[Elvandil]

Or just disconnect it. You can test that easily.

[LauraMJ]

Oh, okay. You can see that I have not been the one to actually look at what's up there, lol. I'll tell hubby to look for a way to disconnect just the one part.

[lotuseclat79]

Hi Laura,

Recently, I asked one of the TV technicians at a local station here in Boston about a problem with one of their subsidiary stations on another channel that they broadcast on, and he told me that local politicians have been telling the local TV stations that with DTV they can reduce their power. Normally, with analog TV the power was at about 30,000 watts, and the politicans (House: Congress) are telling them they should be able to lower the power to 3,000 watts - What a crock!

What do politicians know about DTV from a hole-in-the-ground. Someone told them, and they are repeating the wrong information.

Read my web post for information on lots of links to help your understand the problem you are having (aside from Elvandil helpful comments) Post#14.

Also, on AntennaWeb.org you will find the reception distances, etc. of antennas (if you really do need to replace your antenna). Understand first, that if your house is in a valley and not straight line-of-sight from a digital transmission tower, your signal may be hard to pick up. Also, understand that there is NO SUCH THING AS A DTV ANTENNA!

It is likely that part of your problem is a lower power transmission being used by the TV stations - check with them - it should be over 20,000 watts or more up to 50,000 - and not down around less than 10,000.

If power is not a problem, then your location from the transmission tower/antenna combination may also be part of the problem.

Use the tools like Tiny-Geo code and Antenna Web to help you sort out the problem.

Read, read, read - and you will find a solution that fits your need (if not satellite, cable or FiOS).

-- Tom

[LauraMJ]

Tom,

I had already found AntennaWeb and a couple of the others you mentioned in that other thread, and that along with Elvandil's help and your extra info, I think I've got a bit of a handle on getting this signal improved. I'll have to shop around a bit and talk to some local stores about the amplifiers, and when we get one hooked up, I'll post back and give everyone an update.

[JohnWill]

Originally Posted by LauraMJ

Okay, I found some pictures on Google and it looks like UHF is the back part (on the right of the picture). So you are saying that the UHF part would be the part that would pick up the digital signal the best?

Uhh... that's the FRONT of the antenna! Is it perhaps pointing the wrong way?

[LauraMJ]

Back, front, whatever. The right side of the photo.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by LauraMJ

Here is a photo of the one we are using now.

I think what John is trying to suggest is the left side of your picture is the back of the antenna. The right side of the picture should be pointing towards the source.

[Elvandil]

He has a point, though. It points one way if you think of it as an arrow, but if you haven't tried it, point at the source from the other side. I just assumed that you had probably tried it every whichway.

[LauraMJ]

Yeah, we turned it completely around the spectrum while I watched the little signal meter on the TV.......where it is right now is the ONLY place that it even GETS a signal. And checking it against AntennaWeb, where they give you the compass reading of where it should point to, we've got that end (on the right side of the picture) pointing towards the compass reading.

[Drabdr]

Well, it was worth a try.

I've HD TV for several years now, so I have been battling this stuff for a while. All connections need to be solid, with as few connectors as possible. If you have it going through a surge protector, try bypassing it. Also, if you are into climbing , check the line of sight of the antenna. If a bunch of trees and stuff are getting in the way, that could be a factor. The trees may not have been that tall in the past, but may now be a contributor.

If the line of sight is questionable, you may want to put a taller pole. If you go taller, you might need to beef up the pipe diameter you are using, to give it more strength.

Check all the connectors and see if there is any corrosion; that can start to insulate the signal.

[Wino]

Drabdr - all well and good things to check or do, but if it was working before the change, doubt it has anything to do with the problem now. As I stated in earlier post, I'm in the city, have no outdoor antenna, just indoor, which worked well (received ALL but two channels out of 22) on HD until the change. Now lucky to get 10 with any consistency in picture quality. There is no 'line of sight' on any of the three HD TV connections (1-LCD and 2-computers). I still say they have reduced their signal power, and guessing that saves the local broadcasters some money.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by Wino

Drabdr - all well and good things to check or do, but if it was working before the change, doubt it has anything to do with the problem now. As I stated in earlier post, I'm in the city, have no outdoor antenna, just indoor, which worked well (received ALL but two channels out of 22) on HD until the change. Now lucky to get 10 with any consistency in picture quality. There is no 'line of sight' on any of the three HD TV connections (1-LCD and 2-computers). I still say they have reduced their signal power, and guessing that saves the local broadcasters some money.

Agreed. I don't understand it, though. Essentially all they did was stop broadcasting analog signals. One could go in-line with a wattmeter and measure the signal strength. I'd call the local broadcasting station and ask.

Posted via Mobile Device

[LauraMJ]

I emailed and asked out local station why it worked well before and not now......they said I would probably need an amplifier and completely ignored the question of why it was a worse signal now than before they stopped the analog.

[Wino]

Originally Posted by LauraMJ

I emailed and asked out local station why it worked well before and not now......they said I would probably need an amplifier and completely ignored the question of why it was a worse signal now than before they stopped the analog.

This reminds me of many computer manufacturers (particularly IBM old Aptiva's) - the problem is never on their end - you always needed to buy or do something to make it better on you end or it was your fault there was a problem, not theirs. I suspect the problem is at the broadcaster and they will just shift it off on the consumer to go buy antenna's and amplifiers that probably aren't needed if they would just boost their power. Frankly, this change to digital has been a boondoggle from the gitgo IMHO.

[JohnWill]

The antenna may not be optimized for digital transmission frequencies.

Why is it so hard to receive DTV signals in some locations?

When it comes to digital television, it's an "all or nothing at all" proposition. Once the signal is acquired, a steady stream of data assures you'll get a perfect picture and great audio. If that bitstream is interrupted, however, there will be nothing - just a blank screen. It’s as if the signal went over a cliff!

In areas with lots of buildings and multipath, frequent signal dropout causes this "cliff effect". The fix is to use a higher-gain antenna and perhaps even a preamp - assuming the multipath can be tamed. Fortunately, current model set-top DTV receivers are light years ahead of early models in terms of multipath performance.

The key to widespread rollout of digital TV is carriage of local DTV stations on cable TV systems. Today, better than 70% of all US households are getting television via cable or satellite, so you can see how important it is for broadcasters and cable/DSS providers to sign carriage agreements.