# HDMI over Cat5e/6



## oily_17 (Feb 28, 2009)

This is my problem -

I would like to send a signal from my Sky HD+ box in the living room to another room.

The second TV is about 25m away(~cable run).I have heard that you can send the signal over cat5e/6 cable.This may be my best bet as all rooms have network cables supplied to them (they do go through a switch, dont know if that matters).

Would this be easier than running a long HDMI cable to the second TV ?
Is there anyone using this method and if so do you notice any difference/loss in picture quality ?
Also what hardware is involved in using this setup, any help on what to avoid or the best to use would be appreciated from someone using this method.


----------



## oily_17 (Mar 8, 2009)

Bump...anyone using this method


----------



## v12dock (Mar 8, 2009)

it would be cheaper


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Mar 8, 2009)

CAT6 isn't fast enough for high resolution video.  You're better off getting a long HDMI cable.  It would be expensive but its for the better.  That or break the signal down into something cheap like coaxial/analog. XD


----------



## richardbel (Mar 8, 2009)

v12dock said:


> it would be cheaper



+1


----------



## niko084 (Mar 8, 2009)

FordGT90Concept said:


> CAT6 isn't fast enough for high resolution video.  You're better off getting a long HDMI cable.  It would be expensive but its for the better.  That or break the signal down into something cheap like coaxial/analog. XD



Oh yes Cat6 certainly is...

Cat6 is capable of 10gb/s of throughput!
HDMI 1.3 standard is capable of 10.2gb/s and supports much higher resolution then the 1080P of today.
It's designed to support 1600P

They do make actual conversion kits for this purpose, for long runs of what would normally be hdmi, you use an adapter on each side and drop a cat6 cable in between, but the adapters are not exactly cheap either....


----------



## Ptep (Mar 16, 2009)

Maximum workable length of HDMI without amplifiers or repeaters is 15M, although this is dependant on the quality of the cable. You can extend this up to about 50M by using a repeater, although these vary greatly in cost and quality just like the cable.

CAT5/6 HDMI baluns are a good way of increasing the range of HDMI, as the cable is usually a lot easier to run (not as thick, and doesnt have terminations on as standard so easier to get through small holes - they are comparatively easy to terminate compared to HDMI!!) and a hell of a lot cheaper per meter, although if you do go with these count on running a new cable for the link, you cannot use an existing cable that is also used for networking.
Kramer HDMI Baluns are usually considered the standard for this, however they are not cheap (about £150-170GBP an end). They use two CAT5 cables to transfer the signal, and the part numbers are TP551 for the Tx and TP552 for the Rx if you need them, I believe Keene Electronics are the main retail distributer for them in the UK.
There are plenty other cheaper alternatives to the Kramers available, but carefull reading of reviews on google and research on sites such as 'AV Forums' is advisable as they vary in quality greatly!


----------



## Mussels (Mar 16, 2009)

You wont be able to run this through a network or cat6 or anything, if you're trying to do it over HDMI. Switches and such will have no idea what to do with HDMI traffic, and with different voltages and such it may well burn something out.

I *have* seen someone do this with analogue signals, i REALLY dont think it will work with HDMI. HDMI is digital and as such, its REALLY not going to like any interference at all.

They make it hard for stuff like this for a reason, to prevent piracy.


What outputs does your box have? perhaps its possible to run something in analogue?


----------



## Arrakis9 (Mar 16, 2009)

http://www.tripplite.com/en/products/model.cfm?txtSeriesID=109&EID=603&txtModelID=4063


----------



## Mussels (Mar 16, 2009)

Arrakis+9 said:


> http://www.tripplite.com/en/products/model.cfm?txtSeriesID=109&EID=603&txtModelID=4063



well thats how you do it!

    * Extends an HDMI signal up to 230ft over Cat5/6 cable (480p)
    * Fully Automatic equalization up to 40db; no system control required
    * Compatible with 480p, 720p, 1080i, and 1080p resolutions

Judging by that, distance controls the quality/max res. 720P should be a safe bet with the distances involved.

edit: oh and it still wont be network compatible. you're going to need a cable thats direct point-to-point


----------



## Ptep (Mar 16, 2009)

Your right mussels, you cant run it over the network, its merely using the CAT5 cable as multiple sets of twisted pairs to send the signal. 
You can get baluns/adapters for many other things like usb, composite video (used in cctv a lot) and rs232 to send via CAT cable over longer distances than the original connection would allow for. 







http://www.kramerelectronics.co.uk/indexes/item.asp?name=TP-551_TP-552
http://www.keene.co.uk/multi.php?mycode=TP551


----------



## niko084 (Mar 16, 2009)

Mussels said:


> I *have* seen someone do this with analogue signals, i REALLY dont think it will work with HDMI. HDMI is digital and as such, its REALLY not going to like any interference at all.



Actually Digital signals are much less prone to interference. The levels of interference to make a noticeable difference are much more, mainly because its either no signal or max signal, anything in between beyond a certain point is filtered out. Digital is much easier to keep working with interference granting you don't have too much or its all gone period.


----------



## Ptep (Mar 16, 2009)

niko084 said:


> Actually Digital signals are much less prone to interference. The levels of interference to make a noticeable difference are much more, mainly because its either no signal or max signal, anything in between beyond a certain point is filtered out. Digital is much easier to keep working with interference granting you don't have too much or its all gone period.



+1 

Hence the term that some people use for digital - an 'all or nothing' signal, not usually subject to degradation by crosstalk, signal loss or rf interference. 
Although as far as i know the reason behind HDMI amps or repeaters is more to do with the strange things long cables cause with capacitance and how that affects the signal. (Id guess its similar to jitter or data error in an optical fibre audio cable).


----------



## niko084 (Mar 16, 2009)

Ptep said:


> +1
> 
> Hence the term that some people use for digital - an 'all or nothing' signal, not usually subject to degradation by crosstalk, signal loss or rf interference.
> Although as far as i know the reason behind HDMI amps or repeaters is more to do with the strange things long cables cause with capacitance and how that affects the signal. (Id guess its similar to jitter or data error in an optical fibre audio cable).



You are pretty much on track... The reason for HDMI not being able to be long is mainly because of the gauge of the wire inside the cable, it doesn't hold voltage as well over longer distances. I have run HDMI cables with numerous repeaters for distances around 150ft which continued to transmit perfect 1080p signals.

Too many small wires in a little bunch, if each of those wires were say even 18-20ga, it would run quite a bit longer, but it would be a REALLY thick cable.


----------



## oily_17 (Mar 16, 2009)

Thanks for all the input guy's.

@Ptep...I have read about those CAT5/6 HDMI baluns and that was the way I was thinking of going, but as you said they can be expensive and I am still weighing up the cost/benefit.

The reason I was going to use the network cables is because there is no PC connected to it at the moment and it would be easy to add another cable anyway, as the conduit is already in place.
I understand that I will not be able to use it for both network and HDMI.

As Niko said maybe I could run a HDMI cable with a repeater in-between.

I would also have to use a HDMI splitter/distribution box as I would be feeding two TV's from one box...anyone any thought on these and if they are a good idea or not, sorry but I am not up to speed on these things.


----------



## Ptep (Mar 16, 2009)

oily_17 said:


> Thanks for all the input guy's.
> 
> @Ptep...I have read about those CAT5/6 HDMI baluns and that was the way I was thinking of going, but as you said they can be expensive and I am still weighing up the cost/benefit.
> 
> I would also have to use a HDMI splitter/distribution box as I would be feeding two TV's from one box...anyone any thought on these and if they are a good idea or not, sorry but I am not up to speed on these things.



Again with the splitters quality versus cost is the main thing, although I have to say Keene Electronics is a good place to look, some of their unbranded gear is quite good - they tend to sell pretty reasonable quality stuff and i think the unbranded stuff is tested by them before they sell it.


----------

