# Is there a setup that will do this...?



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

I'm an HGTV fanatic. The Den DVR is almost always tuned to HGTV as I work/play on my computer. It is very common for me to rewind, pause etc. such that I am behind Live TV, I'll call this "delayed live TV". Currently I have the composite output feeding a standard definition modulator. This allows me to go to another TV and continue watching the delayed Live TV (in SD). Whole house IR provides control of the Den DVR from the other rooms.

I would like to upgrade to HD at all TV locations (2 additional TVs at the moment). But I don't want to loose the ability to continue watching the delayed Live TV.

I think the only setup that Directv offers that may be able to do this is the HR34, but I am not sure. Or perhaps the Directv PC software.

I do not want to press record in order to continue watching a delayed Live TV program for reasons I won't go into. That is not an option.

If Directv does not have this ability then I will have to cough up for an HD modulator, or continue with the SD method. 

Any options from Directv to make this happen? I don't mind adding boxes and paying additional mirror fees as long as it doesn't get too expensive. At some point the HD modulator starts to make sense if Directv equipment/fees get too pricey.

Thanks!


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

You can get an HDMI splitter, and feed the other tv(s) with HDMI if the distances are not to great, or you can run 5 bundled coax cables to each room for component distribution (RGB LR). Currently, with MRV, and no RTV clients available (unless you happen to buy RTV capable Samsung TVs for your upgrade), you will need to record on the main DVR, in order to trick play with the satellite receivers, or, get a DVR for each of your other locations that you can independently trick play.

Another option would be an HD slingbox, which I dont know much about, but believe would allow you to feed whatever is on your main tv, over an in home or internet connection to another tv via ethernet or wireless?


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

Thanks Dave.

Routing HDMI cables or additional coax is a possibility, at least to some locations. I put conduit in the walls before sheet-rocking. However the conduit already has 2 RG-6 and 2 Cat 5's so fishing an HDMI cable could be tricky, but may not be impossible. I don't give up easily.  And I own a lot of tools. 

Have been trying to understand if I can split HDMI (HDCP issues?) and route it to different TVs that have different resolutions: main TV is 1080i, others are 720P. I'm not sure if splitting will work. I need to do more research. Of course if anyone here knows what will or won't wrok please share. I assume I need to at least set the output to 720P. Don't need to get side-tracked on this right now. 

Assuming RVU boxes become available, or I purchase RVU TVs (not too likely, X3 TVs), would that fit my requirements as described in my first post? HR34 + RVU boxes (and/or TVs) = able to continue watching delayed live tv in another room? I can wait for RVU boxes if they are coming.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

OH, and by the way. I've read the thread on AVSForum with respect to HDMI over CAT-5e. Not a lot of sure fire success so I don't want to go there.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Well, the RVU TVs would capture one tuner on an HR34 for each one, giving you basically a 1 tuner DVR.

You could set the resolution to 1080i, and if your other TVs were 720p they would still accept the 1080i and convert it to 720p internally.

Currently, HDCP is only used on the movie channels (I think, not sure). Even if they do use HDCP, I would think the way the splitters work, would be to negotiate the HDCP with the primary monitor, and then just split the signal to the others. They all couldnt (I dont think) do a negotiation, because I doubt the source (HR34) is designed to negotiate HDCP/HDMI handshakes with multiple monitors...but I am just guessing here, as I dont use them. I am pretty sure if you read the specs, it should mention that, or else just ask the seller how that works. Monoprice sells them, and are real good about answering customers questions.

WHY no one has come out with a ATSC modulator, which would solve 100% of these problems is beyond me.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Davenlr said:


> Currently, HDCP is only used on the movie channels (I think, not sure).


I'm afraid you're several years behind. DirecTV2PC showed a lot more channels using it and problems if your PC didn't support it.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

Davenlr said:


> Well, the RVU TVs would capture one tuner on an HR34 for each one, giving you basically a 1 tuner DVR.


Sorry I don't understand, are you saying that the HR34 with RVU would do want I want, I can access the tuner that was being used in the den and continue watching that delayed live TV program on the other TVs? Or are you saying each TV locks on to a different tuner, and those Tv's can't access a common tuner?



Davenlr said:


> WHY no one has come out with a ATSC modulator, which would solve 100% of these problems is beyond me.


I'm looking to get the ZVBox 180. A 1080p QAM modulator, if there is no solution from Directv, but the ZVBox is over $1K.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Probably off the wall but would two DVRs tuned to the same channel and using the buffer work for you?


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

nowandthen said:


> Sorry I don't understand, are you saying that the HR34 with RVU would do want I want, I can access the tuner that was being used in the den and continue watching that delayed live TV program on the other TVs? Or are you saying each TV locks on to a different tuner, and those Tv's can't access a common tuner?
> 
> I'm looking to get the ZVBox 180. A 1080p QAM modulator, if there is no solution from Directv, but the ZVBox is over $1K.


On the first question, the last answer is correct. The only way they could access a common tuner is if the common tuner was recording.

As for the ZVBox....OUCH OUCH OUCH. But if you DO get it, please post a review here, PQ, Audio quality, Closed captioning compatability, etc. Is that what Best Buy uses in the showrooms to distribute HD?


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

Davenlr said:


> WHY no one has come out with a ATSC modulator, which would solve 100% of these problems is beyond me.


There are ATSC modulators, but they are very very expensive and not oriented to the consumer market.


----------



## Joe C (Mar 3, 2005)

nowandthen said:


> OH, and by the way. I've read the thread on AVSForum with respect to HDMI over CAT-5e. Not a lot of sure fire success so I don't want to go there.


Use HDbaseT from monoprice. I'm using both of these with 75' of CAT6 cable. A HR24-500 and a Samsung BD player are connected. http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10105&cs_id=1010504&p_id=8121&seq=1&format=2 and http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10105&cs_id=1010504&p_id=8122&seq=1&format=2. The cheaper on uses 2 cat 5e/6 cables and the more expensive one only one CAT5e/6 cable.


----------



## bpratt (Nov 24, 2005)

I use this Monoprice 4x1 HDMI splitter to feed 3 HDTVs and it works great:

http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10113&cs_id=1011307&p_id=6192&seq=1&format=2

Two of the TV are 1080p and one of them is only 720p capable. I set my HR21-700s to output at 1080i and all TVs receive a great picture. My longest HDMI run is 55 feet (a 25' cable connected to a 30' cable). All cables I am using come from this group:

http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240&cs_id=1024005


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

Thanks for all the replies. Yeah the ZVBox is very pricy. Not to excited about that option but it would give me HD at all RG-6 locations in the house. I'l post if i get it, but I'll have to think about that for a while. 

If I go CAT5 route then I need at least CAT5e, right? My CAT5 (5e?) was put in around 1998-2000. It reads "...MULTILAN ENHANCED VERIFIED (UL) CAT5 TO TIA/CIA 568A 24AWG 4UTP... I take it that means it is CAT5e?

Fishing HDMI may be the lowest cost and most reliable, but I can't get it everywhere. At least not every where with reasonable lengths.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

I just ordered a ZVBox 180. Yes it's pricey, but if it performs as advertized, I should have a rock solid HD distribution channel in my home. No messing with Cat-5 or fishing HDMI cables or dealing with SD/HD nag screens. If this works as advertized, I can connect any tv in my house or detached garage to my existing coax and get HD.  I bought an HDTivo years ago for just about as much money and as we all know it is nothing more than a boat anchor now. I think this unit will last a lot longer than that Tivo. I'm looking forward to simple HD distribution.


----------



## bpratt (Nov 24, 2005)

I'm not sure what the ZVbox 180 is capable of. I looks like it has no HDMI input so if your service provider (Looks like you might be using DirecTV) decides to only provide true HD over HDMI with HDCP support, you could only then broadcast 480p to all TV sets. (Some of the PPV channels broadcast by DirecTV can only be viewed using an HDMI/HDCP connection, and by the end of 2012, they could all be that way)
Also, it appears to me that all TVs connected to the 180 would only be able to view the one DirecTV channel that your DirectTV receiver was tuned to, or if you connect an off air antenna to the 180, they could be tuned to any off air HD station you can receive.

I may not understand the full capabilities of the ZVbox 180, but for the amount of money you are spending on it, you should really understand its capabilities.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

The whole point of what I am after is to be able to see what that one receiver is tuned to. That way, if I'm watching delayed live tv in one room, I can go to another room and continue watching that same delayed live tv program.

I know it's component input only.


----------



## NewForceFiveFan (Apr 23, 2010)

OP, I had your exact setup to feed an SD tv in the basement except my DVR was HD and not SD. You didn't mention if the TV in the Den was and HDTV or SDTV. RF modulators are stupid architecture and only output 4:3. What that means is it can't tell if you're feeding it a 16:9 video or a 4:3. That's why you set a DVD player to 4:3 Letterbox mode when hooking up to an sdtv with an rf modulator. With an HD-DVR set to display Widescreen for the Den tv what that means is your SD tv in the second location will display SD programming correctly but HD programming will be squished sideways to fit into 4:3 which is all an RF modulator knows how to put on screen. It doesn't have the circuitry to Letterbox an HD picture like those digital OTA tuner boxes that came out a couple years ago.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

All of my TVs are HD capable. I do not see any aspect ratio issues using the SD modulator. Are you saying I will have aspect ratio issues when I use an HD modulator?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

nowandthen said:


> I know it's component input only.


You seem to be overlooking the implications of component only.

On the one hand you're looking for a solution that guarantees long-term usability but at any time HGTV could choose to implement content protection and the component outputs on your DVR would go dark. Useless.

It may not happen this year or the next, but it isn't at all unlikely to happen; especially if boxes like the ZeeVee units catch on.

The other issue is that, going forward, it is pretty likely that component outputs are going to disappear entirely and you'll be stuck without a source DVR.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

nowandthen said:


> I just ordered a ZVBox 180. Yes it's pricey, but if it performs as advertized, I should have a rock solid HD distribution channel in my home. No messing with Cat-5 or fishing HDMI cables or dealing with SD/HD nag screens. If this works as advertized, I can connect any tv in my house or detached garage to my existing coax and get HD.  I bought an HDTivo years ago for just about as much money and as we all know it is nothing more than a boat anchor now. I think this unit will last a lot longer than that Tivo. I'm looking forward to simple HD distribution.


Over $1200, I'll say its pricey. I went a route, similar to another post for under $150. Ordered from mono price: HDMI to cat 5e/6 wall plates, powered HDMI splitter and 150' of cat 5e cable. Yes it took a bit of effort to run two 75' cat 5e cables, but not $1,000 worth.

Good luck and let us know how the ZVbox 180 works out!


----------



## vict (Nov 26, 2007)

Just reading over this thread, and it seems to me that the OP is a perfect candidate for WHDVR service, and if he's planning on moving to HD for all his TVs, this seems like a no brainer.

I know he mentioned he didn't want to "push record" everytime he wanted to watch "delayed live tv". However, with a Whole Home setup with three HD recievers, he could likely record all the HGTV content he wanted at any given time.

It just seems that having WHDVR service and "pushing record" before moving into the next room to continue watching the program is easier and much cheaper than some of the alternates suggested.

If it were me, and i didn't want to go the WHDVR route, then an HDMI splitter is what i would do. 1080 vs. 720 shouldn't be a problem, as your TV should convert it, as previously mentioned.


----------



## bpratt (Nov 24, 2005)

If the OP is using this solution because he can use his existing coax, there are cheaper solutions:

http://www.hdtvsupply.com/hdmi-to-coax-adapter.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...IGI_HD_COAX_S_DIGI_HD_COAX_S_Transmitter.html


----------



## soccergrunt (Nov 17, 2005)

If you can go with routing HDMI to each location you can also check out this matrix switch from Monoprice. http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10110&cs_id=1011002&p_id=5704&seq=1&format=2

I use it for my whole house distribution, but I fished HDMI from my family room to each TV locaiton in the house. I have two HR23 DVRs, a THR22 DVR and a Roku2 located in the family room. All four sources feed this switch then are routed to the family room TV next to the set up, basement TV and TVs in two bedrooms. Each location can receive a signal from any of the DVRs or the Roku. It also enables us to pause live TV in one room then pick it up in another room all controlled using IR extenders back to the family room. It is a little different than just adding a splitter, but enables expansion of multiple sources for video at one location and distributing to multiple locations using HDMI.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

It would be one thing if any of the HGTV content were live, but as it is, I'm thinking as long as everything is synchronized, it doesn't really matter.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

[STRIKE]And with the ZVbox, aren't you talking about the added PQ degradation of analog component to 4:2:0 sampled A-D conversion, ATSC MPEG-2 encoding, and finally 8-VSB RF modulation and filtering before distribution?[/STRIKE]

EDIT: Hopefully I corrected what I was trying to say here in my post #35


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

bpratt said:


> If the OP is using this solution because he can use his existing coax, there are cheaper solutions:
> 
> http://www.hdtvsupply.com/hdmi-to-coax-adapter.html
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...IGI_HD_COAX_S_DIGI_HD_COAX_S_Transmitter.html


Thanks for pointing those out. I looked at those units. It starts to get pricy as you add more TVs as each TV need a receiver and the units must be daisy chained. In the end the ZVBox comes close in price and is easier to implement.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

HoTat2 said:


> And with the ZVbox, aren't you talking about the added PQ degradation of analog component to 4:2:0 sampled A-D conversion, ATSC MPEG-2 encoding, and finally 8-VSB RF modulation and filtering before distribution?


The ZVBox arrived today. I think the PG is pretty darned good. However I haven't had much time to really critique it yet. But considering I was watching SD on the remote TVs via the monoprice component to composite converter then modulated by a Channelvision SD modulator, you can imagine how much better the picture is now. I ain't complainin'! :lol:

My dedicated theater is where I am most concerned about PQ, 12' x 5' 2.35:1 setup. The TVs are for casual viewing. I have another DTV DVR for the theater.

ZVBox comes set to channel 2-1. If you are happy with that channel, all you have to do is plug it in and hook up the cables. I wanted to change it to another channel, and that was very easy. Push a couple of buttons on the front panel and away it goes!

I didn't mention I have a 3 story house with detached garage, so using RG-6 that is in place, except to the garage (underground conduit is in place), makes this method the simplest solution for me. Not necessarily the cheapest but when all things are considered, it isn't that much more. Running HDMI or additional cable, while not impossible, would be a pain, and the garage is too far away to be practical with regards to HDMI.

Thanks for all the suggestions. DBSTalk and AVS are two great sites to share and learn. I appreciate your comments.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

HoTat2 said:


> ...and finally 8-VSB RF modulation and filtering before distribution?


RF modulation shouldn't degrade the finished product. Digitizing and lossy compression certainly take their whacks.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

HoTat2 said:


> And with the ZVbox, aren't you talking about the added PQ degradation of analog component to 4:2:0 sampled A-D conversion, ATSC MPEG-2 encoding, and finally 8-VSB RF modulation and filtering before distribution?


Huh? :lol: I'm no purist but the PQ looks OK to me. I need to spend some time watching the modulated feeds, but my first impression is it looks pretty good.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

But what other options are there? Running HDMI cables from HDMI splitters? Is that the only way to get top notch PQ?

Can I split HDMI multiple times and run cables in the walls without issues? What if I want to distribute more than one tuner? Now I'm running multiple HDMI cables. The conduit in my walls will not support that many cables. RG-6 is there now.

The ZVBox option gives me the option to add additional tuners (DTV boxes) without having to run more HDMI cables. For those of us that aren't purists, what better options are there than an HD modulator? I'm all ears.

Isn't this unit referenced earlier in this thread subject to the same signal processing? http://www.hdtvsupply.com/hdmi-to-coax-adapter.html

Come on, don't just knock what I'm doing, give me a realistic solution.


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

HoTat2 said:


> And with the ZVbox, aren't you talking about the added PQ degradation of analog component to 4:2:0 sampled A-D conversion, ATSC MPEG-2 encoding, and finally 8-VSB RF modulation and filtering before distribution?


No, you are not.

1) Analog does not imply degradation, and conversion from A to D and from D to A, if done properly, also does not imply degradation. Many of the signals that eventually reach you have been converted back and forth from digital to analog many times with very little degradation. Most of the signal path inside your TV is analog, even when fed by HDMI.

2) Consumer HD is already 8-bit 4:2:0, so no loss there, and there is very little potential loss on a single digital generation of 8-bit 4:2:0 if the bit rate is high enough.

3) There is no such thing as "ATSC MPEG-2 encoding". There is ATSC, which outlines parameters of broadcast TV delivery and reception, and there is MPEG-2 encoding, which is something completely different. This is a closed network, and therefore not bound by SMPTE 310 encoding or compression limitations.

4) MPEG-2 encoding at 35-38 mbps is probably sufficient to not make a noticeable difference in quality. I re-encode 25 to 45 mbps commercial MPEG-2 video all day long to 32 mbps in a professional setting and see no difference. This system starts with full-blown 1.485 gbps video, DACs it, and encodes at 35-38. The rounding errors of 4:2:0 8-bit encoded at 35-38 are pretty small, and much of that is masked by the original artifacts already in the picture from compression for original delivery.

5) 8VSB modulation and filtering does not impart any degradation whatsoever, as the information is extracted untouched (this is the reason we use digital modulation in the first place: no degradation). Neither does QAM. Why do I mention QAM? Because that is what this box uses, not 8VSB. DIstribution over coax is often QAM, unless it is a small MATV distribution system. QAM also has a bit rate of 38.8, which is probably why the unit encodes at 35-38.​
If this system were able to encode from the same quality video as a TV station is fed from their network, it would do a better job than the TV station does. A _Better_ job. Better PQ. Simply because it does not compress as much as TV does. The only reason the output of this system might be just imperceptibly worse than the input video is because the input video is consumer HD already, not professional HDSDI that has not been through the limitations of delivery. There is probably more PQ difference between two programs from the same source than there is between the input and output of a distribution system with these specs.

Bottom line, golden eyeballs probably won't even notice it.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

I finally got the time to do an A-B. I have an HR22-100. The ZVBox 180 does not produce as good a picture as does the HDMI.  Motion results in what I would call graininess. My TVs are 60 Hz. I would guess that fast changing data is not sampled fast enough. I noticed this last night on my older 32" Samsung, but I had to add a QAM tuner on that TV so I wasn't sure which piece of equipment was introducing the graininess. Tonight I hooked up the output of the ZVBox 180 directly to my 46" Samsung (HDMI is hooked up directly as well) so I could remove every other piece of equipment from the equation. And the graininess is still there. I'm bummed as this would have been the simplest way to distribute the output of my hr22 throughout the rest of the house and to my detached garage.

Now I'm thinking about fishing HDMI or component + audio (5 RG-6) throughout the house. I have conduit in most locations, but the conduit already has 2 rg-6 plus 2 cat5-e. Setting aside HDCP for the moment, which method is better and or more reliable? HDMI or component? Monoprice HDMI cables I have bought in the past are really thick and don't bend very easily. But I assume I need to buy those better cables. 

If I use component, how long until TVs no longer have component inputs? I want to future proof as much as possible. Although we all know things will change. I'm talking runs of as much as 100'. Many runs less than that, but the garage run could very well be 100' if not more.

Any advice is appreciated.

By the way, ideally I would want to distribute the output from two different HRXX's. I think a switch at the source would be the way to go. I doubt I can get two HDMi or two sets of component (+ audio) in my conduit.

Again, I don't want more DTV boxes (see post #1).

Thanks to all that have replied. I appreciate all opinions.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Rather than using tons of Coax or expensive HDMI cables, consider using HDMI wall plates and CAT6. CAT6 is tons more forgiving (more flexible and takes less space) and certainly much more flexible going forward.

Monoprice sells wall plate pairs for around $20 and you can get serviceable CAT6 cable from home improvement stores (freight is expensive on Web purchases).

From there, I would suggest looking into HDMI splitters.


----------



## soccergrunt (Nov 17, 2005)

Nowandthen,
If you are going the HDMI route, go back to my post on page one. (#23), I am distributing 3 DVRs and a Roku2 located in the same room to four separate TVs in the house. One located next to the DVRs and three remote locations. The farthest I run HDMI is 150', but there is no difference in PQ on any of the TVs, all LCD 1080p max resolution. This matrix switch is powered and allows any TV to access any of the four sources via the only one dedicated HDMI cable from the source room to each location. The only drawback is that if more than one person wants to watch the same source, they watch the same thing. Not an issue for us at all. I use IR remote extenders to control the switch and source box from each location. There is a less expensive version that has 4 inputs and 2 outputs. I have used this for a few years and it works great. My wife loves being able to pause a live show and pick it up in another room.

In addition to the Matrix switch in my original post, you may want to check out this option.
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p..._id=1011310&p_id=8151&seq=1&format=4#feedback

It does the same thing, but gives you the choice of HDMI or CAT5e/6e. Comes with remote extenders. It may not work for your long distances though. I wish this was out when I installed mine. I already had CAT5e!


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

nowandthen said:


> I finally got the time to do an A-B. I have an HR22-100. The ZVBox 180 does not produce as good a picture as does the HDMI.  Motion results in what I would call graininess. My TVs are 60 Hz. I would guess that fast changing data is not sampled fast enough. I noticed this last night on my older 32" Samsung, but I had to add a QAM tuner on that TV so I wasn't sure which piece of equipment was introducing the graininess. Tonight I hooked up the output of the ZVBox 180 directly to my 46" Samsung (HDMI is hooked up directly as well) so I could remove every other piece of equipment from the equation. And the graininess is still there. I'm bummed as this would have been the simplest way to distribute the output of my hr22 throughout the rest of the house and to my detached garage. ...


Sorry it didn't work out.

The ZVBox looked quite promising ...

However, this is what I feared, and I apologize for the number of errors and wrong assumptions I made in my earlier post about the needed technical processes involved for the ZVBox to perform well.

Therefore rewording, the question to be asked is how well the ZVBox can handle the complex requirements of going from an analog component HD input to 4:2:0 luma-chroma sampling, AD conversion, MPEG-2 compression, and ANSI/SCTE 07 encoding at an affordable price to the consumer (or maybe "prosumer").

Certainly professional digital cable TV equipment probably costing in the tens-of-thousands of dollars can do it very well, but for a device like the consumer/prosumer ZVBox?

Evidently not so good unfortunately ... :nono2:


----------



## DVDDAD (Dec 21, 2002)

Why has no one mentioned Wireless HDMI devices?


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

DVDDAD said:


> Why has no one mentioned Wireless HDMI devices?


Maybe nobody has tried them? Do you have it set up and working? From what I have read, they tend to be a bit flakey. And I'm not sure they have a set of wireless HDMI devices that is reasonably priced and works well through walls.

And for the OP, as I mentioned in an earlier post, if you can fish cat 6 cable to the remote TV, the method below works good for me for under $150. And a wired connection is always more reliable than wireless.



RACJ2 said:


> Over $1200, I'll say its pricey. I went a route, similar to another post for under $150. Ordered from mono price: HDMI to cat 5e/6 wall plates, powered HDMI splitter and 150' of cat 5e cable. Yes it took a bit of effort to run two 75' cat 5e cables, but not $1,000 worth.
> 
> Good luck and let us know how the ZVbox 180 works out!


----------



## Caromsoft (Jul 17, 2010)

I am running a wireless HDMI connection from Brite-View. I have it going between floors, about 25' apart. It has been about 99.9% rock solid.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

Caromsoft said:


> I am running a wireless HDMI connection from Brite-View. I have it going between floors, about 25' apart. It has been about 99.9% rock solid.


I would be interested in seeing if this might be something I want to purchase. Could you please let me know if you have the Brite-View Air SyncHD DX (BV-2822)? I see a cheaper model Brite-View HDelight (BV-1222), but it only appears to work with "line of site".


----------



## Caromsoft (Jul 17, 2010)

RACJ2 said:


> I would be interested in seeing if this might be something I want to purchase. Could you please let me know if you have the Brite-View Air SyncHD DX (BV-2822)? I see a cheaper model Brite-View HDelight (BV-1222), but it only appears to work with "line of site".


I have an older model of the Air SyncHD DX BV-2822, the BV-2500. The advantage of the 2822 is that is has 4 HDMI and 2 Component inputs, so you can use it as a 6x1 switch. The HDelight BV-1222 is designed to be used to wirelessly connect a PC to a display using HDMI, although I have read of people using them to connect satellite receivers, BD players, etc. using a usb power adapter. There is also the Air SyncHD BV-2322, which has 1 HDMI input.

Both the BV-2822 and the BV-2322 have 1 HDMI passthrough, so you can connect a display both locally and remotely, essentially a 1x2 splitter. Both of those they claim can do 100 ft 1080i and 60ft 1080p line of site.

I only had one issue when setting up my unit, and it was this. From the manual,

"The IR sensor supports 36 KHz ~ 56 KHz (NEC, RC5, RC6) remote's signal protocol. Therefore, it is possible that some devices may not be supported."

In my case my Panasonic BD player was one of those devices. I was already using some old RCA IR repeaters so I don't use the built in IR Blaster. If you are using an RF remote it won't be an issue I suppose.


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

harsh said:


> Rather than using tons of Coax or expensive HDMI cables, consider using HDMI wall plates and CAT6. CAT6 is tons more forgiving (more flexible and takes less space) and certainly much more flexible going forward.
> 
> Monoprice sells wall plate pairs for around $20 and you can get serviceable CAT6 cable from home improvement stores (freight is expensive on Web purchases).
> 
> From there, I would suggest looking into HDMI splitters.


I think this is what I will try next. Not a lot of information on this from what I have found so far. Have you used the monoprice units? A thread on AVS tracks this stlye of distribution, it's not without it's problems from what I have read so far. I already have 2 CAT5e to every location so cabling is in place. Agreed, pulling cat is easier than HDMI. Prices are all over the place for devices that convert to cat 5e/6.



soccergrunt said:


> Nowandthen,
> If you are going the HDMI route, go back to my post on page one. (#23), I am distributing 3 DVRs and a Roku2 located in the same room to four separate TVs in the house. One located next to the DVRs and three remote locations. The farthest I run HDMI is 150', but there is no difference in PQ on any of the TVs, all LCD 1080p max resolution. This matrix switch is powered and allows any TV to access any of the four sources via the only one dedicated HDMI cable from the source room to each location. The only drawback is that if more than one person wants to watch the same source, they watch the same thing. Not an issue for us at all. I use IR remote extenders to control the switch and source box from each location. There is a less expensive version that has 4 inputs and 2 outputs. I have used this for a few years and it works great. My wife loves being able to pause a live show and pick it up in another room.
> 
> In addition to the Matrix switch in my original post, you may want to check out this option.
> ...


Thanks I'll check that out too. It may make sense to run HDMI to locations that are easy to fish and use cat for other locations. I worry about HDMI splitters not working due to HDCP. I have read where the source output resolution is based on the TV with the lowest resolution video and audio. So I would get 720P and with no HD audio, only get 2-channel sound? I have two 720P and 1 1080i TV so far. Audio is not an issue for me, as remote TVs are simply "TVs". But I do want the best PQ. Future TVs (none planned at the moment) will be 1080.



HoTat2 said:


> Sorry it didn't work out.
> 
> The ZVBox looked quite promising ...
> 
> ...


No apology necessary. I only said "huh?" because you were talking in terms I haven't dealt with before. It was all "Greek" to me. 

I just dropped the ZVBox off at UPS. Oh well, I get to have fun putting together another distribution system.  I just hope it won't be a disappointment as well.

Time for more research...


----------



## nowandthen (Nov 19, 2005)

What do you think about this unit? No customer reviews. Only uses one Cat5e/6.
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...cs_id=1011308&p_id=8160&seq=1&format=2&style=

I prefer 2 inputs so I can distribute both DVRs but I can live with one input if I have to. Not sure sure why I like one cat 5e, maybe because I have the other cat 5 for flexibility, maybe a the second cat 5e for another 1x8 connected to my second DVR.

I'd like more than 4 outputs, otherwise the 4 in 4 out would be perfect. http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=1011310&p_id=8151&seq=1&format=2#description


----------



## ndirishkmk (Feb 26, 2012)

I'm a newbie on all of this splitting stuff so forgive me if this is a stupid question!!

One user suggests an HDMI extender converting cat5e/6 to hdmi.
My house is wired for cat5e (just normal network wiring). If I got a couple of these extenders and then plugged one into my box and one into the receiving tv, then just plug both into my cat5e jacks in each room will that work? Thanks!!


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

HDMI extenders require their own run(s) of network cable. You can't use active LAN cabling.


----------



## EdL (Sep 1, 2007)

I recently installed the Actiontec wireless hd kit. The latest firmware is installed. Set-up:
HR24-500 out to Yamaha A2000, hdmi 1 out to Mits65738, hdmi 2 out Actiontec transmitter. Receiver & Sammy in the next room, works like a charm. All channels, dolby digital, et al.

Next I reconfigured the DirecTv feed thru the Actiontec, Actiontec hdmi pass thru out to The Yamaha A2000, video on the mits looked dim & there was no dolby digital. I reconnected everything back the way it was and I can no longer view HBO, or movie channels on either tv - your tv does not support copyright protection, please use component video to view this channel, code 900. The HR24 no longer recognizes my mits as being a 3D set and grays out the 3d channels on the guide. I can disconnect the the Actiontec, view the movie channels, but 3D channels remain grayed out.

Anyone else encounter and overcome this problem?


----------

