Rabbit ears, or an antenna based on the legacy analog systems may not to cut it. In order to effectively receive a DTV broadcast, a new antenna may be needed. The DTV spectrum occupies parts of both former VHF and UHF spectrums. So if the old antenna (ie rabbit ears) only recieved VHF, it will not effectively work for the new DTV signals. I would suggest upgrading to an outdoor antenna, pointed to the best source. Note, this may not be the closest geographically, but the one with the best line of sight.

Now, before anyone claims they cannot install an outdoor antenna, please go Google the OTARD Rule (Over-The-Air-Reception-Device Rule). This is an FCC regulation which "prohibits restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance or use of antennas used to receive video programming." This rule includes installation of satellite dishes, TV antennas as well as wireless internet antennas. It is not absolute, as restrictions can be imposed, but the restrictions cannot prevent installation, substantially increase cost of installation or precelude reception of a quality signal. It applies to both renting a single family home or an apartment. According to the FCC, "renters may install antennas within their leasehold, which means inside the dwelling or on outdoor areas that are part of the tenant's leased space and which are under the exclusive use or control of the tenant. Typically, for apartments, these areas include balconies, balcony railings, and terraces. For rented single family homes or manufactured homes which sit on rented property, these areas include the home itself and patios, yards, gardens or other similar areas. If renters do not have access to these outside areas, the tenant may install the antenna inside the rental unit. Renters are not required to obtain the consent of the landlord prior to installing an antenna in these areas. The rule does not apply to common areas, such as the roof or the exterior walls of an apartment building. Generally, balconies or patios that are shared with other people or are accessible from other units are not considered to be exclusive use areas."

So, under most circumstances, a tenant can install an antenna and should the landlord impose unreasonable restrictions on doing so, they are in violation of this regualtion.


Now, as to this discussion on digital vs. analog, I completely understand the frustration with the transition from analog to digital. The cliff effect is something which is scary, but in reality, can be overcome with better modulation techniques, error correction and better RF electronics. Additionally, while the effect is dramatic, the range can actually work out to be longer using a digital device. Or said differently, the cliff can be pushed out beyond where the analog signal is useable.

There are also other reasons for using digital beyond the benefits of decreased spectral occupation. Part of this is the flexibility of the radios. Analog waveforms have reached their limit, where digital radios allow for numerous new features not before seen. A digital radio is capabale of adapting to changing requierments, doing so far better than its analog counterparts. Digital radio technology is advancing very quickly with newer waveforms and techniques arriving all the time. It is still fairly new in its use (compared to the 100+ year history of analog radio), so it is still developing. For that matter, it took several decades from Maxwell and Hertz's discoveries until Marconi successfully invented the first commercial radio and many more years before it was a stable, viable technology in wide spread use. Digital radio technology is expanding the capabilities of wireless communication. Moving to digital might be painful and cumbersome at first, it can (and certainly will) provide signifigant leaps forward in capability for the user. The military has been experienceing such as they have transitioned and I am sure the railroad industry will as well.