It’s O’HARE Airport not O’Hara.Recheck Your typeo’s.3rd column Since done of them,Should be none of them.

Thanks Ed.:-)

Ron, an antenna for HD is nothing more than a UHF antenna. For the best picture I would suggest an outdoor antenna, even at 15 miles. You will probably be able to get reception with an indoor model, but the reception won’t fade [pixelate, or worse] with the stronger signal from an outdoor antenna. I’m not sure of any model numbers, but I’d suggest a UHF yagi or log periodic made by Winegard. I have never had any problems with Winegard antennas, over 30 years.

Hi Marc,
This is what I heard as well that the antenna is just a standard old TV antenna. Also thanks for the suggestion about the outdoor model. I’ve also given that some thought as well.

After I wrote this article my wife came home from Wally-World [Wal-Mart] with guess what? A indoor antenna I had look at over at Circuit City that was the same make and brand but $5 cheaper. So I’ll give it a try.

Thanks for the great info.

Ron

Ron,

I live about 35 miles or so from downtown Chicago, where all the TV stations broadcast from. I tried using an indoor antenna to receive HDTV and it actually worked somewhat from this distance. However, I eventually decided to put up a big roof-top antenna with a rotor. Now I can get ALL the Digital/HDTV channels from Chicago very clearly. And if I rotate my antenna around, I can even pick up channels from Indiana, Rockford and Milwaukee!

Let us know how you do with the indoor antenna your wife got.

Rick

Before I bought a HDTV I had installed a DB2 UHF antenna (from antennasdirect.com) to receive UHF from 2 local broadcasters. When I got the HDTV I hooked it up to the same antenna and I immediately got 4 channels of crystal clear HDTV (1 channel from 1 broadcaster and 3 from the other). This antenna is an outdoor one that I mounted in my attic.

My understanding is that even if you get HD from cable it’s compressed and doesn’t look as good as HD over the air, which doesn’t get compressed.

I think a decent antenna is the way to go!

Ron,
I’m sure you’re aware that there’s no such thing as an “HDTV antenna” (although lots of retailers would like customers to thiink so!). Almost all HD stations currently broadcast on UHF channels, so any decent UHF antenna shoujld rope them in. If you can get even a reasonable picture on analog UHF channels, you should be able to pull in the digitals as well. Since digital signals are a binary “you either get it or you don’t” proposition, you may actually find that an indoor antenna works great for digital even if analog UHF channels were a bit snowy or ghosted. But be aware that when analog signals end in 2009, some stations plan to move their digital signals from UHF back to their existing VHF slots — so you’d need a VHF/UHF antenna at that point.

If you’re only 15 miles from the towers, you may well be able to get away with an indoor antenna. Popular choices include Terk (made by Audiovox), which offers secveral models. Another one I often hear about is the Zenith Silver Sensor. It’s worth trying one of these, as long as you can return it if it doesn’t work out for you.

The best choice, though, is still an outdoor antenna. To get a great idea of what you’ll need, go to http://www.antennaweb.org. Enter your address, and you’ll get a visual plot of all the transmitter towers and the type of antenna needed to receive them. This also gives you a good clue as to whether an indoor antenna will be enough.

If you’re fairly close-in, a compromise worth trying is to mount an outdoor antenna in the attic. Although you lose some strength that way, it often works very well. I live about 40 miles from the towers, but am lucky in that all of them lie in basically the same direction so no rotor is needed. I just hung a big Radio Shack VHF/UHF outdoor antenna in my attic with ropes, and found that I get perfect reception on every analog and digital station in the area. If that doesn’t work, you can always invest the extra work to mount it outside.

Note that even if you can get your local HD stations via cable or satellite, most people get better quality when receiving them directly off-air due to all the compression and signal processing that cable or satellite use. My off-air digital networks are visibly sharper than watching the same local HD stations via my Dish Network setup. So an off-air antenna is a good investment regardless of other alternatives — and it never goes out in a storm!

Rob

Hello Rick and Marc,
The indoor antenna was a flop! I received several channels, but only one had HD which was spotty. This antenna was the Phillips w/ 50db amp in case anyone is interested. I took it back.

Thanks for the info. on using an outdoor antenna. That I can see is the way to go.

Rumor. I got this from two people at opposite sides of the coast. Direct TV is going to be offering 150 HD channels. Anyone else hear about this??????

Regards, Ron

Hello Rob V.,
Thanks for taking the time to provide me with all of the great information. As you can read above, the indoor flopped. I’ll be taking everyones suggestion about the outdoor and even consider placing in my attic as well. Also thanks for the links. I really appreciate all of the great info. Thanks so much.
Ron

Ron,
It’s more than a rumor. DirecTV (D*) and Dish (E*) have been battling for some time about HD leadership. For some time, E* has been clearly in the lead and now offers 39 national HD channels. But D* recently launched a new bird, and that’s the basis for their claims of 100 HD channels (I hadn’t heard “150″ but who knows?) Supposedly, many of these new D* channels are to come online sometime in September.

Frankly, it’s all in how you count an “HD channel”. Of the new channels that D* has announced, many don’t even offer an HD feed yet. Others will do so soon, but for the foreseeable future will just be running upconverted standard-def programming. And still others are channels you won’t get unless you subscribe to extra-cost premium services. Meanwhile, E* is not going to be sitting idle either - these two companies are very competitive, so I think it’s safe to assume that whatever one does will soon be answered by the other. Most people continue to choose D* or E* based on the programmimg choices and price, because HD offerings will follow in both cases.

Whichever you choose, the satellite services continue to offer a lot more HD than the cable companies.

If you want to read more info about all this than you ever cared to know, the ‘HD Programming’ threads on http://avsforum.com are the answer!
Rob

Hi Rob V.,
Again, thanks for the information. I smell Direct TV in my future.
I was at Circuit City today looking at a 50″ Samsung Plasma TV. The picture looks like it is almost painted onto the screen.

What do you think of Plasma vs DLP ? All advice will be appreciated.

Regards, Ron .
PS Thanks for the link as well.

Ron,
I have two HD sets: an older 61″ Samsung 720p DLP set, and a brand-new Sharp 42″ 1080p LCD. Plasma sets are reputed to offer the best images, primarily because they can produce deeper blacks than DLP or LCD. However, plasma also has disadvantages. Most notable is that, like CRTs, they are susceptible to ‘burn-in’ if a static image is left on the display for an extended period. This can be a big issue when you watch standard-def 4:3 programming, because you’ll have the black sidebars to fill in the 16:9 screen. These bars are always on the screen, so you can develop permanent burn-in to the point that the sidebars are still visible even when watching widescreen HD programs. Many plasma owners try to avoid this by using the ’stretch’ options to expand 4:3 programming to fill the entire screen, or by drastically reducing brightness. Personally, I hate stretching because it distorts the image so much. I prefer to watch everything in its original aspect ratio, and at whatever brightness I like, without having to worry about burn-in.

DLP and LCD aren’t affected by ‘burn-in’, and also tend to offer brighter images that ‘pop’ more - especially if you’re in a brightly-lit room. And new LCD and DLP sets now offer improved black levels that come very close to plasma, as well as very good viewing even when you’re well off-axis. As a result, LCD in particular now outsells plasma, and I think that the shift away from plasma will continue.

A good DLP set is a great bargain as long as you don’t need the “hang it on the wall” thinness of LCD. Current DLP sets can deliver very good black levels with excellent brightness/sharpness, and are far less expensive than plasma for equivalent screen sizes (check out prices for a 60″+ plasma vs. DLP!).

If you go for anything 50″ or more, I’d suggest comparing standard 720p HD sets with the new 1080p “full HD” models. These provide much higher resolution, especially iwth Blu-Ray or HD-DVD discs, and the difference can be noticeable at larger screen sizes (although they are also more expensive, of course).

My 2003-vintage Samsung DLP was literally one of the very first DLPs ever manufactured. Yet I have never had one bit of trouble with it, and it still delivers the same awesome image as the day I got it.

The AVS Forum proivdes a ton of opinions and knowledge about specific sets and the whole plasma/LCD/DLP question in general. There are separate threads for most of the popular models, so if you find one that you’re thinking of buying, it’s a great place to spend some time reading and learning before you jump.

If you have any other questions, feel free to ask…
Rob

Hello Rov V.,
Thanks once again for the information.

I do have a few questions for you:

On the new plasma TV’s they now have some type of a degausser [for lack of a better term] that removes a brunt in image. Have you heard of this? I also read by turning off the set on some models for 36 hours also removes the image.

The new DLP’s now come with a LED lighting source that has replaced the bulb that needs to be replaced ever few years. What is your opinion of LED vs replacement bulbs? Is the picture quality still the same?

Finally what is your opinion about the Vizio brand? This is the only brand of big screen that is actually being put together here in the US by a Southern California company. From the reviews that I have read, they are receiving very high marks in quality and performance. Plus their pricing is ’sweet’.

Thanks for your time, Ron

Ron,
The issue of burn-in on plasma and CRT sets is one of great debate. There are actually two phases of burn-in. The milder case is usually called “ghosting”, and can usually be removed with facilities built into the set like you describe. The more worrisome case is permanent burn-in, which cannot be removed and can definitely still occur with plasma — no matter what the salesperson says.

Despite improvements in newer plasma displays, most experts still suggest that plasma owners not watch 4:3 material with the sidebars for extended periods of time, but instead stretch the image to fill the screen. You should also avoid video games or computer displays which have large static areas. They will also tell you that the brightness and contrast should be turned way down, which helps avoid the premature aging of the phosphors that causes burn-in. However, many people will find these “proper” settings too dim for their tastes unless they’[re watching in a completely dark room.

If you’re careful and keep the brightness down, you likely won’t have any permanent problems. But why take the risk at all, when there are LCD and DLP technologies that aren’t susceptible to burn-in at all? Several years ago, plasma images were clearly superior to LCD so it might have been worth taking on the risks. But today, LCD and DLP have advanced to the point that it is very hard for most people to see any difference vs. plasma. And as I said, I like to be able to display 4:3 material all day long and at full brightness without any worries. Note that burn-in is NOT covered by warranties, either.

LED light-sourced DLP is a pretty new technology. The biggest advantage is that it eliminates the high-speed spinning color wheel used in conventional DLP sets, which is reason some people see “rainbows” when viewing a DLP. The LED light engine also lasts longer than a bulb and has a quicker start-up time. But reviews I’ve read for some of the early LED DLPs also point out some flaws with this first-generation technology. And because it’s so new, LED DLPs are much more expensive than their conventional counterparts. My opinion: Unless you’re one of those who see bad rainbows with DLP (and you’ll know that quickly), I don’t think the LED technology is worth the extra cost and other compromises right now. This will likely change over the next couple years as the technology matures and costs fall, but not right away.

Re. Vizio, you’ve summarized it very well. Vizio gives great ‘bang for the buck’ by offering amazing quiality for the money. They’re also known for good customer support, in part because they need to build their reputation vs. more established brands. Sold mostly at Costco and Sam’s Club, Vizio is a very good “tier-two” set. Most people put Samsung, Sony, and Sharp in the top tier of mass-market sets (ignoring more expensive high-end sets like the Pioneer Elite). Falling below those brands, the second tier usually includes Vizio, Philips, Westinghouse, Olevia, etc. The average viewer will be hard-pressed to see any visible difference between Vizio and one of the top-tier sets, but true videophiles will definitely see them.

In fact, as I type this, I have both a 42″ Vizio LCD and a 42″ Sharp set up side-by-side in my home. After comparing them closely for a couple weeks, I’ve decided that the Vizio will be going back to Costco. I find that the Sharp delivers a slightly better picture, especially in terms of black levels. But I must admit that the Vizio comes darn close, and even has some nice features (like PIP, and onscreen program info from off-air digital channels) that the Sharp does not. So I’d strongly consider looking closely at the Vizio, and if the image quality makes you happy, buy it — enjoy the money you saved, and don’t look back. (The only reason I’m even comparing the Vizio and Sharp is that huge discounts on the Sharp brought its price down to be almost identical to the Vizio. Otherwise, I’d have a real tough time justifying the big price difference for the Sharp.)

Rob

Hello Rob,
Thanks once again for the great information and for your advice. It is very much appreciated. Your concise explanation is better than anything else I have found on the web. Have you given any thought to having a blog? Most people who are looking for a new big screen could use this information.

Oh yeah. My wife Jackie thanks you as well. I think she was getting tired of listening to me about LCD, DLP and Plasma! LOL

Thanks again, Ron

Heh Rob,
Just when I thought I really was getting a handle on all of this, my neighbor threw in a ringer. He has a Panasonic Projection LCD. He says that his has a bulb that needs to be replaced just like a DLP set. I didn’t think LCD had bulbs. Do you know anything about this set?

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-PT-52LCX66-Rear-Projection-HDTV/dp/B000FX2XVG

Amazon’s price is $898 plus $48 shipping. It is a older 720P.

I would appreciate your opinion. Bulbs are $233 from Panasonic to replace.

Deal or no deal?

Thanks, Ron

Ron,
Sorry I didn’t mention LCD RP (rear-projection) sets. This technology has been around awhile - Sony came to market with some of the first LCD RP sets at almost the same time as Samsung released the first consumer DLPs (in fact, my Samsung 61″ was one of the very first DLPs available). Both types of RP sets use similar bulbs. At the risk of generalizing, most people think that DLP RP delivers a better picture than LCD RP (again, black levels in particular) — and the relative lack of market success for LCD RP compared to DLP would appear to confirm this.

As far as the Panasonic goes, I’d personally run, not walk. Panasonic had an incredible number of problems with early models of their LCD RP sets, especially with premature bulb failures (some bulbs were actually exploding!). The problems were so bad and so widespread that in 2006 Panasonic lost a class-action lawsuit brought by buyers of these TVs - as I recall, they had to provide free replacement TVs to people who had experienced 3 or more failures.

Panasonic recently rolled out a line of new LIFI sets — basically, these are LCD RP that use a Lumix LIFI bulb that’s supposed to last much longer than conventional bulbs. I haven’t seen one, but the few early reports I’ve read say that the picture is disappointing compared to DLP. Panasonic has already stopped producing DLP sets, and it’s rumored that the LCD sets won’t be far behind. They appear to be focusing mostly on plasma and LCD flat-panel displays at this point.

So I stick to my original thoughts: I’d go with an LCD flat-panel if you need the slim form factor and/or sizes of around 50″ or less; and conventional DLP RP if you want larger screen sizes in the 60-70″ range. There are also plasma sets in those larger sizes, but DLP is much less expensive unless you have an unlimited budget (don’t we all wish!). And if you’re looking at sizes much above 42″, I’d consider 1080p models vs. 720p as the increased resolution is more noticeable as screen size gets larger.

I wouldn’t be overly concerned about lamps (the Panasonic excepted!). Prices of lamps have fallen — most now cost between $100-200, and you can easily change them yourself. They have long lifespans, too — as I said, my 2003-vintage Samsung DLP is still on its original lamp and going strong.

Hope this helps!
Rob

Hi Rob,
Once again, thanks so much for the info. Especially about the info. about the Panasonic. YIPES! The last thing I want is a problematic TV set.

The wife and I are going shopping tomorrow for a look see. I printed out your spec’s to take with us.

Have a great weekend. Ron

the 360 does not send out 1080p signal from hd=dvds since it can’t even play them does not even support 1080p for games its a piece of crap

The 360 supports 720p minimum for ALL 360 games, with 1080i optional, so what you post is true. However, most people can’t see the difference between 720p, 1080i, and 1080p (read any of the several HDTV entries at this site). And while the console itself can’t play HD DVD, the $200 addon definitely does, and it also can do so at 1080p.

This leads me to ask, what does the only other really comparable console offer? (PS3)

I just bought 2 Samsung HDTV LCDs (4061 and 4665) after months of research. There is a distinct difference in viewing quality between these 2 Samsung models and the 2nd tier manufacturers. Combined with holiday sales and internet discounts, both sets were very competitively priced. There’s a reason why Consumer Reports ranked the 4061 #1 - just take a look at it in a side by side comparison! For me, LCD won hands down against plasma, rear projection, etc. Sports are not a problem (motion blur was not evident) and I like the 3 HDMI inuts, PIP, PC capable, etc. that come with the Samsung.