Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Amplified\s+TV\s+Antenna\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Amplified\s+TV\s+Antenna\s*$/: 61 ]

Total 61 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: "Jerry Kaidor" <jerry@tr2.com>; Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 11:13:09 -0700 (PDT); Hello, Need a little advice here. TV reception has been marginal at this QTH since we moved in 8 months ago. Well, that's with an antenna made of 300ohm twinlead thumbtacked to the wall. XYL has been; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00039.html (8,473 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: RMorris <robrk@nidhog.net>; Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 12:51:25 -0400; Unplug the wife....... Get a real, outside TV antenna. _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00040.html (6,873 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 10:03:02 -0700; I get excellent results from an old standby 4x2 bow-tie with reflector. It's a broadband UHF antenna, but also gets enough high-band VHF signal that the set solidly decodes Ch 8 from about 40 miles a; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00041.html (8,047 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: Robert Morris <robrk@nidhog.net>; Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 13:53:30 -0400; I get excellent results from an old standby 4x2 bow-tie with reflector. And if you go to Radio Shack, the kid will tell you need a digital antenna, just like when you needed the special one for color; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00042.html (6,848 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: Bill Fuqua <wlfuqu00@uky.edu>; Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:27:15 -0400; I once had a noise problem that I just could not locate. Late one night I was working DX and had an amplifier I just purchased. I was normally running 100 watts then. My station was in the attached g; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00043.html (10,230 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: iain macdonnell - N6ML <ar@dseven.org>; Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 12:24:41 -0700; If the associate at your local Radio Shack even knows what an antenna is, that's a couple of steps up from mine. "Sorry, sir, we don't have anything like that ... but we have a special on AA batterie; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00045.html (8,309 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: donroden@hiwaay.net; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 15:08:28 -0500; Tell the kid he needs a digital examination... maybe they will find his head. Don W4DNR _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.c; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00049.html (8,069 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: "Jerry Kaidor" <jerry@tr2.com>; Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:42:29 -0700 (PDT); .... my RFI ** This is excellent. It reminds me of the importance of ground loops. Ground loops and me - we have a history. Once upon a time, when I was in high school, somebody gave me a Heathkit OM; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00050.html (9,435 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: "Jerry Kaidor" <jerry@tr2.com>; Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:49:20 -0700 (PDT); ** Naturally we would never sink to the level of teasing RS associates: Uh - this CD player says it has a 1-bit DAC and that one has a 16-bit. How come the one-bit one costs more money? Surely sixte; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00051.html (8,741 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: Jim Barber <audioguy@q.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 13:54:17 -0700; A related "gotcha": Many people are under the impression that OTA television is now strictly UHF, and lots of UHF-only "HDTV ready" antennas are sold. It isn't true, though. There are still stations; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00052.html (8,829 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 17:48:23 -0400; Significantly less impulse noise and interference. Also the allocation formulas favored coverage (higher permitted EIRP) in the low UHF channels and penalized coverage (actual signal levels failed t; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00053.html (10,155 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 18:29:29 -0400; I put a UHF antenna with remote preamp at roughly 90 feet about 10' below the tribander. Running QRO there no QRM. http://www.rogerhalstead.com/ham_files/tower39.htm At 90 feet it receives well out t; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00054.html (9,594 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: "Roger (K8RI)" <k8ri@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 19:42:50 -0400; I had one of those via Radio Shack. Rabbit ears worked better. I took it back. Maybe they've improved. You would if you run enough power. It'll go off and stay off.<:-)) 73 Roger (K8RI) _____________; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00055.html (11,605 bytes)
14. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 17:58:04 -0700; There are relatively few full power DTV stations on Channels 2-6, a lot more on 7-13. A quick search of the FCC database will yield details. http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/tv-query-broadcast-station; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00056.html (9,627 bytes)
15. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 18:08:57 -0700; There is no such thing as a "ground loop" -- it is a totally false concept. The actual cause of the hum/buzz problems we blame on these imaginary "ground loops" are LEAKAGE CURRENT from the AC power; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00057.html (9,613 bytes)
16. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 18:24:20 -0700 (PDT); Perhaps you should advise Wikipedia that there is "no such thing as a ground loop". They seem to have an entire article about them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_loop_%28electricity%29 Ground l; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00058.html (9,406 bytes)
17. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: W2XJ <w2xj@nyc.rr.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 21:52:13 -0400; That is not entirely correct. A 'digital' antenna is generally one that is either omni or has a wide beamwidth. A bowtie is a 'digital' antenna. Yagis and logs do not usually work so well. Unfortunat; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00059.html (9,608 bytes)
18. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: Adrian Flynn <adrianjamesflynn@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 22:02:38 -0400; OK Mr. w2xj. *IF, IF* this statement of yours is* TRUE?,* then why is it that a "*BOWTIE Antenna*" is the *first and best antenna for UHF reception from 1954 to 2012?* 73 Adrian KF7DYU * * * ________; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00060.html (9,592 bytes)
19. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: W2XJ <w2xj@nyc.rr.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 22:07:11 -0400; The statement regarding WBBM is not really correct and is typical of why we should be cautious when reading things on the Internet and taking the information as fact. From the mouths of my corporate; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00061.html (11,625 bytes)
20. Re: [Amps] Amplified TV Antenna (score: 1): Author: W2XJ <w2xj@nyc.rr.com>; Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 22:09:01 -0400; I am not sure I understand your point. The bowtie is a good antenna for many reasons. _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com; /archives//html/Amps/2012-07/msg00062.html (10,238 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]