Best antenna to get
- Thread starter Clarbear
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 41
- Views 5K
-
WELCOME TO THE NEW SERVER!
If you are seeing this you are on our new server WELCOME HOME!
While the new server is online Scott is still working on the backend including the cachine. But the site is usable while the work is being completes!
Thank you for your patience and again WELCOME HOME!
CLICK THE X IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE BOX TO DISMISS THIS MESSAGE
The configuration you recommend is entirely unsuitable for an application where the Topic Starter (TS) is located within seven miles of the towers.
I agree with harshness, and stated so back in response #17. The TS problem was that he was trying to use a wifi antenna, tuned for the wrong frequency and with the wrong impedance.
BTW, I doubt we will see clarbear again. he hasn't been on for a week now, once we answered his initial questions.
BTW, I doubt we will see clarbear again. he hasn't been on for a week now, once we answered his initial questions.
I agree with harshness, the last thing the TS needs is a high gain long range antenna PLUS an Amp. That is why I suggested an inexpensive FV-30 antenna. It very well may work even with low VHF as close as he is. It will work for now - and if it doesn't work for VHF low in the future - he is only out $35.
Not ATSC 3.0 petr se. It is the spectrum repack that is going on currently. The FCC is busy selling off some UHF spectrum and forcing stations to move to lower frequencies.
But he’ll need a little boy to hold one end of the antenna for best reception.
At least, that’s how it worked when I was growing up. And there was only one little boy in the house....
At least, that’s how it worked when I was growing up. And there was only one little boy in the house....
VHF-low isn't dead, its just pining.
There are markets that are going to be using all but one or two of the VHF-low frequencies after the repack and those markets represent a lot of eyeballs. It looks like the LA market may be using all five VHF-low channels.The ATSC 3.0 stations that are brought online will have to use frequencies that aren't currently in use by DTV. In many markets, that's likely to mean visiting VHF-low. Only after Next-Gen takes over can they return to UHF bandwidth (assuming they feel the need to).
Because Next-Gen isn't mandated, the stations can't just bail on their DTV broadcasts and hope that everyone will upgrade their TVs overnight. Let us never forget the lessons of the mandated DTV conversion and how they might apply to a non-mandated conversion.
Many DTV stations are sufficiently loaded with channels now that the lighthousing concept isn't going to net them the bandwidth needed to put more stations on a single channel unless they convert the HD to SD and that will surely force viewers to use other methods of viewing.
It has been my long-held opinion that if Next-Gen doesn't deliver on the upgraded features (UHD, "immersive sound", etc.) because it is too crowded with subchannels, people won't voluntarily upgrade. The prevailing theories hold that, at least early on, Next-Gen will be limited to just one channel where "premium" UHD (UHD with HDR and WCG) is involved. There are many shapes and sizes of promised chickens (including HD with HDR and WCG) and we haven't seen any eggs yet.
The correct spelling is Winegard.
While a great antenna, it is not the best there is for any and all applications and presenting it as such is a disservice to readers (especially if you present it repeatedly without any evidence to back up your claims).
It is certainly the largest and perhaps most expensive consumer unit on the market but neither of those are attractive attributes.
The Channel Master Masterpiece 100 boasts some awfully good specs and it is smaller (less wind load).
Can a paper clip be used for a wifi antenna or should I get a different antenna for getting the channels and use the wifi when I use the television for the internet?
I am still here. I haven't been on here due to being busy with things. Also I been looking for things that was suggested here on this thread. Since Radio Shack is longer in Milwaukee I have to find a similar store like them to go to.
UPGRADED 2018 VERSION HD Digital TV Antenna Kit - Best 80 Miles Long Range High-Definition with HDTV Amplifier Signal Booster Indoor - Amplified 18ft Coax Cable - Support All TV's - 1080p 4K ready Amazon product ASIN B0776LKFZ7
Does anyone know anything about this. I saw this on Amazon.
Does anyone know anything about this. I saw this on Amazon.
A link would help. I'm not invested enough to do a search on amazon. Probably would be OK. I am using one of those cheap flat antennas on one of my sets up here in Bayside. That's about the same distance north as you are south.
But, it is all very dependent on where you live, type of house construction, nearby power lines and even trees in the way. You just need to experiment.
But, it is all very dependent on where you live, type of house construction, nearby power lines and even trees in the way. You just need to experiment.
Practically speaking, no.
In no case does Wi-fi use the F type coax connector on a TV or tuner. The impedance is wrong (50 ohm .vs. 75 ohm) among other things. The Wi-fi antenna (if the TV is capable) will be mounted somewhere inside the TV casework.
As a general class, these are called "mud flap" antennas. This one is a 50 +/- mile (assuming you can see the flashing lights on the antenna towers) antenna that doesn't do VHF-high particularly well and VHF-low probably not at all. If you're particularly close to the antennas, you'll need to take the amplifier out of the circuit.
Antennas like this are regularly selling for under $20 as part of the Amazon daily deals. Today there's one for $17.99.
TV Antenna Indoor Digital HDTV Antenna, Lxuemlu 50 Miles Rang HD Antenna with Detachable Amplifier Signal Booster and 13FT Coaxial Cable - White Amazon product ASIN B07C77GB8V
Is this similar on what you are saying?
