HDMI Streaming

sturob17 · 02-07-2008, 09:18

Wonder if anyone can help. I really want to stream my Sky HD box to my new HD TV in the bedroom (Sky box is in the lounge) and obviously I want best quality, preferably HDMI. The best I've seen is an HDMI splitter, but this mean running cables to the bedroom, 10 metres away. Has anyone got any other thoughts (get another Sky HD box isn't really an option for me at the moment)????

Cheers

Stu

niall campbell · 02-07-2008, 11:17

well you could use 2 strands of CAT 5 cable or better still a HDMI repeater

http://www.keene.co.uk/electronics/m...?mycode=HDMIR1

or watch over RF cable ?

maddog-uk · 04-07-2008, 18:48

There is a better solution using just one UTP/STP from these guys http://www.pixels.uk.com/. I just bought it and have it up and running. I am using the multi output box so I can it to 3 rooms, but thats because my HD box is under the stairs.

Gilson · 04-07-2008, 22:17

There is just one problem with both of the above replies to the OP's post - WIRES!.

I would have thought by now that HD (HDMI in / HDMI out) videosenders would have been commonly available? I note that there is one such product available in the US but at a high price.

Nigel Goodwin · 05-07-2008, 09:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilson

There is just one problem with both of the above replies to the OP's post - WIRES!.

You can't beat wires, anything else is just pretending to be wire, and not doing as good a job.

Quote:

I would have thought by now that HD (HDMI in / HDMI out) videosenders would have been commonly available? I note that there is one such product available in the US but at a high price.

It's going to be a high price, due to the huge bandwidth required.

sturob17 · 13-07-2008, 12:18

What is the problem with going wireless. My Sky signal, with hundreds of channels, gets to my HD box, over a distance of hundreds of kilometers, sans wires. I realise the frequencies involved aren't the same but really? I want to go about 15 metres across my house with one HD source. I realise it isn't that simple, but surely there are ways to do this, relatively cheaply and effectively.

sancheeez · 13-07-2008, 13:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by sturob17

What is the problem with going wireless.

You don't have a dirty great satellite strapped to the roof of your house to transmit the signal.

sturob17 · 13-07-2008, 19:54

True, but I also don't want to transmit 2000km, and 500 channels

Orbitalzone · 13-07-2008, 21:02

36,000km I believe!

The issue is that you don't have a £75m transmitter in your front room unlike the typical satellite used, plus they use highly efficient microwave signals that are great in perfect line of sight but useless in anything is in the way.

Can you imagine if every household could potentially transmit 500 channels wireless around the house!

It's very easy to think that satellite transmissions are relatively simple and cheap as Sky give away the boxes...... there's a helluva lot of technology behind the scenes so don't expect multi channel wireless 'around the house' HD qualtiy video senders just yet.

sturob17 · 15-07-2008, 13:34

Now take that £75M, divide it by 35000000 (metres), divide by 500 channels, you'd roughly get about .5p per channel per metre. Now I would be happy to pay 10 times this price to go legal RF as opposed to directional microwaves. Anyway, I know it doesn't exist yet, was just hoping. I remember playing with SAW resonators when I was at varsity 20 years ago, and only now are they making their way into low cost transponders. The tech isn't new, it just needs someone to turn it into application. And what about a power point solution? A way to plug a dedicated HDMI signal onto your mains and out the other side. 200MB/s are the speeds at the mo, which should suffice for a HD channel or 2?

sancheeez · 15-07-2008, 14:38

The thing about all this is, wireless N can comfortably handle the amount of bandwidth an HD broadcast requires .... I think.

Wireless N modems are common enough now, and not terribly expensive.

It is a bit surprising that no-one has yet taken the technology and applied to to a next gen video sender?

02-07-2008, 09:18	#1
sturob17 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 4	HDMI Streaming Wonder if anyone can help. I really want to stream my Sky HD box to my new HD TV in the bedroom (Sky box is in the lounge) and obviously I want best quality, preferably HDMI. The best I've seen is an HDMI splitter, but this mean running cables to the bedroom, 10 metres away. Has anyone got any other thoughts (get another Sky HD box isn't really an option for me at the moment)???? Cheers Stu

02-07-2008, 11:17	#2
niall campbell Forum Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Aberfeldy Posts: 7,035	well you could use 2 strands of CAT 5 cable or better still a HDMI repeater http://www.keene.co.uk/electronics/m...?mycode=HDMIR1 or watch over RF cable ?

04-07-2008, 18:48	#3
maddog-uk Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 13	There is a better solution using just one UTP/STP from these guys http://www.pixels.uk.com/. I just bought it and have it up and running. I am using the multi output box so I can it to 3 rooms, but thats because my HD box is under the stairs.

04-07-2008, 22:17	#4
Gilson Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,145	There is just one problem with both of the above replies to the OP's post - WIRES!. I would have thought by now that HD (HDMI in / HDMI out) videosenders would have been commonly available? I note that there is one such product available in the US but at a high price.

05-07-2008, 09:29	#5
Nigel Goodwin Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: North Derbyshire Posts: 41,789	Quote: Originally Posted by Gilson There is just one problem with both of the above replies to the OP's post - WIRES!. You can't beat wires, anything else is just pretending to be wire, and not doing as good a job. Quote: I would have thought by now that HD (HDMI in / HDMI out) videosenders would have been commonly available? I note that there is one such product available in the US but at a high price. It's going to be a high price, due to the huge bandwidth required.

13-07-2008, 12:18	#6
sturob17 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 4	What is the problem with going wireless. My Sky signal, with hundreds of channels, gets to my HD box, over a distance of hundreds of kilometers, sans wires. I realise the frequencies involved aren't the same but really? I want to go about 15 metres across my house with one HD source. I realise it isn't that simple, but surely there are ways to do this, relatively cheaply and effectively.

13-07-2008, 13:42	#7
sancheeez Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 6,762	Quote: Originally Posted by sturob17 What is the problem with going wireless. You don't have a dirty great satellite strapped to the roof of your house to transmit the signal.

13-07-2008, 19:54	#8
sturob17 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 4	True, but I also don't want to transmit 2000km, and 500 channels

13-07-2008, 21:02	#9
Orbitalzone Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Sussex Posts: 12,173	36,000km I believe! The issue is that you don't have a £75m transmitter in your front room unlike the typical satellite used, plus they use highly efficient microwave signals that are great in perfect line of sight but useless in anything is in the way. Can you imagine if every household could potentially transmit 500 channels wireless around the house! It's very easy to think that satellite transmissions are relatively simple and cheap as Sky give away the boxes...... there's a helluva lot of technology behind the scenes so don't expect multi channel wireless 'around the house' HD qualtiy video senders just yet.

15-07-2008, 13:34	#10
sturob17 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 4	Now take that £75M, divide it by 35000000 (metres), divide by 500 channels, you'd roughly get about .5p per channel per metre. Now I would be happy to pay 10 times this price to go legal RF as opposed to directional microwaves. Anyway, I know it doesn't exist yet, was just hoping. I remember playing with SAW resonators when I was at varsity 20 years ago, and only now are they making their way into low cost transponders. The tech isn't new, it just needs someone to turn it into application. And what about a power point solution? A way to plug a dedicated HDMI signal onto your mains and out the other side. 200MB/s are the speeds at the mo, which should suffice for a HD channel or 2?

15-07-2008, 14:38	#11
sancheeez Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 6,762	The thing about all this is, wireless N can comfortably handle the amount of bandwidth an HD broadcast requires .... I think. Wireless N modems are common enough now, and not terribly expensive. It is a bit surprising that no-one has yet taken the technology and applied to to a next gen video sender?

DS Forums

HDMI Streaming