RCA Basic Indoor Antenna

by RCA

Product Features

• HDTV Compatible
• Adjustable/retractable VHF dipoles extend up to 36" to improve reception of channels 2-13
• UHF loop for improved reception of channels 14-69
• Off air reception of local channels
• Attached 6 75 ohm coaxial hook-up cable with F connector for easy hook-up

Product Details

• Product Dimensions: 8.7 x 5.1 x 1.8 inches ; 8.8 ounces
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Shipping: This item is also available for shipping to select countries outside the U.S.
• ASIN: B000HKGK8Y
• Item model number: ANT111
• Average Customer Review: 3.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (702 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank:
  • #3 in Electronics > Accessories & Supplies > Audio & Video Accessories > Antennas > TV Antennas
  • #24 in Electronics > Accessories & Supplies > Television Accessories
  • #42 in Electronics > Televisions & Video
• Date first available at Amazon.com: October 2, 2001

Product Description

This high-performance indoor antenna reduces static and increases the beauty of the TV you receive over the air, including HDTV signals. Adjustable/retractable VHF dipoles extend up to 36" to improve reception of channels 2-13. Attached 6 75 ohm coaxial hook-up cable with F connector for easy hook-up. UHF loop for improved reception of channels 14-69. Off air reception of local channels.

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

647 of 669 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars Antennas Compared June 12, 2007

By YSC

I'm a first timer at getting OTA HDTV. This has been an experiment in progress for the past 5 weeks. I have gone through four antennas (they are all here as I write this) before finding something that's satisfactory (rather than tolerable).

I live around 25 miles from Manhattan, where the towers of most TV stations are located. I am also aware of the directional information from [...], and have experimented accordingly with its effects on reception. My apartment's windows all face north, while the signals all comes from southwest. I cannot get signals from where it comes from, and thus needed to get signals from deflections perhaps off nearby buildings and trees. It's a very poor circumstance for over-the-air reception, maybe just slightly better than being underground. Signals are weak, and are affected by weather. Stormy and windy days have shown effects at disrupting signal reception.

With this said, and without going into much detail, let's talk about the antennas. Now all these antenna have been tested with the same equipment, setup, directional adjustments, location, etc. etc. and have been tested through good an foul weather, day and night, to observe differences.

1.Terk HDTVa Terk HDTVa Indoor Amplified High-Definition Antenna for Off-Air HDTV Reception- After reading some rave reviews and high ratings at [...], log periodic types (looks like a fishbone) seems to be the way to go. I got the Terk HDTVa first, thinking that the amplification and VHF antenna should nail my reception problems at the start. However, after more than two weeks of fidgeting around ad nauseam (directions, locations, amplifications, different devices, etc....), I only managed to pick up two ATSC channels' signals, and even those don't have strong enough signals to display anything. I thought maybe it's just my poor location, and that I should probably give up on the attempt. The included in-line amplifier dongle doesn't work at all. Powering it on makes no difference in signal strength readings, which hovered around 5-10%.

It is well built, looks nice, good concepts, but it just didn't work.

2.Phlips PHDTV1 Philips PHDTV1 Digital HDTV-UHF Indoor Antenna- The venerated "silver sensor" which was previously sold under the Zenith brand also had great ratings and reviews. It's in fact nearly legendary. I decided, in desperation, to try it out, even if it doesn't have amplification. It seems all my local HD channels are in UHF anyway, so I won't miss the VHF dipoles.

The unit has startlingly poorer build quality compared to the Terk. It has paint bubbles, hairs and dusts trappings in the paint, sharp edged cheap plastics and much thinner metal blades that's covered in oil and has some dings and bendings. I wasn't impressed with the quality, and didn't expect much from it as I set it up.

To my surprise, it picked up 9 working channels (note: the terk got two channels' signals, but they didn't work) from the start, even if it's randomly placed. It's thrilling as it was the first time I saw OTA HDTV. After some adjustment and location experiments, I was able to receive 19 channels. However, not all of these channels work well given the same direction.

The directionally sensitive antenna needs to be adjusted as I switch channels. e.g. NBC and CBS seems to work well in one direction, while ABC has its own favorite direction, which works also with FOX. I tried as best as possible to find a compromise point where everything works. I couldn't. It just needs to be adjusted constantly.

The transmission is often dogged by reception fluctuations. Signal quality tend to fluctuate quite a bit, especially affected by weather. That means the TV playback would get choppy at times, with its severity dependent on the direction I point the antenna at. I didn't think fluctuating signals was a characteristic until I tried the latter two antennas later. I also found that I had to constantly play with the directional positioning to get a stable signal from each of the stations.

It works, and I was impressed, but then in retrospect it could only be best described as a "tolerable" HDTV experience as I struggled for a smooth signal delivery.

3.RCA ANT111 Basic Indoor Antenna- While shopping in stores, I saw this basic and classic RCA loop/dipole antenna for less than $[...]. I couldn't resist the temptation to try it out, just for the heck of it. It is also a different type of antenna than the previous two.

Again, I was surprised. This cheap antenna worked well, especially considering how it's only a fraction of the price of the two I'd tried. I ended up getting 17 channels, a few less than the PHDTV1, with the same location and setup. Some channels also don't work, even if signals were detected. The quality of the signals seems to be the key.

So what's so special about it? It strangely had better signal delivery for the channels that worked. It's not as choppy, and quality level is very steady. It is also not as affected by directional positioning. I was for the first time able to view FOX, ABC, CBS, NBC without adjusting the antenna. However, the lack of directionality also makes it ambiguous when I lost the signal. It seems that there's no "favorite direction" for the channels, which also means I can't pull in stronger signals at my choosing. It is also quite susceptible to weather changes, particularly wind (which probably affected signals reflected by trees?)

The signal strength also seems to be a little weaker, though the signal quality tend to be higher in general. That probably contributed to the smoother video delivery. It also tempted me to get a similar design that has amplification.

4.Philips MANT510 Philips High Performance Amplified Indoor Uhf/ Vhf/ Fm Antenna- This unit has a "digital TV optimized, patent pending UHF panel array". I thought I'd try it out just for the slightly different antenna design, if not just for the adjustable amplification.

Well, it works, and works quite well. The antenna doesn't work without power, and with amplification turned off it works a little less than unpowered PHDTV1 and ANT111. Yet with the amplification turned on, I get 24 channels, with strength up to 81% (compared to 3-10% unamplified, and quality consistently above 60 and usually in the 70-90%+. That generates the most reliable video delivery of all the ones tried.

While thunderstorms still managed to distrupt signals, it's much less often and only momentarily. I also don't have to worry about hunting for signals as I just point it in one general direction and I get everything but three NJN channels (they are even further from here.. maybe a good 50 miles).

I finally can just set the antenna and forget it. It lets me focus on the programming rather than antenna adjustment. While it needs to be powered, it gives me the confidence to finally enjoy HDTV, rather than tweaking and tolerating it. It's good enough that I can probably stop searching. I hope it'll be helpful to you who may be going through the same purchasing decision nausea as I have. Read more ›

128 of 131 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars A solid option for suburban digital viewing July 15, 2008

By J. Johnston

Because of costs and the fact that we don't watch much TV, our family recently decided to jettison satellite and go back to the venerable over-the-air broadcasts. I have a standard definition TV, so in anticipation of the change to DTV, I purchased this antenna alongside a digital converter box.

I decided to take a chance on this little unit because it was the least expensive out there, figuring it was worth a risk before I started sinking more money. As it turns out, the RCA antenna works great -- we have about 11 digital channels in our area and this device brings in all of them, even with the antennas fully retracted. What's more, the picture is fantastic (satellite-quality) and our digital tuner reports that the signal strength is quite strong. I had to do very little manual adjusting to make it work. I'm glad I took my chances with this little item before I started soaking my money in more sophisticated models.

Now, a disclaimer -- we live about 15 miles from a mid-sized city, so our location is pretty close. That said, I'm also within a couple of miles from an airport, which makes this little antenna more impressive.

UPDATE 1: I've experimented with several other models, including mid-range ($30-40) amplified antennas. To date, none of them have outperformed this little antenna, and most of the time their signals are inferior. The ANT111 has earned it's keep.

UPDATE 2: I found a Terk HDTVa Indoor Amplified High-Definition Antenna at a yard sale for a few dollars. It is the only antenna I have found that has outperformed this antenna.... The Terk is work a look if you want to pay out the money (or can stumble on it used as I did), but the RCA antenna is still the best value for the money. Read more ›

153 of 166 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Great picture - great price February 24, 2008

By beepclick

Length: 1:24 Mins

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000HKGK8Y

99 of 112 people found the following review helpful

1.0 out of 5 stars Ten dollars for ... nothing. February 26, 2009

By Orange Newt

I see that some people have had reasonably good results with this cheapest of antennas. I wasn't one of the lucky ones. I tried the antenna in various positions -- atop the TV, in the window, etc., and did not get any type or quality of signal at all. When I tried to adjust the dipole wands, one of them just broke off.

An update of sorts -- I had the opportunity to speak with a technician at the main station I'm hoping to receive. He said (this is probably greatly simplified) that the TV broadcast network is made up of transmitters, beaming out a signal, and translators, passing it on. Transmitters were required to be digital-ready on February 17, but there was no such mandate for translators, which are being retrofitted or replaced piecemeal. He suggested I keep doing a channel scan every few days to see if the translator in my area, from which we were getting analog signal, has been digitalized yet. He also said that I would probably still get better reception from my old rooftop antenna than from any indoor digital antenna.

And a yet further update, if anyone's still interested by this time; here's some info I read in a newspaper column (and I wonder why it took NINE MONTHS from the changeover for this to be publicized? well, judge for yourself): Arthur Gubeskys, a former Motorola engineer who is now chief technology officer for the HDTV Antenna Labs website, says about antennas:

"Rooftop installation is always the best option. ... Unfortunately, indoor antennas are only good in close proximity to TV towers. ... There is no such thing as an HDTV antenna. Digital and analog television are on the same frequency bands, so any antenna that is good for analog TV is also good for digital TV.... The "HDTV Antenna" is a marketing ploy adopted by American antenna makers to entice Americans to spend their hard-earned dollars on junk antennas ..." Read more ›