Digital tv problems

murphey

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Aug 21, 2008
Messages
11,669
Location
Colorado
Display Name

Display name:
murphey
For starters, I really hate the digital broadcast tv mandate.

Now for the problem. I'm unable to receive the low end of the channels, specifically Ch 2 & 4 (and for some reason, 59). Everything else is fine. Antenna is pointed directly at the BIG tower to the west (about 25 miles). My antenna is as high on the house as possible. Only obstruction is a weeping willow 100 ft away (and in the way). But still have the problem in the winter when the tree is bare.

Would an amplifier work? Any other suggestions?
 
For starters, I really hate the digital broadcast tv mandate.

Now for the problem. I'm unable to receive the low end of the channels, specifically Ch 2 & 4 (and for some reason, 59). Everything else is fine. Antenna is pointed directly at the BIG tower to the west (about 25 miles). My antenna is as high on the house as possible. Only obstruction is a weeping willow 100 ft away (and in the way). But still have the problem in the winter when the tree is bare.

Would an amplifier work? Any other suggestions?

Start here. http://www.antennaweb.org/
(Thanks Lou)
http://www.antennaweb.org/
 
Last edited:
For starters, I really hate the digital broadcast tv mandate.

Now for the problem. I'm unable to receive the low end of the channels, specifically Ch 2 & 4 (and for some reason, 59). Everything else is fine. Antenna is pointed directly at the BIG tower to the west (about 25 miles). My antenna is as high on the house as possible. Only obstruction is a weeping willow 100 ft away (and in the way). But still have the problem in the winter when the tree is bare.

Would an amplifier work? Any other suggestions?


The channel numbering the TV spits out is not accurate anymore and is just a data label / field in the transmitted signal. 4 isn't VHF anymore. 12 is actually high VHF on DTV 13. Etc.

If you're having trouble with 2 and 4 here locally, they're UHF now. 7 and 9 stayed VHF which for most people is actually more problematic. Only station in town that gained significant coverage area via engineering to do so is 31. 4 and 31 are the same power and same antenna gain from almost identical heights above average terrain. Both on UHF.

Ch 4 broadcasts from the TOP of that tower you're pointed at on Lookout Mtn and has a much better signal on UHF than 7 and 9 on VHF, who use a MASSIVE VHF antenna combiner system and broadcast from the front face of that tower in a cartioid pattern which lost them major coverage to the West to try to push VHF out onto the plains.

2 is somewhat north of the shared tower and is on a UHF channel now. 6 is downtown. 12 is on Squaw Mountain. 31 is north of Squaw between Denver and Boulder.

I suspect you have an old antenna meant for VHF only, when I see 2 and 4 are your problem channels. Or you have old tired coax that's awful at UHF (lossy) and a really long cable run.

I'm assuming an outside antenna here. Are you using rabbit ears?

You're getting enough signal from 31 shoved at you that it's getting through the antenna tuned for VHF or bad cable and if 7 and 9 are good, it's a good guess that you don't have a dual-band antenna or it isn't acting like one anymore.

If you can get 7 and 9, with new good quality coax and connectors and a good gain dual-band antenna, 4 should be a breeze. Seriously should be easy. Something is wrong there if it's not.

How's the signal strength bar look for 31? It should hammer in almost everywhere in the metro from the northwest.

See this page and the "post-transition" coverage maps as well as the "DTV channel number". Anything above 13 just like on the old TVs, is UHF.

http://transition.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/maps_current/Denver_CO.pdf

The maps were made in 2009 so ignore the transition transmitters. They're all gone now. Everyone had significant drawbacks to their coverage while they rebuilt.

If you want a tour of the Lookout site, I can probably arrange it. I have friends in low places up there. The backup transmitter for one of the stations up there is their " transition " transmitter and it's an oh-my-God enormous single tube transmitter.

Harris made all three stations up there sweetheart deals on their final transmitters and they're insanely cool modular power amps with individual 1000W trays that can be removed and replaced while the transmitters are on the air. Punch buttons on the touch screen, set module out of service, swap, punch button to go back to full power. Totally cool.

The combiner system for the VHF array looks like massive water pipe. They're enormous. They have the ability to interlock and remove one transmitter and bypass automatically in a failure mode and all sorts of nifty RF toys.

An amp *might* help. But it really can only help amplify what the antenna already can hear. The fact that you're pointed at a site with three transmitters, two VHF and one UHF blowing a megawatt into a nice omnidirectional antenna with lots of gain, tells me something is wrong with your setup for receiving UHF signals.

I forget where your house is but depending on surrounding terrain you could also be suffering from multipath (signal bouncing off of something else and two signals arriving at offset times at your antenna) on UHF. I don't think if you can boresight Lookout Mtn that this is the first thing I would look for though.

You could also have a local noise/interference source on UHF. I had a Linksys router go bad and spew hair all over a spectrum analyzer on VHF and UHF both once.

Anyway... Start by determining if you have a good outdoor dual-band antenna. A big Yagi or Log Periodic style will easily get you the Denver stuff and KCDO in Sterling off the back lobe and probably pull in the religious station on Lee Hill above Boulder. Out East here with the low noise floor they also pull in the stuff on Cheyenne Mtn in Colorado Springs pretty easy. I think the Palmer Divide will block you from that.
 
This whole discussion reminds me of something that played out in the Electrical Engineering department at Johns Hopkins when I was there. I was sitting in the lab and one of the graduate students said he was putting up a new TV antenna on his house and he'd noticed an odd thing. Now the JHU campus is a few miles away from a 950 foot tower that sits even higher above the terrain (TV Hill). It's pretty clear where you need to aim the antenna.

Now my buddy, Matt says "the oddest thing is that I get the best reception when the antenna is pointed exactly 180 degrees away from the station." Of course with several other EE graduate and undergraduate students in the lab many of which either had broadcast or amateur radio experience this set through a whole discussion about strong signal desensing and other radio phenomena that might cause this effect.

Finally, it occured to me to ask: "Matt, which end do you think is the front of the antenna, the fat side or the pointy side?"

Yep, he was using the wrong end as his reference.
 
The channel numbering the TV spits out is not accurate anymore and is just a data label / field in the transmitted signal. 4 isn't VHF anymore. 12 is actually high VHF on DTV 13. Etc.

If you're having trouble with 2 and 4 here locally, they're UHF now. 7 and 9 stayed VHF which for most people is actually more problematic. Only station in town that gained significant coverage area via engineering to do so is 31. 4 and 31 are the same power and same antenna gain from almost identical heights above average terrain. Both on UHF.

Ch 4 broadcasts from the TOP of that tower you're pointed at on Lookout Mtn and has a much better signal on UHF than 7 and 9 on VHF, who use a MASSIVE VHF antenna combiner system and broadcast from the front face of that tower in a cartioid pattern which lost them major coverage to the West to try to push VHF out onto the plains.

2 is somewhat north of the shared tower and is on a UHF channel now. 6 is downtown. 12 is on Squaw Mountain. 31 is north of Squaw between Denver and Boulder.

I suspect you have an old antenna meant for VHF only, when I see 2 and 4 are your problem channels. Or you have old tired coax that's awful at UHF (lossy) and a really long cable run.

I'm assuming an outside antenna here. Are you using rabbit ears?

You're getting enough signal from 31 shoved at you that it's getting through the antenna tuned for VHF or bad cable and if 7 and 9 are good, it's a good guess that you don't have a dual-band antenna or it isn't acting like one anymore.

If you can get 7 and 9, with new good quality coax and connectors and a good gain dual-band antenna, 4 should be a breeze. Seriously should be easy. Something is wrong there if it's not.

How's the signal strength bar look for 31? It should hammer in almost everywhere in the metro from the northwest.

See this page and the "post-transition" coverage maps as well as the "DTV channel number". Anything above 13 just like on the old TVs, is UHF.

http://transition.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/maps_current/Denver_CO.pdf

The maps were made in 2009 so ignore the transition transmitters. They're all gone now. Everyone had significant drawbacks to their coverage while they rebuilt.

If you want a tour of the Lookout site, I can probably arrange it. I have friends in low places up there. The backup transmitter for one of the stations up there is their " transition " transmitter and it's an oh-my-God enormous single tube transmitter.

Harris made all three stations up there sweetheart deals on their final transmitters and they're insanely cool modular power amps with individual 1000W trays that can be removed and replaced while the transmitters are on the air. Punch buttons on the touch screen, set module out of service, swap, punch button to go back to full power. Totally cool.

The combiner system for the VHF array looks like massive water pipe. They're enormous. They have the ability to interlock and remove one transmitter and bypass automatically in a failure mode and all sorts of nifty RF toys.

An amp *might* help. But it really can only help amplify what the antenna already can hear. The fact that you're pointed at a site with three transmitters, two VHF and one UHF blowing a megawatt into a nice omnidirectional antenna with lots of gain, tells me something is wrong with your setup for receiving UHF signals.

I forget where your house is but depending on surrounding terrain you could also be suffering from multipath (signal bouncing off of something else and two signals arriving at offset times at your antenna) on UHF. I don't think if you can boresight Lookout Mtn that this is the first thing I would look for though.

You could also have a local noise/interference source on UHF. I had a Linksys router go bad and spew hair all over a spectrum analyzer on VHF and UHF both once.

Anyway... Start by determining if you have a good outdoor dual-band antenna. A big Yagi or Log Periodic style will easily get you the Denver stuff and KCDO in Sterling off the back lobe and probably pull in the religious station on Lee Hill above Boulder. Out East here with the low noise floor they also pull in the stuff on Cheyenne Mtn in Colorado Springs pretty easy. I think the Palmer Divide will block you from that.

Somebody want to translate all that for me? I do software, not hardware....

The antenna is the Channel Master (CM-4221HDAW) bought specifically for digital when we were held by the gonads with a gun pointed at our heads. Coax from the antenna to the coax connector on the new digital tv. On the website, it suggests an amp may be useful with a long run coax from the antenna. At my house, the antenna is on the top (2nd floor) west side of the house, and the primary tv is on the 1st floor, east side of the house. I haven't bothered running it down to the basement with the other tv.

As for UHF and VHF, I talk TCP & UDP and know that the radios in the airplane are VHF.
 
Last edited:
Somebody want to translate all that for me? I do software, not hardware....

The antenna is the Channel Master (CM-4221HDAW) bought specifically for digital when we were held by the gonads with a gun pointed at our heads. Coax from the antenna to the coax connector on the new digital tv. On the website, it suggests an amp may be useful with a long run coax from the antenna. At my house, the antenna is on the top (2nd floor) west side of the house, and the primary tv is on the 1st floor, east side of the house. I haven't bothered running it down to the basement with the other tv.

As for UHF and VHF, I talk TCP & UDP and know that the radios in the airplane are VHF.

You want it in French, Italian or Hebrew. :D
 
This whole discussion reminds me of something that played out in the Electrical Engineering department at Johns Hopkins when I was there. I was sitting in the lab and one of the graduate students said he was putting up a new TV antenna on his house and he'd noticed an odd thing. Now the JHU campus is a few miles away from a 950 foot tower that sits even higher above the terrain (TV Hill). It's pretty clear where you need to aim the antenna.

Now my buddy, Matt says "the oddest thing is that I get the best reception when the antenna is pointed exactly 180 degrees away from the station." Of course with several other EE graduate and undergraduate students in the lab many of which either had broadcast or amateur radio experience this set through a whole discussion about strong signal desensing and other radio phenomena that might cause this effect.

Finally, it occured to me to ask: "Matt, which end do you think is the front of the antenna, the fat side or the pointy side?"

Yep, he was using the wrong end as his reference.

Another odd one: One night I was doing some MW direction-finding from the north tower of the WTC. We elected to check our equipment by taking the bearings on a few AM broadcast stations, including WCBS and WNBC, which share a common antenna on City Island in the Bronx. Darned if they didn't plot out 20-degrees different from each other, and it was consistent as we moved about the roof (eliminating the theory of a reflection from the TV mast on the other tower....
 
Somebody want to translate all that for me? I do software, not hardware....

The antenna is the Channel Master (CM-4221HDAW) bought specifically for digital when we were held by the gonads with a gun pointed at our heads. Coax from the antenna to the coax connector on the new digital tv. On the website, it suggests an amp may be useful with a long run coax from the antenna. At my house, the antenna is on the top (2nd floor) west side of the house, and the primary tv is on the 1st floor, east side of the house. I haven't bothered running it down to the basement with the other tv.

As for UHF and VHF, I talk TCP & UDP and know that the radios in the airplane are VHF.


Well the CM-4221HDAW is a UHF *only* antenna so that is even more interesting. You're receiving 7 and 9, correct?
 
Well the CM-4221HDAW is a UHF *only* antenna so that is even more interesting. You're receiving 7 and 9, correct?

My 4221 generally works well in the DC suburbs, though there is *occasional* fading on one or two channels (they're on the same tower, so it's probably uncanceled multipath). It does *OK* with high power, high-band VHF signals so that doesn't surprise me. The digital signals can be more sensitive to how the antenna is aimed and blockage. When I first put up my 4221, it took a couple of trips to the roof to get it aimed just-so.... from where I live, all the DC stations (and Baltimore, too, though I can only receive one or two of those) are in the same direction.

I have about 40-50 feet of coax down from the roof feeding an amplified splitter. Works well with all TVs in the house.

One thing to try is to rescan the channels on the TV, just in case the mappings have changed.
 
Well, I haven't looked up the freqs but this sounds like a notch filter problem at the antenna source.

Look for sources where the could be capacitance leaking in. If you have a lot of coil on your antenna feed wire, try stretching it out. If it's stretched out, try coiling it. Try grounding the actual antenna real well with copper to a ground lug, try letting it float if it is well grounded.

Investigate the freqs of the specific 'channels' you can't get, and see if they are clustered nearby. You can google notch filter to see the results, but basically it's a tuned circuit where a specific set of freqs have a suppressed output in relation to the power applied to the circuit. When you are dealing with an antenna for reception, even a small impedance/capacitance loss(tuned notch) can cause disruption.

Again, I haven't looked at the freqs, but this is what it sounds like to my on my first pass.
 
That's why I posted the PDF, so the data was there to analyze. Here...

Analog 2 became Digital 34
Analog 4 became Digital 35
Analog 59 became Digital 43

So your theory works maybe for 2 and 4. Not so good for 59. A loss or poor reception around Digital 34 & 35 or a local interference source blasting those makes sense.

But maybe 59 is throwaway data. Here's a significant find. Those coverage maps from 2009 show KPXC was planning on a high mountain site in Jefferson County. Wikipedia says their transmitter is near Frederick in Weld County now. I bet they swapped with someone. You'll have a hell of a time getting them from inside the Denver bowl unless you point that antenna north. There's only one significant tower up there and it isn't that tall.

Don't worry about the sub channel numbers like 2.1 and 2.2. Those are just lower bit rate stuff in the same digital carrier from 2. If you receive 2, you'll receive 2.1, 2.2 whatever they decided to chunk their signal up into. :)

So.... We're on to something here. You can't receive stuff in the mid-30s of the DTV spectrum and throw out KPXC. They're not going to be well received at your place unless you have a great flat view to the north.

I've got a battery powered portable DTV. Comes in handy for hunting this kind of crap. I can take it and walk a block away and see if 2 and 4 come back. If it's interference we could also go get my service monitor from the guy who borrowed it in Ft. Collins...

Another simple test would be to just hook one of my pair of amplified rabbit ears to your TV and get your antenna completely out of the picture and see what we get.
 
I kinda threw out the 59 lack already.

34 590 591.25 590.31 595.75 596
35 596 597.25 596.31 601.75 602

Carrier for those is just under 600Mhz. Doesn't make sense that he would get everything around it though. This is sounding more directional or local interference rather than a filter issue.
 
Take a look here, may help with orientation.

http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/dtvmaps/

You can click on the callsign for the virtual channel (34,etc) and find the orientation. The number in the parenthesis is the mag direction from your location; W(247) , etc.
 
Last edited:
Take a look here, may help with orientation.

http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/dtvmaps/

You can click on the callsign for the virtual channel (34,etc) and find the orientation. The number in the parenthesis is the mag direction from your location; W(247) , etc.

Still irritated at the transition. Portable TVs simply don't work in most cases. The FCC's signal predictions are based upon an outdoor antenna, 30' up. I could routinely receive every major analog station with the on-set rabbit ears on portables; digital? Not so much. Growl.
 
I put a DTV->wifi adapter in. I can watch broadcast TV on any device. I've got no cable or satellite otherwise at my NC house. Everything comes in over the DTV or internet.
 
Back
Top