'Clueless' needs help!

necktie · 30-Oct-2010, 10:31 PM

I've always had cable, but have moved and think this would be a perfect time to go 'back' to a real antenna. But I haven't a clue what I'm looking for or how to do it. What kind of antenna is best ?
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...a543652b2d1641

We are in mid-Florida. Obviously it's flat terrain, but the antenna would be blocked on the north and east by 40 foot oaks. We rarely watch TV, but when we do it is for weather and news, so getting only 2 or 3 channels would be just fine. Hopefully we could accomplish this without too much of a financial outlay. We have 1 TV, and it is a digital.

Thanx so much for the help!

John Candle · 30-Oct-2010, 11:50 PM

Do you live in a house one story two story. . Do you live in a apt. / condo if so what floors first floor second floor third floor etc. .

necktie · 31-Oct-2010, 12:21 AM

John,

Thanx for the quick response!

It is a double wide manufactured home, built around 1980. Don't know if it makes a difference, but the house has a 'roofover' (a second level of roofing about 6" over the original roof).

Tigerbangs · 31-Oct-2010, 3:06 AM

The Orlando stations are about 55 miles northwest of your location, which would constitute a fringe-area situation: signals are available but are weak, and call for a sizable antenna mounted on your roof. In this case, I would suggest using a Winegard HD-7696P or an Antennacraft HBU-44 aimed at at 115 degrees, as measured by your compass. get as much altitude as possible, and you'll see all of the major Orlando stations.

Here is an antenna installation guide to help you along:
http://manuals.solidsignal.com/AntInstallGuide.pdf

John Candle · 31-Oct-2010, 9:05 AM

Read and understand this about Real channels and Virtual channels , http://forum.tvfool.com/showthread.php?t=695

ADTech · 31-Oct-2010, 12:57 PM

If all you want is several stations to watch for news and weather, you can simplify the system with a more compact UHF-only antenna such as the DB8. You will loose NBC on WESH's channel 11 signal, but they have applied for and received permission to construct a UHF 18 LD translator in Orange City. Once that facility is operational, you'll get all your Orlando stations with the DB8.

Situate your antenna so if has the least-obstructed view on the heading to Orlando's towers to your east-south-east. At 50+ miles, trees in the line of sight in last several hundred yards can turn the odds of reliable reception sharply against you.

Include a low-noise preamplifier in your setup for improved margin.

necktie · 31-Oct-2010, 3:56 PM

Thanx for all the opinions and comments. Guess I'll have to think on it a bit to decide whether to invest in this or not. Again, thank you.

John Candle · 31-Oct-2010, 10:26 PM

More and more people are going with a tv antenna and then getting ROKU / NETFLIX for $10 dollars a month. ROUKU is the little box that receives streaming movies and tv shows.

Tigerbangs · 1-Nov-2010, 2:31 PM

The DB-8 will cost about as much as the HD-7696P and you will have to wait for the NBC station to build out it's UHF transmitter: if you use the Winegard< you'll install it and see everything you want TODAY.

ADTech · 1-Nov-2010, 11:10 PM

They asked for a couple of channels for news and weather and were given an option that met their clearly stated needs, not your opinion of what they should have.

A refurbished DB8 is about $65 delivered from Solid Signal (a new one is less than $80 shipped), either of the 7-69 antennas you recommended is about $100 shipped from Solid Signal. Both of the 7-69 antennas are 9 1/2 to 10' feet long vs the 8-bay bowtie at less than 3' tall by 4' wide by 5 inches deep. Once the channel 18 translator gets built, the bulky back half of the 7-69 antenna is obsolete except as a bird perch.

We'll let the original poster decide which route to take based on their desire whether to include WESH now vs later.

Tigerbangs · 2-Nov-2010, 4:29 PM

If someone is going to go to all of the trouble to install an outdoor antenna, why wouldn't they opt to get all of the channels in a town that are available to them: the cost difference is inconsequential. I am not selling anything here except the satisfaction of the poster, can ADTech make the same claim?

John Candle · 4-Nov-2010, 5:40 AM

I vote for the HD-7695P . Digital television channel assignments are still in flux and will be for a long time.

Tower Guy · 4-Nov-2010, 2:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADTech

You can simplify the system with a more compact UHF-only antenna such as the DB8.

I would echo Tigerbangs feelings to try to pick up more than a few stations. In my opinion the antenna industry should be working to solve VHF reception problems, not perpetuate them.

ADTech · 4-Nov-2010, 8:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tower Guy

I would echo Tigerbangs feelings to try to pick up more than a few stations. In my opinion the antenna industry should be working to solve VHF reception problems, not perpetuate them.

Perpetuate them? C'mon now....

The antenna industry already has offered the necessary solutions to VHF reception problems within the industry's capabilities. The industry has made U/V combo and separate U/V antennas available. It's really up to the broadcasters and the FCC to solve the remaining issues. In most cases and with only a few exceptions, the 500 or so broadcasters on VHF allocations CHOSE their current VHF allocation resulting in many markets with a single high-VHF stations. Quite frankly, it is the opinion of many within the industry that these broadcasters chose their own interests over the interest of their viewers, especially in cases where the station had an "in-core" UHF temporary allocation but elected to revert back to high-VHF anyway. Since some VHF stations are still switching back to UHF or are building UHF translators, it appears that some of them are "getting" it, especially for customers with indoors antennas or in areas where VHF power is severely limited due to adjacent market interference. Since the particular station in question in the OP's market is one who is building TWO UHF translators to cover areas otherwise unserviced by their primary signal, I'd have to say that they got the message.

I talk to dozens of customers every week and I tailor my recommendations to their requirements. I offer them the options available to them and what the technical requirements are based on their wants and needs. I don't impose my opinion upon them as to which channels they should choose to receive and I'd suggest, in all fairness, that the customer's requests and wishes be respected, even on these forums. Give the customer the choices and let them make the decision.

Tower Guy · 5-Nov-2010, 3:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADTech

Perpetuate them? C'mon now....

The antenna industry already has offered the necessary solutions to VHF reception problems within the industry's capabilities. The industry has made U/V combo and separate U/V antennas available.

Don't take it personally. I assume that you don't own the company.

The UHF only C2 antenna box says "Consistent gain through the entire DTV channel spectrum" and "Totally engineered for post 2009 DTV frequencies". How do you defend that?

Yes, some broadcasters are switching back to UHF. In my opinion it's not because VHF is bad for DTV, it's because UHF is better for mobile/handheld.

John Candle · 5-Nov-2010, 11:43 PM

Well lets see , lets say that I paid $85.00 combined total for a HD7695P and shipping. And lets say that the antenna lasts 5 years. 1,825 days , so 85.00 divided by 1,825 = 0.04657534 cents per day. And then lets say that the antenna lasts 10 years. 3,650 days , so 85.00 divided by 3,650 days = 0.02328767 cents per day. So now tell me , what are you guys babbling about ??

John Candle · 6-Nov-2010, 12:15 AM

Well lets see , lets say that I paid $85.00 total for a HD7695P and shipping. And lets say that the antenna lasts 5 years. 1,825 days , so 85.00 divided by 1,825 = 0.04657534 cents per day. And then lets say that the antenna lasts 10 years. 3,650 days , so 85.00 divided by 3,650 days = 0.02328767 cents per day. So now tell me , what are you guys babbling about ??

John Candle · 6-Nov-2010, 12:42 AM

And knowing like I do that Tv channel assignments with the FCC are still in flux and are changing , I got thinking that some tv stations might go back to the tv low band channels 2 thru 6. And then I got to thinking that I can buy a Winegard HD7082P ALL CHANNEL ANTENNA for about $110.00 total cost. And then I used the same math and holy smokes , if the antenna lasts 5 years thats 0.06027397 cents per day. And if the antenna lasts 10 years thats 0.03013699 cents per day. So now I understand that I can get the ALL CHANNEL ANTENNA and be ready for any thing.

ADTech · 8-Nov-2010, 5:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tower Guy

Don't take it personally. I assume that you don't own the company.

The UHF only C2 antenna box says "Consistent gain through the entire DTV channel spectrum" and "Totally engineered for post 2009 DTV frequencies". How do you defend that?

Yes, some broadcasters are switching back to UHF. In my opinion it's not because VHF is bad for DTV, it's because UHF is better for mobile/handheld.

No, I don't.

We've now on the third version of the C2 packaging. The second version added a UHF gain curve and UHF polar plot on the rear of the carton but missed correcting the verbiage on the front. Our current black box package accurately identifies the antenna by inserting the term "UHF" into the above expressions. We're correcting mistakes as we can. The current black box has been used in production for about a year.

FWIW, I'm testing a candidate VHF dipole for inclusion/retrofit for the C2 (and other UHF antennas) this week. If used, it will provide a predictable level of high-VHF reception and will help tremendously in many circumstances.

I think that your assessment as to the broadcaster's reasons is a secondary reason. Inability to replicate analog coverage combined with poor indoor reception on VHF are the reasons we hear directly from the broadcasters.

Given the current shenanigans in DC with Genachowski, et al, it all might become a moot point anyway.

Quote:

what are you guys babbling about ??

Oh, the irony!