Help! House refurb and AV setup definition

GIBSrUS

GIBSrUS

GIBSrUS

Soldato
Joined
10 Dec 2002
Posts
2,656
Location
North Herts
Hi everyone,

We are soon kicking off a big home renovation, and I am trying to define what the best and most cost effective AV solution would be in terms of infrastructure.

Ideally, the goal is for minimal front end hardware (ideally just displays left at the front end) with all backend hardware located under the stairs.

The input devices I have at the moment are:

2 x Sky HD boxes
2 x NOW tv boxes
1 x Bluray player
1 x Media server running plex/plex home theatre.

The output devices planned are:

1x TV in lounge
1 x Projector in family room
4 x TV from each bedroom

My initial plan, and what I have spec'd to the builders for now, is for x2 HDMI sockets at each display location, running to the central AV hub. Each display point was going to run into a 8x1 HDMI switch and in turn go into an "HDMI out" multi-zone x2 HDMI out AV receiver.

The inputs would go into the receiver, and with the help of a Harmony Ultimate/Elite I was going to setup some AV receiver activities to allow the possibility of any 1 source going to 1 output simultaneously using zone control. (appreciating max 2 sources at one time)

However, what I am finding is that unless I spend big bucks on an AV receiver, most of the mutli-zone receivers only seem to do analog in a second zone?

Then I was thinking is a simpler solution a more complex HDMI switch/splitter dealing with multiple inputs/outputs? Or perhaps just two amps, each feeding one circuit of HDMI and forget the zoning thing?

All thoughts would be very much appreciated!
 
i did something similar with only one zone some years back. I have all my networking and AV under the stairs. I don't use the TV speakers for sound and use HI-FI speakers powered from the AV amp.

I simply present a HDMI to the TV. The appleTV, Sky box etc are under the stairs all routed through the AV amp.

I use the IR receivers. one at the tv and many point at the various kit under the stairs.

Wouldn't two av Amps be the most effective solution? That's probably the way i would go so that i could have total control? Av amps aren't too expensive?

Otherwise you might want to look at an HDMI matrix.
 
I think you're making life a bit complicated for yourself with multiple HDMIs and trying to do something that the AV receivers don't really cater for. You'll also run in to control issues... i.e. two people both trying to control the same bit of hardware at the same time. There are products available in the custom install industry that can resolve that, but if you thought AV Receivers that do second zone digital were expebnsive then you'd be horrified what it costs for isolated control.

I also think you're missing a trick not including Freeview in your plans. I know that you have Sky (multi-room I guess with boxes?) and that is probably the main way the family watches TV, but kids are moving away from linear TV to streamed content so you might want to start giving that more weight in your plans.


Without knowing your individual family requirements then all anyone can do is paint with a broad brush, but the following does work for most family homes facing the same conundrum as you. Here's some idea:

(1) If the kids are going to watch in their bedrooms then they're more likely to search out the instant fix of streamed content than to plan and record something on the Sky planner. This means they're unlikely to need access to a Sky box all the time. Yes, it should be available, but maybe not as their primary mode of linear TV. Allocate the second Sky box as the one that the kids can got to by prior arrangement

(2) Wherever the main TV viewing is done, then that's the area that gets access to the primary Sky box. Allocate it to the master bedroom too

(3) Decide which of the Sky boxes should be allocated to the Family Room. If it's likely that both the main lounge and family room will be used for viewing from TV simultaneously then there's your allocation sorted straight away

(4) Remember the basic principle that you can't be in two places at once. With this in mind then, don't try to make all sources available in all rooms all the time, particularly if you're working within a restricted budget.

(5) Good internet access is vital. Don't rely solely on wireless. Chuck in plenty of Cat6. Some of it should be allocated to data traffic, other cabling should be there for hanging baluns off for whatever comes in the future

(6) Networked media players are small and cheap. You can still maintain a clean look and conceal a small player in-room that will help solve a lot of your source and control headaches. Chromecast and similar are cheap but rely heavily on the house Wi-Fi. Consider players with an Ethernet port and then wire accordingly

(7) Include some local connection wiring for the bedrooms. The TV could be used for gaming or connecting a laptop/tablet/camera etc



As I see it you should start off with a backbone of the NAS in to a hub and then radiate out to all the areas that could accommodate a media player. Include network connections for TVs and the AV receiver(s) too. Streaming is growing and it's only going to become more popular.

Wire additionally for baluns. Keep these cables away from the data network switch. Baluns simply replace running long AV cables beit HDMI now or some future interconnects. The signals travelling point to point between baluns are not IP-able.

The next layer is an RF network: IOW Freeview. It doesn't cost much to acquire. It includes HD. If it rains like cats and dogs outside an you lose your Sky signal then Freeview will still be working. TVs often include a "record via USB" feature so with the addition of some cheap USB flash drives you have TV/PVRs. What's more, the same RF network gives you a simple, low cost and effective way to control two Sky boxes on the same house RF network without them clashing with each other.

Finally, your Sky boxes and BD player. TBH, I think you should have a BD player local in the room where it is most likely to be used. I seriously doubt anyone in a bedroom is going to want to go downstairs and load a disc. Keep a BD player for the family room and share it to the lounge via a simple HDMI 1:2 distribution amp. Use HDMI IR injectors for an inexpensive method of control from the 'other' room.

The Sky boxes can be distributed each on via a simple HDMI distribution amp. Send box 2 to the kids rooms plus your choice of lounge or family room. Send the main box to the master bedroom and the remaining prime viewing room(s).
 
I'm with lucid on the point of only bother to distribute what you have to. If multiple people want to watch a Blu-ray movie then they are likely to be in the same room, players are well under £100 even if you're buying a networked Sony one that does 3D. Same with NowTV - the boxes are £15, and you have a Sky subscription if you want to put the same linear channel on all screens at once. You'll spend more money on distributing and controlling a couple of centrally located Blu-ray players than you will on having one for each room.

Another option would be to have a system of ripping (not transcoding) the Blu-rays and building up a library on a central NAS.
 
Some great ideas thanks Lucid. The family consists of 1 (only on the way too), but the house is being setup for the long term.

I am already planning plenty of CAT6 going to the rooms and display points, and I take your point about the baluns thanks.

I did weigh up the idea of going CAT 6 everywhere rather than a blend of HDMI & CAT6, but I was worried I would need to get the more expensive CAT6A if proofing for 4k in the future, whereas I believe high speed 1.4a cabling will be fine with HDMI 2.0 hardware.

Good point about Freeview, I suppose a simple feed to the cupboard and a booster to the rooms would do the job!

Definitely worth a think about a more practical array management thanks!

(otherwise I will just get a 2nd receiver and confuse everyone in the house with what button to press to watch tv :) )
 
Walter Sobchak said:
Is it really worth going Cat6 over Cat5e?

I really not sure it is.
Click to expand...
If you'd have asked that 5 or 6 years ago then there might have been some debate. The cabling costs alone would have been double. That's not the case now though as Cat6 has become a mainstream product. There's still a difference in cost, but I wouldn't call it prohibitive.

What it comes down to a lot of the time is considering the upfront cost saving versus the longer term cost of ripping out a load or Cat5e to replace it with 6 or 6e.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom