NEW REMOTE CONTROL OUTDOOR TV ANTENNA

[gregg75]

They might already have these, but I've never heard of them. I know some people
may be interested in this especially if they have to move the antenna around to pick
up "other" stations.

http://midtnweb.com/new-lava-hd-2605-uhfvhf-hdtv-antenna-with-remote-control

 

[tripinva]

I have a good name for that antenna. I call it "crap."

- Trip

 

[nocomradio]

Those things have been all over e-bay for the last few years and I figure they appealed to the folks who like a really flashy looking item that does nothing.

"Put that baby on the roof and have the neighbors wishing they had one too!"

 

[TomParks]

I saw them on display at the flea market, and one good gust of wind would destroy it. Looks more like a kids toy.

 

[Robnoxious]

It's an outdoor version of the Radio Shack UFO indoor antenna that's no longer available. As shame too since it's a really good antenna.

This garbage is like reinventing the wheel. Antennas having rotors have been around for decades.

Marketing toward the stupid is the motto for today's "technophiles" and it reflects in the rubbish they churn out.

 

[w9wi]

What Trip said.

Unfortunately, that comment can be applied to nearly every modern TV antenna. They're designed to an aesthetic goal, with no regard for engineering.

(don't take my word for it: ask the FCC. Their labs did a test last year & found available antennas were FAR less effective on some channels than others. They didn't even bother testing them on the "low-band" frequencies; many didn't claim to work there, despite their designers knowing major stations transmit on those frequencies.)

So far, nobody has been able to improve on the old-fashioned antennas, both indoor and outdoor, we've had since the 1960s.

 

[nocomradio]

(don't take my word for it: ask the FCC. Their labs did a test last year & found available antennas were FAR less effective on some channels than others. They didn't even bother testing them on the "low-band" frequencies; many didn't claim to work there, despite their designers knowing major stations transmit on those frequencies.)

That is VERY true.

I have several friends and neighbors who have gone back to OTA TV and bought some of the latest offerings in TV antennas. None of them have been happy since the switch to digital. Being 50 miles from the nearest TV station transmitter means that we are definitely fringe, but the ancient Winegard on my Uncle's house still pulls in more than the little flat RCA antennas, or even the Clearstream antennas. I've personally had the best luck with two of the homebuilt bowtie antennas. I pointed one North and one South and can get around 8 channels on a good day.

 

[ansky212]

Unfortunately, that comment can be applied to nearly every modern TV antenna. They're designed to an aesthetic goal, with no regard for engineering.

Not all antennas are bad. I have a Silver Sensor antenna. It's designed for indoor use, but I have had it outside on my roof for 2 years and it's still as good as new and works great (much better than if I had it indoors).

 

[w9wi]

Unfortunately, that comment can be applied to nearly every modern TV antenna. They're designed to an aesthetic goal, with no regard for engineering.

Not all antennas are bad. I have a Silver Sensor antenna. It's designed for indoor use, but I have had it outside on my roof for 2 years and it's still as good as new and works great (much better than if I had it indoors).

Silver Sensors are said to work pretty well on the higher frequencies. (I've never tried one so can't comment firsthand)

However, they don't support the frequencies used by roughly a quarter of all full-power TV stations. To be honest, I'd call an antenna that doesn't receive 1 out of every 4 stations a "bad antenna".

_________________________________________________

nocomradio: try www.solidsignal.com . They still sell the traditional antennas (like your uncle's Winegard) which are still your best choice.

We have found the old-fashioned rabbit ears are still the most effective indoor antenna in our area. (but it's frustrating to see stores selling them in areas 50-60 miles from the towers, where indoor antennas never worked in analog and cannot be reasonably expected to work in digital)

 

[dave73]

I stuck with the old-fashioned element antennas. When I replaced my main combo antenna, I chose to get separate VHF & UHF antennas. My original combo antenna was a Philips VHF/UHF/FM antenna that was good for VHF, but horrible for UHF (used for Chicago stations). My newer antennas are Antennacraft CS600 for VHF (got it for WOCK-CD on RF 4 for America One on 13.4) & Winegard HD9032 for UHF (both antennas pointed at Chicago). Since I have 1 TV station transmitting south of me, I got the Winegard HD-1080 back in 2009 to combine with my combo antenna to get 1 station in clearly. My Antennacraft & Winegard HD9032 antennas are combined into the RCA TVPRAMP1R pre-amp, then that is combined into the Winegard CC7870 coupler with my Winegard HD1080 antenna.

This is what my TV Fool chart looks like for what i can get. Not all low power stations are on the air in digital, & even a few analogs may have gone off the air too. 1 LP digital station on 18 doesn't matter to me, as it's religious (I get that off of one of my antennas with no trouble). I don't even get all the low power stations that are digital, either because they're too weak, or because of interference from other stations. Most don't interest me anyway, as most are religious, or foreign language (Chicago has Spanish, Polish, Chinese, & Korean language stations). WDCI-LD & WMEU-CD are the only 2 I get without a pre-amp from Chicago, while WWME-LD, WESV-LD, W25DW-D, & WOCK-CD need a pre-amp (only care about WWME-LD & WOCK-CD).

 

[azumanga]

Marketing toward the stupid is the motto for today's "technophiles" and it reflects in the rubbish they churn out.

Another notable antenna of the sort is the Clearcast, which is advertised through full-page ads in newspapers, going as so far as listing "eligible" zip codes where it can be ordered and used, and counting not the number of available channels, but the number of available SHOWS that you can get with it. The Clearcast is promoted as some sort of miracle device for people who want to rid themselves of cable bills.

http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=207061.0

The Better Business Bureau gave Clearcast an "F" for misleading customers, especially those believing that they'll get every channel in their market, giving their number of shows as opposed to channels, and tricking people to believe that this will be an end-all / be-all for cable and satellite, when in fact those who watch channels such as ESPN and CNN will be disappointed:

http://www.bbb.org/us/article/clear...ng-the-company-an-f-rating-with-the-bbb-34317

Here's are a couple of articles article about the Clearcast, which includes a pic of a newspaper ad:

http://stopthecap.com/2012/04/02/cl...business-bureau-review-ad-confuses-consumers/
http://stopthecap.com/2011/12/19/hy...that-eliminates-cablesatellite-bills-forever/

I shudder each and every time this ad appears in my local paper -- they pass themselves off as a bunch of shysters.

 

[ansky212]

Silver Sensors are said to work pretty well on the higher frequencies. (I've never tried one so can't comment firsthand)

However, they don't support the frequencies used by roughly a quarter of all full-power TV stations. To be honest, I'd call an antenna that doesn't receive 1 out of every 4 stations a "bad antenna".

I assume you mean the VHF frequencies. With my SS outside or in the attic it picks up the low RFs pretty well. I can pick up a low-power channel on RF 2 from almost 15 miles away. I can also pick up RF 7 (full power) with close to 100% signal (also 15 miles away in NYC).

 

[ajc_trw]

It's an outdoor version of the Radio Shack UFO indoor antenna that's no longer available. As shame too since it's a really good antenna.

This garbage is like reinventing the wheel. Antennas having rotors have been around for decades.

Marketing toward the stupid is the motto for today's "technophiles" and it reflects in the rubbish they churn out.

Exactly! When I was a kid in the 70s I lived in Haddonfield NJ and we had a rotor antenna with a remote on top of the RCA console TV. I used to rotate it from West (Philly) to Northeast (NYC) to watch the 35mm print copies of Star Trek on WPIX (WKBS 48 ran the dirty 16mm copies).

I also occasionally did it to watch network TV as the audio was better, not running through phone lines.

What next, a new type of sliced bread?

 

[LKellerIII]

It's an outdoor version of the Radio Shack UFO indoor antenna that's no longer available. As shame too since it's a really good antenna.

This garbage is like reinventing the wheel. Antennas having rotors have been around for decades.

Marketing toward the stupid is the motto for today's "technophiles" and it reflects in the rubbish they churn out.

Exactly! When I was a kid in the 70s I lived in Haddonfield NJ and we had a rotor antenna with a remote on top of the RCA console TV. I used to rotate it from West (Philly) to Northeast (NYC) to watch the 35mm print copies of Star Trek on WPIX (WKBS 48 ran the dirty 16mm copies).

I also occasionally did it to watch network TV as the audio was better, not running through phone lines.

What next, a new type of sliced bread?

In the mid 1950s, my parents' RCA black and white TV was connected to a rooftop antenna on a servo-motor. It had a toggle switch in a small box on top of the TV console- we pushed on the right side for clockwise, and on the left side for counter-clockwise.

We lived in a mountainous area, and reception was spotty at best, even with the ability to adjust the antenna's direction. As far as I know, none of our neighbors had such a device, and had to climb on their roofs to move their antennas manually. Fortunately, our housing development was all modern homes with low flat roofs, so you could climb up safely (via a ladder) without breaking your neck.

 

[nocomradio]

nocomradio: try www.solidsignal.com . They still sell the traditional antennas (like your uncle's Winegard) which are still your best choice.

We have found the old-fashioned rabbit ears are still the most effective indoor antenna in our area. (but it's frustrating to see stores selling them in areas 50-60 miles from the towers, where indoor antennas never worked in analog and cannot be reasonably expected to work in digital)

Thank you for the link. I may just have to invest in a good 'ol Yagi to get the box back to the analog days!

 

[cd637299]

nocomradio: try www.solidsignal.com . They still sell the traditional antennas (like your uncle's Winegard) which are still your best choice.

We have found the old-fashioned rabbit ears are still the most effective indoor antenna in our area. (but it's frustrating to see stores selling them in areas 50-60 miles from the towers, where indoor antennas never worked in analog and cannot be reasonably expected to work in digital)

Thank you for the link. I may just have to invest in a good 'ol Yagi to get the box back to the analog days!

Ya can't go wrong with Solid Signal. If you tell them in an e-mail/survey exactly what you are looking for, they'll figure out what's best for you.

I got a Channel Master CM3020 from them in 2009 & a CM7777 amplifier in 2010 or so; great performance, and bang-for-the-buck, IMO, as far as DX/long distance reception & decent on the locals.

Great folk to deal w/.

cd

 

[FreddyE1977]

It slices, dices, juliennes, and makes mountains of coleslaw...

 

[Joe_Capitano]

BUT WAIT! THERE'S MORE!!!

Marketing toward the stupid is the motto for today's "technophiles" and it reflects in the rubbish they churn out.

"There's a sucker born every minute." As long as there's an unlimited supply of eggs and "fertilizer," there will be plenty to go around. Next...

Another notable antenna of the sort is the Clearcast, which is advertised through full-page ads in newspapers, going as so far as listing "eligible" zip codes where it can be ordered and used, and counting not the number of available channels, but the number of available SHOWS that you can get with it.... (SNIP!)

You've noticed the ad in USA Today. I did. To me this "antenna" looks just as junky as the old "plug-in" antennas of the 60s that allegedly turned your house wiring into a great big array. Got one of those when I was a kid. Worked better unplugged. (raspberry!).

TIP 1: If the ad you're reading has a list of zipcode prefixes, and every state is listed (they usually are), AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE!!! The item in question invariably is crap.

TIP 2: If they require you to pay $5 for a "warranty," see Tip 1.

Personally, I have a Radio Shack Yagi mounted in my attic and it works quite nicely.

 

[blizzard59]

Another notable antenna of the sort is the Clearcast, which is advertised through full-page ads in newspapers, going as so far as listing "eligible" zip codes where it can be ordered and used, and counting not the number of available channels, but the number of available SHOWS that you can get with it.... (SNIP!)

You've noticed the ad in USA Today. I did. To me this "antenna" looks just as junky as the old "plug-in" antennas of the 60s that allegedly turned your house wiring into a great big array. Got one of those when I was a kid. Worked better unplugged. (raspberry!).

The first time I saw an ad for the Clear-Cast antenna, I thought it looked like something ripped right out of the pages of The Onion!

Here's a full image of the ad as seen in newspapers across the United States: http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/2271/clearcastantenna.png

 

[nocomradio]

That ad must use the same marketing firm that does the "Amish Heater" ads. You know, the ones that you have to call the toll-free number at a certain time if you live in a certain zone of the country to get your special discount and expedited shipping?