Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

DirecTV receiver home wiring question (secondary Tvs)


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
14 replies to this topic

#1 of 15 OFFLINE   Erik Waibel

Erik Waibel

    Auditioning



  • 4 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2003

Posted April 25 2003 - 12:47 AM

First, this is my first post here (I have lurked a bit in the past and liked what I saw, so I am joining in to actively participate!). On to my question:

I have had my two RCA DirecTV receivers for a year now and I LOVE the picture quality on my primary TVs (hooked to the receivers with s-video cables). However, my SECONDARY Tvs that are fed by coaxial cables are not super clear or sharp and appear "fuzzy". The cable I used to route to these secondary TVs from the receiver outputs was existing RG-59 from the original Time Warner cable hookup (going through a splitter too). Would replacing these runs with quad-shield RG-6 and good ends (like Thomas and Betts snap-n-seal) help to clear this up? I am concerned with the shielding of the RG-59 keeping interference out as all the runs are VERY close to live romex electrical wire (can't really avoid it due to proximity of main electrical box). I know that the receivers are capable (the s-video output looks FANTASTIC and I don't have super high-end expensive TVs by any stretch of imagination). I am aware that S-video is far superior to coax, but I don't think the difference in quality should be THIS pronounced.

What are some experienced opinions? Worth the time and expense?

#2 of 15 OFFLINE   Scott Kimball

Scott Kimball

    Screenwriter



  • 1,500 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted April 25 2003 - 01:22 AM

There is a very noticeable difference in quality between RF output via coax and S-video output.

How long are your RG-59 runs? Is the picture just softer, or is there RF interference (snow, wavey lines, etc...)?

As a test, take a piece of coax and hook it up to one of the sets that gets an S-video feed, and switch between s and coax feeds (do an A/B comparison). You will notice a difference, but is it as much as on the other sets?

If your problem on your coax setups is the introduction of RF interference, and not just a softer picture, then changing to better shielded RG-6 MIGHT be beneficial. However, if your picture is just "softer," I don't think you'll benefit from re-cabling. If you have 50 ft of RG-6, you can test the theory without running the cable... just plug it in, coiled up.

Unless your coax is running parallel to electrical wiring at distances of less than a few inches for runs of many feet, you shouldn't have a problem with the introduction of noise from the electrical wiring.

The other issue is the RF modulator built in to most satellite receivers is not of the best quality. They do fine pushing through six feet of cable for a local installation, but if you're pushing through 50ft of cable to house-wide distribution, they may not have the power for a good picture. You may see an improvement by feeding an outboard, tunable modulator from the A/V outs on your receiver, and modulating to the UHF band. A decent, tunable modulator will set you back at least $80... don't get the $20 modulator you can find at Radio Shack... it's the same as the one you're using already.

-Scott

#3 of 15 OFFLINE   Erik Waibel

Erik Waibel

    Auditioning



  • 4 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2003

Posted April 25 2003 - 01:58 AM

Thanks Scott!

The runs are about 30 and 40 feet each. The picture is softer, but also looks like there might be interferance as well (it seems to have a lot of "noise" in the deeper reds and oranges). I did a test last night where I took my little 13" kitchen TV and moved it next to one of the receivers where I then connected it with 6' RCA-type (composite) cables. The picture quality was OUTSTANDING compared to the long coax run . I think my friend next door has an extra 25' RG-6 cable left over from a satellite installation kit - I'll try using that as an "above the floor test".

You mentioned possibly using a tunable modulater (a GOOD one, not RS el-cheapo) - I have no idea what some good manufacturers/suppliers are. Are there any that you can recommend? How about some online retailers that I can check out?

Thanks for your reply!

#4 of 15 OFFLINE   Robert_J

Robert_J

    Lead Actor



  • 8,160 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 22 2000
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMississippi

Posted April 25 2003 - 03:07 AM

Orbitsat.com may have some Sony MRD-D1 modulators. They were made by ChannelPlus are are very similar to the 3025 model but with less channels to assign components to. I've used two of them with very good results. Parts Express has the 3025 but you will need to buy an IR target and IR emmiter (those come with the Sony) to relay your remote signals. PE also has their own Dayton line of modulators that I will be trying out soon. If they are like their other Dayton components, they will be a very good value.

-Robert

#5 of 15 OFFLINE   Scott Kimball

Scott Kimball

    Screenwriter



  • 1,500 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted April 25 2003 - 03:57 AM

I've seen the Dayton mod on the Parts Express website. I have no firsthand experience with Dayton, but the price is attractive.

Look at Dayton, ChannelPlus, etc. (manufacturers)
Check out Parts Express (www.partsexpress.com) or SmartHome (www.smarthome.com).

By all means, test it out with borrowed cable first. That might be all you need. If you do need a better modulator for the longer run, though... you should be looking probably in the $80 and up range to get the performance to push through long cable runs. Cheaper modulators are very hit or miss... sometimes a $20 mod will work great over 30ft, other times it won't. The higer-end mods have high gain RF outputs (sometimes adjustable), as well as more channel choices... and they hold the frequencies better without drift.

-Scott

#6 of 15 OFFLINE   Vin

Vin

    Supporting Actor



  • 547 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 23 2000

Posted April 25 2003 - 05:40 AM

Quote:
The cable I used to route to these secondary TVs from the receiver outputs was existing RG-59 from the original Time Warner cable hookup (going through a splitter too).


Erik,

Is the splitter that you refer to here a regular cable TV splitter? If it is, this will definitely result in the "fuzzy" picture that you describe. If this is the case, you need a digital splitter for satellite TV...Radio Shack has them for as little as $10. I would try this first and see if the PQ improves.

Vin

#7 of 15 OFFLINE   Scott Kimball

Scott Kimball

    Screenwriter



  • 1,500 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted April 25 2003 - 06:53 AM

Quote:
Is the splitter that you refer to here a regular cable TV splitter? If it is, this will definitely result in the "fuzzy" picture that you describe. If this is the case, you need a digital splitter for satellite TV


Actually, you don't need a "digital" splitter for the RF output of a satellite receiver. If you are splitting the input side, which is carrying the digital data into the receiver, then you need a splitter rated for the high bandwidth digital signal - or a so-called "digital" splitter.

Erik is just pushing RF. No need for a splitter that handles above the VHF / UHF bands for his current installation.

-Scott

#8 of 15 OFFLINE   Jerome Grate

Jerome Grate

    Screenwriter



  • 2,935 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 1999

Posted April 25 2003 - 07:36 AM

This is what I did in regards with DirecTV. Each satellite receiver box location has a vcr. Instead of using the coax connection to feed the t.v. where the satellite box resides, I used the S-Video connection for the HT downstairs and the Composite connection for the bedroom t.v. I then fed the coax connections out of each VCR to the secondary t.v.s that also have vcrs. Now for each connection I did use RG-6 cable connection. If the existing Coax run is out in the open and can be changed, then I would certainly suggest changing the RG-59 cable to RG-6 Digital Coax cable. The picture was far better with the new cable, and you can still hook the secondary sets to the vcrs composite out put if one exists. My son's 20 inch Apex t.v. looks great, and t.v. in the den RCA 20 inch is just impressive. All feeding from the coax connection and then utilizing the composite connection from vcr to t.v.
Listen Up People.., Rack Em and Pack Em.., We're Phantoms in 15.

#9 of 15 OFFLINE   Jerome Grate

Jerome Grate

    Screenwriter



  • 2,935 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 1999

Posted April 25 2003 - 07:39 AM

P.S. it was a lot cheaper.
Listen Up People.., Rack Em and Pack Em.., We're Phantoms in 15.

#10 of 15 OFFLINE   Vin

Vin

    Supporting Actor



  • 547 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 23 2000

Posted April 25 2003 - 09:26 AM

Scott,

You're right, thanks for the correction. Posted Image

Vin

#11 of 15 OFFLINE   Erik Waibel

Erik Waibel

    Auditioning



  • 4 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2003

Posted April 29 2003 - 01:34 AM

Thanks for all of your input. Through my testing it appears that the RG-6 makes a marginal difference. I believe that the weak modulator in the RCA receiver is the culprit. I'll have to consider whether the increased clarity on my seldom-used secondary TVs is worth the cost of a better modulator.

Decisions, decisions..........

#12 of 15 OFFLINE   Vin

Vin

    Supporting Actor



  • 547 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 23 2000

Posted April 29 2003 - 04:02 AM

Erik,

Do you have a VCR that you can use to try Jerome's hook-up?

The secondary TV in my kitchen is connected similarly: after the coax exits the satellite receiver in the living room it goes to a splitter that feeds the primary set's VCR, then TV. The other line from the splitter runs to the secondary set in the kitchen, ENTERS the VCR (which acts as the modulator), then goes to the TV.....the PQ on the secondary set is very good.

I think this might be worth a shot if you have a VCR laying around.

Vin

#13 of 15 OFFLINE   Erik Waibel

Erik Waibel

    Auditioning



  • 4 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2003

Posted April 30 2003 - 05:21 AM

Hey Vin, it sounds like we have similar setups. Unfortunately I do not have any spare VCRs laying around. I have one on the primary TV in the living room, but it needs to stay there (so my wife can play the kiddie videos for my son). My hookup consists of the composite output of the receiver feeding the VCR (which feeds the primary TV over composite cables). I also have the coax output of the receiver going into a splitter that runs coax to both a 13" Apex in the Kitchen and a 19" Toshiba in the bedroom.

Now that I think of it...........I wonder if connecting the coax that feeds to the splitter to the VCR coax output (instead of the Satellite receiver) will clear things up. That way I will be using the modulator of the VCR (which is being fed by a short composite run of very good quality cable) instead of the one in the Satellite receiver. I will certainly have to give that a go tonight!!!!

#14 of 15 OFFLINE   Jerome Grate

Jerome Grate

    Screenwriter



  • 2,935 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 1999

Posted April 30 2003 - 08:38 AM

Depending on what model sat receiver you have, I realized that certain models allow you to use S-VIDEO and Composite video at the same time. If this is the case and you have S-VIDEO available then by all means use it for the main t.v.
Listen Up People.., Rack Em and Pack Em.., We're Phantoms in 15.

#15 of 15 OFFLINE   Wes Goff

Wes Goff

    Extra



  • 15 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 29 2003

Posted April 30 2003 - 03:54 PM

I install sats for a living. If your secondary tvs have a composite input, use that. just run another line for audio(it will be a mono sound, but thats what your getting anyway with coax.) they have adapters that go from coax f-pin to rca.





Forum Nav Content I Follow