Are we past distributed video in houses?

Forums › Home Theatre (incl HTPC) › Are we past distributed video in houses?

MikeAqua

5287 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2145

Topic # 238278 10-Jul-2018 11:48

Question relates to a new build.

With the availability of streamed video, are we beyond the idea of having a video distribution hub in a new build that transfers broadcast signals or disc playback to other rooms?

I'm thinking double data-cabling to each bedroom for ethernet and WAPs, with half a dozen data cables and a WAP in the lounge. Plus coax for FTA TV to lounge and Master Bed - we still watch FTA in the morning.

Switch, Router and NAS in a data-hub somewhere.

Should cover off most services?

Also what is now considered future proof data cabling i.e. Cat-what?

Mike

1 | 2

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 970

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2052566 10-Jul-2018 12:01

If you don't want to distribute SkyTV then yes!

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 970

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2052568 10-Jul-2018 12:06

Not sure if I would even have any use for cables of any sort given the quality of mesh networking options now. But cat6 cable is cheapish so may as well put it in from everywhere you can think of back to where your router will be... but not even bother with a patch panel just leave them coiled up in the wall where it could be.

We put a combined cat6+fibre cable from the outside chorus termination point to the office (router) location - you definitely want to do that.

Dynamic

2463 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 735

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2052577 10-Jul-2018 12:21

8 people support this post

kryptonjohn: Not sure if I would even have any use for cables of any sort given the quality of mesh networking options now. But cat6 cable is cheapish so may as well put it in from everywhere you can think of back to where your router will be... but not even bother with a patch panel just leave them coiled up in the wall where it could be.

Cable will always be faster and more reliable than wireless. Wireless is a compromise, uses chips that run hot and often break down after a few years, and has security issues, so I would always cable.... even if, as you say, you run some cables and leave them bundled up in the wall for possible future use.

OP, I would go with the highest rated cable you can reasonably afford, so the cable stands a chance of being useful in 20 years time with 10Gb ethernet or similar. As best possible, allow for fibre to be retrofitted in future with draw wires in a couple of key locations. Internal use of Fibre may never happen, but personally I would allow for the possibility.

"4 wheels move the body. 2 wheels move the soul."

“Don't believe anything you read on the net. Except this. Well, including this, I suppose.” Douglas Adams

chevrolux

3678 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1389

Subscriber

Reply # 2052579 10-Jul-2018 12:21

5 people support this post

In our new build we only have Cat6 cable. Zero coax installed. TV's are run off Raspberry Pi's running Kodi with the TVNZ/TV3 add-ons for "normal" TV and then TV Shows and Movies all on a NAS. Then Chromecasts for web content like YouTube, Netflix etc. The only video "distrubution" we have is an HDMI cable to the main TV from the home theater amp which is tucked away in the network cupboard.

Not sure if I would even have any use for cables of any sort given the quality of mesh networking options now.

Mesh networks are still MILES away from being "quality". Cable access points will forever beat them and it would be inexcusable in a new build to not cable for at least proper AP's.

timmmay

14280 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2590

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 2052586 10-Jul-2018 12:35

One person supports this post

I'd definitely install Cat6. Wired is faster and more reliable than wireless, and you can do hdmi over cat6 if you want to. I'd put in a patch panel with space for fiber terminator, patch panel, 24 port switch, and ideally a UPS and battery.

AWS Certified Solution Architect Professional, Sysop Administrator Associate, and Developer Associate
TOGAF certified enterprise architect
Professional photographer

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 970

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2052590 10-Jul-2018 12:43

chevrolux:

In our new build we only have Cat6 cable. Zero coax installed. TV's are run off Raspberry Pi's running Kodi with the TVNZ/TV3 add-ons for "normal" TV and then TV Shows and Movies all on a NAS. Then Chromecasts for web content like YouTube, Netflix etc. The only video "distrubution" we have is an HDMI cable to the main TV from the home theater amp which is tucked away in the network cupboard.

Not sure if I would even have any use for cables of any sort given the quality of mesh networking options now.

Mesh networks are still MILES away from being "quality". Cable access points will forever beat them and it would be inexcusable in a new build to not cable for at least proper AP's.

I really meant it when I said *I* would have no use... it's true for me, maybe not for others.

Our data into the house, VDSL, is only 30Mb sec on a good day and our wifi is easily 10 times that so cables don't add much benefit but have the inconvenience of running from a wall to the device. Most of the devices are mobile anyway - only the office computer and streaming devices are somewhat fixed. Some of the streaming devices e.g. basic Roku stick don't even have an RJ45 socket.

Lots of useful stuff with wifi management to kick the kids out at bed time which is a big benefit to me.

In the future there may be some need to have faster interconnections but by then the wireless options will have probably improved commensurately.

Still a good idea to make provision but I can't see myself going back at this stage.

MikeAqua

5287 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2145

Reply # 2052621 10-Jul-2018 13:21

One person supports this post

Will have fibre, so definitely worth having data cables. Also it's easier. I have had problems with WiFi connections on Smart appliances. So Smart TVs, network receiver etc will all be ethernet connected and WiFi turned off where settings allow.. Rule of thumb: if it isn't a portable device, I will try to avoid using it over WiFi.

I'm running all the cables and most of the data cable termination points will behind stuff - so basic wall plates can be used. The cost of adding data cables will be minimal.

Is it realistic to think that large appliances will be able to receive signals for off-peak power pricing or similar. If yes, is this likely to be over cables or wireless?

Later on I'll put some research/thought into how I structure the network, to minimise the risk posed by weak security on IoT devices.

For now I'm just trying to think about scope - which is rapidly expanding.

Mike

sbiddle

27267 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6695

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2052624 10-Jul-2018 13:23

One person supports this post

kryptonjohn:

If you don't want to distribute SkyTV then yes!

Just distribute Sky via IP. So much superior as a solution.

sbiddle

27267 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6695

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2052658 10-Jul-2018 13:28

2 people support this post

After having done a number of hotel deployments lately I find it disappointing that you've got such great IPTV support in the hospitality TV's on the market, yet residential offerings lack these. Being able to simply add UDP / RTSP streams as a source channel on a hospitality TV offers a world of possibility. You can stream all your TV channels around the house, mix in foreign channels and distribute Sky all via IP without needing a Kodi box or app on each TV. It's just a shame the panels are of poorer quality than the residential offerings.

elpenguino

706 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 256

Reply # 2052773 10-Jul-2018 15:46

One person supports this post

MikeAqua:

Will have fibre, so definitely worth having data cables. Also it's easier. I have had problems with WiFi connections on Smart appliances. So Smart TVs, network receiver etc will all be ethernet connected and WiFi turned off where settings allow.. Rule of thumb: if it isn't a portable device, I will try to avoid using it over WiFi.

I'm running all the cables and most of the data cable termination points will behind stuff - so basic wall plates can be used. The cost of adding data cables will be minimal.

Is it realistic to think that large appliances will be able to receive signals for off-peak power pricing or similar. If yes, is this likely to be over cables or wireless?

it would be impractical to send signals like this to many appliances using cables, especially when you have many un-cabled homes.

The bandwidth for this isn't high so it wouldn't even have to be WiFi.

MikeAqua:

Later on I'll put some research/thought into how I structure the network, to minimise the risk posed by weak security on IoT devices.

Keep it simple. At this stage you can think of providing infrastructure with services to be decided in the future.

Just like having hot points in many places where you don't use them right now, you will want to provide network connections in enough places to cover yourself. As mentioned, coil up in walls and terminate later if needed.

Personally, I've just installed coax cables as well as data. My conceivable uses are FTA Tvs as well as FM tuners and who knows what any future owner might want to do.

Dingbatt

3573 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 679

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2052824 10-Jul-2018 17:21

2 people support this post

You could always run conduit in the walls that insulated and dropwires in the walls that aren't.
This from someone who renovated/extended when flat panel TVs were $30K and put the connections in the corners of the living rooms :-\

Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

richms

21612 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4429

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 2052826 10-Jul-2018 17:28

If you want the same content on multiple screens then its needed. Even audio which should be a lot easier to get properly in sync over a network is still pretty hit and miss on consumer devices since they dont have a shared clock for all of them. Expecting that to work properly for video is asking a bit much.

My issue is the cost to do it. I had started to put HDMI over cat6 gear in, but its useless for 4k and most of the 4k stuff is that BS HDMI 1.4 30Hz stuff or is only supporting subsampled chroma modes so not worth it IMO.

Richard rich.ms

richms

21612 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4429

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 2052828 10-Jul-2018 17:30

One person supports this post

kryptonjohn:

I really meant it when I said *I* would have no use... it's true for me, maybe not for others.

Our data into the house, VDSL, is only 30Mb sec on a good day and our wifi is easily 10 times that so cables don't add much benefit but have the inconvenience of running from a wall to the device. Most of the devices are mobile anyway - only the office computer and streaming devices are somewhat fixed. Some of the streaming devices e.g. basic Roku stick don't even have an RJ45 socket.

Lots of useful stuff with wifi management to kick the kids out at bed time which is a big benefit to me.

In the future there may be some need to have faster interconnections but by then the wireless options will have probably improved commensurately.

Still a good idea to make provision but I can't see myself going back at this stage.

Any improved wireless will be in the 60GHz band which needs the AP in the same room, so you will have to cable to that.

I have tried a wireless HDMI over 60GHz sender, it was 1080p only, and very sensitive to positioning, not suitable for something like a handheld device that is being moved around all the time.

Richard rich.ms

hio77

'That VDSL Cat'
9062 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1993

Trusted

Spark

Subscriber

Reply # 2052838 10-Jul-2018 17:42

MikeAqua:

Later on I'll put some research/thought into how I structure the network, to minimise the risk posed by weak security on IoT devices.

Ensure you have decent wireless kit, run a ELRA or the likes for a router.

then just vlan anything IoT. unless it needs to, don't expose to the internet. explicitly allow and deny everything else :)

#include <std_disclaimer>

Any comments made are personal opinion and do not reflect directly on the position my current or past employers may have.

MikeAqua

5287 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2145

Reply # 2053124 11-Jul-2018 09:10

hio77:

MikeAqua:

Later on I'll put some research/thought into how I structure the network, to minimise the risk posed by weak security on IoT devices.

Ensure you have decent wireless kit, run a ELRA or the likes for a router.

then just vlan anything IoT. unless it needs to, don't expose to the internet. explicitly allow and deny everything else :)

Thanks, exactly what I'm thinking of.

Also keen on suggestions to set up a secure external access method for the few IoT things that need it - for example heating and irrigation.

Mike

1 | 2