# Is the OTA tuner on the HR20 that bad?



## pdawg17 (Jul 17, 2006)

I currently have an HR10 and have borderline OTA and had heard back when the HR20 was being launched that it had a "new generation" tuner...lately I have been reading people saying the HR20 tuner stinks...is it worse than the HR10?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

pdawg17 said:


> I currently have an HR10 and have borderline OTA and had heard back when the HR20 was being launched that it had a "new generation" tuner...lately I have been reading people saying the HR20 tuner stinks...is it worse than the HR10?


While it "isn't the best" tuner, I wouldn't say it's worse. Just not as good as other new ones.
I don't have an HR10 to compare to, so I can't say for sure.
If you have a H20-100 [I do] I would say they are about the same. Now the H20-600 is much better, as is my Sony TV.
Are you in the San Carlos hills? Do you have a good outdoor antenna? It does need a good signal & multi-path rejection isn't it's strong suit.


----------



## pdawg17 (Jul 17, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> While it "isn't the best" tuner, I wouldn't say it's worse. Just not as good as other new ones.
> I don't have an HR10 to compare to, so I can't say for sure.
> If you have a H20-100 [I do] I would say they are about the same. Now the H20-600 is much better, as is my Sony TV.
> Are you in the San Carlos hills? Do you have a good outdoor antenna? It does need a good signal & multi-path rejection isn't it's strong suit.


Darn...I definitely have some multipath issues ...I am not quite in the hills but the Belmont hills cause some trouble at times...I have a CM4228 but it's on the roof of my one-story home with a two story home on both sides of me...I've moved that antenna all over my roof and even tried raising it another 5 feet and it didn't make any difference...one day my signal strength is in the 70's and the next it could be in the low 60's...I was really hoping the HR20 would help a fair amount


----------



## 4DThinker (Dec 17, 2006)

I think that most complaints of an HR20's OTA tuning are a result of the antenna feed being split in order to run it to both the TV and the HR20 when the HR20 is installed. My HR20 OTA signal strengths are just as strong as the same channels OTA on my TVs are. Then again I run separate paths from my amplified distribution box in the attic to both tuners.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

pdawg17 said:


> Darn...I definitely have some multipath issues ...I am not quite in the hills but the Belmont hills cause some trouble at times...I have a CM4228 but it's on the roof of my one-story home with a two story home on both sides of me...I've moved that antenna all over my roof and even tried raising it another 5 feet and it didn't make any difference...one day my signal strength is in the 70's and the next it could be in the low 60's...I was really hoping the HR20 would help a fair amount


I tend to lean towards a yagi antenna over the refrigerator shelf bow tie type antenna.
We had one member with that antenna, who was having problems. After doing some research & then looking at their mounting, it was backwards. IIRC the "back end" is only 10 dB below the front end's reception.
This is what I use: Winegard HD 9095P UHF Yagi Style, which should be over kill for you. The 9085P is what I'd use where you are, but "that's me".


----------



## hr20manray (Dec 18, 2006)

pdawg17 said:


> I currently have an HR10 and have borderline OTA and had heard back when the HR20 was being launched that it had a "new generation" tuner...lately I have been reading people saying the HR20 tuner stinks...is it worse than the HR10?


If you are basing it on which pulls in the most stations let me say this. I have a 9 inch color tv that I paid 90 dollars for. It gets all the stations my ota hr20 gets and even two that the hr20 doesn't get. So in that sense I would have to say it's tuner is worse than my 9 inch tv. Of course you can alibi for the hr20 as to technically why it doesn't get those stations, like it's probably not in some list or something, but does it really matter why? Strictly speaking, and based on which gets the most channels tuned in, I would have to say the 9 inch tv is clearly the winner.


----------



## finaldiet (Jun 13, 2006)

The HR10 tuner IS better than the HR20 tuner. Before I could pick up channel 2-1 (CBS)here with the HR10, no problem. The HR20 shows- searching for signal- always, but other OTA channels come in ok. I'm using the same antenna I found laying in the dust in attic.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

finaldiet said:


> The HR10 tuner IS better than the HR20 tuner.


Not quite...

Most of my OTA channels on my HR10 are at 70%, including ones that are not even 5 miles away. On my HR20, using the exact same cable as the HR10 was using, those same channels are 95% to 100%. And I can bring in more channels for my secondary network on my HR20 than I ever could on my HR10.

I'd say the HR20 has a better tuner.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

4DThinker said:


> I think that most complaints of an HR20's OTA tuning are a result of the antenna feed being split in order to run it to both the TV and the HR20 when the HR20 is installed. My HR20 OTA signal strengths are just as strong as the same channels OTA on my TVs are. Then again I run separate paths from my amplified distribution box in the attic to both tuners.


I've done a lot of careful measurements and tests on the HR20 tuner, and I can say without reservation that most of the problems with the HR20 tuner are bad design/implementation.

It has terrible dynamic range, it is overly sensitive to phase shift/impedance bumps, and in general a very PICKY tuner. None of this has anything to do with splits or other variables in front of the HR20 tuner. It is a very mediocre tuner. I tested with and without splits, used a variable attenuator, varied line length and gain distribution, and used some sophisticated test equipment not available to the typical consumer....after 4 hours I was able to get the HR20 pretty close to my Sammy TV's tuner. There is NO WAY a typical consumer would have EVER arrived at my solution.

That said, the HR20 tuner works, but is finicky. This is not to mention the database error problems and mismapping that result in channels not showing up on the HR20 or producing 771 errors. Further, LOW VHF (2/3 and perhaps more) channels don't work at all for anyone with an HR20.

Don't be misled by claims of splitting causing the "problems"...they could cause some problems, but the HR20 has enough "real" problems with its tuner to keep us all busy for quite some time.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

So would you say improving the antenna would be a good thing to do?


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

Thank you for confirming that this tunner just plain sucks and I thought The HD Tivo tunner was bad this one is just plain horrible


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Steve Robertson said:


> Thank you for confirming that this tuner just plain sucks and I thought The HD Tivo tuner was bad this one is just plain horrible


Poor, yes.
Horrible?
You might get better results with a better antenna.


----------



## drjjr (Jan 31, 2007)

RunnerFL said:


> Not quite...
> 
> Most of my OTA channels on my HR10 are at 70%, including ones that are not even 5 miles away. On my HR20, using the exact same cable as the HR10 was using, those same channels are 95% to 100%. And I can bring in more channels for my secondary network on my HR20 than I ever could on my HR10.
> 
> I'd say the HR20 has a better tuner.


I have the same experience. Simply switching the OTA cable from my HR10 to my HR20, I got "better" signal quality readings. Then again maybe the HR20 calls an 80% HR10 signal a 90%. You know, like grading on a curve.  
In Houston "The Tube" is on one of the CW subchannels (39-2 I think). With the HR10 I would get frequent pixellation. With the HR20 the signal is nice and clean.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

drjjr said:


> I have the same experience. Simply switching the OTA cable from my HR10 to my HR20, I got "better" signal quality readings. Then again maybe the HR20 calls an 80% HR10 signal a 90%. You know, like grading on a curve.
> In Houston "The Tube" is on one of the CW subchannels (39-2 I think). With the HR10 I would get frequent pixellation. With the HR20 the signal is nice and clean.


Ahh, you guys are out in the flatlands. Git some mountains and you'll see...:lol:


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> Poor, yes.
> Horrible?
> You might get better results with a better antenna.


I have a channel Master up on the roof I am about 6 miles from the farm and it still is not very good. I also have tried the silver sensor from indoors and that is no better. So to me the tunner just plain sucks. Going direct into my tv they both work fine.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Steve Robertson said:


> I have a channel Master up on the roof I am about 6 miles from the farm and it still is not very good. I also have tried the silver sensor from indoors and that is no better. So to me the tunner just plain sucks. Going direct into my tv they both work fine.


I'm on the "other end" as I'm 62 miles from the towers, with 300' of mountain in between. While it isn't as good as other tuners I have, it only rates a "poorer than". Not sucks or horrible. YMMV


----------



## bayareamtnbiker (Jan 30, 2007)

Hasan - Thanks for the meaningful comments that go directly to the OP’s question.

With both tuners on the same setup, the difference you mention is obvious, although would you agree that when working and not being finicky, the 20 does produce a good picture? 

What do you think are the best opportunities for improving the 20’s performance, e.g. antenna, connections etc. (if any – digital being digital).

Regards, K


----------



## scrappy 2000 (Dec 7, 2006)

hasan said:


> I've done a lot of careful measurements and tests on the HR20 tuner, and I can say without reservation that most of the problems with the HR20 tuner are bad design/implementation.
> 
> It has terrible dynamic range, it is overly sensitive to phase shift/impedance bumps, and in general a very PICKY tuner. None of this has anything to do with splits or other variables in front of the HR20 tuner. It is a very mediocre tuner. I tested with and without splits, used a variable attenuator, varied line length and gain distribution, and used some sophisticated test equipment not available to the typical consumer....after 4 hours I was able to get the HR20 pretty close to my Sammy TV's tuner. There is NO WAY a typical consumer would have EVER arrived at my solution.
> 
> ...


I could not have said it better myself. My HR 20 OTA is working fine but it took more work than most would do.


----------



## KurtV (Dec 21, 2006)

Steve Robertson said:


> I have a channel Master up on the roof I am about 6 miles from the farm and it still is not very good. I also have tried the silver sensor from indoors and that is no better. So to me the tunner just plain sucks. Going direct into my tv they both work fine.


There has to be something else wrong (e.g. cabling) or you have a bad, as in defective, OTA tuner in your HR20. At six miles, with a clear line of sight, the HR20 could pull in the signal with a gum wrapper antenna.

By way of comparison, I'm 35 miles from the antenna farm, have a $20 Radio Shack Yagi IN my attic, and I'm getting all my locals just fine. I also get a close-in independent that's only 14 miles away but in a completely different direction (about 120 degrees different).

I agree that your tuner sucks (or you have a bad cable), but not that HR20 tuners across the board do.


----------



## YankeeFan (Jan 31, 2006)

It just plain sucks!


----------



## kmruss (Feb 2, 2007)

Let me say ... that before our upgrade to the HR-20, we were using a H10 (regular HD Receiver - older model compared to the H20 newer regular HD receiver - however much smaller than the H20).

Any rate, before the upgrade, we could NOT pick up our local PBS stations with an actual picture. Signal levels for OTA on channels 13-1 through 13-4 would always read around 20-30% - sometimes 40%.

Once we upgraded to the HR-20, we now have around a 50-60% SOLID signal - and can now receive these four PBS OTA channels that we could not receive picture on before! We were excited because we have an 8-month old that will be watching these channels more often soon. Had it not been for the new HR-20, we would not be getting them.

Note: We did not move or adjust the antenna during the upgrade. We did have a new coax (RG-6) ran for the HD antenna to the living room - and are now using this instead of the old cable - but the only thing that really changed was probably less cable footage was used (the other I had strung through our living room and around our doorframe leading to the garage and then the attic). Less cable footage may have made a slight difference - but I don't think this much.

So it could be worse - but it made things MUCH better in our case.

And I really like the built-in split tuner - because we have had to record TWO HD programs from the OTA channels on a regular basis (Idol and Jericho for instance) - and it really came in handy. I'd hate to have ANOTHER (third) cable just for the second OTA tuner. I however am sympathetic if this killed your extra 3db you needed if your signal was borderline. You might check into a OTA antenna amplifier - as I know they're available for the Wineguard manufactured antennas like we have in the attic (square job).


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

The HR20 may or may not have the best OTA HD tuner. But there are easy and cheap things you can do.

First look at what is possible.

Antennaweb.org says that 60 miles southwest of Chicago, I will at most be able to get 1 HD channel. Even in Chicago, antennaweb thinks you can only get 12 HD channels.

HDTV Magazine HD Local Channel Listing and Map correctly lists the 28 HD channels that I can now get.

The best source I know of for all of the amps, splitters, and antennas is Solid Signal. Their prices are great and they ship almost instantly.

The HR20 could only lock in a few channels on the old antenna and at best with 50% signal.

I upgraded to a decent antenna for about $70, Channel Master 3020. That helped a lot. 16 channels were now at 50% or higher signal. (If you call Solid Signal, they will match up the right antenna for your situation.)

Next I tried a basic distribution amp. A splitter can cut your signal in half or worse. A distribution amp does not really amplify that much but at least it is not worse. The distribution amp helped, but on the SD, you could see that it was also amplifying the noise. I needed the amplifier right at the antenna.

I tried a Radio Shack Pre-Amp for $50. It made little difference.

Then I finally got a $65 Channel Master 7777 from Solid Signal. WOW! That worked. Channels that the HR20 was not even able to lock on before are coming in. I now get 27 OTA channels at 70%-100%. Better yet, those new channels are in the HR20 Guide just like the channels coming from the Satellites.

Is the HR20 OTA Tuner great? NO. But there is a lot that you can do even if you are way out on the fringe. Wait until you see all of the PBS channels you may be able to get...

- Craig


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

HR20's tuner is better then any other tuner in my house. Pulls in an extra station that I can't get on the others. But then I have a straight run to an amp and only one splitter before it hits the HR20. Don't oversplit is all I can say.

Other then the VHF 2/3 problem that is.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

You are going to get mixed results with the question.

Some say it is better...
Some say it is worse...

Some say it hasn't changed.

There are a lot of factors that go into play with the OTA aspect of the unit... some of which are specific to the individual setup.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Some say it is better...
> Some say it is worse...
> Some say it hasn't changed.


Which shows it all depends on what you compare it to, or "your reference".
Better than some & not as good as others. FWIW


----------



## 3stripes (Feb 16, 2007)

I'm having what I have interpreted (hopefully correctly) as serious multipath problems. With the H20, I had no problems and was receiving signals at a constant and high percentage. With the HR20, my signal on most channels jumps from 80-90% down to zero, then back up to 80-90%. The signal I receive on most stations simply will not remain constant enough for me to watch them OTA.

I added an antennuator, and that seems to have helped a little on a couple of stations. However, other stations still experience the same (multipath?) issue. Any suggestions would be appreciated.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

QUOTE=veryoldschool;870183]Which shows it all depends on what you compare it to, or "your reference".
Better than some & not as good as others. FWIW [/QUOTE]

And this is no different then any other OTA tuners frankly. I can take 5 OTA tuners and hook them up to the exact same setup and get 5 different results. Just the nature of the beast.

Now where did I put that 300 to 75 ohm adapter...

Oh, here it is!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

3stripes said:


> I'm having what I have interpreted (hopefully correctly) as serious multipath problems. With the H20, I had no problems and was receiving signals at a constant and high percentage. With the HR20, my signal on most channels jumps from 80-90% down to zero, then back up to 80-90%. The signal I receive on most stations simply will not remain constant enough for me to watch them OTA.
> I added an antennuator, and that seems to have helped a little on a couple of stations. However, other stations still experience the same (multipath?) issue. Any suggestions would be appreciated.


I think if you look, you will see you have a H20-600, made by LG. This has a very good OTA tuner [LG chipset].
If it was a H20-100, I doubt you would see any difference between your H-20 & HR-20.


----------



## drjjr (Jan 31, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Ahh, you guys are out in the flatlands. Git some mountains and you'll see...:lol:


No thank you 
In Houston if you see a hill that means there's a hole somewhere else.


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

My take on this (which is no more valid than anyone else's!).

HR20 tuners, better performance than the HR10. Better performance than my old E86 (alas now deceased!). If you allow for the split (put in a splitter to simulate it), in the same ballpark as the H20-100 for sensitivity, not as good at handling multipath. Definitely not as good as the H20-600. Can't compare it with any built-in ATSC tuners because I don't have one.

The 2.1 issue mentioned in an earlier post is as was pointed out nothing to do with the tuner sensitivity, it is a specific problem in that the HR20 tuner can't pickup low VHF for some reason.

The CM4228 was mentioned earlier, great antenna but not good at taming multipath (bowtie design) - as was mentioned a yagi is better for multipath(Antennas Direct 91XG for example) but has its issues also - VERY directional, and does not seem to have the useful VHF-hi reception of the CM4228 (they are both UHF antennas). UHF reception of the two is comparable.

The problem most people have with OTA is simply they do not have a good enough antenna, or they split the signal too many times. If you are in an apartment you are probably forced to use an indoor antenna, but most of them are poor anyway, and have ridiculous levels of amplification which can cause more problems than they cure. The Silver Sensor (unamplified) is one exception.

Then there are all these flying saucer, batwings and other strange shapes. There are a couple of exceptions, but in general, if it does not look like an antenna it's probably not a good one! Antenna physics have been well known for years - size matters!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

texasbrit said:


> My take on this (which is no more valid than anyone else's!).
> 
> HR20 tuners, better performance than the HR10. Better performance than my old E86 (alas now deceased!). If you allow for the split (put in a splitter to simulate it), in the same ballpark as the H20-100 for sensitivity, not as good at handling multipath. Definitely not as good as the H20-600. Can't compare it with any built-in ATSC tuners because I don't have one.
> 
> ...


Good post.


----------



## f300v10 (Feb 11, 2005)

I agree with texasbrit. The HR20 OTA tuner is better than the HR10-250. It handles multipath better and recovers faster when it does loose lock. The HR20 is not as good as my H20-600 which has the best OTA tuner I have ever used. I use a roof mounted CM4228.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> So would you say improving the antenna would be a good thing to do?


Always, every time, first thing to do. Improve directionality/gain of antenna and reduce feedline losses where possible.

Then, work on gain distribution.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

Steve Robertson said:


> Thank you for confirming that this tunner just plain sucks and I thought The HD Tivo tunner was bad this one is just plain horrible


Please don't put words in my mouth. I know nothing of the Tivo tuners. This tuner has issues, that I have found ways to deal with and now it performs nearly as well as my HDTV tuner (which is VERY good, btw).

The two real problems:

1. One shouldn't have to adjust all the things I did to get decent performance.

2. Low VHF has a fatal problem that has yet to be addressed. That's a "major bug" that I don't use in evaluating the tuner itself, but just MUST get fixed. In other words, the low VHF problem is not a sensitivity/dynamic range/phase issue, but it really puts the hurt on those in the Chicago area 

I didn't say horribe, I didn't say "sucks"...and I especially don't like "this or that sucks" approach.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

hasan said:


> Always, every time, first thing to do. Improve directionality/gain of antenna and reduce feedline losses where possible.
> Then, work on gain distribution.


To the starter of this thread: 
By now you should have some great info to your question.
I do think you could improve your current reception with an improved antenna. FWIW


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

Steve Robertson said:


> I have a channel Master up on the roof I am about 6 miles from the farm and it still is not very good. I also have tried the silver sensor from indoors and that is no better. So to me the tunner just plain sucks. Going direct into my tv they both work fine.


Look at a variable attentuator and also look at an FM trap.


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

hasan said:


> Please don't put words in my mouth. I know nothing of the Tivo tuners. This tuner has issues, that I have found ways to deal with and now it performs nearly as well as my HDTV tuner (which is VERY good, btw).
> 
> The two real problems:
> 
> ...


I am sorry I did not mean to put words in your mouth.


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

hasan said:


> Look at a variable attentuator and also look at an FM trap.


I will give them a try thanks for the advice


----------



## Guest (Mar 14, 2007)

Some good information in this thread. I've been thinking about getting an OTA antenna, but I'll probably hire an installer to do it for me. Any other suggestions would be appreciated.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

bayareamtnbiker said:


> Hasan - Thanks for the meaningful comments that go directly to the OP's question.
> 
> With both tuners on the same setup, the difference you mention is obvious, although would you agree that when working and not being finicky, the 20 does produce a good picture?
> 
> ...


Yes, I found a combination of antenna gain, feedline loss, feedline length, gain distribution (including setting a specific level of attenuation) that permits my HR20 to perform nearly as well (very close) to my "reference" Samsung HD Tuner (which is VERY GOOD). It took 4 hours of adjustments/experiments to get it there. The tuner performance and PQ of the HR20 is now very good (tuner) and EXCELLENT (PQ). The very best PQ is OTA with either the HR20 or my Sammy.

The best opportunities for improving the HR20's OTA performance:

1. Antenna: increase directionality (gain) and get it away from local noise sources (like indoor or even in-attic)

2. Feedline: good quality, the shorter the better, properly waterproofed connections. (Quad shield is completely unnecessary, just good RG-6, or if you are a complete nut Belden 8214 or LMR equivalent)

3. For splitting: if signal is marginal, do not use a standard "distribution amp" as commonly sold to make up for splitting. They have notoriously poor noise figures. While they work in many cases, they are mediocre to poor devices. Use a properly designed antenna mounted preamp (but put it indoors and use it as your "distribution amp".) Noise figure should be 3 dB or less.

4. Put a variable attenuator at the output of the preamp and adjust for best performance. Feed the attenuator output to a decent quality passive splitter.

5. If necessary, vary the length of the feedline from the output of the attenuator to the HR20 in 6 inch/12 inch/couple feet ....random lengths that you may have laying around as patch cords. This will cause the HR20 tuner to potentially see more acceptable impedance transformations. This takes a LOT of messing around.

Properly playing around with all of the above will get you pretty good performance from the HR20 tuner.

That being said, it is NOT GOOD that one has to be so careful with the this tuner. None of these things were required to get good performance from the Sammy HDTV tuner itself. All of these things had to be manipulated to get my HR20 performance up close to the Sammy.

My HR20 is good enough now that I don't think about it much...I just use the heck out of its OTA tuner!

I hope you find this information helpful.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

Hey Hasan N0AN:

I agree that by playing close attention to what you discuss can help improve OTA performance, but for the average person, this should not have to be the case since it may be well over most people's heads. The HR20's OTA tuners should not be so fickle.. I can get stations on my Panny's tuner that don't come in on my HR20. This seems to be common with many users.

I've also done lots of experimenting and tweaked many settings depending on what station I want OTA. Problem with my location is that I am inbetween 3 or 4 transmission sites in all different directions.

Nice work and good discussion, though...

Matt
(N3NTJ and Electrical Engineer)


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

I agree and have so stated many times: it shouldn't be required...but if you want to make "what we have" perform at its best, then I've listed the way to do it.

Thank God I got interested in RF at the age of 16, it has been particularly useful with OTA and the HR20.


----------



## ktabel01 (Aug 19, 2006)

I have a problem with the continued implications that those struggling with OTA have poor setups, be it indoor antennas, splitters, and the like. Bollacks. Most on here were/are in the situation of having excellent OTA reception with their TV or other receivers using the exact same setups. This includes myself. And many of us HAVE to use splitters, because this receiver just flat won't pick up major channels no matter the antenna, amp, etc.

So you have us with good OTA for some time, then hooking up that same equipment to the HR 20, and it is just bad bad bad. Sure, hours of work and buying more equipment is a way, but should it be expected for those who are getting it fine with other equipment with minimal expense and pain? No. It's either a hardware or software problem with this box that should be addressed by DirecTV. Many thanks to people like Hasan who have been a big help, but some love from the manufacturer is certainly in order.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Hitting nail on head: the OTA tuner's hardware is "weak" compared to a new TV.
As such, software isn't the solution. This is a SAT receiver, with a mediocre OTA tuner.


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> Hitting nail on head: the OTA tuner's hardware is "weak" compared to a new TV.
> As such, software isn't the solution. This is a SAT receiver, with a mediocre OTA tuner.


Absolutely agree. But it's (probably) not going to change, so we will have to make the best of what we have.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

texasbrit said:


> Absolutely agree. But it's (probably) not going to change, so we will have to make the best of what we have.


True, I think it's called "life".


----------



## pdawg17 (Jul 17, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> I tend to lean towards a yagi antenna over the refrigerator shelf bow tie type antenna.
> We had one member with that antenna, who was having problems. After doing some research & then looking at their mounting, it was backwards. IIRC the "back end" is only 10 dB below the front end's reception.
> This is what I use: Winegard HD 9095P UHF Yagi Style, which should be over kill for you. The 9085P is what I'd use where you are, but "that's me".


Can these antennas pull in KNTV from San Jose? My 4228 can pull in a solid signal even though it is coming from the south and I technically have an UHF only antenna...and can a 9085p be attached to a vent mount or is it too heavy? That's what I've been using with my 4228...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

pdawg17 said:


> Can these antennas pull in KNTV from San Jose? My 4228 can pull in a solid signal even though it is coming from the south and I technically have an UHF only antenna...and can a 9085p be attached to a vent mount or is it too heavy? That's what I've been using with my 4228...


Here what I think would work for you: http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=HD9085P
Somewhere I heard KNTV moved to Oakland a few years back.
They were in San Jose, from the beginning of time, but with NBC changing from KRON to KNTV there are changes. Their tower is on San Bruno mountain [SSFO].
So you can see that if you're pointing your antenna "south" for KNTV, you're using the "backside" of your antenna.
I would think that the "yagi" shouldn't be too heavy for where you're mounting.
Disclaimer: I don't know what you're doing, so understand I could be completely "full of it", unless I was there to "know". Please use your own "common sense".
Now that I've got that out of the way: Can I help you more? :lol:


----------



## pdawg17 (Jul 17, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> Here what I think would work for you: http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=HD9085P
> Somewhere I heard KNTV moved to Oakland a few years back.
> They were in San Jose, from the beginning of time, but with NBC changing from KRON to KNTV there are changes. Their tower is on San Bruno mountain [SSFO].
> So you can see that if you're pointing your antenna "south" for KNTV, you're using the "backside" of your antenna.
> ...


No...I'm ok there...the "backside" is facing toward San Jose...I'll be ordering an HR20 soon so I'll see how my 4228 does and if not, take your recommendation...

But even though KNTV is at Sutro, it is VHF, right? Can the 9085p pick it up well like the CM4228 can?


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

n3ntj said:


> Hey Hasan N0AN:
> 
> I agree that by playing close attention to what you discuss can help improve OTA performance, but for the average person, this should not have to be the case since it may be well over most people's heads. The HR20's OTA tuners should not be so fickle.. I can get stations on my Panny's tuner that don't come in on my HR20. This seems to be common with many users.


Of course we have to keep in mind that the average person will never even think about an OTA antenna. "That's what cable is for" is what you hear from 98% of the people out there.  We are the crazy ones.


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

pdawg17 said:


> No...I'm ok there...the "backside" is facing toward San Jose...I'll be ordering an HR20 soon so I'll see how my 4228 does and if not, take your recommendation...
> 
> But even though KNTV is at Sutro, it is VHF, right? Can the 9085p pick it up well like the CM4228 can?


KNTV-DT is VHF on channel 12, I have not checked but it's probably going back to channel 11 when analog goes away in 2009.
The 9085p is UHF and its a Yagi so probably has very poor VHF reception. I was not sure from the posts exactly what you were trying to do - add another antenna just for KNTV? If so you need a VHF-hi antenna for channels 7-13, there are a few of them around...

http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=Y10-7-13
http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=YA1713


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

pdawg17 said:


> No...I'm ok there...the "backside" is facing toward San Jose...I'll be ordering an HR20 soon so I'll see how my 4228 does and if not, take your recommendation...
> But even though KNTV is at Sutro, it is VHF, right? Can the 9085p pick it up well like the CM4228 can?


So you "edit" after my post. :lol: 
No it's not on the Sutro tower, but the "South San Fransisco" hill as you make the turn just before the "old candle stick" park [3com still?].
VHF for 11? I don't know why your current antenna would work [well], since it's "only UHF". As has been posted, it might be better [for future] to get a VHF/UHF antenna.
The HR-20 WILL NOT receive any "old" NTSC channels [analog].


----------



## texasbrit (Aug 9, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> So you "edit" after my post. :lol:
> No it's not on the Sutro tower, but the "South San Fransisco" hill as you make the turn just before the "old candle stick" park [3com still?].
> VHF for 11? I don't know why your current antenna would work [well], since it's "only UHF". As has been posted, it might be better [for future] to get a VHF/UHF antenna.
> The HR-20 WILL NOT receive any "old" NTSC channels [analog].


The CM4228 is pretty good for VHF-hi as long as the signal isn't too weak (as a rule of thumb, anything "red" or better on antennaweb). It's one of the only UHF antennas that shows any decent reception on VHF-hi.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

texasbrit said:


> The CM4228 is pretty good for VHF-hi as long as the signal isn't too weak (as a rule of thumb, anything "red" or better on antennaweb). It's one of the only UHF antennas that shows any decent reception on VHF-hi.


Thanks, as I didn't know & haven't any experience with that type. "It doesn't look like an antenna" to me. :lol:


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

texasbrit said:


> The CM4228 is pretty good for VHF-hi as long as the signal isn't too weak (as a rule of thumb, anything "red" or better on antennaweb). It's one of the only UHF antennas that shows any decent reception on VHF-hi.


...and to get better VHF hi reception it's a VERY good idea to tie the two reflector screens together...just a short jumper of wire soldered at each end connecting the two large reflector screens improves VHF hi reception quite a bit.


----------



## dpluta (Sep 5, 2006)

The HR20 OTA tuner is simply horrendous. I get 771 errors all the time. I live in a flat location with a good roof top antenna. I should not have to pay for a commerical-quality antenna to get the HR20 tuner to work as well as the Sony does. D* has been good about getting us software updates for a variety of bugs. However, I now believe that OTA problems are strictly hardware related and we will likely not see a fix from D*.


----------



## Mavrick (Feb 1, 2006)

I have been having issues with my local NBC station and the HR20. The HR20 had always tune this station just fine up until software version ox134 and now half of the time it cannot lock onto the signal. Nothing has changed with my setup except the software on the HR20.

I am now running ce canidate 13d hoping that would fix it but it has not. I have tried connecting the same antenna cable stratight to my tv and can watch the NBC station in HD just fine I even connectected the same cable to the HR10-250 I have and can watch my NBC station in HD it seems to be only the HR20 that has the problem. And it only appeared with software version ox134 and has not went away with any of the latest CE canidates.

Lucklily for me that NBC currently has no shows I want to watch except ER. I hope this gets fixed soon.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Mavrick said:


> I have been having issues with my local NBC station and the HR20. The HR20 had always tune this station just fine up until software version ox134 and now half of the time it cannot lock onto the signal. Nothing has changed with my setup except the software on the HR20.
> I am now running ce canidate 13d hoping that would fix it but it has not. I have tried connecting the same antenna cable stratight to my tv and can watch the NBC station in HD just fine I even connectected the same cable to the HR10-250 I have and can watch my NBC station in HD it seems to be only the HR20 that has the problem. And it only appeared with software version ox134 and has not went away with any of the latest CE canidates.
> Lucklily for me that NBC currently has no shows I want to watch except ER. I hope this gets fixed soon.


What channel? 
What's the signal strength?


----------



## Mavrick (Feb 1, 2006)

41-1 Macon Georgia signal strength 75% when the HR20 wants to lock onto it. TV and HR10 will stay locked to 41-1 all the time but the HR20 will not. NBC 41-1 is the only station I have this trouble with all the rest of my OTA stations have no issuses at all and 41-1 did not either until 134 and following software versions. All my OTA stations are around the 70's in signal strength.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Mavrick said:


> 41-1 Macon Georgia signal strength 75% when the HR20 wants to lock onto it. TV and HR10 will stay locked to 41-1 all the time but the HR20 will not. NBC 41-1 is the only station I have this trouble with all the rest of my OTA stations have no issuses at all and 41-1 did not either until 134 and following software versions. All my OTA stations are around the 70's in signal strength.


Without having more info [like you get from www.antennaweb.org with your address], I would think that software wasn't going to change anything. I'm in a very "difficult" area & winter to summer changes how well [if at all] I get stations. I "would guess" [please understand that's all I can do without the info] that 41.1 is your "hardest" channel to get. This could be from a multi-path problem where "what you get" comes from: the station & a reflection(s) off something else. This is something the HR-20 "doesn't do well". Improving the antenna [pointing it, raising it, etc] most likely will be what will help & not any new software. 
FWIW If you want to PM me with your location [address, zip code] I can look into it from here with SAT maps & photos, to see what "is going on" with the terrain.


----------



## Mavrick (Feb 1, 2006)

Veryoldschool thanks for your help sorry I have not got back to you sooner but been very busy with work here lately. My OTA problem with 41-1 appears to be fixed now did not have it at all on Friday but when I upgraded to 13e I started to recieve 41-1 again imediatly after download and have had it ever since so I am happy again.

Just as a recap for everyone else.

Lost 41-1 WMGT macon georgia on software version ox134
still did not have it on CE release 13b or 13d.
Got 41-1 back on CE release 13e so I am now happy again.


----------



## heiber (Jan 3, 2007)

As far as I am concerned, the OTA tuner is useless. Here is a comparison between the HR20 and my Sony KDS60A2000 tuners:

...........HR20...............KDS60A2000
2-1......Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
5-1......<50%..............70%
5-2......Not Acquired...70%
7-1......75%................85%
7-2......75%................85%
7-3......75%................85%
9-1......Not Acquired...80%
9-2......Not Acquired...80%
11-1....60%................70%
11-2....60%................75%
11-3....60%................75%
11-4....60%................75%
20-1....Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
26-1....Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
26-2....Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
32-1....Not Acquired...75%
35-1....Not Acquired...35% (Not acquired)
38-1....Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
38-2....Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
38-3....Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
38-4....Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
44-1....Not Acquired...70%
50-1....90%................95%
56-1....Not Acquired...38% (Not acquired)
56-2....Not Acquired...38% (Not acquired)
60-1....Not Acquired...60% (Not acquired)
62-1....Not Acquired...38% (Not acquired)
66-1....Not Acquired...60%

Anything listed less than 75% for the HR20 for me doesn't come in. Anything listed 60% or higher for the TV does come in. Pretty much, I can get every major channel except CBS OTA with my TV and only ABC OTA with the HR20.


----------



## KurtV (Dec 21, 2006)

heiber said:


> As far as I am concerned, the OTA tuner is useless. Here is a comparison between the HR20 and my Sony KDS60A2000 tuners:
> 
> ...........HR20...............KDS60A2000
> 2-1......Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
> ...


My guess is there's a hardware problem with your box (or maybe with your setup relative to the HR20, hasan's post are particularly applicable if that's the case). There are many users (including me) who are getting very good results with the HR20's OTA tuners, so it's clear that there's not an inherent hardware or software problem that's severe enough to preclude use altogether.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

heiber,

You are actually IN Chicago. I am almost 60 miles away literally in the woods. My HR20 is doing dramatically better.

The odds of having a bad HR20 AND a bad Sony A2000 are pretty low. In Chicago, both should be pegged at nearly 100 for all of these channels, even channel 2 should come in on the Sony.

My signals strengths are below in red...



heiber said:


> ...Here is a comparison between the HR20 and my Sony KDS60A2000 tuners:
> 
> HR20...........HR20...............KDS60A2000
> No 2-1......Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
> ...


----------



## Hoxxx (Jun 19, 2004)

pdawg17 said:


> I currently have an HR10 and have borderline OTA and had heard back when the HR20 was being launched that it had a "new generation" tuner...lately I have been reading people saying the HR20 tuner stinks...is it worse than the HR10?


I have a HR10 and a HR20 both give me fine OTA. with most to all readings high 90's to 100%. I am atleast 35 miles from the towers. It is all location for sure. When I lived in town more I had a 160 mile range antenna and was unable to get 2 of the locals. now I use a small antenna mounted in my attic.


----------



## heiber (Jan 3, 2007)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> heiber,
> 
> You are actually IN Chicago. I am almost 60 miles away literally in the woods. My HR20 is doing dramatically better.
> 
> The odds of having a bad HR20 AND a bad Sony A2000 are pretty low. In Chicago, both should be pegged at nearly 100 for all of these channels, even channel 2 should come in on the Sony.


In the interests of fair disclosure, I am actually in the Northwest suburbs - about 20 miles from downtown. I do not expect flawless recepetion, especially since I don't have a roof mounted antenna. However, there is a dramatic difference between the HR20 and my tv and I am unwilling to invest in any other hardware or installation with the hope that it will improve the signal.


----------



## liverpool (Jan 29, 2007)

DB2 antenna, 30 miles from transmitter no preamp I get 85-100 % on both tuners no complaints here.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

heiber said:


> As far as I am concerned, the OTA tuner is useless. Here is a comparison between the HR20 and my Sony KDS60A2000 tuners:
> 
> ...........HR20...............KDS60A2000
> 2-1......Not Acquired...41% (Not acquired)
> ...


I routinely watch one of my channels in the high 40's to low 50's on the HR20.

The OTA tuner in the HR20 is FAR from useless for me. I use it all the time.

If you look at my other posts, you will see that I'm far from a "fan" of the OTA tuner for a variety of reasons, but that's a far cry from "useless".

It may be useless for you in your situation (bad multi-path perhaps). I'm 27 miles from the transmitter antenna farm, and until I do fine until the low 40's. Mid to high 30's breaks up badly.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

heiber said:


> In the interests of fair disclosure, I am actually in the Northwest suburbs - about 20 miles from downtown. I do not expect flawless recepetion, especially since I don't have a roof mounted antenna. However, there is a dramatic difference between the HR20 and my tv and I am unwilling to invest in any other hardware or installation with the hope that it will improve the signal.


Thanks. That confirms part of what I was guessing. Can you give a couple more details? Where is your antenna located? What make and model is it? Are you using a splitter? AMplifier? What kind of cable? Any splices?

I was sure that you do not have a defective HR20 and a defection Sony A2000. The odds were just impossibly against that.

We have others here and on the AVS forum on the I90 corridor who get everything but channel 2 at close to 100%. Many also get Rockford and Milwaukee.

Right now, your Sony is being robbed of 20-30 great digital channels. You HR20 is being robbed of even more.

I will bet if you called Solid Signal up in Michigan, they would recommend an inexpensive directional antenna if all you want is Chicago. They will also help you with placement to all but eliminate the multipath problems you are having.

You are also lucky that the back of the antenna will happen to be at pointed at 6 more channels in Rockford. They will help you bring those in as well.

I have said before that I think multipath is the reason why some say the HR20 does just fine and others say it is awful. I think that Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, and others like the H20 are much better at handling multipath.

But in your case, you have so much multipath that even the Sony is just struggling. For very little time and not much money you could cure the problem with your Sony and HR20. What do you have to lose?

- Craig


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

From another thread, a TV station engineer "broke down" the problem. ATSC [as a whole] is prone to multi-path problems. LG seems to have the patents on the chips. Their fifth generation version has been "the talk of the town" for some time. It's clear the HR-20 isn't using it, but the H20-600 [made by LG] does.
Tall buildings, mountains, etc. are the source of multi-path. If you don't have them around your OTA will be better than those that do. You can have 100% signal, but if it consists of "many" signals slightly shifted in time, all of "the zeros" get filled with "ones" and therefore can't be decoded. Welcome to digital TV.


----------



## kaminsco (Nov 27, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> From another thread, a TV station engineer "broke down" the problem. ATSC [as a whole] is prone to multi-path problems. LG seems to have the patents on the chips. Their fifth generation version has been "the talk of the town" for some time. It's clear the HR-20 isn't using it, but the H20-600 [made by LG] does.
> Tall buildings, mountains, etc. are the source of multi-path. If you don't have them around your OTA will be better than those that do. You can have 100% signal, but if it consists of "many" signals slightly shifted in time, all of "the zeros" get filled with "ones" and therefore can't be decoded. Welcome to digital TV.


I have seen a post in the main thread area about combining two antenna's into one feed to get the signals from differen locations. Based on your description, would this add to a multipath problem?

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=82896


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

kaminsco said:


> I have seen a post in the main thread area about combining two antenna's into one feed to get the signals from different locations. Based on your description, would this add to a multipath problem?
> http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=82896


I read that & if you use this: http://www.warrenelectronics.com/ant...Jointennas.htm
It shouldn't, as it traps or blocks the other signals.
Remember: until "your there", you don't really know "for sure".


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

Here on my HR20 I get no OTA thru the HR20 just 771 messages all the way around but when I do a system test the OTA tuners check OK but no signal being acquired?? Sign of defective tuners?!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

DCSholtis said:


> Here on my HR20 I get no OTA thru the HR20 just 771 messages all the way around but when I do a system test the OTA tuners check OK but no signal being acquired?? Sign of defective tuners?!


Sign of no antenna?
If it checks out "OK" the internals should be working.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

There is an antenna connected just no signals being acquired (771 and no signal acquired) I bought a Silver Sensor 3 Im going to try. Using an outdoor one installed by D* now. Thanks VOS!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

DCSholtis said:


> There is an antenna connected just no signals being acquired (771 and no signal acquired) I bought a Silver Sensor 3 Im going to try. Using an outdoor one installed by D* now. Thanks VOS!


I would think the outdoor would work better than an indoor, but if you're getting 771, you sure don't have a signal coming it. The indoor will be easier to point. :lol:


----------



## cygnusloop (Jan 26, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I would think the outdoor would work better than an indoor, but if you're getting 771, you sure don't have a signal coming it. The indoor will be easier to point. :lol:


Unless the outdoor is omni directional, and the indoor is directional, FWIW.

I know that *some* of the antennas installed by D* (particularly the ones that attach to the dish) are omni.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

cygnusloop said:


> I know that *some* of the antennas installed by D* (particularly the ones that attach to the dish) are omni.


Or what's known as "poor".


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

veryoldschool said:


> Or what's known as "poor".


Poor isnt the word Id use for the one D* installed. :lol:


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

DCSholtis said:


> Poor isn't the word Id use for the one D* installed. :lol:


I haven't seen it so I couldn't be more descriptive. :lol:


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

veryoldschool said:


> I haven't seen it so I couldn't be more descriptive. :lol:


Think Terk..ugh...:lol: I just thought of something what the hell am I laughing for?!! I got an antenna up....an ugly one at that that isnt working out for me..ah well...


----------



## heiber (Jan 3, 2007)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> Thanks. That confirms part of what I was guessing. Can you give a couple more details? Where is your antenna located? What make and model is it? Are you using a splitter? AMplifier? What kind of cable? Any splices?


I have an RCA ANT537 amplified antenna (25db). My TV is in the basement, so the antenna is sitting in a south facing window that is above grade. Again, not a very ideal setup, but my issue is that the receiver has dramatically worse reception than the TV. Since one of the supposed benefits of the receiver was being able to record off the air, I am disappointed because I don't have any rainfade protection and I am limited to the lesser channel selection and picture quality of Directv.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

heiber said:


> I have an RCA ANT537 amplified antenna (25db). My TV is in the basement, so the antenna is sitting in a south facing window that is above grade. Again, not a very ideal setup, but my issue is that the receiver has dramatically worse reception than the TV. Since one of the supposed benefits of the receiver was being able to record off the air, I am disappointed because I don't have any rainfade protection and I am limited to the lesser channel selection and picture quality of Directv.


Ouch. Not only is your antenna almost underground but you're probably in multipath hell with that setup. Double strike. Try to at least get it up in an attic or second floor and you'll probably see a lot better reception.

Antennas really need to be outside and free of obstructions for good reception. It only goes downhill from there the lower you go and inside structures.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

heiber said:


> I have an RCA ANT537 amplified antenna (25db). My TV is in the basement, so the antenna is sitting in a south facing window that is above grade. Again, not a very ideal setup, but my issue is that the receiver has dramatically worse reception than the TV. Since one of the supposed benefits of the receiver was being able to record off the air, I am disappointed because I don't have any rainfade protection and I am limited to the lesser channel selection and picture quality of Directv.


Here are the things that are hurting you.
1. The worst place for an antenna is near or below grade. Signals reflect off the ground and rattle inside basement walls. Do you have ghosting on the Sony SD channels 2, 5, 7, or 11?

2. Omni-directional rabbit ears like you are using make it much worse because they pick up those reflections just like the real signal.

3. Because you were not able to tune many stations, did you crank up the gain on the 537? That may have actually amplified the multi-path problems.

4. Are you using a BB or RS cheapie splitter with a signal loss of 3 to 7 to even 10 dB?

Other than being in a submarine or an ICBM silo, this is just about worst case. It is a testament to the Sony and HR20 that they can receive anything.

I think the reason your $3000 Sony can't receive 13 of your Chicago stations is not a problem with the Sony. It is the $29 antenna in the basement.

So it is up to you. You have already invested thousands. You already have at least two RG-6 running into your basement. Why not run a third and put up a decent directional antenna?

The $28 Channel Master 3016 should work well outside.

If you want to put it in your attic, something like the $55 Channel Master 3018 should give you more gain to overcome the multi-path in an attic.

Just as an experiment, try dialing DOWN the 537 gain, take off the splitter and put it straight into the Sony. That alone should help. Temporarily move the 537 outside, up off the ground on a longer cable and you will be amazed at even that.

The truth lies not in your Sony but in your antenna...in your basement. 

- Craig


----------



## heiber (Jan 3, 2007)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> Here are the things that are hurting you.
> 1. The worst place for an antenna is near or below grade. Signals reflect off the ground and rattle inside basement walls. Do you have ghosting on the Sony SD channels 2, 5, 7, or 11?
> 
> 2. Omni-directional rabbit ears like you are using make it much worse because they pick up those reflections just like the real signal.
> ...


Thanks for the help. I know it is about as far from ideal as possible. I am not splitting the cable. The results were from direct feeds into each tuner (with minor break to explain to my wife what I was doing ).

Putting something on the roof would be nice, but not easily done because I have a fairly steep roof. I tried climbing up there once to check things out (there is actual an older VHF / UHF antenna up there already which would be nice if it was still working) but chickened out. That leaves me with professional installation and since I can't guarantee perfermance, I am hesitant to do that.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Other than being in a submarine or an ICBM silo, this is just about worst case.!rolling !rolling !rolling


----------



## cygnusloop (Jan 26, 2007)

heiber said:


> Putting something on the roof would be nice, but not easily done because I have a fairly steep roof. I tried climbing up there once to check things out *(there is actual an older VHF / UHF antenna up there already which would be nice if it was still working)* but chickened out. That leaves me with professional installation and since I can't guarantee perfermance, I am hesitant to do that.


Why don't you just use that? What's "broken" about it? Pretty simple devices, chunk o' metal with a cable running to it. I can almost guarantee that an "old" antenna will work better that any fancy new plastic encased "HDTV" antenna (pervasive myth, and BIG ripoff). If it only requires a new cable, or something, this will be a whole lot of bang for your $$$. As has been said, OTA is most definitely worth it. A little time, and maybe a tiny little bit of money, and you won't be disappointed.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

But it doesn't say HD on it.!rolling !rolling


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

heiber said:


> I tried climbing up there once to check things out (there is actual an older VHF / UHF antenna up there already which would be nice if it was still working) but chickened out.


As suggested, why don't you try hooking it up? When I bought my house it had a 10-15 year old rusting antenna on the roof. Never used it but 5 years later when I got HD I decided to see what I could get. Wouldn't you know I got all the channels in perfectly. New or old doesn't matter. Just so long as the cable isn't shredded or something or the elements are broken you're good to go. You could always try and run a fresh RG6 cable from it down to your basement if the old cable is bad.

My only problem is that every spring I have this dang woodpecker that likes to get on the antenna and pound on it. And he's back again! Grrrrrrrrrrrrr.


----------



## heiber (Jan 3, 2007)

bonscott87 said:


> As suggested, why don't you try hooking it up? When I bought my house it had a 10-15 year old rusting antenna on the roof. Never used it but 5 years later when I got HD I decided to see what I could get. Wouldn't you know I got all the channels in perfectly. New or old doesn't matter. Just so long as the cable isn't shredded or something or the elements are broken you're good to go. You could always try and run a fresh RG6 cable from it down to your basement if the old cable is bad.
> 
> My only problem is that every spring I have this dang woodpecker that likes to get on the antenna and pound on it. And he's back again! Grrrrrrrrrrrrr.


I tried. That was my plan. I found a coaxial lead fed into my attic through a vent. So I temporarily fed the feed through two flights of stairs to the basement - but no signal at all. The connector was coroded. So I cut it off and put a new one on. Some water oozed out - not a good sign. That is when I tried to climb on my roof to get to the antenna - but the roof was too steep for me to feel comfortable. If there is someone in the Northwest Chicago area who has nothing better to do than climb on my roof, I would love to do this.


----------



## pdawg17 (Jul 17, 2006)

Well, I started this thread and as of today I had my HR20 installed so now I can answer my own question....yes...it is THAT bad...two of the major stations that were 70% on my HR10 are now 30% on the HR20...now I know that the two boxes don't quantify signal strength the same but 70% down to 30%? Bummer...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

pdawg17 said:


> Well, I started this thread and as of today I had my HR20 installed so now I can answer my own question....yes...it is THAT bad...two of the major stations that were 70% on my HR10 are now 30% on the HR20...now I know that the two boxes don't quantify signal strength the same but 70% down to 30%? Bummer...


Back to the antenna "playing with" that was pointed out in the beginning. Multi-path is a killer.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

heiber said:


> I tried. That was my plan. I found a coaxial lead fed into my attic through a vent. So I temporarily fed the feed through two flights of stairs to the basement - but no signal at all. The connector was corroded. So I cut it off and put a new one on. Some water oozed out - not a good sign. That is when I tried to climb on my roof to get to the antenna - but the roof was too steep for me to feel comfortable. If there is someone in the Northwest Chicago area who has nothing better to do than climb on my roof, I would love to do this.


I am betting the old antenna would work fine if we could just get to it...

Some ideas...
1. Move the ANT537 up into the attic and connect it to the antenna cable and see if you get anything. It should be better than the basement. It will at least tell you if the old cable is usable.

2. If that doesn't work use that long cable and connect it to the 537 in the attic. See if that is any better.

3. Drop the bucks on the Channel Master 3018 antenna and just lay it in the attic for now. If the roof is that steep, you can walk around in the attic and it is not hot yet. I bet that solves everything right there. Wait until you see. The 3018 is cheaper than a 1-hour call-out.

4. If the Sony still cannot lock on on everything but WBBM, you have bad multi-path and need to mount outside. You are near O'Hare and a lot of other potential problems. There is already a mount up on the roof, attaching the new antenna would be fast...

I promise this will all be worth it. You have an amazing TV and great content just waiting for you. Wait until you can have 11-1 in your Guide.

Please ask the people at Solid Signal be fore you buy another antenna. They will review your full situation and may catch something we are missing. They could have you even pulling down 20 channels from Milwaukee with the right kit. You might be able to sneak a peak behind the Cheddar Curtain...

- Craig


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

pdawg17 said:


> Well, I started this thread and as of today I had my HR20 installed so now I can answer my own question....yes...it is THAT bad...two of the major stations that were 70% on my HR10 are now 30% on the HR20...now I know that the two boxes don't quantify signal strength the same but 70% down to 30%? Bummer...


As veryoldschool warned you in post 5, the 4228 pulls in almost as much from behind as in front. If you have something behind you like a hill or a house it can be causing reflections (multi-path).

Finaldiet gave you the exact comparison you asked for in post 7. His results exactly match what you found.

The difference in answers you got was whether the person had multi-path. The HR20 is great if you don't have multi-path. It is not great at filtering out multi-path.

With the hills and the two story homes on either side of you and the results you are seeing, I think you have bad multi-path. The only way to know for sure is to test it as you have now done.

As veryoldschool said, a Yagi antenna can work wonders in blocking the multi-path. Your bow tie can work good if there are no reflective surfaces.

Can I ask some questions?

In post 22 of this thread I has suggested that you check the HDTV Magazine HD Local Channel Listing and Map.

How many channels do they show you can get? 
How far away from your home are they? 
Are they all the same direction? 
Do you have something that could be reflecting signal behind you? A house? A Hill?
Are you using a pre-amp or distribution amp?
Are you using a splitter?
Are there any splices in your cable?
Is it new? RG6?

- Craig


----------



## pdawg17 (Jul 17, 2006)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> As veryoldschool warned you in post 5, the 4228 pulls in almost as much from behind as in front. If you have something behind you like a hill or a house it can be causing reflections (multi-path).
> 
> Finaldiet gave you the exact comparison you asked for in post 7. His results exactly match what you found.
> 
> ...


How many channels do they show you can get? *43 (all of them)*
How far away from your home are they? *15-20 miles*
Are they all the same direction? *Yes*
Do you have something that could be reflecting signal behind you? A house? A Hill? *I have a 250 foot Bay tree directly behind me about 100 feet away*
Are you using a pre-amp or distribution amp? *No*
Are you using a splitter? *No*
Are there any splices in your cable? *No*
Is it new? RG6? *Yes*

It sounds like a Yagi is better but then I'm giving up NBC here...as a side note, I watched Lost on OTA with a signal strength of 44% so I'll mess with mine a bit more...

Edit: I noticed that now only ABC is low (55%) but the others are up again...the uneasy thing about that is why is it better and when are they going to drop again when I don't know it?


----------



## ktabel01 (Aug 19, 2006)

Antennas do not need to be outside IMHO. My relatively cheap indoor antenna picks up at least 20 channels OTA in downtown chicago, with no fuss, manipulation, preamps, etc. Of course, that is when hooked up to a decent OTA tuner, in my TV. Hook it up to the HR20, and I'm down to like 5. This is their problem, and they have done nothing to fix it. Hopefully it's not because they can't, but because they're working on other problems/issues. With that in mind, this box is becoming pretty stable from the sounds of this board, and OTA should be coming to the front burner if there truly is anything that can be done.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

pdawg17 said:


> It sounds like a Yagi is better but then I'm giving up NBC here...as a side note, I watched Lost on OTA with a signal strength of 44% so I'll mess with mine a bit more...
> 
> Edit: I noticed that now only ABC is low (55%) but the others are up again...the uneasy thing about that is why is it better and when are they going to drop again when I don't know it?


* You do not lose channels going to a Yagi like the 3018. It picks up UHF and VHF. So you will keep NBC.

* Signal strength fluctuates constantly. As a rule, better at night, better still at sunset or in a temperature inversion. Worse in heavy low clouds.

Of the 43 channels HDTV says you get, are you saying the HR20 currently gets all 43 and they are usable? How many digital channels does antennaweb.org say you get?

Do you have FM towers near-by?

- Craig


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

ktabel01 said:


> Antennas do not need to be outside IMHO... My relatively cheap indoor antenna picks up at least 20 channels OTA in downtown chicago, with no fuss, manipulation, preamps, etc. Of course, that is when hooked up to a decent OTA tuner, in my TV. Hook it up to the HR20, and I'm down to like 5. This is their problem, and they have done nothing to fix it. Hopefully it's not because they can't, but because they're working on other problems/issues. With that in mind, this box is becoming pretty stable from the sounds of this board, and OTA should be coming to the front burner if there truly is anything that can be done.


Whether you use any antenna depends on your goal.

- If you don't want OTA, you don't need an antenna.
- If you want 5 HD channels on your HR20, go with the indoor in your case.
- If you want 25 HD channels use an inexpensive outdoor antenna. Call someone like solidsignal.com for your exact situation.

I do not think that the issues with the HR20 tuner are in software I think the HR20 is not using newer OTA hardware. I don't think the software fairy can fix this.

- Craig


----------



## pdawg17 (Jul 17, 2006)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> * You do not lose channels going to a Yagi like the 3018. It picks up UHF and VHF. So you will keep NBC.
> 
> * Signal strength fluctuates constantly. As a rule, better at night, better still at sunset or in a temperature inversion. Worse in heavy low clouds.
> 
> ...


I should say it is 17 STATIONS that I get but it ends up being 43 including subchannels...thanks for the info on the Yagi and VHF...what never makes sense to me is ABC is 50% but is on the same tower as other networks that are 80%...lower power?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

I think what some need to understand is "where" the problems [or not] are. Many live on flat ground with nothing for miles. Others live around tall buildings. Still others live with hills and mountains all around [like the OP]. All of these will affect what your reception is [good & bad].
I grew up in the SF bay area, back when there were only three or four channels & black & white.
The OP has mountains all around, a bay one one side & mountain beyond [most likely not the problem], and several hills between him & the transmitters.
His "main targets" are the Sutro tower & San Bruno mountain. Now behind him is KCSM and off in other directions will be several other sources from across the bay. Add to this a few tall building. I would call this multi-path heaven [having literally: been there, done that].


----------



## ktabel01 (Aug 19, 2006)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> Whether you use any antenna depends on your goal.
> 
> - If you don't want OTA, you don't need an antenna.
> - If you want 5 HD channels on your HR20, go with the indoor in your case.
> ...


Fine, if that's the case, then I want this stated by Directv. If their hardware blows, tell us, acknowledge, and move on. Don't leave its customers to elaborate trials in hopes of obtaining functionality of their box. Because, as you stated, the problem seems to be hardware related and will require much more effort/equipment/expense to receive OTA than most other tuners would merit.


----------



## forum junkie (Sep 9, 2004)

Whenever OTA comes up there is always a number of people having trouble with the HR20 but get great reception with the TV tuner or another receiver. Even those who have great reception with the H20 but say it sucks with the HR20 using the same set up. That excludes the antenna as the problem and leaves either inferior tuners or the split to two tuners that causes a 3db drop in signal. You can eliminate one of those if your brave enough to open it up and run the coax straight to one tuner and check signal strength. If that is the problem, maybe a software change would let us turn off one tuner and run straight to one. One working tuner is better than two that don't.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

forum junkie said:


> Whenever OTA comes up there is always a number of people having trouble with the HR20 but get great reception with the TV tuner or another receiver. Even those who have great reception with the H20 but say it sucks with the HR20 using the same set up. That excludes the antenna as the problem and leaves either inferior tuners or the split to two tuners that causes a 3db drop in signal. You can eliminate one of those if your brave enough to open it up and run the coax straight to one tuner and check signal strength. If that is the problem, maybe a software change would let us turn off one tuner and run straight to one. One working tuner is better than two that don't.


If the "real" problem is the internal splitter, how would turning off one tuner do any good? What you're proposing is an impedance problem that wouldn't change by turning off a tuner. Only removing the splitter could have any effect on this and except for the -3 dB drop in power, wouldn't really make that much difference. Signals need to be on the order of 50 dB above the noise level to work. Your change "at best" would only make a 3 dB change so if the signal was 47 dB S/N ratio, sure. But if it was already above 50 dB S/N it would make no difference. Add antenna gain and you can use both tuners. Remove multi-path signals [antenna again] and the weakness of this tuner is reduced.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

forum junkie said:


> Whenever OTA comes up there is always a number of people having trouble with the HR20 but get great reception with the TV tuner or another receiver. Even those who have great reception with the H20 but say it sucks with the HR20 using the same set up. That excludes the antenna as the problem and leaves either inferior tuners or the split to two tuners that causes a 3db drop in signal. You can eliminate one of those if your brave enough to open it up and run the coax straight to one tuner and check signal strength. If that is the problem, maybe a software change would let us turn off one tuner and run straight to one. One working tuner is better than two that don't.


I think this is somewhat of a mischaracterization of the HR20 OTA tuners. The tuner in the HR20 is not as good as my Sammy, to be sure. This is especially true in terms of dynamic range, sensitivity and response to impedance bumps. However, properly adjusted gain, and gain distribution will permit the HR20 tuner to operate very close to the level of my Sammy. (sans channels 2 and 3, which I don't need) It took a LOT of "playing" to get it there. Since I was able to ultimately get it close to the Sammy, I certainly wouldn't say it "sucks" (and I don't like the term anyway...it communicates no real information and only invites argument).

So, I for one, don't say it sucks. It has issues, and the missing channels from the Guide is a big issue...that has zero to do with the tuner itself.

That said, the tuner needs work, and the low VHF problem needs to be fixed. If I bought the HR20 as only an OTA HD receiver, I WOULD BE DISAPPOINTED, to be sure. (in that it can be very picky and not having channels 2 and 3 working at all is a major deficiency).

It is hard to keep these two problem areas in context (for me, at least). I get all my major networks OTA-HD perfectly with the HR20. It records very reliably. The playback quality of OTA-HD is superb. If, however, I were missing key channels (due to Guide problems) or needed channels 2 or 3 (like the folks in Chicago for WBBM), I would be less "accepting" of the HR20's performance (guide related) and tuner. (Low VHF and pickyness) I would be using words like MAJOR problems, and be pounding on D* for a fix, and credits against my account until those problems ARE fixed.

I guess my real problem is language. I don't much care for POS or Crap or Sucks. In the right circumstances I would use "unacceptable", perhaps even "poor excuse for a properly operating tuner", especially if afflicted with the two issues noted above. It's one thing to not like the operation of a piece of electronics and to clearly state what the issues are. It's another matter to make general, sweeping pronouncements that are only true in highly specific situations.

Does the HR20 OTA-HD tuner suck for me. No, not by a long shot. Does it need fixing, ABSOLUTELY.

N.B. I don't mention multi-path as a problem for the HR20, because I don't have any way to test it. We are in rural Iowa, with few potential causes of multi-path...but I've seen others theorize that multi-path performance is not good with the HR20.

The other thing I've seen stated (without any factual support) is that the HR20 does or doesn't use a particular tuner chip. If anyone has authoritative information on this, I would love to see it. What I have seen is nothing but speculation.

I don't know (nor does anyone else) whether the problems are hardware or software (for Ch 2/3). We can only hope it's software, as a hardware recall is going to be a nightmare for both user and provider alike.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

If someone is going to use "it sucks" referring to the OTA tuner in the HR-20, What they really should be saying is "it doesn't suck enough". Sucks is generally in reference to an intake, so in this sense receiving. Nobody has ever posted this receives too much, just the contrary, it doesn't receive enough. So what the complaints should really be saying is: the HR-20 OTA tuners don't "suck" enough to get my channels x, y, z.....

Tomorrow's topic will be: Why burn-in is really burn-out.
Please bring your notes & homework to class. 
There will be a pop quiz. :lol:


----------



## forum junkie (Sep 9, 2004)

veryoldschool said:


> If the "real" problem is the internal splitter, how would turning off one tuner do any good? What you're proposing is an impedance problem that wouldn't change by turning off a tuner. Only removing the splitter could have any effect on this and except for the -3 dB drop in power, wouldn't really make that much difference. Signals need to be on the order of 50 dB above the noise level to work. Your change "at best" would only make a 3 dB change so if the signal was 47 dB S/N ratio, sure. But if it was already above 50 dB S/N it would make no difference. Add antenna gain and you can use both tuners. Remove multi-path signals [antenna again] and the weakness of this tuner is reduced.


What I suggested was running the coax straight to one tuner - this does bypass the splitter. I did it to my Tivo to get a little more signal strength. The ability to turn off one tuner in the software would be to keep the receiver from trying to lock onto the one with no signal. Yours may be fine but for those that are borderline 3db is sometimes the difference between a solid signal and breakups.

What sucks is being locked into a 2 year agreement for a tuner that doesn't work as well as many others when this one was said to have the latest and best tuners. Many installers on the OTA sites have found the LG 5th generation tuners to work amazingly well on very little signal. If it's not the tuners, explain why even many who get great signals with the H20 are having trouble with the HR20.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

forum junkie said:


> What I suggested was running the coax straight to one tuner - this does bypass the splitter. I did it to my Tivo to get a little more signal strength. The ability to turn off one tuner in the software would be to keep the receiver from trying to lock onto the one with no signal. Yours may be fine but for those that are borderline 3db is sometimes the difference between a solid signal and breakups.
> 
> What sucks is being locked into a 2 year agreement for a tuner that doesn't work as well as many others when this one was said to have the latest and best tuners. Many installers on the OTA sites have found the LG 5th generation tuners to work amazingly well on very little signal. If it's not the tuners, explain why even many who get great signals with the H20 are having trouble with the HR20.


I don't think there's much question there are tuner problems...but there is also a guide problem, and it's easy for the "unintiated" to confuse the two. I get a 771 error on 56-2...no signal...is it the tuner...of course not, the darn database has the HR20 looking in the wrong place for the signal. In this particular case, the tuner is doing EXACTLY what it's told...the wrong thing, of course, but it is following instructions.

This is why so many of us are clamoring for the tuner to "scan" for available channels instead of relying on the guide for the tuning info (not to mention the NIGHTMARE that is going to follow when a ton of the channel assignments change next year)

I sure hope D* enables channel scan before then.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

forum junkie said:


> What I suggested was running the coax straight to one tuner - this does bypass the splitter. I did it to my Tivo to get a little more signal strength. The ability to turn off one tuner in the software would be to keep the receiver from trying to lock onto the one with no signal. Yours may be fine but for those that are borderline 3db is sometimes the difference between a solid signal and breakups.
> What sucks is being locked into a 2 year agreement for a tuner that doesn't work as well as many others when this one was said to have the latest and best tuners. Many installers on the OTA sites have found the LG 5th generation tuners to work amazingly well on very little signal. If it's not the tuners, explain why even many who get great signals with the H20 are having trouble with the HR20.


I'm not about to say this OTA tuner is great. It isn't & I've posted this from the very beginning of it's activation. Find ANY OTA thread & read my postings.
Since this unit isn't "owned" and is only "Leased", removing the splitter isn't an option. This is hacking & "we don't do that here".
Making improvements to the signal coming to the HR-20 would do the same or better than the -3 dB drop to the two tuners, as I posted.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

forum junkie said:


> Many installers on the OTA sites have found the LG 5th generation tuners to work amazingly well on very little signal. If it's not the tuners, explain why even many who get great signals with the H20 are having trouble with the HR20.


The widely held theory here is that the new tuner doesn't do well with powerful signals. Poor multipath rejection and even poorer AGC performance are often blamed. This is on top of the apparent inability of the HR20 to tune the lower two frequencies at all.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> I'm not about to say this OTA tuner is great. It isn't & I've posted this from the very beginning of it's activation. Find ANY OTA thread & read my postings.
> Since this unit isn't "owned" and is only "Leased", removing the splitter isn't an option. This is hacking & "we don't do that here".
> Making improvements to the signal coming to the HR-20 would do the same or better than the -3 dB drop to the two tuners, as I posted.


Perfectly correct....looking at the internal splitter is a waste of time, and cracking the case to bypass the splitter is borderline idiotic, if the HR20 is leased. Let's see, I'll tear apart the HR20 to fix a non-existent problem and violate my lease at the same time...sounds like a plan.

The 3 dB loss from the splitter is NOT the problem. That 3 dB can be made up in a variety of ways....and you still may have the problem:

(not in any particular order)

1. Dynamic Range

2. Multi-path

3. Overdrive

4. Bad channel info from Guide

5. Line length (impedance bumps)

The tuners aren't great, to be sure...but they can be made to work. (They shouldn't have to be "made" to work, but that's the reality we are currently planted in, so either get over it, do what is suggested, or develop some patience, while continuing to hold D*'s feet to the fire to get things right.


----------



## forum junkie (Sep 9, 2004)

They shouldn't have to be made to work is the main point and if they would take it back and drop the 2 year commitment (try to talk them into that) I would be happy. Just like any other purchase that doesn't work and you take it back. No one should have to spend hours of tweaking to get it to work. 

If the H20 works fine why would you need to change anything for the HR20 to work - you already have a working program. Just add the ability to record to improve on it. 

It would be interesting to see just how many have other tuners that work great but struggle with the HR20 which should be cutting edge.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

forum junkie said:


> They shouldn't have to be made to work is the main point and if they would take it back and drop the 2 year commitment (try to talk them into that) I would be happy. Just like any other purchase that doesn't work and you take it back. No one should have to spend hours of tweaking to get it to work.
> 
> If the H20 works fine why would you need to change anything for the HR20 to work - you already have a working program. Just add the ability to record to improve on it.
> 
> It would be interesting to see just how many have other tuners that work great but struggle with the HR20 which should be cutting edge.


There are two H20 models : H20-100 & H20-600. 
I have both. The HR-20 works just as well as the H20-100 and not as well as the superior H20-600 for OTA reception.


----------



## forum junkie (Sep 9, 2004)

veryoldschool said:


> There are two H20 models : H20-100 & H20-600.
> I have both. The HR-20 works just as well as the H20-100 and not as well as the superior H20-600 for OTA reception.


If you can make that H20-600 record --- I'll buy it. Really it's just frustrating when you consider that this unit was supposed to be out a year ago - has been for at least 6 months and were still working on the bugs. I do understand though that OTA may not be a top priorty since they put so much into MPEG4. But with 24 OTA signals available to me and only 3 locals in HD on satelite there is much I like to watch like PBS HD that I want to get reliably. Many say it's a matter of opinion -- but I see a big difference between the OTA when I get it and the MPEG4.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

forum junkie said:


> If you can make that H20-600 record --- I'll buy it. Really it's just frustrating when you consider that this unit was supposed to be out a year ago - has been for at least 6 months and were still working on the bugs. I do understand though that OTA may not be a top priorty since they put so much into MPEG4. But with 24 OTA signals available to me and only 3 locals in HD on satelite there is much I like to watch like PBS HD that I want to get reliably. Many say it's a matter of opinion -- but I see a big difference between the OTA when I get it and the MPEG4.


[Posting once again] LG has the patent on all ATSC chips. They're up to generation 5, which they used in their H20-600. So far only the third generation has been used in the other H/HR-20s.
AND YES I wanted the fifth generation chip too. For all of the same reasons as you. 
If they had asked me, I would have told them which to use & why, but for some reason, they didn't call me.


----------



## toy4two (Aug 18, 2006)

I don't think the PQ is bad at all with the OTA tuner, nor is the sensitivity any worse than any other tuners I've used, I pick up everything in my area and Mexico just with an indoor antenna.

The real problem is the programming in the HR20, it locks you out from recieving all your local OTA stations. Instead of picking up everything over the air like the old Directv tuners (like my SAMSUNG SIR-TS160). So you could be missing out on many digital stations you normally would recieve. 

If they just put in a default ZIP code in the next firmware upgrade like 00000 that picks up whatever is in the area with no guide data, problem solved. 

So Directv determines what you can and can't pickup, it doesn't matter if your local adds a temp subchannel, like here in San Diego we had 3 KPBS for a little while, and some markets will add subchannels for March Maddness basketball to carry different games. But since these are "blessed" by Directv, you aren't getting them.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

toy4two said:


> I don't think the PQ is bad at all with the OTA tuner, nor is the sensitivity any worse than any other tuners I've used, I pick up everything in my area and Mexico just with an indoor antenna.
> The real problem is the programming in the HR20, it locks you out from recieving all your local OTA stations. Instead of picking up everything over the air like the old Directv tuners (like my SAMSUNG SIR-TS160). So you could be missing out on many digital stations you normally would recieve.
> If they just put in a default ZIP code in the next firmware upgrade like 00000 that picks up whatever is in the area with no guide data, problem solved.
> So Directv determines what you can and can't pickup, it doesn't matter if your local adds a temp subchannel, like here in San Diego we had 3 KPBS for a little while, and some markets will add subchannels for March Maddness basketball to carry different games. But since these are "blessed" by Directv, you aren't getting them.


"I don't think", 
"the real problem",
"zip code 00000".

1) you haven't been in a weak signal area, so you haven't any experience.
2) see # 1
3) a zero zip code wouldn't make any difference. The D* database is what is the source currently. What you/we would like is to be able to "detect" any channel in our area and/or be able to manually add a channel.

I hope this will make some sense for you so "you know 
what to ask for".


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

I've said it before and I'll say it again...*every* OTA tuner out there is different. I can take 5 different OTA tuners, line them up, hook them up one by one to the same antenna and get different results. It's just the nature of OTA. No wonder cable came into being 35 years ago. 

Each tuner can and most likely will need tweaking in terms of antenna aim, signal loss, signal gain, etc. to get a strong lock on channels.

And each OTA tuner has it's own pros and cons.
One may handle multipath great but is terrible with weak signals. Another might really get interfered with by that FM station down the road but at the same time be great with weak signals.
For the HR20 it appears to be not so great with multipath but at least in my case is awesome at picking up "side" signals, those not pointed at straight on. When I can pull in a station more then 40 degrees off at a 45-50 lock, that's darn good. None of my other OTA tuners can do it.

So I agree, the HR20 is a worse OTA tuner *for some*, it's better for others. Just like the H20 tuner which many people are posting above as great might be terrible for me.

Again, just the nature of OTA. It's an art, not a science.


----------



## forum junkie (Sep 9, 2004)

bonscott87 said:


> I've said it before and I'll say it again...*every* OTA tuner out there is different. I can take 5 different OTA tuners, line them up, hook them up one by one to the same antenna and get different results. It's just the nature of OTA. No wonder cable came into being 35 years ago.
> 
> Each tuner can and most likely will need tweaking in terms of antenna aim, signal loss, signal gain, etc. to get a strong lock on channels.
> 
> ...


This is indeed true and I knew going in that multipath was a problem for me but I was also led to believe that the HR20 had the LG 5th gen. tuner, which is said to be the best at handling multipath. I made sure to ask this specific question before leasing it.

Based on what veryoldschool said in his post this is not the case but just as you said about 5 different tuners ---- 5 different DTV reps can give you 5 different answers. I just don't like having to wait 2 years to change MY situation.


----------



## Racer88 (Sep 13, 2006)

forum junkie said:


> also led to believe that the HR20 had the LG 5th gen. tuner, which is said to be the best at handling multipath.


That was the pre-release hype that I read...and something I was looking forward to as well. So much for the hype........


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

bonscott87 said:


> I've said it before and I'll say it again...*every* OTA tuner out there is different. I can take 5 different OTA tuners, line them up, hook them up one by one to the same antenna and get different results. It's just the nature of OTA. No wonder cable came into being 35 years ago.
> Each tuner can and most likely will need tweaking in terms of antenna aim, signal loss, signal gain, etc. to get a strong lock on channels.
> And each OTA tuner has it's own pros and cons.
> One may handle multipath great but is terrible with weak signals. Another might really get interfered with by that FM station down the road but at the same time be great with weak signals.
> ...


Your 40 degree off axis sounds, to me, like your antenna.
Since, for me, HD has only been around for 4 years, I have most [all] of my tuners falling into two types: (4) third & (3) fifth generation tuners, which all work the same [fifth better than third]. One person's sampling, connected to one antenna, YMMV.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

veryoldschool said:


> Your 40 degree off axis sounds, to me, like your antenna.


What I mean by this is that all but one of the broadcast towers for the locals are in the same location, all within a couple degrees, nearly 35 miles due north of me. But the other tower is off to the east about 40 degrees to the "right" of the main tower cluster, about 40 miles away. Normally I'd need a dedicated antenna to get this other station as I've never gotten it before but the HR20 is able to pull it in. It's weak but it's a lock unless it's real cold out.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

bonscott87 said:


> What I mean by this is that all but one of the broadcast towers for the locals are in the same location, all within a couple degrees, nearly 35 miles due north of me. But the other tower is off to the east about 40 degrees to the "right" of the main tower cluster, about 40 miles away. Normally I'd need a dedicated antenna to get this other station as I've never gotten it before but the HR20 is able to pull it in. It's weak but it's a lock unless it's real cold out.


Flatlander...:lol:


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

veryoldschool said:


> Flatlander...:lol:


Yep, I don't live in the river valley thankfully. :hurah:

Whenever we move I'm going to drive our realtor nuts....
Clear southern view, not in a valley or hole, no trees on top of the house, no FM transmitter within a mile or two...and that's before the features of the house.


----------



## Racer88 (Sep 13, 2006)

Ok well I finally got off my butt a little while ago and made me some jumpers and split my antenna lead-in to both my HR10 and 20 and made some observations. I didn't see more than 3-5 points of difference between any of the percentage reading on either boxes OTA tuners measuring weaker stations.

I did however notice that the HR20 hit's 100% on my 2 strongest station whereas the HR10 only hit mid to upper 80's on the same stations.

My weakest station, around 49 db after splitting bounced around the mid 70's on both boxes tuners.


----------



## mrjim (Dec 4, 2006)

The H10-250 is a good receiver, I upgraded to the HR 20 to get Local channels in HD. The OTA channels seem to be a liitle better for me except the HR 20 has major problems with channels broadcasted on channel 2 or 3, Chicago 2-1 WBBM is broadcasted on channel 3, thus I can get it on the H10-250 but not the H20. Get a better antenna with maybe a pre-amp and you get better luck with the OTA's


----------

