# Cheap RG59U cable included with DVR 510



## coreillydbstalk (Jun 21, 2004)

Hey guys. When I got my new DVR 510 the other day a cheap RG59U cable was included in the box. I was just curious why Dish Network would include a RG59U cable instead of a RG6. I bought a RCA 3-foot RG6 cable from Home Depot yesterday and it only cost $3.45. Any thoughts? Thanks.


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

It is all you need to run from the RF output of the box to the TV. RG6 is only needed to handle the high frequency signals between the satellite dish and the receiver.


----------



## Slordak (Dec 17, 2003)

Yeah Dish gives you a really cheap RG-59 cable with many of the receivers (e.g. my 301 and my 508 both came with one). However, Dish specifically notes that the cable should only be used to connect the output of the receiver to the input of the TV or VCR. It should *not* be used between the receiver and the wall jack, even though customers do sometimes use it for this.

Still, better to use RCA or S-Video connections in any case if you have these as options, which most TVs of a reasonable size do.


----------



## ShadowEKU (Jul 13, 2004)

Slordak said:


> Yeah Dish gives you a really cheap RG-59 cable with many of the receivers (e.g. my 301 and my 508 both came with one). However, Dish specifically notes that the cable should only be used to connect the output of the receiver to the input of the TV or VCR. It should *not* be used between the receiver and the wall jack, even though customers do sometimes use it for this.
> 
> Still, better to use RCA or S-Video connections in any case if you have these as options, which most TVs of a reasonable size do.


What he said


----------



## Cyclone (Jul 1, 2002)

ShadowEKU said:


> What he said


I whole heartedly endorse this comment, service, or product.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

Cyclone said:


> I whole heartedly endorse this comment, service, or product.


What Cyclone said


----------



## larrystotler (Jun 6, 2004)

True, they gave you am RG59 for connecting your sat box to your TV. However, you also got:

1. A high quality RCA cable. Much better than D* gives their subs.
2. An S-Video cable
3. A UHF Remote
4. A DVR with 100 hours of recording
5. An extra $4.98/month on your bill for no reason....


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

Mike123abc said:


> It is all you need to run from the RF output of the box to the TV. RG6 is only needed to handle the high frequency signals between the satellite dish and the receiver.


You are half right. RG6 and RG59 are both adaptations of transmission-line technology, and they both have the exact same formula determining what loss they have at whatever frequency, so one can't really be considered as "high-frequency" compared to the other. In that respect they are identical.

RG6 will attenuate ALL frequencies less per given length than RG59, however, and has less loop resistance so it will drop less DC voltage over a given length. Those are the reasons it is the cable of choice for runs over 50 ft. and not because it is designed for higher frequencies (it isn't). Also, it is a little hardier, breaks down less easily and holds up to weather better.

The thinner RG59 is actually preferred in an inside short run, because it is easier to work with and less obtrusive, so in this case E* is doing the right thing.


----------



## SimpleSimon (Jan 15, 2004)

Unh. Tomcat - I think you're also half-right.

We use the term RG-6 loosely, when we really mean "RG-6 swept to at least 2150MHz".

That is, not all RG-6 has reasonable loss characteristics at the higher frequencies.

In fact, all coaxial cable I've ever seen has higher loss levels per foot at higher frequencies than at lower ones. Check it out here: http://www.timesmicrowave.com/cgi-bin/calculate.pl


----------



## larrystotler (Jun 6, 2004)

Don't forget that E* specifically specifies RG6 between the Dish and the receiver, and not RG59. This is why the included RG59 has the red tag saying do not put it anywhere but betwen the sat box and the TV.


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

SimpleSimon said:


> Unh. Tomcat - I think you're also half-right.
> 
> We use the term RG-6 loosely, when we really mean "RG-6 swept to at least 2150MHz".
> 
> ...


Maybe a bit more than half.

All coax DOES INDEED have more loss per foot at higher frequencies which is exactly due to the transmission line loss formula I was talking about, but my point is that that formula applies uniformly to both 6 and 59, so one cannot be deemed "high frequency" over the other. That formula is the very engine the calculator you referenced in your URL is based on, so if you understand that correctly you will also come to understand that you are actually supporting my evidence rather than refuting it.

All RG6 and all RG59 has the same response to frequency, IN THEORY and IF manufactured to proper tolerances. So, real world cheap RG6 is fairly equivalent in frequency response to real world cheap RG59, generally, and perfectly made RG6 is exactly equivalent in frequency response to perfectly made RG59, generally. Bottom line, disregarding flat attenuation (6 looses about 75% of what 59 looses at each and every frequency), from the point of view of a carrier at any frequency that has a 75-ohm impedance, they are for all intents and purposes, electrically identical. You can look it up. In fact, you apparently already have.

But you do bring us to another important point, which is that good coax is better than cheap coax, and the cheap stuff may have problems with higher frequencies. Sweeping coax is the method we use to prove that it has been manufactured to proper tolerances. If the distance from center conductor to shield varies, or the CC is not exactly in the center, or the cable is flattened out-of-round or has a periodic defect, the first thing to suffer is the freq response, and since we're dealing with Ku frequencies, that can become an issue.

There are other issues such as ingress/egress and VSWR, but they are not really significant enough to consider in this application. From the point of view of the carrier itself, it doesn't know whether it traveled through 59 or 6 or free space for that matter, as it sees the input or output of any 75-ohm cable as an infinite waveguide, which leaves the only issue to be the amount of attenuation at that frequency, and the chief determining factor of that being the loss per foot, which is pretty much the only difference between 6 and 59.

But, 6 or 59, the physics and rules of the waveguide, and therefore the response characteristics, apply equally. In either case, what the signal sees is electrically equivalent to an infinite number of tiny series resitors connected to an infinite series of tiny parallel capacitors. The impedance or relationship between the "resitors" and the "capacitors" in 59 is exactly the same as that in 6, making the frequency response identical, although the actual values are different, which makes the flat loss (and loop resistance)different.

If you buy the good stuff, it normally sweeps out better than the cheap stuff, but whether it is 6 or 59 will not in itself have any bearing on frequency RESPONSE, as perfectly illustrated by the times-fiber calculator you referenced.

That leaves us with three rules of thumb:

1. Use RG6 whenever possible for long runs or outdoors.

2. RG59 will work just fine (better in some respects) for short indoor interconnects, especially if used only for modulated channel 3 or 4.

3. Always buy the good stuff.


----------



## SimpleSimon (Jan 15, 2004)

OK TomCat - I think we're on the same page - I must've misunderstood your earlier post. 

The main point I think we're both making is that the cable has to be good enough to carry the 2GHz band without "too much" loss, and RG-6 that carrys the 'swept' markings is the "good stuff".


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

SimpleSimon said:


> OK TomCat - I think we're on the same page - I must've misunderstood your earlier post.
> 
> The main point I think we're both making is that the cable has to be good enough to carry the 2GHz band without "too much" loss, and RG-6 that carrys the 'swept' markings is the "good stuff".


Cool. I don't think you so much misunderstood it as I clumsily posted it.

But cheap RG59 will in many cases still do as good a job as swept RG6. As long as the loss at the frequency of interest is not too great. But that's only as a point of interest. Practically, it always makes sense to use good, swept, RG6 from a mainline vendor.

Actually, sweeping hardline cable before installation as trunk and feeder cables for cable TV is a part of my checkered distant past. I have seen scary cheap cable that fell off the table at 500 Mhz, and some that took a dive at 1700, as well as stuff that made spec (of course our specs were for return loss as well as for response) so I know first-hand that not every cable will be problem free, and using cheap coax for DBS is a risk one should avoid.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

*SimpleSimon* said..._"OK TomCat - I think we're on the same page - I must've misunderstood your earlier post."_

*TomCat* said..._"Cool. I don't think you so much misunderstood it as I clumsily posted it."_

Hey, you guys must be jellin' :grin:


----------



## ShadowEKU (Jul 13, 2004)

Nick said:


> *SimpleSimon* said..._"OK TomCat - I think we're on the same page - I must've misunderstood your earlier post."_
> 
> *TomCat* said..._"Cool. I don't think you so much misunderstood it as I clumsily posted it."_
> 
> Hey, you guys must be jellin' :grin:


Like a Fellin :lol:

edit: I know its mispelled meant it that way


----------



## SimpleSimon (Jan 15, 2004)

:lol:


----------

