Winegard-FV-30BB HDTV Antenna

[Peter Gibbons]

http://www.amazon.com/Winegard-FreeVision-FV-30BB-HDTV-Antenna/dp/B003L76BJS

Placed it indoors - just put it on top of box facing the wall.

I am getting 12 crystal clear channels including 3 from Buffalo across the lake.

Nice design, Made in USA ( for a change ) and came with very nice thin coax cable instead of the usual bulky ones.

Much better reception than with the "Rabbit Ears" that I had before.

Not that I had cable before ... but really don't see any reason to get one now.

[The Gorn]

That's pretty impressive for a passive (no power) device.

I bought this model (actually I wound up buying two and giving one to a family member):

http://www.amazon.com/RCA-ANT1450B-Multi-Directional-Digital-Amplified/dp/B001GE6T9A

At Walmart it's been about $30.

The key is the amplifier. We live in a semi rural outlying area with no TV stations close - the closest one is probably 15 miles as the crow flies. I can receive about a dozen stations (including the subchannels of each) with this unit.

Orientation is also extremely important to success with this device. The panel has to be vertical for the best reception. I wound up sticking it behind some trinkets against the wall on top of a bookcase, and it does well there.

[DarkHumour]

HDTV via OTA looks much better than cable or satellite...as they compress the crap out of the signal to varying degrees.  I joked that it was a "conspiracy" in Chicago to force everyone to cable or satellite as the analog reception pre switch was kind of crappy. 

How does it compare to the www.antennaweb.org prediction /suggestion ?

[Walter Mitty]

I've been somewhat intrigued by this possibility for some time.  I played around with my cable hookup, and I discovered that if I bypass the cable box and go direct into my TV, I get a bunch of channels that cable doesn't offer me.  So I have it set up both ways, and I get switch between them with my remote.  And I'm guessing that some of that is relayed HDTV via digital OTA.  I kinda wish I knew more about it.

I live about 45 miles from Mount Tom, where there are a bunch of transmitters at the top.  But it's almost line-of-sight.  If I walk about a half mile up hill, I can see a beautiful view of Mt. Tom from the parking lot of a restaurant.

I've seen the antennas at Walmart, but I have no basis for judging between amplified and passive, multidirectional and unidirectional.  I don't want to waste money.  I guess, given Walmart's return policy, I could buy one, try it out, and take it back if I'm not satisfied.  But I'd like a better plan than that if I can find one.

Correction:  The coax cable delivers both digital and analog channels.  no guessing about it.  The TV set has both a digital tuner and and an analog tuner connected to the coax antenna input.  When the raw cable is plugged into the antenna input, and the TV does a channel search, it comes up with about 2 dozen analog channels and lots of digital channels.  Some content is delivered in both an analog channel and a digital channel. 

[Peter Gibbons]

If there is real line-of-sight 45 miles there should be no problem. With 'almost' line-of-sight you have to try.

I like real directional antennas. I don't trust these tiny plastic 'omnidirectional' things they sell in places like Walmart or BestBuy.
Antenna amplifiers make sense if you have really long cable.

Since my antenna is next to the TV I don't see any reason to buy an amplified antenna. The TV already has an amplifier.
If you have really old TV - amplified antenna might help.

I like Amazon - you could return stuff to them too and you have really good selection of brands.

The antenna I mentioned has 4.5 stars and the only one 1 stars review is complaining about missing hardware in the box.

All the amplified antennas have mixed reviews with some people claiming that they are the best thing since the sliced bread and a lot of people saying the they are no better than the "Bunny Ears" they used before. Quite a few reviews claiming that in matter of weeks or months the amplifier stopped working.

And here is one idea to save you a lot of time:

Talk to your neighbors - are they able to get OTA channels? Are they doing it with indoor antenna?

[Walter Mitty]

What does "4.5 starts" mean?

[Peter Gibbons]

Sorry Walter,

I was in a rush to get the train ... Can't believe I used the wrong word twice

It's 4.5 stars.

[DarkHumour]

I started looking at my hdtv tuner box again as the cable provided where I live forces everything into pan and scan (and the compression 'crazing' happens often..hmm, how many ways is this cable split?)   Even though my tv is analog and the max would be 480 lines of detail I prefer seeing a show in widescreen if it is broadcast that way.  I have a 720p tv that I rescued from a Lincoln Park alley in 2010 that seems to be working except for the dented lcd screen.  I may have finally found a V260B1-L04 LCD panel to replace it for $99.  (Result: A working 26" HDTV for  99 bucks?)  I have a terk antenna that works okay as long as you remain still and don't change channels.  The other alternative was that I was using a 6' outdoor antenna indoors...

The funny thing is that with all the ocd multitasking I sometimes only glance at the screen while watching some TV shows so I guess the picture almost doesn't matter.

[Walter Mitty]

I often make the same typo again and again.  It's misguided reinforcement.

[The Gorn]

I am using the amplified antenna with a relatively new HDTV, a Samsung T260HD computer monitor that also contains an over the air tuner, which I purchased at the end of 2009.

The point of the amplifier is that the antenna itself is contained in a small thin black box that can be wall mounted and/or painted but is probably a mediocre conductor of actual signals. IE, the antenna is a compromise design so the amplifier is pretty much essential. And it works really well in my case.

I just didn't have the room in my office, nor the motivation, to mount an antenna with obvious elements.

Almost all of the "low profile" and compact HD antennas you see being sold are amplified for the same reasons I mentioned. If you are willing to put up with something that looks like a proper antenna with actual elements, then Peter's antenna is probably a great pick.

There is a design floating around the internet for a DIY HD antenna made out of old coat hangers and scrap wood. I may build one for a second TV in the shed or the garage.

The amplifier does not degrade any signals at all. What it does is bring in a signal that you may now only get intermittently or only under specific conditions. And ditto what DarkHumour said about quality. The picture quality from over the air is far superior to * CABLE or SATELLITE TV - most HD images look like posters.

* Fixed

[Walter Mitty]

I don't get this:  The picture quality from over the air is far superior to broadcast TV - most HD images look like posters.

I thought OTA is broadcast TV. 

[The Gorn]

Damn, a person doesn't get by with anything with this crowd. 

I misspoke. No, I actually meant cable or satellite. Not broadcast. It is fixed now.

[Walter Mitty]

I apologize for being such a PITA.  Here's my excuse:  I know next to nothing about this topic.  So when you say something that doesn't make sense to me,  my usual noise rejection filters don't kick in.  My first thought is that there's something I need to learn.

When the topic is something I know well, or even just think I know well,  I'll usually let mistakes pass.

[The Gorn]

Uh, that's perfectly OK, please keep proofreading the garbage I write. 

I see exactly what you're saying. You do a "brain fart" when you stumble across malapropisms in subject matter that you are just learning. A more technically experienced reader (in that discipline) will not notice the error.

Another way to understand the issue is like this:

Over the air (or *broadcast*) TV is closest to the source. It is the purest form of the digital image that you will ever see. The only way to see any "purer" a signal would be to work inside the TV studio.

Satellite and cable transmission always consists of re-encoding this signal to make it take up less bandwidth - which translates directly to more channels that the carrier can sell to consumers, IE, it's a revenue and cost thing. So television over cable has been "altered" - messed with. Usually to degrade the quality so it can be squeezed into fewer megahertz of bandwidth.

Think of how bad music sounds when transmitted over a land line phone and especially over a cell phone. Again, the richness of the signal (audio here) is being cut down in order to cram more voice "channels" into the same medium.

[benali72]

I use the DB2 and DB4 passive antennas.

DB2 -- http://www.amazon.com/Antennas-Direct-DB2-Directional-Antenna/dp/B000EHUE7I/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1317226443&sr=8-5
DB4 -- http://www.amazon.com/Antennas-Direct-DB4-Multi-Directional-Antenna/dp/B000EHYG9K/ref=pd_cp_e_pw_3

Both work line-of-sight and give me great OTA reception. They have 4+ stars at Amazon.

What's most surprising to me is that I have a basement, mostly below ground except for three small windows at ground level. I put one down there and still get all channels but one.

It's great not to buy cable!  I save $1,000 a year in my area.