Slashdot Mirror

My job involves maintaining commercial TV systems. Most of the sites have some combination of sat/cable channels, IPTV, streaming services, plus local channels over antenna. The clients typically want the major network affiliates - NBC, ABC, FOX, etc - so I don't see too much interesting in their local lineups.

However, I am confident saying this. Your antenna matters bigtime. Especially with the digital switchover and FCC moving spectrum allocations around. I don't want to recommend a particular model (haven't done enough comparison) but you might spend $100+ on a solid DTV antenna.

If you are near a majorish metro area you should pick up at LEAST 10 channels on antenna. Probably more like 30. There is a lookup tool you can use to check the reception:
https://www.tvfool.com/?option...
You put in an address and the height of the antenna and it will give you a list of TV stations you can pick up, plus which direction to point the antenna... it takes into account topography and all kinds of neat stuff.

Sounds like the ads I used to see for antennas for color TV reception. No ordinary black and white antenna would work for color TV!

It's generally UHF now. An older UHF antenna may be fine, though you really need to look at your actual channel frequencies and try to match the antenna to them, at least if your going all out. I believe this is the site I used last time I investigated. link The real channels in my area (i.e. the old numbers) start at technically 13, though 14 is likely the first available. Those channels may of course send several programs. Previously vhf was starting with 2...

Thats correct, there is going to be some terrain loss when it comes to propagation, but it shouldn't be that large of an issue overall with AM. Here's an example of what you're referring to using UHF.

WAPA TV's coverage map.

Unfortunately, I can't find a site that does maps quite like this for anything other than TV, but it shows what terrain can do to a UHF signal.

The difference however between UHF and MW when it comes to propagation is huge. UHF is typically received via Line of Sight and needs massive ERP to get long range vs AM, which can propagate using groundwave as well as skywave (mostly at night. This is why many stations dial down their ERP at night) and can penetrate hills and buildings easier with much less ERP at the tower. Also WAPA AM is low on the AM band which also helps in groundwave and skywave propagation.

In the end we're talking about a 100 mile island and a 10K MW transmitter. Unless there's damage or a design issue with the transmitter antenna then just about any car stereo on the island should get this signal. Especially at night.

For the 29% who don't know OTA TV is free, you should also know there is no such thing as an 'High Definition Antenna'

http://www.tvfool.com/ is very good too. I wished my rural area could get the local channels, but no they get blocked by a stupid small mountain/giant hill, trees, etc. :(

Assuming this means Aereo will have to shut down now.

Actually, it may just mean live streaming of TV is off the table, but DVRing is okay.

Or it could mean you'll have to buy (or rent) an actual DVR and antenna which will be hosted in the data center on your behalf. On the plus side, this could mean the elimination of the geographic restrictions they currently have on the service...

Guess I'll have to figure out a way to get OTA reception, but from all the research I've done, where I live the signal's aren't very strong / reliable.

There are very few places in the US where that's a problem, and I bet Aereo hasn't covered any of them.

The most common problem is people living in multi-story apartments where the landlord can forbid you from installing a rooftop antenna, where reception will be best. Still, if you're above ground level, and have a balcony or just a window facing roughly in the same direction, you've got a hell of a good chance of being able to receive a good TV signal with a proper antenna.

TV Fool is invaluable for finding out if you'll be able to get decent reception:

http://www.tvfool.com/index.ph...

If it reports signal strength greater than -110dBn at your location and at the height you'll be installing the antenna, there's an extremely good chance a relatively inexpensive antenna system like a Winegard 8800 (UHF) will offer you a good signal with minimal drop-outs.

UHF is easier in some ways, while VHF needs a large antenna that might not fit too well in a high-rise apartment, unless it can be attic or ceiling mounted out of the way, but still doable.

Just realize tvfool and my advice is general is NOT perfect. Co-channel interference can knock some channels out of contention, when they would otherwise be strong enough.

I've made somewhat of a hobby of OTA TV, so maybe the problem is your antenna. It's possible that your local station transitioned to a UHF band and your antenna isn't appropriate anymore. You can check http://www.tvfool.com/index.ph... to see what you should be able to get.

Depends on which part of Houston you're in as 34's one of the low power stations. They're owned Mako Communications, a company in Corpus Christi that my sister works for.

I'm in Fresno, about 4 miles SE of the broadcast towers in Missouri City - I can see them from my backyard. Reception for 34 was marginal when I was first testing out my setup. After I moved the antenna into the attic it came in just fine. A couple months later I switched to a rooftop antenna as I was having problems with Fox 26 breaking up all the time. Neither antenna is powered.

TVfool has some online tools that might help. I also follow this Houston DTV Blog, though they've not posted anything since May.

They just need a directional antenna. I have line of sight to the CN Tower, so the Canadian channels come in fine. Buffalo's at least 90 degrees out from there where I am. Use the mapping tool on http://www.tvfool.com/ to see what you need.

NOAA Weather Radio should be receivable anywhere in CONUS and there are decent radios to be had (that will activate automatically during severe weather events) for less than $50. Something worth considering.

As far as the asshats at TWC, have you considered going OTA-only or at least OTA for your local channels? If you're lucky you have a local station with a good weather operation that will go above and beyond the EAS reporting -- one of our local stations preempted NBC for the better part of an hour when we had a tornado earlier this year -- but even if they don't you'd still be assured of getting the EAS alerts.

Check out TV Fool and AntennaWeb as starting resources for determining if OTA reception is feasible from your location and what kind of antenna system you would need to make it happen. As an added bonus, you'll get a far better HD picture than anything Time Warner is sending down their pipe, they compress the hell out of their digital channels.

Any good antennas you can suggest? Indoor or outdoor would be fine. I would prefer not to have to move it though. Multiple would also be better than having to move one.

First you should go to http://tvfool.com/ and check your address for OTA digital signals.

Note the "Real" channel on the tvfool chart. If it's 7-13, you'd need a VHF-high antenna, if it's 14-51 a UHF antenna will pick it up. If it's 2-6, you're probably in Alaska, and sadly will need an old, full-range VHF-lo/hi antenna.

Any channels that are Green or Yellow will likely work with a simple, cheap, indoor antenna (preferably in your window, facing towards the transmitter). The simplest old indoor antennas seem to work the best... better than more expensive indoor antennas that are tunable or have a useless (for short cable runs) amplifier. Nice long "rabbit-ears" at a 45 degree angle will do a good job for VHF (real: 2-13) channels, while a nice big "loop" antenna will do very well picking up UHF channels.

If you're in the red, or worse, you MIGHT be lucky and receive the station(s) with an indoor antenna with minimal dropout, but at this point, you're probably at the point that you should invest in a roof-top antenna.

VHF is pretty simple, and easier to receive over longer ranges, and around obstacles like mountains, buildings or trees. For antennas, you have a couple choices which are both about equivalent in reception and price (about $40):

http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?p=Y10-7-13&sku=716079000994">Antennacraft Y10-7-13 100mi 120" VHF-high
or
Winegard YA 1713 100mi 100" VHF-high

For UHF channels, reception is a bit tougher, as curvature of the earth, and any obstacles cause more issues. There's some debate over how the top 8-bay antennas should be ranked, but it's an easy choice when you see one of the contenders costs nearly half as much as the rest:

Winegard HD 8800 8-Bay 60mi UHF

Now, if you need both UHF and VHF-high antennas, connecting them with a splitter will cause you to lose a significant amount of signal strength. Instead, a purpose-built VHF/UHF splitter/combiner will perform much better. Just about any one will do, but here's a link for an in-stock $2 model:

Pico Macom UHF/VHF Band Separator/Combiner

And finally, if you're going to run the coax a non-trivial length, or if you are going to connect the antenna(s) to a splitter to serve multiple TVs or just multiple tuners (eg. TV+DVR) then you'll get a big benefit out of a mast-mounted pre-amp. The key is to get the lowest "noise" figure you can. There are a range of ridiculously expensive options that will get you a just-slightly lower-noise signal, but once again Winegard is much cheaper, and close enough:

Winegard AP-8700 VHF/UHF Pre Amplifier

Thanks to FCC regulations, you can put this all up on a mast as high as 12' above your roof line, without anyone being able to require you to get a permit or similar (unless you're in a historic area, or there's serious safety issues like overhead power lines). And if you happen to NEED to go higher to get reception of local stations, they MUST grant your permit request for minimal cost and in a timely fashion.

To deal with the risk of lighting starting fires or blowing up your TV, you need to ground your mast and the coax. A coax grounding block costs about $1, and like your mast, just needs to be wired to metal water pipes, or a grounding rod. Some more advanced coax surge suppressors exist, but I would never forego the simple task of grounding everything first.

That should be all the equipment you need, and the information on tvfool will tell you EXACTLY which d

HTPC with MediaPortal (only runs on Windows - win 7 works pretty well for this), OTA reception with decent roof-mounted antenna (find your reception report) and ForTheRecord for PVR functionality.

LA is a bit of an outlier. If you look at TVFool.com for LA you can see that the TV allocated spectrum is just about full. Even if they wanted to they couldn't broadcast on another frequency.

If you look at New York it's even worse.

Almost every other city has spare bandwidth available. I hope the companies that are doing whitespace crap realize that in the most populous cities they aren't going to have much success.

LA is a bit of an outlier. If you look at TVFool.com for LA you can see that the TV allocated spectrum is just about full. Even if they wanted to they couldn't broadcast on another frequency.

If you look at New York it's even worse.

Almost every other city has spare bandwidth available. I hope the companies that are doing whitespace crap realize that in the most populous cities they aren't going to have much success.

Actually, basic channels for non-HD TV are no longer available over the air.

Incorrect! We get about ten channels, each with two or three sub-channels. We get PBS, ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX. You would check out TV Fool.

>>>Where I live antenna isn't an option which is too bad

I find it odd that you live someplace where Cable and High Speed Internet Lines have been run, but over-the-air television is not available. What is your ZIPcode? Try here: http://www.tvfool.com/ Or here: http://www.google.com/search?q=cm4228hd

Have you thought about getting limited cable?
It's about $20/month for the first 20 channels.

I love to watch TV, but I hate the price. So, investing less than $100 at Frys, I put up a small antennae on my roof. Now with the help of TV Fool, I can pick up all the big networks and a few independents.

However, for those with reception issues, visit www.tvfool.com and look at their tools/toys. They have some interesting tools that you may find useful. Where we are every station says, "These channels are very weak and will most likely require extreme measures to try and pick them up."

Since we rarely, if ever watch brainwashing ads, extremely biased news, inaccurate weather or bad programming, we decided we really don't need an idiot box anyway. We'll keep the big screen for movies but now, we'll spend more time outside enjoying our world.

Those extreme measures the say we need to take will be to feed the landfill with more toxic waste. I guess I could send the TVs to India or China instead.

The short and simple solution to this problem is to do what your Grandad did in 1950 and his Grandad in 1925:

You spring for a good external antenna - and you install it by-the-book.

Exactly! go here and find out what direction your antenna should point, and what kind of antenna you need. then get a Lensatic compass ! climb up on your roof and get to work!

It is not hard at all.

note: it appears that TVfool's web-servers have been turned in to molten slag by people preparing for the switch to DTV, give them a few days to cry and they will be back

Number of stations I received via analog: 25 (across three markets - Baltimore, Harrisburg, Philly)

Number of stations with digital: 12

I'm gonna pin your location around Edenton PA. here is the TV fool chart.

Looking at that chart I'd recommend a Channel Master 4228HD, or if wind load on the antenna is an issue, a fringe style Yagi. Use a rotor. Receive 22 digital channels.. .

If it's like my area; those stations that are transmitting both analog and digital channels are transmitting the digital ones at about a tenth less strength. I suggest they(or you) visit antennaweb or TV Fool to find out the relative transmitting powers for their area.

Once they shut off the analog transmitters they're generally going to step up the power on their digital stations.

Looking at the FCC TV database, it seems Houston has or will have a number of DTV stations operating at effective power at or near a million Watts, and with pretty fair effective antenna height (500 meters or so). Coverage looks pretty good compared to what many see in more mountainous areas.

Coverage also depends much on terrain. You can get a pretty good idea what to expect from the tvfool coverage maps which take terrain into account. If you're out in the blue it takes more work...

I looked at a couple of the Houston signals and its seems they're generally really strong out to about 50 miles.
You didn't say what kind of installation you have at 60 miles. A decent roof-mounted antenna with a preamp at the antenna (remotely powered) and modern low-loss coax cable will probably work well.
It is important that the antenna be properly aimed. I've had good results with the mast-mounted preamp Radio Shack sells (about $60, about double what I paid for a medium sized antenna).
Increasing antenna height can help, especially when there is clutter nearby.
Some indoor preamps I've tried made matters worse instead of better. (most were around $20). They had both poor gain and were more prone to overload problems. The Radio Shack outdoor preamp has a gain adjustment on the indoor power supply. It is easiest to check reception on analog signals while adjusting the gain. If there is an overload problem from strong signals nearby, the best reception will be below the maximum gain setting. Equipment is more prone to signal overload near transmitters and when there are many signals nearby. Interference is far easier to spot on the analog signals.

The digital signal I get is a little flaky but they are supposed to boost the signal after the switch.

they? Changes in digital facilities at the cut-over date vary on a case by case basis.

There are going to be fewer channels available for tv after the switch. We'll be using 2 through 51, except there is no channel 37 (that's kept silent for radio astronomy).
Some stations will use the same digital facilities after the switch, so those probably won't improve.
Some of the digital signals already on are using channels above 51 and will move. Due to interference issues, some digital signals are temporarily using lower power and/or a different channel. Those stations will likely have a change in signal coverage (mostly for the better) when the transition is complete.
Some stations that are digital on UHF now will move to VHF channels (perhaps their former analog channel) when the analog signal is shut down. Although that may mean a better signal for some viewers, those who installed a UHF-specific antenna for DTV may find their antenna marginal.
UHF antennas still pick up some VHF signal, more so with channels 7-13 than 2-6, but one would have to be in a pretty strong signal area for that to work.
Some stations will be buying antennas or other equipment from other stations as channel-switches occur (transmitting antennas are generally made for a specific channel or narrow range of them)
Rescheduling antenna and general engineering work will be a headache at the switch if the date changes.

Whatever you're using now, plan on using the channel-scan function to relocate stations that have moved after the change. In some places there may be new channels coming on the air (some are low power) scanning periodically to see what's out there isn't a bad idea.

You can see what's licensed or has construction permits for the various types of tv stations using the FCC TV database.

You can get an idea of relative signal coverage as well as what's in your area at tvfool.com. Seeing different colors for various relative signal levels in a stations' coverage is very helpful in determining what kind of antenna you might need to get a particular station.
Using a good outdoor antenna, a preamp at the antenna, and modern low loss coax cable makes a huge difference for weak signals.

Some areas have analog low-power tv or translator (rebroadcast on shifted channel) stations that will continue to operate after the switch. If you're using a DTV converter for an analog tv you'll need a converter with a "pass-through" feature to allow those signals to bypass the converter and still get to the tv. (may require turning converter off for pass-through, much like behavior with old VCRs when not using VCR tuner)

This website is incredibly helpful for determining what you'll need for getting the best reception:
http://www.antennaweb.com/

Try TV Fool http://www.tvfool.com/

Better by far than most other sites...ymmv

Duh. That wasn't it. In my haste I posted a dumb link. I found a lot more info here: http://www.tvfool.com/

It may not necessarily be transmission power. There a many factors to consider.

According to http://www.tvfool.com/, the analog transmitter for WECT is further inland than the digital one, which is right on the coast. (Some stations have both of their analog and digital transmitters on the same site. Others have them at different sites.) The direction and strength of signal received at a certain point will probably be different now. (People may have to point their antennas in a different direction and people out on the old analog fringe area may not be able to receive the digital signal at all.)

Also, their analog channel (6) is on Low-VHF and I'm assuming that their digital channel is still on UHF (44). Radio waves from the low-VHF stations (channels 2-6) travel farther than UHF ones, so it would be easier for those on the fringe to pick them up. However, Low-VHF channels are more susceptible to interference.

It's true that the transmission power for digital TV is less than analog because the quality of the picture and sound doesn't improve after a certain point. You either get a solid lock-on, some drop-outs (where the picture pixelates and the sound cuts off), or you don't get anything. Analog, especially with Low-VHF is much more forgiving. Multipath, ghosting, snow, wavy lines, or other interference may not totally ruin the analog picture and sound.

In my area, a lot of people have problems pulling in the one digital station broadcasting on high-VHF (channels 7-13) with an indoor antenna. I had to play with mine a bit to get a consistent signal lock. (In fact, I had to turn down the built-in amplifier because it was amplifying interference it was receiving!) There aren't any low-VHF digital transmitters here and from what I've heard, it could be quite difficult in some circumstances to get a digital signal on low-VHF due to its susceptibility to interference. Fortunately only a handful of stations will be broadcasting on a low-VHF channel once the transition occurs. However, the majority of the TV markets will have at least one high-VHF channel.

My advice for us tech-savvy folks is to become very familiar with the way DTV works in our respective areas and to be prepared to be pulled in to helping our friends and neighbors out in February. "Come on! You're good at computers and digital stuff. So pulling in channel 9 would be a breeze!"

Don't sweat it too much until after the transition, the channels are all going to switch around (and I think go to higher power). TV Fool can give you some idea of the pre and post signal levels:

http://www.tvfool.com/

Something doesn't feel fright from tvfool. According to their site, all of the TV signals will remain the same strength that they're being broadcasted at now, except one (NBC) which will be reduced from 1000kW to 6kW, resulting in the gain changing from -32.7 to -44.2. Color me sceptical

Are there digital channels to receive? Repeaters are not required to switch yet. You can check it here:

http://www.tvfool.com/

Don't sweat it too much until after the transition, the channels are all going to switch around (and I think go to higher power). TV Fool can give you some idea of the pre and post signal levels:

http://www.tvfool.com/

I never said Digital Broadcasts don't exist, and I never said DTV isn't somewhat active. What I said was that it doesn't truly exist; because as far as the FCC is concerned to a degree it doesn't have to until Feb. 2009. This is a subtle but important difference.

The logic for most of what I said stems from this, particularly the other comment you wasted time arguing with. If this assumption is indeed incorrect than that whole statement (that I made, inferred from that premise) is invalid; no need to attack both. But since you felt the need to in such particular disorder I'll counter with, "And what law would that be?"

Secondly, and back to my main point. The link you provided is broken; tvfool.org does not exist; Not being familiar with it I tried tvfool.com which might be what you meant; but in any event couldn't find any sign of the review you spoke of. Which brings me to point three:

Ironically, after looking at your "reference" I discovered that they make the same point and conclusion that I do. In case you missed it have a read, particularly the 8th paragraph.

http://www.tvfool.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=50&Itemid=99999999&limit=1&limitstart=1

Either way, do you really think that those channels are going to cease to exist when the analog gets turned off? Similarly do you think advertisers won't notice the problem that fewer people are able to view the adds. OTA has a pretty good service record over the past 50 years; especially compared to Cable. Give them a chance to launch the thing before you rip into them.

By all means if come April things are as messed up as say they are now, sure you win you are right. What that means isn't even clear. The number of factors involved isn't simple enough to say its all FCC's fault or its all the OTA stations fault. Irregardless you can wave around your "I told you so" flag.

But until then, and at this point in time, I feel like the only thing you can do is have a little faith in the TV stations and demonstrate some patience. Either quit complaining about being an early adopter or actually counter something I (or anyone else) have said with a valid, substantiated point.

I see a lot of whining about the switch to digital from folks who claim to get fewer digital channels than analog.

Since anecdotes doth not evidence make, I would like to provide a link to an article where some folks actually analyzed what the real net impact of the transition is going to be to the average TV viewer.

The outcome? The peak of the gain/loss graph is at 14% of the U.S. population losing one channel. In other words, the majority of the population will break even or gain channels.

First, go to TVfool and Antennaweb to find out where all the transmitters are and how far. Then, you need to see what type of antenna to get. Good places to discuss about DTV are at: news://alt.tv.tech.hdtv (newsgroup) and AVS Forum. I am not an expert and still learning, but these places are useful.

I couldn't use my old fashion rabbit ears since they were too weak and they were decent for analog feeds.

For those who can't decide which converter boxes to get with the coupons, then see Wikipedia and here. I still haven't ddecided what to get and I need to get them before May 27th, 2008 (should had waited to get better models). :(

Have you looked at what is available in your area online (such as http://www.titantv.com or www.tvfool.com)?

I blog about this, and other related stuff as I find it fascinating!
williambryson.blogspot.com

Good luck!