Wireless TV signal

[TnAndy]

I'd love to get rid of Dish, but still get the local ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX channels. We live down in a valley, and back when TV was analog, and before DISH, we had a roof antennae with a rotor, and could get about 2 1/2 channels via it.

Now they've all gone digital, but I figure a roof antennae wouldn't do much more than it did before....we just don't have good line of sight to the broadcast antennas.

BUT I do have access to the top of our mountain, and from there, I figure I could get a signal from all the locals. Problem is, that is 2500' up the mountain (at an angle, about 800' of elevation change). Running cable would be near impossible from there.

Is there some equipment I could get a signal from a digital antennae into, then get it wireless down to my house and into my TV ?

I do have power at the top of the mountain, and 100' tower to put the antennae on (used for wireless internet in the past, the company died, so I have DSL for now)? Line of sight from tower to house.

Thanks.

 

[/pine]

FWIW...Just for the heck of it...if you can get your hands on a cheapo set of just rabbit ear antennas...hook them up and see what happens...you might be amazed...! (and inspired about what you might get with an external antenna).

One caveat... on many newer flat panel (digital) TV's...you may have to access the menu and tell it to scan for digital (over the air/antenna) signals...just switching the input port (from say HDMI to Antenna) won't work...

I would connect the rabbit ears directly to the TV rather than going through a sat./cable box...
Good Luck...

 

[nybirdman]

Most of the local channels now are broadcasting in HD;you will either get a good signal or none at all.I would try an antenna first.

 

[MarkF48]

Check these two sites to see what you might receive....
http://www.antennaweb.org/address.aspx
The Digital TV Transition: Reception Maps

I put up a high gain antenna on a rotor about 30' up on my roof peak and an inline amplifier. I can get about 10-12 digital over the air channels about 30-50 miles away and somewhat dependent on weather, some of which have better clarity than what I get over cable.
Getting the signal down the mountain would be an interesting problem.

 

[buickanddeere]

It's all about quality components and attention to detail. Jdemaris posted a link one time to proven high gain antenna. A rotor is usually required . Low loss rg6 cable with water proof connectors . The amplifier combination FM radio filter needs to be antenna mounted, not located at the TV. TV Fool

 

[k0ua]

Please advise how much money do you have, and your electronics/antenna skill level.

Several solutions come to mind from building actual head ends like a cable company would do or even simple passive repeater solutions consisting of unpowered passive antenna's

 

[aeblank]

I agree with trying first... TV signals aren't LOS, they do "bounce around" off of things. Not saying it'll work, but it's the easiest solution.

That said, to your original question, I can only really think of a kludge. I use windows media center, and I use network tuners.
In theory, the tuner could be up on the mountain, and then a wireless bridge (needs to be FAST) to the house.
I think the tuner company, Silicon Dust, has encoding tuners and then (don't quote me) an app for the TV. That would lessen the network requirement and remove the need for windows media center. NONE of this is pretty or cheap.

If you can't run a cable down, how does it have power up there?
I always question the "I can't run a cable". If it's up a mountain or a cat-5 from one end of the house to the other. Where there's a will, there's a way. A cable is always better.

Just saying..

 

[buickanddeere]

Channels 2-6 will travel the farthest per watt of transmitter power. They will sometimes even skip like CB radio transmissions. However the long wave length makes the antenna very wide and heavily wind loaded. Channel 2-6 in will suffer some interference from FM broadcast radio.
Channel 7-13 are the next best to travel distances .
Channels 14-59 are pretty much like of sight and can be attenuated by rain, snow or fog.

 

[Fossil Farm]

When TV was analog, we could get about 30 to 35 stations with an antenna in the attic. Once stations went digital, we could only get 2 or 3, even with an antenna outside on the roof. Most stations have tweaked their equipment a bit since the initial switch, so hopefully you can get a decent signal to a couple stations with an antenna. Don't waste your money on "special digital antennas", any good antenna designed properly will work.

 

[mark02tj]

Channels 2-6 will travel the farthest per watt of transmitter power. They will sometimes even skip like CB radio transmissions. However the long wave length makes the antenna very wide and heavily wind loaded. Channel 2-6 in will suffer some interference from FM broadcast radio.
Channel 7-13 are the next best to travel distances .
Channels 14-59 are pretty much like of sight and can be attenuated by rain, snow or fog.

I am by no means an expert in any of this, but.... Is the above still true? I know back in the analog days that channels 2-12 were VHF and 13-83(?) were UHF. I remember as a kid that channels 2 and 5 were were especially susceptible to CB intererence - something to do with their frequencies/wave lengths being some sort of multiplier of the 27 Mhz band that CBs used. I thought when the world went digital that ALL the digital channels became UHF in spite of being designated as 2-1 (or 2.1), 2-2 (or 2.2), 2-3, 7-1,.... In other words, even though 2.1 is now delivering the same station as the old analog channel 2, it's now UHF instead of channel 2's VHF.

Also read that because of this, any old UHF antenna was basically the equivalent of a "digital TV antenna".

Like I said, I'm no expert and my memory sure ain't what it used to be!

 

[aeblank]

All channels are now UHF, unless special variance from FCC.
I believe the variances to be few, but one station, broadcasting probably less than a dozen miles from me, is one of them. 9&10 out of Cadillac (broadcast out of Tustin, I think), MI is VHF. All others around me are UHF.

The whole point (other than auction money) was to narrow the frequency band that TV took up.

 

[ray66v]

I say it's do able, with an antenna, and coax cable.

All you probably need, is a regular TV antenna, at the top of the hill. And, a powered signal amplifier.

You may need an amp, at both ends of the coax.

The signal is defiantly going to need amplification to go that far. The $64,000 question is, how much amplification?

It may take some type of commercial amplifier, to do it.

It may also take commercial coax.

The best thing about digital is, the interference that signal amplifiers used to potentially put in the picture, does not happen.

Don't fall for the "digital" antenna hype. The signal is on the same band as before. An analog antenna works fine.

I have lots of TV's hooked up to an antenna. And, it works far better now, than it did before we went digital.

 

[buickanddeere]

I am by no means an expert in any of this, but.... Is the above still true? I know back in the analog days that channels 2-12 were VHF and 13-83(?) were UHF. I remember as a kid that channels 2 and 5 were were especially susceptible to CB intererence - something to do with their frequencies/wave lengths being some sort of multiplier of the 27 Mhz band that CBs used. I thought when the world went digital that ALL the digital channels became UHF in spite of being designated as 2-1 (or 2.1), 2-2 (or 2.2), 2-3, 7-1,.... In other words, even though 2.1 is now delivering the same station as the old analog channel 2, it's now UHF instead of channel 2's VHF.

Also read that because of this, any old UHF antenna was basically the equivalent of a "digital TV antenna".

Like I said, I'm no expert and my memory sure ain't what it used to be!

Tv channels used to run 2-69 before the last round of sell offs to the cellular phone industry . When TV went from analog to digital , channels 52-69 were sold off to cellular. I did have a senior moment and was thinking the upper active tv channel was 59 but it's 51.
Channels 2-51 are all in use. There are fewer down at 2-6 because the signals travel farther and I terrier with each other. The next band up is channels 7-13 and they will travel farther than the 14-51 channels.
Antennas for channels 14-51 have the advantage of being small and compact due to short wave length.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_television_frequencies

 

[Xfaxman]

All channels are now UHF, unless special variance from FCC.
I believe the variances to be few, but one station, broadcasting probably less than a dozen miles from me, is one of them. 9&10 out of Cadillac (broadcast out of Tustin, I think), MI is VHF. All others around me are UHF.

The whole point (other than auction money) was to narrow the frequency band that TV took up.

What is your source for that statement?

Here ABC Ch 5.1 transmits on RF Ch 7 and PBS 13.1 is on RF 13

RF Ch 2 - 6 are no longer used for Digital TV in my area.

This is one of the best Websites for digital reception information: TV Fool

 

[k0ua]

Keep in mind guys channel numbers are just arbitrary numbers we assign for reference. They have no actual relation to actual RF frequency's

 

[roadhunter]

I'M able to get a station that's over 100 miles away using one of the $70 "long range" antennas that go on the roof so give that a try first as it won't cost you much to try. Might be surprised.

If you live by a big city it is amazing how many free stations there are. We only get about 6 different programs here but when I lived between Tulsa and OKC I got over 40 with just a wal mart antenna. Everything from kids programming to country music TV including some spanish channels and a few religious channels along with the big networks like Fox, CBS, NBC, etc....

 

[wampum]

We went wireless 2 years ago.With the old analog we could only get 2 or 3 channels with out snow. Now we literally get 35 channels and they are all clearer then cable or dish.What amazed me is some stations got as many as 6 channels now.Every major network stations have at least 2 or 3.We do have a rotor that helps clear up channels in another direction.I believe it cost about $70.00 to get hooked up.I do miss the sports,but I am not going to spend $100 or more a month to watch a ball game.The NFL is still pretty much free.

 

[buickanddeere]

Fox out of Detroit is using channel 2.

 

[Xfaxman]

Fox out of Detroit is using channel 2.

But they are transmitting on RF Ch 7, a VHF frequency: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WJBK

WJBK, virtual channel 2 (VHF digital channel 7), is a Fox owned-and-operated television station located in Detroit, Michigan, United States. The station is owned by the Fox Television Stations subsidiary of 21st Century Fox. WJBK maintains studio and transmitter facilities located on West 9 Mile Road in the Detroit suburb of Southfield.[1][2]

 

[TnAndy]

We went wireless 2 years ago.With the old analog we could only get 2 or 3 channels with out snow. Now we literally get 35 channels and they are all clearer then cable or dish.What amazed me is some stations got as many as 6 channels now.

By 'wireless', you mean you dropped cable and went to an antennae ?

Based on responses here, I guess I'll try one down here at the house.

The tower I have at the mountain top is 2500' up. We did run power there, in a black, roll type conduit, just laid on the ground up thru the woods. It was a major PITA to do, and I would not want to repeat it with cable, plus I assume it would take some serious boosting of signal even if I did get the cable run.....hence I was looking for a wireless solution. I have little electronics experience....my skills are more 'hard' stuff....I built the tower, got the power to it, for example, but the internet company put the equipment on it. I know little about that stuff.

Thanks to all for the advice and suggestions.

andy