[mythtv-users] Hauppauge WinTV-quadHD TV Tuner Card 1609 and Pixelation

Barry Martin barry3martin at gmail.com
Mon Feb 25 17:07:53 UTC 2019

Hi Allen!

Thanks for the photo – I’d still get ‘shot’! <g> As for the duplicate 
message, I did receive in this packet what appears to be the original 
followed by probably the first one indicating a problem. To assist in 
troubleshooting timestamps are “Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2019 09:12:04 -0800” 
and “Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2019 09:14:36 -0800”. If the third and fourth 
posts duplicated the second might explain why rejected.

> 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.

As for the specs on my DB2 antenna, yes, more fluff than substance. At 
the time it looked to have decent specs, had a decent price, and would 
fit between the 16” rafters. Yagis tend to be too fat!

As sort of a tie-in with Jay’s reply on site recommendations I recall 
for some reason being recommended a more-fringe antenna even though I’m 
less than 20 miles from the local stations. I’m figuring because of the 
option to receive stations from adjoining markets/coverage areas.

As far as the brochure’s “changing physics” comment, I’m thinking not 
for that price! <g>

> 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.

As for contacting Winegard, sounding like getting to be a good idea, 
though I’m dreading the conversation of asking for permission to have 
their tech crash here for a week or so! <joke> ...At this point I’m 
still leaning towards the new Backend with the 1609 just because 
gut-reaction seems to indicate a tuner sensitivity issue, though the 
suggestion of a higher-gain antenna being able to target the incoming 
signal makes sense. Maybe that was the reason the site was advising the 
fringe-type antenna?? Too many variables!!

> 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.

Agree on the antenna market has changed. Have seen ads for ‘hidden’ 
antennae: one style fits against the back of the television, others are 
clear and so barely show at all. Must use RG-187 for the lead! AFAIK the 
display is only as good as its weakest link. I have used old UHF 
antennae (bow-tie and circular) for testing – these seem to work about 
as well as the ‘digital’ antennae – apparently they didn’t read the 
hype-brochures! (The DB2 antenna in the attic does provide a better 
quality signal; I was using the old antenna to test positioning, etc.)


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20190225/c1a98d87/attachment.html>

More information about the mythtv-users mailing list