Re: OTA reception: 35 miles SW from Chicago: should I get a cool, new design antenna or standard antenna?

Just a few comments. I installed my Dish Network system 7 years ago. I had
a previous high gain VHF Yagi and on top of that (by about two feet) I had a
UHF Yagi (all on a rotator). While it lasted for many years, it had too
much wind resistance and blew down late in the 90s. Since I am only about
22 miles from the San Francisco towers I put up a Channel Master 'Stealth'
antenna.which I would describe as a 'batwing' design. It was good enough
but lacking at channel 2 frequencies. I added the optional amplifier. All
this sounds similar to the Winegard hardware.

I then installed the Dish Network hardware and always considered my antenna
system as a backup. I went HDTV last year and plugged in the antenna rig to
the Dish receiver. Everything works great but, quite frankly, I see little
or no difference between the satellite-received signal or the OTA
equivalent. The big advantage to me is the additional station coverage I
receive by way of the OTA antenna. PBS here is Channel 9. The regular
station is identified as 09-00. There are five additional channels for
channel 9; 09-01 through 09-05. All DTV and several of them HDTV (depending
on the source material).

I think you can get good reception from the Winegard hardware as described
but you will probably need the amplification. Good luck.

John

"Kim Groves" <kg2323@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4gURh.15128$Um6.1375@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This may end up being a long post... sorry for that, but I am looking for
experienced opinions with OTA reception. I would love to have one of these
options installed in the next few days. Here is my situation:

I live in Plainfield, IL, about 33 miles west from the Sears tower and the
Chicagoland broadcasting system. I have a satellite system, I get locals
over the sat. system, but want to get that "higher quality" that
uncompressed video may contain for HD reception. I have not yet knowingly
seen HD material sent OTA, so I don't know the difference in picture
quality that exists. I have DirecTV's HR20, and I should be able to merge
OTA into this system.

Two installers with different suggestions. Both adamant that they are
correct. Both state they have 20+ years of experience in my area. Both
install and recommend Winegard products.

Installer 1: Hyper guy; knows the area (business is 20 miles south of
here; he reports doing a lot of TV installs). He suggests either a
Squareshooter or a Batwing, because I stated I didn't really want a "big
old antenna" on my roof. Both of his suggestions are amped antennas. Both
advertise getting 50 mile reception. Either one would probably not look
"too antennaish" when installed on my roof. You would notice them, but not
think too much about them due to a smaller form factor. Using either of
these antennas, I was told I would be able to get all local programs
excluding channel 2 (too low in the VHF range). This installer visited my
home when I wasn't there, and essentially overlooked an old Comcast cable
box on the outside of my house, which would allow me to link the new
external antenna line to this box, which already has a run present to
where my TV is located. His install solution involved drilling a hole for
the cable through the outside of the house, through the wall, to where the
TV is, using a plate to join the outside cabling to the cable that will
run to the TV.

Installer 2: Nice guy; installs antennas in the Plainfield area for "30+"
years. He favors a standard Winegard antenna (7080), non-amplified. He is
adamant that the Batwing or Squareshooter won't work for this area. He is
certain with the "7080", I would get all the local channels, including
channel 2.

I am guessing that VHF channels may be channels 2, 5, 7, and 9.

Both installers stated they would install "whatever I want", but both
remain loyal to their suggestions.

Two questions: first, I am hoping that by installing an external antenna
that there really will be a noticeable difference in quality between OTA
and Satellite-compressed HD displays. I really like the Satellite HD local
channels, but I feel there must be "something more" in quality to
experience. I just saw some wrinkly old skin on William Shatner's face,
but typically I don't believe I am receiving the full compliment of facial
blemishes I should be viewing with HD TV. I can pick up a few elements
like these periodically, but "eye-popping" small details are not typically
evident. Maybe I am used to the HD system. I have had HD reception for
about 7 months. My TV is a good one (10 months old), and I am happy with
the picture quality. I just want everything I can get with respect to
clarity. Based on what I have read and heard, OTA supporting a better
picture is a "fact". In your experience, do you agree?

Question 2: The Winegard 7080 is designed to pick up both VHF, UHF, and
FM. It should be better at reception. Is it a better option to go with
this "traditional design" antenna, which will appear very noticeably on
the top of my house, and which should guarantee reception of channel 2, or
go with either of the other "newer" design types, receive hopefully all of
the same channels excluding channel 2, but have the "plus" of a much
less-noticeable presence on the top of my roof?

Down the road, I could easily see dropping the satellite system entirely,
watching HD on local channels only, and having everything else I might
watch on a video server (representing archived DVDs and eventually, either
HD DVDs or Blue Ray DVDs).

Sorry for the long post. Thanks for any suggestions.

Kimmer





.

Relevant Pages
Loading