TV Fool  

Go Back   TV Fool > Over The Air Services > Help With Reception

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 26-Feb-2019, 7:58 PM   #41
rabbit73
Retired A/V Tech
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 2,544
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsgarage View Post
What ways do you know to combine and get the signals in good from both directions?
The best method for you would depend upon how many TVs you have and how many channels you want from both directions (and how much money you are willing to spend). If you want a lot of channels from both directions all combined in one coax, you would have the equivalent of a CATV or cable system. This would involve single channel amplifiers, modulators, and a combiner; very expensive.

Using the custom filters approach has limitations. If you want a lot of channels, you would need many custom filters, and they would have an insertion loss that would affect the weaker channels. Also, there are limitations with adjacent channels. A notch filter for a channel will affect the adjacent channels. Don't forget, many TVs can edit out a channel you don't want by going into the channel menu.

If you want just a few channels from one direction to add to the coax from the main direction, you could add some tuners and modulators to insert them in unused UHF channels. They would be analog and not HD digital, but analog can look better than compressed 480i digital.



Analog can look better than this compressed 480i digital:



The method I favor for your situation would be to run two coax lines to each TV, one for each antenna system. At each TV there would be an A/B switch to select which antenna is desired. If the TVs are not able to add a channel after scan, it would be necessary to rescan after changing direction. To avoid that, you can connect the main antenna to the TV antenna input and connect the other antenna to a separate tuner with its output connected to the TV aux input. With HDMI it could be HD.
__________________
If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
http://www.megalithia.com/elect/aeri...ttpoorman.html

Last edited by rabbit73; 27-Feb-2019 at 4:06 PM.
rabbit73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-Feb-2019, 12:09 AM   #42
Nascarken
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 346
Well thank you rabbit and the channel master rotors are junk!!
And so I experienced the same problem with the RCA.Rotor
That is why yes $300dollars for a Rotor is crazy to spend.
But you do not have that problem when installing a good quality rotor.
And with the 91xg,you need a Rotor to get IT'S full use.
And the best ANTENNA for the uhf.Well good luck and be safe on the roof and look out for power lines when installing an Tv ANTENNA.
Nascarken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-Feb-2019, 12:28 AM   #43
Nascarken
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 346
Yes u might want too see if the low power vhf channels
Or maybe like the fcc suggests use a combination ANTENNA
That does Low&hi,vhf/uhf,with a good quality rotor
That will last year after year after year.
And if you use a channel master amp it does the same thing
And you are not loosing db,insert loss,and it's fm filter.
Nascarken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-Mar-2019, 1:56 AM   #44
bobsgarage
Senior Member
 
bobsgarage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Beach Park IL
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit73 View Post
The best method for you would depend upon how many TVs you have and how many channels you want from both directions (and how much money you are willing to spend). If you want a lot of channels from both directions all combined in one coax, you would have the equivalent of a CATV or cable system. This would involve single channel amplifiers, modulators, and a combiner; very expensive.

Using the custom filters approach has limitations. If you want a lot of channels, you would need many custom filters, and they would have an insertion loss that would affect the weaker channels. Also, there are limitations with adjacent channels. A notch filter for a channel will affect the adjacent channels. Don't forget, many TVs can edit out a channel you don't want by going into the channel menu.

If you want just a few channels from one direction to add to the coax from the main direction, you could add some tuners and modulators to insert them in unused UHF channels. They would be analog and not HD digital, but analog can look better than compressed 480i digital.


Analog can look better than this compressed 480i digital:


The method I favor for your situation would be to run two coax lines to each TV, one for each antenna system. At each TV there would be an A/B switch to select which antenna is desired. If the TVs are not able to add a channel after scan, it would be necessary to rescan after changing direction. To avoid that, you can connect the main antenna to the TV antenna input and connect the other antenna to a separate tuner with its output connected to the TV aux input. With HDMI it could be HD.
Rabbit,

Thanks for the advice. It looks like my XG91 got damaged this winter. The lower rear reflector is just hanging by what looks like the coax, surprisingly, the reception is still good. Now, I have to get back up the mast some how and service the XG-91.

I have to say, that I'm not impressed with the XG91 durability. My HDB91X seems more solid, at least in the reflector area. The XG91 reflector is like garden fence. And not very well fastened either.


I like your idea of the two coax cable to each TV, not that hard to do.

But, as always, I have rethought the situation. Buying an expensive "box" to block certain signals would be a great idea, but you say expensive. How expensive?

The other idea I have is …

Is there still such a thing as a "omni directional" antenna?

I drive around different towns doing business and I always look up at the rooftops. I still see those antennas.

But, I also see a lot of 8 bays these days. Some masts have two 8 Bays usually one pointing north and one south.

But what's the deal with removing the reflectors?

The reason I ask is that I don't see a lot of co-channels on my TV Fool report:

http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...90382eb6d5dbe3

Well, there are a few.

Just rethinking the whole plan since I have to get up and fix the array.

Would it just be easier to use something that is more omni directional?


Thanks, Bob

Last edited by bobsgarage; 11-Mar-2019 at 1:58 AM.
bobsgarage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-Mar-2019, 2:52 AM   #45
rabbit73
Retired A/V Tech
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 2,544
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsgarage View Post
I like your idea of the two coax cable to each TV, not that hard to do.
It's my favorite; inexpensive, simple, and reliable.
Quote:
But, as always, I have rethought the situation. Buying an expensive "box" to block certain signals would be a great idea, but you say expensive. How expensive?
Thousands of $$$$$ for single channel amplifiers, modulators, balancing attenuators, and a combiner.

If there was an easy inexpensive way to do it, CATV systems wouldn't have to do this:


Quote:
Is there still such a thing as a "omni directional" antenna?
Yes, an Omni receives poorly in all directions. It works OK at some locations.
Quote:
I drive around different towns doing business and I always look up at the rooftops. I still see those antennas.
Yeah, I'm thinking of the UFO type.
https://www.google.com/search?client...nal+TV+antenna

Quote:
But, I also see a lot of 8 bays these days. Some masts have two 8 Bays usually one pointing north and one south.

But what's the deal with removing the reflectors?
Removing the reflector from an 8-bay or 4-bay, makes it bi-directional to receive from the front and rear; just what you might need.







Quote:
Would it just be easier to use something that is more omni directional?
Easier? Yes. Effective? Probably not.

Why don't you put up an Omni to satisfy your curiosity.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg CM 4228HD No Reflector HHH.JPG (78.8 KB, 1128 views)
File Type: jpg CM 4228HD No Reflector HHH Rotated_1.jpg (95.2 KB, 562 views)
__________________
If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
http://www.megalithia.com/elect/aeri...ttpoorman.html

Last edited by rabbit73; 13-Mar-2019 at 12:27 PM.
rabbit73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-Mar-2019, 9:04 PM   #46
Nascarken
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 346
Well you should not have too remove any thing off an ANTENNA when you spend that much money on it $100dollars you should probably tack a look at the new master antenna
With its vhf/uhf and go with the channel master 7778amp check it out RABBIT!!
Nascarken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-Mar-2019, 11:52 PM   #47
ADTech
Antennas Direct Tech Supp
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,932
Quote:
The XG91 reflector is like garden fence. And not very well fastened either.
I can tell you that, in my more than ten years with Antennas Direct, I've had to replace the reflectors on exactly on 91XG. Ironically, it was my own antenna installed on a home that I sold a couple of years ago. A tall, spindly oak tree about 30' from the house came over and slapped the tail end of the antenna during a windstorm.


BTW, your location per the chart, is ideal for one of our C4MAX antennas. Bi-directional right out of the box. I've been recommended reflector-less C2V and C4V antennas for your area along the state line for a long time with very good results.


Quote:
But, I also see a lot of 8 bays these days. Some masts have two 8 Bays usually one pointing north and one south.

But what's the deal with removing the reflectors?
Removing the reflectors eliminates about 3 dB of insertion loss from using a splitter as a combiner plus the problems with phase cancellation is eliminated. The potential drawback is an increased susceptibility to multipath.
__________________
Antennas Direct Tech Support

For support and recommendations regarding our products, please contact us directly at https://www.antennasdirect.com/customer-service.html

Sorry, I'm not a mod and cannot assist with your site registration.

Last edited by ADTech; 12-Mar-2019 at 12:48 AM.
ADTech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-Mar-2019, 4:00 PM   #48
rickbb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 313
I have a 4 bay with no reflector and receive excellent reception from front and back. Back tower is appx 45 miles out and front towers are appx 60 miles out.

I even turned it slightly off line and receive some side towers, although not was well as the front and back towers.
rickbb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-Mar-2019, 4:07 PM   #49
Nascarken
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 346
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADTech View Post
I can tell you that, in my more than ten years with Antennas Direct, I've had to replace the reflectors on exactly on 91XG. Ironically, it was my own antenna installed on a home that I sold a couple of years ago. A tall, spindly oak tree about 30' from the house came over and slapped the tail end of the antenna during a windstorm.


BTW, your location per the chart, is ideal for one of our C4MAX antennas. Bi-directional right out of the box. I've been recommended reflector-less C2V and C4V antennas for your area along the state line for a long time with very good results.


Removing the reflectors eliminates about 3 dB of insertion loss from using a splitter as a combiner plus the problems with phase cancellation is eliminated. The potential drawback is an increased susceptibility to multipath.
Yes that's exactly why I have used both the HDB91,buy SOLiD single is a better made antenna with one less element then the antenna Direct 91xg.With a
Beem with of 60 marking it easier for you too find the broadcasting tower's
And the price is right!!!!
Nascarken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-Mar-2019, 2:56 PM   #50
rabbit73
Retired A/V Tech
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 2,544
Solid Signal's claim of a 60 degree beamwidth for the HDB91X is misleading. They are not using the conventional method of calculating beamwidth. Some people will fall for it.
Quote:
Technical Specifications
Beam width approximately 60 wide (out of 360)
https://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?p=hdb91x

https://www.xtremesignal.com/portfolio-item/hdb91x/





Note that Winegard also uses the -3 dB half-power points to calculate the beamwidths of the 8200U:





You can have an antenna with more gain and narrower beamwidth or an antenna with wider beamwidth and less gain, but you can't have an antenna with more gain and wider beamwidth; the two are mutually exclusive.

Additional gain comes from making the antenna more directional with a narrower beamwidth, which ignores other directions like a searchlight or spotlight. There is no free lunch.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg AD 91XG Spec Data.JPG (59.4 KB, 542 views)
File Type: jpg Winegard HD8200U gain.JPG (66.3 KB, 582 views)
File Type: jpg antenna_beamwidth_diagram_2.jpg (67.7 KB, 528 views)
File Type: jpg HDB91X Field Pattern_2.jpg (116.9 KB, 549 views)
__________________
If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
http://www.megalithia.com/elect/aeri...ttpoorman.html

Last edited by rabbit73; 13-Mar-2019 at 7:08 PM.
rabbit73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-Mar-2019, 5:32 AM   #51
bobsgarage
Senior Member
 
bobsgarage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Beach Park IL
Posts: 184
C4max ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ADTech View Post
I can tell you that, in my more than ten years with Antennas Direct, I've had to replace the reflectors on exactly on 91XG. Ironically, it was my own antenna installed on a home that I sold a couple of years ago. A tall, spindly oak tree about 30' from the house came over and slapped the tail end of the antenna during a windstorm.


BTW, your location per the chart, is ideal for one of our C4MAX antennas. Bi-directional right out of the box. I've been recommended reflector-less C2V and C4V antennas for your area along the state line for a long time with very good results.


Removing the reflectors eliminates about 3 dB of insertion loss from using a splitter as a combiner plus the problems with phase cancellation is eliminated. The potential drawback is an increased susceptibility to multipath.
AD Tech, thanks for the great advice.

I haven't had the chance to see how bad the damage is to my XG91, I just see the reflector hanging, I guess by the coax? So far good reception.



I'll look into the C4MAX. They look like the windload is low.

Funny, I was driving through Kenosha WI, I saw this array:



I know it's not the MAX, but someone got crafty. Actually, I've seen a few of these array near the state line as you say.

And, I thought I saw two C4MAX's combined, somewhere. Easily distinguished by no reflectors, correct?

I always thought they were novelty antennas and overlooked them.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSC00367 (3).JPG (166.8 KB, 501 views)
File Type: jpg 20190314_174400 (2).jpg (72.7 KB, 480 views)

Last edited by bobsgarage; 15-Mar-2019 at 6:02 AM.
bobsgarage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-Mar-2019, 6:04 AM   #52
bobsgarage
Senior Member
 
bobsgarage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Beach Park IL
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit73 View Post
It's my favorite; inexpensive, simple, and reliable.
Thousands of $$$$$ for single channel amplifiers, modulators, balancing attenuators, and a combiner.

If there was an easy inexpensive way to do it, CATV systems wouldn't have to do this:


Yes, an Omni receives poorly in all directions. It works OK at some locations.
Yeah, I'm thinking of the UFO type.

Removing the reflector from an 8-bay or 4-bay, makes it bi-directional to receive from the front and rear; just what you might need.


Easier? Yes. Effective? Probably not.

Why don't you put up an Omni to satisfy your curiosity.
Rabbit,

I have to admit, I did mean Bi-directional, not Omni. I don't know why IO asked about that, the only time I see them is on RV's actually. My bad.

I was thinking Bi-directional.

Last edited by bobsgarage; 15-Mar-2019 at 6:05 AM. Reason: Oops! NOT OMNI !
bobsgarage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-Mar-2019, 12:47 PM   #53
rabbit73
Retired A/V Tech
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 2,544
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsgarage View Post
Rabbit,

I have to admit, I did mean Bi-directional, not Omni. I don't know why IO asked about that, the only time I see them is on RV's actually. My bad.

I was thinking Bi-directional.
Oh, OK; good. Thanks for the clarification, Bob.

Thanks for the new photos.

Please let us know if you make any improvements.

There is one thing I don't like about the Solid Signal Xtreme Signal HDB91X. The coax connector on the balun doesn't make good contact with the center conductor of the coax; it doesn't grasp the wire firmly. I noticed that when I was making resistance measurements of the driven element. I consider that a design defect. I inserted a short length of 18 gauge wire in the connector to make the measurement, which is the same gauge as the center conductor of RG6 coax.







Attached Images
File Type: jpg TestingCoaxTip4_1.jpg (170.6 KB, 439 views)
File Type: jpg HDB91X DE1_2.jpg (122.3 KB, 438 views)
File Type: jpg HDB91X DE2_2.jpg (125.5 KB, 436 views)
File Type: jpg HDB91X DE3_2.jpg (126.4 KB, 466 views)
__________________
If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
http://www.megalithia.com/elect/aeri...ttpoorman.html

Last edited by rabbit73; 15-Mar-2019 at 8:12 PM.
rabbit73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-Mar-2019, 6:49 PM   #54
Nascarken
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 346
Well you see that is why I went with the HDB91 instead of the antenna Direct 91st
And the HDB91 has the same performance as the 91st and I like your set up
But know you need too tack it down and see what happen to it Don t for get IT'S
life time w tee.And if you get 2antennas together on top it will look a lot better than just
One antenna with your hi band vhf ANTENNA
Nascarken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-Mar-2019, 7:37 PM   #55
rabbit73
Retired A/V Tech
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 2,544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nascarken View Post
Well you see that is why I went with the HDB91 instead of the antenna Direct 91st
There is one thing I don't like about the HDB91 (Solid Signal Xtreme Signal HDB91X). The coax connector on the balun doesn't make good contact with the center conductor of the coax; it doesn't grasp the wire firmly.
__________________
If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
http://www.megalithia.com/elect/aeri...ttpoorman.html
rabbit73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-Mar-2019, 12:58 AM   #56
ADTech
Antennas Direct Tech Supp
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,932
Had a lengthy post underway earlier today but my my 2 month-old Dell desktop decided to crash on me with a BSOD and a memory error... so, you get the short answer this evening.


Anyway, the 91XG, like ALL of our antennas, has a lifetime warranty (try that with the Chinese-made stuff to which it has been compared). All customers need to do is contact us, the link is in my signature.


Have a great weekend!
__________________
Antennas Direct Tech Support

For support and recommendations regarding our products, please contact us directly at https://www.antennasdirect.com/customer-service.html

Sorry, I'm not a mod and cannot assist with your site registration.
ADTech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-Mar-2019, 10:30 PM   #57
bobsgarage
Senior Member
 
bobsgarage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Beach Park IL
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit73 View Post
Oh, OK; good. Thanks for the clarification, Bob.

Thanks for the new photos.

Please let us know if you make any improvements.

There is one thing I don't like about the Solid Signal Xtreme Signal HDB91X. The coax connector on the balun doesn't make good contact with the center conductor of the coax; it doesn't grasp the wire firmly. I noticed that when I was making resistance measurements of the driven element. I consider that a design defect. I inserted a short length of 18 gauge wire in the connector to make the measurement, which is the same gauge as the center conductor of RG6 coax.
Hi Rabbit,

Yes, I am listening to the whole thread here.

The 8 Bay idea has me very interested. Your pattern tells me that it could be the answer.

A while back, I saw a 4228 double stacked in this test, can't find it right now,.

AD Tech suggested the C4MAX. Have you done any testing with the C4MAX?

One advantage would be the lesser windload, at least that's what it appears to a layman like myself

Also, I guess my XG91 is a lifetime warranty, that's good. I may warranty it and save it for other uses.

The balun issue is interesting to me. in the automotive industry, that causes major issues. Also known as pin fit.
bobsgarage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-Mar-2019, 8:13 PM   #58
Nascarken
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 346
Well the warranty is good On the antenna Direct 91xg.
I just dount like to return to some one that I have installed
An ANTENNA that has been up for a year later
And the public mad about an ANTENNA falling apart that I suggested to someone!!
That is why I have used both of these antennas Direct&the HDB91.
That has not let me down and it's been 5years on the first one I have
Installed and China yes just like the car's performance BETTER
than the USA grade.

Last edited by Nascarken; 18-Mar-2019 at 1:08 PM.
Nascarken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-Mar-2019, 2:32 AM   #59
bobsgarage
Senior Member
 
bobsgarage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Beach Park IL
Posts: 184
Questions for ADTech

Quote:
Originally Posted by ADTech View Post
Had a lengthy post underway earlier today but my my 2 month-old Dell desktop decided to crash on me with a BSOD and a memory error... so, you get the short answer this evening.


Anyway, the 91XG, like ALL of our antennas, has a lifetime warranty (try that with the Chinese-made stuff to which it has been compared). All customers need to do is contact us, the link is in my signature.


Have a great weekend!

AD Tech, what would you say the wind load is on these C4 / Max antennas?

So, the C4-V-CJM, I have been researching/reading. AD says it's re-engineered from the original C4. What did they do to improve it?

I imagine it has to be better, since its more expensive even without reflectors

Also, you mentioned that it is highly recommended along the WI-IL State line, that must be true since I see a lot of them. I should clarify. I see a lot of the the C4's with reflectors, usually aimed in opposing directions.



Wouldn't they have been smarter to keep both and remove the reflectors? or even just one? Or, is the original C4 useless w/o the reflectors?

My experience has taught me that it's a bad idea to combine antennas pointing in two opposite directions.

I found a decent price for the C-MAX on Amazon, ($120.00) so I was thinking about purchasing one or two.
It also appears they still have some of the original CS4Vs with reflector for $109. Would that be a better deal?

Thanks, Bob

Last edited by bobsgarage; 29-Mar-2019 at 2:07 PM.
bobsgarage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-Mar-2019, 4:31 AM   #60
bobsgarage
Senior Member
 
bobsgarage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Beach Park IL
Posts: 184
Above the antennas video

Above the antennas videos, through Dropbox:


Current set-up
https://db.tt/a5SDMFCqps

Earlier experiment:
https://db.tt/YASaxi2jMR


Last edited by bobsgarage; 26-Mar-2019 at 4:58 AM.
bobsgarage is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Go Back   TV Fool > Over The Air Services > Help With Reception


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT. The time now is 8:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © TV Fool, LLC