|
Thwomp posted:I get every channel (except CBS but they're broadcasting in some frequency only used in two other places in the US) in HD. It can be a bit shaky during storms so I may get the amplified version of it when it goes on sale. Still a great device. Just a note about amplified antennas - they are only really useful if the signal is borderline but OK at the receiving element but have lost enough signal strength over the connecting cable to become problematic. In other words, if the signal that is hitting the antenna is already having problems with signal:noise levels an amp will not help your situation. If you go ahead with the amplified antenna get it from a place with a liberal return policy. golgo13sf posted:That's because what's coming through the cable is compressed to hell and back, OTA is not. This is STRONGLY dependent on the provider. A lot of OTA channels are still using MPEG-2 since changing out all their hardware for MPEG-4 compatible stuff is prohibitively expensive. Some tests have shown that the cable stream is virtually identical to the OTA stream, with only some header info changed (nothing that affects picture quality). Panty Saluter fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Jul 11, 2012 |
# ¿ Jul 11, 2012 06:12 |
|
|
# ¿ Mar 28, 2024 14:05 |
|
upsciLLion posted:Is there an easy way to find where the cables connect? I live in a townhouse apartment if it matters. Start lookin' for a big pile o' wires Seriously, if you're very lucky and this is a new building (less than ten years old) you may have a panel in a closet (master bedroom is a popular location). Otherwise the cable wires generally converge in the attic or outside at the demarc point.
|
# ¿ Jul 16, 2012 20:39 |
|
Yeah, I don't think they'll be able to dodge the legal banhammer forever but it's a neat idea. It's Community Antenna TV for the 21st century
|
# ¿ Jul 26, 2012 01:16 |
|
Netflix has the Walking Dead but it's only season 1 so I assume that's pretty behind.
|
# ¿ Aug 8, 2012 23:00 |
|
A signal booster is only useful on certain types of problems - say if you have a borderline but usable signal at the antenna but it loses just enough strength on the wire then an amp can offset that loss and make the signal usable. If the signal is already crap when it hits the antenna, you're SOL. If the signal is plenty hot already an amp can overdrive it and turn it into crap. Why can't you use your Tivo with the freebie cable? It should work with plain-jane analog cable just fine. e: if multipath is a problem then an amp will not help. you could try a small directional antenna since an omnidirectional will not help a multipath problem.
|
# ¿ Aug 10, 2012 14:09 |
|
Don Lapre posted:If comcast being allowed to encrypt clearqam requires them to make it available over IP, and software/devices can integrate with it, id be more than happy with that. This, plus I hope it kills off the space hog that is analog broadcast. I don't know that broadcast channels need to be encrypted but on the other hand it'll make securing the signal a lot easier.
|
# ¿ Oct 17, 2012 00:47 |
|
Don Lapre posted:Most cable companies are already or have killed analog. This has to do with removing the clearqam channels. We haven't...still got 50+ of the annoying buggers floating around. I think the office would be stormed by angry villagers with pitchforks and torches if they went away though. I thought most cable companies still had an analog tier and only a few had gone all digital?
|
# ¿ Oct 17, 2012 02:18 |
|
I used to work for a home theater company that sold Winegard and they are indeed a fine product. Usually pretty reasonably priced as well.
|
# ¿ Dec 27, 2012 03:46 |
|
Don Lapre posted:People used to buy old voom sat receivers and use the atsc tuner. That's cool. I'd forgotten all about Voom (looks like I wasn't the only one either). Then I found this on the Voom Wiki page: quote:Voom set-top boxes have commanded prices upwards of $100 on websites such as eBay as people seek a less expensive way to receive digital off-air broadcasts. I hope this is outdated, although as I recall most ATSC adapters were well under $100 from the outset.
|
# ¿ Apr 3, 2013 04:00 |
|
Thwomp posted:So RCN is now encrypting basic local TV signals that you could've accessed through your internet line. Comcast is reportedly going to start doing so as well. Also, to be extra dicks, you'll need a box for every TV and it doesn't even have to be an HD box. Might not be a bad idea. Invest in a compass and hit up http://tvfool.com or http://antennaweb.org Depending on where you live you might get a dozen or so channels (including sub-channels) for the cost of your time and a few dollars for a decent antenna.
|
# ¿ Apr 12, 2013 19:03 |
|
Thwomp posted:That's what I do now with my cable line. The point of the article I posted is that cable operators are beginning to encrypt those signals that come leaking through their wires. Not exactly. Cable ops are encrypting the local stations that are being rebroadcast over their system. If the cable hookup in your place is getting actual over-the-air transmission (because it is disconnected or possibly leaking somewhere else) the cable op has no control over that.
|
# ¿ Apr 12, 2013 23:33 |
|
The_Franz posted:Doesn't the FCC have rules that prohibit the encryption of local FTA channels? I think you missed the point of what I was saying - the OTA channels that you receive by antenna are unencrypted. If they are retransmitted over the cable companies lines then they can be encrypted. I think where the confusion comes in is when someone is using a cable line as an antenna and doesn't realize it. Coax will act like an antenna if it is not connected to the cable company's feed. Then you are getting OTA channels.
|
# ¿ Apr 13, 2013 01:49 |
|
Boxman posted:Does anyone else have problems with interference from HDMI mucking with an antenna signal? I just picked up an amplified for my $10 antenna hoping it would fix the problem. But to no avail. What leads you to believe HDMI is causing the issue? If you have a cable or piece of equipment that's leaking that badly I can't imagine it would be working very well at delivering video.
|
# ¿ May 21, 2013 04:19 |
|
Boxman posted:Fak, I asked a question then forgot to check in. When I unplug the HDMI cables (or if the devices are turned off), I get far better antenna reception. How odd. Have you tried leaving just one HDMI plugged in at a time to see if it's just one of them causing the issue? Where is your antenna located? Have you been able to try a different set of cables (perhaps with ferrite chokes installed)? I guess it could be an internal leakage issue too, where something is getting out of the HDMI input board and is messing with the tuner. First I've heard of it though. e: make sure your antenna input is screwed on but good. You don't have to tool tighten it (in fact it's better if you don't), but make sure the cable is firmly seated and not able to wiggle at all. You'd be amazed how little looseness it takes with a coaxial cable fitting to leave the door open to problems. Panty Saluter fucked around with this message at 14:12 on Jun 30, 2013 |
# ¿ Jun 30, 2013 14:08 |
|
Cornjob posted:ok so i picked one of these up. so far pretty impressed. theres a few quirks, and some might be dealbreakers for some users. I can post more thoughts, but only if theres an audience here that cares. Nope, no one cares in the thread obsessing over TV delivery mechanisms.
|
# ¿ Jul 2, 2013 01:52 |
|
Mahoning posted:He was being sarcastic. Forgot the tags again, my b. e: I like that it is considered "not cable" even though it is a subscription service being served by a cable provider.
|
# ¿ Jul 2, 2013 02:25 |
|
Mighty Horse posted:Reports are coming in that Comcast shut down ClearQAM locals for at least the Northeast Region today. That's cute, you think a lot of people know or care enough about this to do something about it.
|
# ¿ Jul 31, 2013 04:50 |
|
The filter may have failed. Sometimes they let stuff through when their internals get funky. Also if you were hooked to cable this whole time you've probably been receiving unencrypted channels that aren't cut out by the filter. That or you have a very leaky cable or connector that is allowing OTA channels on to the cable.
|
# ¿ Nov 6, 2013 13:54 |
|
Gozinbulx posted:So I finally got a Winegard Flatwave per recommendation of this thread and... Is the Flatwave in exactly the same spot as the RCA was? If so you may be better off with the RCA. Other than that you may need to fool with positioning some. http://tvfool.com/ can help you with placement and orientation for your area.
|
# ¿ Nov 7, 2013 01:37 |
|
You could try an amplified antenna placed a little higher. I don't think an amp would help in your situation since the problem is probably reflections and/or EMI/RFI from the train. If you do wind up buying an antenna I would get it from a place that has a liberal return policy in case it doesn't work. Is there any way to get an attic mounted antenna? If you don't need ultimate sensitivity (and it doesn't sound like you do) an attic mount is a nice simple compromise if you don't want to mess around with or can't install a roof mount.
|
# ¿ Dec 22, 2013 16:47 |
|
She should get together with some of her neighbors and rent space on a local broadcast antenna on a nearby hill. Install the antenna there, then have cables run to the houses (might be pricey but it's a long term solution) et voilá! Reception for all.
|
# ¿ Jan 20, 2014 16:07 |
|
According to TV Fool anything in green (especially with LOS) will probably be picked up fine by an indoor antenna. Since you're relatively close an omni or multidirectional antenna will probably work better than a more tightly focused directional antenna. Judging for an amp is probably tricky unless you have a signal meter. Unless you have a ridiculously long run of cable from the antenna (over 100 ft or so) you probably don't need one too much
|
# ¿ Feb 11, 2014 01:48 |
|
Going "all digital" is not a problem for any TV with a ClearQAM tuner (so almost any TV manufactured in the last 8-10 years). In fact it will result in a better picture for a lot of channels, as wa27 noticed. Now if your provider starts encrypting channels - yes you will need a converter box. I'd say wait it out until they make the switch and see if you lose service before going for the nuclear option. Also a lot of providers will usually send letters notifying subscribers if they are encrypting channels to let you know you need to pick up converters.
|
# ¿ Feb 17, 2014 23:29 |
|
Mr Executive posted:It sounds like Charter is legitimately going all-encrypted. C'mon man, at least read what I posted. It's an important distinction to make.
|
# ¿ Feb 18, 2014 01:58 |
|
Until recently - yes they were. The FCC ruled last year that cable ops can encrypt local stations since it will cut down on piracy. Sadly many people seem to think that free OTA HD includes those same channels being free when transported over a cable network. In reality the charges for any "basic" type cable package are covering costs for retransmission fees and maintenance (you would be amazed at how much TLC a cable network needs). I would imagine most cable ops are going to go all encrypted before too long for just this reason. I'm sure a lot of people won't like it but the cable operator's position is not completely without reason.
|
# ¿ Feb 18, 2014 02:54 |
|
Don Lapre posted:Yes nothing they can really do about it except encrypt. There's always diconnecting your line or trapping it appropriately but that depends on how much the technician gives a poo poo.
|
# ¿ Feb 19, 2014 02:32 |
|
Don Lapre posted:Don't think they can trap clearqam. Sure you can. Just cut the frequencies the channels ride on -> porblem solved
|
# ¿ Feb 19, 2014 02:57 |
|
Don Lapre posted:Yea I guess so, I guess I've just never seen it done for digital TV frequencies. THat's going to be highly dependent on the provider. TWC here in central Texas has QAM channels all across the spectrum, some sitting right next to analog channels. Plenty of other providers are mapped differently for sure.
|
# ¿ Feb 19, 2014 03:16 |
|
Brock Landers posted:Do the cable companies pay the broadcasters like CBS fees though? I thought they were forced to carry them by the FCC. Pay TV companies would love for the FCC to mandate carriership rather than pay and squabble to retransmit. If Aereo wins it certainly could set an interesting precedent. I don't know that it would apply 100% to satellite and cable because (at least in some cases) get direct fiber feeds from local affiliates rather than using an antenna. Since it's not technically the same as Aereo (and let's be real, Aereo is tap-dancing down the razor's edge of technicalities) the ruling might not apply.
|
# ¿ Mar 11, 2014 23:59 |
|
Dr.Caligari posted:What speed internet connection would you recommend for a roku? Well Netflix uses 3Mbps for their "HD" streams so at least 5 down would be OK depending on how heavy an internet user you are when streaming (Steam downloads, pic heavy sites, etc). If you want Vudu HDX apparently they go to 10+ Mbps so...you would need something a little faster.
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2014 02:55 |
|
http://www.amazon.com/Amplified-High-Definition-Antenna-Off-Air-Reception/dp/B0007MXZB2 If you're a little far out you might try a directional antenna. Only downside is you may have to re-point it when changing stations, unless all of your transmitters are clustered together (seems like they are pretty frequently) e: no idea how good the one I linked is, it's just an example
|
# ¿ Jul 20, 2014 18:40 |
|
You have to lick the back of the antenna first.
|
# ¿ Jul 30, 2014 02:36 |
|
Slippery42 posted:Is there a consensus on the best DVR solution for over the air TV these days? I really like the idea of the Channelmaster DVR+, but not so much the idea that it only hooks up to one TV. A whole-home DVR would be preferable. I'm fine with homebrewing something since I have some spare computer parts laying around, but since the HTPC thread OP is a bit out of date, I'm a bit lost on two points in particular: The HD Homeruns are really nice network-attached tuners. You don't need the Prime unless you REALLY want three tuner capability (the big draw of that model is that is has a CableCard slot).
|
# ¿ Aug 19, 2014 23:22 |
|
Gaming is not bandwidth intensive so it really only becomes an issue if you have enough people using the internet at once to cause packet delays. It sounds like it's just you which means 20 Mbps is probably more than adequate (Netflix is what, 6 Mbps on Super HD?). That being said, I have been very spoiled by 100 Mbps downloads, even though relatively few things can take advantage of it
|
# ¿ Sep 22, 2014 19:00 |
|
Speaking of XBMC has anyone had luck with NetfliXBMC? I have it installed on Ubuntu 14.04.1 (I have Chromium installed as well) and I can log in and browse but it crashes when I try to actually watch something. I'd rather not spend $200 on Windows 8 just to get Netflix working (even though Metro seems like it might not be bad for an HTPC).
|
# ¿ Sep 25, 2014 12:52 |
|
At this point you want a modem that supports at least 8 x 4 bonding (8 downstream channels and 4 upstream). There are some less expensive models that only do 4 x 4 and they are not worth a few dollars in savings. If you want something at least a little future proofed, get a 16 x 4 model (this is the only one I know of off hand) since that will allow for 100+ Mbps download speeds.
|
# ¿ Sep 25, 2014 18:54 |
|
Don Lapre posted:An 8x4 allows up to 336Mbps downstream and 120Mbps upstream. A 16 is nice but really not necessary and its possible your isp doesnt' even support 16 channel bonding In theory, yes. If you have the entire spectrum to yourself those speeds are achievable. In practice you want 16 channels because you will never have the whole thing to yourself. While 16 x 4 is new and rare now it's not a bad thing if you're thinking forward at all.
|
# ¿ Sep 25, 2014 19:31 |
|
I don't know about Comcast but technically it can be done - you just wind up with your modem for data and a voice modem for voice and the whole thing is sort of a pain in the rear end.
|
# ¿ Sep 25, 2014 23:18 |
|
Toad King posted:I recently moved to Chicago and was trying to get an indoor antenna to use. Even though I'm only 4-5 miles from the broadcast towers I get a horrible signal with the Amazon High Performance antenna, probably because my apartment is facing the opposite direction of all the broadcast towers downtown and all the high-rises in the way. Is there a good antenna for this kind of situation: short distance but lots of poo poo in the way? The kind you can mount really high You would want a highly directional antenna. Most likely the one you have now is omnidirectional since that means a lot less fooling with positioning. A directional antenna would require a lot more fine tuning and maybe repositioning between channel changes but I would say it's your best bet.
|
# ¿ Sep 28, 2014 14:42 |
|
|
# ¿ Mar 28, 2024 14:05 |
|
I think Terk is generally regarded as OK. I'm kind of a fan of Winegard antennae personally. They don't seem to have a compact directional that I can find and the one I linked could be a little ungainly inside a house. If you can mount it in the attic it might not be a bad idea.
|
# ¿ Sep 28, 2014 19:50 |