Whole house distribution Sage vs. Video Matrix Switches

[TorontoSage]

Originally Posted by sic0048

There are also a plethera of used matrix switches out there. It isn't hard to find a really nice HD capable Autopatch on E-Bay for $300-$400. So the price issue isn't as bad as one might think.

Take my parents for example. It is only my Mom and Dad living in their house now, but they have 6 TVs that they use regularly (Master Bedroom, Master bath, Office, Sunroom, Den, Downstairs Den/Theater). So either they need 6 HD Extenders which is kind of a waste since they will never use more than two at a time, or they can get 2 extenders and a matrix switch and have more flexability and spend less money overall. This is the route I took with them. Besides the two HD extenders, they also have a Wii, local DVD player and HD-DVD player all hooked up to the matrix switch too. So it allows them a much more flexible system overall.

But with an Autopatch (or Extron, which is another brand many buy on eBay), you still have to buy an IR receiver and an HDMI or component video balun pair for each TV and the total cost of these items per TV is great than the cost of an HD extender. Also, you need to have a means of converting the IR signals to control the matrix switch so you need to buy a device to do so, not to mention you have to program it.

I priced out a matrix switch/IR receiver/balun setup vs SageTV and SageTV came out at about the same price for 5 rooms and that's includng the computer. The difference was that SageTV was orders of magnitude more powerful than the matrix switch setup, the latter essentially being a 'dumb' system allowing you mainly to control cable boxes, DVD players and other such equipment that was in the equipment closet, but no online storage, online video access, programmability, customization, etc.

But, of course SageTV is orders of magnitude more work to configure than a matrix switch is as it involves a computer and there is lots of ongoing tinkering.

[Slipshod]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

In my whole-house (actually whole-condo) system, Sage is just one video source out of several. When I signed up for DirecTV service a few years ago, they were offering a free DVR promotion, so I took it. We use this DVR box as a backup to Sage, not as part of the Sage system, so for that purpose it remains separate from the Sage system

Well, there's one big difference. I kept the old Dish Network VIP 622 around just long enough to make sure I had Sage up and stable and then ditched it to save on monthly fees. The only TV we watch is through Sage, and with Comskip and fanart my wife won't watch TV on anything else now.

I'm not a DVD packrat; I don't have a library of hundreds of ripped movies. Most of the DVDs we watch are rentals, and for that purpose it's convenient to have a standalone player near the TV instead of having to stick them in a headless server in a closet.

I'm fairly the same. While we may have 30 or so DVDs ripped, the vast majority are Kids movies since those are the only ones that get watched multiple times. For rentals I have the main PC in the family room setup with anydvd HD and a shared BD-ROM drive. Haven't messed much with Blu-Ray yet (soon!), but DVD works fine. Sometimes I rip the DVD up to the server temporarily until we watch, sometimes I leave it in the drive and watch from there. Depends on when I need to return it and where I got it from.

The matrix switch and whole-house component cabling make it easy to switch any of these sources to any screen in the condo. As a bonus feature (although I don't use it very often) I can also pipe the output of my desktop/gaming PC through the switch to any screen.

Having the gaming PC on any screen in the house is pretty cool, though I wouldn't use that at all. I guess one of the big differences so far is that I'm more of a "pure" Sage user; all my media is through SageTV so I don't need to switch any sources around the house. The only other devices I have are the Wii and the 360, and I leave them in the family room with the big TV, aka 'Daddy's Playground".

Multi-zone sync matters because my condo has an open floor plan where (for instance) the kitchen audio can easily be heard from the living room and vice versa. If I have the same content playing in both of those zones (as I often do), it had better be in perfect sync or it gets annoying real fast. Similarly, it's very handy to be able to hit Pause in the kitchen, carry my meal through to the living room, and hit Resume. Or if I'm starting to nod off in front of the living room screen, I can pipe it through to the bedroom and finish watching in there. Feeding all three screens through a matrix switch from a single Sage client makes this very easy.

The only area in my house with "overlapping audio" is the Kitchen and the Family room, and I solved the sync problem there by just using 2 speaker zones with the same TV. The Living room is far enough away to mute the audio, or at least make it unlikely you'd have both on. Ditto for the Master Bedroom (when I get that setup).

I don't mind the extra clicks for stopping and resuming playback on another extender. I'm using MX-900 remotes, so turning everything on is one click, and I don't find it objectionable to have to scroll down to the last show I was watching. Or at least not objectionable enough to want to throw more money at it.

Whether you find these reasons compelling may depend on whether you're trying to retrofit an existing dwelling at minimal cost and disruption, or include a whole-house distribution system as part of a larger remodel or new construction project. In the latter case, it makes sense to run every kind of cable you can to all rooms while you have the walls open, and the incremental cost of a matrix switch isn't all that much compared to the total project budget.

I'm in the former camp - in a rental house. I got permission from the landlord to run Cat5e, but doing much more than that was too much cost/effort for me to justify.

My biggest reason for doing it the purist way is because I have kids. I wanted to be able to watch different TV shows, or movies, or music, or anything at the same time on different TVs. No fighting with the kids over who watches what, where. If I want to play Fallout3 or watch a movie/TV show I kick them out of the living room and they continue watching their show in the Family room. If my wife wants to listen to music in the family room/kitchen I can do anything else in the living room.

This all probably stems from me being the youngest, and never being able to watch the shows *I* wanted to watch when my big-sister-with-the-bad-attitude was home. She also used to use me as the "remote control" to change the dial on the TV. I'm making sure that doesn't happen in my house.

[m1abrams]

Well after seeing so many people post about not having issues with concurrent HD recording and playback on a single drive I decided to investigate my issues a little closer.

I noticed the culprit I have is when I have 3 or more shows recording with 2 of them HD and have a client watching a different HD show I will get stuttering. The culprit is SA comskip I have setup to run. If I disable that no issues. I use to have SA setup to not run while watching however lately it has ignored that setting. I do confirm with SA that it can access the Sage web server which it uses to determine if a client is watching.

Right now I have SA set to throttle HD access to a pretty low number and no more stuttering. Bad part is that it is so slow that during periods where I have a lot of new shows it will take some time to get caught up.

Curious if others posting use a comskip analyzer and if so how it is configured.

[sic0048]

Originally Posted by TorontoSage

But with an Autopatch (or Extron, which is another brand many buy on eBay), you still have to buy an IR receiver and an HDMI or component video balun pair for each TV and the total cost of these items per TV is great than the cost of an HD extender. Also, you need to have a means of converting the IR signals to control the matrix switch so you need to buy a device to do so, not to mention you have to program it.

I priced out a matrix switch/IR receiver/balun setup vs SageTV and SageTV came out at about the same price for 5 rooms and that's includng the computer. The difference was that SageTV was orders of magnitude more powerful than the matrix switch setup, the latter essentially being a 'dumb' system allowing you mainly to control cable boxes, DVD players and other such equipment that was in the equipment closet, but no online storage, online video access, programmability, customization, etc.

But, of course SageTV is orders of magnitude more work to configure than a matrix switch is as it involves a computer and there is lots of ongoing tinkering.

First, I am not trying to argue one method as being better than the other. Both work well and have their place. The OP was trying to find out why a person would use one method over another. So I am trying to give some examples where I feel that a matrix based solution was better given the desired goals.

Granted, you do need some control mechanism to be able to use a matrix switch. In both my system and my parents system, we use a home automation system (Charmed Quark Controller - or CQC) that does a lot more than just control the matrix switch. So while that is an expense to consider, in both our cases, we already had the control mechanism in place.

As far a baluns go, that is one route and it is expensive, but it isn't the only option. I ran precision coaxial cable (basically coax cable designed for component video transmission) to all my locations. Usually 4-6 runs per device depending on what type of audio I wanted to get from the unit (ie 3 wires for component video, 1 for digital audio and/or 2 for analog stereo). Running this wire was considerably cheaper than buying baluns for each location. The wire costs around $225 per 1000' spool vs. baluns that cost $100/pair or more.

In my parents case, out of the 6 TV locations, only 1 is located in a position where you could have a local device attached to the TV. All the other locations are wall mounted or ceiling mounted or built into a fireplace surround where there is no possible way to mount an extender, DVD player, or other local device. They have bought new flat screen TVs during their remodel project and wanted the "clean look" of the TV without any addition equipment.

They also don't own very many DVDs at all, but rather have a Netflix membership and rent their DVDs. So having a DVD player was important to them because they are not going to want (or have the technical knowledge) to rip a rental movie just to be able to watch it.

So we put a local DVD player in the master bedroom which is the only location where the TV is mounted in a wall unit that has shelves and cabinets to hide the player. The master bedroom is also right off the greatroom on the main living level, so it is convinently located. That way they can slip the rental DVD into the player and watch it in the greatroom or any other location they want. That's because the output actually gets routed to the matrix switch and the back to the TVs.

I realize this type of set up isn't for everyone - nor will it save money in every situation. But I just wanted to make sure people realized that having a local extender at every TV isn't the only option either. In my parents case, they ended up with a much more flexible system that met their needs better for about the same cost as buying an extender for every TV. Even if the total cost was higher (and it is if you consider the CQC software), it would have been worth it to them, because an extender only solution would not have met their needs. That is the basic point I am trying to make I guess. For a lot of people, an extender only solution is all they really need.

IVB uses the same automation software and he really wants to have an extender at every TV location to distribute his A/V feeds. He is really hoping that someday there is a person that steps up and writes a new Sage Studio interface that would have extra icons and menus to control not just Sage, but all aspects of his home (lights, sound, blinds, etc). He wants to get away from the matrix switch solution. That isn't wrong - just a different way of doing things.

[TorontoSage]

I agree. One size does not fit all. I did consider CQC at one point, but decided that I just wasn't up for embarking on setting that all up. But it is a very powerful system and would allow me to avoid using different controls for different things (ie it could likely control my Lutron light switches and Sivoia drapes and some other stuff too) but one day I might.

I am wondering though about your decision to go with the component video cables. Before I went with SageTV I priced those out too but ended up running cat5e instead (6 runs per TV). For the component video, at about, say, 40' per average run (some longer some shorter) x 5 cables avg per run. That's 200' or about $45 for the cable using the cost you gave. Then if you use high quality terminations at each end that could easily add another $40 or more. And then there is the labour to run all of those cables and make 10 terminations per run. And then you end up with a cabling system that can only be used for component video. The baluns were about $180 per run (and that's for active ones, passive ones were about $100) but also provided the IR transmission capability.

I am not saying my way is the right way of the better way, but this is what I did. I decided to run 6 x cat5e cables to everywhere that I was going to have a TV or thought I might in the future (Before SageTV, 2 of the cables were for the baluns and the rest for future proofing and a few local ethernet where necessary) and at about 10c/ft this was about 6 x 40 x $0.10 = $24 per run. I'd only have to terminate 2 of the cables on each run, instead of 5 or 6 if I used component video. Aside from the fact that cat5e is much easier to run and to terminate, this allows the possiblity of repurposing the cables for another use or for another transmission protocol, such as HDMI or whatever might come up in the future. For me the flexibility of changing the baluns later or using the cables for another use, combined with the ease of installation, was worth the extra money I paid. But, I know not everyone's value matrix is the same.

Also, in my case, as I was not using CQC, I would still have to buy IR receivers. I assume you control your TVs with CQC.

Anyway, just another way of doing it that some might want to look into. In the next house, btw, I will be running cat6. Although cat5e is more than adequate for 720p/1080i and works for 1080p too (although there are few 1080p sources you can distribute except for Blu-Ray and games, both of which I don't as I am not a gamer and my Blu-Ray player will only be in the home theatre), the price difference between cat5e and cat6 has narrowed considerably such that the latter is very affordable. While provide higher transmission speeds, one just has to keep in mind that cat6 is a bit more finicky to install.