TV & Broadband - Cat6 and Coax Cabling for Home

Gruver

I have just begun a development / extension project at my home. As part of the project the house is going to be rewired. Separate to the electrical installation, I have an opportunity now, at minimum cost, to lay/pull cables (coax and Cat6) throughout the house. With a view to taking full advantage of the opportunity, I am looking for some advice as to how best to do this.

In addition to ensuring that cables are as invisible as possible, part of what I am trying to achieve is to simplify the process where I (might) change broadband/TV provider. In the past it has been awkward (for example, UPC -> Sky -> VirginMedia) and, despite competitive deals being available, I have resisted switching. I appreciate that you can't avoid changing set top boxes, routers etc. but I thought there must be an easier way to change service provider without the need to have multiple sets of ugly cables all over the place.

My plan is to bring all inbound communications cables to a cabinet in a new utility room. This will involve eir, VirginMedia, and Sky (satellite (octo LNB)) feeds. From that point I will distribute Cat6 cable throughout the house (probably 2 pairs to each termination point in each room) and pairs of coax cable to each TV point (I previously posted in relation to this topic and learnt that, at least in the case of Sky, a pair of separate coax cables must run to each TV point - effectively directly from the dish).

If, for example, I were to switch from Sky to VirginMedia, I think I might need some sort of switch in the cabinet to change the coax signal from the former to the latter. Is such a switch available?

In relation to Cat6 cables and broadband, I spoke with one of our IT team at work and I explained what I was hoping to do. He suggested that, within the utility room, in addition to the broadband providers' routers, I should install a small patching block for home / home office use, a switch and a NAS. To be honest I wasn't totally sure what he meant.

I wonder has anyone any experience with this sort of configuration? Can I buy the necessary equipment on-line or is it something that I should ask my electrician to provide? Is it expensive? Is there anything else that I might have missed?

Johnboy1951

As this is a new set up you might look at IPTV, SAT>IP, DVB>IP etc.
There are now 'dishes' available which provide all the info on an ethernet cable and the dish powered by PoE.

I guess if you need a Sky subscription that might pose a problem.

snagger

If making a comms room ensure all cables from services can get there and allow for change of service provider. Depending on how many rooms,tvs,people in the house you may want to go with a mutiswitch setup for sat/tv. In each room at them have a coax with diplex wallplate and cat5e/6a for future proofing and in main tv room 3coax and 2 cat5e/6.A sat decoder can be left in comms area and hd can be distriburted via cat5e/6 cable. You can never have too many cables in comms area. Better looking at them than looking for them so leave spare coax and cat cables in attic.Hope this helps.

bk

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

As this is a new set up you might look at IPTV, SAT>IP, DVB>IP etc.
There are now 'dishes' available which provide all the info on an ethernet cable and the dish powered by PoE.

While Gruver could do that, it still run coax just in case, as others said, you can never have too much cable in the wall and would give you greater flixibility if signing up to Sky *, Virgin, etc.

* Though even Sky is going IP with their new Sky Q service and Virgin is likely to follow, so plenty of cat6 is the most important.

Two cat6 to each point is a most and maybe even a third might be handy. Would allow you to flexibility to run IPTV or HDMI over ethernet.

Gruver wrote: »

In relation to Cat6 cables and broadband, I spoke with one of our IT team at work and I explained what I was hoping to do. He suggested that, within the utility room, in addition to the broadband providers' routers, I should install a small patching block for home / home office use, a switch and a NAS. To be honest I wasn't totally sure what he meant.

NAS - Network Attached Storage, a box (really a computer server) with a bunch of Hard Disk Drives in it that allow you to store vast amounts of data on (such as TV shows, movies, backups of your computers, etc.) and then makes these disks and data available on the network. Can include RAID for some data redundancy against failed disks.

QNAP make some lovely NAS for SOHO, that run as powerful servers that include running PLEX, etc. for a great home set up. You can find many on amazon, here is an example of a nice 4 disk one:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/QNAP-TS-453A-4G-Network-Attached-Storage/dp/B017UKCHVM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1464271453&sr=8-1&keywords=qnap

Note the above one doesn't include the HDD's you would need to buy too.

Also note you don't need to buy this now if money is short, you can always add it in future, once you have the initial network setup.

Patch Panel - Depends if you are using solid or stranded ethernet cable. Solid ethernet cable is difficult to bend (preferable for having in walls), so using a patch panel makes life easier, but it isn't necessary.

If you are using stranded-core cable, you could still use a patch panel, but is probably unnecessary overkill in this case.

Switch - Think about it, your ISP supplied router only has 4 ethernet ports. If lets say you have 24 ethernet cables coming into your server room, then you can't connect them all to the ISP router! You need to have a switch to allow you connect all the incoming ethernet cables to the ISP router.

You can get 8, 16, 24, 48 port switches on Amazon.

What I'd actually do is buy a separate, high quality wifi router (e.g. Archer C8) and set it up as so:

ISP Modem -> high quality wifi router -> 24 port switch

Have the wifi router act as the DHCP server and put the ISP router into bridge mode.

Two reasons:
1) ISP routers often can't handle a high number of devices connected to it, due to limited processing power, a decent wifi router will fix this.

2) The wifi performance sucks on most ISP supplied routers. A decent router will give you more performance.

Having said all that, your first priority should be to get the cabling right. All the above gear can easily be changed or upgraded. Once the wires are in place, it is extremely difficult and expensive to change them.

Johnboy1951

I have yet to be persuaded to use Cat6 in preference to Cat5e within the household.
I cannot envisage any single outlet requiring more that the 1Gb/s that Cat5e provides over the distance within the household.
I guess it will eventually happen, but by then I expect it will be an upgrade to fibre that will be the preferred option.

On the matter of coax cable ..... I have ripped out a lot of it and hope to rip out the rest as renovations and upgrades progress.

The only coax remaining in use is that coming from the Dish & Aerial .... and that in time will reduce as the standard LNB gets replaced by a Sat> IP dish/LNB.

The Cush

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

On the matter of coax cable ..... I have ripped out a lot of it and hope to rip out the rest as renovations and upgrades progress.

The only coax remaining in use is that coming from the Dish & Aerial .... and that in time will reduce as the standard LNB gets replaced by a Sat> IP dish/LNB.

Personally I'd never recommend ripping out co-ax but would recommend adding Cat5/6 if people were doing renovations. The requirement for co-ax cabling will be around for a long time to come for the majority of sat/terrestrial viewers. This can be seen with Sky's decision to stay with co-ax when they changed the LNB technology for SkyQ, they didn't go with IP or Fibre.

Johnboy1951

The Cush wrote: »

Personally I'd never recommend ripping out co-ax but would recommend adding Cat5/6 if people were doing renovations. The requirement for co-ax cabling will be around for a long time to come for the majority of sat/terrestrial viewers. This can be seen with Sky's decision to stay with co-ax when they changed the LNB technology for SkyQ, they didn't go with IP or Fibre.

I am not recommending to others that they should rip out existing co-ax, but I do question if fitting it is a long term strategy worth following.

The requirement for co-ax cabling will be around for a long time to come for the majority of sat/terrestrial viewers.

To do what if there is ethernet cable to each location capable of IPTV and other uses?

The Cush

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

To do what if there is ethernet cable to each location capable of IPTV and other uses?

So that the present or any future homeowner has the choice of which technology they wish to use. As the saying goes looking at it rather than looking for it. My brother did this in recent times when he built his house.

Johnboy1951

The Cush wrote: »

So that the present or any future homeowner has the choice of which technology they wish to use. As the saying goes looking at it rather than looking for it. My brother did this in recent times when he built his house.

I could understand that if the house was to go for sale almost immediately, but I doubt there will be any call for co-ax distribution cables in 5 or 10 years time.

bk

I have to strongly disagree, the SAT>IP systems I've seen so far are pretty poor.

Most people simply want Sky or Virgin and a SAT>IP system simply won't give them that. Even if the current owner is happy to use a FTA SAT>IP system for now, what if their circumstances change in future and they decide to go Sky/Virgin or if they sell and the new owners want Sky/Virgin. They are extremely limiting themselves.

I'll bet you €100 right now Johnboy1951 that 10 years from now that the vast majority of people in Ireland will continue to be using coax for their TV and broadband. While those of us on the cutting edge will of course moved on, the majority of ordinary people are much slower to change.

I'd also say that it would be foolish to underestimate ethernet requirements and assume that 1Gb/s cat5e will be good enough for the future.

Virgin will likely be offering 1Gb/s broadband in the next 2 years and the cable industry in general is working towards offering 10Gb/s in 10 years from now.

Also you can also use ethernet to carry HDMI. cat5e can just barely carry the current HDMI standards, it has no hope at all of carrying 4k UHD HDMI, you will definitely need cat6 for that.

As for fibre networking, I'm sure it will happen eventually, but I see little evidence in the market of it coming down in price to consumer levels any time soon. I doubt it will do so in the next 10 years. And the OP needs to put something in the wall today, not 10 years from now!

Johnboy1951

We will agree to disagree bk

Sky is a special case as they do not permit use of their decoder card in other than their hardware. That is why I mentioned it. Is there a similar problem with Virgin? Just wondered why you mentioned them.

Yes the vast majority of people will not rip their house asunder solely to replace the old co-ax. But I would bet that the majority of houses built in 10 years time will not have co-ax distribution, even as a consideration.

I don't see how the speed of internet affects the requirements of TV points. It would hardly matter if 100Gb/s was available from the ISP, if all the TV required was 20Mb/s or even 200Mb/s.

Yes you could carry HDMI over ethernet, but why would you even try when you have a much better IPTV solution which is more flexible and future proofed?

So yes we must agree to disagree on the matter of co-ax distribution in the home

bk

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

We will agree to disagree bk

Sky is a special case as they do not permit use of their decoder card in other than their hardware. That is why I mentioned it. Is there a similar problem with Virgin? Just wondered why you mentioned them.

Sky is the largest TV provider in Ireland with almost 2/3rd of homes connected to Sky!

So as such, Sky is the number one requirement for people setting up a system like this IME. People who have spent a lot of money on buying a house and then even more money renovating it and plumbing it with a home network are in all likelihood goingto want their Sky and Sky Sports HD.

Virgin has similar issues. You need a virgin set top box at each TV and each virgin box needs to be connected by coax. Virgin has about 1/3rd of the pay TV subs in Ireland.

Eir and Vodofones systems don't need coax, being IP based, but so far they only have about 2% of the pay TV subs in Ireland, so largely irrelevant.

Your setup only works for Saorview and FTA Sat, it doesn't even work with Freesat, the recommended FTA sat service, nor will it likely work with the upcoming Saorview Connect boxes. So your setup won't work for 98% of pay TV subscribers, which in turn represents about 90% of homes in Ireland!

To be honest, you are recommending a very narrow minded and limited system, that is very immature and might leave people stuck badly in the future as the TV market changes.

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I don't see how the speed of internet affects the requirements of TV points. It would hardly matter if 100Gb/s was available from the ISP, if all the TV required was 20Mb/s or even 200Mb/s.

Ughh... horrible logic. The OP didn't specify that he just wanted TV, he sounds like he wants to build a whole home network that is future proofed as possible.

And he is absolutely correct with that goal.

It isn't just about TV distribution, again that is very narrow minded. It is also about distributing broadband though-out the house, hanging wifi access points off ethernet points to improve wifi coverage and performance, using ethernet to carry HDMI, mutli room audio, internet of things and home automation, ethernet cables can even carry speaker audio.

And if he did say have Virgin 10Gb/s broadband service, he may well want to be able to use it from his ethernet wired gaming PC in his study. Using cat5e, he couldn't do that. Using cat6 instead he could absolutely do that in 10 years from now.

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Yes you could carry HDMI over ethernet, but why would you even try when you have a much better IPTV solution which is more flexible and future proofed?

Errr... because it is WAY more flexible and a MUCH better user experience IMO.

With HDMI over ethernet you can use the following TV services (in addition to Saorview and FTA Sat):
- Sky
- Virgin
- Freesat
- Saorview Connect (when it launches)

Non of the above services will work with your setup, only a poor version of Saorview and FTA sat and frankly, having played with SAT>IPTV, the user experience is pretty terrible compared to a standard box like any of the above.

UI are pretty terrible and channel changing speed pretty slow in comparison.

With HDMI over ethernet, you can do what I've done.

I've set my study up as a central server room, I've a AV in their, along with a Saorview/FTA sat box, multiple game consoles, mac mini, roku, etc. all connected to that AV.

The HDMI from the AV then goes to two rooms, my living room and my bedroom over ethernet. I use a Logitech Harmony Wifi remote to control it all.

The beauty of this set up, is that on the TV's it works exactly the same way any ordinary set top box would for my girlfriend or visiting parents. And all the cable clutter is hidden away in the study, just a lovely TV hangs on the wall.

If I decide I want to get Sky or Virgin, no bother, I can just drop the box in the study and away I go in all rooms. You on the other hand, are stuck with your SAT-IPTV setup and can never change to Sky or Virgin if you decide you want to.

You are also limited to TV distribution only. You can't do what I do, at a flick of a switch I can play my PS3 in either room, you on the other hand have to leave your PS3 in one of the rooms, looking ugly under the TV and have to physically move it if you decide you want to play in another room.

Oh, and I can still do SAT->IP, in fact my Amiko Alien 2+ can stream over IP, so best of both worlds. I've a third room with a Fire TV and Dream Play app on it, that allows it to access the IPTV stream. It works, but the user interface isn't very nice (bad UI layout IMO) and it is super slow in switching streams. To be honest, I only have it there to fiddle with, the room is rarely used. If it was, I'd switch it to a second HDMI over ethernet setup.

Johnboy1951, don't get me wrong, it is cool to play with new technology and be on the cutting edge, I do the same myself. But this technology is really immature and not really ready for the general public yet IMO and I really don't think you should be giving it as general advice to people on a forum.

I'm afraid what you are recommending is super specific and not at all suited to what probably 95% of people want today and probably for the next 10 to 20 years. Yes, eventually everything will go all IP (see Sky Q, etc.) but at the moment it is WAY too immature and limited IMO.

BTW Johnboy1951, what SAT->IP box are you using?

Johnboy1951

To be honest, you are recommending a very narrow minded and limited system, that is very immature and might leave people stuck badly in the future as the TV market changes.

bk, you seem to be trying to put words in my mouth!
I never recommended anything to the OP. Here is the full content of my post to him ...

As this is a new set up you might look at IPTV, SAT>IP, DVB>IP etc.
There are now 'dishes' available which provide all the info on an ethernet cable and the dish powered by PoE.

I guess if you need a Sky subscription that might pose a problem.

Anything further I posted was in response to your posts.

MrTime

hi
slightly baffled by some of the advanced concepts

but going back to the mention of octo LNB

is a quarto LNB feeding a multiswitch a reasonable option

this would mean a maximum of 4 co ax from dish and another one for terrestrial

multiswitch can be chosen to feed an almost unlimited number of points

Gerry Wicklow

MrTime wrote: »

hi
slightly baffled by some of the advanced concepts

but going back to the mention of octo LNB

is a quarto LNB feeding a multiswitch a reasonable option

this would mean a maximum of 4 co ax from dish and another one for terrestrial

multiswitch can be chosen to feed an almost unlimited number of points

You are correct in your thinking. The biggest negative with a multiswitch is the initial cost compared to a LNB.