View Full Version : Free off-air antenna?
Horsnuts
09-23-03, 06:43 PM
Say I buy the 811 when it comes out. Will Dish provide an off-air antenna for me to view my local HD if I request it? And will the programming info for the HD locals be integrated with the sattelite channel guide?
Say I buy the 811 when it comes out. Will Dish provide an off-air antenna for me to view my local HD if I request it? And will the programming info for the HD locals be integrated with the sattelite channel guide?
I've never heard of them doing this, but you can find HD-OTAs at www.terk.com
dtcarson
09-23-03, 09:20 PM
So according to antennaweb.org, to get my networks in 'digital' [not sure if that means HD], I would want a yellow antenna. Terk has got a TV42 or TV44 antenna that clips onto my satellite itself, and looks like it uses my existing sat wiring to get to the receiver? Would I still need an OTA box if I have a digital/HDTV?
http://www.terk.com/pdfs/HDTV-LK.pdf
rollua1
09-23-03, 10:36 PM
I would get this .
http://www.tvantenna.com/products/tvreception/tvantennas/winegard/HD-8200P.html
freaktx
09-24-03, 07:26 AM
Dish *did* install an off-air antenna for my HD channels when I got my 6000 under the current promotion, free-of-charge. It's mounted on top of my chimney, which is too high for me to adjust it myself, unfortunately. I don't think it's pointed correctly, and it's unamplified, so the signal could be better. I get about 3 of my Atlanta locals in HD using it.
In contrast, I plugged in an old set of Philips amplified rabbit ears (with a UHF element), and have been able to get all of my local channels crisply except for the VHF station, WXIA (any tips on this would be much appreciated). I'm probably 15-20 milesfrom most of the transmitters, so I find the results pretty impressive, overall - the stations I do get are pretty stable in the 80% range.
So according to antennaweb.org, to get my networks in 'digital' [not sure if that means HD], I would want a yellow antenna. Terk has got a TV42 or TV44 antenna that clips onto my satellite itself, and looks like it uses my existing sat wiring to get to the receiver? Would I still need an OTA box if I have a digital/HDTV?
http://www.terk.com/pdfs/HDTV-LK.pdf
First off, I've not heard good things about Terk products. I've read and experienced better results with Channel Master and others say that Radio Shack products work for them ... As for rcvg digital content (SD & HD), you will need a tuner unless your TV has a built in HD tuner. The 811 will serve as a tuner or you can purchase a HD tuner. Zenith & Samsung both sell realtively low cost HD tuners. I have a Samsung T151 that I purchased off of e-Bay for $250. I think there're about $175 now.
If you want HD, make certain that your TV is HD ready. If it has component inputs, then it more than likely HD ready.
dtcarson, by the way ... HD is digital. SD (standard def) is digital too, but not as good as HD. Here in ATL, all of the locals broadcast in digital, but not everything is HD. Here's the rank order (IMO) for viewing OTA ...
1. Analog
2. SD
3. HD
To get SD & HD, you need a tuner ...
Cyclone
09-24-03, 11:48 AM
Terk antennas have a bad repuation. I use Radio Shack stuff, cause they are local and do the job. Plus you can return them no questions asked.
the RS 15-1171 Digital Cable amplifier works great for OTA HTDV boosting. I can now get a few Baltimore stations that I would have never been able to get without it.
Horsnuts
09-24-03, 04:20 PM
Thanks for the replies everyone. I've heard that if you request the antenna for local HD they will give you one. It's one of those things they don't talk about much. Of course you probably have to have a 6000u w/8vsb to get one, and the situation might be the same for the 811 when it arrives. I have a JVC 56wp74 now and im itching to get HD to it. As for the above mentioned, this is just what i've heard!!
I've heard that if you request the antenna for local HD they will give you one. It's one of those things they don't talk about much.I was surprised when you first asked, and am surprised to hear this. I can't imagine what they could be giving out that would meet everyone's needs, nor could I imagine them offering more than a couple of choices, at most.
Please let us know if you get anything and what it is.
x
I'll agree with the others that have found Terk's HDTV antennas no better than mediocre. I like the Channel Master 4248. It's inexpensive and works great.
It is important to understand your local conditions when you purchase an OTA antenna. First of all there are no HD antennas. Analog or digital makes no difference to the antenna. If you live in a moderate climate without a lot of ice snow and high winds, then the Radio Shack antennas will likely work fine for you. If you are in an area that has heavier weather then Channel Master and Winegard make more rugged antennas. Depending on how far you are from the transmitting tower and whether you have to rotate to get various channels also will affect the decision. The most unobtrusive antennas are the 2 bay and 4 bay bow tie antennas. They have excellent front to back ratios and very high gain. Large Yagis are also good if you are 50 miles or more away from the signal source. If all you need is UHF then don't get an all band antenna as you can get a much better antenna for less money if it is UHF only. Mail order may be cheaper but buying from a local guy may allow you to return it if it doesn't perform as you would expect. The antennas that clip onto your Dish are really for markets where the stations are relatively close. They may work and they may not. Terk is an interesting subject. They have a bunch of "unique" antennas and they charge a premium price. Most of the reports indicate that they are not worth the extra cost. If you can get your signals on rabbit ears then a Terk will likely work for you but so would a $20 Radio Shack bow tie. The channel master 4248 is an excellent antenna and probably one of the more praised antennas in the various HD forums.
..Doyle (KG6MY)
First of all there are no HD antennas. Analog or digital makes no difference to the antenna.That's obviously true, but digital TV tuners can be more sensitive to multipath. So many people are finding that where a somewhat less directional log-periodic worked fine with analog TV, they have to switch to a more directional yagi (and add a rotor, in some cases) to get DTV. Some of the antennas I've seen labeled as "HDTV" are yagis (though "fashion" antennas like Terks don't seem to have any particularly characteristic beyond a higher price tag).
x
If all you need is UHF then don't get an all band antenna as you can get a much better antenna for less money if it is UHF only.I've replaced an OK all-band with a nice ChannelMaster 4038 UHF, since *most* of my digital stations are UHF. But one is not: KNTV (analog ch 11, digital ch 12). Which leads me to a question:
I saw mentioned on a forum somewhere that many stations with their analog signal on VHF are using UHF for their digital signal on a provisional basis, and will migrate their digital signal down to theit VHF channel when they phase out analog. Is any of this true? Specifically:
1. Is it true that many/most/all stations with VHF analog will eventually move their UHF digital signal down to the analog channel?
2. Is it true that they would abandon the UHF channel?
3. Is it true that analog will be phased out at some planned date?
I sure hope not (on point 2), because I really like having a nice small UHF-only antenna.
x
I am also in the Bay Area in Sunnyvale and I have a long Radio Shack UHF only Yagi. I still get KNTV-12 off of the side of the Yagi with no problem. However, you can buy a small antenna for Ch 12 and couple that into your coax along with your UHF antenna. Most of the UHF/VHF antennas tend to be rather large. I tend not to agree with the statement about multipath being worse on digital because it is easy to see on an analog signal whenever a plane flies over the signal gets fuzzy or filled with lines. With Digital you don't see that. Now and then you will see a short bit of localized pixelization in the picture but rarely a complete dropout of the signal.
I don't think they will be moving back to those low channels as the FCC has plans for that lower spectrum. Channels 2-6 are between 59 and 88 MHz and I think there are definite plans for those frequencies to be used in another service. As to channels 7-13, which are between 179 and 216 MHz, I am not sure. Analog will be phased out but the date has been moved back to 2006 or 2008 (not sure). It is not trivial for them to move from VHF to UHF and back to VHF. The transmitting antennas are quite different and the transmitters are different. Even in a TV set you have a separate VHF and UHF tuner as it is too hard to make a continuously tuned receiver. Much easier to have 2 separate tuners.
..Doyle
I tend not to agree with the statement about multipath being worse on digital because it is easy to see on an analog signal whenever a plane flies over the signal gets fuzzy or filled with lines. With Digital you don't see that. Now and then you will see a short bit of localized pixelization in the picture but rarely a complete dropout of the signal.It depends a lot on location. Where I'm located, we have permanent multipath from tall structures. Some stations I'm barely able to get at all, even with the ChannelMaster UHF yagi, and dropouts are frequent and long-lasting (actually, longer than the short periods of locked reception). These "static" multipath sources are much less annoying on analog, because they appear as permanent ghosts fairly close to the primary signal. I can see where multipath from planes and such would be much more annoying on analog than digital.
x
you can buy a small antenna for Ch 12 and couple that into your coax along with your UHF antenna.Excellent suggestion. I'll give it a try.
x
1. Is it true that many/most/all stations with VHF analog will eventually move their UHF digital signal down to the analog channel?
2. Is it true that they would abandon the UHF channel?
3. Is it true that analog will be phased out at some planned date?
x
1. Good question. Why don't you call the stations and find out. If you do find out, please post it here so we can plan the types of antennas that we will need in the future.
2. They must get rid of one or the other after the transition phase. VHF uses less power than UHF and this could be a factor.
3. That's the plan.
A small, high gain antenna for channels 7-13 http://www.starkelectronic.com/wya1713.htm
X
Sounds like you might be in a location where you don't have a clear line of sight to Sutro Tower. That is a bit of a bummer as having them all on one tower makes it pretty straightforward from an antenna standpoint if you are line of sight. If indeed you are getting only reflected signals, you may want to try moving your antenna several feet one way or another if possible. Since the majority of signals come from Sutro and they are all UHF, the wavelengths are relatively short and should behave somewhat similiarly to the reflectors causing the multipath. Normally one would use a more directional antenna to improve the signal to reflected signal ratio. In your case you may have to experiment with even using two antennas and coupling them together. If you do this, the feedlines between the antennas and the splitter/combiner should be the same length to prevent signal cancellation. I have not yet received my 6000 and VSB so I can't compare the tuner quality with that of my other 2 HD receivers. Clearly the tuner in the MYHD card is much better than my older Unity Motion HDR1000. I used to have lots of breakup with Ch 12 on the old receiver and even added the Channel 12 antenna to no avail. Once I setup the MYHD card, I could get 12 easily with the signal coming in at a right angle to my UHF Yagi. Which City are you in?
..Doyle
scooper
09-26-03, 10:06 AM
One correction to DoyleS comments - By the end of the NTSC to ATSC transition, the TV channels will range from the current channel 2 - 51. DTV stations on lower VHF may have problems , or reception of them maybe more problematic than upper VHF (7-13) / UHF (14-51) channels.
Sounds like you might be in a location where you don't have a clear line of sight to Sutro Tower.It's possible. We're near the bay in Menlo Park. I'm not sure, but we might be in the shadow of the San Carlos ridge. One clue is that *everyone* in our neighborhood has serious antennas mounted high up. It's what got most people here onto cable or dbs in the first place. But I'm going to fiddle with the antenna this weekend and see what happens.
In your case you may have to experiment with even using two antennas and coupling them together.I'm familiar with this trick, but it can bring in as much multipath as it eliminates. It's impossible to predict; you just have to fiddle.
2. They must get rid of one or the other after the transition phase. VHF uses less power than UHF and this could be a factor.I think Doyle's point that there's some expense involved in shifting might make some stations stay on UHF, but anyone who's already got an upper-half VHF transmitter could move their digital signal there. I'll see what I can find out.
A small, high gain antenna for channels 7-13 http://www.starkelectronic.com/wya1713.htmYup, that would work nicely. But I can actually get 12 with rabbit ears, so I don't think I need a 100" boom! On the other hand, maybe I should put up a ChannelMaster 4242 and just be done with it :-).
Bobby94928
09-26-03, 06:32 PM
I think Doyle's point that there's some expense involved in shifting might make some stations stay on UHF, but anyone who's already got an upper-half VHF transmitter could move their digital signal there. I'll see what I can find out.
KGO in San Francisco has already commited to using channel 7 as their digital station when the transition happens. It uses less power and has a wider footprint then the current channel 24.
KGO in San Francisco has already commited to using channel 7 as their digital station when the transition happens. It uses less power and has a wider footprint then the current channel 24.This is pretty useful info, as it seems to imply that they will abandon their UHF signal. On one hand, that should be good news for me, because I should have less problems with reception. On the other, it will mean I need to put up a VHF antenna, and it will just be hard to fit one in my current location.
I have to say, it's not easy being on the bleeding edge. If it's not E* jerking us around with DVR fees, inconsistent offers, new antennas and migrating content, it's the OTA broadcasters. Maybe I should just bag the whole HDTV thing until things all wash out in 5 years (and the prices come down).
x
This is pretty useful info, as it seems to imply that they will abandon their UHF signal. On one hand, that should be good news for me, because I should have less problems with reception. On the other, it will mean I need to put up a VHF antenna, and it will just be hard to fit one in my current location.
I have to say, it's not easy being on the bleeding edge. If it's not E* jerking us around with DVR fees, inconsistent offers, new antennas and migrating content, it's the OTA broadcasters. Maybe I should just bag the whole HDTV thing until things all wash out in 5 years (and the prices come down).
x
I was wondering what kind of antenna picks up television and radio signals within a 90 mile radius. I don't want 3 antennas on my roof I'd like just one that would get tv(both sd and digital), and radio (both sd and digital) stations within 90-100 miles. In my area this would mean I could get stations from morgantown, zanesville, parkersburg, cleveland ,Pittsburgh, Youngstown area. The antennaweb.org doesn't cover radio stations and doesn't tell me what specific antenna to look for. Any help would be appreciated.
thanks
I was wondering what kind of antenna picks up television and radio signals within a 90 mile radius.Not too many for UHF, that's for sure. Check www.winegard.com and www.channelmaster.com. Even their big arrays will be challenged at 90 miles for UHF.
x
Not too many for UHF, that's for sure. Check www.winegard.com and www.channelmaster.com. Even their big arrays will be challenged at 90 miles for UHF.
x
I found one that will do 100 vhf and 65+ uhf but how far will it go with fm? I want one that I can pick up the cleveland stations with. Cleveland is 75-80 mile northwest of here.
scooper
09-27-03, 03:03 PM
If anything - FM is even easier to get long range than VHF / UHF - and any standard VHF antenna should also receive FM.
If anything - FM is even easier to get long range than VHF / UHF - and any standard VHF antenna should also receive FM.
so an antenna that will pick up vhf from 100 miles and uhf from 60+ should get every fm station within 150 miles?
so an antenna that will pick up vhf from 100 miles and uhf from 60+ should get every fm station within 150 miles?150 is pushing it, but it's possible. I remember being able to get New York City stations from Montauk Point, which is about 120 miles east, but not too well.
x
150 is pushing it, but it's possible. I remember being able to get New York City stations from Montauk Point, which is about 120 miles east, but not too well.
x
Clevleand is 90-120 miles from us should I be able to get their stations?
Clevleand is 90-120 miles from us should I be able to get their stations?Is Cleveland in motion, so on some days it's 90 miles and on others it's 120?
Sorry, couldn't resist :-). I know the Cuyahoga has been a "hot" topic for a long time :-).
As far as getting Cleveland stations, I wouldn't think so, but it's possible. Depends on too many things to know without trying.
x
vBulletin® v3.7.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.