Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
220 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am looking to either get these 2 antennas for VHF-Hi, the benefits of the Y10 seem to be good price but with 10 elements, its gotta be huge for VHF-hi. The C5's benefits obviously shown is it's small size but more expensive. Which of these antenna's has a better gain? Also does anyone know how much db loss the vhf/uhf diplexer that comes with the C5 has? or would it be better to get the pico UVSJ?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,074 Posts
I own the C5 myself. After contacting Antennas Direct, one of their techs bench tested a random selection of their UVSJ's, and found insertion loss to average around 0.5dB to 1dB. I don't use this part, as my pre-amp has separate inputs for VHF and UHF. The UVSJ comes with an excellent weather enclosure--probably the best I've seen on the market--that is designed specifically for this UVSJ.

This link provides a good comparison of the two antennae. The Antennacraft is 10' long.

In short: The C5 is about 3dB lower in gain on channel 7 and 8, and about 6dB to 7dB short on the high end (channel 13).

What the above link doesn't discuss is beamwidth. The Yagi likely has a much tighter beamwidth. This could be an advantage or disadvantage, depending on your situation.

For example, here in Kitchener, I can receive both Toronto ch 9 and Hamilton ch 11 very well while pointed at Toronto. Which makes the C5 great if you want to tune multiple VHF stations without rotating (also great for a multi-TV home).

With the Log-periodic VIP307SR I had previously (similar characteristics to a Yagi), ch 11 would likely still be viewable in digital, but with substantially less signal (while pointed at Toronto). Toronto and Hamilton are approximately 42° apart at my location.

On the other hand, if you have a strong local VHF nearby, and you're trying to get it into a null so it doesn't overpower adjacent distant VHF stations, you might have an issue. Tight beamwidth is also desirable in high-multipath areas (due to large buildings, etc).

In my situation, channel 13 is 7 miles alway, and very strong. Fortunately this station is 180° from Toronto, and thus manageable on the back side of the C5.

I hope this helps!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,074 Posts
Given your location, Ontherooftop, you shouldn't have any difficulty receiving Barrie (ch 10 post-transition), Hamilton (ch 11), Kitchener (ch 13) & Toronto (ch 9) VHF stations with a C5.

It's doubtful that you'll receive channel 7 from western New York with any commercially available VHF antenna. Unless channel 7 applies to change their technical parameters after August 31, 2011, which are currently restricted to protect the channel 7 (unused) transitional allocation in Kitchener.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
220 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Yeah thanks, I see the C5 wins in terms of small size and I saw a chart of the C5 and it showed a large beamwidth and even showed a pretty good sized beam width from the back of the C5. I only care about ch 11, ch 9, ch 7 buffalo and rochester has lots of VHF channels so it can make for good tropo a C5 hooked up with a CM4221HD. If I get Barrie's 10 of the backside which is 40 miles away then I guess that should be alright too, but I am still gonna point south instead of North due to all the channels south. Seems amazon reviews are saying its worth the price, it's smaller and more beamwidth than the yagi Vhf-hi antenna ( which is considered to be one of the highest gain for VHF-hi), but I think it's like 10 feet tall which is way to much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
534 Posts
The C5 is relatively comparable to a 5-element high-VHF Yagi in high-V performance (gain-wise). In cases where you absolutely need the extra gain of a 10-element Yagi, well, you need the bigger antenna.

The C5 has a relatively flat gain across the entire high-VHF band as indicated on its data sheet at https://www.antennasdirect.com/cmss_files/attachmentlibrary/pdf/C5 w_UHF-TDS.pdf This matches my on experiments referencing it to a dipole of VHF 8 and 12 last year.

Off the back side, the C5 exhibits nearly unity gain on channel 7 and drops to around -10 dB on channel 13. If your relative signal powers are within limits, back-side reception is certainly possible with the C5. If you need to, the loop can be used by itself as a bi-directional antenna.

On high-VHF, the C5 exhibits a very consistent horizontal beam-width of about 70° across the entire design band, similar to the horizontal beam-width of its UHF siblings C1 and C2. On UHF, the C5 behaves much like an omni.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,074 Posts
Though smaller, the C5 does occupy more vertical mast space than a Yagi. You'll need to factor this in, especially if you intend to mount it with a bowtie UHF on the same mast.

With regards to tropo, I've had good success with the C5. During the warmer months, channel 7 is frequently received here, despite a strong local electrical interference issue at my location. Channel 8 from Cleveland also makes regular appearances.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
Another "real world" discussion of the C5.
Thanks for posting that -- I somehow missed it in spite of regularly reading TV Technology.

As was the case with me, the operative word in O'Neal's article is "skeptical". Although I had ballparked the size, when the C5 arrive I was disheartened by the light weight and small dimensions of the box and had even started making plans to return it. I've become persuaded that the bigger, the uglier and the heavier, the better. :)

Well, suffice it to say that the C5 has become a real favorite of mine besting VHF performance on much larger (and heavier) VHF-specific antennas. I've tried others in a head-to-head comparision but invaribly go back to the C5.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top