View Full Version : HDTV resulting in new hams?
I was reading a Newsweek the other day and there was a stat showing that TV antenna purchases are undergoing a new upsurge as folks discover they need an antenna for HDTV reception. Sales started to upswing around 2001 and have been on a steep ramp up (I don't have the numbers in front of me, but there has been a doubling if not quadrupling in just a few years).
I was wondering, has anyone noticed an upswing in new hams as a result of younger people fiddling with antennas and the like to improve their HDTV? I know that for me, as a kid I was drawn to antennas, reception and ultimately ham radio and that TV antennas played a role.
ka5piu
03-02-2007, 06:58 AM
Hello.
I can see where there might ba a connection.
And, I also saw a digital to analog converter at Wal-Mart today.
The thing was $80
A digital TV is now around $250 to $300 range for the runt sized models, and they do both i720 digital and analog as well as being able to be used as a computer display.
Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Mar. 01 2007,23:58)]Hello.
I can see where there might ba a connection.
And, I also saw a digital to analog converter at Wal-Mart today.
The thing was $80
A digital TV is now around $250 to $300 range for the runt sized models, and they do both i720 digital and analog as well as being able to be used as a computer display.
Some public TV stations are giving away DTV converters at some of their higher membership levels (some public radio stations are doing the same with "HD Radio" receivers).
I see a few more recenly built homes with TV antennas on them, over the air HDTV might be why. I just pay the extra $10/month to get HD channels on cable. I cant get ESPN over the air anyway.
73
Joe
N3PAQ
kn4ds
03-02-2007, 02:01 PM
Quote[/b] (N3PAQ @ Mar. 02 2007,08:25)]I see a few more recenly built homes with TV antennas on them, over the air HDTV might be why. I just pay the extra $10/month to get HD channels on cable. I cant get ESPN over the air anyway.
Based on what I've seen from people I know, as well as on other forums relating to television, I think most people are preferring to get their HDTV from their cable or satellite provider.
I don't know that I would expect much of an uptick in interest in amateur radio due to the antennas for HDTV, though. Maybe a few, but not a lot.
W4HAY
03-02-2007, 02:15 PM
Quote[/b] ]...I see a few more recenly built homes with TV antennas on them...
And the CC&R Nazis are having hissy-fits! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
kn4ds
03-02-2007, 02:29 PM
Quote[/b] (W4HAY @ Mar. 02 2007,09:15)]Quote[/b] ]...I see a few more recenly built homes with TV antennas on them...
And the CC&R Nazis are having hissy-fits! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
Good... gives their lives purpose.
Quote[/b] (WF7I @ Mar. 01 2007,11:47)]I was wondering, has anyone noticed an upswing in new hams as a result of younger people fiddling with antennas and the like to improve their HDTV?
No.
I'm a regular poster at TiVo community and AVS forum.
Many people there have set up OTA antennas for HDTV reception but I haven't seen any that are talking about ham radio as a result.
As a matter of fact there is a lot of junk science going around.
One guy even claimed that his channel master UHF antenna picks up high VHF channels because UHF and high VHF are close together. LOL!
I had to set him straight. This guy's no idiot either, he's a software developer for Apple, and I think he writes software for iPods.
ka5piu
03-03-2007, 01:37 AM
Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Mar. 02 2007,07:36)]One guy even claimed that his channel master UHF antenna picks up high VHF channels because UHF and high VHF are close together. LOL!
Hello.
TV high is 175 MHz to 216 MHz.
UHF is 470 to 806 MHz.
Most UHF TV antennas are a bowtie that is 3/4 wave in the middle of the band, so 600 MHz divide by 3 = 200 MHz.
A quarter wave.
That is why it works.
And, at around 425 MHz it is A 5/8th wave, give or take a little.
A bowtie is quite broadbanded but for TV horizontal in polarity.
An easy fix and one has an excellent ATV antenna.
The math says that this is around 55 ohms.
The MFJ job says 58 ohms, so a SO-239 and a toroid rated for 400 MHz are the coupling interface.
Cheap and easy, just what I like.
KC9ECI
03-03-2007, 02:03 AM
Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Mar. 02 2007,09:36)]I had to set him straight. #This guy's no idiot either, he's a software developer for Apple, and I think he writes software for iPods.
That 'splains a lot.
va7aax
03-03-2007, 04:31 PM
Quote[/b] (WF7I @ Mar. 01 2007,09:47)]I was reading a Newsweek the other day and there was a stat showing that TV antenna purchases are undergoing a new upsurge as folks discover they need an antenna for HDTV reception. #Sales started to upswing around 2001 and have been on a steep ramp up (I don't have the numbers in front of me, but there has been a doubling if not quadrupling in just a few years).
I was wondering, has anyone noticed an upswing in new hams as a result of younger people fiddling with antennas and the like to improve their HDTV? #I know that for me, as a kid I was drawn to antennas, reception and ultimately ham radio and that TV antennas played a role.
thats good . from ''audio-visual'' to ''audio'' http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Well, that's what got me into it.
In December of 2003, I bought an HDTV tuner card for my computer. At the time, the drivers only supported OTA reception (cable support was added a few months later), so I dug a bowtie antenna out of the attic and set it up on a post outside. After much fiddling, I was able to get in the entire local lineup reliably, including a few stations I didn't even know about before.
In April of 2004, for no particular reason, I decided to try aiming the antenna southwest, over Lake Michigan towards the Chicago area. As luck would have it, the band was up that day and the band scan revealed a number of stations from Chicago, as well as Milwaukee, Green Bay and South Bend. I spent the rest of that afternoon exploring the band, until it died without warning in the late evening. I wondered what the cause of all of this was, so I went in search of information.
Some questions and googling led me to a group called the Worldwide TV-FM DX Association. Many of the members of that group happened to be hams, and several convinced me to get my ticket, which I did in December of 2004, almost exactly one year after I bought that HDTV tuner. To this day, I'm still mainly interested in VHF/UHF stuff.
N7RJD
03-05-2007, 06:13 AM
So, are we saying Amateur Radio could be the preferred hobby of the serious couch potato?
W4HAY
03-05-2007, 01:52 PM
Quote[/b] (KE7DLG @ Mar. 05 2007,06:13)]So, are we saying Amateur Radio could be the preferred hobby of the serious couch potato?
I'll go you one better! My rig is set up beside my recliner in the living room! The XYL reads and I chase DX!
Yeah, yeah, I know! Armchair copy, OM! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
kb2vxa
03-05-2007, 02:23 PM
Hi all,
Just to get it out of the way first;
"And the CC&R Nazis are having hissy-fits!"
Let them hiss at the federal preemption of antennas intended for broadcast reception thanks to the deep pockets of industry lobby.
The "HDTV/DTV antenna" is a product of sales advertizing hype, if you get good analog reception digital will follow in it's tracks. As long as the stream is above BER threshold you'll get a perfect picture.
Like the man said, there's a sucker born every minute.
"So, are we saying Amateur Radio could be the preferred hobby of the serious couch potato?"
Well, I worked a serious 2M band opening with an HT while lying on the couch but no potatoes, only hams.
Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Mar. 02 2007,20:37)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Mar. 02 2007,07:36)]One guy even claimed that his channel master UHF antenna picks up high VHF channels because UHF and high VHF are close together. LOL!
Hello.
TV high is 175 MHz to 216 MHz.
UHF is 470 to 806 MHz.
Most UHF TV antennas are a bowtie that is 3/4 wave in the middle of the band, so 600 MHz divide by 3 = 200 MHz.
A quarter wave.
That is why it works.
And, at around 425 MHz it is A 5/8th wave, give or take a little.
A bowtie is quite broadbanded but for TV horizontal in polarity.
An easy fix and one has an excellent ATV antenna.
The math says that this is around 55 ohms.
The MFJ job says 58 ohms, so a SO-239 and a toroid rated for 400 MHz are the coupling interface.
Cheap and easy, just what I like.
I'm afraid you're wrong.
The reason that the channel master 4228 antenna picks up high VHF is because the reflector is a 1/2 wave of the high VHF band.
It has nothing to do with the bowtie elements themselves.
http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/CM4228.html