Sounds like You are in a similar boat Mark,main difference is cable is not an option here. It seems dishtv has a 6 month $10 deal right now,I don't know what that price goes to after the promo deal tho. In the long run I think having the conversion set up will be much cheaper,just need to go without instant gratification wich could become the norm for a few years anyway,economy considered. Other than a favorite channel or two local channels trip My trigger more than cable/satelite.
If this thread stays open I will try to keep My situation updated,if not,stuff happens.
Dean
Digital antenna
Sub channels;
Why are sub channels recieved differently in the sense that,say,5.1 will pixelate when 5.2 will be clear? I assume they come from the same station,are they on different transmitters/antennas of varying power/position? Or,,is it *all* in My antenna's orientation?
I think soon I will be looking for more steel pipe to raise My antenna to whatever height I can get without compromising the pole or structure in high winds. I'm thinking of hinging the very bottom so the pole can be tipped/walked downward for servicing connections or making changes like adding another antenna or a rotor. After extending it will be too high to reach from the roof.
Dean
Why are sub channels recieved differently in the sense that,say,5.1 will pixelate when 5.2 will be clear? I assume they come from the same station,are they on different transmitters/antennas of varying power/position? Or,,is it *all* in My antenna's orientation?
I think soon I will be looking for more steel pipe to raise My antenna to whatever height I can get without compromising the pole or structure in high winds. I'm thinking of hinging the very bottom so the pole can be tipped/walked downward for servicing connections or making changes like adding another antenna or a rotor. After extending it will be too high to reach from the roof.
Dean
-
DigitalDreams
Dean in answer to your question about pixelation on 5.1 but not on 5.2 ect.
Broadcasters are alloted 19.39 mhz as I understand it under the new digital scheme and can use it as they see fit either using all 19.39 mhz of bandwidth for one channel or just a portion and assigning sub channels to the rest of it so the best signal is the one they deem as their primary and the rest are portions as they see fit.
For example my local channel 3 which in digital is really on channel 33uhf now send their main broadcast on 3.1 using about 12mhz of
the 19.39 and uses the rest to send the weather services radar picture as a weather channel at lower digital resolution.
You have heard of 1080I the hdtv standard I sure well if your broadcaster is only sending one signal such as my local channel 6
the signal is 1080I or in computer terms about 1920 x 1080 resolution good as a nice computer.
But if they are using 1/4 of that band width for a sub channel the
signal is degraded by how they split it and how many times.Also digital is like you satellite dish if a simple tree branch blocks the signal for a few nanoseconds you lose part of the digital stream
causing freezing and pixelation and if you combine that with a lower bit stream rate and blockage wala you get what you were talking about, kinda like you throw a house in a river the
river slows but wash's it away,throw that same house in a creek and you slow it to a trickle.
Broadcasters are alloted 19.39 mhz as I understand it under the new digital scheme and can use it as they see fit either using all 19.39 mhz of bandwidth for one channel or just a portion and assigning sub channels to the rest of it so the best signal is the one they deem as their primary and the rest are portions as they see fit.
For example my local channel 3 which in digital is really on channel 33uhf now send their main broadcast on 3.1 using about 12mhz of
the 19.39 and uses the rest to send the weather services radar picture as a weather channel at lower digital resolution.
You have heard of 1080I the hdtv standard I sure well if your broadcaster is only sending one signal such as my local channel 6
the signal is 1080I or in computer terms about 1920 x 1080 resolution good as a nice computer.
But if they are using 1/4 of that band width for a sub channel the
signal is degraded by how they split it and how many times.Also digital is like you satellite dish if a simple tree branch blocks the signal for a few nanoseconds you lose part of the digital stream
causing freezing and pixelation and if you combine that with a lower bit stream rate and blockage wala you get what you were talking about, kinda like you throw a house in a river the
river slows but wash's it away,throw that same house in a creek and you slow it to a trickle.
Ok,I think I got that part now,all things are not equal,,even from the same station.Thanks.
I may have a longer pole coming,My neighbor lady's BF has some sections within 25 miles of here.Sounds like I'll get the antenna up to between 24' - 26',roughly a 10' raise.I'm guessing that will help for now,after the trees leaf out it's anybody's guess.
Dean
I may have a longer pole coming,My neighbor lady's BF has some sections within 25 miles of here.Sounds like I'll get the antenna up to between 24' - 26',roughly a 10' raise.I'm guessing that will help for now,after the trees leaf out it's anybody's guess.
Dean
Ok,if it comes to it after raising this antenna,I might stack another antenna on the pole. Question is; Since there is about 30% loss using a splitter will the 2nd antenna need to be the most expensive type to overcome the splitter loss?
I realize all My other variables may make it difficult to answer with acuracy but any/all info may prove useful to My amature design capabilities.
Dean
I realize all My other variables may make it difficult to answer with acuracy but any/all info may prove useful to My amature design capabilities.
Dean
-
DigitalDreams
Antenna separation is important to prevent ghosting,but you can daisy chain antennas eliminating a splitter by simply jumping from one to the other with flat ribbon wire, but be sure to put a twist in it as that will make it less likely to pick up other interference,or using a ballast transformer you know the little barrel shaped things,you use to connect cable to the back of your tv with before cable connections become the norm and a short chunk of cable.
Also in this arrangement make sure to put any amplifier on the bottom antenna as ballast transformers do not pass voltage they just heat up and burn out kinda like sending 120 volts through a toy made for 12 volts.
Also in this arrangement make sure to put any amplifier on the bottom antenna as ballast transformers do not pass voltage they just heat up and burn out kinda like sending 120 volts through a toy made for 12 volts.
I thought ghosting was an analog problem,in the event I try a 2nd antenna it would be to try to increase the digital signal. Yet,if there is a reason to separate the antennas for digital use,how far apart should they be? Is putting the 2nd 1' down the pole gonna work? 2'? More?
Dean
Dean
If any one is interested you can build your own antenna. It worked for me. Here is the link. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthre ... 265&page=2
JimCNY,thanks. I might have to make several tries to build a fringe or deep-fringe antenna. There are stations closer than that but I don't know that any are line of sight.
For now I'm going to try the basics with what I have and what I can get cheap,namely raising it up 10' to start with. Then I can reroute and shorten the cable. Then I can try low loss cable. Then stacking antennas and/or low noise pre amp(gettin pricey now).
With luck I will get delivery of 22' of schedule 40 pipe tomorrow,.I will mount it lower to gain more spots to attache and brace 1/2-way from top bracket to antenna,after mounting 2' lower I will have a net gain of 10' from current height. Supposedly this pipe will cost Me $25,delivery included,I'm a bit skeptical as to what will actually be the case.
I came here to post this link when I saw You message. Lots of techy info on both links but it is good to read and try to get used to the terms and such.
http://www.geocities.com/toddemslie/UHF-TV-DX.html
Dean
For now I'm going to try the basics with what I have and what I can get cheap,namely raising it up 10' to start with. Then I can reroute and shorten the cable. Then I can try low loss cable. Then stacking antennas and/or low noise pre amp(gettin pricey now).
With luck I will get delivery of 22' of schedule 40 pipe tomorrow,.I will mount it lower to gain more spots to attache and brace 1/2-way from top bracket to antenna,after mounting 2' lower I will have a net gain of 10' from current height. Supposedly this pipe will cost Me $25,delivery included,I'm a bit skeptical as to what will actually be the case.
I came here to post this link when I saw You message. Lots of techy info on both links but it is good to read and try to get used to the terms and such.
http://www.geocities.com/toddemslie/UHF-TV-DX.html
Dean
-
DigitalDreams
Sorry guess ghosting not really a issue in digital, hey give me a break I'm still analog on a lot of stuff.
Did however find the number of the ultimate uhf antenna but unfortunately channel master no longer makes it ,but you could build one pretty easy.
It was a channel Master CM 4251 Ultra parabolic uhf, I use to use this dish in 80's to setup my clients for a uhf pay service that was on channel 23 uhf and got picture gain enough to key the decoder at 150 miles out.
If you find one of these out there grab it they sold for 170 dollars in 1985 and now are worth upwards of a thousand dollars to seekers.
They looked like this.
Did however find the number of the ultimate uhf antenna but unfortunately channel master no longer makes it ,but you could build one pretty easy.
It was a channel Master CM 4251 Ultra parabolic uhf, I use to use this dish in 80's to setup my clients for a uhf pay service that was on channel 23 uhf and got picture gain enough to key the decoder at 150 miles out.
If you find one of these out there grab it they sold for 170 dollars in 1985 and now are worth upwards of a thousand dollars to seekers.
They looked like this.
I wasn't pickin on You man,I was a tad confused for a second tho. Absolutely no prob here and I do appreciate Yer info.
Hmmm,My big bro is inspector in a metal engineering/fabrication factory,I bet He would be a giant help with building one of those. It looks to be directional. I'm still hoping for multi direction solution,without a rotor,if possible.
Distance alone from the closer towers doesn't put Me in a "far fringe" area,but from what I understand so far,obstructions and lay of land compound the issue and I am what I might call "tantamount" to far fringe area.
I haven't heard anything about My new mast pole yet today,I'm curious to see it,pay the bill,and go from there with mounting the antenna higher.
I haven't matched the 14 channels that worked well that 1st night since then,but have come close,with the highest signal reading 29% on the RCA converter signal test,I find that encouraging enough to try the new mast.
Dean
Hmmm,My big bro is inspector in a metal engineering/fabrication factory,I bet He would be a giant help with building one of those. It looks to be directional. I'm still hoping for multi direction solution,without a rotor,if possible.
Distance alone from the closer towers doesn't put Me in a "far fringe" area,but from what I understand so far,obstructions and lay of land compound the issue and I am what I might call "tantamount" to far fringe area.
I haven't heard anything about My new mast pole yet today,I'm curious to see it,pay the bill,and go from there with mounting the antenna higher.
I haven't matched the 14 channels that worked well that 1st night since then,but have come close,with the highest signal reading 29% on the RCA converter signal test,I find that encouraging enough to try the new mast.
Dean
-
DigitalDreams
Heres a idea when you get the new mast up.
If you got a friend who has another brand of converter have him bring it over and try it on your system , because not all electronics are created equally I have a Digistream sold by radio shack and the reason I got it is I researched all of them when they first come out and it and one zenith converter had the highest good feedback at the
time.
And yes it is somewhat directional but thats what you want if you got a channel that you wanna be sure is always there when you need it.
I'm gonna build a smaller one to aim at the channel we get most of our weather info off of.
If you got a friend who has another brand of converter have him bring it over and try it on your system , because not all electronics are created equally I have a Digistream sold by radio shack and the reason I got it is I researched all of them when they first come out and it and one zenith converter had the highest good feedback at the
time.
And yes it is somewhat directional but thats what you want if you got a channel that you wanna be sure is always there when you need it.
I'm gonna build a smaller one to aim at the channel we get most of our weather info off of.
Yeah,I didn't get that part till after I bought the RCA DTA800B1,then read that converter boxes have an *average* of 10db noise factor,,dunno how My RCA compares to that average tho.
I bought the RCA because it supposedly had a better remote control compared to the other box walmart had available.A friend told Me the RCAs were sold out faster than the other brand(magnavox I think).In retrospect,I would probably go for low noise instead,price and availability dependant tho.
Dean
I bought the RCA because it supposedly had a better remote control compared to the other box walmart had available.A friend told Me the RCAs were sold out faster than the other brand(magnavox I think).In retrospect,I would probably go for low noise instead,price and availability dependant tho.
Dean
Stay away from the Magnavox. I got one as soon as they were available with the Gov coupon. Junk... The engineer at the local station was on tv and said they have had nothing but complaints, and you can't exchange then if bought with the coupon. I also have a Dish Network "DTV Pal" converter much better reception, onscreen, guide, remote. Got it at Sears
I guess I got the better of the only two the local walmart stocks then. One complaint with the RCA's "better remote" tho is there is no recall/last channel button,one of My favorite features on any remote. Also the point button is in a very crappy position for those occasions when Ya want to go to a sub channel without using up/down.
I guess this box will serve to get used to digital and for getting the rest of the system set up,I can upgrade later.
Dean
I guess this box will serve to get used to digital and for getting the rest of the system set up,I can upgrade later.
Dean