OT Digital TV signal question

I live in a woods and when we get a little breeze,enough to move the tree leaves there's some channels we can get very well.Maybe a few seconds,then they looked scrambled or the screen goes black for a few seconds.The antenna guys I've talked to say the trees don't effect the signal.
They want to sell me a verticle antenna with a booster,but won't guarantee anything.It looks to me like the tree's are messing the signal up.I have a horizontal antenna with a booster now.
I wonder what you guys use. I'm about 40 miles from the signal source.

I don't have many trees around here but my digital signals do just like you say. I was told digital needs a perfect signal or it won't work. The old analog could work with a weak signal but would have some snow in the picture. Digital signals won't have snow they'll pixilate and just quit. I figure there is nothing on tv anyway so I'm not missing anything worth watching.

Does it do it in the winter too (when there are no leaves) or just in the warmer months?

Your so-called "antenna guys" are complete idiots.

Tree branches and leaves effect the signal GREATLY.

Either get the antenna above the trees or cut the trees down so there is a clear line of sight to the signal source for best results.

It's not as bad in the winter time.I'm located between two fairly large towns,dayton ohio and lima ohio and sometimes the NBC signal is week from one and stronger from the other.I'm probably 40 miles from either.I've got a 30ft tower,but the tree's are a lot taller.

you can get an amplifier from wally world that should help. It goes in line with the antenna cable but it connects with coax only, not twin lead. I have used them for years to improve the signal and they will help. last one I bought was only about 30 dollars so they are not expensive.

frank

These Guys are Right, Trees/Leaves are a factor in Signal loss,,ESPECIALLY since the Digital era, to some Extent, Analogue was better, as You could at least get a signal, albeit With Some Snow... Larry

A direct line of sight between your antenna and the transmitter is best. If you can't move your antenna above the trees, try using an amplifier. Winegard #AP-8275 is a good amplifier for me at 70 miles from the transmitters.

The wind isn't pushing your antenna out of alignment is it?

Go to Satelite and get 40 to 600 channels and never worry about bad signals again. Oluss there are late of great programs that you won't get off the locals.
Walt

I have a rotor,but the antenna placement doesn't change anything.

Not interested in a 100 bucks or more a month for TV.

Not interested in 100 bucks a month for TV.To many trees to cut down.Tower would need to be 75 ft. to clear trees.

"vertical antenna"? I don't know what that is, with respect to TV antennas.

I assume your "horizontal" antenna is a yagi, which has a lot of gain and is highly directional. If you have a yagi and it's properly aimed, I doubt the "antenna guys" will have anything better. But the higher you can get it the better.

You got that right. The day they want me to pay for tv is the day it's unplugged and going to the dump.

Since over the air tv went digital, I've never been able to receive a usable signal. I think its mostly intended for those folks that live in major urban areas

I'm with you on that one. My in laws have cable - 120 channels and maybe 10 that aren't crap.I've got similar problems with digital and don't have any trees in line with the signals we get. Can be fine all day and all of a sudden nothing. Be OK again in the morning.

(quoted from post at 19:49:27 06/06/14) Since over the air tv went digital, I've never been able to receive a usable signal. I think its mostly intended for those folks that live in major urban areas

Click to expand...

Same here. We have not had a TV since they ended the analog broadcasting.

Ray, how close are you to the intersection of SR 47 and SR66? Was it your Dad or Grandpa in the machinery business?

I am on a nice hill but 100 + air miles from the major net works (Nashville) and get clear plain pictures on an antenna , I assume it is a horizontal mounted on a 40 ft tower. Does have to be pointed in the right direction. Have wild blue internet and weather does affect it to some degree.

The government GAVE away too many band widths to the cell phone people.

I kicked the dish on down the road a few years ago, and went back to antenna tv. A rotor and filter does make a huge difference, and since the signal is not analog anymore, if you are using your old antenna, most signals come in on the UHF vertical screen, and not the horizontal rods anymore.

At 40 miles a good antenna with a booster and RG6 coax should give you a great signal.
I am 80+ miles from the TV stations and I get a good signal with the antenna on a 40 foot tower. A heavy thunderstorm will cause me to lose the signal sometime.

The amp placed just prior the TV amplifies noise and what ever signal that is not buried under the noise floor.
There is no substitute for an antenna mounted amp with a FM trap. Then using loss shielded RG-6 cable down the amp power supply.
An antenna the size of a BBQ grill, mounted on a 20ft pole using twin lea cable and no amp. That is being very optimistic.

There must be a reason the analog signals were/are used by emergency services instead of the digital signals.

As far as I can tell digital signals can get blown around when ever the wind blows. I say that only because any time the wind blows we loose at least 3 channels. Just a truck/car/motorcycle passing the house makes the signal go haywire even when there isnt enough of a breeze to move the leaves. My antenna is located inside the house and is made of coathangers and a a slab of wood. Don't laugh too hard as with this unit we get 20 stations compared to 8 with a store bought unit. I returned the store bought unit and kept the money.

Ray, emergency services are rapidly converting to digital communication. The reason they used analog in the past is that was what was available, and it is quite expensive to upgrade communications infrastructure and vehicles to use digital systems.

Trees certainly DO affect signals. So does the weather, hill-tops, etc. If you have a very strong signal to start with -it won't be noticeable. If weak to start with with - then it will cut in and out. With analog - that would mean seeing more snow in the screen. With digital - it means breaking up into pixels and/or disappearing completely.

The ability of the signal to travel have nothing to to with being digital or not. It's more about being VHF or UHF.

I've installed many TV antenna systems for people in problem areas.

#1 - you ought to download a signal-map for your property. Find out what is available and from what direction. Note that many TV stations changed locations when they changed to digital.

#2. Vertical antenna does not offer any improvement. The right antenna will and so will an antenna-mounted pre-amp. "Stacked" dual antennas in phase also offer some improvement for channels with big problems.

The main issue in your case is to find out what frequency your problem channel is on. The channel ID # means NOTHING. Digital channels now use "virtual channel IDs." You need to know the true RF channel and work from there. Can be low-VHF (used to called 2-6), high- VHF (used to be 7-13), or UHF (used to be 14 and up).

Very likely all you need is a $60 antenna and a $35 pre-amp and you'll be fine. I cannot imagine hiring someone to do it.

You can buy separate antennas and couple together. I do. I have a VHF-low, VHF-high, and UHF - all on one pole. Or you can just buy a big combo VHF-UHF antenna for simplicity. Winegard HD8200U is one of the most popular but it's big.
Cost $116 and can be easily UPS shipped now. A few years ago - it had to be truck-shipped.

I live in two rural areas. Central NY and northern Michigan. Both with TV transmitters 50-80 miles away. With both - TV reception improved after the change to digital. Just meant getting the antennas to match the frequencies, pointing them in the correct direction, and installing pre-amps.

Here in NY for 30 years all we got was one weak VHF channel. Now we bet 8 channels - VHF and UHF.

A few comments from one of your so-called
"complete idiots."

Trees and hilltops certainly effect signals. That
being said -a channel 60 miles away - blocked by
trees, hills, and having absolutely NO line-of-
sight to the antenna will sometimes work fine.
Signals refract and bounce. It's just a matter of
how strong they are.

This "idiot" installed over a dozen TV antenna
systems this past year in rural problematic areas
- that worked. How many did you install??

Well, I took the dish down a month ago to replace the porch roof it was mounted on. Don't have it put back up yet and don't miss it a bit. Only watched in the winter and then only Judge Judy so might not put it back up until winter.

Trees and rain affect digital signal. No question about it. Find a different antenna provider.

Digital signal is "make or break." Either you see a good picture - or you don't. Very little inbetween like analog snow.

If you get break-up and pixelation when the wind-blows the trees- you've got a very weak signal to start with. If it was strong - you could be pointed straight though a dense forest and still get a good picture.

You did not mention if UHF or VHF and what antenna and amp you are using.

Trees are a pain when the leaves are on them. I use the following website to see what is available and in what direction.

I had my roof in my attic on a rotator and amplifier for quite a few years. I replace the roof last year with a raised seam steel roof. The attic antenna does not do anything for me anymore and I really don't miss it. I use Netflix quite a bit for movies, watching what I want, when I want.
Antenna Site

Wrong, polarity is the same.
The only difference between a "digital antenna" and an analog is the tuned range. An analog is tuned from channels 2 through 83. A digital antenna is tuned between ch 7-51.
Less interference from FM radio broadcast. Less wind loading without the wide ch 2-6 element and without the added length for ch52-83.
Like anything else, you get what you pay for. HD7698P Platinum HD Series Antenna, a antenna mounted amp with a FM trap. 30-40ft tower and rotor. RG 6 low loss cable.

If "vertical antenna" means a 30 x 30 inch panel like a Channel Master brand, those are very good long range antennas.

It sounds like your antenna guy knows what he's doing, he just doesn't explain himself very well.

If you want to do it yourself you can buy the antenna for around $100 to $150 and a 28Db amplifier for $60 to $100. I'll guess 2 times that amount will get them professionally installed.

If you are down in a valley surrounded by thick stands of high trees you could have troubles receiving TV signals. Do any of you TV's have a signal strength meter?

Good luck.

It is bad advice if the problem channel is on VHF. What some call "vertical" is a bow-tie antenna. Good gain on UHF and poor on VHF. One example is the Antennas Direct DB8.

The "horizontal" Winegard HD8200U easily beats it for overall performance across all the channels.

29 dB gain preamps can be had for $45 and up. Antenna Craft 10G222 for $45, Channel Master CM777 (from China) for $65, Winegard AP-8275 (discontinued), etc.

Good point. The Channel Master "fence panel" antenna and amp combo works well for me at a range of 70 miles. We don't see bow tie antennas at this distance.

I couldn't help but notice a few responses in the thread speaking of needing line-of-sight. Unless you have significant hills for either or both antennas (TX & RX), then it is improbable that you can attain line-of-sight at 40 miles. For example if the RX antenna is near ground level, then the TX would need to be over 1,000 feet tall, just to account for the earths curvature, i.e., no intervening hills, trees, etc. VHF signals will "follow the earth's curvature" a little, but UHF, not very much and at cell phone frequencies you are pretty line-of-sight, where cell towers are typically spaced at 5 mile intervals, such that any given tower only has to reach out 2 1/2 miles to you. Part of the low cell range is low power, design to re-use same frequency nearby & time division schemes the set max range.
When they went to digital TV, transmitter power was dropped by a factor of 10X & sometimes even more. It is possible to pull weaker digital signals out of the noise than analog, hence the power reduction. It gave the added benefit of being able to re-use the same frequency for a not too distant station & not have the two interfere with each other.
Just interesting "stuff" that I ran across & found interesting. Hope you do too.

My antenna is 275ft above Lake Huron and is lake view with no obstructions in the way west to Michigan.
Until the most recent ice storm smashed my antenna to bits. Alpena, Bad Axe, Flint, Saginaw, Lansing and occasionally Detroit or Sault Ste Marie Michigan. They could be received unless there was a rainstorm , snow, fog etc.
The signal isn't even transmitted to the east from Michigan but aimed mostly north,south and west.
The signal isn't very strong but radio waves travel rather efficiently when there are no obstructions inline.
As as there is a low noise floor without other radio signal interfering with the desired signal. A weak desired signal can still be received clearly. Signal to noise ratio is far more important than signal strength.
Many reception problems are due to signal noise and not weak signal. An analogy would be trying to converse in a noisy bar. Even when yelling into another person's ear, they can hardly hear you.
FM radio transmitters are a problem, in particular to channels 2 through 6.
Every antenna needs a mast mounted FM trap built into the amplifier.

(quoted from post at 20:20:10 06/07/14) My antenna is 275ft above Lake Huron and is lake view with no obstructions in the way west to Michigan.
Until the most recent ice storm smashed my antenna to bits. Alpena, Bad Axe, Flint, Saginaw, Lansing and occasionally Detroit or Sault Ste Marie Michigan. They could be received unless there was a rainstorm , snow, fog etc.
The signal isn't even transmitted to the east from Michigan but aimed mostly north,south and west.
The signal isn't very strong but radio waves travel rather efficiently when there are no obstructions inline.
As as there is a low noise floor without other radio signal interfering with the desired signal. A weak desired signal can still be received clearly. Signal to noise ratio is far more important than signal strength.
Many reception problems are due to signal noise and not weak signal. An analogy would be trying to converse in a noisy bar. Even when yelling into another person's ear, they can hardly hear you.
FM radio transmitters are a problem, in particular to channels 2 through 6.
Every antenna needs a mast mounted FM trap built into the amplifier.

Click to expand...

hy?! You told us that 2-6 are no longer used for TV & I believe that. S/N ratio can be improved with stronger signal and/or lower noise, so don't rule out weak signal so quickly.

It is easy enough to spend $100/month, but DirecTV has a $25/month plan (turns to $30 after a year) that would give you all sorts of crystal clear channels. It also takes a heck of a storm for satellite to be affected.

I never said channels 2 through 6 transmitters are gone. I said an antenna without elements for 2-6 works much better than an antenna with 2-6.
A ch7-51 antenna works just fine on ch2-6.
2-6 are VHF-Low and carry longer distances and with less atmospheric and ground obstruction loss than VHF and UHF in particular.

I absolutely disagree. Channel 6 here in central
NY is a very problematic channel to receive. Same
with 8 and 13. I'm referring to the actual RF
numbers and not the make-believe virtual channel
IDs. We have many mountain tops in the way.
Transmitter tower is around 60 miles from our
house. I have tried just about every antenna combo
on this planet earth. The best reception - by far
- has been with a 12 foot long low-VHF 2-6
antenna. I tried two of the largest combo 7-51
antennas and neither worked near as well as the
old 2-6 only rig. We have four antenna "farms."
Four different areas with various types of
antennas.

The best "combo" all channel antenna was a
Winegard HD8200. 14 3/4 feet long with 37 UHF
elements and 34 VHF elements. Does not get channel
6 (WRGB)near as well as the VHF low only antennas.

My best VHF low antenna is 16 feet long and was
made in Canada for Radio Shack in 1979. My next
best is a Winegard 2-6 antenna I bought last year.
10 feet long.

I have a roof-top combo antenna 15 miles from Lake
Huron and Rogers City, Michigan. 127 miles from
Saute Ste. Marie, Canada. Antenna is 850 feet above
sea level. Winegard HD8200 and 29 dB preamp.
We get many Canadian stations from Saute Ste. Marie
and other areas. Lot of CBC stuff. Mostly channels
2,3,5, and 7 from Canada. We were still getting
analog from some last year but might be gone now.
From Michigan we get . . 2,3,6,8,10,11, and 18
(these are virtual channel numbers).

With the exception of "Hockey Night in Canada". My apologizes regarding CBC programming. One of the reasons why roof tops of US bordering residences. Look like retro 1960's and 1970's with shinny new antenna systems but pointed into Michigan and NY.
Around here three local FM broadcasters have wiped out channels 2-6 even when a trap filter is used.

Ontario & Quebec only is a shorter list. iirc you are closer to the Country of Quebec than Ontario Canada ?

This is a list of broadcast television stations serving cities in the Canadian province of Ontario.[1]
Note: Due to the mandatory digital television transition on August 31, 2011, most of these stations are broadcasting in digital only.
City of licence Analog
channel Digital
channel Virtual
channel Callsign Network Note
Barrie 10 3.1 CKVR-DT CTV Two
Belleville 26 53.1 CICO-TV-53 TVO
Brighton 30 66.1 CICO-TV-53 TVO
Chatham 33 59.1 CICO-TV-59 TVO
Cloyne 44 55.1 CICO-TV-92 TVO
Cornwall 8 No CJOH-TV-8 CTV satellite of CJOH-TV ch. 13 Ottawa, formerly CJSS-TV
Hamilton 18 11.1 CHCH-DT CHCH-DT
Hamilton 36 36.1 CITS-TV CTS
Kenora 13 No CJBN-TV CTV
Kingston 11 11.1 CKWS-TV CBC
Kitchener 28 28.1 CICO-DT-28 TVO
Kitchener 13 13.1 CKCO-DT CTV
Leamington 22 22.1 CIII-TV-22 Global Licensed to Stevenson, serving Leamington and Chatham
Leamington 34 34.1 CFTV-DT community channel airs four digital subchannels (34.1, 34.2, 34.3 and 34.4), the first station in Canada to offer multiple digital subchannels, and the first low-power broadcaster/community channel in Canada to convert to digital operations.
London 10 10.1 CFPL-DT CTV Two
London 14 14.1 CITS-TV-2 CTS
London 18 18.1 CICO-TV-18 TVO
London 48 69.1 CFMT-TV-1 Omni Television
London 20 20.1 CJMT-TV-1 Omni Television
London 51 51.1 CHCH-DT-2 CHCH-TV
Midland 7 7.1 CIII-TV-7 Global satellite of CIII-TV
Muskoka 23 11.1 CHCH-DT-3 CHCH-DT
North Bay 2 2.1 CFGC-TV-2 Global satellite of CIII-TV ch. 6 Paris/Toronto
North Bay 10 No CKNY-TV CTV
North Bay 32 No CHCH-TV-6 CHCH-TV
Oil Springs/Sarnia 29 29.1 CIII-DT-29 Global satellite of CIII-TV ch. 6 Paris/Toronto
Oil Springs/Sarnia 42 No CKCO-TV-3 CTV satellite of CKCO-DT ch. 13 Kitchener
Orillia 21 No CFTO-TV-21 CTV satellite of CFTO-DT ch. 9 Toronto
Oshawa 22 48 CHEX-TV-2 CBC semi-satellite of CHEX-TV 12 Peterborough
Ottawa 25 4.1 CBOT-DT CBC
Ottawa 14 6.1 CIII-DT-6 Global
Ottawa 33 9.1 CBOFT-DT R-C
Ottawa 22 11.1 CHCH-TV-1 CHCH-DT
Ottawa 13 13.1 CJOH-DT CTV
Ottawa 20 14.1 CJMT-TV-2 Omni Television
Ottawa 24 24.1 CICO-DT-24 TVO satellite of CICA-TV ch. 19 Toronto
Ottawa 42 32.1 CITS-TV-1 CTS
Ottawa 43 43.1 CHRO-TV-2 CTV Two
Ottawa 27 60.1 CFMT-TV-2 Omni Television
Ottawa 17 65.1 CITY-TV-3 Citytv
Ottawa/Gatineau, Quebec 30 30.1 CIVO-TV T-Q satellite of CIVM-TV ch. 17 Montréal
Ottawa/Gatineau, Quebec 34 34.1 CFGS-TV V
Ottawa/Gatineau, Quebec 40 40.1 CHOT-TV TVA
Paris 6 6.1 CIII-DT Global
Pembroke 5 No CHRO-TV CTV Two
Peterborough 12 12.1 CHEX-TV CBC
Peterborough 27 27.1 CIII-TV-27 Global satellite of CIII-TV
Peterborough 35 54.1 CFTO-TV-54 CTV
Sault Ste. Marie 2 No CHBX-TV CTV
Sault Ste. Marie 12 No CIII-TV-12 Global satellite of CIII-TV ch. 41 Toronto
Sault Ste. Marie 20 No CICO-TV-20 TVOntario
Sault Ste. Marie 38 No CHCH-TV-5 CHCH-DT
Sudbury 5 No CICI-TV CTV
Sudbury 11 No CFGC-TV Global satellite of CIII-DT ch. 41 Toronto
Sudbury 25 No CHLF TFO
Sudbury 41 No CHCH-TV-4 CHCH-TV
Thunder Bay 2 2.1 CKPR-DT CBC
Thunder Bay 4 4.1 CHFD-DT CTV
Thunder Bay 9 9.1 CICO-TV-9 TVO satellite of CICA-TV ch. 19 Toronto
Timmins 3 No CITO-TV CTV
Timmins 11 No CHCH-TV-7 CHCH-DT
Timmins 13 No CIII-TV-13 Global satellite of CIII-TV
Toronto 20 5.1 CBLT CBC
Toronto 9 9.1 CFTO-DT CTV
Toronto 19 19.1 CICA-TV TVO
Toronto 25 25.1 CBLFT-DT R-C
Toronto 41 41.1 CIII-TV-41 Global satellite of CIII-TV ch. 6 Paris/Toronto
Toronto 47 47.1 CFMT-DT Omni Television
Toronto 44 57.1 CITY-DT Citytv
Toronto 40 69.1 CJMT-DT Omni Television
Wheatley 16 16.1 CHWI-DT CTV Two Broadcasts from Stevenson, northeast of Wheatley, serving Chatham–Kent, Leamington, and Essex County
Windsor 9 9.1 CBET-DT CBC Broadcasts from McGregor, Ontario
Windsor 32 32.1 CICO-TV-32 TVO Broadcasts from McGregor, Ontario
Windsor 26 26.1 CHWI-TV-60 CTV Two Broadcasts from Victoria Park Place apartment tower, in Downtown Windsor
Wingham 8 No CKNX-TV CTV Two
Woodstock 31 31 31.1 CITY-DT-2 CITY-DT

Quebec

This is a list of broadcast television stations serving cities in the Canadian province of Quebec.[1] Digital channels as of November 2011.
City of licence Analog
channel Digital
channel Virtual
channel Callsign Network Notes
Baie-Comeau 9 9.1 CFTF-DT-5 V
Baie-Saint-Paul 13 13.1 CIMT-DT-4 TVA
Baie-Saint-Paul 26 26.1 CFTF-DT-10 V
Baie-Saint-Paul 36 2.1 CKRT-DT-1 R-C
Baie-Trinité 12 12.1 CIVF-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Cabano 12 12.1 CFTF-DT-3 V
Cabano 21 5.1 CKRT-DT-4 R-C
Cabano 23 3.1 CIMT-DT-8 TVA
Carleton 44 44.1 CFTF-DT-11 V
Carleton 5 5.1 CHAU-DT TVA
Carleton 15 15.1 CIVK-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Chandler 26 6.1 CHAU-DT-4 TVA
Chapeau 23 23.1 CIVP-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Chicoutimi 46 6.1 CJPM-DT TVA Saguenay
Cloridorme 11 11.1 CHAU-DT-8 TVA
Dégelis 25 2.1 CKRT-DT-2 R-C
Forestville 4 4.1 CFTF-DT-4 V
Gascons 32 32.1 CIVK-DT-1 T-Q
Gaspé 34 35.1 CIVK-DT-3 T-Q
Gaspé 30 58.1 CFTF-DT-9 V
Gaspé 7 7.1 CHAU-DT-6 TVA
Gatineau 30 30.1 CIVO-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-TV Montreal
Gatineau 34 34.1 CFGS-DT V
Gatineau 40 40.1 CHOT-DT TVA
Grand-Fonds 31 31.1 CIVB-DT-1 T-Q
L'Anse-a-Valleau, 12 12.1 CHAU-DT-9 TVA
Les Escoumins 33 33.1 CFTF-DT-8 V
Les Escoumins 35 57.1 CIMT-DT-7 TVA
Montreal 10 10.1 CFTM-DT TVA
Montreal 12 12.1 CFCF-DT CTV
Montreal 19 2.1 CBFT-DT R-C
Montreal 21 6.1 CBMT-DT CBC
Montreal 26 17.1 CIVM-DT T-Q
Montreal 29 29.1 CFTU-DT Ind.
Montreal 35 35.1 CFJP-DT V
Montreal 15 15.1 CKMI-DT-1 Global satellite of CKMI-TV Quebec City
Montreal 49 62.1 CJNT-DT Independent station
Parent 15 CH4458 V
Percé 40 40.1 CIVK-DT-2 T-Q
Percé 13 13.1 CHAU-DT-5 TVA
Port-Daniel 10 10.1 CHAU-DT-3 TVA
Quebec City 39 2.1 CFAP-DT V
Quebec City 17 4.1 CFCM-DT TVA
Quebec City 12 11.1 CBVT-DT R-C
Quebec City 25 15.1 CIVQ-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-TV ch. 17 Montreal
Quebec City 20 20.1 CKMI-DT Global
Quebec City 9 CHMG-TV Independent station
Radisson 13 CJBJ-TV V
Rimouski 45 2.1 CJBR-DT R-C
Rimouski 11 CFER-TV TVA
Rimouski 18 CJPC-TV V
Rimouski 22 22.1 CIVB-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Rivière-au-Renard 4 4.1 CHAU-DT-7 TVA
Rivière-du-Loup 41 6.1 CIMT-DT-6 TVA LPTV repeater serving a dead zone in channel 9's reception area
Rivière-du-Loup 7 7.1 CKRT-DT R-C
Rivière-du-Loup 9 9.1 CIMT-DT TVA
Rivière-du-Loup 11 11.1 CFTF-DT-6 V LPTV repeater serving a dead zone in channel 29's reception area
Rivière-du-Loup 13 13.1 CKRT-DT-3 R-C LPTV repeater serving a dead zone in channel 7's reception area
Rivière-du-Loup 29 29.1 CFTF-DT V
Roberval 10 CJPM-TV-1 TVA
Rouyn-Noranda 9 4.1 CKRN-DT R-C
Rouyn-Noranda 8 8.1 CIVA-DT-1 T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Rouyn-Noranda 13 13.1 CFEM-DT TVA
Rouyn-Noranda 20 20.1 CFVS-DT-1 V satellite of CFVS-DT Val-d'Or
Saguenay 13 4.1 CFRS-DT V
Saguenay 46 6.1 CJPM-DT TVA
Saguenay 8 8.1 CIVV-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Saguenay 12 12.1 CKTV-DT R-C
Saint-Urbain 38 5.1 CIMT-DT-5 TVA
Sainte-Marguerite-Marie 3 3.1 CHAU-DT-1 TVA
Sept-Îles 5 CFER-TV-2 TVA satellite of CFER-TV ch. 11 Rimouski
Sept-Îles 7 7.1 CFTF-DT-7 V
Sept-Îles 9 9.1 CIVG-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Sherbrooke 7 7.1 CHLT-DT TVA
Sherbrooke 9 9.1 CKSH-DT R-C
Sherbrooke 11 11.1 CKMI-DT-2 Global
Sherbrooke 24 24.1 CIVS-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Sherbrooke 30 30.1 CFKS-DT V
Trois-Pistoles 19 5.1 CKRT-DT-6 R-C
Trois-Pistoles 13 13.1 CIMT-DT-2 TVA
Trois-Pistoles 17 17.1 CFTF-DT-2 V
Trois-Rivières 8 8.1 CHEM-DT TVA
Trois-Rivières 28 13.1 CKTM-DT R-C
Trois-Rivières 34 16.1 CFKM-DT V
Trois-Rivières 45 45.1 CIVC-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Val-d'Or 7 7.1 CJDG-DT R-C satellite of CKRN-DT Rouyn-Noranda
Val-d'Or 10 10.1 CFEM-DT-1 TVA satellite of CFEM-DT Rouyn-Noranda
Val-d'Or 12 12.1 CIVA-DT T-Q satellite of CIVM-DT Montreal
Val-d'Or 25 25.1 CFVS-DT V

What are the current better performing new TV antennas on the current market. In 2-51 and 7-51?
One of these days there is a new antenna and amp going to my tower.

As far as I know - this is no ONE antenna that
gets all the channels the best. There will always
be a few that would have more signal strength on a
different antenna. The Winegard HD8200 is one of
the best comprises. But - some smaller special
tuned and "stacked" antennas seem to beat it.
That is "Dennys HD Stacker." I've been thinking
about trying one. If you go to the link - you can
find some interested test trials where it is
compared to other leading antennas. "Stacking" is
taking two identical antennas and hooking together
in phase. If done right - stacking can do some
amazing things. If just a little out of phase and
the two work worse then just one alone. Denny's
antenna is two non-identical units on top of each
other and tests show it works great. Read the
following test results on various frequencies.

http://dennysantennaservice.com/best-tv-
antenna.html

Thanks JDe

excellent link and data.