<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 8:11 AM Barry Martin <<a href="mailto:barry3martin@gmail.com">barry3martin@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="gmail-m_-1648088963245224563moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail-m_-1648088963245224563moz-cite-prefix">
<p style="margin-bottom:0in;line-height:100%">Hi Allen!</p>
</div>
<div class="gmail-m_-1648088963245224563moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="gmail-m_-1648088963245224563moz-quote-pre">The performance of that antenna for WHBF is probably close to your wet
noodle which is probably a good thing as it is so close and could otherwise
overload any preamp. This antenna has about 10dB gain where you care and is
similar to the Winegard I linked. If it meets those specs it is probably
fine. That same company makes a DB4 which has about 14dB gain. The
boresight bain is the gain on axis so where your antenna is pointing.
Did you say the antennas are in the attic? There is a trend around here to
have roofing plywood with aluminum on it. If you have that definitely move
the antenna up on the roof. You would also benefit by adding height so if I
followed this thread correctly I would get a pole and chimney mount or post
mount and get the thing out of the attic.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in;line-height:100%">Thanks for the info
– FWIW Winegard’s Burlington, IA, facility is about 80 miles SSW
of me – trivia for the Small World Dep’t. </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in;line-height:100%">The DB2 antenna
specs are listed as “range of 1-30 miles and high gain of up to
11.4 dBi”. Next line says “multi-directional (pulls in signals
from many directions)” which from the thread discussions could be
causing multipath problems when windy. OTOH could be signal
disruption as the poor electronics go on a roller coaster ride to
get
here The ‘performance data’ and ‘boresight gain’ were
extracted from the DB2 antenna’s detailed spec sheet.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in;line-height:100%">And yes, the
antennae are in the attic. I don’t think there is any aluminum in
the sheathing nor other than the flashing. Have tested with the
antenna outside on the deck and did not make any difference. Well,
no difference as far as signal reception; there were ‘relationship
differences’ ==> “how long is <u>that</u><span style="text-decoration:none">
going to be outside?!”. <whimper!> So appears to be no
</span>Faraday Cage issues. </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in;line-height:100%">Barry</p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I am having fits with this mailing list. Here is attempt #4 at sending this. If you got all four, I apologize.</div><div>*************************************************************</div><div>I have looked more carefully at the specifications on your antenna and you can just subtract 2.15dB from the published numbers. They are using dBi and Winegard is using dB over a dipole and a dipole had 2.15dBi gain. The antenna is multidirectional because it doesn't have a lot of gain. Reading the flyer on your antenna, it reads like marketing hype and not an engineering document. Perhaps that is normal and to be expected but the fact is that they have probably not changed physics as they claim they have. Me bad for not catching that earlier.</div><div><br></div><div>Your wife might like the photo I can't post in this group but sent to you.. The antenna to the left of the chimney is a vertical HAM antenna. The top TV antenna is a full bandwidth one left over from analog days when you needed channel 2 but it works so why replace it? The middle one is unused and was from the early HDTV days when NBC transmitted from the other direction. I rotated it when they moved their antenna and have since disconnected it. I should take it down but why? There was a small UHF one between these but I don't need those stations any longer as the two PBS stations now broadcast each others signals on one of the sub channels. I gave it to a friend. The lower antenna is for FM radio. FM Radio was what we used to use to listen to music :-) The antennas are on pipe, not tubing. No seam. They are connected to a larger pipe that goes through the roof and is anchored on the floor of the attic. </div><div><br></div><div>You are obviously not going to do this and I would not duplicate this setup myself. I would get one of the higher end HD Winegards. Perhaps you can get a recommendation directly from them. Given they are close to you, I am sure they would know which antenna would be good if you can get in touch with technical support and not marketing.</div><div><br></div><div>All this said the market for antennas has clearly changed. HDTV is a lot easier to receive than the old analog signals. Multipath used to give ghosts and most people had TVs with terrible pictures. That led to the Cable industry. But with digital, you can get a perfect signal more easily. Equalizers can remove problems from multipath and you have less of a constraint on the antenna. In your case with the wind and the pixelation your new tuner might solve it or you might need a better antenna.</div><div><br></div><div>I think there was a thread on pixelation that basically implied that tuners can detect it and basically remove it probably by using pixels from adjacent frames. Someone even said that some stations transmit pixelated content and rely on the receivers to remove it.</div><div><br></div><div>I will be interested in how your new tuners works out so please let me know how it goes. My old HDHomeruns are not without issues so I may be in the market for something better.</div><div><br></div><div>Allen </div></div></div></div>