"Wes Newell" <w.newell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:Yaorj.373$gg1.114@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 11:26:35 -0800, G-squared wrote:
>
>> On Feb 9, 9:56Â am, Wes Newell <w.new...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 10:31:45 -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> > > In article <Wwjrj.266$qV2.179@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>> > > Â Wes Newell <w.new...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >
>> > >> My analog scan picked up NTSC
>> > >> stations I would call unwatchable.
>> >
>> > > You would call anything less than HDTV unwatchable, so your
>> opinion is
>> > > meaningless.
>> >
>> > Then judge for yourself. Guess which one is ATSC.:-)
>> >
>> > http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/atscntsc.jpg
>> >
>> > ATSC channel 2.1 (top) vs. NTSC channel 2 (bottom). Photos taken on
>> same
>> > analog TV. Digital being fed from PC ATSC tuner via S-Video.
>
>> If you're using a UHF/VHF antenna it's very impressive. If it's a UHF
>> only antenna then it's misleading in that you're comparing apples and
>> oranges. I wouldn't expect VHF performance from a UHF antenna at 40
>> miles out.
>>
> These photos were taken with a uhf/vhf combo antenna connected. Similar
> to this one:
>
> http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103085
>
==================================
This is the one I use:
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103087
Virtually no DTV/HDTV reception problems.
