Dave's new TV antenna...day 1

On May 6, 9:28*am, (GMAN) wrote:
In article , "Sal M. Onella" wrote:

There is some risk of combining antennas. *If the signals arrive
out-of-phase at the combiner, the combined signal will be weaker than either
of the originals. *Only way to tell is to experiment. *

When i meant to combine, I meant by using a seperate UHF and a separate VHF
antenna. That shouldnt cause any out of phase issues.

Thanks guys, I'm still a week or three away from mounting the antenna
above the roof. A few of the nearby channels are moving after the
transition which will change things some.

Looking at this site ( http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...144e0d75e77 f
) it appears that many of the channels I want are about 120% or so
apart from my house. With the antenna on my deck, I am able to
receive some stations from each direction by pointing the antenna sort
of between the two cities. I hope that when I raise the antenna I'll
be able to receive most/all of the stations from the two cities by
pointing between the two cities.

If I don't receive any more stations when I raise the antenna and aim
it between the cities, I could just leave it alone, since I now
receive a FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS and CW. Or I *could* add another
CM4228HD antenna and point one at each city and combine them before
the preamp. These are pretty directional antennas, I've read some
about ganging antennas, maybe phase issues wouldn't be a problem with
two of these. I definitely will not do this until I raise the one
antenna I have. Still, some people claim they have had success doing
this.

"GMAN" wrote in message
...
In article , "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:

"swangdb" wrote in message
...

snip

I could try mounting the
cheapo Winegard on my roof and combining it with
the new antenna. The Winegard does pick up channel
3 fairly well from my deck.

There is some risk of combining antennas. If the signals arrive
out-of-phase at the combiner, the combined signal will be weaker than
either
of the originals. Only way to tell is to experiment. If it happens,
there
are some tricks to do, like moving one antenna toward or away from the
station (which is often hard to do if it's on a mast) or by changing the
length of one cable a few inches at a time (tedious). Possibly a better
approach if you need more than one antenna to get all your stations is a
switch or switches. At one house, I had several such switches in use; I
have just one now.

"Sal"


When i meant to combine, I meant by using a seperate UHF and a separate
VHF
antenna. That shouldnt cause any out of phase issues.

In theory, you're right. In practice, each type antenna will pick up some
of the other's signal. I'll bet you'll be OK.

There are U/V combiners that filter their two input bands to make it even
better.

In article , "Sal M. Onella" wrote:

"GMAN" wrote in message
...
In article , "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:

"swangdb" wrote in message
...

snip

I could try mounting the
cheapo Winegard on my roof and combining it with
the new antenna. The Winegard does pick up channel
3 fairly well from my deck.

There is some risk of combining antennas. If the signals arrive
out-of-phase at the combiner, the combined signal will be weaker than
either
of the originals. Only way to tell is to experiment. If it happens,
there
are some tricks to do, like moving one antenna toward or away from the
station (which is often hard to do if it's on a mast) or by changing the
length of one cable a few inches at a time (tedious). Possibly a better
approach if you need more than one antenna to get all your stations is a
switch or switches. At one house, I had several such switches in use; I
have just one now.

"Sal"


When i meant to combine, I meant by using a seperate UHF and a separate
VHF
antenna. That shouldnt cause any out of phase issues.

In theory, you're right. In practice, each type antenna will pick up some
of the other's signal. I'll bet you'll be OK.

There are U/V combiners that filter their two input bands to make it even
better.


Thats what i meant.

A long time ago I discovered that often the best signal is close to the
ground. I don't know why when logic says the higher the better. (anybody
remember the old Rhombic antennas?) Also UHF signals can change drastically
moving small distances both sideways and up or down. The wavelength is so
short and there are peaks and dips in both directions. And each channel may
have a different hot spot so stick the pole in the ground where the weakest
station is and probably the stronger stations will be ok. I know it is
stupid logic but when all else fails......

--
Mr Ed
http://www.ed-camin.com
http://home.earthlink.net/~bcamin/betty.htm
http://www.mountairykiwanis.org
http://www.ma-artleague.org
http://home.earthlink.net/~j3dogs/index.htm
http://home.earthlink.net/~donnahayes/index.htm
"swangdb" wrote in message
...
I have a house in east Alabama that is about 45 miles from Columbus,
GA and 50 miles from Montgomery, AL. The three towns form a triangle.

There is no cable tv available at the house and I have had satellite
tv there for over a decade.

I once had a pretty good rooftop antenna (with amplifier and rotor)
but storms tore it up maybe five years ago and I haven't replaced it
since.

A few years ago the US Govt forced DISH to stop providing network
stations to me (I'd received NY and California stations for many
years), DISH gave me a free cheapo Winegard antenna. They installed
it on my deck next to my dish. Without an amplifier, it received
almost nothing. With the salvaged Galaxy amplifier from the destroyed
rooftoop antenna, it received a few analog stations that were worth
watching and several that were barely worth watching.

Last year I bought a Zenith Digital converter box and was able to
receive a few channels and sub-channels with the same antenna. Some
of the channels worked some days, some didn't work other days. The
house is surrounded by trees and there is a small mountain between the
house and Columbus. I moved the antenna around and sometimes received
other channels while losing some channels I had before.
Antennaweb.org says I shouldn't receive any channels.

I bought a Channel Master 4228HD antenna this week and tested it some
today. I connected it to a short pole and put the pole in an umbrella
mount on the deck. I'm not making this up, the mount is just
temporary of course. The bottom of the antenna is maybe 8 to 9 feet
off the ground. I used the same cable/amplifier that was connected to
the Winegard antenna. I was able rotate the antenna by hand and
received varying results results.

Long story short, I receive more channels with this antenna than with
the Winegard. Oddly enough, the *best* case was one where I received
ABC and CBS from Columbus and NBC and Fox from Montgomery (something
that never happened with the Winegard). I received all their
subchannels too. I couldn't seem to get all four major networks at
once from either city no matter how I rotated the antenna. I tested
several times by rotating the antenna slightly then rescanning.

Now I'm thinking about:

- replacing the coax from the antenna to the television. It's maybe
10 years old and a lot of it is either outdoors or in a musty
crawlspace.

- buying a new amplifier. The galaxy seems to work but it's been
outdoors for maybe 10 years or so.

- Mount the antenna on the roof. I probably should do this next.
What a pain. I'd like to put it up there without a rotor and
magically get every channel from both cities. I know I am dreaming.
My old rotor is still in the antenna salvage pile, I guess I could
make it work

Maybe I'll have another report in a week or so.

On Apr 30, 2:15*pm, swangdb wrote:
I have a house in east Alabama that is about 45 miles from Columbus,
GA and 50 miles from Montgomery, AL. *The three towns form a triangle.
....
I bought a Channel Master 4228HD antenna this week and tested it some
today. *I connected it to a short pole and put the pole in an umbrella
mount on the deck. *I'm not making this up, the mount is just
temporary of course. *The bottom of the antenna is maybe 8 to 9 feet
off the ground. *I used the same cable/amplifier that was connected to
the Winegard antenna. *I was able rotate the antenna by hand and
received varying results results.

Long story short, I receive more channels with this antenna than with
the Winegard. *Oddly enough, the *best* case was one where I received
ABC and CBS from Columbus and NBC and Fox from Montgomery (something
that never happened with the Winegard). *I received all their
subchannels too. *

This morning NBC from Montgomery vanished and their web site said it
would be on soon. It came on soon on another channel as expected.
ABC in Montgomery moved to 11 from 47 and suddenly the signal is very
strong.

My antenna is still on my deck and I am very happy so far. I am
putting it on the roof soon. No really, it's going to happen. There
are some channels that have a weak signal, just not strong enough to
see. Maybe with the antenna on the roof I'll be able to pick them up.

The first weekend of the transition was kind of weird.

All of the channels I thought I would receive, I did (and still do)
receive, so that was good.

There were off and on storms all weekend and there were clouds over
much of Alabama. I rescanned for channels several times and in
addition to the same core channels I received every time I scanned, I
picked up several channels from pretty far away. The different
channels would sometimes change with each rescan. Usually I would
only be able to view these channels for a short time, then there would
be no signal.

Dothan, AL is maybe 100 miles south of my house and in the past I was
sometimes able to receive some fuzzy analog pictures from the Dothan
stations. I suppose with a better antenna setup maybe I would have
been able to receive clearer images. Still, I was surprised to
receive some digital channels from Dothan, though they went away soon.

Then I was very surprised to receive a station from Tuscaloosa which
is about 150 miles away. This one went away soon too.

I guess these signals were bouncing of the clouds/stratosphere/
something.