Does anyone else like FM?

[EJ3]

I test drove it in the living room near the window. It was about 15 years ago.

Still there, then? If so, it was good 'nuff for it's purpose and had found it's place.

 

[Doodski]

Still there, then? If so, it was good 'nuff for it's purpose and had found it's place.

I was attempting to use it with a digital TV reception PCI desktop PC card. It was fussy at best but the card was always fussy on digital reception. I only had good results in one location where I used it and in the others it was not so good. I think I had poor line of sight to the broadcast location?

 

[EJ3]

I was attempting to use it with a digital TV reception PCI desktop PC card. It was fussy at best but the card was always fussy on digital reception. I only had good results in one location where I used it and in the others it was not so good. I think I had poor line of sight to the broadcast location?

Mounting it to the ceiling may have helped.
Line of site doesn't always apply when it comes to distance (I have done 60 miles, with nothing in between [desert or ocean]) of WiFi with the approximate 30" antennas mounted on the top of a standard wooden American telephone pole at each end & the laptop at each end having 2 watt WIFI transceivers.
But objects in between (depending on their height and their makeup) can (and usually will), cause highly undesirable Fresnel effects, playing havoc with communication at both ends.

 

[Mark1]

I picked up a smaller maybe about 1.5 meter long Yagi antenna from a Chinese discount website and it worked. The price was astoundingly low too.

I'm always flipping through about 8 presets so need an omni directional antenna and one for indoor. I'm not sure if any antenna even outdoor would fix the occasional interference issue. I think I need a really good tuner .

 

[EJ3]

I'm always flipping through about 8 presets so need an omni directional antenna and one for indoor. I'm not sure if any antenna even outdoor would fix the occasional interference issue. I think I need a really good tuner .

Take a look around here and you will find which tuners are the better ones and which tuners can be modded to be as good as the better ones. Then you can keep an eye out for one that might be more suitable for you: https://www.fmtunerinfo.com/.
Or you may find out that your tuner is better than you think and all you need is a better antenna or better antenna placement!

 

[mhardy6647]

I'm always flipping through about 8 presets so need an omni directional antenna and one for indoor. I'm not sure if any antenna even outdoor would fix the occasional interference issue. I think I need a really good tuner .

1) I have no short term memory -- and I'm too lazy to check! what are you using for a tuner?
2) You could consider a good ol' "turnstile" type omni -- which is essentially a center-fed folded dipole wrapped into either an S (the true "turnstile" design) or an "O" shape. The former, I think, is out of fashion, but the latter is still available.
Hung from the ceiling, it could be construed as an objet d'art.

(of course, no mast needed if it dangles from the ceiling)

Oh, looky, there's at least one old-school turnstile antenna on the market, per google...

source: https://online.laceys.tv/ANT1200A/FRACARRO-FM-Antenna-OMNI-Directional-2.1dB-Gain/pd.php (absolutely no endorsement implied, just sayin')

@Mark1 , you can probably see how straightening out either one of the above is consistent with a center-fed, folded dipole like:

 

[Mark1]

Take a look around here and you will find which tuners are the better ones and which tuners can be modded to be as good as the better ones. Then you can keep an eye out for one that might be more suitable for you: https://www.fmtunerinfo.com/.
Or you may find out that your tuner is better than you think and all you need is a better antenna or better antenna placement!

Today I been getting great reception on all the channels without touching the rabbit ears once lol. It appears the rabbit ears and receiver get the job done when there isn't a lot of interference. I wonder what the interference could be, but it's something external I have no control over.

At this time, I can't go with an attic or indoor antenna. I'm not sure how much an outdoor antenna (or better tuner) would help in the interference situation anyway and I doubt any available indoor would do much better than the rabbit ears.

 

[EJ3]

Today I been getting great reception on all the channels without touching the rabbit ears once lol. It appears the rabbit ears and receiver get the job done when there isn't a lot of interference. I wonder what the interference could be, but it's something external I have no control over.

At this time, I can't go with an attic or indoor antenna. I'm not sure how much an outdoor antenna (or better tuner) would help in the interference situation anyway and I doubt any available indoor would do much better than the rabbit ears.

Attic usually (always in my experience) does better than inside. In this case, Height is your friend (inside or out).
Then outside generally does better than that: eliminating walls (and things that are in the walls) & usually giving greater height.

 

[Mark1]

1) I have no short term memory -- and I'm too lazy to check! what are you using for a tuner?
2) You could consider a good ol' "turnstile" type omni -- which is essentially a center-fed folded dipole wrapped into either an S (the true "turnstile" design) or an "O" shape. The former, I think, is out of fashion, but the latter is still available.
Hung from the ceiling, it could be construed as an objet d'art.

View attachment 426008
(of course, no mast needed if it dangles from the ceiling)

Oh, looky, there's at least one old-school turnstile antenna on the market, per google...
View attachment 426009

source: https://online.laceys.tv/ANT1200A/FRACARRO-FM-Antenna-OMNI-Directional-2.1dB-Gain/pd.php (absolutely no endorsement implied, just sayin')

@Mark1 , you can probably see how straightening out either one of the above is consistent with a center-fed, folded dipole like:
View attachment 426012

The tuner is whatever is integrated into a Sony STR-DE197 receiver. https://www.sony.com/electronics/support/res/manuals/W001/W0010546M . The sensitivity and selectivity on page 26 seem pretty average.

Do you really think a turnstile antenna or any other dipole could do better with the occasional or intermittent interference than the rabbit ears? The rabbit ears seem to be a half dipole with lots of adjustability. I seem to get the best reception overall with the rabbit ears in a narrow V-shape. Adjusting the elements horizontally was really bad for reception.

For best average reception the rabbit ears elements almost fully extended in a tight V shape, antenna oriented or facing sort of in an axis I think with most stations are broadcasting, the tuner knob left in a certain position. I've tried 3 antennas, wire, fixed 1/8 wave dipole and the rabbit ears and they seem to work about the same but a little better in that order. They all work great at times but on other times when there's interference they don't, except with the rabbit ears it is possible to adjust the antenna for a specific channel to knock out interference. . It doesn't seem like any indoor antenna would do much better than the rabbit ears,

 

[mhardy6647]

The tuner is whatever is integrated into a Sony STR-DE197 receiver. https://www.sony.com/electronics/support/res/manuals/W001/W0010546M . The sensitivity and selectivity on page 26 seem pretty average.

Do you really think a turnstile antenna or any other dipole could do better with the occasional or intermittent interference than the rabbit ears? The rabbit ears seem to be a half dipole with lots of adjustability. I seem to get the best reception overall with the rabbit ears in a narrow V-shape. Adjusting the elements horizontally was really bad for reception.

For best average reception the rabbit ears elements almost fully extended in a tight V shape, antenna oriented sort in an axis I think must stations are broadcast with the tuner knob left in a certain position. I've tried 3 antennas, wire, fixed 1/8 wave dipole and the rabbit ears and they seem to work about the same but a little better in that order. They all work great at times but on other times when there's interference they don't, except with the rabbit ears it is possible to adjust the antenna for a specific channel to knock out interference. . It doesn't seem like any indoor antenna would do much better than the rabbit ears,

Only in the sense that you could (conceivably) mount it up high yet relatively unobtrusively.

Of course as soon as I saw your reply I remembered what you were dealing with! Yes, that's certainly not helping your cause! That is an entry level Sony. The tuner section is almost certainly of afterthought (i.e., checking the box) quality and performance.

Does that receiver have a stereo pair (L-R) of line-level inputs that you're not using?
Looks like it offers several (photo from a legacy Crutchfield page)

source: https://www.sony.com/electronics/support/res/manuals/4253/42534371M.pdf
If so... let me see if I have a tuner small, light-weight, and good enough (in terms of radio performance) to be worth sending to you to try as a source to feed into your receiver. I might...

 

[EJ3]

The tuner is whatever is integrated into a Sony STR-DE197 receiver. https://www.sony.com/electronics/support/res/manuals/W001/W0010546M . The sensitivity and selectivity on page 26 seem pretty average.

Do you really think a turnstile antenna or any other dipole could do better with the occasional or intermittent interference than the rabbit ears? The rabbit ears seem to be a half dipole with lots of adjustability. I seem to get the best reception overall with the rabbit ears in a narrow V-shape. Adjusting the elements horizontally was really bad for reception.

For best average reception the rabbit ears elements almost fully extended in a tight V shape, antenna oriented or facing sort of in an axis I think with most stations are broadcasting, the tuner knob left in a certain position. I've tried 3 antennas, wire, fixed 1/8 wave dipole and the rabbit ears and they seem to work about the same but a little better in that order. They all work great at times but on other times when there's interference they don't, except with the rabbit ears it is possible to adjust the antenna for a specific channel to knock out interference. . It doesn't seem like any indoor antenna would do much better than the rabbit ears,

The answer is: Maybe, maybe not.
The only advantage that I see is IF: for sure, you could have another style of antenna than the rabbit ears, at ceiling height.
Otherwise, I'd probably not spend the money on it.

 

[Mark1]

Attic usually (always in my experience) does better than inside. In this case, Height is your friend (inside or out).
Then outside generally does better than that: eliminating walls (and things that are in the walls) & usually giving greater height.

It would be interesting as an experiment to see how the rabbit ears would do if placed in the attic. running a coax cable and messing around in the attic isn't really option right now but it would be interesting to see if it would reduce interference.

There's some indication maybe that antenna height helps the situation, lowering the elements horizontal hurts reception. I have the rabbit ears sitting pretty high and the elements vertical and almost reaching the ceiling, but what if the antenna base was 3-4ft higher at the ceiling with the elements horizontal? Might improve reception even more and maybe I'll try that sometime just to see.

If the gosh darn occasional interference whatever it is wouldn't crop up some days or times, I would have perfectly fine reception on all channels without even having to touch the rabbit ears .

 

[EJ3]

It would be interesting as an experiment to see how the rabbit ears would do if placed in the attic. running a coax cable and messing around in the attic isn't really option right now but it would be interesting to see if it would reduce interference.

There's some indication maybe that antenna height helps the situation, lowering the elements horizontal hurts reception. I have the rabbit ears sitting pretty high and the elements vertical and almost reaching the ceiling, but what if the antenna base was 3-4ft higher at the ceiling with the elements horizontal? Might improve reception even more and maybe I'll try that sometime just to see.

If the gosh darn occasional interference whatever it is wouldn't crop up some days or times, I would have perfectly fine reception on all channels without even having to touch the rabbit ears .

I would definitely find a way to get the antenna into the attic & run a lead to the receiver. It may be just enough, as you seem to have pretty good reception at times.
I was fortunate, most of my life, when I have been indoors, I was at least on the second story (or higher).
Even my cabin, in the forest, on the bank of a river, I can walkup-right underneath the 800 square ft cabin (an enclosed by rebar, storage area) and the antenna goes on the top of the 3 degree angled roof.

 

[Mark1]

Only in the sense that you could (conceivably) mount it up high yet relatively unobtrusively.

Of course as soon as I saw your reply I remembered what you were dealing with! Yes, that's certainly not helping your cause! That is an entry level Sony. The tuner section is almost certainly of afterthought (i.e., checking the box) quality and performance.

Does that receiver have a stereo pair (L-R) of line-level inputs that you're not using?
Looks like it offers several (photo from a legacy Crutchfield page)
View attachment 426088
View attachment 426091
source: https://www.sony.com/electronics/support/res/manuals/4253/42534371M.pdf
If so... let me see if I have a tuner small, light-weight, and good enough (in terms of radio performance) to be worth sending to you to try as a source to feed into your receiver. I might...

Yeah that's the right receiver info. The sensitivity and selectivity seem pretty ho hum wouldn't you say? I think selectivity would be particular important but not sure what a good spec is.


One of the reason I keep using my old -2005 year or so Sony is I like having direct presets on the faceplate. I could probably find a better 80s-90s vintage digital tuner receiver with the 8-10 direct presets if I looked around. If all you have is only an analog tuner, in the interest of experimentation and science I'd test to see if a real tuner can bust the interference .

 

[mhardy6647]

If you have attic space accessible to you -- yes, by all means get your antenna as much altitude as you can.

 

[EJ3]

Yeah that's the right receiver info. The sensitivity and selectivity seem pretty ho hum wouldn't you say? I think selectivity would be particular important but not sure what a good spec is.


One of the reason I keep using my old -2005 year or so Sony is I like having direct presets on the faceplate. I could probably find a better 80s-90s vintage digital tuner receiver with the 8-10 direct presets if I looked around. If all you have is only an analog tuner, in the interest of experimentation and science I'd test to see if a real tuner can bust the interference .

What I use (for non-HD signals) and what's been done to it (It's in German but it's enough in English that you can probably figure out the specs):
Technical data


https://mikesdx.com/nad4300.html

 

[mhardy6647]

@Mark1 -- look for a Parasound T/DQ-1600 AM-FM tuner. Both AM and FM sections are very, very good (from both a radio and an audio perspective), it shouldn't cost too much*, and it has presets.

(photo from a current eBAY auction - not mine!)
______________
* Chance favors the prepared mind - as Pasteur said (albeit in French).

 

[Mark1]

What I use (for non-HD signals) and what's been done to it (It's in German but it's enough in English that you can probably figure out the specs):
Technical data


https://mikesdx.com/nad4300.html

Dang those tuner specs seem near top of the line and way better than the Sony I'm using.

I'm getting such great reception today with the super duper rabbit ears even with my pedestrian tuner . I'm even pulling in stereo from the furthest station 20 miles away. I think short of an extraordinary situation such as my occasional interference, rabbit ears are great FM antennas. They kind have an obtrusive shape and stick out like rabbit ears , but most of us FM types don't mind the look of gear and of course stuffing them in the attic above the tuner would put them out of sight and boost performance.

 

[Mark1]

@Mark1 -- look for a Parasound T/DQ-1600 AM-FM tuner. Both AM and FM sections are very, very good (from both a radio and an audio perspective), it shouldn't cost too much*, and it has presets.


View attachment 426096
(photo from a current eBAY auction - not mine!)
______________
* Chance favors the prepared mind - as Pasteur said (albeit in French).

I'd really like to have a tuner like that. It has exactly the number of presets I need too. I imagine about any component tuner would be a step up from my receiver. But I imagine there's more vintage receivers out there with a better tuner than mine and maybe less expensive than there are vintage component tuners.

Dumb question but I imagine these component tuners have to have a preamp so if I use line level input like CD or video input on the receiver, I'd be bypassing most of the receiver's preamp except for the volume and tone controls (which I leave flat) right? I'm a little unclear, are a receiver's volume and tone control circuitry past the preamp output?

Anyway, just suggestions of a tuner or receiver you might come across is great even if you don't have one you want to ship yourself .

 

[mhardy6647]

I'd really like to have a tuner like that. It has exactly the number of presets I need too. I imagine about any component tuner would be a step up from my receiver. But I imagine there's more vintage receivers out there with a better tuner than mine and maybe less expensive than there are vintage component tuners.

Dumb question but I imagine these component tuners have to have a preamp so if I use line level input like CD or video input on the receiver, I'd be bypassing most of the receiver's preamp except for the volume and tone controls (which I leave flat) right? I'm a little unclear, are a receiver's volume and tone control circuitry past the preamp output?

Anyway, just suggestions of a tuner or receiver you might come across is great even if you don't have one you want to ship yourself .

No, no preamp in most components sold as tuners -- it is just a tuner with (fixed level) outputs. Some have variable output level, but it's not really meant to be used routinely as a volume control. A preamp, integrated amp, or receiver is needed for almost all tuners.

There have been, and still are, preamps with built in tuners; quality and price vary widely -- and wildly.