Sky Q on Second TV

TechnoFreek

Hi,

I currently have a sky hd box, with the rf cable and magic eye solution to get the image on a second tv.

I'm thinking of upgrading to sky Q but I know that solution doesn't work anymore.

Are there any workarounds to get sky q box on a second tv in the house without multiroom. Its fine that the same image is displayed on both tvs

Thanks

Johnboy1951

TechnoFreek wrote: »

Hi,

I currently have a sky hd box, with the rf cable and magic eye solution to get the image on a second tv.

I'm thinking of upgrading to sky Q but I know that solution doesn't work anymore.

Are there any workarounds to get sky q box on a second tv in the house without multiroom. Its fine that the same image is displayed on both tvs

Thanks

Officially no ..... unofficially I very much doubt it.

If the setup you have is sufficient for your needs why are you considering getting Sky Q? (just wondering what prompts you to do so).

stephend2000

A HDMI splitter would work with a HDMI cable going to the second TV. If the run is long then HDMI to Ethernet would work. To get the remote to work in the second room, an IR receiver and sender over HDMI would suffice.

If you’d like to use the existing RF cable, you could opt for a HDMI DVB-T modulator, although that would be more expensive.

I haven’t tried any of this with sky Q but it works perfectly with Sky+ HD so I do not see why it wouldn’t work

Johnboy1951

stephend2000 wrote: »

A HDMI splitter would work with a HDMI cable going to the second TV. If the run is long then HDMI to Ethernet would work. To get the remote to work in the second room, an IR receiver and sender over HDMI would suffice.

If you’d like to use the existing RF cable, you could opt for a HDMI DVB-T modulator, although that would be more expensive.

I haven’t tried any of this with sky Q but it works perfectly with Sky+ HD so I do not see why it wouldn’t work

But that would not make any 'extra' functions of Sky Q available in the other room ....... which raises the question why change at all then?

stephend2000

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

stephend2000 wrote: »

A HDMI splitter would work with a HDMI cable going to the second TV. If the run is long then HDMI to Ethernet would work. To get the remote to work in the second room, an IR receiver and sender over HDMI would suffice.

If you’d like to use the existing RF cable, you could opt for a HDMI DVB-T modulator, although that would be more expensive.

I haven’t tried any of this with sky Q but it works perfectly with Sky+ HD so I do not see why it wouldn’t work

But that would not make any 'extra' functions of Sky Q available in the other room ....... which raises the question why change at all then?

He said it’s fine if the same image is displayed on both tv’s. This has many benefits. The user could be the sole resident and decide to watch tv in a different room. Instead of paying for multi room or moving the box every time, he could use this solution. Also Sky Q has a few more features than Sky HD such as apps and a newer interface. All of which would be available in both rooms. Just not at the same time obviously!

I use this solution since no two people use Sky at the same time and I do not want to watch it in the living room most of the time.

Johnboy1951

stephend2000 wrote: »

He said it’s fine if the same image is displayed on both tv’s. This has many benefits. The user could be the sole resident and decide to watch tv in a different room. Instead of paying for multi room or moving the box every time, he could use this solution.

That is what he has at present, is the point I was making.

Also Sky Q has a few more features than Sky HD such as apps and a newer interface. All of which would be available in both rooms. Just not at the same time obviously!

I use this solution since no two people use Sky at the same time and I do not want to watch it in the living room most of the time.

I guess if those extra apps are the driving force to change to Q, then I can understand the decision.

TechnoFreek

hey guys, thanks for all the suggestions.
As mentioned I currently have sky hd and output the same image to other tvs in the house. this is just for when we are getting the kids ready for school etc, only one tv is in use at the one time so multiroom isnt necessary.

Sky have offered me an upgrade of the skq 2tb box for 25 euro. this is a good deal buti am trying to assess all the pros and cons. the main con being the loss of rf out.
I'm not under any urgency to upgrade and certainly not if it means forking out an extra 16 quid a month for multiroom!

That hdmi over ethernet may be an options as I have the house wired with cat5e

icdg

OP, I think you should think carrefully about why you want Sky Q.

Is it for the larger hard drive? To access the (rather limited) range of Ultra HD content? Those are both good reasons.

The apps? They are rather limited. Spotify, YouTube, and soon Netflix are the main ones. Nothing a Smart TV or Apple/Android TV won’t be able to handle. Or Chromecast with a smartphone.

But the massive, massive selling point of Sky Q is the change in how it handles multiroom. One HDD shared between all rooms. The ability to pause on one TV and pick up on another. Watch all your live channels (eir/BT excepted) and recordings on a tablet. It’s a massive improvement for people taking multiroom.

But you’ve already said you don’t want multiroom and are happy with the video sender.

Think about if you really want Sky Q in those circumstances, and if losing the video sender is more important than what you’ll gain.

TechnoFreek

thanks icdg, that's exactly what I'm contemplating!