Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to alkizmo
Re: Should I run RG6 or skip it? said by alkizmo:He should compromise by spending the same amount of $$$ on getting conduits to fewer, but key, locations instead of wiring CATV to every room. That's more expensive in materials and much harder to do labor wise not to mention the OP already bought the RG6. I seriously doubt they are going to shift gears at this point. Ideally that would be the best way to go but that's insanely rare in new and old construction. |
|
nonymousPremium
join:2003-09-08
Glendale, AZ Reviews:
 ·Callcentric
| reply to TheSMJ
The OP doesnt want it now but maybe in the future a wife, girlfriend, kids, a pet dog may. After the fact installations can be easy or hard. Look ok or be way messy with wire visible everywhere. Built in now it will be neat and clean. Install it to the most logical places a TV would go. It will never be as easy later unless another remodel. |
|
| reply to PoloDude
said by PoloDude:No,NO,NO I will tell you right now that putting in splitters in new construction is a last resort. You put in splitters when you can't run an additional coax. Quite correct!
Basic rule of in building distribution, home run all drops to the point of distribution and only when no other run is possible, split an existing drop. |
|
 alkizmo
join:2007-06-25
Pierrefonds, QC
kudos:1 | reply to Critsmcgee
said by Critsmcgee:The OP's house is from 1959 and it will have it. Mine is from 1960 and it has it. Are you talking about houses older then that? My house is from 1964 and it doesn't have it.
said by Critsmcgee:Once upon a time coax was a luxury item but with everything online it's no longer in that category. There's where people are confused. I don't know anyone who doesn't have internet. Maybe it's different in Canada.
Back in the 90s and early '00s, people did care about CATV being in every room. That's why older houses had it added later on.
However, as you said, it's a lot less important now because of bedroom TVs being replaced by bedroom laptops 
That's why I said it's a luxury, because while we still use it, it is not important anymore.
With HDTV cable providers forcing you to pay an extra monthly fee for additional HDTV boxes per household. People just limit cable TV to one or two TV and everything else is on the computer.
said by Critsmcgee:Just because you spend $100,000 on addition doesn't mean the new addition is worth $100,000. You might only see $50,000 return. You spend 100,000$ on a house at the risk of only getting 50,000$ back only because you want to enjoy the upgrades yourself before selling.
OP doesn't need CATV, so it's a loss. He'll install CATV, never use it for years, and by the time he sells the house, people will see the CATV outlets are an eye sore like we do for telephone jacks (useless, ripped out and patched next time they paint a room).
We're missing the entire point here though.
The OP doesn't need CATV, but he wants to use the opportunity while his walls are open. He should compromise by spending the same amount of $$$ on getting conduits to fewer, but key, locations instead of wiring CATV to every room. |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to alkizmo
said by alkizmo:said by Critsmcgee:said by alkizmo:And if you find a house you like and it is not wired, you can't demand it to be wired (at least, in my local realestate market). It's more lucrative to negotiate over the price and not over the wiring. The wiring is the price negotiation. No wiring means you can reduce the price whether they like it or not. Will they let the deal fall though over $500? I doubt it. In the end no wiring can cost you money. Based on that who would argue that it doesn't affect the sale? It is still a gamble. You would Spend a couple of hundred dollars now for something you won't use in order to maybe not have to discount a multihundred dollars house price by a few hundred bucks. I have never seen negotiations go like that (asking a lowered price because a luxury feature is not present). I am not saying it never happens, but it must be rare, and I mostly underwrite mortgages for old houses (guaranteed not to have that stuff). The OP's house is from 1959 and it will have it. Mine is from 1960 and it has it. Are you talking about houses older then that? My parent's in law have a 1930's house with it. Everything with property is a gamble. Just because you spend $100,000 on addition doesn't mean the new addition is worth $100,000. You might only see $50,000 return. Once upon a time coax was a luxury item but with everything online it's no longer in that category. There's where people are confused. I don't know anyone who doesn't have internet. Maybe it's different in Canada. |
|
alkizmo
join:2007-06-25
Pierrefonds, QC
kudos:1 | reply to Critsmcgee
said by Critsmcgee:said by alkizmo:And if you find a house you like and it is not wired, you can't demand it to be wired (at least, in my local realestate market). It's more lucrative to negotiate over the price and not over the wiring. The wiring is the price negotiation. No wiring means you can reduce the price whether they like it or not. Will they let the deal fall though over $500? I doubt it. In the end no wiring can cost you money. Based on that who would argue that it doesn't affect the sale? It is still a gamble. You would Spend a couple of hundred dollars now for something you won't use in order to maybe not have to discount a multihundred dollars house price by a few hundred bucks.
I have never seen negotiations go like that (asking a lowered price because a luxury feature is not present). I am not saying it never happens, but it must be rare, and I mostly underwrite mortgages for old houses (guaranteed not to have that stuff). |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
3 edits | reply to PoloDude
said by PoloDude:said by Critsmcgee:said by ric:Avoid splitters
Splitters are fine as long as your not using more then one or two per run. Knowledge is power so as long as you understand how they work there's nothing wrong with using them. No,NO,NO I will tell you right now that putting in splitters in new construction is a last resort. You put in splitters when you can't run an additional coax. said by TheSMJ:My current house (built in 1959) Who's talking about new construction besides you? OP is old construction!
A home run for the internet is all that really matters. TV's are fine off splitters. You have a minimum of 2 splitters in the house. The cable company brings in ONE connection so you need a splitter or tap to run internet to one side and cable to the other. Next you need a splitter to deliver cable to every room. That's just how it works. You know that if you install FIOS. You also know it's fine to split the cable connection after that once maybe twice depending on the length of the run and have no ill effects on the TV viewing experience. It's not ideal but most people aren't trying to optimize their TV's by tweaking them to get a few more DB's to look cool. It either works or it doesn't at the end of the day. |
|
 PoloDudePremium,VIP
join:2006-03-29
Northport, NY
kudos:3 | reply to Critsmcgee
said by Critsmcgee:said by ric:Avoid splitters
Splitters are fine as long as your not using more then one or two per run. Knowledge is power so as long as you understand how they work there's nothing wrong with using them. No,NO,NO I will tell you right now that putting in splitters in new construction is a last resort. You put in splitters when you can't run an additional coax.
--
“My horse fights with me and fasts with me because if he is to carry me into battle, he must know my heart and I must know his or we shall never become brothers.
-Plenty Coups, Chief of the Crow” |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to alkizmo
said by alkizmo:And if you find a house you like and it is not wired, you can't demand it to be wired (at least, in my local realestate market). It's more lucrative to negotiate over the price and not over the wiring. The wiring is the price negotiation. No wiring means you can reduce the price whether they like it or not. Will they let the deal fall though over $500? I doubt it. In the end no wiring can cost you money. Based on that who would argue that it doesn't affect the sale? |
|
|
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to ric
said by ric:Avoid splitters
Splitters are fine as long as your not using more then one or two per run. Knowledge is power so as long as you understand how they work there's nothing wrong with using them. |
|
lutful... of ideasPremium
join:2005-06-16
Ottawa, ON Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy DSL
2 edits | reply to TheSMJ
said by TheSMJ:If RG6-to-CAT6 adapters existed I'd just use those, but I haven't been able to find any so I'm assuming they don't. Search for MoCA. RG6 has enough bandwidth to support gigabit Ethernet. If you really want to future-proof, run optical fiber and wait for affordable residential "cable-over-fiber" adapters. My new company has developed such a product and I am sure other companies will have them soon. There are also "antenna-over-fiber" for bringing free-to-air stuff to your TV/computer. *** Here are some articles showing all kinds of services that can run over good quality coax cable. Seems you could run even 10G Ethernet in near future while watching TV from same cable.  » www.mocalliance.org/news/HFC_Acc···0da469cc» www.lightreading.com/fttx/china-···40146955 |
|
| reply to Critsmcgee
Avoid splitters |
|
| reply to TheSMJ
If your running cable, do it right. Run cat5 or cat6 along with triple shielded rg6. Run more than you need. It never hurts to put in a media panel. |
|
| reply to robbin
»www.costcaptain.com/mm5/merchant···od2E4A2Q
Reasonably priced to boot. Who would have thought it? |
|
 Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to robbin
said by robbin:Satellite used to need one feed per tuner. So if you wanted to record one channel and watch another then you needed two coax. I haven't had satellite in a while so I'm not sure if that is still the case.
I have a DVR and can watch one channel and record another. Directv has an upgrade to allow more channel recording. I have one coax to the DVR. |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to TheSMJ
said by TheSMJ:So then why do most people seem to recommend running two per tv location?
Most people? Tell that to the Directv installers. I have two installations and one coax to each one. |
|
robbinPremium,MVM
join:2000-09-21
Leander, TX
kudos:1 | reply to alkizmo
It's not something to demand but for many it could make a difference between two competing properties. The cost of materials is minor compared to the cost of labor to wire the house retroactively. Conduit is nice but both cost and labor are greater than coax. As far as future proofing, high quality coax can support a very large amount of bandwidth. For instance, you can't get a coax to ethernet converter to run cable over an ethernet line, but you can get an ethernet to coax convertor to run ethernet over coax. |
|
alkizmo
join:2007-06-25
Pierrefonds, QC
kudos:1 | reply to Critsmcgee
said by Critsmcgee:Ask anyone you want and as many of them as you want. I've bought 3 houses and coax has been a requirement in all 3 for me. My sister and parents the same. As a matter of fact even the service providers came into the picture. Last year when I bought this house FIOS was a requirement. The fact is coax DOES play a role in decision making for some people. I don't know if these houses were new construction (as in you could DEMAND the installation of the cables).
A used house is a different story. You hunt and hunt for a house in the right area of the right style of the right size, it's not custom made to you. Once you find that house, you'll be lenient as to whether or not there is network/catv wiring.
A bit like house inspection, if you're buying a old house, you can't DEMAND that the inspection finds nothing old in the house.
said by Critsmcgee:Discount it all you want but blanket statements will never win and you know it. At best you can say something like "For most people it won't play into the decision process". A 100% statement just gets you into trouble. There are always exceptions, but as a house improvement investment, it will bear very little return. It's not just the spool that costs $$$, it's the termination jacks, the labor, and 500' will get little coverage especially if you want dedicated lines to every room (instead of piggy backing from room to room).
said by Critsmcgee:For your example those people don't know what to look for. The most common problem with people is they don't know what they want or what to look for. A Realtor will tell you whatever sells the house. Do they care if you have cable or internet once you buy the house? NO! Do they care if it costs you $300-500 to have the house wired? NO! This is a classic hindsight problem with buying property.
And if you find a house you like and it is not wired, you can't demand it to be wired (at least, in my local realestate market). It's more lucrative to negotiate over the price and not over the wiring.
In OP's case, he doesn't need CATV, so for him it's a bad expensive. If he wants a real using addition, he should run conduits that are easy to use for pulling anyy sort of cable in the future. 50 years later, when we're using house-central-nerve-system wiring to wire brain scanners in every room, they'll be glad they had conduit in place, they won't care for the obsolete CATV. |
|
| reply to TheSMJ
said by TheSMJ:Now I'm trying to figure out how many drops per room. I wasn't aware satellite systems needed two wires (I've never hooked one up before) and I was only planning on two drops in each room w/ one on opposite walls. But with this information maybe I should run two per wall? Simple answer is bring a single drop into each room that you have access to and if some coax is left over then double up on say the living room or a den or more.
You have already bought the coax, so may as well utilize every inch you paid for. |
|
| reply to TheSMJ
Run two per location in case you want like OTA tv plus either satellite or regular cable. Plus some people like having a separate outlet for a cable modem and another for their tv/dvr box.
I definitely say run atleast 1 RG6 to each location, possibly even on on each side of the wall (so each room would have two runs of coax). Definitely run one RG6 to each wall of your main living area as others have said, it may limit your furniture arrangements. You don't want to be sitting under your TV. We don't really watch a lot of tv so we only had one run of coax and two cat6 per box, one utility box per room and two boxes on opposite sides of the wall in the main living area. I also put a wireless AP in the ceiling above the main living area as well with a dedicated cat5e line back to a home run area in our laundry room.
Contrary to what others have said, this WILL affect future home buys. I don't see how it wouldn't. Everyone I know who has bought a house, this has come into play with. It costs several thousand dollars more to have it installed AFTER the walls are put in and they NEVER look as well done. Plus, you can't run drops to outside walls without tearing up the walls. I had my entire house wired up for $1,000 for coax and cat6 wire. It would have cost 4x that after the house was completed. |
|
