tigerbangs prescription for deep fringe reception

gjvrieze · 01-03-2009, 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iroc_zz

After some closer mesurements the cable runs from the antenna about 45 feet to the basement to a 4 way splitter and then has three longer runs. One is about 40 feet long, one is 35 feet long, one is 25 feet long, and the last one is about 15 feet long. I am only using the one 4 way digital splitter rated at 5-2300 MHz. All runs use Magnavox RG6/U 18 AWG cable.

I think that I would try it without additional amp first, my gut says it will be fine, but in the end a good distribution amp may be needed.....

Davepet · 01-08-2009, 04:00 AM

I've been reading in here for hours now & haven't found a definite answer to my situation.
Here's what TV Fool says about my location:
Sorry, I am not allowed to post urls until I post 5 times
I am over a mile high in the Sierras outside of Sacramento, Ca. Most of the stations I want to see are within a 30 degree arc of my location.

I currently use a mid-sized broadband antenna of unknown make & a distribution amp of unknown gain & get most Sacramento area stations (analog) fine some San Francisco stations (analog) watchable but not great.

With my converter box, reception is all over the place, during an hour's show, a perfect picture can deteriorate into various ugly artifacts to no signal at all. On good days, the reception is way better than analog, on bad days I may get one or two stations reliably.

So clearly I need an antenna upgrade at the least. Probably a new amp & perhaps a better rotator as well. I am only concerned about the UHF channels at this time, I know there will be a few digital VHF stations in my range, but I have a couple of Blonder Tongue style single channel antennas here I can use for that if needed. Only one of those 3 channels is watched often enough to be concerned about, in any event.

I don't think the multi-path problem exists up here, how can I tell? (Ghosting isn't a problem with my current antenna, if that helps) I suspect the 4228HD is the best option, wish I could have seen this early enough to get the original 4228, but it seems too late for that.

It's not clear (even after all the discussions in here) if the 91XG would be a better choice for this location. I am also wondering about the Clearstream 4 , since the smaller the antenna the better it deals with the severe snow loads up here. It is not uncommon for a storm to leave 3 feet of snow on the horizontal portions of an antenna & it can take several days before it falls/melts off. Is Antennas Direct using snake oil to get those performance figures on the Clearstream 4?

This form has the most useful information I've found so far on this topic. Thank you to all who contribute.

Dave

Davepet · 01-08-2009, 04:09 AM

OK, I got frustrated. I know the 5 posts before allowing URL's is to deter spammers, but it is kinda frustrating when the best way to show you what I am dealing with is to post a URL & it happens to be my first post in here.

I was tempted to post 4 more posts titled "post 2" "post 3" etc, so I could just point you to the results, but instead will just list my lat / lon & if you'd like to try & help I guess you can find the needed info.
LAT: 39.283119
LON: 120.690037

Thanks,
Dave

otaota · 01-08-2009, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davepet

LAT: 39.283119
LON: 120.690037

I've attached your pre- and post-transition digital reports here. I don't remember exactly, but I think you might be able to attach files to your posts prior to the 5 post minimum.

Quote:

It's not clear (even after all the discussions in here) if the 91XG would be a better choice for this location. I am also wondering about the Clearstream 4 , since the smaller the antenna the better it deals with the severe snow loads up here. It is not uncommon for a storm to leave 3 feet of snow on the horizontal portions of an antenna & it can take several days before it falls/melts off.

The XG91 may actually be better for you. It is light-weight yet sturdy and plays nice with other antennas on the same mast. The 4228 takes up a lot more vertical space and is much heavier. The Clearstream 4 doesn't really seem that much better because its elements have more surface area for snow and ice to cling to.

Are you using a pre-amp? If not, I'd recommend the CM 7777. Without a pre-amp, you're sacrificing an additional 5 to 10 dB of signal quality to the cable losses and tuner noise figure.

Cheers,

Davepet · 01-08-2009, 01:04 PM

Thanks, Chuck!
Let me clarify a few things:
1- I am using an indoor distribution amp & without it I have very little reception with any antenna I've tried over the last 20 years (5 or 6). I plan to change to a normal preamp when I change antennas.

2- Vertical space & weight are not really issues. Snow loading on horizontal surfaces takes out most antennas up here eventually. You'd probably get a chuckle to see how many antennas have bent or missing elements, yet still seem to deliver a usable signal. Losing VHF low is a good thing, IMHO, smaller element last much longer. I've also had the upper half of the corner reflector collapse on 2 units so far, so I look hard at how well that area is designed.

3- I forgot to mention that my antenna is about 25-30 feet off the ground, but according to the report, that only seems to make a few db difference in the strong stations. It does change the lineup quite a bit in the weaker stations, but I don't expect to get those anyway.

So, are you recommending the 91XG because you feel it will deliver a better signal up here or due to it's structural merits?

I know multipath won't be a problem wit the 91XG, might it be a problem with the 4228? Based on the difficulty I currently have aiming, I'll probably need to upgrade to a microprocessor controlled rotor with the 91XG. My current rotor is crude at best.

Thanks again,
Dave

gjvrieze · 01-08-2009, 01:36 PM

I have and like the 91XG, while it is a great antenna, I do not know how it will hold up for you, maybe you should spring for a Televes DAT-75.. It is a LOT more, but is built much more like a commercial antenna, the 91XG's corner reflector, is pretty weak IMO, I do not think it will make it a winter in your environment.... Good thing about the 91XG, is that Antennas Direct seems to be good about sending out parts for their antennas, often free.... There are a guy on AVS who got 2" of ice and it wrecked all of the reflectors, they sent the replacements out for FREE!

otaota · 01-08-2009, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davepet

1- I am using an indoor distribution amp

OK. Then you'll probably improve things by a couple of dB by having an amp closer to the antenna. Just make sure any amp you get has a noise figure of around 3 dB or less.

Quote:

2- Vertical space & weight are not really issues.
...
smaller element last much longer. I've also had the upper half of the corner reflector collapse on 2 units so far, so I look hard at how well that area is designed.

OK. Maybe the 4228 would be better for you. The boom elements on the XG91 are probably fine in the snow because they are so short and have very little surface area, but the corner reflectors may be a problem since they are at a 45 degree angle and held on with wing nuts. It's not that it is a bad design, it's just that a few pounds of force seems like a bit much for it to handle.

The large vertical screen of the 4228, combined with a strong mount, should be able to tolerate much more loading than the screens of the XG91. I just hope you don't have any high winds because the 4228 is definitely much more vulnerable to that.

Gain-wise, both these antennas are good performers. Due to its Yagi design, the XG91 has its highest gain around channel 69 and falls off a bit as you go toward lower UHF channels. The 4228 will generally perform better at the low end of UHF while the XG91 will generally perform better at the upper end.

Quote:

So, are you recommending the 91XG because you feel it will deliver a better signal up here or due to it's structural merits?

It's a well built antenna in both regards, but I must admit that I don't think the reflectors will stand up to the levels of snow loading that you've described.

Since it sounded like you wanted to have separate UHF and VHF antennas, the lower weight, lower wind resistance, and smaller vertical dimensions of the XG91 make it the preferred choice in most situations (prior to accounting for your snow concerns). The 4228 will put more stress on the mast and rotator (if you use one), so you'll want to be more cautious in terms of keeping the mast short, using guy wires and load bearings for support, and selecting a solid mount.

Quote:

I know multipath won't be a problem wit the 91XG, might it be a problem with the 4228?

I don't think this will be much of an issue. It does not sound like you have that much multi-path to contend with and either antenna should be fine. The 4228 has a slightly broader vertical beam width, but apart from that, both antennas are quite similar in performance.

Quote:

Based on the difficulty I currently have aiming, I'll probably need to upgrade to a microprocessor controlled rotor with the 91XG. My current rotor is crude at best.

These antennas are sensitive to aiming, but as long as you can get it to within +/- 5 degrees or so, you should be fine.

Cheers,

Davepet · 01-08-2009, 04:52 PM

OK, thanks that's pretty much what I needed to know.

I've been reading in another forum that the 4228HD may not be as good a performer as the discontinued 4228:

Do you think the new model is still up to the task? Most of the stations of interest are in that channel 25-45 range where the newer design isn't as strong.

Dave

fm234n5 · 01-22-2009, 12:02 AM

This thread is quite long and the CM 4228 is no longer available.
from post #1

Quote:

the deep-fringe perscription is as follows,

1 Channel Master 4228 UHF antenna
1 Wade-Delhi VIP-306 VHF antenna
1 Channel Master Titan 7777 preamp
1 Channel Master 9521a rotator
30'+ antenna height from the ground

Where is Tigerbangs most up-to-date "prescription" for deep fringe?

tigerbangs · 01-22-2009, 06:49 AM

The only thing that has changed is to use an AntennasDirect XG-91 in place of the 4228. Everything else is still valid.

torymon · 01-23-2009, 02:25 PM

Tigerbangs,
I live in the 38621 area code.
Co-ordinates are 34.320129N by 90.114136W
Have existing antenna on 10' pole on roof of single story house, give or take about
30 feet in the air, whole bunch of mature Pecan trees and one huge Magnolia...
of course, the Magnolia is directly in line-of-sight to Memphis... naturally!
Being on a fixed income, I can't afford to buy a tower but I am fixing to add another
section of 10 foot pipe and guy wires to raise my antenna.
Any thoughts or suggestions?
torymon

jim5506 · 01-23-2009, 10:49 PM

Shame on WMC-DT staying on VHF-low throws a monkey wrench into the ointment, to mix metaphors.

So you need to be able to get 5, 13, maybe 10 and a variety of UHF channels.

I might be tempted to use a Winegard HD7694 or one of its larger brothers and insert channel 5 signal off a channel 5 cut yagi.

Otherwise you are left with putting up a full VHF/UHF antenna (quite large) like the Winegard HD7084P or the Winegard HD8200U.

Either way I'd amplify it with a Channel Master 7777

torymon · 01-24-2009, 04:17 PM

jim5506 wrote;

Quote:

Shame on WMC-DT staying on VHF-low throws a monkey wrench into the ointment, to mix metaphors.

Good catch! WMC-DT is currently using a smaller transmitter tower (for pre-transition digital broadcasting) located in the N.E. Memphis area (Brunswick, TN) but after transition, they'll be using their primary tower in the downtown area. TVFool shows that after 2/17, I should be able to receive DTV broadcasting if my antenna is up to snuff.

You bring up a good point tho', I'm led to believe that DTV will be all UHF. I researched and thought I understood the transition to be the conversion to digital thru utilization of UHF channels with only the smaller stations remaining in the VHF bands.
I further understood that the transition was (primarily) to free up the VHF bands for emergency/police/military uses.
Am I wrong?

Further confusing the issue is reading thru the forums, I follow discussions regarding receiving the high VHF (7 - 13) channels for digital broadcasts as well as the upper UHF bands...

Or is this primarily PRE-transition reception?

Quote:

I might be tempted to use a Winegard HD7694 or one of its larger brothers and insert channel 5 signal off a channel 5 cut yagi.

Isn't the HD7694 a combo antenna? If the transition is a switch to digital broadcast on the UHF bands, why would I need a VHF antenna? I'm about finished building a SBGH G6 UHF antenna which I thought would help me with my poor reception.

Quote:

Either way I'd amplify it with a Channel Master 7777

Yeh, I'm using Radio Shack stuff right now and ain't happy with it!!! I'm saving my pennies to get the CM 7777...
In fact, I believe (now!) this would probably be the biggest improvement.
So... I think now... VHF 7 - 13 & UHF 14 - 51 for DTV, right???

This is definitely a learning experience for me!
I appreciate the patience of everyone and the sharing of information!
Please continue to suggest and guide... further assistance is welcome!
Thanks!
torymon

smdp1 · 01-24-2009, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim5506

Shame on WMC-DT staying on VHF-low throws a monkey wrench into the ointment, to mix metaphors.

they are not the only one on vhf low...wcft is trying to stay on vhf low channel 5 as well as wtvf....ironically I can get all 3 from here.

Davepet · 01-24-2009, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by torymon

jim5506 wrote;

You bring up a good point tho', I'm led to believe that DTV will be all UHF. I researched and thought I understood the transition to be the conversion to digital thru utilization of UHF channels with only the smaller stations remaining in the VHF bands.
I further understood that the transition was (primarily) to free up the VHF bands for emergency/police/military uses.
Am I wrong?

Yes you are mistaken, at least in the US, the channels above UHF 51 will be auctioned off. VHF low are subject to too much interference & are mostly undesirable for digital, but I guess a few stations are holding on anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by torymon

Further confusing the issue is reading thru the forums, I follow discussions regarding receiving the high VHF (7 - 13) channels for digital broadcasts as well as the upper UHF bands...

Or is this primarily PRE-transition reception?

Nope, in some areas a few stations will use the VHF high frequencies. In my area channels 7 & 10 will stay put. Channel 6 will move to 9. Every station has a choice, basically.

Quote:

Originally Posted by torymon

Isn't the HD7694 a combo antenna? If the transition is a switch to digital broadcast on the UHF bands, why would I need a VHF antenna? I'm about finished building a SBGH G6 UHF antenna which I thought would help me with my poor reception.

If you have any post transitions stations staying on VHF, you may need a VHF antenna as well. I'd give your SBGH a try first, though. I've picked up usable signals down to channel 2 with my crude version & I'm 140 miles from that station.

Dave

01-08-2009, 04:00 AM	#812
Davepet How can anyone watch standard def? Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Northern Calif Posts: 15	Clear LOS, but 80-120 miles away I've been reading in here for hours now & haven't found a definite answer to my situation. Here's what TV Fool says about my location: Sorry, I am not allowed to post urls until I post 5 times I am over a mile high in the Sierras outside of Sacramento, Ca. Most of the stations I want to see are within a 30 degree arc of my location. I currently use a mid-sized broadband antenna of unknown make & a distribution amp of unknown gain & get most Sacramento area stations (analog) fine some San Francisco stations (analog) watchable but not great. With my converter box, reception is all over the place, during an hour's show, a perfect picture can deteriorate into various ugly artifacts to no signal at all. On good days, the reception is way better than analog, on bad days I may get one or two stations reliably. So clearly I need an antenna upgrade at the least. Probably a new amp & perhaps a better rotator as well. I am only concerned about the UHF channels at this time, I know there will be a few digital VHF stations in my range, but I have a couple of Blonder Tongue style single channel antennas here I can use for that if needed. Only one of those 3 channels is watched often enough to be concerned about, in any event. I don't think the multi-path problem exists up here, how can I tell? (Ghosting isn't a problem with my current antenna, if that helps) I suspect the 4228HD is the best option, wish I could have seen this early enough to get the original 4228, but it seems too late for that. It's not clear (even after all the discussions in here) if the 91XG would be a better choice for this location. I am also wondering about the Clearstream 4 , since the smaller the antenna the better it deals with the severe snow loads up here. It is not uncommon for a storm to leave 3 feet of snow on the horizontal portions of an antenna & it can take several days before it falls/melts off. Is Antennas Direct using snake oil to get those performance figures on the Clearstream 4? This form has the most useful information I've found so far on this topic. Thank you to all who contribute. Dave Last edited by Davepet; 01-08-2009 at 04:15 AM.

01-08-2009, 04:52 PM	#818
Davepet How can anyone watch standard def? Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Northern Calif Posts: 15	OK, thanks that's pretty much what I needed to know. I've been reading in another forum that the 4228HD may not be as good a performer as the discontinued 4228: Do you think the new model is still up to the task? Most of the stations of interest are in that channel 25-45 range where the newer design isn't as strong. Dave Last edited by Davepet; 01-08-2009 at 04:53 PM. Reason: typo

01-22-2009, 06:49 AM	#820
tigerbangs Antenna Maven Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Springfield, MA Age: 54 Posts: 2,102	The only thing that has changed is to use an AntennasDirect XG-91 in place of the 4228. Everything else is still valid. __________________ Real men don't use indoor antennas; neither do real women!

01-23-2009, 02:25 PM	#821
torymon My plasma is High Def. Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 5	That tip about wire straightening... Tigerbangs, I live in the 38621 area code. Co-ordinates are 34.320129N by 90.114136W Have existing antenna on 10' pole on roof of single story house, give or take about 30 feet in the air, whole bunch of mature Pecan trees and one huge Magnolia... of course, the Magnolia is directly in line-of-sight to Memphis... naturally! Being on a fixed income, I can't afford to buy a tower but I am fixing to add another section of 10 foot pipe and guy wires to raise my antenna. Any thoughts or suggestions? torymon Last edited by torymon; 01-23-2009 at 09:10 PM.

01-23-2009, 10:49 PM	#822
jim5506 Yellow Submarine Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Lubbock, Texas Posts: 2,404	Shame on WMC-DT staying on VHF-low throws a monkey wrench into the ointment, to mix metaphors. So you need to be able to get 5, 13, maybe 10 and a variety of UHF channels. I might be tempted to use a Winegard HD7694 or one of its larger brothers and insert channel 5 signal off a channel 5 cut yagi. Otherwise you are left with putting up a full VHF/UHF antenna (quite large) like the Winegard HD7084P or the Winegard HD8200U. Either way I'd amplify it with a Channel Master 7777 __________________ Programming: Dish HD Absolute with 0.01 Cinemax Displays: Sony VPH-D50Q - 7 ft on the wall; Hitachi 57R59 Receivers: DishNetwork ViP722k; DishNetwork ViP211K; DishNetwork ViP211; DishNetwork 301; 2 - TiVo Series 2's; Accurian 6000; Samsung SIR-T351; Panasonic ShowStopper 2000; ATI HDTV Wonder Dish 1000 on 110,119,129; Dish 500 on 61.5; DPP44 Sony 80GB PS3; Toshiba HD-DVD

01-08-2009, 04:09 AM	#813
Davepet How can anyone watch standard def? Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Northern Calif Posts: 15	OK, I got frustrated. I know the 5 posts before allowing URL's is to deter spammers, but it is kinda frustrating when the best way to show you what I am dealing with is to post a URL & it happens to be my first post in here. I was tempted to post 4 more posts titled "post 2" "post 3" etc, so I could just point you to the results, but instead will just list my lat / lon & if you'd like to try & help I guess you can find the needed info. LAT: 39.283119 LON: 120.690037 Thanks, Dave

01-08-2009, 01:04 PM	#815
Davepet How can anyone watch standard def? Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Northern Calif Posts: 15	Thanks, Chuck! Let me clarify a few things: 1- I am using an indoor distribution amp & without it I have very little reception with any antenna I've tried over the last 20 years (5 or 6). I plan to change to a normal preamp when I change antennas. 2- Vertical space & weight are not really issues. Snow loading on horizontal surfaces takes out most antennas up here eventually. You'd probably get a chuckle to see how many antennas have bent or missing elements, yet still seem to deliver a usable signal. Losing VHF low is a good thing, IMHO, smaller element last much longer. I've also had the upper half of the corner reflector collapse on 2 units so far, so I look hard at how well that area is designed. 3- I forgot to mention that my antenna is about 25-30 feet off the ground, but according to the report, that only seems to make a few db difference in the strong stations. It does change the lineup quite a bit in the weaker stations, but I don't expect to get those anyway. So, are you recommending the 91XG because you feel it will deliver a better signal up here or due to it's structural merits? I know multipath won't be a problem wit the 91XG, might it be a problem with the 4228? Based on the difficulty I currently have aiming, I'll probably need to upgrade to a microprocessor controlled rotor with the 91XG. My current rotor is crude at best. Thanks again, Dave

01-08-2009, 01:36 PM	#816
gjvrieze High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Rochester, MN Posts: 289	I have and like the 91XG, while it is a great antenna, I do not know how it will hold up for you, maybe you should spring for a Televes DAT-75.. It is a LOT more, but is built much more like a commercial antenna, the 91XG's corner reflector, is pretty weak IMO, I do not think it will make it a winter in your environment.... Good thing about the 91XG, is that Antennas Direct seems to be good about sending out parts for their antennas, often free.... There are a guy on AVS who got 2" of ice and it wrecked all of the reflectors, they sent the replacements out for FREE!