[SOLVED] HDTV antenna amplifier suggestions

[scarlettpenelopegwe]

So I recently bought a Roku TV and loved it so much that we finally cut the cord. The apps are great and I was getting good but not great reception of local channels. Some occasional dropouts. Not brutal but distracting. I had a friend recommend an amplified antenna. I didn't want to ditch the antenna I had just bought, so I checked Best Buy (so I could pick it up today) and they sell an "inline cable amplifier". I put it on and saw significant improvement in the major networks. However, I also observed that it greatly denigrates PBS and FM radio. The box says "5-42/54-100 MHz compatible. Our PBS station broadcasts on digital 13.1, which is RF 4 (low VHF) which is about 68 MHz. Close to the notch that the box describes, but still above it. So I pull out the instruction sheet and in the specs section it states "5-42 MHz 7db insertion loss". Well, that to me makes the front of the box inaccurate. I wouldn't call a signal loss a fair description of a useable signal. It then said, "54-100 MHz UP TO 4db gain" (emphasis mine). This leads me to believe that it's not a consistent 4db but probably linear, likely boosting more as it moves up in frequency. That would certainly be in line with the results I was observing before I read any of that.

So now I am having two trains of thought for my next move. First, can I find an in-line amp with a flat response? This is called a "Cable amp", is the filtration at the bottom deliberate to prevent some kind of cable TV interference? If I can find one that boosts all of the frequencies I suspect I'll be all set. If there is some reason that all amps are made that way, my second thought is to perhaps get a separate VHF antenna and point it at the PBS tower and combine both signals. Then I could use a booster on just the UHF antenna and let the VHF one play without any amplification. That seems reasonable to me, what say you?

 

[BradtheRad]

My experience with digital tv...

There are some channels which usually come in fine but then a day come along when my tv fails to pick up certain ones. Atmospheric conditions have a lot to do with it. It's not necessarily when a storm is near.

Sometimes channels are detectable which I can't pick up most days.

A friend gave me a store-bought tv antenna. When a favorite channel doesn't come in then I hold up the antenna while moving around the room. Often merely a few inches makes the difference between receiving a channel clearly and 'no signal detected'.

That seems to be the nature of digital transmission. The receiver needs to pick up a broadcast virtually free of noise, otherwise it gives us a blank screen. With old-fashioned analog transmission you could usually see a show even if you had to tolerate a snowy picture.

For an antenna I tried using a length of wire. Performance is similar to the store-bought antenna. I can't expect good reception because my window is at the inside corner of a building. I do not face the transmitters.

 

[vfone]

I don't know where you have the antenna placed, but if you put the antenna on the roof of the house and the amplifier just beside it, it will work for sure.

 

[betwixt]

+1 for vfone's answer.
Getting a good signal in the first place is paramount. An amplifier near the TV is better than nothing but if you can put it up by the antenna it will be better.

Reason: amplifying a good but weak signal will make it stronger.
Amplifying it after the cable losses and induced noise will bring up the noise level as well as the signal you want.

Think of it this way: If someone uses a loudhailer to talk to you across a field you will hear them clearly. If they speak normally and you use a very sensitive microphone at your end you will hear a weak voice amongst a lot of background noise.

Brian.

 

[BigBoss]

If you want to amplify CH-4 only (68MHz), using a wideband cable amplifier is useless.
-It will increase the Noise due to wideband
-It will bring all broadcast and other signals to TV receiver. And probably mix them
-Noise Figure is too high compare to LNA.

The best option is to design an LNA dedicated to CH-4 and to use a high quality antenna oriented to right path.

 

[D.A.(Tony)Stewart]

i use a 15 dB inline boost amp to improve reception to a Buffalo from North of Toronto with a high gain antenna tuned within 1 deg to avoid the downtown CN tower that can saturate the weaker channels. i can get 32 channels as long as it isn't raining or the path blocked by wet leaves in the neighbour's tree then 1 or 2 drop out. I use HDhomerun's digital tuner to read the signal levels which plugs into the router. Then use the TVfool site to examine signal power to my address with a custom radar plot. It works pretty well but the latest firmware are only win10 compatible drivers which I may try now that I have multiboot Linux Cinnamon Mint W10 and W7. That includes free EPG but the W7 version does not. But then most of the time ai use the web to watch live TV and movies in theatres and TV series on Kodi and Stremio, which can be problematic at times with snags on closing, but I can deal with that.

 

[scarlettpenelopegwe]

I don't know where you have the antenna placed, but if you put the antenna on the roof of the house and the amplifier just beside it, it will work for sure.

I placed it on the top of the roof.

 

[vfone]

And the amplifier where is placed? If is down, near the TV, might be useless...

 

[biff44]

here is the deal, you want a good signal to noise ratio. period.

you have to then apply the right antenna, amplifier, and low loss cable to best achieve that.

a "good amplifier" would have a low noise figure, but also have a fairly decent intercept point so that out of band signals will not fold into the channel (and therefore jam it) that you are trying to receive.

So one way would be to use a good antenna (relatively high gain), a low noise amp, and a low loss coaxial cable down to wherever your TV set is. Perhaps such an antenna has the amplifier already built in.

Another idea is a directional antenna (a physically large one) on a mechanical rotator. then just a very low loss coax cable down to the tv set (probably no amplifier needed)

 

[Externet]

Along decades of playing with antennas, the only certain thing is television reception is unpredictable. No matter the opinion and good knowledge from experts. Moving an antenna decimetres away makes a lot of difference with no way to identify why/how/where/when. Time of day and temperature and nobody-knows-what-else contribute with even more unpredictable reception. All left to guess. Just like praying to get a signal.

Antenna manufacturers make it even worse by promising their garbage products are better than the other garbage. Impedance considerations in such huge wide bands are just technical diarrhea. Specifications of digital TV tuners manufacturers are unobtanium; no way to find a RX impedance-to-frequency plot, all left to art more than engineering. Your coat hanger yes, really, a coat hanger piece of wire with zero engineering can perform as well or better in who-knows-what conditions compared to the expensive super antenna on the market trend ( now you can see antennas are sold by rating of reception miles ) and everyone knows about such behavior fact but nobody has a clue how it happens .

Whenever someone comes with solid technical facts, I want to be first in the line to learn.

 

[Externet]

Yeeeeeaaaaahhhh !
Selling fast ! They just either upgraded the aluminium foil inside or shrank the miles. Now I will be able to receive TV from Europe for $10
It is your choice to read only the [Up to 200 miles finer print]

 

[scarlettpenelopegwe]

So I recently bought a Roku TV and loved it so much that we finally cut the cord. The apps are great and I was getting good but not great reception of local channels. Some occasional dropouts. Not brutal but distracting. I had a friend recommend an amplified antenna. I didn't want to ditch the antenna I had just bought, so I checked Best Buy (so I could pick it up today) and they sell an "inline cable amplifier". I put it on and saw significant improvement in the major networks. However, I also observed that it greatly denigrates PBS and FM radio. The box says "5-42/54-100 MHz compatible. Our PBS station broadcasts on digital 13.1, which is RF 4 (low VHF) which is about 68 MHz. Close to the notch that the box describes, but still above it. So I pull out the instruction sheet and in the specs section it states "5-42 MHz 7db insertion loss". Well, that to me makes the front of the box inaccurate. I wouldn't call a signal loss a fair description of a useable signal. It then said, "54-100 MHz UP TO 4db gain" (emphasis mine). This leads me to believe that it's not a consistent 4db but probably linear, likely boosting more as it moves up in frequency. That would certainly be in line with the results I was observing before I read any of that.

So now I am having two trains of thought for my next move. First, can I find an in-line amp with a flat response? This is called a "Cable amp", is the filtration at the bottom deliberate to prevent some kind of cable TV interference? If I can find one that boosts all of the frequencies I suspect I'll be all set. If there is some reason that all amps are made that way, my second thought is to perhaps get a separate VHF antenna and point it at the PBS tower and combine both signals. Then I could use a booster on just the UHF antenna and let the VHF one play without any amplification. That seems reasonable to me, what say you?

So I recently bought a Roku TV and loved it so much that we finally cut the cord. The apps are great and I was getting good but not great reception of local channels. Some occasional dropouts. Not brutal but distracting. I had a friend recommend an amplified antenna. I didn't want to ditch the antenna I had just bought, so I checked Best Buy (so I could pick it up today) and they sell an "in line cable amplifier". I put it on and saw significant improvement in the major networks. However, I also observed that it greatly denigrates PBS and FM radio. The box says "5-42/54-100 mHz compatible. Our PBS station broadcasts on digital 13.1, which is RF 4 (low VHF) which is about 68 mHz. Close to the notch that the box describes, but still above it. So I pull out the instruction sheet and in the specs section it states "5-42 mHz 7db insertion loss". Well that to me makes the front of box inaccurate. I wouldn't call a signal loss a fair description of useable signal. It then said "54-100 mHz UP TO 4db gain" (emphasis mine). This leads me to believe that it's not a consistent 4db but probably linear, likely boosting more as it moves up in frequency. That would certainly be in line with the results I was observing before I read any of that.

So now I am having two trains of thought for my next move. First, can I find an in line amp with a flat response? This is called a "Cable amp", is the filtration at the bottom deliberate to prevent some kind of cable TV interference? If I can find one that boosts all of the frequencies I suspect I'll be all set. If there is some reason that all amps are made that way, my second thought is to perhaps get a separate VHF antenna and point it at the PBS tower and combine both signals. Then I could use a booster on just the UHF antenna and let the VHF one play without any amplification. That seems reasonable to me, what say you?

 

[FvM]

"5-42/54-100 MHz" sounds like describing cable internet reverse channel. So you probably misunderstood the specification.

 

[Audioguru]

I have had cable TV for many years and most channels are now digital HD. Friends and neighbors have little "bow tie" digital HD antennas. Aren't they only for UHF?
Are the huge VHF analog TV antennas used anymore and do they work for digital HD?

 

[jazz3]

In my opinion, rather than setting antenna, TV shows, streaming live sports, and movies are free downloaded from trusted sites.

 

[Audioguru]

I looked for TV shows online but some shows and even "Breaking News" are a few years old.