Tv antenna recommendations

SoundGuy wrote:

westend wrote:
SVC Jeff, a Forum member that knows his broadcast electronics and has a very sophisticated signal analyzer tested the Winegard and Jack antennas. The Winegard was the better receiver. A lot of folks swear by the Jack antenna, stating it improved their reception over the Winegard. I believe Jeff.

Not to be argumentative but this is an oversimplified conclusion and isn't a matter of whether or not to believe SVCJeff's results. I've read his report and it's indisputable that analyzed measurements of a Winegard Sensar IV correctly pointed is more sensitive across both the VHF and UHF bands than is a King Controls Jack TV antenna. However, the reality is that many users find the Jack easier to use and from their perspective have it successfully receive more stations because it's not as directional as is the Sensar. As Jeff's results clearly demonstrate the Jack does work well in the UHF band but is not nearly so effective in the VHF band ... but most users wouldn't recognize this difference as many stations moved from VHF to UHF during the analogue > digital transition, meaning there are far more now transmitting in the UHF band than used to be the case. Many also wouldn't be aware that many stations that still do tune in on one's television as a VHF channel, say Ch 2, are in fact transmitting on a UHF frequency, referred to as virtual channel transmission. Many therefore conclude that the Jack antenna is the "better" of the two when in fact, as measured with a signal analyzer and the results carefully noted, the Winegard Sensar IV is clearly the more sensitive antenna. However, none of us actually watch TV using a signal analyzer and would prefer to put as little effort into tuning in signals as we can and because of that simple human fact the Jack antenna often is referred to by many as the "better" of the two antennas. And yes, I've owned both and although I currently run a Sensar IV with a SensarPro signal amplifier there are times I'd still prefer the Jack's ease of use. :)

IMO Sound Guy makes a couple of subtle and cogent comments regarding other not so directional and not as effective antennas such as the Jack as it pretains to the directivity and ease of use over the Bat Wing. In addition to the Wineguard Sensar Pro amp/meter I also use the DigiAir Pro 2 antenna meter/spectrum analyzer to fine tune my Bat Wing see pic ...



Based on a variety of locations and CGs over the last 5 years or so I have noticed that at times the Bat Wing can actually be a little tricky to aim for the best reception. At times I have found that the signal strength can vary over 4 db with very little (less than 5 deg antenna rotation) as seen on the Digi Air meter while the Sensar Pro system shows little to less than a 1 change in the signal strength in that mode. I attribute this as a combination of the 3db down beamwidth of the Bat Wing along with potential multi path signals and possibly reflective signal paths to the Bat Wing coupled with the distance to the radiating antenna. Also, you can actually have too much signal strength when dealing with digital TV signals where some TV tuners can difficulty in not pixelating due to the TV tuner being over driven. I'm not sure of the best solution, but potentially having two antenna systems such as the Jack and Bat Wing might have significant advantages where one should try and use the Jack first and only resort to the more capable Bat Wing when the signal level requires it. However, this is not really realistic for most folks not is it really cost effective or necessary most of the time.

Because of an issue with my installed Bat Wing several years ago during a road trip I purchased a ClearStream 2V antenna ....



and added the Wineguard Boost XT antenna amplifier that is co-located on the Clear Stream antenna for best performance. This "secondary" antenna system is mounted on a 12' fiberglass extension pole that I temporarily mount to my ladder and run into the trailer via the cable antenna connection. Not sure why and don't have a lot of data, but sometimes (maybe like 1 in 5 to 10 times) I have found the Clear Stream system preforms better than the BatWing mainly in solving excessive pixelating that the Bat Wing system is experiencing. While it's true there is no such thing as a "DIGITAL TV ANTENNA" there are definitely antennas that have been better optimized for digital signals where their multi-path and reflective signal resolution capabilites exceed those found in the more simplistic and older Bat Wing basically "DIPOLE" technology.

Just based on my experiences so far I am convinced that one could spend HUNDREDS or more $$$ in testing and accumulating various antennas, amplifiers, etc., etc. in search of that potentially unattainable "antenna Nirvana".

No real answers here, but just a little more "stuff" to "chew on":p

Larry