What kind of coax for DirecTV?

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

Sorry if this is a faq, but I couldn't find one for this group, and
searching google didn't help. My house already has coax cable
installed, and it would be difficult and expensive to replace it, so I
have 2 questions:

1) Is RG-6 really necessary for multiple receivers?

2) How do I find out what kind of cable is already present? I don't
know when it was installed, but it was used with a large satellite dish
back in the early 90's.

--
J.B. Moreno

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

In article <r2hSc.9666$5i4.5459@bignews3.bellsouth.net>,
Pamela and Howard Signa <psigna@nospambellsouth.net> wrote:

> When they installed my dish system, the installer left the old cable wires.
> No real problems here. We have 4 receivers.

Do you use the old cable? Running new cable along the floorboards just
isn't an option.

--
J.B. Moreno

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

In article <YohSc.9685$5i4.5543@bignews3.bellsouth.net>,
Pamela and Howard Signa <psigna@nospambellsouth.net> wrote:

> They hooked up the receivers to the old cable. Each room already had cable
> in them. It s no more cable that just enough to come into the house and hook
> up to the receiver. you cannot see it because they are hidden by the TV,
> etc.

Thanks.

--
J.B. Moreno

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

"J.B. Moreno" wrote:
>
> Sorry if this is a faq, but I couldn't find one for this group, and
> searching google didn't help. My house already has coax cable
> installed, and it would be difficult and expensive to replace it, so I
> have 2 questions:
>
> 1) Is RG-6 really necessary for multiple receivers?

A quality R6-6 cable should be used regardless of how many receivers.

>
> 2) How do I find out what kind of cable is already present? I don't
> know when it was installed, but it was used with a large satellite dish
> back in the early 90's.

It should be stamped/inked onto the cable every few feet.

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

In article <411A98F8.B2935F9F@your.net>,
KF/AKA AH#49 <AH#49@your.net> wrote:

> "J.B. Moreno" wrote:
>
> > Well, I just checked (thanks for the info on how), and the line into
> > the house is RG 6, but the lines to the individual rooms is RG 59/U.
>
> Replace it!

Ha, ha, ha. I'm worried about being able to afford the satellite, and
you want me to replace a bunch of cable in the bargain? Hello,
broadcast aint that bad....

--
J.B. Moreno

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

KF/AKA AH#49 <AH#49@your.net> wrote:

> "J.B. Moreno" wrote:
> >
> > In article <411A98F8.B2935F9F@your.net>,
> > KF/AKA AH#49 <AH#49@your.net> wrote:
> >
> > > "J.B. Moreno" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Well, I just checked (thanks for the info on how), and the line into
> > > > the house is RG 6, but the lines to the individual rooms is RG 59/U.
> > >
> > > Replace it!
> >
> > Ha, ha, ha. I'm worried about being able to afford the satellite, and
> > you want me to replace a bunch of cable in the bargain? Hello,
> > broadcast aint that bad....
>
> Then keep the existing cable for (future) high speed computer access,
> and have them install new RG-6 for the receivers.
> Drilling a few holes is easy, and is part of the "Free Install" that
> they do anyway.

Actually it's not....

Installation covers the wire from the dish into the house and one hole
drilled in the outside wall (I don't need either), and running some
cable along the baseboard (which simply isn't an option in this case,
big house, multiple stories). If RG 59/U will work, then fine, if not,
I'll have to still with broadcast.

--
J.B. Moreno

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

Greg <v65rider@freeshell.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:56:04 GMT, "D.M." <notme@notnow.com> wrote:
> > RG-59 will not suffice. You WILL have problems.
> > The rating for 59 wire does not meet the current standards for high
> > frequency transmission used by satellite providers and CATV
> > providers.
> Hey, we agree on something.

I must have magic RG-59 then, because in a year of watching DishNetwork,
the only problems I've had have occurred when there was a great big
thunderhead between my house and the satellite.

--
Huey

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

KF/AKA AH#49 <AH#49@your.net> wrote:
> huey.callison@gmail.com wrote:
> > Greg <v65rider@freeshell.org> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:56:04 GMT, "D.M." <notme@notnow.com> wrote:
> > > > RG-59 will not suffice. You WILL have problems.
> > > > The rating for 59 wire does not meet the current standards for high
> > > > frequency transmission used by satellite providers and CATV
> > > > providers.
> > > Hey, we agree on something.
> > I must have magic RG-59 then, because in a year of watching DishNetwork,
> > the only problems I've had have occurred when there was a great big
> > thunderhead between my house and the satellite.
> It's not that it CAN'T work, because it most certainly can and does.

Hey, we agree on something.

> Funny how I NEVER had a complaint about the work I have done, eh?

Yes, but the original poster's first question was "Is RG-6 really
necessary for multiple receivers?". The answer to that is
'depending on the length of cable runs and the quality of the
existing cable, maybe not. Hook it up and find out.'

He also said "If RG 59/U will work, then fine, if not,I'll have to
still with broadcast.", so I'm guessing he isn't going to be paying you
to run the cable in his house. So, your 'reputation', no matter how
impressive it is, is immaterial to this discussion.

It isn't a venial sin to use existing RG-59 if you get a free or cheap
dish, hook it up, and it works; that's just being thrifty. Sure, I'd
like it if every room in my house was wired with phone, CAT5e, two or
three runs of RG6, and multimode fiber. I'd also like it if tomorrow I
win the Lotto and get elected Supreme God-Emperor of the Universe, but
it's only once every couple months I'm even prepared to bet a dollar
that any of those things are gonna happen. Maybe somebody gets a $50
dish setup off of eBay and can afford a $30/month package. It's silly to
expect them to also throw down several hundred bucks for a good
low-voltage cable installer when they have existing cable that might
work. When they try it and it doesn't? THEN fix it.

--
Huey

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

In article <R7ydnU1RosGwLL_cRVn-rQ@speakeasy.net>,
<huey.callison@gmail.com> wrote:

> He also said "If RG 59/U will work, then fine, if not,I'll have to
> still with broadcast.", so I'm guessing he isn't going to be paying you
> to run the cable in his house. So, your 'reputation', no matter how
> impressive it is, is immaterial to this discussion.

Absolutely right. I've gotten verification that it'll likely work, and
that's enough to take a chance on, but no way could I afford to have
the whole shebang rewired. I *might* be able to get RG6 to a couple of
the locations at a reasonable cost, but not the others. Fortunately,
I've seen proof with my own eyes that it isn't *necessary* and so I'm
looking forward to having satellite....

--
J.B. Moreno

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

I can tell you this... Remove any Radio Shack equipment asap because it is
JUNK!!! It will not help you.
If you need more signal, the provider will remedy that for you if they are
at all reputable!!
RG-59 wire is not recommended or accepted anymore for ANY type of
Satellite/CATV installs.
It will work for the most part but again, it's not recommended. The cons
outweigh the pros.

The Cable/Sat companies are utilizing some very high frequency bandwidth
these days and 59 wire just doesn't cut it.
In the old days where you had a 450 mhz (maximum) CATV system, it was fine.
Now where they are utilizing well over a Gig of bandwidth, 59 wire is not
capable of carrying these higher freqs without distortions or packet loss.

If you look at it from a technical standpoint, it is simply out of the
question.

Looking at it from a homeowner's standpoint where you don't have much of a
choice because the 59 wire was installed either, in the days of the old
systems or some hack did it to save money or the homeowner just simply
didn't know any better because it's not his line of work, and now its buried
under the finished ceiling or siding or whatever, I can understand why it
would make sense to use the existing cable.
But, coming from an experienced installer/service tech/line tech/satellite
tech/ installation-service manager with almost 20 yrs in the business, I
would recommend that if there is even a small possibilty that the 59 can be
replaced with RG-6 then spare no expenses (because it's really not that
expensive at all.)
Contrary to what you might read here in his NG, it is the more efficient and
technically sound move to make.

I hope this helps you a little.




"J.B. Moreno" <planB@newsreaders.com> wrote in message
news:200820041827212805%planB@newsreaders.com...
> In article <180820041910109137%planB@newsreaders.com>,
> J.B. Moreno <planB@newsreaders.com> wrote:
>
> > <huey.callison@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > He also said "If RG 59/U will work, then fine, if not,I'll have to
> > > still with broadcast.", so I'm guessing he isn't going to be paying
you
> > > to run the cable in his house. So, your 'reputation', no matter how
> > > impressive it is, is immaterial to this discussion.
> >
> > Absolutely right. [...] Fortunately, I've seen proof with my own eyes
> > that it isn't *necessary* and so I'm looking forward to having
> > satellite....
>
> OK, it's in and working everywhere....but at the one location fed
> mainly by RG6/U.
>
> For this location I *can* replace most of the cable easily, so let me
> describe it and maybe someone will have a suggestion:
>
> The RG6 comes into the middle of the house, there a RG 59/U cable for
> about 30 feet (I can't replace this) and then it connects to the RG6/U
> for another 100' feet or so -- this cable I can replace.
>
> The signal is strong at the end of the RG 59/U, I tried to put a
> powered 10 db signal booster that I bought at Radio Shack on at that
> point, but it didn't make a difference.
>
> Like I said, I can easily change that last run of cable if that would
> make a difference, and could buy a reasonably priced booster, so if
> anyone has a suggestion, I'd appreciate it.
>
> --
> J.B. Moreno

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

J.B. Moreno <planB@newsreaders.com> wrote:
> I had a TV/Receiver hooked up to the 59 terminates, and was getting
> good signal (93, just like at the main branch), but when I try to go on
> from there, I get nothing. I do run past some high voltage cables, I
> don't know if that would cause a problem or not (and of course the
> cable is over a hundred feet long).

Since you don't seem to be getting a lot of help from the
'professionals', I'll offer a little advice on how to do the cheap hack
job that will probably still work just as well, and save you a little
money in the process.

If you have an ohmmeter, short one end and test for continuity between
the two sides of the the other end to see if it's broke somewhere. If
you don't have a cheap meter, get one. They're like $10-$20 at any
hardware store.
http://www.radioshack.com/product. [...] d=22%2D810

If the cable is bad, you still might not have to replace it if it's just
one of the ends that's bad. If you don't have coax crimp tools, just
spend five bucks on a couple twist-on connectors, and try cutting a
couple inches off each end of the cable and putting new ends on. Most
cable gets hosed near the ends. Radio Shaft has these:
http://www.radioshack.com/product. [...] =278%2D285
but the Home Depot has 'em cheaper.

Then, short the cable again and retest. If it's still broke, you get
to re-run that piece of cable. And forget what that other dude said
about throwing out the line amp - once you get good connectivity from
one end to the other, try it both ways, with the amp in and out of the
circuit. Sometimes it helps.

--
Huey

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

Are you kidding with that statement? Talk about a HACK!
So what your telling me is that its better to have multiple splices and
barrels in the cable run with cheap ass, no good "twist on connectors"?
You have GOT to be kidding!! I suppose that your going to attempt to
convince everyone that those good old "gold plated" connectors are going to
work miracles as well?

This just goes to show you who is Pro and who's a nasty-assed hack!.

To the original poster:
It would be way cheaper and efficient to run the new cable. Pay no mind to
these fly by night sub-contracting hacks that shoot their mouths off and
lead you in the wrong direction and gouge your pockets by not back up their
service agreement. Oh sorry, the hacks don't have any idea what a service
agreement is.

Have your reputable service provider do it. They usually have a few pros on
hand that will get it done.

If you think you need an amp, have it verified for free by a PRO.
99% of the time an amp is not needed regardless of what hacks might think.
Remember, amplifiers will amplify everything it sees.
Including the noise generated from the several splices and shitty connectors
that the hack advised.
Does INGRESS ring a bell?















Since you don't seem to be getting a lot of help from the
> 'professionals', I'll offer a little advice on how to do the cheap hack
> job that will probably still work just as well, and save you a little
> money in the process.
>
> If you have an ohmmeter, short one end and test for continuity between
> the two sides of the the other end to see if it's broke somewhere. If
> you don't have a cheap meter, get one. They're like $10-$20 at any
> hardware store.
>
http://www.radioshack.com/product. [...] %5Fname=CT
LG%5F011%5F008%5F002%5F000&product%5Fid=22%2D810
>
> If the cable is bad, you still might not have to replace it if it's just
> one of the ends that's bad. If you don't have coax crimp tools, just
> spend five bucks on a couple twist-on connectors, and try cutting a
> couple inches off each end of the cable and putting new ends on. Most
> cable gets hosed near the ends. Radio Shaft has these:
>
http://www.radioshack.com/product. [...] %5Fname=CT
LG%5F011%5F003%5F011%5F000&product%5Fid=278%2D285
> but the Home Depot has 'em cheaper.
>
> Then, short the cable again and retest. If it's still broke, you get
> to re-run that piece of cable. And forget what that other dude said
> about throwing out the line amp - once you get good connectivity from
> one end to the other, try it both ways, with the amp in and out of the
> circuit. Sometimes it helps.
>
> --
> Huey

Archived from groups: alt.satellite.tv (More info?)

D.M. <notme@notnow.com> wrote:

> Then you have an open in the line somewhere. You will not lose that much
> signal in that short a distance.
> Either you have a bad barrel or gaffed connector or maybe even a clean cut.
> Possibly a staple through it? Never should one staple a cable line.
> Replace it, locate the break and repair it or abandon it. It is way to
> fragmented to do you justice at this point as it is.
> Those are about the only practical answers I can give you.

That's it been clipped somewhere or I got a bad cable to begin with are
possible problems, I'll check into that tomorrow. But it's not really
all that fragmented -- from dish to receiver there are 3 "runs" when
there would normally only be 2. While that is a 50% increase, I
wouldn't call it "way to fragmented".

I'm not sure of what advantage or disadvantage shielded cable gives
you, if there's not a break in the line, could shielding be a
problem/solution? As I said, the long run is RG6/U.

--
J.B. Moreno