Use 21" monitors as TVs with Hauuppauge 250 card?

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Rather than using a media hub to "pipe" video to conventional TV sets
thru out my home (bedroom, front room, kitchen).. could I instead
buy and use 21" tube monitors and pipe that signal to them via
ethernet somehow?

I already have one Dell 21" tube monitor and have seen others for sale
at good prices on Ebay. My idea is to buy the Haupauge 250 TV/PVR
card and have a TV/video "server" hidden away in another room and pipe
the TV/video signal to multiple computer monitors in several rooms.
But what hardware will i need to pipe that signal via ethernet cable?

Advice? Opinions?

Thanks in advance!!
27 answers Last reply
More about monitors hauuppauge card
  1. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:24:40 -0500, me6@privacy.net wrote:

    >Rather than using a media hub to "pipe" video to conventional TV sets
    >thru out my home (bedroom, front room, kitchen).. could I instead
    >buy and use 21" tube monitors and pipe that signal to them via
    >ethernet somehow?
    >
    >I already have one Dell 21" tube monitor and have seen others for sale
    >at good prices on Ebay. My idea is to buy the Haupauge 250 TV/PVR
    >card and have a TV/video "server" hidden away in another room and pipe
    >the TV/video signal to multiple computer monitors in several rooms.
    >But what hardware will i need to pipe that signal via ethernet cable?
    >
    >Advice? Opinions?
    >
    >Thanks in advance!!


    http://www.hauppauge.com/pages/products/data_mediamvp.html
    works well for me if I understand your need correctly.


    Rich M.
  2. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    >
    >http://www.hauppauge.com/pages/products/data_mediamvp.html
    >works well for me if I understand your need correctly.

    So the above hub has video outputs for a PC
    monitor...... and NOT just outputs for a reg TV only?
  3. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:49:49 -0500, me6@privacy.net wrote:

    >>
    >>http://www.hauppauge.com/pages/products/data_mediamvp.html
    >>works well for me if I understand your need correctly.
    >
    >So the above hub has video outputs for a PC
    >monitor...... and NOT just outputs for a reg TV only?


    I should have corrected myself. This device is for composite video
    only. Will not work with a stand PC monitor unless PC monitor has
    composite video inputs, which I doubt. Not sure why one would want to
    use a PC monitor in this application anyway.


    Rich M.
  4. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "Richard M." wrote:

    > On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:49:49 -0500, me6@privacy.net wrote:
    >
    > >>
    > >>http://www.hauppauge.com/pages/products/data_mediamvp.html
    > >>works well for me if I understand your need correctly.
    > >
    > >So the above hub has video outputs for a PC
    > >monitor...... and NOT just outputs for a reg TV only?
    >
    >
    > I should have corrected myself. This device is for composite video
    > only. Will not work with a stand PC monitor unless PC monitor has
    > composite video inputs, which I doubt. Not sure why one would want to
    > use a PC monitor in this application anyway.
    >
    > Rich M.

    As an MVP owner, I wouldn't reccommend using a MediaMVP unless one is
    desperate. They're not very good, except for the picture quality.
  5. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    > Not sure why one would want to
    >use a PC monitor in this application anyway.

    Why not?

    Can get 21" tube monitors used for less than $100

    What is wrong with using several of them spread around
    house for TV via a TV/PVR card?
  6. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:50:08 -0500, me6@privacy.net wrote:

    >> Not sure why one would want to
    >>use a PC monitor in this application anyway.
    >
    >Why not?
    >
    >Can get 21" tube monitors used for less than $100
    >
    >What is wrong with using several of them spread around
    >house for TV via a TV/PVR card?


    Not necessarily saying it's a bad idea, but I am not sure I am
    understanding your application. You want to be able to view video or
    whatever from your PC but somehow distribute the signal via the VGA
    port to multiple monitors around your house. The TV/PVR 250 card is
    an input only device for recording broadcast/video signals.

    I use this card to record from a Directv sat receiver with Beyond TV 3
    software (http://www.snapstream.com/Products/Products_PVS3.asp) then
    use the MediaMVP to stream or 'pipe' recorded broadcast and MP3 files
    to other locations via Ethernet. You can have up to 6 of these on the
    same network. From reading your original post, this would meet one
    of your objectives, but not with a PC monitor with just VGA inputs. I
    can't offhand think of anything that can do this using VGA inputs on
    your 21" monitors without a PC attached, which I have done also. But
    a 20" standard TV with video input ports can be had new from Wal-mart
    for around $100 and comes with a built-in tuner.


    Rich M.
  7. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:31:17 -0700, Keith Clark
    <clarkphotography@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >As an MVP owner, I wouldn't reccommend using a MediaMVP unless one is
    >desperate. They're not very good, except for the picture quality.


    I guess that would depend on what your application is. Suits mine
    perfectly. Never had a moments trouble with it and I can customize my
    screens. 'They're not very good' at doing what?

    I realize there are other boxes that do this, but not at this price.


    Rich M.
  8. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "Richard M." wrote:

    > On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:31:17 -0700, Keith Clark
    > <clarkphotography@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > >As an MVP owner, I wouldn't reccommend using a MediaMVP unless one is
    > >desperate. They're not very good, except for the picture quality.
    >
    > I guess that would depend on what your application is. Suits mine
    > perfectly. Never had a moments trouble with it and I can customize my
    > screens. 'They're not very good' at doing what?
    >
    > I realize there are other boxes that do this, but not at this price.
    >
    > Rich M.

    Well if you use the Hauppauge software, then they're not good for fast
    forward, reverse, skipping forward or backwards, there's no OSD so you
    don't know where in the program stream you are, you can't stop watching
    something in the middle and come back to it later if you reboot the server
    machine, there's so little RAM for buffering that the tiniest network
    issue can cause stuttering, etc.

    Price? There are $30 VCRs that do a hell of a lot better job of playing
    than a MediaMVP does and that's at 1/3 of the price.
  9. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:09:50 -0700, Keith Clark
    <clarkphotography@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >Well if you use the Hauppauge software, then they're not good for fast
    >forward, reverse, skipping forward or backwards, there's no OSD so you
    >don't know where in the program stream you are, you can't stop watching
    >something in the middle and come back to it later if you reboot the server
    >machine, there's so little RAM for buffering that the tiniest network
    >issue can cause stuttering, etc.
    >
    >Price? There are $30 VCRs that do a hell of a lot better job of playing
    >than a MediaMVP does and that's at 1/3 of the price.

    I would investigate your setup. I've never had these issues OR they
    are not issues. I haven't tried streaming video or playing mp3's or
    displaying jpgs from my VCRs yet. I can't even locate the the ethernet
    jacks on ANY of mine, and they are considerably more than $30.


    Rich M.
  10. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Must be pretty happy watching movies w/o audio?

    On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:24:40 -0500, me6@privacy.net wrote:

    =>Rather than using a media hub to "pipe" video to conventional TV sets
    =>thru out my home (bedroom, front room, kitchen).. could I instead
    =>buy and use 21" tube monitors and pipe that signal to them via
    =>ethernet somehow?
    =>
    =>I already have one Dell 21" tube monitor and have seen others for sale
    =>at good prices on Ebay. My idea is to buy the Haupauge 250 TV/PVR
    =>card and have a TV/video "server" hidden away in another room and pipe
    =>the TV/video signal to multiple computer monitors in several rooms.
    =>But what hardware will i need to pipe that signal via ethernet cable?
    =>
    =>Advice? Opinions?
    =>
    =>Thanks in advance!!

    Stores are dumping 30+ TV sets like dirts.
  11. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    >
    >Must be pretty happy watching movies w/o audio?

    >Stores are dumping 30+ TV sets like dirts.

    Yes..... you are correct. Hadn't thought of the above.

    I was just thinking that maybe if one could watch the save PVR video
    without converting it to NTSC signal..... that might make for a better
    system. Hence my question abt distributing video to several monitors
    via ethernet rather than to several reg TVs
  12. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    >Analog TVs can "hide" artifacts that would show up crystal clear on a
    >non-interlaced high res computer monitor. And like someone else said,
    >analog TVs are cheaper.

    Wow...... interesting!

    Thanks for that info and explanation
  13. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    >You can pick up an ATI Radeon 7000 with TV out for like $30 US now if
    >you want to get somthing to experiment with.

    Yeah I might do that

    However my short term goal is buy/build a new PC this
    winter. Something with some muscle

    Tell me something.... would a dual CPU unit be overkill
    for PVR use?
  14. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    me6@privacy.net wrote:

    > >You can pick up an ATI Radeon 7000 with TV out for like $30 US now if
    > >you want to get somthing to experiment with.
    >
    > Yeah I might do that
    >
    > However my short term goal is buy/build a new PC this
    > winter. Something with some muscle
    >
    > Tell me something.... would a dual CPU unit be overkill
    > for PVR use?

    A complete waste of electricity and money.

    I use a $65 Celeron (2.4 GHz) for my DVR and it's never once "bogged
    down". I do no rendering on the machine, only recording and viewing, and
    it's plenty fast.

    Now consider that you if you use Intel CPUs you'd need dual Xeons, and a
    $400 motherboard. I don't know how much a dual AMD system goes for, but
    it's really hard to beat the cost of a $100 motherboard and $65 CPU...

    Spend the money on a slick case that will look great in your living room,
    and some 250GB hard drives, not CPU.

    Save the "muscle" for your desktop machine. At least that'd be my
    recommendation...
  15. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    In article <sv79j05q6607mbjh8t1g00u3mrn1nnrq4p@4ax.com>, me6@privacy.net
    says...
    > >You can pick up an ATI Radeon 7000 with TV out for like $30 US now if
    > >you want to get somthing to experiment with.
    >
    > Yeah I might do that
    >
    > However my short term goal is buy/build a new PC this
    > winter. Something with some muscle
    >
    > Tell me something.... would a dual CPU unit be overkill
    > for PVR use?
    >

    Probably, especially if you plan to run windows.
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    http://www.ramsays-online.com
  16. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    >> Tell me something.... would a dual CPU unit be overkill
    >> for PVR use?
    >>
    >
    >Probably, especially if you plan to run windows.

    Why?
  17. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Chris Phillipo wrote:

    > In article <sv79j05q6607mbjh8t1g00u3mrn1nnrq4p@4ax.com>, me6@privacy.net
    > says...
    > > >You can pick up an ATI Radeon 7000 with TV out for like $30 US now if
    > > >you want to get somthing to experiment with.
    > >
    > > Yeah I might do that
    > >
    > > However my short term goal is buy/build a new PC this
    > > winter. Something with some muscle
    > >
    > > Tell me something.... would a dual CPU unit be overkill
    > > for PVR use?
    > >
    >
    > Probably, especially if you plan to run windows.
    > --

    Depends on the version of Windows. Win2K and XP Pro can both do very well
    with dual procs. But in the end it comes down to the application. I kind of
    doubt that BeyondTV is multi-threaded since it doesn't need much horsepower.
    I've never seen a codec that was multithreaded, so I doubt he'd get any real
    benefit unless he was doing heavy software rendering or gaming - on a
    separate hard drive from the PVR drive.

    For a living room dedicated DVR box, it'd be a complete waste IMO.
  18. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    In article <gcb9j095l4dudjgo2ml7l8340kf9iu7l9i@4ax.com>, me6@privacy.net
    says...
    > >> Tell me something.... would a dual CPU unit be overkill
    > >> for PVR use?
    > >>
    > >
    > >Probably, especially if you plan to run windows.
    >
    > Why?
    >

    The applications you will be running were not written to take advantage
    of it and you don't even need a fast single processor to run them
    anyway. Now if you were going to do a lot of post processing with the
    same machine, then it might make sense. Mine is an AMD Duron 1.6 with
    256mb ram. It can play two shows at once, one out through the PVR-350
    and one through the TV out on the Radeon 9200SE. While it's doing that
    it can still record through the 350 which only uses 1-2% cpu with the
    GBPVR recording service.
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    http://www.ramsays-online.com
  19. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Chris Phillipo wrote:

    > In article <gcb9j095l4dudjgo2ml7l8340kf9iu7l9i@4ax.com>, me6@privacy.net
    > says...
    > > >> Tell me something.... would a dual CPU unit be overkill
    > > >> for PVR use?
    > > >>
    > > >
    > > >Probably, especially if you plan to run windows.
    > >
    > > Why?
    > >
    >
    > The applications you will be running were not written to take advantage
    > of it and you don't even need a fast single processor to run them
    > anyway. Now if you were going to do a lot of post processing with the
    > same machine, then it might make sense. Mine is an AMD Duron 1.6 with
    > 256mb ram. It can play two shows at once, one out through the PVR-350
    > and one through the TV out on the Radeon 9200SE. While it's doing that
    > it can still record through the 350 which only uses 1-2% cpu with the
    > GBPVR recording service.
    > --
    > _________________________
    > Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    > http://www.ramsays-online.com

    But the statement was "if you run Windows".

    The answer still doesn't address this adequately since the reasons you gave
    are just as applicable to Linux. It still comes down to needing
    multi-threaded applications.

    Anyway, I completely agree with you.
  20. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    In article <4134C5E3.C47C5AB7@hotmail.com>, clarkphotography@hotmail.com
    says...
    >
    > But the statement was "if you run Windows".
    >
    > The answer still doesn't address this adequately since the reasons you gave
    > are just as applicable to Linux. It still comes down to needing
    > multi-threaded applications.
    >
    > Anyway, I completely agree with you.
    >
    >

    Well without saying it my point was that I doubt there are any PVR apps
    for windows that are multithreaded where as MythTV can be.
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    http://www.ramsays-online.com
  21. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Chris Phillipo wrote:

    > In article <4134C5E3.C47C5AB7@hotmail.com>, clarkphotography@hotmail.com
    > says...
    > >
    > > But the statement was "if you run Windows".
    > >
    > > The answer still doesn't address this adequately since the reasons you gave
    > > are just as applicable to Linux. It still comes down to needing
    > > multi-threaded applications.
    > >
    > > Anyway, I completely agree with you.
    > >
    > >
    >
    > Well without saying it my point was that I doubt there are any PVR apps
    > for windows that are multithreaded where as MythTV can be.
    > --
    > _________________________
    > Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    > http://www.ramsays-online.com

    OK, I'll buy that - actually, if someone would come out with a SuSE RPM that
    would seamlessly install as easily as BeyondTV and give me DVD compliant files
    and seamlessly install support for my PVR-250s, and *support* it, I truly *would*
    buy it. I really liked the Myth interface when I had it partially running. I'd
    much rather have my media center running Linux. Oh well. Can't complain about
    BeyondTV...at least it doesn't use the painfully slow "xmltv" guide that Myth
    does.
  22. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    In article <4134DD2C.643AF7A5@hotmail.com>, clarkphotography@hotmail.com
    says...
    >
    > OK, I'll buy that - actually, if someone would come out with a SuSE RPM that
    > would seamlessly install as easily as BeyondTV and give me DVD compliant files
    > and seamlessly install support for my PVR-250s, and *support* it, I truly *would*
    > buy it. I really liked the Myth interface when I had it partially running. I'd
    > much rather have my media center running Linux. Oh well. Can't complain about
    > BeyondTV...at least it doesn't use the painfully slow "xmltv" guide that Myth
    > does.
    >
    >

    I still haven't tried the new demo for Beyond TV but GBPVR .20 is doing
    everything I want so far, the PVR-350 support is only as good as
    Hauppage's drivers though so I have been using my ATI for playback
    lately. The only thing is lacks right now is VBR support.
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    http://www.ramsays-online.com
  23. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Chris Phillipo wrote:

    > In article <4134DD2C.643AF7A5@hotmail.com>, clarkphotography@hotmail.com
    > says...
    > >
    > > OK, I'll buy that - actually, if someone would come out with a SuSE RPM that
    > > would seamlessly install as easily as BeyondTV and give me DVD compliant files
    > > and seamlessly install support for my PVR-250s, and *support* it, I truly *would*
    > > buy it. I really liked the Myth interface when I had it partially running. I'd
    > > much rather have my media center running Linux. Oh well. Can't complain about
    > > BeyondTV...at least it doesn't use the painfully slow "xmltv" guide that Myth
    > > does.
    > >
    > >
    >
    > I still haven't tried the new demo for Beyond TV but GBPVR .20 is doing
    > everything I want so far, the PVR-350 support is only as good as
    > Hauppage's drivers though so I have been using my ATI for playback
    > lately. The only thing is lacks right now is VBR support.
    > --

    Why do you want VBR? If you record in BR and then edit out commercials, then audio sync
    becomes a real issue, at least that's been my experience. I'm really happy with CBR at
    7000 kbits...
  24. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    In article <413506E8.96D30A19@hotmail.com>, clarkphotography@hotmail.com
    says...
    > > > much rather have my media center running Linux. Oh well. Can't complain about
    > > > BeyondTV...at least it doesn't use the painfully slow "xmltv" guide that Myth
    > > > does.
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > > I still haven't tried the new demo for Beyond TV but GBPVR .20 is doing
    > > everything I want so far, the PVR-350 support is only as good as
    > > Hauppage's drivers though so I have been using my ATI for playback
    > > lately. The only thing is lacks right now is VBR support.
    > > --
    >
    > Why do you want VBR? If you record in BR and then edit out commercials, then audio sync
    > becomes a real issue, at least that's been my experience. I'm really happy with CBR at
    > 7000 kbits...
    >
    >
    >

    Simply, VBR gives better quality for the same amount of space. And 7000
    is way out of the rage of what I can use to fit 2:30 on a DVD.
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    http://www.ramsays-online.com
  25. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Chris Phillipo wrote:

    > In article <413506E8.96D30A19@hotmail.com>, clarkphotography@hotmail.com
    > says...
    > > > > much rather have my media center running Linux. Oh well. Can't complain about
    > > > > BeyondTV...at least it doesn't use the painfully slow "xmltv" guide that Myth
    > > > > does.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > > I still haven't tried the new demo for Beyond TV but GBPVR .20 is doing
    > > > everything I want so far, the PVR-350 support is only as good as
    > > > Hauppage's drivers though so I have been using my ATI for playback
    > > > lately. The only thing is lacks right now is VBR support.
    > > > --
    > >
    > > Why do you want VBR? If you record in BR and then edit out commercials, then audio sync
    > > becomes a real issue, at least that's been my experience. I'm really happy with CBR at
    > > 7000 kbits...
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    > Simply, VBR gives better quality for the same amount of space. And 7000
    > is way out of the rage of what I can use to fit 2:30 on a DVD.
    > --
    > _________________________
    > Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    > http://www.ramsays-online.com

    What I do when I have more than will fit is author to a folder on the hard drive and then use
    DVD-Shrink to squeeze it down to size. Works pretty well, since DVD-Shrink is really fast.
  26. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    In article <4135F86F.A9620194@hotmail.com>, clarkphotography@hotmail.com
    says...
    > > Simply, VBR gives better quality for the same amount of space. And 7000
    > > is way out of the rage of what I can use to fit 2:30 on a DVD.
    > > --
    > > _________________________
    > > Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    > > http://www.ramsays-online.com
    >
    > What I do when I have more than will fit is author to a folder on the hard drive and then use
    > DVD-Shrink to squeeze it down to size. Works pretty well, since DVD-Shrink is really fast.
    >
    >
    >

    I've been thinking of trying that since I don't have the patience to
    reencode a whole 5 gigs just to cut down the file size by 500 megs,
    sometimes something I'm recording like a race will run long and my
    calculated bitrate ends up screwing me over :)
    --
    _________________________
    Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    http://www.ramsays-online.com
  27. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Chris Phillipo wrote:

    > In article <4135F86F.A9620194@hotmail.com>, clarkphotography@hotmail.com
    > says...
    > > > Simply, VBR gives better quality for the same amount of space. And 7000
    > > > is way out of the rage of what I can use to fit 2:30 on a DVD.
    > > > --
    > > > _________________________
    > > > Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
    > > > http://www.ramsays-online.com
    > >
    > > What I do when I have more than will fit is author to a folder on the hard drive and then use
    > > DVD-Shrink to squeeze it down to size. Works pretty well, since DVD-Shrink is really fast.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    > I've been thinking of trying that since I don't have the patience to
    > reencode a whole 5 gigs just to cut down the file size by 500 megs,
    > sometimes something I'm recording like a race will run long and my
    > calculated bitrate ends up screwing me over :)
    > --

    The only time I have any problems is if the total of the files will be over 9 GB. Then Ulead DVD
    Movie factory barfs on itself.

    But DVD Shrink is a very cool tool.
Ask a new question

Read More

Tuner Cards TV Video Monitors Graphics