Today the Gray Hoverman build-it-yourself antenna has been improved yet again, this time with a huge jump in VHF-HI gain to make it an excellent post-transition broadband OTA antenna for channels 7 to 51.

First introduced to the world in March of 2008, it has been continually improved to the point where it now easily outperforms equivalent commercial antennas and smokes any other DIY antennas out there. Best of all, its free! Just do a Google of "Gray Hoverman" to find it. :)

Well , stampeder , Welcome to the Forum once again after a long time, and unlike your forum on www.digitalhome.ca where you are an administrator and will ban anyone (me for instance, trafficinfo, remember?) mentioning a , on your own words, "competing forum" like this one BTW, on this one feel free to mention the website or forum directly instead of subtlely "just google Gray Hooverman".

I might be wrong on the suspicion , but beleive me I am hardly ever wrong. I can not afford to be wrong !!.

On the antenna subject , I agree with you , the Gray Hooverman seems to be a great antenna and easy for DIY's, specially for the TV stations in this GTA area. I do not know for BC though? , lol lol.

Check out these comparison numbers!

The Gray Hoverman design is based on the Hoverman patents but we are waaaaay past that into a range of performance that beats any comparable commercial antenna (the SBGH smokes the CM4221, the DBGH smokes the CM4228) and any other DIY antenna project of similar requirements.

GH Gain Figures Vs. Similar Antennas

Channel-----4228---4228HD--PR-8800--DB-8---GH10-----DBGH

14--------------10-------11.2---------12.5------11------14.24-----14.34
19--------------12-------11.6---------13.7------12------14.74-----17.17
27--------------14-------11.7---------14.5------13.5----14.61-----17.83
35--------------15.7----10.9---------14.4------14.2----14.75-----18.26
43--------------15.7----11.1---------12---------15------15.30-----16.53
52--------------15-------11.7---------10.5------16------15.03------8.92*
60--------------14-------11.7---------10---------16.6-----NA--------NA

Notes:
* CM4228 is the original Channel Master 8-bay bowtie reflector (data from HDTVPrimer)
* CM4228HD is the new Channel Master 8-bay bowtie reflector
* PR-8800 is made by Winegard (data from HDTVPrimer)
* DB-8 is made by Antennas Direct (data from HDTVPrimer)
* GH10 is a Single Bay Gray Hoverman Gold Standard (data from j3d)
* DBGH is a Double Bay Gray Hoverman (data from 300ohm)
* * is for Channel 51 (antenna not designed for 52 and higher)

The announcement I made earlier today is about a new variant of the SBGH and DBGH antennas that also get great VHF-HI gain. It isn't on this table.

By data from 300 Ohm , you mean without using the 300 to 75 Ohm Balun? If yes , then Would you care to explain why are you comparing Apples to Oranges?. Apples being other antennas using the Balun (which as any other device always introduces insertion losses) and oranges being YOUR antenna with no Balun attached. As you probably know most antennas are designed for 300 Ohms at the Dipole.

Please if the answer was yes , Would you care to mention the insertion losses of the Balun on the other antennas so we can compare Apples to Apples?.

Unlike you I am a Telecommunication Engineer and therefore I always base my technical opinions on technical data rather than personal taste or profit margin. Maybe that is why I am so poor or maybe rich depending on someone's dictionary.

Insertion losses should not be that high either for a balun so the DBGH should still be a very good antenna, performance wise.

Thanks for posting the info, BTW. Good to know you guys are improving it a bit more.

I can see on the DHC forum who 300ohm, you refered to, is? , lol lol lol. I guess you guys were comparing Apples to Apples then, lol lol. My apologies. I wonder if there is a 75ohm user name as well, lol lol.

Who are these guys? Is it actually just one guy? When's the last time you saw a telecommunications engineer use lol? Four times in one post?

I did enjoy the Freudian slip of "Hooverman." Like, in his opinion, it sucks?

I'd like some info regarding "designed for 300 ohms." If these antennas are designed for 300 ohms, but we use 75 ohm cable, why aren't they simply designed for 75 ohms? I think the answer to that is that the antennas aren't actually designed for 300 ohms, but instead they are designed with dimensions that pick up signals, and they HAPPEN to be about 300 ohms...so 300 ohm cable is used. Any telecommunications engineer type comments?

On several web forums one of the leading contributors to antenna design and computer modelling is a guy from Delaware, USA with the user name "300ohm" who has done a huge amount of work on the Gray Hoverman, and I also mentioned "j3d", who has also done crucial design work on the Gray Hoverman antennas on his own free time. Nice guys too!

As far as the GH antennas, the impedance at their feed point is 300 ohms, so a person can either connect a preamp with 300 ohm twinlead input at that point or else install a balun there to convert to coax.

cheers

The reason is actually that most TV antennas use a folded half wave dipole instead of a half wave dipole which has aprox 75 ohm impedance (73 exactly). Why do they use the folded version? ; very simple, because it has a wider bandwith than the half wave dipole that will allow the TV antenna to cover most of the TV frecuencies. BTW just for your info the simplest practical antenna is the quarter wave dipole (practical because the isotropic radiator is just a theoretical representation of an antenna) that uses a conductor surface like the ground and has aprox 36 ohms of impedance.

BTW impedance is a complex number (refer to complex numbering system for more info) in the form Z= R + Xj where R is the real resistance and Xj represents the imaginary part of the complex number Z which is the impedance.

I agree with you that "desing for" was not the proper wording, I guess I should have said most retail TV antennas have 300 ohm impedance at the dipole feeding point.

I was just wondering. That makes sense.

This thread has bothered me from the start because it looks like a commercial thread, where someone is selling something. Then it turns out that they don't seem to be selling anything. They're hinting at something great being out there...that apparently is not available. That leaves me wondering what value this thread has to any of us.

Since you guys seem to know all about this, would you please give us information that is useful to us as end users or as installers? I don't mind doing a research project when I have to solve a weird-ass problem for a client, but this thread makes finding out what the antenna actually IS into a research project!

First, it looks like this:


although no exact specification is given anywhere as to just how long that nice fringe in the back must be....

Second, if that's not the right illustration, how about giving us ALL the information we need, instead of just sending us out to seek out the information you already have? And where can this be gotten? Must this be home made?


After looking at the picture for a moment, I just realized that I don't know something as basic as whether the antenna is shown in its mounting orientation, or whether it would be mounted like a yagi. I see no obvious mounting points to help me out here. I'm guessing, since it looks like a variation on a bowtie antenna, that "up" in the phto is "up" when in use. Please don't criticize if it seems totally obvious to you; this antenna is described as almost revolutionary, so how can I make assumptions about it?

The Gray Hoverman antenna is free as in beer and free as in liberty. It is not for sale. It is licensed under the GPLv3 because almost all of us are retirees who want to give something back to society.

It is very, very easy to find it all over the web. Just do a Google of "gray hoverman superantenna" and you will find it, as I mentioned in the first post.

Your picture shows a commercial version of the original 1950s Hoverman antenna that was our starting point with the design, but we are waaaaaaaayyyyy past that into performance levels that smoke any similar commercial antenna on the market. Our versions look much nicer too.

Build one and enjoy.

It of course has a value, at least from my point of view, as it calls everyone attention on another antenna that although not commercially available it can be done by DIY's. Very easy to build with easy to find materials, and of course very important , the antenna works and could be a good solution for someone out there. Also for hobbysts.

My problem with the start of the thread and the OP is the subtleness , the implicit intentions on how to redirect us to where the proper info is in another website, in other words , not to go straight to the point and just mention where to get more info. Might be in orther to comply with forum rules, IDK , to be honest I hardly ever read forum rules as I always follow rules that over the years I learned and/or was taught.

Like I said on my first post (intended to criticize the , in my opinion, obscure intentions of the OP) there is another website , canadian made as well , that has plenty of info on this matters as well , www.digitalhome.ca

For someone like me who had to live most of his live under the ruling of a dictator back in Cuba, always shown only one side of the story and stopped from even, trying to view the other side, it would be an insult , now that I , thanks to the generosity of the Canadian Goverment and its people enjoy freedom , not to oppose or criticize actitudes that in nature are similar but somehow disguised. In other words, when someone has rules that forbids everyone from mentioning competing forums or will face a ban, it will always remaind me of the now old and sick , and thankfully about to die, Mr Castro. It is just the same dog but with a different collar.

Ernie , maybe now you will understand the several lol , the mispelled words and everything else. When blood boils inside at 100 degrees and the heart beats at 150, when passions and emotions are at maximun , not even the powerfull human brain can keep with the good work and eventually makes mistakes.

My apologies for being OT, I have a tendency to write long posts and apparently to be somehow criptic. But for being honest I will never apology, I will just be happy to face the consecuences, if any.

I will try to build one SBGH myself, now that the old set up died, and of course will post results.

Have a nice and warm day everyone.

Here is a variation made of PVC with step by step instructions and temples


[Link: community.9wsyr.com]

A friend has just completed constructing one ….but I Have not been informed of its performance yet

I questioned the value of this antenna (oops, I almost said "product") because it seemed to be cloaked in a cloud of conspiracy. hd fan's point is right on.

If other forums want to keep member from mentioning competing forums, they are going down the wrong road. We are not here to compete with any other forum, but to be ourselves. If people like being here, great. If people don't, they don't have to stop by. If another forum thinks we are competing, their members will be deprived of very useful information about remote controls, A/V receivers, and other products that they don't even deal with. They impoverish their members by limiting them. This is communism at its best: share the poverty. Equally, of course! (Except with the leaders....)

IBM's approach with the PC was to make internal information available to the world. Apple's approach was to secretly guard everything. Which system is used by most people? Which has the most applications? ...How many Gray-Hoverman antennas will be made in the next year? Twenty?

I find this antenna of no value as it is not available as a product, yeah, that's right, mass-produced and -- guess what -- available to everyone! That also means value engineered, quality controlled, available to be shipped to someone who does not have the talent to make it or integrate it into their system. Hell, if I were afraid to go onto a roof, that alone would make this antenna useless to me! Now think of all the people who are buying converter boxes...since this antenna can't be bought for them, it has no value to them.

I do audio/video system installations and my clients can't afford to have me build these. They are therefore instantly out of the running as an item with value. They are worthless or, as with the forums mentioned, they are limited to those who wish to build them.

It's odd that those who

have created an item that is inherently elitist, isn't it?

I love helping people get the very best TV reception. :)

Anyone who wants the best TV reception from an antenna that they can build themselves is smart to build a Gray Hoverman. Glad to share the info here.

I call this elitist in that the vast majority of television viewers who would benefit from this antenna simply will not be able to do so. It is either too expensive for them, needing custom one-off construction, or beyond their talents to construct. I agree,

Heck, I might!

But what about the other 99.99% of the OTA viewing population? How is something being given back to society by this being kept away from commercialization, and not even spoken of openly by giving direct forum references?