1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

New HD Channels: RG6 Really ?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV HD DVR/Receiver Discussion' started by thekochs, Sep 3, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. PoitNarf

    PoitNarf New Member

    4,880
    0
    Aug 19, 2006
    I'd be very weary to use RG-59 once D10 starts broadcasting, and I'd bet dollars to donuts that a SWM will not work with anything less than RG-6.
     
  2. carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    12,475
    937
    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    Actually, I think part of the intent of the SWM design was to be able to use any existing in-house wiring (including RG59) from the FTM or PI output port to the receivers. I agree it should not be used between the dish and the SWM, and I agree it should be avoided elsewhere if possible. But I believe it will work.

    Carl
     
  3. ShiningBengal

    ShiningBengal Godfather

    447
    0
    Jan 24, 2003
    You may be right. But I wouldn't go pulling out RG-59 that is working now based on the possibility that it may be a problem with SWM.

    An existing installation won't need SWM in most cases, because you will already have dual cable runs to each DVR.
     
  4. PoitNarf

    PoitNarf New Member

    4,880
    0
    Aug 19, 2006
    Agreed! :D
     
  5. crazy4dss

    crazy4dss Cool Member

    28
    1
    Sep 10, 2006
    Rg59 is not swept tested for the high frequencies that DTV will be using for the kaku dish. u can use rg59 fo only a shot run say about 10 to 15 feet before you realy start getting signal loss but if i had it in my house i would change it before it becomes a headach for my hd system.
     
  6. djr

    djr DBSTalk Club Member

    31
    0
    Oct 3, 2006
    RG59 may be "good enough" for many installations now but it is not the minimum that D* itself requires. Their own installation videos say you "MUST" use RG6 Solid Copper Center wire in ALL H20 and HR20 installations and specifically warn against using RG59. They are emphatic about all components being within specification.

    When the first installer (D* contractor) came to do my installation, he wanted to use the existing RG59, which was installed when the house was built 15 years ago and was probably pretty cheap RG59. When I insisted, he said he didn't have all the parts he needed and left.

    I called D* to confirm that RG6 must be used and was told yes. When I related that the installer said RG59 would be good enough, he said if the installer refused to run RG6 to have them call D*.

    The next one was much friendlier and, although he started with saying to use the existing wire, when I told him D* said it was supposed to be RG6, that is what he used. We did compromise on using the existing RG59 to the two D11 receivers, mainly to avoid running wire outside half the house. He did not fish any wires and I didn't ask him to.

    I understand that installers are not well compensated in either time or money but the job should be done to the manufacturers specifications. I firmly believe many of these RG59 HD installations cause problems and will cause more as the HD/MPEG4/SWM use increases. I suspect some of the obscure problems people report here are caused by not using specification components.

    On the other hand, some of those installations will never have a problem.

    Regardless, specifications are there for a reason and large companies like D* do not waste money on excessive capacity - they have studied the minimum requirements to the nth degree.
     
  7. vertigo235

    vertigo235 Godfather

    293
    0
    Mar 18, 2007
    Nobody is denying that RG6 is better and prefered. The point is that RG59 might be fine.
     
  8. JonW

    JonW Icon

    526
    0
    Dec 21, 2006
    Funny. Installers are pretty predictable. When my house was first installed, the installer gave me the choice of using the RG59 house wiring *or* he'd run a wire along the outside of the roof and drill a hole to get it inside. Fortunately my basement was unfinished so he agreed to run fresh RG6 across the basement to the family room, but since he was unwilling to fish wire, the upstairs bedroom was connected with RG-59.

    There was a little more signal loss through the RG-59, but it worked well enough. Hopefully the SWM will solve this mess once and for all.

    When I had my two HR20's installed I had them both installed in the family room with RG-6. And then since the HR20 supports simultaneous output, I connected the S-Video outputs to a video switch and then to a RF Modulator and use that to feed the other TVs in the house.

    What that solves is now we can watch any program from any tuner anywhere in the house while enjoying full quality on our HDTV.
     
  9. ShiningBengal

    ShiningBengal Godfather

    447
    0
    Jan 24, 2003
    RG-59 has NEVER been approved for DBS installations, by DirecTV or Dish for that matter.

    The point is that sometimes it is not practical to replace existing RG-59 with RG-6. Solid copper is marginally better than copper-clad core center. No reason not to use RG-6 in most cases.

    But the fact remains, RG-59 normally will cause no problems. Your guess that RG-59 may be responsible for "obscure" problems is just that: a guess. My own experience is that cabling problems are normally easily determined and are primarily due to bad connections or excessively long runs. The symptoms are neither subtle nor obscure to an experienced installer.

    I don't recommend using RG-59 in most installations. What's the benefit? But as I stated before, RG-59 works fine in most cases and I wouldn't go spending hundreds of dollars re-running new RG-6 without first determining that the RG-59 is causing a problem. The fact is, RG-59 works in most cases.
     
  10. aim2pls

    aim2pls Icon

    560
    0
    Jun 18, 2007

    only real difference between RG-59 and RG-6 is line loss per HD feet
     
  11. ShiningBengal

    ShiningBengal Godfather

    447
    0
    Jan 24, 2003
    There is another difference: The shielding used on RG-59 is not designed to control the multiswitch/LNB in DBS installations. In RG-6, the outer shield is used by the satellite receiver to control the switching that DBS systems need to change channels. RG-59 has a significantly higher resistance to current flow, hence long cable runs may be adversely affected because the voltage drop puts it outside the voltage range the LNB's need to change polarity, and may be insufficient to power a multiswitch.

    The symptom? Channel changes become erratic or impossible. Hundreds of channels are of little use if you can only tune to one of them (and even that could be a shopping channel!)
     
  12. Thaedron

    Thaedron Hall Of Fame

    1,886
    0
    Jun 29, 2007
    This all comes down to "what is certified to work" vs. "what may work in some situations but not all".

    Vendor minimum requirements are often more than is absolutely necessary for just this reason to stay away from the margins where performance may start to degrade.

    When civil engineers build roads, they design them to be safe for speeds greater than the posted limit. Otherwise everyone doing 65 in a 55 mph zone would be sent flying off into the ditch on corners, etc... Likewise electronics manufacturers (that follow good design principles) test the limits and then set minimum requirements to slightly within the margin of error to account for the extremely wide range of variability that is the "real world".
     
  13. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    183
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    You say that like it is no big deal. If it means the difference between properly powering your LNB assembly and BBCs or not, it is all the difference in the world.
     
  14. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    183
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    I think it very likely that if you have a 5LNB dish, the B-band will be present -- trashing part of the UHF spectrum -- regardless of the connected receiver. I doubt that the LNB assembly has the guts/brains to not pass it.

    It could well be that a BBC would be required for all receivers if you were trying to diplex in OTA digital using the distant BBC method.
     
  15. JonW

    JonW Icon

    526
    0
    Dec 21, 2006
    The same is true of RG-6 if you try to run it too long. It all depends on the cable length. So we're still back to square one. Use RG-6 if you can, but if all you have is RG-59 it *may* work acceptably.
     
  16. Meklos

    Meklos Legend in his own mind...

    324
    0
    Nov 7, 2006
    I would expect SWM to work with RG-6 runs from the dish to the SWM and RG-59 from the SWM to the boxes. From what I understand of the architecture, there should be much less actual 'used' frequency space on the output side of the SWM.

    Think about it. Today, you have a full 'stack' of downlinks on one wire. All H or all V polarity on 101, maybe more. With SWM and one receiver on the port watching one channel (with no OTA diplexing), you should have one 'channel' worth of bandwidth being used on the wire.

    At least that's the way I understand it...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page