Home > Consumer Reviews > Channel Master 4228HD Long-Range Outdoor Rooftop HDTV Antenna
Channel Master 4228HD Long-Range Outdoor Rooftop HDTV Antenna
See it at Amazon.com for $56.17Average Customer Rating
(4.0 out of 5)
Amazon Customer Reviews
Most Helpful First | Newest First | + Share42 of 42 people found the following review helpful:
Perfect for long range reception.
(5 out of 5) by James Rose on Jun 29, 2007 (Marysville, WA)I bought this antenna to replace an older Radio Shack VHF/UHF combo antenna. I've made the switch to digital only OTA TV and wanted an antenna that would bring in a stronger signal from my local stations, which are 30 miles plus away. This antenna brings then in great.
Installation was a snap. The antenna comes fully assembled. All you have to do is attach it to a mast. You may need to buy a new mast if you are using a rotator with a short mast. This antenna requires about 3 1/2 feet or so of mast to attach it to a rotator, unlike the 12 inches or so that a horizontal antenna would need when used with a rotator.
One caveat - The box it comes in is HUGE. Shipping costs may be high. I purchased mine locally and had to strap it to my roof rack to get it home.
**NOTE** This review was written based on the original 4228 antenna, not the 4228HD antenna.
Installation was a snap. The antenna comes fully assembled. All you have to do is attach it to a mast. You may need to buy a new mast if you are using a rotator with a short mast. This antenna requires about 3 1/2 feet or so of mast to attach it to a rotator, unlike the 12 inches or so that a horizontal antenna would need when used with a rotator.
One caveat - The box it comes in is HUGE. Shipping costs may be high. I purchased mine locally and had to strap it to my roof rack to get it home.
**NOTE** This review was written based on the original 4228 antenna, not the 4228HD antenna.
45 of 47 people found the following review helpful:
Not the same as the earlier (excellent) CM-4228
(1 out of 5) by Douglas B. Moran on Sep 3, 2009 (Palo Alto, CA USA)The predecessor CM 4228 (no "HD" suffix) was widely regarded as one of the very best antennas. A corporate change moved manufacturing from the US to China and introduced a major design change--you can find pictures on the web of the original model and see that it has a starkly different reflector grid. Consequently, disregard the (rightfully positive) reviews of more than a year ago as applying to that previous model (and some of the newer reviews may also be for the old model).
For the 4228HD, there was widespread complaints about manufacturing quality (many times in reviews comparing it to the original 4228 model). So although some may have good experience with the new model, YMMV. For something where I have to climb up on my roof, "YMMV" is almost an automatic disqualifier.
One review I saw (elsewhere) said that the 4228HD's performance is so poor that it is roughly comparable to its 2-bay sibling, which has the advantages of being cheaper (about 40%), lighter and smaller.
Design problem: _Reportedly_ the antenna generates its own interference (but I don't know how big an effect this is): The wires connecting the elements on each side to the balum are different lengths and geometries, thereby creating an antenna that is broadcasting into the intended antenna. This is so, so very basic that it is impossible for me to trust anything else in the design. Note: the _total_ length of each wire from one side to the other is the same, but the balum is connected at different points (relative to the ends) on the two wires, thereby creating the antenna effect (from a review by someone who appeared credible and that was consistent of what I remember of my course in antenna design). Background: Every wire is an antenna, both receiving and broadcasting. Where the effect is non-trivial, the standard practice is to have the two wires be the same length (same frequency response) and parallel, close together with crossovers to cancel each other out.
Design problem, balum (signal): Observation that the balum's location in the plane of the antenna results in it radiating (broadcasting) into the antenna. Aside: The balum provides the proper impedance for the coax cable downleads (conversion by induction circuit).
Design problem, balum (physical): Complaints about difficulties connecting to the balum (sealed box; terminal is not adequately fastened and rotates until it breaks). Complaints that the projected/inevitable problems with the balum (as it weathers) are not easily fixable.
Design change: The reflector screens are very different and in ways that could produce substantial differences in performance between the original and current models.
Manufacturing is also a major complaint in the (credible) reviews I found: Proper connectivity and isolation of elements is crucial to performance, but poor quality construction and assembly negates some elements.
Addon: See the comments for a link to a page quantifying some of the problems mentioned above.
For the 4228HD, there was widespread complaints about manufacturing quality (many times in reviews comparing it to the original 4228 model). So although some may have good experience with the new model, YMMV. For something where I have to climb up on my roof, "YMMV" is almost an automatic disqualifier.
One review I saw (elsewhere) said that the 4228HD's performance is so poor that it is roughly comparable to its 2-bay sibling, which has the advantages of being cheaper (about 40%), lighter and smaller.
Design problem: _Reportedly_ the antenna generates its own interference (but I don't know how big an effect this is): The wires connecting the elements on each side to the balum are different lengths and geometries, thereby creating an antenna that is broadcasting into the intended antenna. This is so, so very basic that it is impossible for me to trust anything else in the design. Note: the _total_ length of each wire from one side to the other is the same, but the balum is connected at different points (relative to the ends) on the two wires, thereby creating the antenna effect (from a review by someone who appeared credible and that was consistent of what I remember of my course in antenna design). Background: Every wire is an antenna, both receiving and broadcasting. Where the effect is non-trivial, the standard practice is to have the two wires be the same length (same frequency response) and parallel, close together with crossovers to cancel each other out.
Design problem, balum (signal): Observation that the balum's location in the plane of the antenna results in it radiating (broadcasting) into the antenna. Aside: The balum provides the proper impedance for the coax cable downleads (conversion by induction circuit).
Design problem, balum (physical): Complaints about difficulties connecting to the balum (sealed box; terminal is not adequately fastened and rotates until it breaks). Complaints that the projected/inevitable problems with the balum (as it weathers) are not easily fixable.
Design change: The reflector screens are very different and in ways that could produce substantial differences in performance between the original and current models.
Manufacturing is also a major complaint in the (credible) reviews I found: Proper connectivity and isolation of elements is crucial to performance, but poor quality construction and assembly negates some elements.
Addon: See the comments for a link to a page quantifying some of the problems mentioned above.
24 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
Excellant product and price
(5 out of 5) by darc87 on Feb 21, 2008 (Plantation, FL United States)I bought this antenna to replace my indoor Terk. This antenna brings in all the channels I received previously as well as about 15 additional channels reaching as far as 50+ miles away. I have it mounted in my attic.
If you are going to mount this unit in your attic be advised that you need a pretty large access entry otherwise you will need to disassemble and reassemble.
If you are going to mount this unit in your attic be advised that you need a pretty large access entry otherwise you will need to disassemble and reassemble.
24 of 25 people found the following review helpful:
Excellent as an indoor antenna
(5 out of 5) by W. Kennedy on Feb 27, 2007I replaced my Terk 55 with this antenna. I am now able to receive HD channels over 50 miles away without an amp. It does seem to be more directional than my Terk but once I got it dialed in it was fine. I installed it in the attic over my garage but had to take the reflectors off to make it fit through the access hole. That was not too difficult and it went back together pretty quickly.
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
Exactly What I Needed.
(5 out of 5) by Colin A. Moore on Sep 29, 2007 (Bay Area, CA)My sole goal for purchasing this antenna was to get NBC. I live in the East Bay- after installing the antenna on my roof I get both the San Francisco and San Jose HD stations. Heck, I haven't even calibrated it yet, I've just finished mounting it on the chimney and plugged it in. Very pleased so far, might not even bother optimizing the angle, I'm getting everything I wanted and more.