Who uses TV antennas anymore?

[tcdriver]

Originally Posted by Jeffhs

Who uses regular television antennas these days, anyway?.

I use a regular television antenna to receive broadcast transmissions. Most of the stations I receive are about fifty miles north of here. No cable, No satellite, no monthly bills.

[radiotvnut]

I also forgot to mention that I know a girl in her mid 20's that uses an antenna. In fact, I recently assisted her in connecting her DTV converter box. She could have cable if she wanted it; but, I think she'd rather save her money for a rainy day.

The next time I go to the parts house, I think I'll ask how antenna sales have been lately.

I have cable in my "shop"; but, the picture quality is so bad that I'm thinking of putting up an outside antenna and using a DTV converter for use in my shop.

[AnalogDigit]

Originally Posted by Ampico-kid

I for one refuse to pay some cable or satelite company for programing that I could not care less about, and be at their mercy for uncontrolled and frequent rate increases for the service. The average basic cable costs in this part of the country are in the $50 a month range. I'd much rather see that $600 a year in my pocket than in the pocket of some cable exective. When the cable or satelite companies start to offer an A LA Carte selection for the channels that they provide, I'll reconsider my position, but until that time I'll keep my antenna.

I live in the NY metropolitan area and receive all of the broadcast signals fine with my outdoor antenna. I'm perfectly content to receive 25 or 30 OTA stations which cost me no monthy fees.

Bob.

I agree! I have a outdoor antenna that I bought on Amazon.com to receive the digital stations with a DTV converter. Not only I can get the local stations that I get through the analog system, but more stations. One station in Chicago shows movies that I have not seen in decades. The picture is clear, no problems with reception and I never could be happier.

The ABC channel 7 and NBC channel 5 shows doppler radar coverage 24 hours a day.

Until cable lets me pick and choose shows I would like to watch at a reasonable price, I would never get cable. I have seen what's on cable, and for the price, I don't care for it.

[Sam Cogley]

My locals have channels available OTA that aren't available on satellite service. That's reason enough for me to have rabbit-ears on both TVs.

[Duffinator]

I have an HD antenna mounted in my attic and it's connected to both of my DTV HD DVR's. While I don't use it much I do watch a couple of the sub stations, mainly weather. It's nice to have in case of an emergency. I've been ready for the digital switch for about eight years now and I look forward to the day when I no longer have to watch crappy 4:3 broadcasts on my widescreen TV's!

[Fred Sanford]

Not much CATV access around me unless you're in a new development, they did wire my street recently and want $3,000 to bring it up to my house...not likely. My neighbor did pay ~$9,000 to get it to his house (mostly for modem, and he's writing that off as a business expense), but he also paid about $90,000 for the home AV system I helped install.

Previous owners here had Direct TV, but local channels are not available on it. Antenna's fine for me, even though I only get NBC and PBS since I'm on the South side of a large hill and all the local antennas are on a mountain directly North of me. We stream other shows via DSL, and Netflix covers the rest.

je

[Robert Grant]

Originally Posted by Jeffhs

<snip> Case in point: I live in an area of northeastern Ohio, 33 miles east of Cleveland and 610 feet above sea level, where the TV reception with an antenna is terrible. One station (the NBC affiliate) doesn't reach here at all; <snip>.

Jeff,
I'm curious as to what kind of antenna you are using where you are.

WKYC is one of the few large-market, network affiliate stations operating a digital transmitter on a VHF lowban channel (Channel 2). Many users have been complaining about lowband VHF DTV performance.
If you are using an indoor antenna, lowband DTV does present a "fatal" problem. Modern home electronics (in particular, with switching power supplies and/or unshielded microprocessors) produce severe interference with lowband VHF television (digtal or analog).
Some outdoor antennas are not designed for lowband VHF reception. UHF-only antennas have been made for decades, and some people bought UHF-only antennas when it was announced that all DTV would be UHF (a decision that was later reversed). Some newer antennas are designed only for channels 7-69 (since many areas have no lowband DTV)
If you are using an all-channel outdoor antenna only 33 miles from WKYC and not getting excellent reception, you have a big problem.
This should end when WKYC-DT changes channels from 2 to 17 (likely in June 2009).

FWIW, When I had satellite TV with local channels, it provided less than half of the local channels available. For the local channels they did carry, the antenna provided a useful backup, not only when my own dish was covered with ice, but also when I had a fine satellite signal, but the satellite company's uplink facility dish had ice!

As for radio, a ton of people have abandoned radio. With consolidation, many listeners gave up when their favorite radio station was changed (e.g., if the owner shut down an oldies station on the assumption that their captive audience would listen to their rap station instead - the oldies listeners actually bought personal CD players and tossed their radios).
This situation became obvious with the Northeast blackout of 2003, and people suddenly realized that there were no portable radios around.

[audiofred]

I wish we could break the ties with paying for TV reception, but we're stuck in a rut. Sat TV is not as compressed as cable. The HDTV is beautiful on sat. Cable is crummy......FIOS...Fiber is magic!!!
Unfortunatley there are a number of folks who are still using antennas in rural areas or, as stated here, someone needs a TV signal in a bedroom and doesn't want to get strapped for another cable/sat box rental.
Then there's a public safety issue, that most folks will get the message in case of a national emergency. Cell phones and the Internet will be useless in another 911 type of situation. We can't say that it's not going to happen again.
A lot of analoge stations have signed off and are digital only. The FECES sold large blocks of spectrum to other entities, and in the larger metro areas, THEY want to occupy what's rightfully theirs, so the FCC has authorized many analog stations to sign off.

Fred

[AUdubon5425]

I still use set-top antennas in the bedroom and on my Philco portable in the front parlor since I refuse to rent more cable boxes. I will be erecting an outdoor antenna soon as the DTV signals are borderline strong enough using the sets' antennas, and route the antenna signal through all the coax except for the back den.

I would LOVE to tell Cox to stick the cable bill in their ear. I didn't have cable from 1997-2003. In 2003, I bought a new computer and subscribed to cable since the "poverty package" was only $15 more than the internet service, and I was having reception problems in my apartment on WWL, basically the only channel I watch.

Alas, my wife loves two particular channels only available on digital cable, so I've been shelling out $60-70 a month to keep her happy. I have suggested we drop the high-end cable service, which resulted in much excitement.

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by Robert Grant

Jeff,
I'm curious as to what kind of antenna you are using where you are.

WKYC is one of the few large-market, network affiliate stations operating a digital transmitter on a VHF lowban channel (Channel 2). Many users have been complaining about lowband VHF DTV performance.
If you are using an indoor antenna, lowband DTV does present a "fatal" problem. Modern home electronics (in particular, with switching power supplies and/or unshielded microprocessors) produce severe interference with lowband VHF television (digtal or analog).
Some outdoor antennas are not designed for lowband VHF reception. UHF-only antennas have been made for decades, and some people bought UHF-only antennas when it was announced that all DTV would be UHF (a decision that was later reversed). Some newer antennas are designed only for channels 7-69 (since many areas have no lowband DTV)
If you are using an all-channel outdoor antenna only 33 miles from WKYC and not getting excellent reception, you have a big problem.
This should end when WKYC-DT changes channels from 2 to 17 (likely in June 2009).

FWIW, When I had satellite TV with local channels, it provided less than half of the local channels available. For the local channels they did carry, the antenna provided a useful backup, not only when my own dish was covered with ice, but also when I had a fine satellite signal, but the satellite company's uplink facility dish had ice!

As for radio, a ton of people have abandoned radio. With consolidation, many listeners gave up when their favorite radio station was changed (e.g., if the owner shut down an oldies station on the assumption that their captive audience would listen to their rap station instead - the oldies listeners actually bought personal CD players and tossed their radios).
This situation became obvious with the Northeast blackout of 2003, and people suddenly realized that there were no portable radios around.

Please reread my post, as I'm sure you missed something. I stated there that I do not have a television antenna (cannot erect an outside one because I live in an apartment); rabbit ears don't work well here at all. (OTA digital would probably be even worse.) I have Time-Warner expanded basic cable, which gets channel 3 and all the rest of the stations in my area very well.

I am not making it up when I say I cannot receive Cleveland's channel 3 on an antenna--no one can in the village in which I live, which is why practically everyone here has either cable or satellite. That channel simply will not reach here, for whatever reason. You have to remember that I live in an area that is just 50 feet lower in elevation above sea level than is the city of Cleveland (610 vs. 660 feet ASL, respectively). I really don't know why the OTA television reception is so poor here, but again, channel 3 in Cleveland simply does not reach this area. It is probably due to the geography of this part of northeastern Ohio. I used to live in an eastern suburb of Cleveland that had much, much better OTA television reception than I have here, although I never bothered much with antennas the last 17 years I was there; by then I had cable.

Your remarks concerning radio got me to thinking. Radio programming in most major cities is nothing like what it once was, with most stations now operated by large conglomerates such as CBS Radio, Clear Channel and so on; Cleveland's major AM and FM stations are operated by one or the other--some by CC and others by CBS, which explains why the programming on these stations, and other CC/CBS O&Os (owned and operated stations) across this country is so blah these days. Many stations today are automated as well, which has taken the "personality" out of most radio programming (the classic-hits station in Cleveland, for example, is automated all night five nights a week, and carries nothing but syndicated, automated, satellite delivered programming after seven p.m. on weekends; the only local voices heard during these syndicated shows are of local announcers doing the hourly station identification).

I see far more mp3 players on kids' belts these days, even in this small town (which, ironically, gets excellent FM radio reception with indoor and car antennas), than FM radios; mobile audio is going the same way--witness new car stereo systems now equipped with inputs for mp3 players such as the iPod.

I don't listen to standard radio much myself these days. I downloaded AOL's radio toolbar to my computer a few days ago and have several other links (in Winamp) to other Internet radio stations, including WLS-FM in Chicago and a small oldies AM station in Tucson, Arizona. My personal music collection is stored on my computer. I ripped many of my CDs into it some time ago, and am doing the same with some of my cassettes; can't rip them all into the system since my hard disk isn't that big--it is only 20GB.

As far as radio being useful for emergency info, as I mentioned in my post, all stations are required to have Emergency Alert System receivers and are required to conduct weekly tests of the system. The EAS (and its predecessor, EBS--the Emergency Broadcast System) has been used to alert TV viewers to such things as tornados, high winds, snowstorms, etc., but the warnings are only visible on television. I don't know if such warnings are carried over EAS on radio these days or not--probably, even likely or certainly, not.

However, since many people today are turning away from radio as a source of entertainment, you have a point. If today's young people listen mainly to mp3 players rather than FM radios, they would miss any emergency information broadcast over the EAS. I cannot help wondering what these people will do in the event of a local or national emergency such as, Heaven forbid, another terrorist attack. Without radio, these people will be left in the lurch--which we cannot afford, especially in these troubled times. Something must be done, quickly, to get emergency info infallibly on radio as well as TV, or else this nation will be in real trouble in case of another national (now global) emergency.

73,

[Carmine]

I think you should realize that not everyone lives the same lifestyle as you do, in an apartment, in an urbanized area, etc.

Plenty of people have vacation cabins, TV set in the garage, drag a TV along when re-habbing a home, etc. Not everyone wants to sit in the same place listening to the "radio" via the internet either.

On a personal level, I think the MP3 exclusive people will end up as morons with all the depth of a mud puddle. But that's their choice.

You are also ignoring a rather basic principle of a democracy, that is that the radio spectrum belongs to everyone. The government's job is supposed to be putting that spectrum to the maximum good of all by introducing some regulation, much like a traffic signal.

If the sole qualification for use of a natural resource is "highest bid", then we have simply reached a form of fascist-capitalism; which we have. But to argue in favor of this???

[cornhulio]

I've had a fullsize outdoor antenna in my attic now for close to 20 years. It pulls in all the local channels (30) nice and clear including the hd channels.

The only thing I'm wondering is if antenna technology has changed enough in 20 years to where it would be worth it to replace it with a current model.

[compucat]

I have always used antennas for TV. I do not like the idea of paying for television service. I intend to use over the air TV indefinitely.

[qpagoda]

Originally Posted by Jeffhs

Who uses regular television antennas these days, anyway?

I do. Cable TV is not available where I live. Satelite TV is available but is very expensive. Besides that, I have young kids in the house. I don't want them to have access to the trash that the satelite companies will force me to take just to get the local channels. I'm not even sure local channels are available through satelite.

In reality, though, broadcast TV is barely available here. We can get two channels clearly enough to watch - most days. Sometimes only one (PBS). I don't expect to get any after the analog broadcasts cease. We don't have an outdoor antenna because of frequent lightening strikes - we live on top of a hill. We have a 13-foot long antenna in the attic. That's the only reason we can get two channels. Only one channel with rabbit ears.

About the only thing I would watch is the news. I have better things to do that stare at a TV.

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by qpagoda

I do. Cable TV is not available where I live. Satelite TV is available but is very expensive. Besides that, I have young kids in the house. I don't want them to have access to the trash that the satelite companies will force me to take just to get the local channels. I'm not even sure local channels are available through satelite.

In reality, though, broadcast TV is barely available here. We can get two channels clearly enough to watch - most days. Sometimes only one (PBS). I don't expect to get any after the analog broadcasts cease. We don't have an outdoor antenna because of frequent lightening strikes - we live on top of a hill. We have a 13-foot long antenna in the attic. That's the only reason we can get two channels. Only one channel with rabbit ears.

About the only thing I would watch is the news. I have better things to do that stare at a TV.

According to TV Guide's web site, under "Washington (Arkansas) area broadcast (channels)," you should be able to get the local channels from Shreveport, Louisiana with an antenna. If your antenna is 13 feet long it must have quite a few elements, and should pick up quite a bit of signal from stations perhaps 60-70 miles or more away. I'm surprised your TV reception isn't better than you say it is with an antenna like that, unless you are in a poor signal area. The height of your attic above the rest of your house, however, could be a factor. If your house is small and not far off the ground (say it is built on a slab, with no basement), your attic won't be too high up, which would of course affect the performance of any antenna (even a deep-fringe monster such as what you seem to have) you put up there.

Some satellite providers do offer local channels in their service packages. I don't know what satellite TV providers are in your area, but here in northeastern Ohio, we have Dish Network which offers a package including 150-odd satellite channels, plus local channels.

However, you are correct as far as the programming on some of these channels goes; much of it is not suitable for children. I have Time-Warner Cable, which offers HBO, Cinemax, Showtime and I don't know how many other pay-cable services. I do not subscribe to any of these channels today, although I did have HBO for exactly one month about 20 years ago. Had it disconnected when I discovered they were showing basically the same trash over and over again for a week at a time. I don't have children, so keeping kids away from porn is not an issue in my case, but I personally don't care to see pornography on my TV 24 hours a day, seven days a week; I simply cannot afford pay channels, since I live on a fixed income. I have a DVD player and a subscription to Netflix (as well as several of my own DVDs), which suits me very well and is, IMO, for me anyway, a very suitable alternative to those high-priced movie channels. I'm currently watching disc 3 of a 3-disc set from the first season of the detective series Kojak, which was on CBS television in the seventies (the decade during which I grew up). Those classic shows, IMHO, have it all over a lot of the trash and nonsense passing for programming on the major networks these days. If I had to do it, I'd downgrade my cable to bare-bones basic (local channels only) and watch most of my TV programming on DVD, as many of the shows I grew up watching are now on DVD and Blu-ray (I have a Memorex full-size DVD player; can't afford a Blu-ray player--yet, anyway). As it is now, I watch very little regular cable TV except for news and a couple of comedy shows; the rest of my viewing is of DVDs (and VHS videos) of older shows from the '60s and '70s.

Do you have a DVD player? If so, there's your answer to finding programming suitable for your kids to watch, if you can't find anything on local TV that meets your standards. Netflix has an entry level package that starts at $4.95 per month. I don't want this to look like I'm advertising the service, so here's the Netflix website, which will give you all the information you need to start enjoying their offerings: http://www.netflix.com.

BTW, there is a way you could keep your children from watching inappropriate programming if you had satellite service. Most satellite providers have systems in place to enable viewers to lock out unwanted channels by the use of a password or pass code, which only you would know.

Just out of curiosity, how much does satellite service cost in your area? Sometimes satellite providers run specials in which they offer, for example, service to up to four rooms (with up to four receivers and an outlet in each room) for a very low rate. Keep in mind, however, that these are, as a rule, introductory rates; they expire after a certain length of time, say three months, after which you must pay the standard monthly rate if you wish to keep the service. And yes, they can be high. I'm looking at an ad from Dish Network that was in my mail this morning, in which a limited-time offer is being made (I'm not interested, since I already have cable and don't want the movie channels, as I mentioned earlier); the offer is three months of Dish Network service, plus DVR (digital video recorder), for $9.99. This package offers 100 channels, but no locals. Dish Network may be reached at the following number: 1.800.455.3813. For satellite with local channels, DirecTV has a package starting at $29.99. For more information: 1.888.680.8771 or http://www.directv.com.