Homeworx HD Antenna

51prhQ0icML If you're looking to get rid of your cable or never had it to begin with, the Homeworx HDTV Antenna is the cheapest way to get free, crystal clear over the air HD on your television.

At under ten dollars, the price more than makes up for the occasional hiccup. The antenna's base does a decent job of sticking to surfaces, although you won't want to stress it too much. If you live in a city you likely have a decent broadcast source, like San Francisco's Sutro Tower. Getting high definition major networks and a selection of local favorites for free makes cord-cutting an even simpler proposition.

Notable Replies

  1. This is a decent cheap antenna, but it really is meant for urban environments. Due to the size, it will work best on UHF stations -- VHF takes a bigger antenna. However, most stations are UHF.

    When in doubt, check this web site. Put in your address and it will tell you roughly how big of an antenna you need, and which direction to point it.


  2. Never mind that all TV Antennas are "HD". When the switch was made to digital broadcast absolutely nothing changed about the Antenna technology. You could use your Grandfathers old rabbit ears to receive HD signals just fine.

  3. jerwin says:

    rabbit ears are best for VHF stations; low VHF in particular. When hdtv was introduced, most of the vhf band was already occupied by ntsc stations, so to recieve the digital signals, most people needed uhf antennas--not rabbit ears. Depending on when your grandpa watched TV, his old antenna might not have been even designed with anything other than VHF in mind. in "rabbit ear" sets, the wire loop was the UHF antenna, and it was a farely ineffiecient one.

    Thus, if consumers wanted to watch HDTV, they needed a UHF antenna, and so to cash in on this market some manufacturers started to sell variations on UHF designs as good for recieving the new signals.

    Since HDTV snow is unpleasent to watch, there was a certain risk to selling badly performing antennas as Digital, but such is marketing. Zenith made an newly designed hdtv antenna that iirc did fairly well at resolving "multipath" which was a new problem associated with recieving, and descriminating amongst atsc signals.

    Of course, after ntsc was phased out, some stations did reclaim their old vhf assignments, and digital uhf only antennas are less useful.

  4. Who is this Ivan Hernandez and why is he pitching cheap junk with an affiliate link? Is he related to the product?

    Honestly guys....I don't mind hitting the BBers affiliate links since they provide the content, and even the cool tools posts have occasional (very occasional) value. But this is the second time I've seen plastic crap pushed by a random byline and no context. Not cool.

    The antenna itself? I returned mine because it had worse reception than other inside antennas and the suction cup was worthless. The AmazonBasics indoor antenna was the best out of the 6 different models I tried.

    ETA: The last piece of cheap crap referenced was a $20 ounce of plastic that would make a "phone mount".

  5. Here's what that site says about my location, even if I put up a 30' antenna:

    "No Stations were predicted for this address

    Due to factors such as terrain and distance to broadcasting towers, signal strength calculations have predicted no television stations may be reliably received at this location."

    But using the other site that @LagerVsAle provided, I get empirically correct results... 2 VHF stations easily receivable, 3 UHF if I use a roof-mount antenna and the weather's good.

    I am in a declivity cut by a stream, so I can only get stations with antennae lined up just right. People around me get dozens of stations easily, because they are not down here in the holler.

Continue the discussion bbs.boingboing.net

18 more replies