• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

HDTV Report

Solitaire

Neoclinus blanchardi
Joined
Jul 25, 2001
Messages
3,098
Location
Tennessee
This report is on my exploration into digital television with a Wine Guard HD-4400 semi-directional antenna and an Insignia receiver.

The antenna – a small vertical semi-directional antenna chosen for its low cost and relatively flat gain curve across the UHF spectrum – worked surprisingly well, outperforming an old outdoor antenna five times its size.

The receiver – a small square black box with sixth generation LG chipset – did a great job converting the digital signals into analog, although it lacks a pass-through feature for viewing regular analog transmissions on the television while not in operation.



Television Station Reception:


1. Any antenna not receiving a station’s analog signal will not likely receive the digital signal either.

Weak signals in analog with obvious static but in color will show up in digital. Extremely weak analog signals absent color will not show up at all in digital. For analog signals that fade in and out, the digital receiver will show a normal picture with normal audio for one moment and then freeze the picture with no audio the next moment.


2. An old rooftop antenna does not perform any better than an eight-inch loop antenna.

The old rooftop antenna works fine for analog television. The signal strength of analog stations change with rotation of the antenna going from weak to decent reception. In digital no discernible change in reception occurs with rotation of the antenna – weak stations remained weak and strong stations remained strong – performing not much better than an eight inch loop antenna.

The new semi-directional antenna did show changes in reception with rotation, including the discovery of a new television station.


3. Amplification has no apparent effect upon digital reception unlike analog reception.

Increasing the amplification of distant stations in analog improved the picture – from gray static to decent color reception. Increasing the amplification of distant stations in digital resulted in no noticeable change in reception.

The new semi-directional antenna received distant stations fairly well; and when the air was still, brought in a new station ninety miles away. Increasing amplification on the new semi-directional antenna had no discernable effect upon reception of distant digital television stations.


4. On windy days trees can redirect both weak and strong signals canceling out digital reception.

When radio waves pass through trees from a television station, the radio waves undergo a process of diffraction where parts of the signal constructively interfere becoming brighter and destructively interfere becoming dimmer. The greater the distance between the transmitter and an antenna the more the intervening trees alter the signal path requiring careful placement of an antenna for reception of distant stations.

When the wind blows – either as a breeze in summer or as a gust in winter – the moving trees momentarily become better at diffracting the signal from the television station. Even very strong signals from local stations can cancel out at the antenna resulting in loss of audio and the loss of video in the form of blocks on the screen.

I estimate that the new semi-directional antenna receives signals from one thirtieth of the area of an omni-directional antenna. This reduced area means fewer redirected signals during windy days can cancel out the direct signal from a television station; and, dropouts that once lasted four seconds on an eight-inch omni-directional antenna now last less than a quarter of a second on the new semi-directional antenna.


5. Close stations and distant stations require separate antennas.

For close television stations about fifteen miles away, I’m thinking that an inline attenuator will reduce signal strength from a directional antenna preventing the receiver from overheating. For distant television stations about seventy-five miles away, I’m thinking about adding an inline amplifier to another directional antenna – although I cannot be sure it will work.



HDTV Audio and Video:


1. Picture quality largely depends upon data rate.

The commercial stations – WCYB, WEMT, WKPT, and WJHL – and the public television stations – WEMT and WSBN – broadcast fifteen megabits per second high definition channels that look pretty good on an analog television set. The high definition channel always ends in a one, for example: 2 – 1.

The commercial stations – WCYB, WEMT, and WJHL – also broadcast four megabits per second standard definition channels that look okay, but become a little blurry when anything moves on the screen. The standard definition channels always end in a two, for example: 5 – 2.

The public television stations – WEPT and WSBN – broadcast two low definition channels splitting the four megabits per second into two equal parts. These low definition channels look okay for static unchanging pictures, but even the slightest motion reduces the picture to a grainy, blurry, blocky mess. The low definition channels end in a two or three.

The commercial station – WKPT – broadcasts three low definition channels splitting the four megabits per second into three parts. These low definition channels never look bad, but motion can become stilted or frozen for a moment, suggesting that frames get dropped.

The religious station – WLFG – broadcasts a single television channel in stretched mode. By pressing the button on the remote labeled zoom a few times the picture can be squeezed back into a more natural shape.

Also with the high definition channels on the other stations, pressing the zoom button can crop the picture removing those annoying black stripes at the top and bottom of the screen. But for the other station’s standard definition and low definition channels pressing the zoom button has no effect on the picture.


2. Apart from being digital, the audio quality of the stations didn’t change in any perceptible way.

WSBN remains the quietest station out there – doubling the length of the volume bar improved matters but you have to scale it back when changing channels. WJHL has a weather channel with nice music, but the commercials and weather alerts blast in loudly. WYCB has a standard definition channel where actors hiss like snakes because the station has over emphasized the high frequencies.

WSBN has a secondary audio program that doesn’t differ from the primary audio program. WKPT rebroadcasts a local radio station as a secondary audio program labeled French.



Additional Notes:


1. Changes in February

A few low power analog broadcasts will still continue on after the February 19, 2009 data and some digital television stations will change their frequencies – see TV Fool for details.


2. Helpful websites on HDTV

TV Fool – This site has a great list of the few stations you can get over the air. Just enter your coordinates from Google Earth or a street address.

Titan TV – This site lists the program schedules for broadcast stations by area.

HDTV Primer – This site lists antennas and their reception characteristics.

Multipath Solutions – This site presents solutions to the problem of multipath – also known as ghosting – in an urban environment.

DIY Budget HDTV Antenna – A video of a simple low cost antenna you can build yourself.


3. Antenna, cable, and splitter effects

A non-directional antenna with receiver brought in stations at the -45 decibel level.
A semi-directional antenna with receiver brought in stations at the -75 decibel level.
A fifty-foot cable reduced reception by 1.5 decibels – approximately half a block on the signal meter.
A two-way splitter reduced reception by 3.0 decibels – approximately one full block on the signal meter.


4. Time deviation by station

Not every stations broadcast has the same time as NIST Eastern Standard Time.
Measurements done by the quick look method – accurate to within plus or minus one second.

Station Deviation in Hours: Minutes: Seconds
--------------------------------------------------
WCYB -00:00:17
WEMT -00:00:01
WEPT -00:00:05
WJHL +00:00:17
WKPT -00:00:02
WLFG -05:06:39
WSBN -00:00:09
 
2. An old rooftop antenna does not perform any better than an eight-inch loop antenna.

The old rooftop antenna works fine for analog television. The signal strength of analog stations change with rotation of the antenna going from weak to decent reception. In digital no discernible change in reception occurs with rotation of the antenna – weak stations remained weak and strong stations remained strong – performing not much better than an eight inch loop antenna.

The new semi-directional antenna did show changes in reception with rotation, including the discovery of a new television station.

It sounds like the old rooftop antenna designed for VHF reception only, or perhaps the cable between the set and antenna had a splitter that passed only VHF channels.

Most digital channels are on UHF frequencies, even those the report "channel numbers" below 14.
 
My informal friinge area experience varies somewhat from the above. I have an old rooftop antenna, but it's a big rotating amplified one, with UHF and VHF sections.

I live in a nortn-south oriented valley, and rotation is still required to get digital reception from different locations. Most stations are 50 miles or more from my location, and cannot be received at all by an indoor antenna. I get good digital signals from anywhere that was accessible to decent UHF reception before, but none at all from areas that once brought in poor UHF and VHF.

One distinct advantage of the digital signal is its immunity to multipath (ghost) problems. There is one station that is located only a few miles from here that I had never been able to watch, because although the signal is very strong, it is deflected and reflected by ledges and mountains so that the picture is smeared by a dozen or more ghosts. But the digital signal is perfect.
 
Thanks for all the info. The only one that had me scratching my head was...

5. Close stations and distant stations require separate antennas.

For close television stations about fifteen miles away, I’m thinking that an inline attenuator will reduce signal strength from a directional antenna preventing the receiver from overheating. For distant television stations about seventy-five miles away, I’m thinking about adding an inline amplifier to another directional antenna – although I cannot be sure it will work.

Why would the receiver overheat?
 
Thanks for all the info. The only one that had me scratching my head was...

Why would the receiver overheat?

The correct term is overload.

Amplifier and mixers in the front end of a receiver can distort signals that are too high in amplitude. The distortion can make it impossible for the signals to be decoded. The distorted signal from one channel can also cover up signals on nearby channels. Even signals outside the TV bands can cause reception problems.
 
It sounds like the old rooftop antenna designed for VHF reception only, or perhaps the cable between the set and antenna had a splitter that passed only VHF channels.

Nope. I checked again last night. It’s a VU-190 Radio Shack antenna with both UHF and VHF elements, but it’s an old antenna and they probably changed design in the last fifteen to twenty years. No splitters from the antenna to the receiver, just fifty feet of cable.



Thanks for all the info. The only one that had me scratching my head was...

Why would the receiver overheat?

I guess that’s the wrong term. I worry that too much signal might burn out the receiver.

Microwatts aren’t bad for an old television receiver, but the new receiver is a very small microchip and I’m uncertain just how much power it can take.
 
I figured that I could use my LCD monitor plus my PC for HDTV, so when I needed a slimmer monitor, I bought a wide screen LCD.

According to the links in the OP, I may have a potential 23 on-air stations.

Now that it's getting time, all the recievers for PC use say I need at least 3 gig processor. Really? On top of a digital video card, a flat-screen TV might be cheaper. Or will a set-top box hook direct to a monitor as well as a crt?
 
I figured that I could use my LCD monitor plus my PC for HDTV, so when I needed a slimmer monitor, I bought a wide screen LCD.

According to the links in the OP, I may have a potential 23 on-air stations.

Now that it's getting time, all the recievers for PC use say I need at least 3 gig processor. Really? On top of a digital video card, a flat-screen TV might be cheaper. Or will a set-top box hook direct to a monitor as well as a crt?


The units I looked at had outputs for 75-ohm co-axial cable and three RCA connector outputs – Red, White, and Yellow. If the LCD monitor has the same RCA connector inputs then you can connect both the television and the monitor to the same converter box. If the monitor has different inputs such as Green and Blue RCA or S-Video or HDMI port then you might take a look at a digital video recorder, but some of these don’t have 75-ohm co-axial connectors for television sets requiring a small adapter.


Why do they say three gigahertz? I just don't know.

Visiontek Site –No useful info on processor speed, but they do have a USB box that works with the Mac.

Pinnacle Systems – Okay. We got specs.

SDTV 2.4 GHz Pentium 4 or 1.3 GHz Pentium M or AMD Athlon Processor
HDTV 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 or 1.7 GHz Pentium M or AMD Athlon Processor

Ah, I get it now. They use the main processor for decoding instead of a video card. Go to the Start menu, Settings, Control Panels, then double click the System icon. I've got an AMD Athlon 1.5 GHz so cannot decode either stream on my PC.

Scanning the reviews of these products, I see lots of Vista warnings – even though the companies claim compatibility.



I ought to mention that, right now, I get all the stations in green and only one of the stations in yellow listed on TV Fool. Stations in the red and gray just don't show up – not even as blips on the digital signal meter.



P.S. Digging through the AVS Forums I find warning about the boards melting the sealed Magnavox units that Walmart sells – you might want to avoid that brand.
 
Last edited:
This report is on my exploration into digital television with a Wine Guard HD-4400 semi-directional antenna and an Insignia receiver.

The antenna – a small vertical semi-directional antenna chosen for its low cost and relatively flat gain curve across the UHF spectrum – worked surprisingly well, outperforming an old outdoor antenna five times its size.

The receiver – a small square black box with sixth generation LG chipset – did a great job converting the digital signals into analog, although it lacks a pass-through feature for viewing regular analog transmissions on the television while not in operation.



Television Station Reception:


1. Any antenna not receiving a station’s analog signal will not likely receive the digital signal either.

Weak signals in analog with obvious static but in color will show up in digital. Extremely weak analog signals absent color will not show up at all in digital. For analog signals that fade in and out, the digital receiver will show a normal picture with normal audio for one moment and then freeze the picture with no audio the next moment.


2. An old rooftop antenna does not perform any better than an eight-inch loop antenna.

The old rooftop antenna works fine for analog television. The signal strength of analog stations change with rotation of the antenna going from weak to decent reception. In digital no discernible change in reception occurs with rotation of the antenna – weak stations remained weak and strong stations remained strong – performing not much better than an eight inch loop antenna.

The new semi-directional antenna did show changes in reception with rotation, including the discovery of a new television station.


3. Amplification has no apparent effect upon digital reception unlike analog reception.

Increasing the amplification of distant stations in analog improved the picture – from gray static to decent color reception. Increasing the amplification of distant stations in digital resulted in no noticeable change in reception.

The new semi-directional antenna received distant stations fairly well; and when the air was still, brought in a new station ninety miles away. Increasing amplification on the new semi-directional antenna had no discernable effect upon reception of distant digital television stations.


4. On windy days trees can redirect both weak and strong signals canceling out digital reception.

When radio waves pass through trees from a television station, the radio waves undergo a process of diffraction where parts of the signal constructively interfere becoming brighter and destructively interfere becoming dimmer. The greater the distance between the transmitter and an antenna the more the intervening trees alter the signal path requiring careful placement of an antenna for reception of distant stations.

When the wind blows – either as a breeze in summer or as a gust in winter – the moving trees momentarily become better at diffracting the signal from the television station. Even very strong signals from local stations can cancel out at the antenna resulting in loss of audio and the loss of video in the form of blocks on the screen.

I estimate that the new semi-directional antenna receives signals from one thirtieth of the area of an omni-directional antenna. This reduced area means fewer redirected signals during windy days can cancel out the direct signal from a television station; and, dropouts that once lasted four seconds on an eight-inch omni-directional antenna now last less than a quarter of a second on the new semi-directional antenna.


5. Close stations and distant stations require separate antennas.

For close television stations about fifteen miles away, I’m thinking that an inline attenuator will reduce signal strength from a directional antenna preventing the receiver from overheating. For distant television stations about seventy-five miles away, I’m thinking about adding an inline amplifier to another directional antenna – although I cannot be sure it will work.



HDTV Audio and Video:


1. Picture quality largely depends upon data rate.

The commercial stations – WCYB, WEMT, WKPT, and WJHL – and the public television stations – WEMT and WSBN – broadcast fifteen megabits per second high definition channels that look pretty good on an analog television set. The high definition channel always ends in a one, for example: 2 – 1.

The commercial stations – WCYB, WEMT, and WJHL – also broadcast four megabits per second standard definition channels that look okay, but become a little blurry when anything moves on the screen. The standard definition channels always end in a two, for example: 5 – 2.

The public television stations – WEPT and WSBN – broadcast two low definition channels splitting the four megabits per second into two equal parts. These low definition channels look okay for static unchanging pictures, but even the slightest motion reduces the picture to a grainy, blurry, blocky mess. The low definition channels end in a two or three.

The commercial station – WKPT – broadcasts three low definition channels splitting the four megabits per second into three parts. These low definition channels never look bad, but motion can become stilted or frozen for a moment, suggesting that frames get dropped.

The religious station – WLFG – broadcasts a single television channel in stretched mode. By pressing the button on the remote labeled zoom a few times the picture can be squeezed back into a more natural shape.

Also with the high definition channels on the other stations, pressing the zoom button can crop the picture removing those annoying black stripes at the top and bottom of the screen. But for the other station’s standard definition and low definition channels pressing the zoom button has no effect on the picture.


2. Apart from being digital, the audio quality of the stations didn’t change in any perceptible way.

WSBN remains the quietest station out there – doubling the length of the volume bar improved matters but you have to scale it back when changing channels. WJHL has a weather channel with nice music, but the commercials and weather alerts blast in loudly. WYCB has a standard definition channel where actors hiss like snakes because the station has over emphasized the high frequencies.

WSBN has a secondary audio program that doesn’t differ from the primary audio program. WKPT rebroadcasts a local radio station as a secondary audio program labeled French.
1. You should be able to receive both equally with digital winning out. In fact you actually said that you received signals you never received before with digital in point 3.
2. Don't really know.
3. Doesn't really make sense from a fundamental prospective. Your not really improving the analog/digital signal through amplification because you are amplifying the noise along with the signal.
4. The same thing happens with analog signals also. The equivalent phenomenon where you see two television stations on the same channel. You precisely described a form of multipath propagation. In an analog signal your getting two signals superimposed upon one another. In digital you probably would get inter symbol interference meaning you can't decode the signal because of the overlapping waveforms.
5. Can't argue with the data rate and quality. The faster the data rate the more information you send.
6. Can't argue with that observation either. If the quality is the same the only real tangible effect is that bandwidth is saved.
 
Last edited:
I figured that I could use my LCD monitor plus my PC for HDTV, so when I needed a slimmer monitor, I bought a wide screen LCD.

According to the links in the OP, I may have a potential 23 on-air stations.

Now that it's getting time, all the recievers for PC use say I need at least 3 gig processor. Really? On top of a digital video card, a flat-screen TV might be cheaper. Or will a set-top box hook direct to a monitor as well as a crt?

I've been watching HDTV reliably for almost a year now, using a computer with a 1.2 Ghz processor. But the video display is mostly handled by the video card itself. ATSC uses an MPEG stream for the data transmission. If your video card can decode that in hardware (newer nVidia and ATI cards can) there will be no problem (Unless you're running Linux and are forced to only use the nVidia card, due to incomplete drivers from ATI*).

That said, there are several stations that I was able to receive with the analog set-top antenna that are not of sufficient signal quality to decode the HD stream. Weak analog signal = fuzzy picture, but still likely viewable, possibly lacking color information. Weak digital = no picture at all.



* My ATI Linux driver evaluation was as of July 2008, and may no longer be accurate
 
Yeah, Godmark, I came to that conclusion. Some Tuner cards will work on lower than 2 gig processors, but not the cheapest USB gismos.

On the other hand, If all I ever watch is The Simpsons and South Park, or Twilight Zone marathons, I don't think HD is any gain. But then HD might just bring Jimmy Neutron to life.
 

Back
Top Bottom