches and leafs. That is with the poles fully extended. I can see turning it sideways would work, but its not practical.

Doing to a Google search of 7-51, I get on Winegard's site its version of the Leaf (Flatwave) and other types of antenna that have to be externally mounted (Outside). I get UHF now with my present antenna and I'm open to keeping it and adding another antenna for VHF.

Here's the thing though, with a tiny extendable mono antenna included with my PCTV 80e USB HDTV Tuner, gets all the same UHF channels but no Hi-VHF. It seems to me, getting UHF on axis is not the issue. Getting VHF off axis is...

So if an Omni-Directional you say is putting a round peg in a square hole, then I guess one of these paper thin antennas would work. I don't know why you say that though, if the antenna is standing upright or laid flat it should get the Hi-VHF meaning orientation is meaningless. Others located in my general area (Granada Hills, Northridge, Sherman Oaks, etc) with either the Winegard Flatwave, Leaf and even the RCA flat antennas have said they get all the channels here.

Fry's (Woodland Hills) is out of stock on those RCA 1450R and 1550R Antennas. I found a few (three) in stock at Fry's Burbank store. Not that many at the various big box stores either, it seems to me some people return these because they have a window that is not facing the towers

According to the FCC KABC (7.1) is the strongest VHF station, so it makes sense just a minor turn on the antenna and boom I get it. The next strongest is KCAL and with the same location and rotation to get KABC, I start to pick it up but its a weak signal.

Again, common sense says an antenna that can receive signals 360 degrees or good with off-axis reception would solve my Hi-VHF problem. Like I said the tiny antenna with some type of software based signal booster , get all 102 channels. 2-69, just not 7,9,11 and 13. I can't get Channel 8.1 and I can't get 24.1, both are in the Inland Empire. I get the channel furthest out, 50.1 PBS SoCal and ION -TV 30.1 which is the same distance but I guess weaker???? I get it with the small antenna, not an issue. (27-28 miles away)

I need good off-axis coverage not turning Rabbit Ears sideways which is not possible with my arrangement ie: there's no where to put it. I have the same problem with the RCA Flats. But at least on the opposite wall there are nails in the wall. The point is, popping in a few small nails is easy. Rabbit Ears have a base and are designed to set atop something.

It will be a couple of days before I can try again because I need money I spent credited back. I wanted to try the RCA because they are widely available locally. Both Paper Flat antennas I can get from Amazon, but the same charge back, RMA process if they don't work.

All the data seems to point to Leaf being the better of the two. On the test I posted the Leaf Plus was able to get NYC's Main ABC Channel which was 28 miles away (Line of Sight). I think the Plus adds 10db of gain, the amp I have adds 10db of gain.

A Winegard or a Leaf should work perfectly. I am not trying to sell myself on any thing, its just I am (a) against putting anything outside and (b) making the impossible happen. I don't have a book shelf or anything else near the window to put the Rabbit Ears on top, I have Rabbit Ears, they sort of work but the highest I can place is is 4 feet off the ground. Any other way and I can't extended the poles, its not practical.
post #8856 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Loudin View Post

@dj4monie, the two antenna models I suggested to you (the RCA and the Channel Master) are the smallest commercially available designs that are truly appropriate for hi-VHF Antenna Direct's C2V is also a possibility in a different form. So, someone DID try to answer your chief question. We're trying to help from a distance, so a few back-and-forth rounds of questions are unavoidable as we try the easiest/cheapest ideas first. Good on you for trying to do a little research (those hdtvexpert links were pretty good.)
First, please post the URL for your TVFool analysis, using the antenna height you expect to use. I understand what you're saying, but there sometimes is more information in that tables that can help us at a distance smoke out an unusual problem. At a minimum, doing so will ensure that those of us trying to help you are working from the same data.
One problem you may be dealing with is destructive interference caused by multiple paths between Mt. Wilson and you. This site has some pictures that show what can happen as a result - hot and dead spots in either/or horizontal and vertical directions. What I want you to take note of in general is that VHF hot/cold zones are much wider than UHF because of the wavelengths involved. You may not have moved any of your antennas around enough to get out of a VHF dead spot if that is indeed your problem.
I still believe that you have not tried a proper antenna for hi-VHF. Any of the flat-panel or other small indoor antennas are not physically large enough to capture enough VHF RF to work effectively, as you are finding out. You've got to use rabbit-ears or the log-yagi designs I've suggested.
Again, please post your TVFool report.

I have posted my TVFool Report before, but here it is again - http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29&q=id%3d1349292825a7cf
post #8857 of 9442
More fooling around...

2012-06-25140229.jpg

Turning my antenna flat (perpendicular with the ground), I pick up 7.1 (7.2 and 7.3). Starting with 62.1 at the top of my TV Fool Channel List, I get break up on most of the other UHF channels. Still no 9, 11 or 13.

I am not sure where this I need a big physical antenna to get those channels when I get one but the others suffer because of orientation of the antenna.

Then I turned it like so -

2012-06-25141521.jpg

2.1 and other UHF channels fine, 4.1 now breaks up a little.

I get 7.1 but no other VHF.

So having it like I had it originally (The other picture in the other threads), I get slight break up on 2.1 and 4.1 and a few sub channels, but overall I get everything (No VHF).

Turning it flat (like in image at the top of this post), I get 7.1 but some break up on other channels. Not unwatchable at all, just the occasional stutter while watching a program. I start to get 9.1 but nothing else.

Last, I turn it flat like I usually have it towards the south and I get 7.1 and break up on 4.1, while 2.1 is perfect.

Seems to me again orientation is the problem and maybe antenna type. As I said previously this is a directional antenna. If 7.1/9.1 are off axis due to obstructions like trees, buildings, etc. I don't see how a Omni won't work but SHO says its Round Hole/Square Peg issue. Leaf/Flatwave are good with UHF and Hi-VHF as proven here - http://www.hdtvexpert.com/?p=2105
Edited by dj4monie - 6/25/12 at 3:39pm
post #8858 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

OK, KCBS can work sometimes depending where, what angles/directions, etc. Most of the times, it's just crap.
I guess it is time to give up (unless they decide to try on the top of the house's attic or mount it high above it. Yeah right. :P) and buy expensive TWC cable TV (with missing asian channels) with its cable Internet. We'll keep that unreturnable RCA antenna as a backup and for some working channels (e.g., channels 31.x that cable doesn't carry). frown.gif
I forgot to share this information over the weekend. I only seem to mention them in my newsgroup post. Oops! These will probably add support that I won't be able to get OTA fully:

Elevations according to Google Earth (GE): About 956 ft. in the front yard and kitchen's ground levels where thec best feeds are. Highest blocked hill/small mountain to Mt. Wilson in a straight line is about 1,254 feet (never knew GE had this feature!): http://i.imgur.com/A6yEe.gif ... So there's about a 300 feet height difference.
Edited by phildaant - 6/25/12 at 8:23pm
post #8859 of 9442
The measurements documented at hdtvexpert showed that the Leaf and Flatwave were NOT effective hi-VHF antennas. The channel 8 they picked up was very, very strong, so that did not prove anything. Antennas need to be at least 1/8th of a signal's wavelength to start to be effective in collecting that signal. Wavelength and frequency are inversely related - as one gets bigger, the other gets smaller. Hi-VHF signals have longer wavelengths, so antennas have to be physically bigger to be able to pick up those channels. That is physics. Don't let the reception of 7 fool you - that was a lucky break.

If you are serious about getting 7, 9, 11, and 13, you will need to start with one of the three antennas I recommended. They are all hi-VHF/UHF models, so you won't have to worry about combining.
post #8860 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

...(e.g., channels 31.x that cable doesn't carry). frown.gif
Check out channel 31.9: It is CCTV-9 Chinese State Television in English. They have interesting shows about China and carry a different perspective on world news and sports.
post #8861 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelLAX View Post

Check out channel 31.9: It is CCTV-9 Chinese State Television in English. They have interesting shows about China and carry a different perspective on world news and sports.
Yeah, I noticed that recently. When was that added? Sheesh, some of these channels keep growing! Too bad they will never go HD. frown.gif


FYI after 6/26/2012 8:50 AM PDT for about 15 minutes: I was at the other house again. I noticed that RCA ANT751 antenna (not perfectly horizontal either) was remounted on the kitchen and garage corner facing NW (can't go north more due to the garage wall like I did in front of the kitchen patio, grassy lawn, and inside the kitchen). Here is what Zeinth converter box picked up (60-63 channels scanned multiple times [3 were added after the first one from scratch]): 2 (actually stable!), 4, 7, 9, 11, 13, 18 (unstable), 22, 31, 44, (unstable), 50, 54, 57, and 58 (unstable). Also, no winds I felt outside like on Sunday's early afternoon. I also CM 4228HD antenna has not been disassembled to be returned to Fry's yet.
Edited by phildaant - 6/26/12 at 12:31pm
post #8862 of 9442
There really isn't enough bandwidth for that many channels in HD. Some major broadcasters have found that two 720P channels is about the most they can offer while still offering a minimally acceptable video to the average person. Some would offer that that's too much.

A typical "decent" quality HD signal gets around 9-12 mbs of the available 18 mbs (rounded). A low-quality SD signal can get by with 1 or 2 mbs. It doesn't take too long to run out of bandwidth unless video quality is severely compromised as seen on channel 1 in San Jose.
post #8863 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADTech View Post

There really isn't enough bandwidth for that many channels in HD. Some major broadcasters have found that two 720P channels is about the most they can offer while still offering a minimally acceptable video to the average person. Some would offer that that's too much.
A typical "decent" quality HD signal gets around 9-12 mbs of the available 18 mbs (rounded). A low-quality SD signal can get by with 1 or 2 mbs. It doesn't take too long to run out of bandwidth unless video quality is severely compromised as seen on channel 1 in San Jose.
Can the current ATSC OTA ever do true 1080p? I noticed 1080i is the maximum.
post #8864 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

Can the current ATSC OTA ever do true 1080p? I noticed 1080i is the maximum.


1080P is not supported in ATSC. If you want 1080P, you'll have to get it from a satellite or cable provider.
post #8865 of 9442
@dj4monie,

Sometimes, cheap antennas actually picks-up VHF-Hi signals on the cable instead of the antenna. You might want to try running your cable horizontally across the window instead of vertically down the window to see if it makes a difference. This may work since all the TV stations transmit horizontal polarization.
Edited by retiredengineer - 6/26/12 at 7:48pm
post #8866 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post

1080P is not supported in ATSC. If you want 1080P, you'll have to get it from a satellite or cable provider.
Wait, I thought satellite and cable have lower picture quality compared to OTA. Or did satellite and cable finally improved their quality to match/bypass OTA's picture quality?
post #8867 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Loudin View Post

The measurements documented at hdtvexpert showed that the Leaf and Flatwave were NOT effective hi-VHF antennas. The channel 8 they picked up was very, very strong, so that did not prove anything. Antennas need to be at least 1/8th of a signal's wavelength to start to be effective in collecting that signal. Wavelength and frequency are inversely related - as one gets bigger, the other gets smaller. Hi-VHF signals have longer wavelengths, so antennas have to be physically bigger to be able to pick up those channels. That is physics. Don't let the reception of 7 fool you - that was a lucky break.
If you are serious about getting 7, 9, 11, and 13, you will need to start with one of the three antennas I recommended. They are all hi-VHF/UHF models, so you won't have to worry about combining.

Can't use Rabbit Ears, have some not practical no place to put them and still get all the channels. Get all UHF, spotty VHF 4ft off the ground. That's the highest I can go in this room. Too expensive to put one outside..

Flatwave clear is available at Costco, I may try that. That antenna is physically bigger than my current one. The largest RCA Flat is the 1650 which runs about $34 (Amazon), not sure its worth it. RCA's web site suggest the smaller 1450R (Amplified), 1550R (Amplified) and 1650R I already mentioned. I can make Fry's price match it, they keep most of these in stock at the Burbank store. I returned the other one and all of them are gone (1450, 1550).

I am not debating you on physics I get what your saying about wave lengths but the REALITY in today's world is not everybody can get a outdoor antenna or even mount any type of outdoor antenna. I am unemployed many things are cost prohibitive. If I complained about $105 Converter which is what I need to combine signals with HD DirecTV, I won't be spending $70 on Terk's version of the Silver Sensor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by retiredengineer View Post

@dj4monie,
Sometimes, cheap antennas actually picks-up VHF-Hi signals on the cable instead of the antenna. You might want to try running your cable horizontally across the window instead of vertically down the window to see if it makes a difference. This may work since all the TV stations transmit horizontal polarization.

Nope it didn't help, 9.1 had a partial picture, no audio. 9.1 sometimes with the antenna turned flat and outward facing south.
post #8868 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

Wait, I thought satellite and cable have lower picture quality compared to OTA. Or did satellite and cable finally improved their quality to match/bypass OTA's picture quality?

You're mixing and confusing different subjects. Don't get hung up on the drivel put out by marketing departments.

1080P and 1080i are the same resolution, just different ways of displaying each picture frame. The cable and sat providers still need to deal with their bandwidth capacity limitations just as do broadcasters, so compression still comes into play regardless of the native display format. Just because the service providers have the capability to do 1080P doesn't mean they'll use it to its fullest potential. For now, if you want ensured 1080P display format, use a BR disk. A lot of the available content available to the broadcast industry wasn't created in a 1080P format anyway.

The potential picture quality differential lies mostly in the retransmission of the local signals over the service provider's platform and depends on several variables. For example, if the provider's head-end uses an antenna to capture the local broadcast, it still has the possibility of compression losses as the signal is shaped and then stuffed to their "pipe" for distribution to their paying customers. Some do a very good job (I can't tell the difference in PQ between d* and my antenna signals, for example) while other historically have not. YMMV depending on the provider.
post #8869 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post

You're mixing and confusing different subjects. Don't get hung up on the drivel put out by marketing departments.
1080P and 1080i are the same resolution, just different ways of displaying each picture frame. The cable and sat providers still need to deal with their bandwidth capacity limitations just as do broadcasters, so compression still comes into play regardless of the native display format. Just because the service providers have the capability to do 1080P doesn't mean they'll use it to its fullest potential. For now, if you want ensured 1080P display format, use a BR disk. A lot of the available content available to the broadcast industry wasn't created in a 1080P format anyway.
The potential picture quality differential lies mostly in the retransmission of the local signals over the service provider's platform and depends on several variables. For example, if the provider's head-end uses an antenna to capture the local broadcast, it still has the possibility of compression losses as the signal is shaped and then stuffed to their "pipe" for distribution to their paying customers. Some do a very good job (I can't tell the difference in PQ between d* and my antenna signals, for example) while other historically have not. YMMV depending on the provider.
Ah thanks! FYI, my family most likely are getting Time Warner Cable (TWC) digital (no analog). Hopefully, its picture quality will be good as OTA.
post #8870 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectSHO89 View Post

1080P is not supported in ATSC. If you want 1080P, you'll have to get it from a satellite or cable provider.

Actually 2 of the 18 DTV formats defined in the ATSC standard are for 1080p resolution. Just not used by any broadcaster as of yet.

From the Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Television_Systems_Committee_standards#MPEG-2

ATSC Standard A/53 Part 4:2009 (MPEG-2 Video System Characteristics)
Res.-1920 x 1080; AR-16:9; Pixel AR-Square; Scanning-Progressive; FR-23.976/24 Hz or 29.97/30 Hz.
post #8871 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoTatII View Post

Actually 2 of the 18 DTV formats defined in the ATSC standard are for 1080p resolution. Just not used by any broadcaster as of yet.
From the Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Television_Systems_Committee_standards#MPEG-2

ATSC Standard A/53 Part 4:2009 (MPEG-2 Video System Characteristics)
Res.-1920 x 1080; AR-16:9; Pixel AR-Square; Scanning-Progressive; FR-23.976/24 Hz or 29.97/30 Hz.
Interesting. I wonder why no one yet.
post #8872 of 9442
HoTat,

Thanks for pointing that out. I do know that no broadcasters use it so I made the assumption it wasn't supported.
post #8873 of 9442
@dj4monie, I don't think it will be worth your while to fool with any of the other indoor flat designs. If you want to improve your VHF, you'll have to invest in some type of compact log-Yagi design. I gather that one of your challenges is buying from somewhere that can take returns. I have some other small-ish, less than $40 recommendationis, but I don't see them listed on Fry's website. The other challenge would be finding a place to hang them. Maybe you can dangle from the ceiling?

The cheapest is the AntennaCraft AC9 that can be had for around $20. It's 30 inches long and the largest element is 98 inches across. Next would be the Winegard HD7000R, about $25, 33 inches long and 100 inches across. The third is the Winegard FreeVision FV-HD30, about $35. I'm not 100% sold on this design, but it is wall-mountable - 21 inches wide by 18 inches high.

The only other avenue worth considering is a do-it-yourself bowtie array that's documented here. This design has proven to be modestly sensitive to high-VHF so long as it has a reflector. It's a pretty simple design to build, but you can order a kit if you like for $30 or so shipped.
post #8874 of 9442
Is it me or a lot of So. CA people have rooftop antennae these days? Or maybe I never really noticed/paid attention in the past. Even the buildings near the 10 FWY in downtown L.A. have roof top antenna (wonder how they are with all those vehicles going by!). smile.gif
Edited by phildaant - 7/10/12 at 8:47pm
post #8875 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

Is it me or a lot of So. CA people have rooftop antennae these days? Or maybe I never really noticed/paid attention in the past. smile.gif

I haven't paid much attention either, but it seems that nearly everyone in my immediate area must be using cable/satellite only. I have not noticed anyone else wuth OTA antennas in the neighborhood.
post #8876 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarrisonS View Post

I haven't paid much attention either, but it seems that nearly everyone in my immediate area must be using cable/satellite only. I have not noticed anyone else wuth OTA antennas in the neighborhood.
I noticed a few more houses have them in my old home area. Same for on my way to L.A. and back.

Speaking of the new home area, more attempts done to get better OTA feeds at the new house with photos. tonight (yep, they still won't put it above the roof :P):
http://zimage.com/~ant/MiCasa2/RCAandCMantennaeAboveKitchenNonPatioWindow1.jpg
http://zimage.com/~ant/MiCasa2/RCAandCMantennaeAboveKitchenNonPatioWindow2.jpg
CM 4228HD antenna managed to get over 100 channels again tonight and recently in this position. RCA ANT751 was OK tonight, but we moved it to where CM was sitting (took it down) and it got decent (70, 107, and 111 [big jumps in numbers]). We are trying to get the unreturnable RCA ANT751 in a better spot so we can return that huge CM antenna before its return date arrives. No winds tonight. I am still suspicious since a few channels are sometimes unstable and/or unlockable like KSCI18, KTLA5, KABC7, etc.). This was after 8 PM PDT. Oh and that surprisingly San Diego's ABC channel, that was seen last week, is gone now. Heh. I wonder if it is worth trying to merge both of these antennae feeds together.

Questions: Does it matter what vertical angle and RCA ANT751 supposed to be upside down or not for optimal feeds? It doesn't seem to matter? I know someone said CM one should be tilted back about 10% degrees or so, but does that apply to RCA ANT751 too?

--

7/7/2012 9:52 PM PDT:

More again today. It looks like we're going to keep that CM 4228HD antenna since we still failed with RCA ANT751. Also, I took and added several more photo(graph)s to share: http://zimage.com/~ant/MiCasa2/ ...

Both Zeinth DTT900 converter box and Digital Prism portable DTV can get about 110 channels (including KFMB's channel 8 and KGTV's channel 10) in the best room -- still need to fix the other rooms with weaker signals [lose about 30 channels and more unstable feeds [probably need preamps or new coax cables from the previous owners with their Dish service]). We'll see how long "stable" OTA feeds this will last. The weather was nice and no winds. I hope it doesn't get worse than what we got! :P

I also discovered that Digital Prism loves to pick up those encrypted Airbox (channel 30-xxx) and analog (e.g., snowy channel 12) channels.

--

PRE-AMP(LIFIER)S QUESTIONS:

Also, does anyone know where can one get an OTA pre-amp(lifier) that is returnable in local retail stores like Radio Shack (only seems to carry regular amps), Best Buy, Costco, Walmart, Sears, Fry's Electronics, etc.?
Edited by phildaant - 7/7/12 at 9:52pm
post #8877 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADTech View Post

The local ION station is transmitting their signals.
Airbox's home page just says "Coming soon", but a simple Google search using "*.* site:www.airbox.com" will show a lot of their content.
I noticed only this portable Digital Prism ATSC DTV detects these encrypted Airbox and analog channels. Zeinth DTT900 converter box never does. Weird design on this portable TV I guess, but then I noticed Zeinth converter box picked up some audio only channels (says that on the screen too) for radio. :/
post #8878 of 9442
Is there a suggestion for an indoor antenna to get 31.4?

TVFool:
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29&q=id%3d9900f93a4184a3

I am trying to help a family friend get a stable signal year-round. My understanding is that with their current indoor antenna (uhf loop + rabbit ears), this channel only comes in during cooler/cloudy days. Once it is hot/dry, the signal is zero. Sounds to me like an outdoor antenna might be required, but I am just guessing here. Plus, something outdoor is not what they want.

Thanks.
post #8879 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by WackyPacks View Post

Is there a suggestion for an indoor antenna to get 31.4?

I am trying to help a family friend get a stable signal year-round. My understanding is that with their current indoor antenna (uhf loop + rabbit ears), this channel only comes in during cooler/cloudy days. Once it is hot/dry, the signal is zero. Sounds to me like an outdoor antenna might be required, but I am just guessing here. Plus, something outdoor is not what they want.
Thanks.

My daughter lives in Irvine 40 miles away from Mt. Wilson and she uses a Terk HDTVi indoor antenna. She gets all the full power local stations. The antenna also has favorable reviews. Since your friend lives a lot closer, and TVFool says 31.4 is a strong signal, there shouldn't be any problems receiving 31.4. The antenna is also more directional so it will reject multipath interference a lot better than a UHF loop.
post #8880 of 9442
Quote:
Originally Posted by WackyPacks View Post

Is there a suggestion for an indoor antenna to get 31.4?
TVFool:
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29&q=id%3d9900f93a4184a3
I am trying to help a family friend get a stable signal year-round. My understanding is that with their current indoor antenna (uhf loop + rabbit ears), this channel only comes in during cooler/cloudy days. Once it is hot/dry, the signal is zero. Sounds to me like an outdoor antenna might be required, but I am just guessing here. Plus, something outdoor is not what they want.
Thanks.
There is also a translator (transmitter mirror) of channel 31x in La Habra Heights, CA 90631 since I live 0.5 miles SW from it. You can try facing that direction.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Local HDTV Info and Reception
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Los Angeles, CA - OTA