4228HD Results, or try 91XG (attn:Tigerbangs?)

[Mr Norm]

Hi all,

Here's my current setup and TV Fool Report. Used Tigerbangs' deep fringe recipe before I discovered the old 4228 was now the 4228HD...

TV fool report:
http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...81a3ad31559f57

CM 4228HD (with original harness removed and 2 balun/combiner hack)
CM 7777 Preamp
RG6 Quad cable
CM 9521a rotator
Antenna on tower 30' above ground

"Virtual" channels (plus sub-channels) now receiving with consistent watchable signal:
2.1, 5.1, 7.1, 8.1(PBS), 11.1, 14.1, 17.1(Peachtree), 18.1, 34.1, 36.1, 46.1, 63.1, 69.1

57.1 is weak with careful aim and good weather. I have also picked up a few weaker Atlanta stations by lowering the antenna...(maybe reflection from structures?)

We have hills and a distant mountain to the N-NW. TV fool report suggests Chattanooga should be easy, but I've got nothing. Atlanta seems to be a cinch despite TV fool report.

Question: Should I quit while I'm ahead and be happy with my results? or does the 91XG really have the extra reach that will make a difference?

Thanks to those in the know...

[GroundUrMast]

Based on the TVF report you posted, I would be happy getting four 'real' channels, 33, 51, 16 and 12. Anything else would be 'gravy' given the co-channel interference, low signal level predictions and edge paths.

http://forum.tvfool.com/showthread.php?t=695 is a thread regarding virtual vs real channels.

Any chance there is a discrepancy between the report you posted and your actual location?

[GroundUrMast]

here is a link to a comparison of antennas, including both the CM and AD.

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

I am fairly certain these are original / unmodified.

The differences are channel dependent and on the order of just a couple of dB at most. I expect that you would see little difference changing to the 91XG unless the 'hack' you mentioned has reduced the performance of your CM antenna. If I understand you correctly, the left and right bays of your antenna are joined using two baluns and a reversed 2-way splitter. If so, you could easily be loosing 4 dB or more signal as it passes through those components.

[John Candle]

Many of the channels that you have listed do not exist or are not receivable for any length of time , example 8.1 WVLT -22.3 NM(dB) TROPO - tropo means sky wave in the troposphere and 11.1 WTVM -28.8 TROPO - tropo means sky wave in the troposphere. Are you doing DX and watching the channels as they come in on the tropo skip.

[John Candle]

4228HD hack is like putting 2 , 4 bays back to back. http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=103749

[Tigerbangs]

To answer your question, you are in an area with very few viable stations. Many of the stations that you ARE seeing are likely the result of tropospheric skip, and wouldn't be likely to be reliable 24/7. It does sound as if you are doing well with the 4228, and I believe that switching to an XG-91 won't do a lot for your UHF, and would likely hurt your existing VHF reception. Frankly, you sound as if you are doing about as well as could be possibly expected with what you have.

[Mr Norm]

Thanks for the replies,

I have reposted the report rated at 125 feet to get the channels that I actually receive to appear on the list. I re-verified the location by map and address. Keep in mind the actual antenna height is 30'.

http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...81a3ec33708580

Here are the "clear" channels 24/7 for over the last 15 months or so. does Tropo effect work consistenly that long?

Real channels and call letters
51- WPXA (ION)
33- WNGH (PBS Georgia)
7- WCIQ PBS Alabama
41- WATC (with good weather)
10- WXIA (NBC)
19- WGCL (CBS)
20- WPCH (Peachtree TV)
8- WGTV (PBS Georgia)
27- WAGA (Fox)
25- WATL (My Network)
39- WSB (ABC)
43- WUPA (CW)
48- WUVG (Univision)

Not on report but receiving
44- WHSG (TBN) -30.5 NM @ 57 miles

The hack on my 4228 is not exactly like the setup posted above on digital home (Techluvr). I only removed the factory phasing harness and used the 2 baluns into one combiner. This was supposed to clean up the 4228HD in terms of distance based on Ken Nist's article. I have removed and replaced the factory harness and found a slight improvement across the board with the hack, but not a night and day difference.

It appears all of you have confirmed that I should be very happy with the results in spite of the tvfool report.

Bottom line: Tigerbangs, for me, your original deep fringe recipe still works even with the new 4228HD. Thanks for sharing your experience and expertise. No 91XG for me at least for now.

(Now if we could just add another 20 feet or so maybe Chattanooga...oh nevermind)

If nothing else, maybe someone else can use this information to see some real world reception results from somebody else "out in the sticks."

Thanks again to all for your time and opinion.