Most helpful client reviews
1262 of 1277 humans found the following review helpful.
Incredibly Good Indoor Antenna
By A. R. Harris
Having expended a bundle acquiring a Sony LCD HDTV and upgrading our Dish service to include it is fixed set of HDTV channels, we were anxious to see what an Over-the-Air Antenna might add.
In all, we tested 5, including the highly ranked Zenith log periodic (about $40 at Sears), an amplified Samsung (about $99 at Best Buy), an outdoor Terk 32 (about $80 at Circuit City), our old roof mounted VHF/UHF antenna (circa 1985), and the amplified Terk HDTVa (about $50 at Radio Shack). The Terk HDTVa won hands down; no contest, blowing away the much touted Zenith.
We live in the sparsely populated, low hill countryside of Western Massachuetts. The THDTVa effortlessly brings in amidst 20 and 30 analogue and digital (incl hdtv) channels broadcast most from 12 to 45 miles away, and a great deal of as far as 65+ miles away in Connecticut. Some digital OTA channels genuinely come in more sharply than some of the (Dish) satellite digital channels.
This is unquestionably a keeper: a great value, gem of an antenna. So good, in fact, we are debating giving up our $50/month Dish service, putting $15 of that to Netflix to replace HBO, and banking the remaining $35.
371 of 375 people found the following review helpful.
Works for me
By TerrierLover
I'm in SF Bay Area, with regards to 30 miles from Sutro Tower. This was my firstborn antenna and it worked out of the box for me. It is not perfective and I'm keeping among 70 and 90% signal strength on all the majors with better reception than satellite. I can't compare it to any others but to say "it doesn't work" is insane. You won't know until you try it. This is not an all or not one thing deal. It will work great for some, not at all for others and anyplace in between.
To check your specific situation, I commend you undertake www.antennaweb.org. Click button on initial page, enter your full address and you will get a report distinctive to your home with regards to how/where your channels are broadcast, including a map showing precisely how you will have to point your antenna. In my case, all my required channels were "yellow" and all in the same compass direction. If you are very far from broadcast source or channels are coming from galore dissimilar directions, it may not work. However, with good return policy, it can't hurt to try.
1294 of 1342 humans found the following review helpful.
Antennas Compared
By YSC
I'm a introductory timer at getting OTA HDTV. This has been an experiment in progress for the past 5 weeks. I have gone through four antennas (they are all here as I write this) before finding something that's adequate for the purpose (rather than tolerable).
I live around 25 miles from Manhattan, where the towers of most TV stations are located. I am also conscious of the directional data from [...], and have experimented hence with it is effects on reception. My apartment's windows all face north, while the signals all comes from southwest. I cannot get signals from where it comes from, and therefore necessitated to get signals from deflections perchance off nearby buildings and trees. It's a very poor circumstance for over-the-air reception, perchance just somewhat better than being underground. Signals are weak, and are affected by weather. Stormy and windy days have shown effects at disrupting signal reception.
With this said, and without going into much detail, let's talk with regards to the antennas. Now all these antenna have been tested with the same equipment, setup, directional adjustments, location, etc. etc. and have been tested through good an foul weather, day and night, to detect differences.
1.Terk HDTVa Terk HDTVa Indoor Amplified High-Definition Antenna for Off-Air HDTV Reception- After reading a lot of rave reviews and high ratings at [...], log periodic types (looks like a fishbone) seems to be the way to go. I got the Terk HDTVa first, thinking that the amplification and VHF antenna will have to nail my reception difficulties at the start. However, after more than two weeks of fidgeting around ad nauseam (directions, locations, amplifications, dissimilar devices, etc.), I only managed to pick up two ATSC channels' signals, and even those don't have strong sufficient signals to display anything. I thought possibly it's just my poor location, and that I will have to in all probability give up on the attempt. The included in-line amplifier dongle doesn't work at all. Powering it on makes no divergence in signal strength readings, which hovered around 5-10%.
It is well built, looks nice, good concepts, but it just didn't work.
2.Phlips PHDTV1 Philips PHDTV1 Digital HDTV-UHF Indoor Antenna- The venerated "silver sensor" which was antecedently sold underneath the Zenith brand likewise had outstanding ratings and reviews. It's in fact almost legendary. I decided, in desperation, to undertake it out, even if it doesn't have amplification. It seems all my local HD channels are in UHF anyway, so I won't miss the VHF dipoles.
The unit has startlingly poorer build quality equated to the Terk. It has paint bubbles, hairs and dusts trappings in the paint, sharp edged cheap plastics and much thinner metal blades that's covered in oil and has a heap of dings and bendings. I wasn't impressed with the quality, and didn't suppose much from it as I set it up.
To my surprise, it picked up 9 working channels (note: the terk got two channels' signals, but they didn't work) from the start, even if it's randomly placed. It's thrilling as it was the primary time I saw OTA HDTV. After a lot of adjustment and emplacement experiments, I was competent to receive 19 channels. However, not all of these channels work well given the same direction.
The directionally sensible antenna needs to be adjusted as I switch channels. e.g. NBC and CBS seems to work well in one direction, while ABC has it is own favored direction, which works likewise with FOX. I tried as best as possible to find a compromise point where everything works. I couldn't. It just needs to be adjusted constantly.
The transmission is ofttimes dogged by reception fluctuations. Signal quality tend to vacillate rather a bit, in particular affected by weather. That means the TV playback would get choppy at times, with it is severity dependent on the direction I point the antenna at. I didn't think vacillating signals was a characteristic until I tried the latter two antennas later. I also found that I had to constantly play with the directional positioning to get a stable signal from each of the stations.
It works, and I was impressed, but then in retrospect it could only be best described as a "tolerable" HDTV experience as I was struggling for a smooth signal delivery.
3.RCA ANT111 Basic Indoor Antenna- While buying goods in stores, I saw this basic and classic RCA loop/dipole antenna for less than $[...]. I couldn't protest the temptation to try it out, just for the heck of it. It is likewise a dissimilar type of antenna than the former two.
Again, I was surprised. This cheap antenna worked well, specially giving careful consideration to how it's only a fraction of the price of the two I'd tried. I ended up getting 17 channels, a few less than the PHDTV1, with the same emplacement and setup. Some channels likewise don't work, even if signals were detected. The quality of the signals seems to be the key.
So what's so special with regards to it? It queerly had better signal deliverance for the channels that worked. It's not as choppy, and quality level is very steady. It is also not as affected by directional positioning. I was for the firstborn time capable to view FOX, ABC, CBS, NBC without adjusting the antenna. However, the lack of directionality likewise makes it equivocal when I lost the signal. It seems that there's no "favorite direction" for the channels, which likewise means I can't pull in more inviolable signals at my choosing. It is likewise rather susceptible to weather changes, peculiarly wind (which in all probability affected signals reflected by trees?)
The signal strength likewise seems to be a little weaker, even though the signal quality tend to be higher in general. That probably contributed to the smoother video delivery. It likewise tempted me to get a similar design that has amplification.
4.Philips MANT510 Philips High Performance Amplified Indoor Uhf/ Vhf/ Fm Antenna- This unit has a "digital TV optimized, patent pending UHF panel array". I thought I'd try it out just for the somewhat dissimilar antenna design, if not just for the adaptable amplification.
Well, it works, and works rather well. The antenna doesn't work without power, and with amplification turned off it works a little less than unpowered PHDTV1 and ANT111. Yet with the amplification turned on, I get 24 channels, with strength up to 81% (compared to 3-10% unamplified, and quality systematically above 60 and normally in the 70-90%+. That generates the most dependable video deliverance of all the ones tried.
While thunderstorms still managed to distrupt signals, it's much less many times and only momentarily. I also don't have to worry with regards to hunting for signals as I just point it in one standard direction and I get everything but three NJN channels (they are even further from here.. perchance a good 50 miles).
I at last may just set the antenna and forget it. It lets me focus on the programming rather than antenna adjustment. While it needs to be powered, it gives me the selfassurance to ultimately get enjoyment from HDTV, rather than tweaking and tolerating it. It's good sufficient that I may in all likelihood stop searching. I hope it'll be helpful to you who may be going through the same purchasing decision nausea as I have.
See all 1367 client reviews...
Why not to buy
Direct TV Guide
