Hagar Kelly: maybe it's my monitor that isn't big enough, but couldn't make out how you wired all those loops together. Some info? thanks
good goat: I am about 31 miles W NW of Chicago and with a $19.95 10" x 6" tri-fold antenna with a telescoping 24" whip facing about 10 degrees west of directly south sitting in a window on the second floor and a $14.95 amplifier, receive on a brand new Samsung 48" TV 7-1 -2 -3, 9-1 -2 -3, 20-1 -2 -3, 26-1 -2 -3 -4 -5, 32-1, 44-1 -2, 50-1 -2 -4, 62-1 -2 -3 -4, & 66-1 -2 -3. I don't know if you would count the channels as 8 or 27. The antenna and amp came from Walmart. My previous 5 year old 32" Samsung TV with the same antenna in the same location but with no amplifier would also receive 5 and a very snowy 2 which I don't understand. If the antenna could be rotated 90 degrees it would be pointed right at the Chicago transmitters. In spite of apparently no thought of engineering a design except for using cheap and common materials and ease of assembly, some of the youtube video makers claim and seem to show good results. instead of criticism maybe actual comparisons would prove the importance of sound design practice.
Ben Hansford: I think if you took your old antenna and moved it to the back window it would have to the same as your copper tube antenna. but you sure bashed people a lot for an educated idot
Colin Roth: i think this guy just wanted to hear himself flap his lips and be an idiot
Qeelin: You should consider changing the title to "How to be a pickle to people who don't know as much as I do". This is nothing more than a rant about other peoples videos. I endured your f-bomb rant trying to get some good information but you didn't even show the details of your build.
Drone stuff: So what antenna do you recommend for purchase? I'm looking at Denny's Stacker, Clear 4v, ebay 360 and a Wineguard DB4E. thanks, Rick
lwj w: I wonder how four of these circular designs would work being put in a series on a pole like the standard ones ?
lwj w: good effort tho, this world would be a lot better if people would experiment with everything to try and find a better solution instead of going along with everyone else's opinions..
Ricky Ric: @Ash Hack, Ya know, u stopped me dead in my tracks as I was walking out the door to go get supplies for my bow tie antenna. You definitely caught my attention with what you were saying and sounded very knowledgeable. I was shocked to hear you say how poor that bow tie set up is. You are the first one I heard that complained about it. I still watched your entire video. You were able to get 11 channels with your set up. The Bow Tie is getting 40 plus channels. You spent a small fortune on the supplies. I literally just need a coax converter/ transformer and have everything else. I'm definitely going with the Bow Tie setup after seeing you only picked up 11 channels with your very complex expensive set up.
mrblowhard2u: So, you picked up 21 Channels, some with a very weak signal and would be worthless to view. The Chicago area has over 90 TV cannel's available. Some city's have way less so, if I only pick up 5 o6, my Antenna is not worth crap?
Leon De Vose, II: Why not simply offer your design as an alternative to the Bow-tie dipole. Trashing someone else's efforts to help others helps no one. It certainly does not serve you. I will build both and see which works best. I am actually looking for ways to resolve reception problems from FM to UHF.
The main thing I am trying to say is that your idea looks good. The others' idea works for a lot of people. You make yourself look better by simply giving the primer on wavelength and frequency relationships to antenna design. One of the bow-tie dipole antennae specifically mentioned the use of copper as a superior RF conductor. Talk about materials and conductivity. I have no problems with the teaching end, and I think others who have berated you also would have not been so negative but for your negative comments about others' ideas - that work!
Calling someone else stupid does not make you appear smart. Oh. and when you reshoot or edit this, can the profanity.
Arthur Hau: Technically speaking, the so-called bowtie antenna often shown on youtube is called biconical antenna. A "solid" bowtie antenna is a two-dimensional version of a three-dimensional biconical antenna. a double-horizontal-vee antenna is a non-solid bowtie antenna and hence is a simplified version of a solid bowtie antenna. A non-solid bowtie is NOT a dipole antenna! Do some research, dube. You are very confused. BTW, the wiring of the 4 bay bowties shown on yourtube is correct, so you are wrong. See if you are smart enough to figure out why it is correct. Your comments on the bowtie antennas shown on this video are ALL WRONG. Do some research and apologize to all the people out there. Be a gentleman!
Kal Jak: approx 2.50 seconds you say "freaken problem " but hate to tell you genius you ref "bow tie" antennas. I agree with your idea of right tools for job metal not coat hangers etc etc, you lost me at circular polarity. news for ya bro. maybe you're confused omni directional signal with circular polarity. Ota signals for tv and radio are not vertical nor circular, they are horizontal and omni directional (which means looking from sky down on antenna signal pattern it spreads like a ripple caused on water by a pebble, yes in a circle that's called OMNI DIRECTIONAL aka 360 degrees BUT signal is not vertical it's horizontal , that's why it's spreads outward. Signal is coming to you left right pattern not up and down pattern for VHF uhf fm am shortwave c band satellite. circular polarity is a corkscrew signal, spreads out in one direction like a flashlight, used by all small dish companies, directv, dishnet, bell tv, so that's where I lost faith in the video, you're welcome oh me? rf engineer
أهل البيت: اللهم صل على محمد وال محمد و عجل فرجهم ولعن اعداهم
Richard Ulmer: get to the point make the thing.not a lesson in TV waves
James Thom: you've got almost as many dislikes as likes..should tell you something