I Am Thinking Of Cutting Cable

[TerryMiller]

I'm watching this thread with interest. We cut the DirecTV about a year ago, because it had gotten up around $140 per month. However, that was more than just the basic DirecTV. We are currently in an RV park with fairly decent internet via WiFi, but when everyone in the park is home, it sucks big-time.

We are considering selling our RV and moving into an apartment, and then buying a smaller RV for traveling. When we will be in an apartment, I will need something really good for internet because of the size of the photos that I upload to my Smugmug site. Then, depending on what that costs us, I "might" get the DirecTV Now system. Still undecided at the moment, thus the interest in this thread.

 

[OKNewshawk]

The dirty little secret of HD antennas is... There's no such thing as an "HD" antenna. An antenna is just a conductor that directs RF signals to a receiver. The antenna doesn't care if that RF signal is analog or digital, or if it's HD or SD. If it's in good repair, you could receive a HD signal with a TV antenna made in 1948!

Now. unless you live right next to a TV transmitter, you'll probably need a signal amplifier. That's where you have to begin to pay attention to the type of device you're using. Today's digital TV signals are not as strong as analog signals used to be. The days of picking up faint distant TV signals ended on June 12th, 2009.

Therefore, find the TV antenna that works for you but ignore the hype.

Sent from my LML413DL using Tapatalk

 

[O4L]

WiFi isn't internet. You can have a WiFi local area network (LAN) without connecting it to the World Wide Web. A Chromecast would connect to your smartphone or tablet but unless it had internet (like LTE service) you'd be restricted to casting what was stored on your device.

Sent from my LML413DL using Tapatalk

Well I wasn't tech savvy enough to figure out how to connect my phone to the Chromecast gadget a friend loaned me so I gave it back.

 

[Tanis143]

The dirty little secret of HD antennas is... There's no such thing as an "HD" antenna. An antenna is just a conductor that directs RF signals to a receiver. The antenna doesn't care if that RF signal is analog or digital, or if it's HD or SD. If it's in good repair, you could receive a HD signal with a TV antenna made in 1948!

Now. unless you live right next to a TV transmitter, you'll probably need a signal amplifier. That's where you have to begin to pay attention to the type of device you're using. Today's digital TV signals are not as strong as analog signals used to be. The days of picking up faint distant TV signals ended on June 12th, 2009.

Therefore, find the TV antenna that works for you but ignore the hype.

Sent from my LML413DL using Tapatalk

Actually, thats incorrect to a degree. The older antennas were configured for VHF and UHF channels. When tv broadcasters started pushing out digital channels, then HD channels, they went with UHF as VHF didn't have the bandwidth for 1080i. That old antenna might pick up the channels, but it is not optimized for them now, hence the need for an amp. The antenna I built, while simple, picks up every single channel in Tulsa without an amp.

Would you care to share the prototype? That sounds like a good idea, I'd like to build one also if it isn't too complicated or needs a metal work shop.

This is similar to what I built. I just didn't use a reflector. You will need a couple of long pieces of at least 14 gauge copper wire (I used ground wire), a long enough board or a couple of pvc pipes put together with 4 elbows and a 300 ohm to 75 ohm matching transformer (the little block you would use to go from a coax to the two pigtails). Then its just the time to make it.

http://pinosy.com/media/317574211215444200/

Here is a picture of the dimensions in US measurement.

There are other variations as well. This one was just the simplest to make.

 

[MacFromOK]

Antennas (lol, antennae?) can be tuned to frequency (wavelength), but not much else AFAIK. Reflectors simply help capture the signal and bounce it back (i.e. concentrate it) toward the antenna.

Digital signals are basically 0s and 1s, and the receiver builds the picture & sound from those.

Unlike analog TV, it doesn't matter whether the signal is strong or weak, as long as those 0s and 1s are discernable to the receiver.

Just my two cents.

 

[Tanis143]

Antennas (lol, antennae?) can be tuned to frequency (wavelength), but not much else AFAIK. Reflectors simply help capture the signal and bounce it back (i.e. concentrate it) toward the antenna.

Digital signals are basically 0s and 1s, and the receiver builds the picture & sound from those.

Unlike analog TV, it doesn't matter whether the signal is strong or weak, as long as those 0s and 1s are discernable to the receiver.

Just my two cents.

Well, you get too weak a signal and bits of data will go missing, causing pixelation. This is why rabbit ears and other older antenna typically need rf amplifiers, they are not tuned for strictly UHF but rather tuned to balance reception for VHF and UHF. This would be too hard to convey for the masses, so the just called them HD antenna to differentiate between an VHF/UHF antenna and a strictly UHF antenna. A vast majority of the people don't understand that UHF stands for Ultra High Frequency (when tv's were able to tune to channels above 13 which start in the 500 mhz range) so they still equate UHF to analog even though no broadcaster uses an analog signal anymore.

 

[TwoForFlinching]

I'd be curious where anyone is still broadcasting analog. DTV is far cheaper to operate with far superior quality.

 

[MacFromOK]

Well, you get too weak a signal and bits of data will go missing, causing pixelation.

Indeed, but then the receiver isn't getting all the data.

My point, is that a weak signal (as long as it makes it to the receiver complete) will have just as good picture & sound as a super-strong signal. Analog couldn't do that (a weak signal meant a weak picture).

That's the major advantage of digital.

 

[dennishoddy]

We didn't have dish for several years because it didn't fit in our budget. Then we got richer and my wife said it'd sure be nice to be able to watch the NFR. Now we've had it for about 8yrs. That's just on 10 evenings a year. Dish doesn't offer a 10 day of the year plan. We really should look for other NFR viewing options and cancel the dish. We'd save about $1100-1200 a year I think. That'll buy a pretty nice rifle or sumpin

In our RV we have a dish module that mounts on a tripod. We got the model that can search for the east or west satellites, and finds which is the strongest. Good for us as our RV site in Red River NM backed up to a mountain that blocked the west satellites.
Its a pay as you go system. You pay for the first month, and if you only use three weeks, you have a week in the bank to use the next time you go out. Pretty cool deal so you don't have to pay if your not using it, but your still a member and get to pay another month the next time you go out.

 

[Tanis143]

Indeed, but then the receiver isn't getting all the data.

My point, is that a weak signal (as long as it makes it to the receiver complete) will have just as good picture & sound as a super-strong signal. Analog couldn't do that (a weak signal meant a weak picture).

That's the major advantage of digital.

Very true. There is a measurement of signal vs noise, its called Signal to Noise Ratio, or SNR. On digital anything over 32 dB is good and anything over 38 is perfect. You can have a weak signal but as long as the ambient noise is low, it won't make a difference.

That being said, using an antenna that is tuned to UHF will get you a better signal. So if you have an old antenna or rabbit ears and a few channels will pixel now and then, getting a UHF only tuned antenna can clear that up. Now if you are going to split that signal for multiple tv's I would recommend throwing in an amp anyways.