[Message Prev][Message
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Digest Number 103
- Subject: RE: Digest Number 103
- From: Mark Harrison
- Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 09:16:00 +0000
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0
Transitional//EN">
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2">Stuart,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">You
are fitting far too little CAT5. You may not believe me, and I may not be
able to think of enough application yet, but I've seen far too many people
fit "what they thought they needed", and then wish they'd fitted
more. (Once you've got it, you find uses for
it.)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN
class="722010808-16052002"></SPAN><FONT
face="Arial"><FONT color="#0000ff"><FONT
size="2"></FONT></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">I
would allow for 4 points in each corner of each room - ie 16 points per
room. Extra in your study/den/office, extra wherever you have your main
hi-fi.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">The
cheap part of running cable is the cable. The expensive part is the
termination. The solution is therefore to run the cable, but instead of
fitting expensive modules in each room, just fit blanking plates, and fit
the modules as and when you need to.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">In a
retro-fit, it makes sense to fit cable only where you need it. In a
new-build / re-wire it makes sense run more than you'll ever think you'll
need.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">As
some examples, here are some of the things I run on
CAT5.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
ISDN from wall point to firewall</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
Ethernet to 3 PCs + a Rio in my study</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
Ethernet to 2 PCs + a Rio in Mary's
study</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
KAT5 from the nursery to the main hifi which lives in our
bedroom(baby-cam!)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
KAT5 from the main hi-fi to the back wall (for surround sound without
trailing wires)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
Garden-cam (security)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
Rio Receiver in the nursery</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
Rio Receiver in the living room</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
KAT5 from the main hi-fi upstairs to the downstairs system to play
laserdisks/DVDs on the projector</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">...
coming soon:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
"Beam-breaks" from some of the doorways back to the central
controller</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
Viaproject (a cheap player that plays back DVDs from a central networked
store, sort of Rio for DVD)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">-
Low-level control of valves for the garden irrigation
system.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">....
I could go on, but I hope you get the message :-) You may not want to do
90% of these things, but I'm willing to bet that, over the lifetime of your
house, you'll come up with some things NOT on my list that you DO want to
do...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2">Regards,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class="722010808-16052002"><FONT
face="Arial" color="#0000ff"
size="2"><BR>Mark</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class="OutlookMessageHeader" dir="ltr"
align="left"><FONT face="Tahoma"
size="2">-----Original
Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Stuart Lee [mailto:s.f.l@xxxxxxx]<BR><B>Sent:</B>
16 May 2002 07:41<BR><B>To:</B>
kat5-users@xxxxxxx<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [KAT5] Digest
Number 103<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><TT>Does
anyone know roughly when the new Kat5 products will be ready?<BR>I
will be ready to cable my new house in August but I need to know
exactly<BR>what I am going to be<BR>wiring for.<BR>I was
thinking about at least a double cat5 socket in each room, 1 infra
red<BR>receiver in the main rooms, hard wired to node
zero<BR>and connected to a xantech block.<BR>speaker cable in
each room.<BR>I dont know whether to bother with co-ax or
not.<BR><BR><BR>Stu.
<BR><BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From:
<kat5-users@xxxxxxx><BR>To:
<kat5-users@xxxxxxx><BR>Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:27
AM<BR>Subject: [KAT5] Digest Number
103<BR><BR><BR>><BR>> To unsubscribe from
this group, send an email to:<BR>>
kat5-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx<BR>><BR>><BR>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>>
There are 9 messages in this issue.<BR>><BR>> Topics in
this
digest:<BR>><BR>>
1. Re: [OT] Hum on Phone.....was RE: Advice on sending video
and<BR>audio around my house ...
?<BR>>
From: "tefxp"
<ukha_d@xxxxxxx><BR>> &n
bsp; 2. Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5
AVS-RXU<BR>>
From: "graham_howe"
<graham@xxxxxxx><BR>>
3. RE: Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5
AVS-RXU<BR>>
From: "Keith Doxey"
<keith.doxey@xxxxxxx><BR>>
4. RE: Advice on sending video and audio around my house ...
?<BR>>
From: "Marcus Warrington"
<marcusw@xxxxxxx><BR>>
5. RE: How can I tell if its CT100 cable
?<BR>> &n
bsp; From:
"Marcus Warrington"
<marcusw@xxxxxxx><BR>>
6. RE: RE: Advice on sending video and audio around my house ...
?<BR>>
From: "Keith Doxey"
<keith.doxey@xxxxxxx><BR>>
7. Re: Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5
AVS-RXU<BR>>
From: "graham_howe"
<graham@xxxxxxx><BR>>
8. RE: Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5
AVS-RXU<BR>>
From: "Keith Doxey" <
keith.doxey@xxxxxxx><BR>>
9. RE: Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5
AVS-RXU<BR>>
From: "Graham Howe"
<graham@xxxxxxx><BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>>
Message: 1<BR>> Date: Wed, 15 May
2002 09:35:11 -0000<BR>> From:
"tefxp" <ukha_d@xxxxxxx><BR>> Subject: Re: [OT]
Hum on Phone.....was RE: Advice on sending video and<BR>audio around
my house ... ?<BR>><BR>> --- In kat5-users@y...,
"Keith Doxey" <keith.doxey@b...> wrote:<BR>> >
A phone line is balanced as well. When
it becomes unbalanced due to<BR>> a fault<BR>> > on
the line, that is when you hear all the hum and other<BR>>
conversations.<BR>><BR>> I see. I thought it
was because the builder put some of the wires<BR>> too near the
mains wiring - there are two runs in particular that I'm<BR>> not
sure how he routed and when I connect them into the circut,
the<BR>> hum increases significantly, whereas adding others only
slightly<BR>> increases it. They are probably the two
longest runs too if that<BR>> contributes to
matters......<BR>><BR>> > You may be picking up
interference because of the way you have<BR>> patched
it.<BR>> > The phone wiring should be on 4&5 the
Blue/White pair and the bell<BR>> wire on<BR>> > the
Orange on Pin2 if you have patched it to the correct standard<BR>>
for<BR>> > structured cabling and are
using the plug in adaptors.<BR>><BR>> Umm..
dunno. Will have to check. I remember not being able to
find<BR>> any info on connecting RJ11 to RJ45 so I probably went
with using<BR>> similar colours to what was in a phone lead or
something :)<BR>><BR>> I am using master socket adpaters
throughout though....<BR>><BR>> > Moving myself away
from the dimmer, or the phone away from my mouth<BR>> >
deacreses the hum as well.<BR>><BR>> <LOL> - image
of you standing in one corner of the room as far frmo<BR>> the
dimmer as possible, shouting at your phone another corner of
the<BR>> room :)<BR>><BR>>
cheers,<BR>><BR>><BR>>
Tony<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
_____________________________________________________________
___________<BR>><BR>> Message:
2<BR>> Date: Wed, 15 May 2002
10:41:53 -0000<BR>> From:
"graham_howe" <graham@xxxxxxx><BR>> Subject:
Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5 AVS-RXU<BR>><BR>> Is this
possible for someone who last year progressed from zero<BR>>
knowledge to finally working out which end of a soldering iron to
use<BR>> (hint for those still on the learning curve: hold the
cold end!). I<BR>> was also wondering if it would be possible
(with a little case<BR>> manipulation) to mount a double adapter
or recond RJ45 in the unit at<BR>> the same
time.<BR>><BR>>
Graham<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>>
Mess
age: 3<BR>> Date: Wed, 15 May 2002
12:27:21 +0100<BR>> From:
"Keith Doxey" <keith.doxey@xxxxxxx><BR>> Subject:
RE: Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5 AVS-RXU<BR>><BR>>
Graham,<BR>><BR>> The RXU only differs from an RX by the
ommision of 4 resistors.<BR>><BR>> To use an RXU you need
to either hardwire two CAT5 cables onto an RJ45<BR>> outlet or use
an RJ45 doubler. There physically isnt the space to mount a<BR>>
second RJ45 on the KAT5 itself and without cutting a chunk out of
the<BR>case,<BR>> a double wont fit the socket on the
KAT5.<BR>><BR>> The way to use the doubler is to place it
in one half of a double<BR>faceplate<BR>> and run one lead
to the other socket, one lead to the KAT5<BR>><BR>> The
attached image shows the resistors to remove.<BR>><BR>>
Hope
that helps<BR>><BR>> Keith<BR>><BR>>
www.diyha.co.uk<BR>>
www.kat5.tv<BR>><BR>><BR>> -----Original
Message-----<BR>> From: graham_howe [mailto:graham@xxxxxxx]<BR>> Sent:
15 May 2002 11:42<BR>> To: kat5-users@xxxxxxx<BR>>
Subject: [KAT5] Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5
AVS-RXU<BR>><BR>><BR>> Is this possible for
someone who last year progressed from zero<BR>> knowledge to
finally working out which end of a soldering iron to use<BR>>
(hint for those still on the learning curve: hold the cold end!).
I<BR>> was also wondering if it would be possible (with a little
case<BR>> manipulation) to mount a double adapter or recond RJ45
in the unit at<BR>> the same time.<BR>><BR>>
Graham<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
:<BR>>
kat5-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <A href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</A><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
[This message contained
attachments]<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>>
Message: 4<BR>> Date: Wed, 15 May
2002 12:30:44 +0100<BR>> From:
"Marcus Warrington" <marcusw@xxxxxxx><BR>>
Subject: RE: Advice on sending video and audio around my house ...
?<BR>><BR>> Wow.. thanks for all the rep
lies :)<BR>><BR>> I'm receiving this email list in digest
mode so I've only just read<BR>> all the advice and discussion
generated.<BR>><BR>> * "tefxp" writes
;<BR>> >Seems you got the short end of the stick then
:)<BR>><BR>> Yeah.. but its not too bad because all the
cable runs are planned and<BR>> conduit has already been plastered
"into" the walls to allow drops<BR>> from the attic
rooms to Node0 etc. All in all it "should" be
reasonably<BR>> straight forward... I hope
:)<BR>><BR>> > Why bother keeping RF at all if you're
looking at KAT5 - or is it a<BR>> > case of keeping your
options open?<BR>><BR>> Well basically its down to cost
!<BR>><BR>> The house has a total of 14 rooms that
"could" have a TV in them<BR>> (not including the
bathroom/showerroom). The RF cable allows me<BR>>
to have a TV in any room that can receive any (terrestrial)
channel<BR>> it wants. The Kat5 will be used for more
"important" stuff like<BR>> sending DVD or DigitalTV
from Node0 to the "AV Channel" of the<BR>> main TV's
(i.e. Living room / Master bedroom / Study). The kids<BR>> rooms
would still be fed via RF and I'm thinking of maybe sending<BR>>
the DigitalTV stuff through and old VCR to modulate it onto a<BR>>
"spare" channel as well... I doubt that they would even
notice<BR>> the difference in quality
:)<BR>><BR>> > Personally, I put double RF sockets in
all the rooms<BR>><BR>> As I said this "was" my
original intention but after some<BR>> hard decision making I
decided that I probably wouldn't<BR>> have VCR's etc in each room
that needed piping down to<BR>> Node0 for distribution, rather I'd
have all the equipment<BR>> housed i
n Node0 itself and pipe it around the house.<BR>> At worse case I
will physically still have 2 RF's per<BR>> room, its just that
they are physically in opposite<BR>> corners of the
room...<BR>><BR>> > at least a foot from the CAT 5
sockets.<BR>><BR>> >From what I've read I don't think
this is necessary.<BR>><BR>> I mean we all know that you
shouldn't run Cat5 next to<BR>> mains cable right.. but if look
under my desk now I can<BR>> see about 3 foot of cat5 cable
connecting my PC to the<BR>> LAN and its tangled up with 5 power
cords.. and all<BR>> working fine !<BR>><BR>>
> Clever huh? Nope. I should have gone for satellite
cable<BR>> > like CT100, so haven't quite got the ultimate
flexibility<BR>><BR>> Haa harr.. I'm OK on that one.. I
HAVE specified CT100.. :)<BR>><BR>> > Though ask Ken
Watt in t
he main UKHA group all about retro-fitting<BR>> > inline
modules......<BR>><BR>> Sorry for asking dumb questions
but what is this "main UKHA group"<BR>> is it an email
list ?<BR>><BR>> > The cunning plan with the switcher
will be to switch any 8 sources<BR>> > into any 1 or more of 8
destinations.<BR>><BR>> Hey this sounds cool
!<BR>> Is this planned to be controllable via IR .. how about IP
?<BR>><BR>> * "Mark Harrison" Writes
..<BR>> > The module that you're thinking of is one to carry an
SP/DIF signal -<BR>> > ie to a remote
decoder.<BR>><BR>> Sorry.. dumb question again.. is this
sp/dif signal something different<BR>> from a normal audio signal.
Would it be possible to transmit the sp/dif<BR>> signal over a
cat5 cable via a Kat5 box and would that a different<BR>> box than
the one for 4 chann
el audio ?<BR>><BR>> Ideally I'd love to have the house
wired such that each room has a speaker<BR>> in each corner and
each room could (at the flick of a button or the press<BR>> of a
touch screen) either play from a local source, TV audio (stereo
or<BR>> 5.1)<BR>> , or whole house audio. Problem is cost
:)<BR>><BR>> * "Keith Doxey" writes
;<BR>> >Tony and Mark have answered most of the points and its
good to have the<BR>> > answers given by satisfied customers
:-)<BR>><BR>> Certainly inspires "future"
customers :)<BR>><BR>> > KAT5 can be custom built to
ANY mix of Audio and Video in either<BR>direction<BR>> >
subject to a maximum of 4 circuits in a unit. This is because
each<BR>circuit<BR>> > uses one pair in the CAT4 cable
and there are only 4 pairs.<BR>><BR>> Mmm.. would it not
be possible
to build a unit that was completely user<BR>> configurable then.
i.e. it had 4 audio and 2 video encoder/decoder circuit<BR>> and
the user simply flipped a dip switch or something to
configure<BR>> which 4 circuits to use ? Sorry if that's obviously
a dumb question but<BR>> from a "user" perspective it
seems very versatile and means I wouldn't<BR>> be "painted
into a corner" at some later date...<BR>><BR>> >
Your RF cables should not cause any problems as they a receiving
signals<BR>> > rather than transmitting them so the signal
levels are only microvolts.<BR>> Also<BR>> > despite
my best efforts at introducing interference to KAT5 I
have<BR>failed<BR>> > miserably
:-)<BR>><BR>> So I should be OK to run RF cable under the
floorboards back to Node0 in<BR>the<BR>> same conduit as my
Cat5 ?<BR>><BR>> What about speaker cable
.. I assume this is similar to mains.. i.e. keep<BR>>
away<BR>> from cat5 ?<BR>><BR>> > So much so
that I did a demonstration to Mark McCall where
I<BR>DELIBERATELY<BR>> > connected the output of a CD
player to the CAT5 cable to cause<BR>>
interference<BR>><BR>> Impressive ! Is this resilience a
product of your Kat5's or the cat5<BR>> standard
?<BR>><BR>> * "Keith Doxey"
<keith.doxey@xxxxxxx><BR>> > You may be picking up
interference because of the way you have patched<BR>it.<BR>>
> The phone wiring should be on 4&5 the Blue/White pair and the
bell wire<BR>on<BR>> > the Orange on Pin2 if you have
patched it to the correct standard for<BR>> > structured
cabling and are using the plug in adaptors.<BR>><BR>> OK,
that brings up the question of what is the "correct" standard
for<BR>> s
tructured cabling ? I was thinking about punching my patch
panels<BR>> to 586B standard (since that's what our engineer at
work said we use<BR>> here).. how does this effect
anything. Presumable how ever I punch<BR>> it down at
the patch panel (586B) should be mirrored at the RJ45 Socket<BR>>
end i.e. straight through connections.<BR>><BR>> Thanks
for all the help guys :)<BR>><BR>>
Marcus<BR>><BR>><BR>.---------.-------.-v---------.-------.--..--------------------------------.<BR>>
:
\.~~~./
: :
\.~~~./ : Marcus J Warrington BSc (Hons)<BR><BR>>
.. Y o. .o Y
.. Y o. .o Y
Senior Analyst Programmer<BR><BR>> ::
: (@) :
:: :
(@) : MIS PTS Ltd<BR><BR>> `. ~~__~\
`._!_./ `.~~__\`._!_.'/
<BR><BR>>
: :
`~'Y
: : `~'
Y Phone :(+44) (0)845 330 4325<BR><BR>>
;
; D \
; ;
D \ Email :marcusw@xxxxxxx<BR><BR>>
:
. !
: &nb
sp; . !
<BR>>------------------------------<<BR>>
:
.
; ! :
.
; !
FreeView : WallEyed<BR><BR>> ;
:~__\ / !
; :~_\ /: !
***WARNING*** This .sig is<BR><BR>> /
;'! / Y / : ! / ;' ! /Y
/ : ! protected by 3D Guard
Dogs<BR><BR>> : . !: :
! : ! : . !: :
! : !
<BR>>------------------------------<<BR&g
t;> : :. `:. : ! : ! : :. `:.:
! : ! The opinions herein are my
own<BR><BR>>
`.i' : ! .
`..`.i' : ! .
`.. and , unless explicitly<BR>stated,<BR>>
; `.
`~''
; `. `~'' may not represent those of
MIS<BR><BR>><BR>`---------`ii'------^---------`ii'-------'`--------------------------------'<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>>
Message: 5<BR>>  
; Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 12:32:40
+0100<BR>> From: "Marcus
Warrington" <marcusw@xxxxxxx><BR>> Subject: RE: How can
I tell if its CT100 cable ?<BR>><BR>> * "tefxp"
writes ;<BR>> > (so how _can_ I tell? It's white,
that's all I know!)<BR>><BR>> I'm no expert but doesn't
the CT100 have a metallic foil wrapper<BR>> under the copper braid
? If your cable doesn't have the foil wrapper<BR>> then I would
assume it isn't CT100 (or CT125)...<BR>><BR>> All CT100
cable I've ever seen has been black (as opposed to
"normal"<BR>> brown), the ONLY white RF cable I've seen
has been interconnecting<BR>> cables.<BR>><BR>>
Marcus<BR>><BR>><BR>.---------.-------.-v---------.-------.--..--------------------------------.<BR>>
&am
p;nbsp; : \.~~~./
: :
\.~~~./ : Marcus J Warrington BSc (Hons)<BR><BR>>
.. Y o. .o Y
.. Y o. .o Y
Senior Analyst Programmer<BR><BR>>
:: :
(@) : :: :
(@) : MIS PTS Ltd<BR><BR>> `. ~~__~\
`._!_./ `.~~__\`._!_.'/
<BR><BR>>
: :
`~'Y
: : `~'
Y Phone :(+44) (0)845 330 4325<BR><BR>>
;
; D \ &
;nbsp; ;
; D \ Email
:marcusw@xxxxxxx<BR><BR>>
:
. !
:
. !
<BR>>------------------------------<<BR>>
:
.
; ! :
.
; !
FreeView : WallEyed<BR><BR>> ;
:~__\ / !
; :~_\ /: !
***WARNING*** This .sig is<BR&g
t;<BR>> / ;'! / Y / : ! / ;' !
/Y / : ! protected by 3D
Guard Dogs<BR><BR>> : . !: :
! : ! : . !: :
! : !
<BR>>------------------------------<<BR>> : :.
`:. : ! : ! : :. `:.:
! : ! The opinions herein are my
own<BR><BR>>
`.i' : ! .
`..`.i' : ! .
`.. and , unless explicitly<BR>stated,<BR>>
; `.
`~''
; `. `~'' may not represent those of
MIS<BR><BR>><BR>`---------
`ii'------^---------`ii'-------'`--------------------------------'<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>>
Message: 6<BR>> Date: Wed, 15 May
2002 12:47:22 +0100<BR>> From:
"Keith Doxey" <keith.doxey@xxxxxxx><BR>> Subject:
RE: RE: Advice on sending video and audio around my house ...
?<BR>><BR>> -----Original Message-----<BR>>
From: Marcus Warrington [mailto:marcusw@xxxxxxx]<BR>>
Sent: 15 May 2002 12:31<BR>> To: kat5-users@xxxxxxx<BR>>
Subject: [KAT5] RE: Advice on sending video and audio around my
house<BR>> ... ?<BR>><BR>><BR>> >
Why bother keeping RF at all if yo
u're looking at KAT5 - or is it a<BR>> > case of keeping your
options open?<BR>><BR>> Well basically its down to cost
!<BR>><BR>> [KD] You should always have some coax whilst
you still have TV's with<BR>>
Tuners.<BR>><BR>><BR>> > The cunning plan
with the switcher will be to switch any 8 sources<BR>> > into
any 1 or more of 8 destinations.<BR>><BR>> Hey this
sounds cool !<BR>> Is this planned to be controllable via IR ..
how about IP ?<BR>><BR>><BR>> [KD] There will be
a Web interface as well<BR>><BR>><BR>> > KAT5
can be custom built to ANY mix of Audio and Video in
either<BR>direction<BR>> > subject to a maximum of 4
circuits in a unit. This is because each<BR>circuit<BR>>
> uses one pair in the CAT4 cable and there are only 4
pairs.<BR>><BR>> Mmm.. would it not be possible
to build a unit that was completely user<BR>> configurable then.
i.e. it had 4 audio and 2 video encoder/decoder circuit<BR>> and
the user simply flipped a dip switch or something to
configure<BR>> which 4 circuits to use ? Sorry if that's obviously
a dumb question but<BR>> from a "user" perspective it
seems very versatile and means I wouldn't<BR>> be "painted
into a corner" at some later date...<BR>><BR>> [KD]
it would be possible but it would require a larger unit and would
be<BR>> more expensive.<BR>><BR>> > So much
so that I did a demonstration to Mark McCall where
I<BR>DELIBERATELY<BR>> > connected the output of a CD
player to the CAT5 cable to cause<BR>>
interference<BR>><BR>> Impressive ! Is this resilience a
product of your Kat5's or the cat5<BR>> standard
?<BR>><BR>> [KD] It demonstrates the principle of
Balanced Tran
smission and its<BR>inherant<BR>> resiliance to
interference<BR>><BR>> * "Keith Doxey"
<keith.doxey@xxxxxxx><BR>> > You may be picking up
interference because of the way you have patched<BR>it.<BR>>
> The phone wiring should be on 4&5 the Blue/White pair and the
bell wire<BR>on<BR>> > the Orange on Pin2 if you have
patched it to the correct standard for<BR>> > structured
cabling and are using the plug in adaptors.<BR>><BR>> OK,
that brings up the question of what is the "correct" standard
for<BR>> structured cabling ? I was thinking about punching my
patch panels<BR>> to 586B standard (since that's what our engineer
at work said we use<BR>> here).. how does this effect
anything. Presumable how ever I punch<BR>> it down at
the patch panel (586B) should be mirrored at the RJ45 Socket<BR>>
end i.e. straight through
connections.<BR>><BR>> [KD] if you stick to either 568A
or 568B (the only difference is the<BR>colour<BR>> code,
electrically they are identical) then you shouldnt have any
problems<BR>> whatsoever<BR>><BR>>
Keith<BR>><BR>> www.diyha.co.uk<BR>>
www.kat5.tv<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>>
Message: 7<BR>> Date: Wed, 15 May
2002 11:54:21 -0000<BR>> From:
"graham_howe" <graham@xxxxxxx><BR>> Subject: Re:
Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5 AVS-RXU<BR>><BR>> --- In
kat5-users@y..., "Keith Doxey" <keith.doxey@b...>
wrote:<BR>> > Graham,<BR>> ><BR>> > The
R
XU only differs from an RX by the ommision of 4 resistors.<BR>>
><BR>> > To use an RXU you need to either hardwire two CAT5
cables onto an<BR>> RJ45<BR>> > outlet or use an RJ45
doubler. There physically isnt the space to<BR>> mount
a<BR>> > second RJ45 on the KAT5 itself and without cutting a
chunk out of<BR>> the case,<BR>> > a double wont fit
the socket on the KAT5.<BR>> ><BR>> > The way to
use the doubler is to place it in one half of a double<BR>>
faceplate<BR>> > and run one lead to the other socket, one lead
to the KAT5<BR>> ><BR>> > The attached image shows
the resistors to remove.<BR>> ><BR>> > Hope that
helps<BR>> ><BR>> >
Keith<BR>><BR>> Thanks Keith,<BR>><BR>>
I had already read the stuff on your site about the adapter
not<BR>> fitting, but I was tryin
g to avoid having it dangling out of the wall<BR>> plate. But if
there isn't any space inside the units then I guess<BR>> that will
be the only solution.<BR>><BR>> The diagram is indeed
helpful, but it got me thinking. Would it be<BR>> possible (again
space might be a problem) to fit 4 dip switches<BR>> to 'short'
across each of the resistors so that I end up with a unit<BR>>
that can be AVS-RX or AVS-RXU. The reason I ask is that when (note
I<BR>> didn't say if ;-)) the switcher is available, I assume I
will need<BR>> AVS-RX units rather than
AVS-RXU.<BR>><BR>> Regards<BR>><BR>>
Graham<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>>
Message: 8<BR>> Date: Wed, 15
May 2002 13:05:48 +0100<BR>> From:
"Keith Doxey" <keith.doxey@xxxxxxx><BR>> Subject:
RE: Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5 AVS-RXU<BR>><BR>> Once
IR is released there will be an upgrade for existing
units.<BR>><BR>> There will be redesigned units for new
production. These will incorporate<BR>> switchable
termination.<BR>><BR>> The switches will DISCONNECT the
termination resistors NOT short them<BR>> otherwise the signals
would be terminated by a short.<BR>><BR>> Shorting the
resistors would guarantee that no unwanted noise would get<BR>>
through, but unfortunately it would also mean that the wanted signal
would<BR>> not get through either!!!<BR>><BR>>
Keith<BR>><BR>> www.diyha.co.uk<BR>>
www.kat5.tv<BR>><BR>><BR>> -----Original
Message-----<BR>> From: graham_ho
we [mailto:graham@xxxxxxx]<BR>> Sent:
15 May 2002 12:54<BR>> To: kat5-users@xxxxxxx<BR>>
Subject: Re: [KAT5] Converting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5
AVS-RXU<BR>><BR>><BR>> --- In kat5-users@y...,
"Keith Doxey" <keith.doxey@b...> wrote:<BR>> >
Graham,<BR>> ><BR>> > The RXU only differs from an
RX by the ommision of 4 resistors.<BR>> ><BR>> > To
use an RXU you need to either hardwire two CAT5 cables onto
an<BR>> RJ45<BR>> > outlet or use an RJ45 doubler.
There physically isnt the space to<BR>> mount a<BR>> >
second RJ45 on the KAT5 itself and without cutting a chunk out
of<BR>> the case,<BR>> > a double wont fit the socket
on the KAT5.<BR>> ><BR>> > The way to use the
doubler is to place it in one half of a double<BR>>
faceplate<BR>> > and run one l
ead to the other socket, one lead to the KAT5<BR>>
><BR>> > The attached image shows the resistors to
remove.<BR>> ><BR>> > Hope that helps<BR>>
><BR>> > Keith<BR>><BR>> Thanks
Keith,<BR>><BR>> I had already read the stuff on your
site about the adapter not<BR>> fitting, but I was trying to avoid
having it dangling out of the wall<BR>> plate. But if there isn't
any space inside the units then I guess<BR>> that will be the only
solution.<BR>><BR>> The diagram is indeed helpful, but it
got me thinking. Would it be<BR>> possible (again space might be a
problem) to fit 4 dip switches<BR>> to 'short' across each of the
resistors so that I end up with a unit<BR>> that can be AVS-RX or
AVS-RXU. The reason I ask is that when (note I<BR>> didn't say if
;-)) the switcher is available, I assume I will need<BR>> AVS-RX
units
rather than AVS-RXU.<BR>><BR>>
Regards<BR>><BR>>
Graham<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>>
kat5-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <A href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</A><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>>
Message: 9<BR>> Date: Wed, 15 May
2002 16:07:11 +0100<BR>> From:
"Graham Howe" <graham@xxxxxxx><BR>> Subject: RE:
Co
nverting KAT5 AVS-RX to KAT5 AVS-RXU<BR>><BR>> >
-----Original Message-----<BR>> > From: Keith Doxey [mailto:keith.doxey@xxxxxxx]<BR>>
> Sent: 15 May 2002 13:06<BR>> > To:
kat5-users@xxxxxxx<BR>> > Subject: RE: [KAT5] Converting KAT5
AVS-RX to KAT5 AVS-RXU<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>>
> Once IR is released there will be an upgrade for existing
units.<BR>> ><BR>> > There will be redesigned units
for new production. These will<BR>> > incorporate switchable
termination.<BR>> ><BR>> > The switches will
DISCONNECT the termination resistors NOT<BR>> > short them
otherwise the signals would be terminated by a short.<BR>>
><BR>> > Shorting the resistors would guarantee that no
unwanted noise<BR>> > would get through, but unfortunately it
would also mean that<BR>> >
; the wanted signal would not get through either!!!<BR>>
><BR>> > Keith<BR>>
><BR>><BR>> I was wondering if you noticed my
deliberate mistake about thew function<BR>> of the switches
;-)<BR>><BR>> Graham (publicly showing his electronic
stupidity again)<BR>><BR>><BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <A href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</A><BR>><BR>><BR><BR></TT><BR><BR><TT>To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:<BR>kat5-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx<BR
><BR></TT><BR><BR><TT>Your use of Yahoo!
Groups is subject to the <A href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>Yahoo!
Terms of Service</A>.</TT>
<BR><BR>________________________________________________________________________<BR>This
email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs
SkyScan<BR>service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus
service working<BR>around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com<BR>________________________________________________________________________<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
KAT5 Main Index |
KAT5 Thread Index |
KAT5 Home |
Archives Home
|