HR20 OTA - No Signal

[dbassman]

I know this is long, but I wanted to try to give as much detail as I could.

I have DTV HiDef, two receivers an HR20-700, and a H20-100 & a SlimLine Dish.

I get the locals from DirecTV, but only in standard mode, not HiDef. An indoor antenna wasn't practical as I turn my TV and the rabbit ears would get in the way. So I purchased an outdoor antenna, from dennysantennaservice.com (Highly Recommended). I had a friend install it and for some reason, cannot get any reception from it on my HR20-700.

I checked signal strength and it's VERY intermittent/Non-existant, I'll sometimes pick up a signal for just a few seconds, and when I get a signal its strong, anywhere from 78% to 100%, but 99% of the time it just shows:
Tuner 1: Not Aquired
Tuner 2: Not Aquired

I live in South Bend Indiana and am mainly interested in getting my locals in HiDef through the HR20-700 and H20-100 receivers. All of the channels in my market are UHF, the channel numbers are: (16, 22, 28, 34, 46, 57 and 69). I purchased the antenna that Denny recommended and also ran all-new solid copper coax cable. The antenna is mounted at the peak of my room, which faces South and faced the antenna Southeast (also recommended by Denny). I ran cable down the corner of the outside of the house and into my room (approx 25 feet), put a compression fitting on it, and attached it to a splitter, then made & ran a new cable approximately 8 feet to my HR20 receiver and the other wire is approximately 80 feet and connected to the H20.

This is the strange thing, the H20 is the furthest from the antenna (approximately 100 feet), yet it gets a signal well enough for every channel. When I viewed the signal strength on the H20 it averages between 43% and 58%, but the picture shows good on all channels, but with some minor pixelization. Another thing is the H20 lists channel 57-1, which is our local ABC affiliate, but the HR20 does not show 57-1. Another strange thing is channel 69 does not show on either receiver & DTV does not have it in our locals line-up either, so the only way I can get it is by antenna direct to TV, which I'm trying to avoid.

I tried hooking the antenna directly to the TV in my room before the splitter and also after the splitter and was able to get all of the HiDef channels. I did the same in my front room, after the splitter & was able to get all of the HiDef channels with no pixelization.

When my friend first installed the antenna, he forgot to ground it, but came back today to do that. I was hoping it would make some difference, and I think the signal may have gotten a tad stronger, but not a lot. Since I ruled out everything it seems as if it's the OTA tuners or software in my HR20.

A quick recap of the problems... I have two receivers an HR20-700, and a H20-100.:
The H20 despite being the furthest from the antenna, gets the best, but not perfect signal.
The HR20 gets NO signal.
The H20 gets channel 57-1 (ABC-HD), where the HR20 does not.
Neither receivers gets channel 69, I don't think their broadcasting in HD or even SD yet. It's just a local programming, but my Mom & Dad like it as they show a lot of old re-runs.

Thought I'd list all the channels w/ locations. Channel 69 is not HD yet, not even sure they're SD. All the rest have HD & SD signals.
WBND-LP (Channel 57; SOUTH BEND, IN; Owner: WBND-TV LIMITED PARTNERSHIP)
WSBT-TV (Channel 22; SOUTH BEND, IN; Owner: WSBT, INC.)
WNDU-TV (Channel 16; SOUTH BEND, IN; Owner: MICHIANA TELECASTING CORP.)
WSJV (Channel 28; ELKHART, IN; Owner: WSJV TELEVISION, INC.)
WNIT (Channel 34; SOUTH BEND, IN; Owner: MICHIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING CORPORATION)
WMWB-LP (Channel 25; SOUTH BEND, IN; Owner: WMWB-TV LIMITED PARTNERSHIP)
WHME-TV (Channel 46; SOUTH BEND, IN; Owner: LESEA BROADCASTING CORPORATION)
WRDY-LP (Channel 69; SOUTH BEND, IN; Owner: WEIGEL BROADCASTING COMPANY)

I'm a quadriplegic and can't afford to spend too much money on this, I already have over $100 in the antenna, new solid copper coax cable & install.
I'm writing to ask if anyone else has had a similar problem.
If so, what have you done to fix it?
Why does the H20 work better than the HR20 w/ OTA?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

[K4SMX]

Your OTA signals are not strong enough to be received by the HR20. The H20 has a much more sensitive OTA receiver. The OTA tuners in the HR20 are older, 3rd generation tuners. Additionally, there is an internal splitter inside the HR20 to feed each of its OTA tuners separately, so there is an additional 3 db loss before you even get to the HR20 tuners.

You will need a bigger OTA UHF-only antenna and possibly an antenna amplifier as well, such as the Channel Master 7777. You could try the antenna amplifier with your current antenna, but I am not hopeful. Any way to get your antenna higher, and has someone actually turned the antenna while observing the signal strengths at the receiver on your most important channels?

BTW, neither the H20 nor the HR20 will receive anything but HD OTA signals. If you want to receive SD stations, you'll have to have a 3-way splitter in the antenna line: one for the H20, one for the HR20, and one to the TV set antenna input for watching the SD OTA channels. Also, you'll find that most TV's of recent manufacture have better HD tuners than the HR20, and perhaps the H20-100.

[Beckzilla]

dbassman, I live in Granger and have the same problems. The reason the HR20 will not receive 57.1 or 25.1 is because these 2 stations do not have their PCIP data set properly and therefore their guide data does not broadcast right and the HR20 will not receive them. This is well documented in other OTA threads. BTW..channel 69.1 is alive and well. I get it on both of my Sony HD TV's.

[NR4P]

PSIP data aside on two of the channels, any chance you can get that antenna outside? You will gain a tremendous improvement in signal. And the 7777 amplifier recommended by K4SMX is terrific. That mounted next to the antenna outside will boost your signals remarkably!

[K4SMX]

Actually, I think his antenna is already outside the way I read the post. I think he's saying the peak of the roof above the "room," with cable running "outside," etc.

[Smuuth]

Originally Posted by K4SMX

BTW, neither the H20 nor the HR20 will receive anything but HD OTA signals. If you want to receive SD stations, you'll have to have a 3-way splitter in the antenna line: one for the H20, one for the HR20, and one to the TV set antenna input for watching the SD OTA channels.

This statement is incorrect. The OTA tuners will receive both HD and SD signals as long as they are ATSC digital signals. The tuners will not receive NTSC analog signals.

[texasbrit]

dbassman - Two important pieces of information you don't give us - what's your zip code, and what sort of antenna do you have?
If the H20 gives you signal strengths in the 43-58 range than you are really struggling to get a decent signal and I am not surprised the HR20 does not give you good OTA reception. Those sort of signal strengths are an indication you need a better antenna probably plus a preamp as K4SMX mentioned.

[K4SMX]

Originally Posted by Smuuth

This statement is incorrect. The OTA tuners will receive both HD and SD signals as long as they are ATSC digital signals. The tuners will not receive NTSC analog signals.

Nice catch, Smuuth. Sometimes I get a little sloppy! Yes, you can watch all the SD digital TV you want on the D* advanced receivers, and there's still plenty of it. You can't watch that CH 69 yet, though, if their ATSC transmitter is not yet on-the-air.

[JDP127]

I have the same problem and used the same trouble shooting steps to conclude, what I feel, is a problem with the HR20. I hooked the antenna to the TV and also the HD-Tivo and got my locals but not with the HR-20. It all started after the last update. I've reset.. refreshed my services, performed antenna setup and even forced the download of the latest update again and was not able to recover my channels. Also when I do a system test I randomly Off-Air 1 or Off-Air-2 fail... alternating between test or both are marked as fail. Directv says not their problem. So I'm stumped.

[jwd45244]

The HR20 OTA tuner are much more susceptible to multi-pathing. The 1B4 had some OTA issues that may have it worse. The fact that your TV and other tuners are getting it does not mean all that much. Make sure your antenna is pointed correctly. Try http://www.tvfool.com/ go through the analysis there (include your antenna height. This will give you much better data for pointing than antennaweb.org. Note that tvfool the azimuths are relative to true north so you will have to adjust your offset for a compass to work.

[hasan]

Originally Posted by jwd45244

Try http://www.tvfool.com/ go through the analysis there (include your antenna height. This will give you much better data for pointing than antennaweb.org. Note that tvfool the azimuths are relative to true north so you will have to adjust your offset for a compass to work.

Thanks for the tip on this excellent tool. The only beef I have with it is they do not allow specifying true location...just city/zip code, and that is really inadequate for the nice analysis they are doing. They have the topo tables and the math right, but need to allow specifying the lat/lon of the receiver.

If you are lucky enough to be in the target city of the zip code, you are pretty well set. If, on the other hand, you are 3.6 miles out in the country in a completely different topography, then some gross inaccuracies are going to be suffered.

Nevertheless, it is a much more robust analysis tool overall, than antennaweb.org. I particularly like the ability to compare the predicted performance of VHF vs UHF...as several of our UHF HD stations are going back to VHF in Feb 2009. Before I looked at the data generated by this analysis, I was a bit worried. I no longer am. Thanks for the pointer!

[jwd45244]

Originally Posted by hasan

Thanks for the tip on this excellent tool. The only beef I have with it is they do not allow specifying true location...just city/zip code, and that is really inadequate for the nice analysis they are doing. They have the topo tables and the math right, but need to allow specifying the lat/lon of the receiver.

If you are lucky enough to be in the target city of the zip code, you are pretty well set. If, on the other hand, you are 3.6 miles out in the country in a completely different topography, then some gross inaccuracies are going to be suffered.

Nevertheless, it is a much more robust analysis tool overall, than antennaweb.org. I particularly like the ability to compare the predicted performance of VHF vs UHF...as several of our UHF HD stations are going back to VHF in Feb 2009. Before I looked at the data generated by this analysis, I was a bit worried. I no longer am. Thanks for the pointer!

You can put in the address. I do it all the time. Try this: http://www.tvfool.com/index.php?opti...pper&Itemid=29

[hasan]

Originally Posted by jwd45244

You can put in the address. I do it all the time. Try this: http://www.tvfool.com/index.php?opti...pper&Itemid=29

Duh! I don't know how I missed it.

Interestingly all the VHF stations are 5 to 8 dB stronger than their UHF counterparts. In one particular case: WOI-TV the results are quite peculiar

Ch 5 VHF Power 100 KW: Predicted Signal: -42.2 dBm
Ch5-1 UHF Ch 59, 1000 Kw: Predicted Signal: -50.7 dBm

The UHF transmitter is running 10 dB more power than the VHF.
All transmitters are co-located at the same complex and on similar height towers.

Certainly path loss at UHF is quite a bit more than low VHF, but 18 dB? With 10 dB more transmit power and a predicted advantage from the calcs of 8.5 dB, that makes 18.5 dB. That is just short of a 100:1 advantage. Hmmmm.....

Even if the path losses were 10 dB greater, that is made up for by 10 dB more transmit power at UHF. I'm going to have to dig out my old references on path loss vs. frequency.

I'm dumbstruck. In fact, I don't believe it, unless there is something particularly "odd" about their transmitting antennas (and in all our local discussion, I've heard nothing of that sort of thing). I've worked with RF for most of my life, very extensively in the areas of vhf/uhf propagation, antennas. low loss coaxial transmission lines and low noise preamps....many of which are in the same frequency ranges we are currently looking at ....and I've never seen anything so obviously "off". There must be an explanation for it, that is just not occurring to me at the moment.

On the positive side, the relative strengths of the stations are "within limits" reasonably accurate..although ch 5-1 currently is running at somewhat reduced power....and I have no absolute measure of strength, just the BER (bit-error-rate).

You've given me something to chew on for quite a while. Thanks so much for pointing me to this site, and catching my miss of lat/lon. Now it's on to my reference books and the scientific calculator.

Here is one data point that does agree:

KDSM on Analog UHF 17
KDSM on Digital UHF 16 is running 1/7th the power of the analog, and it shows up about 8 dB weaker, as it should.

Similar frequencies, so path loss is the same (close), so the only relationship left is power. (assuming similar antennas, which I can't verify at this point) At least in this case, the prediction makes sense. I still have to work through the Channel 5 example above to see if I can explain it to myself.

[Kansas Zephyr]

Originally Posted by hasan

I've worked with RF for most of my life, very extensively in the areas of vhf/uhf propagation,

Isn't part of it that the UHF is more line of sight, and the VHF will slightly "curve" downward, due to the increased atmospheric density, the lower to the ground you go? The higher the frequency the less atmospheric "bending" occurs, right? So, with distance, the curvature of the Earth degrades UHF more over VHF, at the same reception height.

Could that be part of it?

[hasan]

Originally Posted by Kansas Zephyr

Isn't part of it that the UHF is more line of sight, and the VHF will slightly "curve" downward, due to the increased atmospheric density, the lower to the ground you go? The higher the frequency the less atmospheric "bending" occurs, right? So, with distance, the curvature of the Earth degrades UHF more over VHF, at the same reception height.

Could that be part of it?

Nope, it's actually the opposite ....there is more tropospheric "bending"/"refracting" on UHF than on VHF. More efficient ducts form on UHF than VHF. They are quite rare, for example below 30 Mhz...even at 50 Mhz they are not common. On 144 Mhz and above, they are notorious!

[Kansas Zephyr]

Originally Posted by hasan

Nope, it's actually the opposite ....there is more tropospheric "bending"/"refracting" on UHF than on VHF. More efficient ducts form on UHF than VHF. They are quite rare, for example below 30 Mhz...even at 50 Mhz they are not common. On 144 Mhz and above, they are notorious!

I'm talking about transmission through a "standard" atmosphere, not during ducting conditions.

[hasan]

Originally Posted by Kansas Zephyr

I'm talking about transmission through a "standard" atmosphere, not during ducting conditions.

For bending to take place, there has to be a discontinuity. Any discontinuity will affect UHF more than VHF. Similarly, forward scattering requires a "scatter volume" and discontinuities in the scatter volume are more effective at UHF than VHF.

Anywho, I don't want to go on about this in this thread...it doesn't much address the OP's original intent and I don't want to further hijack his thread.

I do appreciate your interest and comments and will look into my reference manuals to see if there is something akin to what you are describing....although it could be a bit hard to separate out in a "real" atmosphere.

[jwd45244]

Again, I was trying to point folks to a better antenna aiming guide (www.tvfool.com) than antennaweb.org. That is all.

[K4SMX]

Originally Posted by hasan

Thanks for the tip on this excellent tool........ Thanks for the pointer!

tvfool.com - Aptly named for all of us! It shouldn't be too long before an OTA presentation application is available similar to dishpointer.com which combines 3-D topographical info with the exact location of the user and all the local NTSC and ATSC transmitters. This will be a great benefit to new OTA enthusiasts. Until then, the rule-of-thumb for OTA is: put up the biggest OTA antenna you can (which passes the WAF!) as high in the air as you can get it, plus RG-11A/U and an antenna amplifier, as necessary.

People frequently complain about the Guide-based HR20 not scanning for channels like the H20 and ATSC TV's. This is an HR20 advantage, however, if you receive two different DMA's which are in different directions, since you can enter both primary and secondary zip codes and employ an antenna rotator or combine two separate OTA antennas without respect to whether the HR20 has actually simultaneously received all the signals on a "scan for stations."

[dbassman]

Originally Posted by Beckzilla

The reason the HR20 will not receive 57.1 or 25.1 is because these 2 stations do not have their PCIP data set properly and therefore their guide data does not broadcast right and the HR20 will not receive them. BTW..channel 69.1 is alive and well. I get it on both of my Sony HD TV's.

Not to sound stupid, but what is the PCIP data?... I assume something encoded in the signal that tells receivers how to pick them up? Also, why does 57.1 show up on my H20, but not my HR20?

Do you get 69.1 through your HR20 or just on your TV's?

[dbassman]

Originally Posted by texasbrit

dbassman - Two important pieces of information you don't give us - what's your zip code, and what sort of antenna do you have?

Sorry, my zip code is 46628 & the antenna is the "CHANNEL MASTER 4221 UHF TV ANTENNA" Here's a link to some pic's of my antenna This side of my house faces almost directly South as you can tell by the DTV & DishNetork dishes.

Thanks jwd for the link... It IS a much better tool!