TV cabling options for house rewire

baggytiger · 14-06-2015 03:04PM #1

I'm intending to get coax TV cabling installed as part of a house rewire, and wondering about how it should be connected together.

If this should be posted in a different forum, apologies, please let me know!

I'm planning 5 coax points altogether. 2 of these will be inputs only, from cable port (there already) and satellite dish (possible future installation). The other 3 will be outputs only, to a TV set-top box – 2 points on different walls of the living room, the other one for another TV in a bedroom.

At any given time, only 1 of the inputs and 1 of the outputs will be in use. There will be very little changing between different inputs and ouputs – only if I change provider, decide to move the position of the main TV, or want to watch the TV in the bedroom. Even the last of these will probably only be very occasionally.

The options seem to be as follows:

1. Electrician “hard wires” in a combiner for the 2 inputs, connected to a splitter for the 3 outputs – these won't necessarily be accessible easily (or at all) by me, e.g. they might be within the wall.

2. Everything runs to a central location, accessible by me, and is all connected to a coax patch panel.

3. Everything runs to a central location, accessible by me. The currently-used input is connected directly to the currently-used output. The other cables are left unconnected.

4. Everything runs to a central location, accessible by me. The currently-used input is connected to both the chosen living room output and the bedroom output, using a 2-way switching unit. The other cables are left unconnected.

Option 1 will probably result in shorter cable runs. But it may be less flexible in the event of future unforeseen changes to requirements. Also, I understand the splitter will reduce the signal strength, even though only one of its output ports will be connected to anything.

On the other hand, I found a post on another website (whose link I can't post) that says “Don't forget that every joint in a UHF cable will lose around 3db and can cause reflections is Satellite signals”.

If that's true, then that will mean significant losses in options 2 and 4 too, because of the number of joints involved. But is the clue here in the use of “UHF”? I'd be using threaded F connectors, not UHF ones.

If it's not true, option 4 sounds more convenient (flick a switch) than options 2 and 3 (unscrew and rescrew F connectors), but I'm not sure whether it has any additional drawbacks.

Can anyone offer any clarification / advice, including any other options I haven't thought of?

Thanks.

thefalconer · 14-06-2015 04:32PM

baggytiger wrote: »

I'm intending to get coax TV cabling installed as part of a house rewire, and wondering about how it should be connected together.

If this should be posted in a different forum, apologies, please let me know!

I'm planning 5 coax points altogether. 2 of these will be inputs only, from cable port (there already) and satellite dish (possible future installation). The other 3 will be outputs only, to a TV set-top box – 2 points on different walls of the living room, the other one for another TV in a bedroom.

At any given time, only 1 of the inputs and 1 of the outputs will be in use. There will be very little changing between different inputs and ouputs – only if I change provider, decide to move the position of the main TV, or want to watch the TV in the bedroom. Even the last of these will probably only be very occasionally.

The options seem to be as follows:

1. Electrician “hard wires” in a combiner for the 2 inputs, connected to a splitter for the 3 outputs – these won't necessarily be accessible easily (or at all) by me, e.g. they might be within the wall.

2. Everything runs to a central location, accessible by me, and is all connected to a coax patch panel.

3. Everything runs to a central location, accessible by me. The currently-used input is connected directly to the currently-used output. The other cables are left unconnected.

4. Everything runs to a central location, accessible by me. The currently-used input is connected to both the chosen living room output and the bedroom output, using a 2-way switching unit. The other cables are left unconnected.

Option 1 will probably result in shorter cable runs. But it may be less flexible in the event of future unforeseen changes to requirements. Also, I understand the splitter will reduce the signal strength, even though only one of its output ports will be connected to anything.

On the other hand, I found a post on another website (whose link I can't post) that says “Don't forget that every joint in a UHF cable will lose around 3db and can cause reflections is Satellite signals”.

If that's true, then that will mean significant losses in options 2 and 4 too, because of the number of joints involved. But is the clue here in the use of “UHF”? I'd be using threaded F connectors, not UHF ones.

If it's not true, option 4 sounds more convenient (flick a switch) than options 2 and 3 (unscrew and rescrew F connectors), but I'm not sure whether it has any additional drawbacks.

Can anyone offer any clarification / advice, including any other options I haven't thought of?

Thanks.

Along with the coax, no harm run in a cat6, or two to each point, wouldn't be hiding stuff in walls as they will give trouble at some stage a d could cause a lot of hassle to get at after, each cable should just run straight from the point to the central location (attic, hotpress etc) clearly label everything for ease of installtion and troubleshooting

The Cush · 14-06-2015 07:13PM

Are you using a cable provider atm, if so is it digital or analogue? Does broadband come down your TV cable? A standard splitter or powered distribution amp should split the signal between all points.

If you're planning for a dish install in future a min. of 2 cables should be run from the dish to the central location or main TV point as this future proofs for Sky or Freesat satellite recorders (a plus box requires 2 separate feeds from the dish, 1 for each tuner). If you want to go a step further in future proofing and think any other rooms might require a satellite receiver then each receiver requires a separate feed from the dish.

Do you plan to install a Saorview aerial at any time, this will require a cable to the central location.

I would suggest running a min. of 2 cables to the main TV point but at least 3 if possible (future proofing for 2 sat feeds and 1 aerial/cable feed) and 2 cables to each other TV point (1 sat, 1 aerial).

- Run all cables to an easily accessible location, hiding combiners/joiners or such like behind plasterboard is a bad idea if problems occur in future.
- Satellite feeds in normal circumstances cannot be split between tuners, each tuner requires a direct feed from the dish (a plus box box has 2 tuners, a standard non-recorder has 1 tuner). The exception is where there will be more than 4 or 8 tuners in a house then a powered unit called a multiswitch takes 4 feeds from the dish and distributes that signal to each tuner via coax cables.

baggytiger · 15-06-2015 12:26AM

Thanks for the replies.

My main reason for posting was to ask about the feasibility / advantages / disadvantages of purely “mechanical” alternatives to a splitter (such as my options 2-4 in the OP), given the limited scope of my current requirements (also detailed in the OP).

So any ideas specifically about options 2-4? If they're complete non-runners, I'd like to know – I don't mind looking foolish!

But on specifics of your replies...

Falconer, yes, Cat6 is in the plan too.

Cush, thanks for the detail but I'm afraid your reply has prompted more questions...

Are you using a cable provider atm, if so is it digital or analogue? Does broadband come down your TV cable?

No current provider – I've recently purchased the house and I'm getting it rewired before I move in. But I'd want to cater for the possibility of digital cable TV (including HD) with broadband and phone down the TV cable.

A standard splitter or powered distribution amp should split the signal between all points.

If my options 2-4 (see the OP) will have the roughly the same or worse signal loss than a splitter, then a splitter or amp would make sense. But otherwise that seems like more than I need at the moment given my current requirements (again, see the OP).

Anyway, presumably I could install a splitter or amp at the central point in future if my requirements change?

If you're planning for a dish install in future a min. of 2 cables should be run from the dish to the central location or main TV point as this future proofs for Sky or Freesat satellite recorders (a plus box requires 2 separate feeds from the dish, 1 for each tuner).

Twin coax cable will be used. Does your “2 cables” equate to 1 or 2 twin coaxes?

Do you plan to install a Saorview aerial at any time, this will require a cable to the central location.

Not sure...

Could the Saorview use the same cable as was installed for satellite, if there is no satellite connection?

Are all Saorview channels also available as standard from all the paid providers?

Are there any other benefits in having both satellite and Saorview services available at the same time? All I can think of is perhaps if 2 people wanted to watch different things at the exact same time and they didn't have multi-room on the satellite contract.

Thurston? · 15-06-2015 11:47AM

baggytiger wrote: »

Could the Saorview use the same cable as was installed for satellite, if there is no satellite connection?

... Are there any other benefits in having both satellite and Saorview services available at the same time? All I can think of is perhaps if 2 people wanted to watch different things at the exact same time and they didn't have multi-room on the satellite contract.

Satellite & terrestrial (Saorview) signals can share a cable anywhere in the system, as they're in completely separate frequency bands, & can be easily combined.

Saorview is only RTE & TV3 services, TG4, & UTV Ireland, so of course there's an advantage in having more channels available at each TV point, via satellite or whatever, & you don't need a contract for satellite, with many popular channels being free-to-air.

The Cush · 15-06-2015 12:34PM

baggytiger wrote: »

If my options 2-4 (see the OP) will have the roughly the same or worse signal loss than a splitter, then a splitter or amp would make sense. But otherwise that seems like more than I need at the moment given my current requirements (again, see the OP).

A standard power passing multi-output splitter should suffice to distribute cable TV services to all TV points down single satellite grade cable. A distribution amp in this setup wouldn't work but there should be sufficient signal at each TV point. Your electrician would be best to advise.

For future satellite/Saorview install it would be advisable to run 2 single or 1 twin cables to each TV point also, keeping them separate from the Cable TV cabling. Better to be looking at them than looking for them if required.

Thurston? · 15-06-2015 02:45PM

baggytiger wrote: »

... I found a post on another website (whose link I can't post) that says “Don't forget that every joint in a UHF cable will lose around 3db and can cause reflections is Satellite signals”.

If that's true, then that will mean significant losses in options 2 and 4 too, because of the number of joints involved. But is the clue here in the use of “UHF”? I'd be using threaded F connectors, not UHF ones.

Yeah, properly done f-connectors shouldn't lose anything like that, maybe something between .5 & 1 dB at the most, to the best of my knowledge. I don't think they cause noticeable problems due to reflections either, unless maybe if you had a silly amount of joints in the cable.

Sam Russell · 15-06-2015 07:30PM

You could think of using conduits so cables can be changed in the future. Run the coax(es) in the conduit and also run a thread/wire to allow pulling new wires through if required in the future.

Just a thought. Better option than just burying wires in walls.

TV cabling options for house rewire

Comments