NBC Boston info

Jeff Lehmann jjlehmann@comcast.net
Mon Nov 7 21:24:23 EST 2016

Is your outdoor antenna only for VHF? The only non extreme local you mention that wasn't VHF was 19. Seems you should have gotten reception of at least 25, 38, 56, and 66 in the analog days. These days all the major Boston channels are on UHF, and 27 is probably close enough for you to pick it up with a paper clip.

Also, I see more outdoor TV antennas now these days with the cord cutting going on, than a few years ago. I don't know where we'll end up with this repacking/ATSC 3.0 stuff... Hopefully it's a big flop and things stay as is! :)

Jeff Lehmann

> On Nov 7, 2016, at 6:42 PM, Mark Laurence <marklaurence@mac.com> wrote:
> Well, having had TVs in Rutland, 12 miles northwest of Worcester, for
> decades, I can tell you that in the analog days we got clear reception on
> 2, 4, 5, 7, and 27, plus shaky reception of 3 and 19 from western Mass.
> Now, even with a rooftop antenna, we get absolutely nothing but 27. 
> (Sorry, in my earlier post when I said we get nothing, I forgot about 27.
> I don't speak Spanish. Which makes me wonder why the owners of 27 don't
> put an English service on a secondary channel to serve OTA viewers in
> central MA who can't get anything else.)
>> On Nov 7, 2016, at 2:43 PM, Trip Ericson <webmaster@rabbitears.info>
> wrote:
>> Here's a good example.  WGBX's analog was at 1100 kW.  Its digital is
> now
>> 500 kW.  That's slightly more than 3 dB of difference.  They're
> basically
>> equivalent when you account for the difference between peak and average
>> power.  An outdoor antenna should receive WGBX, notwithstanding
>> interference from other stations, out to at least Webster, Charlton,
>> Rutland, and Ashburnham, notwithstanding a few really serious
>> terrain-caused holes, and see increasing terrain blockages west of that.
>> - Trip
>> www.rabbitears.info

More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list