Can one get HDTV with just an antenna on the roof?

I called Verizon today about my phone service. During the course of
the day, I spoke with three different representatives. Each tried to
get me to sign up for FIOS TV when they saw that my current service
did not include FIOS TV. I asked each of the three, "Are you aware
that you can receive high-definition television for free just by
putting an antenna on your roof." Each of the three customer-services
representatives said, "no".

Comcast, Verizon, Dish, and DirectTV must be pretty happy that most
people do not know about FREE TV. How can we "spread the word"?

Of course, I live in a large metropolitan area and receive 16 digital
channels (20 if you include Spanish and home-shopping channels). I
don't get ESPN (but I hate sports). Yes, I miss TBS, USA, Lifetime,
AMC, (et al), but all those channels are not worth an extra $57 per
month. With a DVR, there's always plenty to watch.

"NadCixelsyd" wrote in message
...
I called Verizon today about my phone service. During the course of
the day, I spoke with three different representatives. Each tried to
get me to sign up for FIOS TV when they saw that my current service
did not include FIOS TV. I asked each of the three, "Are you aware
that you can receive high-definition television for free just by
putting an antenna on your roof." Each of the three customer-services
representatives said, "no".

Their response of "no" is actually the correct one. One can't just put an
antenna on the roof and get High Definition Television. There are several
other factors involved.

First, one needs to be sure they can get reliable over-the-air DTV reception
in their areas by checking the charts and maps that tend to give an overly
optimistic representation of the projected reception. Second, they need to
be sure their rooftop antenna is adjusted properly, assuming they already
have a rooftop antenna, otherwise now they have to research, purchase, and
install that rooftop antenna. Third, given the tendancy for the 8VSB
modulation used in ATSC OTA DTV to end up with jitter, one needs to make
sure their RF conditions are reasonably void of interference and especially
void of dynamic multipath. Furthermore, they need to have an HD capable TV
that should also have a built in ATSC tuner, since using a DTV converter box
on a standard definition (480i) or even enhanced definition (480p) TV won't
give HDTV. Finally, the programming itself has to be HD, so then even if one
has an HD capable TV and flawless OTA DTV reception they won't get HD for
any specific program in standard definition (unless they "upscale" the
standard definition to an HD resolution, but then it still won't be true HD
programming).

Comcast, Verizon, Dish, and DirectTV must be pretty happy that most
people do not know about FREE TV. How can we "spread the word"?

First the word has to be spread that the DTV system needs to be fixed. Now.
No delays, no excuses. Spread the word that they who broadcast and they who
regulate OTA DTV must spend the money needed to get those digital
translators up and running to increase the range and reliability of the DTV
signal, and they should also increase power levels where needed to ensure
the cleanest signal without jitter.

Note the system absoutely has to be fixed because the picture and sound may
have the capability to come in clear and even in high definition, but the
base modulation is proven to be too unstable for a nontrivial number of
areas and for a nontrivial number of viewers. That's because the fundamental
design flaw of the system is that was designed around an assumption that a
30 foot high outdoor antenna would be used. Not everyone can mount an
outdoor antenna, so then indoor antenna usage is a complete gamble.

Given whatever antenna they are able to use--if they get a significant
amount audio dropouts and picture problems, then the proposition of using
free OTA DTV is essentially a failed one. At that point, it's all dependent
on how much hassle they want to spend trying and returning antennas that may
or more than likely may not work for them. But if they get to that point,
it's actually worth just outright giving up, so then even analog cable
reception in standard definition never looked and sounded better when
compared to unreliable/unstable OTA DTV reception. (That's especially the
case when compared and contrasted with OTA DTV's tendancy for dropped audio
and picture problems such as blocky artifacts, frame dropping, freezing,
smearing, failing all the way to a black screen with a message such as No
Signal, Weak Signal, or No Program.)

[snip...]

On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 21:06:29 -0700, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:

"NadCixelsyd" wrote in message
news:6ee2f5e9-60cd-41c2-
...
I called Verizon today about my phone service. During the course of
the day, I spoke with three different representatives. Each tried to
get me to sign up for FIOS TV when they saw that my current service did
not include FIOS TV. I asked each of the three, "Are you aware that
you can receive high-definition television for free just by putting an
antenna on your roof." Each of the three customer-services
representatives said, "no".

Their response of "no" is actually the correct one. One can't just put
an antenna on the roof and get High Definition Television. There are
several other factors involved.

That's right I got it fine with a $2 Radio shack bow tie. For many
people, they don't need an outside antenna.

First, one needs to be sure they can get reliable over-the-air DTV
reception in their areas by checking the charts and maps that tend to
give an overly optimistic representation of the projected reception.

Roughly 90% of every household in the US can receive OTA DTV HDTV. And
over half of those can do it with a set top antenna.

Second, they need to be sure their rooftop antenna is adjusted properly,
assuming they already have a rooftop antenna, otherwise now they have to
research, purchase, and install that rooftop antenna.

What kid of scare tactics are you putting out. That's just total BS. Most
people don't need a rooftop antenna. At over 40 miles from the
transmitters, I can get perfect reception from an antenna it the attic.

Third, given the
tendancy for the 8VSB modulation used in ATSC OTA DTV to end up with
jitter, one needs to make sure their RF conditions are reasonably void
of interference and especially void of dynamic multipath.

Not a problem where I've seen it.

Furthermore,
they need to have an HD capable TV that should also have a built in ATSC
tuner,

Not really, My first HDTV picture was on my computer monitor with the
tuner in the computer. And while all my current HDTV's have built in
tuners, I never use them. All 6 of my ATSC tuners or in my server, and
all my TV's just acxt as monitors behind my MythTV system.

since using a DTV converter box on a standard definition (480i)
or even enhanced definition (480p) TV won't give HDTV. Finally, the
programming itself has to be HD, so then even if one has an HD capable
TV and flawless OTA DTV reception they won't get HD for any specific
program in standard definition (unless they "upscale" the standard
definition to an HD resolution, but then it still won't be true HD
programming).

Comcast, Verizon, Dish, and DirectTV must be pretty happy that most
people do not know about FREE TV. How can we "spread the word"?

First the word has to be spread that the DTV system needs to be fixed.

Nothing needs to be fixed. 8VSB works as designed. I've been using it for
over 5 years now without any major problems.

Now. No delays, no excuses. Spread the word that they who broadcast and
they who regulate OTA DTV must spend the money needed to get those
digital translators up and running to increase the range and reliability
of the DTV signal, and they should also increase power levels where
needed to ensure the cleanest signal without jitter.

How much range do you want. Some have received DTV over 100 miles.

Note the system absoutely has to be fixed because the picture and sound
may have the capability to come in clear and even in high definition,
but the base modulation is proven to be too unstable for a nontrivial
number of areas and for a nontrivial number of viewers. That's because
the fundamental design flaw of the system is that was designed around an
assumption that a 30 foot high outdoor antenna would be used. Not
everyone can mount an outdoor antenna, so then indoor antenna usage is a
complete gamble.

That's just pure BS.

Given whatever antenna they are able to use--if they get a significant
amount audio dropouts and picture problems, then the proposition of
using free OTA DTV is essentially a failed one. At that point, it's all
dependent on how much hassle they want to spend trying and returning
antennas that may or more than likely may not work for them. But if they
get to that point, it's actually worth just outright giving up, so then
even analog cable reception in standard definition never looked and
sounded better when compared to unreliable/unstable OTA DTV reception.
(That's especially the case when compared and contrasted with OTA DTV's
tendancy for dropped audio and picture problems such as blocky
artifacts, frame dropping, freezing, smearing, failing all the way to a
black screen with a message such as No Signal, Weak Signal, or No
Program.)

If they're too stupid or lazy, them let them get cable/sat and spend the
$50-100 a month for HDTV. How much have I saved by never paying for it
over the last 45 years.:-)

ATSC is the best thing that's happen to TV since the introduction of the
TV set.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
My Tivo Experience http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/tivo.htm
Tivo HD/S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm
AMD cpu help http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

On Jun 4, 9:06*pm, "Daniel W. Rouse Jr."
wrote:
"NadCixelsyd" wrote in message

...I called Verizon today about my phone service. During the course of
the day, I spoke with three different representatives. *Each tried to
get me to sign up for FIOS TV when they saw that my current service
did not include FIOS TV. *I asked each of the three, "Are you aware
that you can receive high-definition television for free just by
putting an antenna on your roof." *Each of the three customer-services
representatives said, "no".

Their response of "no" is actually the correct one. One can't just
put an
antenna on the roof and get High Definition Television. There are
several
other factors involved.

First, one needs to be sure they can get reliable over-the-air DTV
reception
in their areas by checking the charts and maps that tend to give an
overly
optimistic representation of the projected reception. Second, they
need to
be sure their rooftop antenna is adjusted properly, assuming they
already
have a rooftop antenna, otherwise now they have to research,
purchase, and
install that rooftop antenna. Third, given the tendancy for the
8VSB
modulation used in ATSC OTA DTV to end up with jitter, one needs to
make
sure their RF conditions are reasonably void of interference and
especially
void of dynamic multipath. Furthermore, they need to have an HD
capable TV
that should also have a built in ATSC tuner, since using a DTV
converter box
on a standard definition (480i) or even enhanced definition (480p)
TV won't
give HDTV. Finally, the programming itself has to be HD, so then
even if one
has an HD capable TV and flawless OTA DTV reception they won't get
HD for
any specific program in standard definition (unless they "upscale"
the
standard definition to an HD resolution, but then it still won't be
true HD
programming).

If your DTV converter box works, you CAN get HDTV. Just get one and
connect it to whatever feeds the converter box.

Comcast, Verizon, Dish, and DirectTV must be pretty happy that
most
people do not know about FREE TV. *How can we "spread the word"?

First the word has to be spread that the DTV system needs to be
fixed. Now.
No delays, no excuses. Spread the word that they who broadcast and
they who
regulate OTA DTV must spend the money needed to get those digital
translators up and running to increase the range and reliability of
the DTV
signal, and they should also increase power levels where needed to
ensure
the cleanest signal without jitter.

What the heck are you talking about? Fixed? How? Replace the entire
infrastructure AGAIN? Ain't gonna happen so figure out how to live
with it. What jitter are you referring to? How does jitter show up in
your picture? I've been using this for 6 plus years with a TV and 3
computers recording many hours. Here the are so few dropouts/
disruptions you have to weite them down so you don't forget. I know of
one last December 10 and it was likely NOT a transmission problem.
There is no magic involved. just a decent antenna properly installed.
Unfortunately that CAN get tricky.

Note the system absoutely has to be fixed because the picture and
sound may
have the capability to come in clear and even in high definition,
but the
base modulation is proven to be too unstable for a nontrivial
number of
areas and for a nontrivial number of viewers. That's because the
fundamental
design flaw of the system is that was designed around an assumption
that a
30 foot high outdoor antenna would be used. Not everyone can mount
an
outdoor antenna, so then indoor antenna usage is a complete gamble.

Given whatever antenna they are able to use--if they get a
significant
amount audio dropouts and picture problems, then the proposition of
using
free OTA DTV is essentially a failed one. At that point, it's all
dependent
on how much hassle they want to spend trying and returning antennas
that may
or more than likely may not work for them. But if they get to that
point,
it's actually worth just outright giving up, so then even analog
cable
reception in standard definition never looked and sounded better
when
compared to unreliable/unstable OTA DTV reception. (That's
especially the
case when compared and contrasted with OTA DTV's tendancy for
dropped audio
and picture problems such as blocky artifacts, frame dropping,
freezing,
smearing, failing all the way to a black screen with a message such
as No
Signal, Weak Signal, or No Program.)

[snip...]

My, aren't you the cheerful upbeat one. Won't know until you try but
by and large it works. If you're 'hiding' in a concrete jungle you'll
likely have problems. If you're in the country the odds are much
better.

G²

In article "Daniel W. Rouse Jr." writes:

Their response of "no" is actually the correct one. One can't just put an
antenna on the roof and get High Definition Television. There are several
other factors involved.

First, one needs to be sure they can get reliable over-the-air DTV reception
in their areas by checking the charts and maps that tend to give an overly
optimistic representation of the projected reception.

Interesting. I get several digital channels that were not listed on the
maps/charts, and that with an antenna in the attic.

Second, they need to
be sure their rooftop antenna is adjusted properly, assuming they already
have a rooftop antenna, otherwise now they have to research, purchase, and
install that rooftop antenna.

How my soul cries for them. All sorts of people did this in the 1950's
for analog TV. I guess they were smarter than most folks are now.


Furthermore, they need to have an HD capable TV
that should also have a built in ATSC tuner, since using a DTV converter box
on a standard definition (480i) or even enhanced definition (480p) TV won't
give HDTV.

Or a tuner in a computer, a HDHomeRun, or a stand alone HD receiver...
However, all new HD TV sets have the tuner, so it is no big deal.


Finally, the programming itself has to be HD, so then even if one
has an HD capable TV and flawless OTA DTV reception they won't get HD for
any specific program in standard definition (unless they "upscale" the
standard definition to an HD resolution, but then it still won't be true HD
programming).

The same is true of cable... Not all programs are HD. This is not the
fault of the antenna.


First the word has to be spread that the DTV system needs to be fixed. Now.

Fixed? Why? Do you want it to not have kittens? It surely isn't broken.
It works so much better than the analog system that as soon as I got my first
HD receiver connected to an old standard definition TV set, I never went back
to analog. I started getting perfect signals from stations where the analog
version was unwatchable.


Note the system absoutely has to be fixed because the picture and sound may
have the capability to come in clear and even in high definition, but the
base modulation is proven to be too unstable for a nontrivial number of
areas and for a nontrivial number of viewers.

Nonsense. Everyone I know who has tried it gets better reception,
and more channels, than they did with analog.

That's because the fundamental
design flaw of the system is that was designed around an assumption that a
30 foot high outdoor antenna would be used. Not everyone can mount an
outdoor antenna, so then indoor antenna usage is a complete gamble.

I believe that assumption is only for the far fringe area coverage, where
similar 30 foot high outdoor antennas were already needed for analog. As I
mentioned above, I get more digital channels with an attic antenna than I
ever got with analog. And, the channels appear perfect, while most of the
analog ones were unwatchable to barely watchable.

Alan

"Alan" wrote in message
...
In article "Daniel W.
Rouse Jr." writes:

Their response of "no" is actually the correct one. One can't just
put an
antenna on the roof and get High Definition Television. There are
several
other factors involved.

First, one needs to be sure they can get reliable over-the-air DTV
reception
in their areas by checking the charts and maps that tend to give an
overly
optimistic representation of the projected reception.

Interesting. I get several digital channels that were not listed
on the
maps/charts, and that with an antenna in the attic.

Second, they need to
be sure their rooftop antenna is adjusted properly, assuming they
already
have a rooftop antenna, otherwise now they have to research,
purchase, and
install that rooftop antenna.

How my soul cries for them. All sorts of people did this in the
1950's
for analog TV. I guess they were smarter than most folks are now.

And those same antenna will still work. Is this guy Rouse really Bob
Miller using another nym?

I live in NE Florida and I get a quality signal without any antenna and
I assume it is in HD. Also noted that Dish is now offering "free" HD
which is a good way to attract new customers and maybe some from DTV.
HD access charge for DTV is $10 so it is a good discount and may get
some to change their provider. Or will DTV soon give the same discount?

Lee

"Stewart" wrote in message
...

"Alan" wrote in message
...
In article "Daniel W.
Rouse Jr." writes:

Their response of "no" is actually the correct one. One can't just put an
antenna on the roof and get High Definition Television. There are several
other factors involved.

First, one needs to be sure they can get reliable over-the-air DTV
reception
in their areas by checking the charts and maps that tend to give an
overly
optimistic representation of the projected reception.

Interesting. I get several digital channels that were not listed on the
maps/charts, and that with an antenna in the attic.

Second, they need to
be sure their rooftop antenna is adjusted properly, assuming they already
have a rooftop antenna, otherwise now they have to research, purchase,
and
install that rooftop antenna.

How my soul cries for them. All sorts of people did this in the 1950's
for analog TV. I guess they were smarter than most folks are now.

And those same antenna will still work. Is this guy Rouse really Bob
Miller using another nym?

No, I am not Bob Miller, but I have seen the failure cases of DTV and when
researching the root cause found discussions, including those by Bob Miller,
indicating that 8VSB was the most susceptible to RF interference and dynamic
multipath.

I think we have some people who weren't using OTA for analog & decided to try it for digital. They found it wasn't just plug-and-play (at least not
with an indoor antenna) like cable was.

And they'd probably forgotten (or never knew) that indoor-antenna reception wasn't exactly plug-and-play in analog either. There's a reason those
"ears" on a set of rabbit ears are adjustable, a reason why the antennas that came with analog TVs could be rotated in their "socket" on top of the TV.

I think we also have:

- Stores selling antennas that are woefully wrong for the areas in which they're being sold. Rabbit ears in locations 60 miles from the nearest
station. Amplified antennas in areas right under the towers. UHF-only antennas in markets (most of them) where major stations are on VHF.

- People who were watching analog signals that were FAR worse than engineers felt anybody would be willing to watch.

(I do receive fewer stations with an indoor antenna in digital than I did in analog. But the missing stations, their analog reception was so noisy
you wouldn't be able to tell what county the tornado warning was for...)

(no longer do I wake up to find the ABC station is broadcasting in Spanish... not really, just that when the skip was in, Monterey, Mexico would
completely overwhelm local channel 2. In digital, that simply doesn't happen -- if there would ever be a show on ABC I'd want to watch, I'd be able
to see it..)

Wes Newell wrote:
Third, given the
tendancy for the 8VSB modulation used in ATSC OTA DTV to end up with
jitter, one needs to make sure their RF conditions are reasonably void
of interference and especially void of dynamic multipath.

Not a problem where I've seen it.

I am aware of cases of co-channel interference (DTV-into-DTV) causing reception problems. However, it's happening outside the stations' protected
coverage area -- and indeed, outside the stations' protected *analog* coverage area.

(not Wes, but the other guy
since using a DTV converter box on a standard definition (480i)
or even enhanced definition (480p) TV won't give HDTV. Finally, the
programming itself has to be HD, so then even if one has an HD capable
TV and flawless OTA DTV reception they won't get HD for any specific
program in standard definition (unless they "upscale" the standard
definition to an HD resolution, but then it still won't be true HD
programming).

True enough, but using a SD or ED TV on cable or satellite isn't going to give you HDTV either...

First the word has to be spread that the DTV system needs to be fixed.

Nothing needs to be fixed. 8VSB works as designed. I've been using it for
over 5 years now without any major problems.

I do wish we'd considered a more flexible system. I thought Sinclair had the right idea asking for rulemaking to allow broadcasters to choose between
8VSB and COFDM. My experience with COFDM for live remote pickups has been VERY impressive -- but there is no way we'd be able to pay for enough
transmitters to cover our entire market with COFDM. I think it would have been useful to allow stations to simulcast on low-powered COFDM
transmitters in the major cities in their market.

But that horse is out of the stable.

(again not Wes, but the other guy
Now. No delays, no excuses. Spread the word that they who broadcast and
they who regulate OTA DTV must spend the money needed to get those
digital translators up and running to increase the range and reliability
of the DTV signal, and they should also increase power levels where
needed to ensure the cleanest signal without jitter.

Multipath and interstation interference are not solved by power increases. The relative powers of the desired and undesired signals remain the same.

As long as cable & satellite continue to be responsible for the majority of viewing, it's going to be awfully hard to get hard-strapped stations to
agree to the non-trivial cost of installing additional transmitters. Especially in this depressed economy. Heck, we've had four stations turn in
their licenses & go dark with only *one* transmitter to support.

It is legal for third parties to build digital translators. Maybe if enough people want it badly enough, we'll see some applications.

(going back to Wes
If they're too stupid or lazy, them let them get cable/sat and spend the
$50-100 a month for HDTV. How much have I saved by never paying for it
over the last 45 years.:-)

ATSC is the best thing that's happen to TV since the introduction of the
TV set.

Wes, it makes perfect sense to me. Unfortunately many Americans don't think that way.

They don't do the math. $75/month * 12 months/year = $900/year for TV. You could buy one heck of an antenna installation for $900, pay a
professional to do all the work, and have enough left over to rent a movie on DVD every Saturday night. Unfortunately, you have to pay most of the
$900 upfront, and nobody budgets for that anymore...

With an indoor antenna, I went from analog with two channels that look decent all the time and three that one can sorta watch when the skip isn't in
and five more that you can figure out what program is on if you concentrate enough... to digital with three channels that are absolutely perfect all
the time... With a simple outdoor antenna, 22 perfect channels. I sure don't want to see us go back...

--

Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View, TN EM66

Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:


No, I am not Bob Miller, but I have seen the failure cases of DTV and
when researching the root cause found discussions, including those by
Bob Miller, indicating that 8VSB was the most susceptible to RF
interference and dynamic multipath.

Using the Los Angeles Basin as an example, if you can see Mt. Wilson (on
a clear day) from your roof, your chances of receiving HDTV from the
broadcasters located on that mountain are effective 100%. It is not
rocket science and the reps that told the OP "no" are a bunch of
incometent goons.