[TriLUG] [OT] HD Antenna suggestions, was: TV Tuner Card suggestion

[Neil L. Little]

Remember, that there is really no difference antenna wise from a regular 
antenna than the HD antennas. The only difference would be that these 
new HD channels will not be using the vhf TV channels any more. HD 
channels use UHF TV channels. Any TV antenna that is able to receive UHF 
TV channels will work.

My HD antenna cost me nothing. I constructed it from a 1x4, a few screws 
and washers and some 12 gage wire. It took me about 30 minutes to put 
together. It is a stacked "bow tie" type antenna such as the 4221 that 
channel master has been selling for years.

There are several places to find this with a short google search using 
"coat hanger hd antenna" string.

73,
Neil, WA4AZL
JARS Forever!!
www.jars.net

Brian Henning wrote:
> Hi gang,
>
> Thought I'd hijack this thread to see if anyone might have advice on HD
> antennas.  I just got the converter box (I have an old analog-only TV
> right now, and dropped TWC a few months ago when they wouldn't let me go
> straight from one promo deal to another) and I've been trying different
> antennas and have had somewhat surprising results.  Note: low-profile is
> a requirement; I don't have room for something I can't mount on the
> wall.
>
> First I tried a $20 passive antenna.  Looks cheap, but scanning found
> about 12 channels (though I can't actually watch all of them; I get
> weak- or no-signal messages on all the NBC channels, and most channels
> suffer frequent dropouts).
>
> Then I tried a $100 "smart" antenna.  It works WAY WORSE than the $20
> contraption; I can only pull in PBS with that thing.  Granted I was
> testing during the icky weather last night, but I was
> half-expecting/hoping that the $100 guy would always outperform the $20
> guy.  Caveat emptor.
>
> So next I'm thinking about trying a $60 amped not-smart antenna.  Should
> I bother?  It seems my reception (in a ground-floor apartment near
> Southpoint) is poor all around, but even with a low SNR, more amplitude
> still means more signal, right?...  until you start to overwhelm the
> receiver, but one amped antenna shouldn't do that...
>
> All suggestions welcome.
>
> Thanks a lot!
> ~Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: trilug-bounces at trilug.org [mailto:trilug-bounces at trilug.org] On
> Behalf Of OlsonE at aosa.army.mil
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 9:38 AM
> To: trilug at trilug.org
> Subject: Re: [TriLUG] TV Tuner Card suggestion [may be OT]
>
> LOL! C-SPAN would be the last channel on my list I'd pay for!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: trilug-bounces at trilug.org [mailto:trilug-bounces at trilug.org] On
> Behalf Of Tanner Lovelace
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 9:36 AM
> To: Triangle Linux Users Group General Discussion
> Subject: Re: [TriLUG] TV Tuner Card suggestion [may be OT]
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Josh Vickery <josh at vickeryj.com> wrote:
>   
>> If you have Timer Warner Durham, I find this list to be wonderfully
>>     
> helpful:
>   
>> http://home1.gte.net/res18h39/channels.htm
>>
>> as Time Warner seems to like to change their channel assignments.
>>     
>
> I wonder why, out of all the possible channels, it lists C-SPAN  as
> "(encrypted)".  I would have thought that would be one of the first
> ones to leave unencrypted.  I guess they just can't have people
> watching their government without paying for it!
>
> Cheers,
> Tanner
>
>