Total Home Television...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Famine
  • 46 comments
  • 2,161 views
wfooshee
The hotel-type systems I've found by Googling seem to be satellite-based rather than local storage, and geared to movies specifically, where the hotel basically resells the movie to the end user, skims their cut and pays the service provider.

Thinking about how they work, though, I could see the pay-per-view model working for you. While no money actually changes hands, the system could budget time allowances and schedules, so the TV in this room gets a certain amount of time and stops, or simply doesn't work after, say, 11:00 PM, while your main theater room might be unlimited. It should also allow selection of allowable media per end device.

User at TV gets menu on channel 3 or whatever, uses remote to select programming from a menu. Higher-level sets need a passkey to keep little ones from sneaking to another set.

It just needs to use local storage rather than an outside provider for media.
Click to expand...

Yes! You've got it precisely!

Invisible +rep.
 
TB
Would something like this work? It uses Cat5E to carry the video signal and then has a wall plate that converts the signal back to component.

Manufacturers website
Click to expand...

Doesn't use stored PC media as a source, uses video sources, like DVD, satellite receiver, or tuner. Nice multi-room setup, though. I like that it converts to Ethernet, distributes over CAT5, then comes out of the wall as component, not Ethernet. Downside: you need component at every TV receiver.

I'm not clear how you control the source, either, from the other end, and what if two people want two different DVDs?

(I'm not up on multiroom hardware at all, beyond some audio receivers that can select a different source for a different room.)
 
Saw this in a magazine today and remembered that Famine was looking for something similar.

http://singlepointnetworks.co.uk/
Assign up to eight independent devices from just one MediaX faceplate
Just one cable type distributes all the signals for your internet and LAN services including current or new buy audio & visual equipment
Solitary faceplate leaves your walls neat and tidy
Click to expand...
 
So like...?

Vitrine_lg.jpg


http://www.apollodisplays.com/Products/MultidisplaySolutions.html
 
Here you go, Famine. It's not perfect, but it's something to go on. Doesn't help that the author is an officer of the company that makes his 3rd and "best" solution.

http://www.networksystemsdesignline.com/howto/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=199200095

If I'm not mistaken, it sounds like you want your network via coaxial (RF) cable. That's very possible, but expensive.

Key Digital manufactures switches and amplifying distributors and all that for other analog (and digital via HDMI) media.

I think any way with ethernet would require an extra piece of equipment with each television. (or shall we say monitor.)
 
Last edited:
My brother's house has a setup that fits your needs, but it will be expensive to implement. In his case, it is set up to feed only audio throughout the house, but it should be easy to set it up for video as well.

In his entertainment room, there is a wall outlet that accepts the audio from a home theater receiver. Any mid to high end unit will have a multi-zone feature. From there, it goes to a base unit in the basement. That unit can be placed anywhere. Note: The HT receiver is connected to an audio source - cd changer, pc, whatever.

The unit splits out the signal and sends it to speakers installed within the walls of every room in the house. There is a wall switch to turn the speakers on/off and raise/lower the volume. Some rooms also have an infra-red receiver allowing you to change the audio tracks.

A similar setup with a computer and some fancy wiring should do the job for you. Just note that coaxial cable is not going to be sufficient for high definition video. You'll need HDMI or Component, but those technologies have major limitations on distance. For this method, you'll need a home theater installer to help you out.


All else fails, build a windows pc with Vista Home Premium. Get a bunch of low cost Media Center Extenders for $150-200 for each tv. Connect to your network and presto-bango. Instant access to your central PC's audio/video library.
 
Omnis
If I'm not mistaken, it sounds like you want your network via coaxial (RF) cable.
Click to expand...

emad
Just note that coaxial cable is not going to be sufficient for high definition video. You'll need HDMI or Component, but those technologies have major limitations on distance.
Click to expand...

Famine
Ideally I'd just like a composite/L/R port in each room (or "better" for the more important viewing pleasure areas).
Click to expand...

No point in the house is more than 30/50 feet (line of sight/cable routing) from the source, so I don't imagine distance is much of a limit.
 
Famine
No point in the house is more than 30/50 feet (line of sight/cable routing) from the source, so I don't imagine distance is much of a limit.
Click to expand...

Yeah but the problem with composite is that it won't relay info back to the source if you want to have an end-user interface or commands or something. If you already have working cable run through your house, you probably could find some kind of source(whatever medium)-to-RF adapter and then cut your incoming cable line and re-attach it to the RF-side of said adapter. Unless the adapter is also an amplifier, you would probably only need an amplifier installed before the cable branches out to each room.

I'm not absolutely sure this would work, but I can't see why it wouldn't. But then there's the software/firmware world to deal with this kind of distribution... :scared:
 
I only watch a handful of programs on the BBC (I think this year I have watched Top Gear and Stephen Fry in America, which I can watch on demand via iPlayer)

If I'm not watching anything on there live why should I have to pay for the TV licence? I would be more than happy for Sky to block my access to BBC content if it meant I didn't have to pay there licence fee.

Because Famine brought this up in his first post it's really made me realise just how little BBC content I watch. The BBC seems to be the equivalent of a cinema asking for an entry fee rather than a fee to watch a specific film.
 
Mark T
I only watch a handful of programs on the BBC (I think this year I have watched Top Gear and Stephen Fry in America, which I can watch on demand via iPlayer)

If I'm not watching anything on there live why should I have to pay for the TV licence? I would be more than happy for Sky to block my access to BBC content if it meant I didn't have to pay there licence fee.

Because Famine brought this up in his first post it's really made me realise just how little BBC content I watch. The BBC seems to be the equivalent of a cinema asking for an entry fee rather than a fee to watch a specific film.
Click to expand...

Your licence fee pays for content on the BBC website including iPlayer. This is why it's only officially available for UK residents.
 
TheCracker
Your licence fee pays for content on the BBC website including iPlayer. This is why it's only officially available for UK residents.
Click to expand...

True, but the BBC have said that you don't need a TV licence to watch iPlayer. I just have a hard time paying £140 a year for Top Gear and maybe one other series. Especially when I see that the BBC is paying Nick Knowles £1,000,000 a year.
 
More fool me i suppose but i fork out the best part of £460 per year for dozens hundreds of channels, most of which i'll never watch. All of which are payed for by the constant stream of adverts that i refuse to watch.

Maybe i'm becoming my old man, but i'd happily pay £140 a year not to have to watch 5 minutes of adverts for every 15 minutes of broadcasting.
 
TheCracker
Your licence fee pays for content on the BBC website including iPlayer. This is why it's only officially available for UK residents.
Click to expand...

Also for tech, R&D and infrastructure. And also the DVDs of the programs. So apparently having paid to make them, we must also pay to rewatch them...


So, assume I use a Japanese television to view Sky programmes using only the Astra satellite, not using anything for which the BBC pays... I still have to pay the licence fee. Even if you cannot receive BBC, but live in the UK and can receive other transmissions (including web broadcasts), you must pay the licence fee, since it's a fee for the operation of equipment capable of receiving a broadcast as it is made. It's almost like having to pay, say, Shell a stipend every year, even if you never use their petrol, simply because you have a car...
 
I can totally understand why people object to paying the licence fee these days, but i'd still hate to see the BBC pimping themselves out to 'Confused.com' just to make ends meat. The only thing for me that makes Sky bearable is the wonderful Sky+ box and it's 30x speed goodness.
 
Omnis
Yeah but the problem with composite is that it won't relay info back to the source if you want to have an end-user interface or commands or something. If you already have working cable run through your house, you probably could find some kind of source(whatever medium)-to-RF adapter and then cut your incoming cable line and re-attach it to the RF-side of said adapter. Unless the adapter is also an amplifier, you would probably only need an amplifier installed before the cable branches out to each room.

I'm not absolutely sure this would work, but I can't see why it wouldn't. But then there's the software/firmware world to deal with this kind of distribution... :scared:
Click to expand...

IR blasters are pretty simple to route through the house. The problem comes from HT receivers being limited in their ability to allow person A to watch channel 47 in room 1 while person b in room 2 wants to watch channel 36. A computer can solve this by distributing files to wherever they are demanded. However, even a PC doesn't have enough video outputs to support more than 2 or 4 screens at a time... then there's the sound card. How do you set that up so that each video stream goes to a separate sound card for output to the TV.

A client-server solution is ideal but that would require a set-top box in every room. The up-front cost of these units will be significantly lower than routing a/v cables throughout the house and building a super high end pc capable of distributing content.

The box would retrieve the video and do the decoding and send the signal into the TV. The server itself can be a low end, run of the mill PC with however much storage you need since it will only be responsible for distributing files rather than playing back audio/video.
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back