Pulling In Chicago Stations from 70 miles away

tvfool dotcom/?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29&q=id%3d8ecdb2f21d8bba

In-laws live 70 miles south/SW of Chicago. Currently they have a VERY beat up no name antenna hooked to a $10 Magnavox pre-amp, run to a 4-way splitter/amp and split again at least 4 more times.

And with all that they get almost all of the Chicago stations.

Problem is chanel 7 (vhf-hi) and channel 5 ocassionally don't come in.

So they want to replace it all to get consistent reception. I read TigerBang's suggestion but wondered if the VHF antenna was necessary or if the 4228 would be capable of pulling in the 3 VHF-hi stations from Chicago.

Or, is there a better antenna setup?

Also, they have an unassembled tower that would get them about 25' in the air.

Here's a clickable link for your TV Fool results:

http://tvfool.com/?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29&q=id%3d8ecdb2f21d8bba

The experts will be able to provide the proper advice for your situation.

This isn't that bad a situation, but you do need a deep-fringe antenna system. I would recommend the digital deep-fringe prescription: a Winegard YA-1713 VHF high-band yagi plus an AntennasDirect XG-91 UHF antenna mounted on the roof, with the XG-91 mounted 4' above the YA-1713. Combine the two antennas by using a Channel Master Titan 7777 preamplifier, and aim the rig at 39 degrees by your compass. use high-quality RG-6u coaxial cable, and be sure to put the preamplifier in the 'separate' input mode to it will see and amplify both antennas.

Good Luck.

http://www.winegard.com
http://www.channelmaster.com
http://www.antennasdirect.com

Thanks for the prompt replies and assist. I just have two questions:

1. Should the coax going from each antenna to the pre-amp be the same length?

2. If they insist on a combined antenna solution are there any good recommendations?

Thanks,

Bob

Your coaxial cables do not need to be the same length, but you may want to re-think the distribution system that has multiple splitters in it. We'll help you with that if you want. Most multiple-TV households lose most of their signal distributing to individual TV sets. When done properly, distributing TV to multiple TV sets in a home shouldn't cause any quality loss at each TV set.

If they insist on a single antenna, I would probably suggest the Winegard HD-7697P, but it costs about the same as the prescription that I described, and will be a bit less effective on UHF. If WMAQ is an issue for you, you may want to reconsider the 2-antenna system

I just asked about the splits. Apparently my FIL did some cleanup.

The split right now is as follows:

1 in - 4 out RatShack distro/amp:

1 line to spare bedroom
1 line to living room where a second splitter breaks it up for a DVR and the TV
1 line to master bedroom where a second splitter breaks it up for a DVR and the TV
1 line on amp is open

1 more question regarding antenna selection:

They get a pretty good amount of wind around them year round (live in country with no buildings or high trees around for miles).

How will these antennas do in high winds?

I should also mention that with the garbage antenna right now they are able to pull in some non-Chicago stations, the most unique being the Chicago station at 233 degrees orientation.

I should also mention that with the garbage antenna right now they are able to pull in some non-Chicago stations, the most unique being the Chicago station at 233 degrees orientation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly the point, the WYZZ station at 233 degrees is out of Peroria, Ill, and while the Tigerbangs recommendations may be all well and fine to pick up those Chicago Stations at a heading of 37 degrees, it may require some sort of an antenna rotar to pick up all those non Chicago stations at multiple other aims also.

But then it gets somewhat more complex, because at the end of the day, it becomes a cost question, because if you can pick up all networks with a fixed aim at Chicago, will picking up an exact duplicate network at another aim be worth the added expense?
WYZZ is a Fox network and probably the same as another Fox network out of Chicago.

I for one will not presume to judge, because its always up to the end user to decide that value added question.

The other thing to mention with an antenna at a fixed aim, is that while it always does best at exact aim, its not a matter where the further off exact aim, the worse you do. Because depending on channel, the gain loss patterns of antennas are more shaped like a club on a playing card. And one can have a huge gain at exact aim, and get a huge loss at 30 degrees off aim, but then get a much lesser loss at 45 degrees off exact aim. So with a fixed aim antenna, you may get a surprising large number of way off main aim stations without a rotar.

1 more question regarding antenna selection:

They get a pretty good amount of wind around them year round (live in country with no buildings or high trees around for miles).

How will these antennas do in high winds?No need to worry about wind with the 91-XG/YA-1713. Both are very well constructed, and have very low wind resistance. Also, as Tigerbangs mentioned, the 91-XG is noticably better on UHF than the 7697.

If your in-laws like "House" they may want to keep WYZZ 43(28). I realize thats probably carried elsewhere but there does seem to be unique programming outside of prime time.
The tower is about 10 miles NW of Bloomington and I have so much gain in my pre-amps that I just block it with a JoinTenna to let the other Peoria stations thru.

If he Peoria stations are an issue for the OP, he can always add a rotator: it's no big deal, really

If he Peoria stations are an issue for the OP, he can always add a rotator: it's no big deal, really

The station is actually in Bloomington, about 40 miles from their house. I just didn't know if these antennas would "block" the ability to pull that in off the back of the antenna.

Bob

I wouldn't count on picking up much from the back of an XG-91 because it's pretty directional and has a high front-to-back ratio, meaning that it strongly rejects signals coming at it from the rear.