Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
- Thread starter HarrY
- Start date
-
- Tags
- HDTV Home Theatre Silver TV
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Harry wrote:
> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
All antenna are analog, just as all signals are analog.
Matthew
--
If the war in Iraq was over oil, we lost.
Harry wrote:
> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
All antenna are analog, just as all signals are analog.
Matthew
--
If the war in Iraq was over oil, we lost.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Harry wrote:
>
>> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
>
>
> All antenna are analog, just as all signals are analog.
>
> Matthew
>
True all antennas are analog and the only differance is the frequency
they are tuned for. In the case of TV the Silver sensor is just fine.
Clay
Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Harry wrote:
>
>> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
>
>
> All antenna are analog, just as all signals are analog.
>
> Matthew
>
True all antennas are analog and the only differance is the frequency
they are tuned for. In the case of TV the Silver sensor is just fine.
Clay
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Harry <harry@pond.com> wrote in news:sj7fa050ppsirpi0p1p1ak8rgn8k2v6b4r@
4ax.com:
> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
The silver sensor is UHF only.
Harry <harry@pond.com> wrote in news:sj7fa050ppsirpi0p1p1ak8rgn8k2v6b4r@
4ax.com:
> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
The silver sensor is UHF only.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
"Harry" <harry@pond.com> wrote in message
news:sj7fa050ppsirpi0p1p1ak8rgn8k2v6b4r@4ax.com...
> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
No! As far as I know, the Silver Sensor was designed only for UHF, not for
VHF where the historically important analog channels lie. In the Chicago
market, the Silver Sensor is almost useless even as an HDTV antenna because
the Chicago CBS affiliate broadcasts its HD signal in the VHF band.
"Harry" <harry@pond.com> wrote in message
news:sj7fa050ppsirpi0p1p1ak8rgn8k2v6b4r@4ax.com...
> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
No! As far as I know, the Silver Sensor was designed only for UHF, not for
VHF where the historically important analog channels lie. In the Chicago
market, the Silver Sensor is almost useless even as an HDTV antenna because
the Chicago CBS affiliate broadcasts its HD signal in the VHF band.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> "Harry" <harry@pond.com> wrote in message
> news:sj7fa050ppsirpi0p1p1ak8rgn8k2v6b4r@4ax.com...
>
>>Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
>
>
> No! As far as I know, the Silver Sensor was designed only for UHF, not for
> VHF where the historically important analog channels lie. In the Chicago
> market, the Silver Sensor is almost useless even as an HDTV antenna because
> the Chicago CBS affiliate broadcasts its HD signal in the VHF band.
>
How does the geographical location change the abilities of an antenna?
Matthew (the SS is just as good in Chicago as it is anywhere else, no?)
--
If the war in Iraq was over oil, we lost.
Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> "Harry" <harry@pond.com> wrote in message
> news:sj7fa050ppsirpi0p1p1ak8rgn8k2v6b4r@4ax.com...
>
>>Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
>
>
> No! As far as I know, the Silver Sensor was designed only for UHF, not for
> VHF where the historically important analog channels lie. In the Chicago
> market, the Silver Sensor is almost useless even as an HDTV antenna because
> the Chicago CBS affiliate broadcasts its HD signal in the VHF band.
>
How does the geographical location change the abilities of an antenna?
Matthew (the SS is just as good in Chicago as it is anywhere else, no?)
--
If the war in Iraq was over oil, we lost.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
"Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
news:808585fb9f89d75b4b359fa9b058366c@news.teranews.com...
> Matthew (the SS is just as good in Chicago as it is anywhere else, no?)
No, I don't think so. The SS appears to be a UHF-only antenna, advertised
as an "HDTV antenna." Thus, it may be quite useful in a metropolitan area
whose OTA HD stations all broadcast in the UHF band. But in Chicago, where
a major network (CBS) broadcasts in the VHF band, the SS is crippled. CBS
is simply too important to skip.
"Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
news:808585fb9f89d75b4b359fa9b058366c@news.teranews.com...
> Matthew (the SS is just as good in Chicago as it is anywhere else, no?)
No, I don't think so. The SS appears to be a UHF-only antenna, advertised
as an "HDTV antenna." Thus, it may be quite useful in a metropolitan area
whose OTA HD stations all broadcast in the UHF band. But in Chicago, where
a major network (CBS) broadcasts in the VHF band, the SS is crippled. CBS
is simply too important to skip.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> "Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
> news:808585fb9f89d75b4b359fa9b058366c@news.teranews.com...
>
>>Matthew (the SS is just as good in Chicago as it is anywhere else, no?)
>
>
> No, I don't think so. The SS appears to be a UHF-only antenna, advertised
> as an "HDTV antenna." Thus, it may be quite useful in a metropolitan area
> whose OTA HD stations all broadcast in the UHF band. But in Chicago, where
> a major network (CBS) broadcasts in the VHF band, the SS is crippled. CBS
> is simply too important to skip.
>
You do realize that the SS works just as well in Chicago as it does
anywhere else, don't you? It receives UHF very well no matter where it
is. It isn't the SS's fault if there are no UHF channels to receive.
Matthew (who wonders why logic and reason are so often ignored)
--
If the war in Iraq was over oil, we lost.
Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> "Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
> news:808585fb9f89d75b4b359fa9b058366c@news.teranews.com...
>
>>Matthew (the SS is just as good in Chicago as it is anywhere else, no?)
>
>
> No, I don't think so. The SS appears to be a UHF-only antenna, advertised
> as an "HDTV antenna." Thus, it may be quite useful in a metropolitan area
> whose OTA HD stations all broadcast in the UHF band. But in Chicago, where
> a major network (CBS) broadcasts in the VHF band, the SS is crippled. CBS
> is simply too important to skip.
>
You do realize that the SS works just as well in Chicago as it does
anywhere else, don't you? It receives UHF very well no matter where it
is. It isn't the SS's fault if there are no UHF channels to receive.
Matthew (who wonders why logic and reason are so often ignored)
--
If the war in Iraq was over oil, we lost.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Harry wrote:
> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
Harry, to summarize:
The Silver Sensor is a UHF antenna. It gets channels like "25" and
"56" quite well. The Silver Sensor is a lousy VHF antenna. It does
not pick up channels like "4" and "7" well at all.
Detail:
For years, US broadcasters have been sending signals using a standard
called NTSC; this is probably what you are thinking of when you write
"analog." The newer ATSC "digital" television standard is a digital
signal being carried on an analog channel.
Let's say you're George Bush and you want to put up an antenna in your
eastern home. NBC is on channel 4, but the digital NBC channel is on
channel 48. (That is, what you are likely thinking of as "analog" NBC
- the NTSC broadcast of the Washington, DC NBC affiliate - is on
channel 4 and the ATSC "digital" broadcast is on channel 48.)
Likewise, CBS is on 9, but the digital CBS channel is on 34. Because
the digital channels have to go (for now) on unused slots, they tend
to be on UHF channels (14-69) rather than VHF channels (2-13) because
VHF has been crowded for years.
So, the Silver Sensor is a UHF antenna but gets advertised as a
"digital TV" or "HDTV antenna" because most of the digital signals are
being sent on UHF (14-69) channels.
Now, in some cases, a VHF channel was available to carry the digital
signal. Examples are CBS digital on channel 3 in Chicago and NBC
digital on channel 12 in San Jose. In that case, the Silver Sensor
"HDTV Antenna" won't do you a heck of a lot of good getting the HDTV
signal because it's a UHF antenna and the digital signal is on a VHF
channel.
Confused? Gets worse. George goes up on the roof and points his
antenna away from the Capitol Building, because the TV towers are in
the other direction. Well, the TV towers for NBC, CBS, ABC and UPN
are in the other direction. WETA (the PBS station in Washington that
people outside of Washington know) is in a different direction and the
WB affiliate is in yet another direction. Don't get George started on
multipath and all the tall buildings. Or how he needs to point his
antenna in different directions to get a picture from different
channels coming from the same tower. Or how all the digital signals
may get switched over to the VHF (2-13) channels in several years when
US TV broadcasts go all digital.
Well, the last point isn't a big deal - George will have a new address
by then.
Harry wrote:
> Is Silver Sensor also a good analog antenna?
Harry, to summarize:
The Silver Sensor is a UHF antenna. It gets channels like "25" and
"56" quite well. The Silver Sensor is a lousy VHF antenna. It does
not pick up channels like "4" and "7" well at all.
Detail:
For years, US broadcasters have been sending signals using a standard
called NTSC; this is probably what you are thinking of when you write
"analog." The newer ATSC "digital" television standard is a digital
signal being carried on an analog channel.
Let's say you're George Bush and you want to put up an antenna in your
eastern home. NBC is on channel 4, but the digital NBC channel is on
channel 48. (That is, what you are likely thinking of as "analog" NBC
- the NTSC broadcast of the Washington, DC NBC affiliate - is on
channel 4 and the ATSC "digital" broadcast is on channel 48.)
Likewise, CBS is on 9, but the digital CBS channel is on 34. Because
the digital channels have to go (for now) on unused slots, they tend
to be on UHF channels (14-69) rather than VHF channels (2-13) because
VHF has been crowded for years.
So, the Silver Sensor is a UHF antenna but gets advertised as a
"digital TV" or "HDTV antenna" because most of the digital signals are
being sent on UHF (14-69) channels.
Now, in some cases, a VHF channel was available to carry the digital
signal. Examples are CBS digital on channel 3 in Chicago and NBC
digital on channel 12 in San Jose. In that case, the Silver Sensor
"HDTV Antenna" won't do you a heck of a lot of good getting the HDTV
signal because it's a UHF antenna and the digital signal is on a VHF
channel.
Confused? Gets worse. George goes up on the roof and points his
antenna away from the Capitol Building, because the TV towers are in
the other direction. Well, the TV towers for NBC, CBS, ABC and UPN
are in the other direction. WETA (the PBS station in Washington that
people outside of Washington know) is in a different direction and the
WB affiliate is in yet another direction. Don't get George started on
multipath and all the tall buildings. Or how he needs to point his
antenna in different directions to get a picture from different
channels coming from the same tower. Or how all the digital signals
may get switched over to the VHF (2-13) channels in several years when
US TV broadcasts go all digital.
Well, the last point isn't a big deal - George will have a new address
by then.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
"Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
news:daac99ac82e5279a5a1ef7922784ab78@news.teranews.com...
> You do realize that the SS works just as well in Chicago as it does
> anywhere else, don't you? It receives UHF very well no matter where it
> is. It isn't the SS's fault if there are no UHF channels to receive.
>
> Matthew (who wonders why logic and reason are so often ignored)
Incorrect--use your logic and reason. Any consumer product must be judged,
first and foremost, on whether it meets its advertised specs. In other
words, does the product do exactly what it is advertised to do? The SS is
commonly advertised like this:
http
/www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=90113670
"Zenith ZHD-TV1 Digital Indoor HDTV Antenna"
Farther down in the description, there is some mention of UHF, but there is
no clear statement in the writeup that this antenna does *not* capture VHF
HDTV channels, which do occur on major networks in major markets. Hence,
this antenna (considered by itself) is unsuitable as an HDTV antenna in
those major markets, and should not be referred to as such, unless its
description explicitly, clearly, and prominently mentions the antenna's
UHF-only limitation, and that this limitation has the practical effect of
reducing the number of HDTV channels received.
But here's the real kicker. This particular product has an *extremely*
obnoxious Special Returns Policy (at least at Buy.com, but Buy.com blames
the manufacturer):
"Due to manufacturers' policies, buy.com cannot accept returns on this item
for any reason. The manufacturer will handle all exchanges and replacements.
Please contact the manufacturer directly and they will assist you with
repair or replacements. NO REFUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR THIS PRODUCT UNDER ANY
CIRCUMSTANCES. THIS PRODUCT CAN ONLY BE RETURNED FOR REPAIR OR EXCHANGE."
Cute, don't you think?
You can attempt to blame Buy.com in particular, but a Google search makes
clear that *many* retailers are singing from the same incorrect song sheet
on this product--perhaps based on a misleading product sheet from Zenith
itself? In any case, Zenith is not taking any action to correct the
problem. To the contrary: According to Buy.com, Zenith is covering its
ass-ets by blocking refunds.
"Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
news:daac99ac82e5279a5a1ef7922784ab78@news.teranews.com...
> You do realize that the SS works just as well in Chicago as it does
> anywhere else, don't you? It receives UHF very well no matter where it
> is. It isn't the SS's fault if there are no UHF channels to receive.
>
> Matthew (who wonders why logic and reason are so often ignored)
Incorrect--use your logic and reason. Any consumer product must be judged,
first and foremost, on whether it meets its advertised specs. In other
words, does the product do exactly what it is advertised to do? The SS is
commonly advertised like this:
http
/www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=90113670"Zenith ZHD-TV1 Digital Indoor HDTV Antenna"
Farther down in the description, there is some mention of UHF, but there is
no clear statement in the writeup that this antenna does *not* capture VHF
HDTV channels, which do occur on major networks in major markets. Hence,
this antenna (considered by itself) is unsuitable as an HDTV antenna in
those major markets, and should not be referred to as such, unless its
description explicitly, clearly, and prominently mentions the antenna's
UHF-only limitation, and that this limitation has the practical effect of
reducing the number of HDTV channels received.
But here's the real kicker. This particular product has an *extremely*
obnoxious Special Returns Policy (at least at Buy.com, but Buy.com blames
the manufacturer):
"Due to manufacturers' policies, buy.com cannot accept returns on this item
for any reason. The manufacturer will handle all exchanges and replacements.
Please contact the manufacturer directly and they will assist you with
repair or replacements. NO REFUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR THIS PRODUCT UNDER ANY
CIRCUMSTANCES. THIS PRODUCT CAN ONLY BE RETURNED FOR REPAIR OR EXCHANGE."
Cute, don't you think?
You can attempt to blame Buy.com in particular, but a Google search makes
clear that *many* retailers are singing from the same incorrect song sheet
on this product--perhaps based on a misleading product sheet from Zenith
itself? In any case, Zenith is not taking any action to correct the
problem. To the contrary: According to Buy.com, Zenith is covering its
ass-ets by blocking refunds.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> "Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
> news:808585fb9f89d75b4b359fa9b058366c@news.teranews.com...
>
>>Matthew (the SS is just as good in Chicago as it is anywhere else, no?)
>
>
> No, I don't think so.
Then you appear to be playing a moron on usenet.
> The SS appears to be a UHF-only antenna, advertised
> as an "HDTV antenna."
Do you really believe that advertising trumps physics?
> Thus, it may be quite useful in a metropolitan area
> whose OTA HD stations all broadcast in the UHF band. But in Chicago,
What does that location have to do with the effectiveness of the
antenna? Let me lend you a clue: absolutely nothing!
> where
> a major network (CBS) broadcasts in the VHF band, the SS is crippled.
Not at all. It works just as well as it would where any other major
network is on VHF.
> CBS
> is simply too important to skip.
In your location and with your dependence on CBS, a SS is a bad choice.
Only a moron would conclude that it is a bad antenna because one
particular station in one particular location can't be received with it.
Matthew
--
If the war in Iraq was over oil, we lost.
Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> "Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
> news:808585fb9f89d75b4b359fa9b058366c@news.teranews.com...
>
>>Matthew (the SS is just as good in Chicago as it is anywhere else, no?)
>
>
> No, I don't think so.
Then you appear to be playing a moron on usenet.
> The SS appears to be a UHF-only antenna, advertised
> as an "HDTV antenna."
Do you really believe that advertising trumps physics?
> Thus, it may be quite useful in a metropolitan area
> whose OTA HD stations all broadcast in the UHF band. But in Chicago,
What does that location have to do with the effectiveness of the
antenna? Let me lend you a clue: absolutely nothing!
> where
> a major network (CBS) broadcasts in the VHF band, the SS is crippled.
Not at all. It works just as well as it would where any other major
network is on VHF.
> CBS
> is simply too important to skip.
In your location and with your dependence on CBS, a SS is a bad choice.
Only a moron would conclude that it is a bad antenna because one
particular station in one particular location can't be received with it.
Matthew
--
If the war in Iraq was over oil, we lost.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
"Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
news:b33d5a03c84997c46e5b1c932a2ffdc9@news.teranews.com...
> Then you appear to be playing a moron on usenet.
Namecalling greatly undermines your credibility.
> Do you really believe that advertising trumps physics?
Consumers don't care about physics; they care about whether a product works
as advertised.
> What does that location have to do with the effectiveness of the
> antenna? Let me lend you a clue: absolutely nothing!
The American Heritage Dictionary definition of 'effective' is "serving the
purpose." A product that does not serve its advertised purpose is not
effective.
> Only a moron would conclude that it is a bad antenna because one
> particular station in one particular location can't be received with it.
If a product does not serve its advertised purpose, it is indeed a "bad"
product. Any product designer who is unwilling to face this simple fact of
economics is unworthy of his salary.
Your namecalling leads one to believe that you are too young to have an
Internet account of your own. Please stop abusing your parents' account.
"Matthew L. Martin" <mlmartin@me.com> wrote in message
news:b33d5a03c84997c46e5b1c932a2ffdc9@news.teranews.com...
> Then you appear to be playing a moron on usenet.
Namecalling greatly undermines your credibility.
> Do you really believe that advertising trumps physics?
Consumers don't care about physics; they care about whether a product works
as advertised.
> What does that location have to do with the effectiveness of the
> antenna? Let me lend you a clue: absolutely nothing!
The American Heritage Dictionary definition of 'effective' is "serving the
purpose." A product that does not serve its advertised purpose is not
effective.
> Only a moron would conclude that it is a bad antenna because one
> particular station in one particular location can't be received with it.
If a product does not serve its advertised purpose, it is indeed a "bad"
product. Any product designer who is unwilling to face this simple fact of
economics is unworthy of his salary.
Your namecalling leads one to believe that you are too young to have an
Internet account of your own. Please stop abusing your parents' account.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> The SS is commonly advertised like this:
>
> http/www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=90113670
>
> "Zenith ZHD-TV1 Digital Indoor HDTV Antenna"
>
> Farther down in the description, there is some mention of UHF, but there is
> no clear statement in the writeup that this antenna does *not* capture VHF
> HDTV channels.
See: http/www.zenith.com/index.asp?url=./sub_prod/product_List.asp
The Zenith web site clearly indicates that this antenna is for UHF only.
The lead description is:
"HDTV-UHF Digital Indoor Antenna".
Further down in the features area:
"Even Response: A flat forward gain slope delivers balanced reception
throughout UHF. Ensures all channels are received to the same quality."
Finally in the Notes area:
"Note: When using the enclosed antenna, you will only receive UHF
channels. To receive VHF channels (Channels numbered 1 thru 13), you
must slso connect a VHF antenna to the TV. You can install a device
referred to as a "antenna combiner" which will combine the two antenna
output signals into one 75 ohms for a single connection."
Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> The SS is commonly advertised like this:
>
> http
/www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=90113670>
> "Zenith ZHD-TV1 Digital Indoor HDTV Antenna"
>
> Farther down in the description, there is some mention of UHF, but there is
> no clear statement in the writeup that this antenna does *not* capture VHF
> HDTV channels.
See: http
/www.zenith.com/index.asp?url=./sub_prod/product_List.aspThe Zenith web site clearly indicates that this antenna is for UHF only.
The lead description is:
"HDTV-UHF Digital Indoor Antenna".
Further down in the features area:
"Even Response: A flat forward gain slope delivers balanced reception
throughout UHF. Ensures all channels are received to the same quality."
Finally in the Notes area:
"Note: When using the enclosed antenna, you will only receive UHF
channels. To receive VHF channels (Channels numbered 1 thru 13), you
must slso connect a VHF antenna to the TV. You can install a device
referred to as a "antenna combiner" which will combine the two antenna
output signals into one 75 ohms for a single connection."
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
"numeric" <numeric@att.net> wrote in message
news:43Grc.44992$hH.860627@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> See: http/www.zenith.com/index.asp?url=./sub_prod/product_List.asp
Yes, Zenith's own Web site is now accurate and fair. Unfortunately, most of
its retailers appear to still be using outdated and misleading fact sheets.
"numeric" <numeric@att.net> wrote in message
news:43Grc.44992$hH.860627@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> See: http
/www.zenith.com/index.asp?url=./sub_prod/product_List.aspYes, Zenith's own Web site is now accurate and fair. Unfortunately, most of
its retailers appear to still be using outdated and misleading fact sheets.
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Is there any indoor UHF antenna better than the Silver Sensor?
Christopher Calder
Is there any indoor UHF antenna better than the Silver Sensor?
Christopher Calder
Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)
Although the antenna itself is UHF, you can actually pick up some VHF with
it...through the downlead! Seriously.
"numeric" <numeric@att.net> wrote in message
news:43Grc.44992$hH.860627@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> The Zenith web site clearly indicates that this antenna is for UHF only.
Although the antenna itself is UHF, you can actually pick up some VHF with
it...through the downlead! Seriously.
"numeric" <numeric@att.net> wrote in message
news:43Grc.44992$hH.860627@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> The Zenith web site clearly indicates that this antenna is for UHF only.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Question Transferring iPhone 8 (iOS 14.5) to new 15: Upgrade 8’s iOS & best method of transfer
- Started by autozonejawana
- Replies: 0
Facebook
Twitter