Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Anyone use an Over The Air Antenna for HD?


fitty76

Recommended Posts

Yeah I do. The picture depends on your antenna. If you buy a fancy one and put it on your roof it will give you a great picture. However any sort of bad weather will knock out the digital picture completely. In the old days antenna signal would just get fuzzy but digital signal just drops completely. Also you need to be living close to Charlotte. You get out in the country and there is no signal to pick up. I tried taking my TV camping in Greenville, SC and I couldn't watch anything. If you can afford a cable/uverse/dish plan then it will be much better but I've had antenna TV all my life living in Gastonia and it works just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its usually pretty good, though I rarely use it. I believe most of the signals are 720p with a few 1080i thrown in. I don't think I've seen 1080p over the air.

My biggest gripe is how long it takes to tune in all the channels. I have two HDTVs with with Dish and with rabbit ears. They both take about a half hour or more to search and find all the channels. But you will get tons of extra channels.

This, of course, depends on two things: 1 you having a TV with a digital tuner. I'm assuming you do, but just making sure. 2 you live in an area where you can pick the signal up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.amazon.com/Paper-Thin-Leaf-Indoor-Antenna/dp/B004QK7HI8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1339399260&sr=8-1&keywords=leaf

I have one of these. The signal is good but you have to move the antenna around. I think it's related to lighting and reflection. It works well in some areas during the day and other areas at night. I don't pay for cable. I use the antenna for local channels and it works great. Fits my needs since I don't watch television much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspend my directv over the summer and works pretty well to use an antenna (if your TV has a tuner built-in, a lot don't.).

You are right about getting the best picture. TWC, directv and the like compress the HD signal and often it's pretty easy to see artifacts when watching certain images. When it comes over the air, it isn't compressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought this one http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/RCA-ANT1450B-TV-Antenna/3440637/product.html?cid=202290&kid=9553000357392&track=pspla&adtype=pla&kw=%7Bkeyword%7D and it works great. Can lay it flat or hang it on the wall. Picture quality is superb. It pulls in around 40 channels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember something before you go spend too much money.... there is no such thing as an "HDTV antenna"

Your grandmother's old set of rabbit ears will pick up digital, uncompressed HD channels. They are broadcast on the same UHF and VHF spectrum that they used before cable and satellite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember something before you go spend too much money.... there is no such thing as an "HDTV antenna"

Your grandmother's old set of rabbit ears will pick up digital, uncompressed HD channels. They are broadcast on the same UHF and VHF spectrum that they used before cable and satellite.

This.

And many of the older antennas will actually work better too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

http://www.amazon.co...1&keywords=leaf

I have one of these. The signal is good but you have to move the antenna around. I think it's related to lighting and reflection. It works well in some areas during the day and other areas at night. I don't pay for cable. I use the antenna for local channels and it works great. Fits my needs since I don't watch television much.

my wife and i bought one of these last week... showed up friday and i've been trying to get it working today. so far, i've been able to pick up three, THREE fuging channels. i live in the Northlake area, so i should be able to pick up plenty of channels, but no dice. only one HD channel out of the three, and it's PBS. this junk is heading back asap. it's even the USB powered, $75 version... junk

what's the word on this? this obviously doesn't have adjustable rabbit ears to help fine tune for direction.

i just wanna keep TWC from getting anymore of my money but need my football this fall. besides that, i'm moving to the hulu plus/netflix route

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my wife and i bought one of these last week... showed up friday and i've been trying to get it working today. so far, i've been able to pick up three, THREE fuging channels. i live in the Northlake area, so i should be able to pick up plenty of channels, but no dice. only one HD channel out of the three, and it's PBS. this junk is heading back asap. it's even the USB powered, $75 version... junk

what's the word on this? this obviously doesn't have adjustable rabbit ears to help fine tune for direction.

i just wanna keep TWC from getting anymore of my money but need my football this fall. besides that, i'm moving to the hulu plus/netflix route

I lived in Northlake area from 2006-2008 (Preston Village). I bought a couple of hd attennas. The only one I could get to work had Huge rabbit ears, and you had to plug it into the AC outlet and get power. I had to position it on the 2nd story window just to get reception. When I did finally get reception, I got the Panther games in crystal clear images. There was an alternet channe

Fox had, that had no announcers, just stadium sound. So I would crank up the surround sound system, and have to listen to the announcers in the stadium....it was like being at the game and quite nice!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I lived in Cornelius, I had rabbit ears and got great signal. The ones that plug in do get a better signal strength. The person living in my house there now got cable and I can't believe the difference in how much better my picture was (on the same tv) with the rabbit ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Let's be completely honest about this... Our WR room is AT and a bunch of question marks. Thielen is the only guy we know who knows the route tree completely, understands play calls and can regularly get open/beat close coverage when necessary. He's long in the tooth, isn't the speediest guy on the field but he plays like a pro, starting level wide receiver. Xavier, last season looked great at first, but man he kind of petered out down the stretch and would disappear in a number of games. He wasn't reliable on routes or getting open and where he was supposed to be a king at contested catches, he often looked a bit intimidated. I'm not saying he's a washout by any means. Anyone with his size, speed and catch radius could make it big in the NFL, but can he do it? He'll need to show more than he did in the preseason before we can really rely on him as a WR1 or WR2.  Coker was a revelation last season, he really played way above his (non)draft status and flashed multiple times in games and was a steady performer. What we need to find out, though, is whether he was benefiting from being an unknown that wasn't getting maximum effort from opposing DBs or if he was just outworking and outhustling everyone on the field. We should find out this season. We sure as hell didn't find out much in the pre-season (from him or any receiver or QB for that matter). He's still a question mark, but I think he has the look of the real deal. He might be this generation's next Thielen. Now, let's talk about Tet. High first round draft pick, first true WR off the board this year. Stellar career out west in college. Has the swagger of the WR1. And man, y'all are going to get mad about this but... he comes across as a mook. And in the pre-season he performed, well, not so great against poor opposition of second and third stringers. Yeah, he caught that one moonshot ball in the first game but really, nothing else lighting the place up. Rookie endzone drop in that game, too. He's still young and adjusting, I'm sure, but I was hoping to see something of a breakthrough kind of guy. I'm still looking. Hunter Renfro? Gosh, I hope he can make the team and make a comeback to his old form. It would be such a great story. But maybe neither one of those happens. We won't know until Tuesday and then, if he makes it past there it could be weeks. So, TL;DR: AT is all we can bank on right now. We couldn't afford to let him go considering the number of unknowns we'd be throwing out there for our QB, who himself is still an unknown. One thing to add: Our receivers coaching group has their work cut out for them. I hope they are up to the task, but the pre-season gave me little reason to believe in them. And I really need something to believe in here in Carolina.  
    • Same I think Randsom is a baller..... hopefully we don't have to suffer through 4-8 games of Scott blowing azz to get him on the feild.
    • Linebacker is the biggest need - I hope we figure out a way to address it. Krys Barnes is the only one who even moderately flashed.  Super nervous about Trevin/Rozeboom as a duo (Still like Trevin) I'd be excited if we had a better vet to mentor Trevin.  Or a better younger guy to support Rozeboom.  They just don't fit well and it may be a big problem against the run, even with our DL much improved. 
×
×
  • Create New...