Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The TV antenna is making a comeback

marketplace.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 254 posts

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#161

Post by PretzelFisch »

Animats wrote: post #146
z2 wrote: post #139

Two years back I decided to make my own antenna. I had no idea what a folded dipole was, but found a website that instructed me to use a metal clothes hanger cut to the proper length for HD US signals, and a block of wood. I had neither so I taped some leftover enamel wire to a piece of cardboard. I still use this antenna today, and get about 50 channels, living 30 miles away from the nearest broadcast antenna. Point…

At the UHF frequencies digital TV is using, antenna location and direction matter more than antenna design. If you have line of sight to the transmitter, almost anything will work. The article talks about antennas having become an exotic product. That's just not true. WalMart has a good selection of outdoor TV antennas, starting from $20.[1] Home Depot also has a selection, but many of theirs still have the VHF eleme…

There are many areas where digital is still broadcast over VHF.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#162

Post by johnwards »

ForHackernews wrote: post #153
pidg wrote: post #7

This kind of TV is the 'default' here in the UK (Freeview) - we get about 50-60 digital channels and 10 HD channels. I suspect cable TV is actually on the rise here, but can't find stats to back that up.

The Brits really have us beat here. For Americans, take a look at this list: http://www.ukfree.tv/channels/all On the other hand, they have to pay an annual government tax just for owning a TV.

The TV Licence funds the BBC content, which is Free to Air TV, online stuff, Radio etc. It has no ads and aims to have as much diverse stuff as possible.

The BBC is awesome, I happily pay my tv tax :)

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#163

Post by Animats »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #45
imglorp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh, they used to drive around in the UK with an EM locator, looking for unlicensed TV's to tax. Craziness.

You mean unlicensed TV broadcasters ? How could they track a receiver ?

The local oscillator in the tuner emits some RF. This not only indicates that there's a TV receiver present, but indicates what channel is selected.

This was more of an issue with older tuners, because standards have tightened on emitting unwanted RF signals. Tube era tuners emitted a lot of RF, since the tubes themselves were out in the open, not behind shielding. Modern tuners are in small metal cans [1], which both shield them from nearby RF sources and prevent them from emitting. They also operate at much lower power levels than older tuners, so they don't emit much RF.

One of the unsung victories of regulation is that electromagnetic compatibility is quite good today. In the early days of consumer electronics, personal computers emitted so much junk RF that they'd interfere with TVs and crash other devices. A Radio Shack TRS-80 and a Milton Bradley Big Trak toy would both crash if nearby. Today, cell phones have four radios (cellular, WiFi, Bluetooth, and GPS) going at the same time without interference. When the FCC clamped down back in the 1980s, there was a lot of bitching, but the FCC was right. Now, it Just Works.

[1] http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/en/compact-tv-tuners-focu...

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#164

Post by PretzelFisch »

ghaff wrote: post #19
ThinkingGuy wrote: post #13

I just recently installed an antenna in our attic after we cancelled our cable TV, and I've been very pleased with the results. Here in the Atlanta area, we're getting almost 60 TV channels, plus about 10 audio-only simulcase of several local radio stations. There's even a channel that displays a program guide, like the ones you find on the cable or satellite services. People's lack of awareness of over-the-air telev…

I suspect that, for many people, getting cable (or satellite) has just become sort of the default. Of course, many do watch sports which often (though not always) run on non-network channels. Also, not everyone is able to get TV OTA or is in a position to install an attic/rooftop antenna. I personally can't get anything OTA. I regularly toy with cutting back to a very basic bundle but haven't seriously pursued yet.

This depends on what you're after. HBO, Showtime, comedy central, espn the simple solution has been cable or satellite.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#165

Post by PretzelFisch »

aparks517 wrote: post #141
shanecleveland wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. Seems to be pretty general, though. I just think it would be cool to combine this with anecdotal info from antenna users.

I've found http://tvfool.com to be very useful and precise. It appears to rely on physics rather than anecdotes, but you might find it worth a try.

tvfool.com has been the go to resource not only will it help you determin what type of antenna you will need but also what stations you can expect to recive as well as what direction the broadcasts come from so you can better am your antenna.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#166

Post by dtparr »

jessaustin wrote: post #147
dtparr wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, another not super cheap option is Tablo[0]. It's different than most since it doesn't actually have an HDMI plug, but rather it's basically just a back-end box than records off an antenna and then can play back on its app on most of the standard devices, Roku, Chromecast, Apple/Android/Fire TV as well as Android/iOS mobile devices and desktops via Chrome. You'll likely want a subscription at $5/mo or $150/life…

It's kind of amazing to me that they can get $200 for that. Since it doesn't have video out it's positioned as a "network device", which is perfectly valid since we already have roku and chromecast. Except, it can't use NAS? I'm thinking there must be a cheaper option for getting OTA into e.g. Plex. [EDIT:] Also there must be some EPG service for cheaper than $5/mo?

Yeah, I'd like NAS support as well. I think their thinking is that the variability introduced by the network speed (especially since they advertise it with wifi), might cause unexpected failures that they won't see with a usb drive. They seem to be riding the line between a "just works" appliance and something more configurable. I'm surprised, frankly, that there's not an option to just get the HDD bundled with it and call it a day, in order to guarantee the user is using a known-good HDD.

If you already have a home server, this is probably not as good of an option as you could just add some software and a dual tuner for $75-100. The EPG thing is more of a hassle once WMC gets deprecated. For mythtv and some others, you can do schedules direct for $25/yr. There are some free setups I've seen using scripts and such, but they mostly seem to be held together with twine and bailing wire and seem likely to break if a 3rd party decides to crack down.

For someone who's looking for a whole-house DVR though without running a bigger media setup though, it seems reasonable.

If you find a good appliance that'll get stuff onto a NAS on the cheap using reliable EPG, I'd love to see it.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#168

Post by pjc50 »

legitster wrote: post #159

I'm 24 and I have never had cable in my life. Frankly, I'm surprised it's not more common. You get a LOT of TV for free. I grew up watching PBS and Simpsons and etc. I remember at superbowl some of my friends were amazed that I was able to watch the football game without cable. I was floored. They didn't even know that channels came in over the air. I showed them the antenna, where it installs in the TV, how cheap th…

How on earth does this situation come about? Hypereffective advertising by the cable companies?

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#169

Post by joezydeco »

narrowrail wrote: post #132
joezydeco wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tivo Roamio OTA ($49.99) will let you do this if you never activate the subscription. You can use the tuner and buffer the broadcast stream.

This never came up in my research (although I was biased against Tivo), but I just checked and it said: " $14.99 Monthly service with 1-year commitment " Do you (or anyone else) know if the Tivo will work without an internet connection?

Yes, it will work without an internet connection.

I bought a Roamio OTA for my mother-in-law, who has no internet. I set it up at my place (it usually wants to upgrade to latest firmware over wifi when you unbox it), scanned for the OTA channels, then I took it to her place and wired it up.

The operation without monthly activation is bare-bones. I mean, you don't even get channel or station names. But you can tune to prescanned OTA channels and watch tv and pause it live.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#170

Post by z2 »

JTon wrote: post #140
z2 wrote: post #139

Two years back I decided to make my own antenna. I had no idea what a folded dipole was, but found a website that instructed me to use a metal clothes hanger cut to the proper length for HD US signals, and a block of wood. I had neither so I taped some leftover enamel wire to a piece of cardboard. I still use this antenna today, and get about 50 channels, living 30 miles away from the nearest broadcast antenna. Point…

Awesome. Care to share the resources you used for this project?

It may have been this page, though I'm pretty sure the resource I used told me what length to cut it. http://www.diytvantennas.com/dipole.php

Still, we can figure this out: Wikipedia says North American UHF frequencies are on average 680MHz across all channels, which corresponds to a wavelength of about 44cm. A folded dipole needs to have a length half of that, so we want a 22cm antenna when folded, plus about a 1cm gap.

Post reply on HN