• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Gadgets
  • TV and Home Entertainment Technology
HDMI Video Senders
richie wild
28-04-2011
Hi,

It would be great to enjoy Sky's HD picture on another telly too far from the main one to wire in, so I'm considering a Maplin HDMI transmitter/sender thing... £150 B Grade.

I've seen reviews saying the picture quality is poor, but HOW POOR? It's to be watched on a 32" tv, will the "artefacts" mentioned in other forums be noticed? It's got to be better than Sky RF... right?

Any info gladly received,

Cheers!
Nigel Goodwin
29-04-2011
Try one and see - if it's not good enough then take it back.
chrisjr
29-04-2011
A lot depends on what is between the transmit and receive ends and the radio frequency environment where the sender is being used. If there are lots of thick walls between the two ends and/or there is lots of RF interference then the signal will degrade somewhat. With who knows what effects.

There is no way to predict this with any certainty so trial and error may be the only option. A bit of experimentation with the positions of each end will almost certainly be required to find the best signal transfer.

I'm also not entirely sure if these devices use any form of data compression? If they do then that could certainly introduce artefacts into the image. Even more so if the original is a broadcast TV channel which will have itself used data compression. Two lots of compression can be noticeable.
gomezz
29-04-2011
Although you say the remote TV is too far away to run a long cable have you considered the use of an extender?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
Chris Frost
29-04-2011
If you're just being lazy and see wireless as an easy quick fix then go ahead. The rest of us know that wireless is pants. It rarely achieves the promised bandwidth. The connection is flaky and prone to drop-outs. It's also at the mercy of interference from a huge range of devices in your home and the homes of your neighbors.

Copper cable is far more robust. For less than the cost of the B Grade wireless kit you can buy a balun system and have Sky in its full resolution with no loss in quality and no nasty drop outs. You'll also have IR control of the Sky box that's far more responsive that a radio/wireless based system.

In fact, since you're on the Wirral I'd say I can probably supply and install a CAT5 balun system with up to 2x40m cable runs and IR Repeaters for the same price at the Maplin kit.
niall campbell
30-04-2011
even better is HDMI cable and RF


RF would allow you to change channels with a magic eye , and recieve digital signal for freeview

how much cable do you need ?
Robert__law
30-04-2011
I have these and the picture quality is excellent , worked instantly and far superior to the analogue sd video senders which you have to move around to find best picture.
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map