• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

New FM antenna

I'm glad a couple of you oriented them horizontal. Pic's always seem to be verticle. I was always taught that FM antennas should be horizontally polarized so that the verticle fm signals cut them at 90 deg. Also all good yagi antennas and director/reflector configurations and simple diapoles are always horizontal. Hmmm!
 
Hey Timbo in Oz, GoodOnYa Mate. You said it all. Of course it is no better than any other dipole. For those reading this looking for that magic bullet, this isn't it. In antenna siting, height is everything - that and low loss transmission line. A dipole is a dipole is a dipole. They all have the same gain.
ps: Timbo in Oz, I once lived in Hughes ACT for 6 months so I know your turf.
 
FM-bandII - receiving antenna polarisation vs transmitter antenna polarisation

It is best to align the antenna to the transmitter's polarisation.

In the past most VHF TV and FM was transmitted with horizontal polarisation. Though here in Canberra it started out vertical, and the installed VHF receiving antennas tend to be vertical.

But now it is mostly a mixture, with a vertical component added to allow reception in cars with mostly vertical whips, also known as 45degree slant. Some stations use circular polarisation, off a helical antenna, either RH thread, or less often LH thread. IIRC! ;-)!

With a T antenna ( a dipole) used indoors, and where the signal may have bounced enough to have phase shifted by 90 degrees or more, it is best to try both vertical and horizontal, and see which works best, on each station.

Note that it is theoretically possible to use two antennas at 90 degrees to help minimise multi-path, and the feed can be switched to either / or \ . One of which can have less multipath. There is also a theoretical increase in gain, possibly, and IIRC.

Indoor DIY rhombic wire antennas just have to be horizontal, so you can 'hide' them on the ceiling or really hide them under the rug! ;-)!

tim B
 
Looking at the photos on the mfr website, is DIY a possibility? It looks to me, he w/ NO electronic/electrical expertise, like two solid car-style antennas connected to a 75 ohm connector. Is it that simple or is my naivete showing? I would guess the length of each element is important, but other that some nice looking machined aluminum(?) and some allen-head screws, what makes this not a DIY? . . . :scratch2:
 
akforum said:
I also purchased this antenna and use it inside because of condo rules. In my location it works only marginally better than the simple dipole I used before. And whenever I move it toward a window or wall reception degrades. I have it in a closet away from the wall. All in all I was disappointed. I'm glad it's working well for you.
Click to expand...




another big disappointment: Terk

i bought one of their lower priced antennae and it was no better than a cheap dipole. very disappointed.

i think i'll go with a magnum dynalab antenna. there is a reasonably priced one at audio advisor.
 
imglocked said:
Looking at the photos on the mfr website, is DIY a possibility? It looks to me, he w/ NO electronic/electrical expertise, like two solid car-style antennas connected to a 75 ohm connector. Is it that simple or is my naivete showing? I would guess the length of each element is important, but other that some nice looking machined aluminum(?) and some allen-head screws, what makes this not a DIY? . . . :scratch2:
Click to expand...

This sounds logical. A car antenna does fit the 75 ohm connector on my 1980. I had a broken wire floating around my shed out back. I tried it for the hell of it.

I'm getting some poor recption here. Most of my stations are to the North. I am at a high elevation being in the hills but do have a mountain to the east and west. I don't listen alot to radio but when I do I wish it would come in clear.

(Pearl River HUH, isn't that around the Rockland County area?)
 
The MD whip will be no better than a dipole, and possibly worse, less gain for one. I've used the Fanfare one. A joke.

and there's always the DIY rhombic/s option.

the last two posters SAY they want good reception.

I'd like to know how much their tuner's (or tuners are) worth and why they aren't willing to invest enough thought and time and THEN money / work - enough to get a real 'radio system' in place. A tuner without a GOOD antenna is like a sports car with cross-plys and narrow rims.

Merely spending money - without doing some research and developing some understanding of your own reception issues - manifestly just doesn't work for most of you.

Rhombic article? All you have to do is go to the Tuner Info centre, and then click 'JOIN the yahoo FM group', and go to their FM antenna's site and download the article for a DIY indoor rhombic that you can pin to the ceiling where you won't notice it, you could also have a look around AK for other posts of mine. You can always pin up several pointing in different directions.

For the guy with stations to the north a spread pair of rhombics may do the job.

You'll need a map and a floor plan of your house to figure out the compass bearings of your stations in relation to the rooms' diagonals. And find the web sites - that do exist - showing where the transmitters that matter to you are.

Yawwwwwnnnn!

Tim B
 
Last edited:
I seem to have started quite the antenna debate here. The antenna I posted about is indeed nothing but a dipole - but I like it, find it easier to use and move around than a wire dipole. I now have it oriented horizontally, positioned so I get good reception on my favorite - and hard to receive - station. I'm happy.
 
my point is that it is possible to do a great deal better, even with an indoor antenna.

It is manifest to me that few here in this thread have any idea how much better the sound will usually be from a directional antenna, but one with gain, that is aimed so as to minimise multipath from the station/s listened to.

As a moderator, could you find out if it might be possible to allow a larger file to be uploaded - the rhombic article?

I'd also be happy to add a short article on why such a directional antenna should and mostly will sound better.

In sum?

fully limiting the front end on all desired stations. thus keeping total noise and distortion as low as possible.

Low multi-path components in the signal, so that nuances that depend on stereo, like arrival times and interplay, are preserved. aka even lower distortion.

I'd be willing to bet that you'ld be even happier with the music, via a wire rhombic pinned to the ceiling, pointing at your favourite station.

It is a fact that it would have cost you less money, and I see no value in giving any money to a company that wilfully distorts the truth to sell things.

warmly

Tim B
 
Im not at all sure I understand what an (i)sotropic radiator is

I mean, can we build one?

;-)!

But a dipole is better by 2.15dB, I get that, and that a whip is worse than a dipole.

My difficulty with dipoles indoors is, they get in the way / are difficult to hide.

tim B
 
RichPA said:
I seem to have started quite the antenna debate here. The antenna I posted about is indeed nothing but a dipole - but I like it, find it easier to use and move around than a wire dipole. I now have it oriented horizontally, positioned so I get good reception on my favorite - and hard to receive - station. I'm happy.
Click to expand...

I agree, I have had one for 3+ years and love it, works great, easy to mount outside on the deck.
Regardless of what it is, your experience may vary, as geographical location, station power, tuner quality-has it been aligned recently- too many factors to say anything is the end all be all-in general outdoor antennas work the best, and a yagi with a rotor is the ultimate for reception, and reducing multipath.
Nothing has really changed in that department for years-if it does what you want-awesome-if not find something that works, instead of telling someone their antenna is nothing but this-or that-gain this or that-most of us who have been around awhile realize this-save your breath.
 
FM DX Antenna Co

I really wish I was not wading in on this but I'm going to anyway.

First, thanks to those that purchased the dipole and shared their results. The antenna has been an amazing performer.

The reason I'm posting is to be clear that I have NEVER referred to the dipole I sell as a DX antenna nor have I implied that it is. FM DX is the NAME OF MY COMPANY.

The reason this bothers me is I have gone out of my way to be very honest about my product and I often recommend the Antennacraft FM6 (which I don't sell) for certain situations and tell people that I don't believe the antenna I sell will work for them. I personally believe that the dipole I sell will will work fantastic in the open mounted vertically.

Another thing I never do is to comment on an antenna I have never owned and I'll let that statement stand on its own merit.

I'm going to step out again. I advertise on this site and advertised for a bit on another site that was taken over by a poster that has now come here and overposts in my opinion but it isn't my business. However, the implication that I advertise my antennas dishonestly is my business and I do not do that and if you read through the board I don't shill my antennas either and I'll add that I never asked anyone to post their results on here either, though I do appreciate it very much.

Regards,
Lake
 
fmdxantenna.com said:
I really wish I was not wading in on this but I'm going to anyway.

First, thanks to those that purchased the dipole and shared their results. The antenna has been an amazing performer.

The reason I'm posting is to be clear that I have NEVER referred to the dipole I sell as a DX antenna nor have I implied that it is. FM DX is the NAME OF MY COMPANY.

The reason this bothers me is I have gone out of my way to be very honest about my product and I often recommend the Antennacraft FM6 (which I don't sell) for certain situations and tell people that I don't believe the antenna I sell will work for them. I personally believe that the dipole I sell will will work fantastic in the open mounted vertically.

Another thing I never do is to comment on an antenna I have never owned and I'll let that statement stand on its own merit.

I'm going to step out again. I advertise on this site and advertised for a bit on another site that was taken over by a poster that has now come here and overposts in my opinion but it isn't my business. However, the implication that I advertise my antennas dishonestly is my business and I do not do that and if you read through the board I don't shill my antennas either and I'll add that I never asked anyone to post their results on here either, though I do appreciate it very much.

Regards,
Lake
Click to expand...

Way to go Lake-I have two of these and they work well, but I have overall a "easy" reception area for the stations I want to recieve.
Nothing beats a yaggi on a rotor for ultimate, of difficult recepetion areas.
There is no magic in FM antenna's, gain is gain, multipath is multipath, and ajacent channel interference is that as well. Most indoors antennas (especially amplified ones) are a over priced gimmick, vs real performance.
If the owners really tried a outdoor mounted antenna (if possible of course)-they would soon realize this
Your dipole is a interesting and realitively inexpensive spin on the design- that specifically makes it easier, and provides a more durable solution to mounting a dipole outside- which is where all the benefits are gained- pure and simple-that's it. A folded one would soon succum to the elements.
 
Timbo in Oz said:
But a dipole is better by 2.15dB, I get that, and that a whip is worse than a dipole.

My difficulty with dipoles indoors is, they get in the way / are difficult to hide.

tim B
Click to expand...

No a dipole is 2.15db "i" the same as a 0 zero "db" gain. The dbi is a isotropic radiator which is a theoretical antenna that exists only in free space and theory. 2.15 dbi = 0 decibel(db) gain. And yes a whip can be worse than a dipole and so can other situations. If you have any gain at all your heading the right way. Fm is line of sight (except in the case of tropospheric ducting)so the higher you get it the better your reception is likely to be.:thmbsp:
73
-Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom