HMM which is better for receiving HD content?

[montypythizzle]

Ok, I have an LG 50PC5D and of course it has a QAM and ATSC tuner. I have no problem using the QAM tuner but some of the content I receive seems to be kind of blurry in moving scenes and of course looks compressed.

Now I have heard that OTA signals are not/less compressed because it is sent through the cable provider. However bunny ears (try to keep the antenna as small and not require as much work as possible and cost effective) are going to look slightly goofy next to it.

I have constantly gone over this before and keep going back to being lazy and leaving it like it is. I mean it looks decent but I get sort of frustrated watching golf (I miss all the prime time content, QQ) and the greens and the sky is looking blurry.

Make up my mind AT!!!

 

[AstroManLuca]

Most OTA broadcasts these days are in the UHF band, not VHF. UHF antennae are those smallish loops. Bunny ears are for picking up VHF channels. VHF is only for channels 1-13, though in many cases, lower channels have been reassigned to UHF frequencies and are given a lower channel number just because people have gotten used to it.

Go to tvfool.com to check to see which of your local stations are UHF and which are VHF. If enough of them are in UHF, you could possibly forego the bunny ears and stick to using UHF only, which is much more compact.

As an example, my local channel 11 station is actually broadcasting on channel 35, but they've been channel 11 for so long that you still enter that number in. Sadly, though, it looks like they're switching back to channel 11 in February 2009. So after that I'll have to start using a VHF antenna again.

Antennas are cheap so you may as well try and see how good your reception and picture quality is. You don't need a special antenna for HD channels, just any old antenna will work.