# Can't Get VHF Channels at All



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

We paid about $500 to get a roof antenna for HD back in January 2002. We've used it with our HR10-250 for the past five years to receive both Baltimore and Washington HD channels (DirecTV will only give us Baltmore over the dish).

Now Friday when I came home from work and rescanned for the "new" assignments, I find I can only get channel 2 and 45 out of Baltimore and channel 5 only from DC. Did some research and found that 11, 13 and 7 and 9 have all switched back to VHF frequencies. We checked out model antenna on-line and it's _supposed_ to get VHF channels as well. We tried everything, even putting the antenna lead directly into our 2-year old Samsung with an internal digital tuner. Still nothing. I'm real reluctant to pay MORE to get the antenna folks out to check the antenna, but really liked getting the DC locals OTA, especially the doppler radar on channel 7 and 9.

With only 2-3 HD channels remaining on my HR10-250 and the inability to get some of my favorite OTA channels, it seems like it's almost time to deactivate my Tivo, which I dread. I've had an HR20-100 for about two years, but still hate the search features and all.

Anyway, back to the main point, is there anyone in the Baltimore-Washington area experiencing the same problems with their antenna? I mean, I had NO idea when we converted back in 2002 that the locals would switch back from UHF to VHF. I'm thinking that the antenna people may have only given me a UHF antenna, which really, really pisses me off!

Cheryl


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

Exactly what model antenna do you have?

I'm going to assume that all of your stations were using UHF for their digital transmissions.
Since, the analog shutoff, some have switched back to VHF. Your antenna is probably a UHF only. Some UHF antennas can receive high band VHF and may list that in the online specifications.


----------



## CaptDS9E (Dec 3, 2002)

Try rescanning again. I had to do it twice here. We actually get double the channels now. Picking up stuff from jersey out here in easter queens


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

JimSpence said:


> Exactly what model antenna do you have?


I don't have the information here with me at work. I'll check at home and let you know. But my husband checked the model on-line on Saturday and it _supposedly_ does UHF and VHF...I just get the sinking impression that it's only UHF or else we need another amp to pull in the VHF versions...Not sure I want to invest any more money in the thing now though.

We tried a rescan with the Tivo 3-4 times and a couple of times after we hooked the antenna lead directly into the TV.

Cheryl


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

speedcouch said:


> We paid about $500 to get a roof antenna for HD back in January 2002.


For $500 it better be a VHF antenna too. For that price, you should get an amplifier as well.

If it's a good antenna, *and *it's pointed accurately at the transmitters, then I suggest you get an amplifier and place it as close to the antenna as possible.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

speedcouch said:


> I find I can only get channel 2 and 45 out of Baltimore and channel 5 only from DC. Did some research and found that 11, 13 and 7 and 9 have all switched back to VHF frequencies.


It's odd that you can only get 2 and 45. If you do, you should easily also get 54, as it's a UHF channel with the same transmitter location as 45.

Check out the expected coverage changes for Baltimore here: http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/maps_report1/Baltimore_MD.pdf


----------



## treymiller (Jun 15, 2009)

I am having the exact same problem - over the air channels worked great on my TiVo HD until Friday or Saturday, now I only get 14 or 15 and up.

I'm using an amplified indoor antenna - Terk HDTVa.

Any thoughts anybody?

I will scan for channels when I get home and see if that works.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

It's the analog cutoff, though you're in the wrong forum section if you're using a TiVo HD. Nevertheless, a rescan should do the trick.


----------



## treymiller (Jun 15, 2009)

I've rescanned twice with no success.

I will search the HD forum, although my problem is not really TiVo-related anyway...I did connect the antenna directly to the TV and got the same failed results...

I just read on the WJZ site that it may help to disconnect the antenna, rescan, then re-connect the antenna and scan again...I'll try that tonight I guess.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

treymiller said:


> I am having the exact same problem - over the air channels worked great on my TiVo HD until Friday or Saturday, now I only get 14 or 15 and up.
> 
> I'm using an amplified indoor antenna - Terk HDTVa.
> 
> ...


Two things...Looking at the Terk antenna, it's a directional UHF antenna, with rabbit ears for VHF. It may be rated for both UHF and VHF, but its VHF performance won't be that great.

And depending on which city you're trying to get signal from, you have to reorient the antenna. Remember, it needs to be pointed in the direction of the signal for optimal reception.


----------



## treymiller (Jun 15, 2009)

I've positioned it according to antennaweb.org's recommendation, but I haven't extended the rabbit ears...maybe it's come to that...

Thanks for the input.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

treymiller said:


> I've positioned it according to antennaweb.org's recommendation, but I haven't extended the rabbit ears...maybe it's come to that...
> 
> Thanks for the input.


Ah, well that will definitely keep you from getting any VHF channels.

The VHF area of the spectrum is lower in frequency. That means a longer wavelength for the signal. You actually need the longer elements of the VHF part of the antenna extended so that they can receive these longer wavelengths. And then it's the old game of moving them in all different positions to try and get the best reception...


----------



## kmccbf (Mar 9, 2002)

What was never advertised about the digital switch is that many of the stations where going to move their channels from the UHF to the VHS. What they didn't think about when doing this is that VHS does not have the transmission range of the UHF channels. So many people who were getting the UHF digital signals will not get the VHF digital signals. Some stations are trying to get the FCC to allow them to transmit at a higher power. But it may take a while before they get permission.


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

In my case, one of our channels will be moving back to their UHF assignment. And another will stay as UHF.

So every locale has different requirements. 
That's what antennaweb.org can show you.


----------



## treymiller (Jun 15, 2009)

This is all helpful info...I am confused as to why the change from UHF to VHF when the channel designation remains the same (i.e., channel 13 - vhf, right? - is still channel 13, I just don't receive it anymore)

This entry at wikipedia is somewhat enlightening:

The majority of digital TV stations currently broadcast their over-the-air signals in the UHF band, both because VHF had been largely already filled with analog TV at the time the digital facilities were built and because of severe issues with impulse noise on digital low-VHF channels. While virtual channel numbering schemes routinely display channel numbers like "2.1" or "6.1" for individual North American terrestrial HDTV broadcasts, these are more often than not actually UHF signals. Many equipment vendors therefore use "HDTV antenna" or similar branding as all but synonymous to "UHF antenna".​


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

treymiller said:


> This is all helpful info...I am confused as to why the change from UHF to VHF when the channel designation remains the same (i.e., channel 13 - vhf, right? - is still channel 13, I just don't receive it anymore)


Channel numbers are kind of an antiquated idea now.

In the old days, when TV was developed, they defined the actual frequency slots that would be used for TV broadcast, they gave successive frequency slots a channel designation. (There actually was a channel 1 in the beginning.)

It made sense with the technology, though. Your TV tuner had to select a frequency with a mechanical knob. Channel 5 meant you were tuning in a specific frequency.

Technology improved, other radio based services were created, and the spectrum filled up. Actually, at times, things were shuffled around a bit too. Eventually it became necessary to devote more channels to TV, as the demand expanded, and new areas of spectrum were used. But still, in the analog world...the channel selector meant that every TV could choose the intended freq by turning to a channel number.

So stations naturally became recognizable by their channel assignment. It's part of their identity, it's in their logos. It's a kind of branding that they can't give up.

So enter the digital age. To the receivers, the channel is not important. The TV can tune to channel 12, and call it 7. It can tune to channel 23, and call it 32. The actual frequency assignment is irrelevant. The receiver maps it to a number for display.

The stations want to keep their "number," and they can, regardless of what actual frequency they have. In the DTV era, the number you select has nothing to do with the channel that the tuner actually tunes to.

So, your "channel" 13 is not _necessarily _tuning to actual channel 13.


----------



## ke3ju (Jan 5, 2004)

hefe said:


> Channel numbers are kind of an antiquated idea now.
> So enter the digital age. To the receivers, the channel is not important. The TV can tune to channel 12, and call it 7. It can tune to channel 23, and call it 32. The actual frequency assignment is irrelevant. The receiver maps it to a number for display.
> 
> The stations want to keep their "number," and they can, regardless of what actual frequency they have. In the DTV era, the number you select has nothing to do with the channel that the tuner actually tunes to.
> ...


My understanding was that this was the case only prior to the cut-off, because the stations could not transmit the analog and digital signals on the same frequency at the same time.

Cheers,
Ed


----------



## gastrof (Oct 31, 2003)

ke3ju said:


> My understanding was that this was the case only prior to the cut-off, because the stations could not transmit the analog and digital signals on the same frequency at the same time..


Your understanding is a little off.

The stations had the option of keeping their digital broadcast on the same "extra channel" they'd been given to use, or they could go back to using their original channel for digital once the analog broadcasts had stopped.

In my area all but one channel opted to keep their digital channel, and gave up their old analog channel.

The one channel that tried to do digital on their old VHF analog channel quickly found out they were having SERIOUS problems reaching people with their signal, and the FCC is currently letting them also use the UHF channel they'd been using for digital.

Yep. After the changeover they're STILL simulcasting, only both are digital.

Oh...

The channels that opted to keep their digital channel and give up their analog? They're still calling themselves by their old channel number, now totally inaccurate.

What makes it more amusing to me is at least four in our area originally were on UHF channels above 50 when they were analog. Supposedly channels 51 and up are no longer available for TV use.

Now doing digital on other, lower channels, they're all keeping their old channel numbers, even tho there can't BE any channels that actually broadcast on such channels.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Viewers are having issues all over the country with stations that switched back to VHF. It's big time failure.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

gastrof said:


> The stations had the option of keeping their digital broadcast on the same "extra channel" they'd been given to use, or they could go back to using their original channel for digital once the analog broadcasts had stopped.


That wasn't the only scenarios. Here in Chicago, CBS channel 2 broadcast their DTV channel on RF channel 3. After the transition, they moved to their digital home...RF channel 12.


gastrof said:


> The channels that opted to keep their digital channel and give up their analog? They're still calling themselves by their old channel number, now totally inaccurate.
> 
> What makes it more amusing to me is at least four in our area originally were on UHF channels above 50 when they were analog. Supposedly channels 51 and up are no longer available for TV use.
> 
> Now doing digital on other, lower channels, they're all keeping their old channel numbers, even tho there can't BE any channels that actually broadcast on such channels.


Channel numbers are their identities. Their branding. Since channel numbers are arbitrary things, I don't really care what they call themselves. You still select the "faux channel" number to get there on your tuner. The actual RF is under the hood and nobody sees it anymore. No big deal.


----------



## ke3ju (Jan 5, 2004)

What a fiasco...You'd think they would want to utilize their full power equipment that was designed for their original frequency, rather than go with the wicked low power temporary equipment that they bought for simulcasting.

Not to mention that in the area I live, 90% of the simulcast frequencies collide with the original analog frequencies of other stations, as we receive channel from Philly, NYC, and Scranton/Wilkes-Barre. That's why no here could receive anything OTA.

Who ever approved that band plan should be shot...


----------



## videojanitor (Dec 21, 2001)

treymiller said:


> This is all helpful info...I am confused as to why the change from UHF to VHF when the channel designation remains the same (i.e., channel 13 - vhf, right? - is still channel 13, I just don't receive it anymore)


One thing that I don't think has been mentioned here is the actual reason that some stations moved from UHF to VHF -- and that reason is money. A VHF transmitter uses significantly less electricity than UHF, hence the station(s) stood to save a good deal of cash by returning to VHF. As we have now seen though, that may not have been a great idea ...


----------



## tucsonbill (Aug 11, 2004)

kmccbf said:


> What was never advertised about the digital switch is that many of the stations where going to move their channels from the UHF to the VHS.


 No kidding. We had one station here who kept their analog channel 9 assignment for their digital signal. They spent the entire year running crawls about the impending transistion, but never once mentiioned that they'd be the only guys in town who would be moving their signal to vhf. The last week they did start talking about you may need a different antenna -- but never gave any reason. I only knew from the antennaweb site. I happened to be lucky enough to be located such that I get a strong signal on channel 9 with my uhf rooftop. I still was out of luck for half a day waiting for D* to update the mapping.


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

Well, it's two weeks later and we still can't get the "new" VHF channels from Baltimore or Washington! Called the antenna installer a week or so ago and he claims I just need to keep "rescanning." We've done it like 10-12 times now and still no 13, 11, 7, or 9. 

For the guy who said I should get 54, I probably do, but never watch that channel, so didn't really think about it.

We have a pre-amp up ON the antenna that I had my husband add several years ago. But I'm thinking we still need a better amp down closer to the TV to pull in the VHF channels. 

Antenna company said they could come out and rescan for me, but they'd have to charge me $75 for what I could do myself. I'm to the point if he guaranteed they'd get me the channels for a reasonable price (including a better amp), I'd go for it. I've been checking Stark TV on-line (where I got my pre-amp from) and am thinking about ordering a Wineguard amp to see if we can do something to boost the signals we're getting. It's a damn shame nobody local has something you could try and return if it didn't work. I checked Radio Shack on-line but they only seem to have their own brand amps and from the reviews I read, they don't sound that great. Anybody got any suggestions in central Maryland?

My co-worker saw a scroll on channel 13 that they had "gotten permission" to boost their signal, but I haven't seen any change in our ability to get it. Of course, 13 is really the least of my problems since we DO get that in HD on DirecTV. I'd mostly like 7 and 9 out of DC.

Cheryl


----------



## litzdog911 (Oct 18, 2002)

That "preamp" might be your problem. If you're original setup was UHF-only, then that might be a UHF-only preamp, so it's actually blocking your VHF signals. Do you know the preamp's brand/model number?

Also, before deciding on a local antenna speciailist, be sure to check out the resources in the "Local HDTV Reception Forum" at http://www.avsforum.com. Find the thread for your nearest city. There you'll find local experts that can offer the best advice for your specific area.


----------



## Matt L (Aug 13, 2000)

You really don't want to amplify an amplified signal. In fact some older preamps and amps were so noisy that they killed the HD signal. Is the preamp a good quality unit for Channel master of Winegaurd?


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

litzdog911 said:


> That "preamp" might be your problem. If you're original setup was UHF-only, then that might be a UHF-only preamp, so it's actually blocking your VHF signals. Do you know the preamp's brand/model number?


Just saw your response today and it pretty much mirrors what I'd come up with through my own research - that I may have got a UHF-only pre-amp. Our antenna is up on a very highly pitched roof and I hate to send my husband up there for no reason (he's not great with heights).

I finally found the receipt from Pay Pal here at work for the pre-amp which we put up in May 2002. Need to go home tonight and see if I can find any record of the model in our receipts files. If not, I'll have to call Stark Electronics to see if they might have a record from that long ago. Hopefully, I can determine if it was UHF-only. If so, then maybe I can get my husband to go up and disconnect it to see if it's blocking any VHF signals.

Thanks!
Cheryl


----------

