Looking for recommendations for new home wiring plans and ideas

Discussion in 'TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion' started by smoberly, Nov 14, 2014.

  1. Grakthis

    Grakthis New Member

    828
    1
    Oct 4, 2006

    Advertisements

    Right. This is kinda what I was saying. I get why you would want it, but in practical reality, I just don't see the second one ever being used.

    But this is a good point.
     
  2. brewman

    brewman Member

    152
    0
    Jun 28, 2003
    Don't know if this was said, but home run everything to your "wiring closet". No daisy chaining phone or cable.
     
  3. Dan203

    Dan203 Super Moderator Staff Member TCF Club

    53,290
    6,968
    Apr 17, 2000
    Nevada
    Still seems excessive. Why would you need HDBaseT when you've got devices like the Mini, Joey or Genie that can extend your viewing experience to other rooms via your gigabit network or MoCa? If you really need HDMI distribution there are also HDMI over IP devices that can convert an HDMI signal to regular TCP/IP packets and send them over your standard network.

    It seems these "minimums" are based on old assumptions. The future is all IP. In reality you could probably get away with just one Cat6 to each room. Although I think RG6 is still a good idea for flexibility and potentially future proofing. (we're reaching the limits of twisted pair, coax may be required to the next big bandwidth jump after 10Gbps)

    Running speaker wire for whole home audio would be nice if you like to listen to music, but pre-running it for your HT system would lock you into a single configuration for your living/family room which you may regret later.

    I don't know, I'm kinda of cheap though so I'd hate to waste money on running a bunch of wires that probably will never get used just in case.
     
  4. evanborkow

    evanborkow Member

    145
    2
    Mar 17, 2008
    As mentioned before, conduit is the best idea. The wire, fiber, or whatever you may need 10 years from now may not exist yet.
     
  5. Bigg

    Bigg Cord Cutter

    7,419
    822
    Oct 30, 2003
    Hartford-...

    Advertisements

    Those don't work well in residential applications. CAT-6 is by far the most versatile type of cable, and it's cheap, so it makes sense to run some extra. Gigabit, HDBaseT, and phone are just three common uses for it, and there are tons of other applications for it.

    Sure, eventually, yes, everything is going IP, but the 2 and 2 requirement still makes perfect sense for today's world, and any future application is either going to use RG-6 or CAT-6, since there is so much of it out there installed. You absolutely cannot get away with not running RG-6, because that's the established standard for TV, and will be well into the future. If you run only one wire to each room, you run RG-6, because that's what the systems are set up for, and that's what everyone else has. That's been that way for more than a decade, and that won't change.

    What in a home application is going to need more than 10gbps? 4K video takes 16mbps. Even if you're streaming at much higher bitrates, gigabit is more than fast enough. Of course, you have to have RG-6 anyways, so whatever is developed for it in the future will be available to you as well, so either way, with an RG-6/CAT-6 prewire, you win.

    HUH? 5.1 was the original standard, and it's still the basic standard, and it always will be. You could wire for 7.4.4 or something like that. What's the worst that happens, Atmos is a flop and you still can use the 7.2 wiring for a 7.2 setup capable of really good DTS 7.1? And what are you going to do without speaker wiring? Just run them on the floor? That's what I have now, but I'm renting, so I don't have any options. I'd rather have them all hidden, although it works fine for 7.1 for the time being.

    It's better to have extra sit unused than it is to have to tear up walls later to run them, unless you know you will have relatively easy access. If you're spending big bucks to build a house or tear your house apart for a renovation or addition anyways, why not add some extra wiring for as many potential future uses as you can imagine today? The key is to follow what other people are doing, as products are developed for the wiring that has some critical mass (even if it's relatively small compared to all households).

    It's certainly not a bad idea, but CAT-6 and RG-6 are the two common types of cabling, so everything in the future will be developed to work with them.
     
  6. Dan203

    Dan203 Super Moderator Staff Member TCF Club

    53,290
    6,968
    Apr 17, 2000
    Nevada
    From what I found they can send 3 HDMI signals over a gigabit network, which means that one only requires about 330Mbps. That should be fine for any gigabit network with plenty of spare bandwidth for everything else. Although I really don't even see a need for transmitting HDMI at all. All major MSOs have an option for multi-room viewing without having to result to HDMI mirroring. And since they send around the compressed signal, they only require like 15Mbps.

    Actually TV is transitioning to IP fast, there is even a requirement in place that makes it so all cable boxes will have to output a standards compliant IP signal soon. (DLNA CPV-2 most likely) So you'll be able to put the box anywhere and stream video from it using your home network.

    Although I wasn't really advocating against RG6, I was just saying that you "could" get away without it. In my original post I suggested 1 Cat6 and 1 RG6 to each outlet.

    Who knows, we always find ways to use bandwidth. That's why 10Gbps even exists.

    And for the record 4k is going to require about 30Mbps, not 16Mbps. H.265 allows you to reduce the bitrate by about 4x compared to MPEG-2 but 4K has 8x as many pixels as 1080i. (4x the resolution and 2x the frame rate) So if it currently requires ~15Mbps for 1080i MPEG-2 it's going to require about 30Mbps for 4k H.265. That's why they can't broadcast 4k in this country, each ATSC channel only has 19.2Mbps of bandwidth. A switch to ATSC 3.0 would be required to support bandwidths high enough for 4k.

    I was referring to location. If you run speaker wire to a specific location you're going to lock yourself into a specific orientation for your furniture. Unless you put in multiple drops to every potential location. Although that really depends on the design of the room. Some rooms are designed so that there is really only one viable orientation anyway, so in that case I would definitely do it.

    I'm not sure I agree. Spending money to buy and install a bunch of unused wire seems like a waste. I would rather apply that money to other upgrades. Like you said the technology is designed around what most people have in their house now, and in most cases that's a single RG6, or even RG59, cable to each room.
     
  7. lessd

    lessd Well-Known Member

    7,962
    93
    Jan 23, 2005
    CT
    In 1996 I ran Cat5 home runs to each potential phone jack and home runs from each room of RG6 quad, that been a good investment, except maybe for the Cat 5 as I now have a wireless phone system that can have up to 10 handsets so I don't need hard wired phones except at the base unit, but I did not know that at the time. With MoCA my home can have hard wire IP in each room if needed, but our notebooks, Kindles, smart HDTVs, and BD players all use my WiFi. Hard to know the future so I do have a 3" open pipe from each attic to the cellar so if any other type of wiring is needed I can drill down or up any wall.
     
  8. mr.unnatural

    mr.unnatural Well-Known Member

    4,864
    180
    Feb 2, 2006
    Ellicott...
    I'd have to agree that two RG6 and two CAT6 cables per room should be considered the minimum. Cost isn't that much of an issue when you buy in bulk. A 1000' roll of CAT6 won't break the bank and it will easily supply two runs to every room in most homes with cable to spare. Solid copper RG6 with either dual or quad shield will satisfy even the most bandwidth hungry setups and should future-proof your home for any digital cable advancements for quite some time. Like I said previously, it isn't cheap, but buying in bulk will get you the best deal and you'll have ample quantity to do your whole house and still have plenty left over for patch cables between your components and the wall outlets.

    I've never been a fan of whole house audio and prefer individual setups for each room. Speakers in every room with music piped in makes me think of shopping at a local WalMart with a Muzak sound system.

    I'm not sure why there's a discussion of HDMI over CAT6 since a central server with a gigabit network will supply HD content to any PC or other compatible device quite nicely.
     
  9. Bigg

    Bigg Cord Cutter

    7,419
    822
    Oct 30, 2003
    Hartford-...
    Are you talking about JustAddPower? From what I've heard, due to the audio support, it's ill-suited for home use, and intended for digital signage. They are about 140mbps, unless you're talking about a different system. The main application would be for centralization of all the equipment, but that's usually for high-end setups. The other potential I could see would be for something like a security DVR, where it needs to be centrally located to be connected to all the cameras, although some are supporting IP cameras now, which can be aggregated with PoE switches, and then run over a single gig connection.

    Cable is still extremely QAM dependant, and even the IP portions of cable (MoCA) and DirecTV (DECA) are done with coax.

    NO! RG-6 is an absolute must, no two ways about it. Anything after that is nice to have. I wouldn't wire without 2 and 2 in each room, although I'd probably be happy with 1 and 1. Most people don't care about Ethernet at all.

    10gbps exists for a few specialized applications, i.e. network cores, virtualization and SANs, and digital content creation (mostly video). It has no use in a home network. Maybe, eventually, it will become cheap, and start being used, and somebody will figure out what to do with it but until then, there's no big clamor for it.

    Well actually, 4K content is currently 15.6mbps or 15.9mbps. Maybe someone will provide higher bitrates, but that is what the actual content available today is encoded at in H.265. Maybe realtime encoding won't get as low as the offline encoding that Netflix and Amazon use, although we don't know yet, since online encoders don't even exist for H.265 yet. I'm not saying it's good practice, because it is not good practice at all, but Comcast is broadcasting 1080i HD at bitrates varying anywhere from 8mbps (yes, 8mbps, it looks HORRIBLE) to 17mbps on their systems, with most channels around 12. Somehow, they've actually managed to make 12mbps MPEG-2 look decent, although it's still not as sharp as HD is supposed to be. The few channels that are running 16-17mbps look a LOT better.

    4K could be broadcast via cable systems, which have up to 38mbps per QAM, although most don't have QAMs available for 4K, so it's going to be interesting.

    True. Most rooms have one decent way to do things. However, one set of wiring is better than none, and most "alternate" setups are twisting things 1/8 to 1/4 of the way around the room, with everything still on the same side, in which case, the speaker wire can just run along the baseboard to the connections.

    RG59 is a big no-no at this point. RG-6 is the bare minimum. Wire is cheap, and it's good to future proof as much as you know how. The good part about this stuff is that there are pretty much established standards of what goes where, since manufacturers in the future are going to make equipment that works with the wiring plans that have been in use for over a decade now.

    You could re-terminate all your CAT-5 for Ethernet. Even non-e CAT-5 should be able to handle gigabit. Conduit is good, as long as it is in a good spot. My parents put conduit in their house when they built it, but it's at the extreme wrong end of the house, so now there's a couple of CAT-5e lines that run across the basement, up, and back across the attic, for a total length of probably 120-150'. It's OK for CAT cable, but it won't work for RG-6, which they only installed in 3 of the 15 or so rooms, and they refuse to wrap any wiring on the outside. It's not impossible to run more RG-6, but it would take some construction work on the inside to make an interior chase-way on the correct end of the house (or they could just deal with wiring on the outside of the house like most people do).

    Yup. Compared to the cost of building a house, wiring for the future is really cheap, and is a really good investment.

    HAHA. It can be done nicely with a bunch of SONOS units in a central location and in-ceiling speakers. I usually think of it as a premium feature, since usually high-end houses have WHA...

    Two different things, two different applications. I'm not a huge fan of HDMI over CAT, but there are uses for it, very high end installations use a ton of it, and if you put CAT cable in, there are lots of things you can use it for if you don't want HDMI over CAT. Ethernet, phone, more Ethernet.
     
  10. trip1eX

    trip1eX imo, afaik, feels like to me, *exceptions, ~aprox

    4,542
    722
    Apr 2, 2005
    This sort of idea is a good idea. Conduit of some sort. But it requires some thought and planning. Running a string with your cable lets you pull a new wire through easily btw.

    The reason to run spare wires isn't just for future use, but in case you have a problem wire. But depending on your layout it might be easy enough to add a wire in the future. Some rooms more than others.

    And as someone said the way to buy wire is in bulk in 1000' lengths. You might already have enough for 2 wires to every room depending on home size. Or at least 2 wires to key rooms or to rooms that look like they would be trouble to run a spare wire to in the future.
     
  11. wwu123

    wwu123 Member

    43
    0
    May 14, 2008
    I think labor costs are going to dominate over the cost of the cabling in most cases, unless you DIY, so the contractor would prefer to homerun a single structured cable (everything in a single jacket) than multiple individual cables. So most commonly you're going to get 2 Cat5e/6 and 2 RG6 in the bundle anyway. Maybe even fiber-optic as well since the labor cost will be the same, and maybe just a few hundred more for the cable to futureproof. Though I agreed with my contractor that fiber-optic seemed like overkill for the home, and so opted out even though it would have been a very modest cost.

    I do have a couple of conduit runs as well, just in case, to a couple of key rooms - the family room and master bedroom.
     
  12. Bigg

    Bigg Cord Cutter

    7,419
    822
    Oct 30, 2003
    Hartford-...
    DIY is so easy with this stuff. It's also not harder to run 2 or 4 than one, you just tape them together and thread/pull them together out of 2 or 4 boxes of cable at once. Not sure the draw of the structured cable when you can just have a row of boxes of the various cables that you want anyway.

    There is no use in a home for fiber, and there won't be anytime in the foreseeable future, since CAT cable can easily do anything that needs to be done in a home, and there isn't an install base out there with fiber to use in the first place like there is for RG and CAT cable.

    Depending on the construction, it can be anywhere from easy to impossible to preserve access for future wiring. In a 2-story colonial with a full basement, you have full access to basically every room for wiring, once you get into capes and other styles, it gets harder. Finished basements are easy, just use a drop ceiling, third floors are harder, since you lose access to the second floor, and then in some parts of the country they do weird stuff like not building basements.
     
  13. tarheelblue32

    tarheelblue32 Well-Known Member

    4,348
    592
    Jan 12, 2014
    Raleigh, NC
    LOL, yeah like my house! That's when you get to explore the "crawl space". And just like the name suggests, you are literally crawling on your hands and knees in dirt, with poor lighting and the ever-present danger of running into an ornery rat, wolf spider, or Mr. Snake at every turn.
     
  14. Bigg

    Bigg Cord Cutter

    7,419
    822
    Oct 30, 2003
    Hartford-...
    GROSS! Our unfinished basements are often semi-livable space if done right here in the northeast. I can't imagine a house without a basement!
     
  15. mr.unnatural

    mr.unnatural Well-Known Member

    4,864
    180
    Feb 2, 2006
    Ellicott...
    Pretty much anywhere in the southwest or deep south and Florida homes don't have basements unless you want to blast through solid rock or go swimming. :D
     
  16. HarperVision

    HarperVision TiVo's Italian Cuz!

    5,275
    18
    May 14, 2007
    Paradise...
    Or in my case.......Molten Magma!!! :eek: :p
     
  17. astrohip

    astrohip Well-Known Raconteur TCF Club

    15,058
    4,809
    Jan 6, 2003
    Houston/Bren...
    I can't imagine a house with a basement. Never lived in one. Certainly never spent any time in one.
     
  18. nooneuknow

    nooneuknow Well-Known Dismembered Member (Lurk Mode On)

    3,559
    3
    Feb 5, 2011
    Whitewater, WI
    Wolf spiders are your friend. They don't make webs, but find a place to hide, and literally jump other insects, thus the name for them. Just like some will intentionally infest their yards and such spaces with praying mantises, some will do the same with wolf spiders (some even keep either one as pets).

    Unless you are worried about the loss of some benign insect species, you have nothing to gain by eliminating such insects (or snakes) that hunt and eat other pests. I'd be much more worried about black widows, brown recluses, and venomous snakes (even though the non-venomous ones can still bite you, though).

    I've brought in a few wolf spiders and mantises, as temporary pets, never being bitten by the spiders, nor pierced by the spikes a mantis has. Watching a mantis (they like to be watched, behaving differently if they know they are being watched, than if left alone), can be quite interesting. I liked snakes, too, until I moved to a desert, where most are venomous.

    I guess the most scary thing I can think of would be running into an escaped boa constrictor, that used to be somebody's pet. Although, raccoons and other mammals or rodents, are not something it is fun to find yourself in a crawl space with (I know this from experience)...
     
  19. ej42137

    ej42137 Well-Known Member

    3,765
    587
    Feb 15, 2014
    Los Angeles
    Really? When I lived in Ladoga, California we had rattlesnakes living under the house. They would come out in the afternoon to sun themselves on the lawn. You couldn't have paid me any amount of money to go into that crawlspace.
     
  20. tarheelblue32

    tarheelblue32 Well-Known Member

    4,348
    592
    Jan 12, 2014
    Raleigh, NC
    Sweet Jesus. If I knew I had poisonous snakes living under my house, I would have called out the exterminator. Non-venomous snakes are one thing, but snakes that can kill you living under your roof is an entirely different story.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements