HDR Fox T2 and T1000 in same room?

Hdmi over Ethernet, there's a thought! I might investigate that. I would maybe need to leave the switch on permanently to do that, but am not sure I could control the boxes in the lounge from the dining room without yet another harmony hub, and what is to stop someone in the dining room from switching off a box someone is watching in the lounge? Life just got more complicated!

My Panasonic recorder is a media server, though, even in standby, and the freetime HD box in the dining room can see that, so maybe I don't need such complications.
 
I don't think it is really HDMI-over-Ethernet, I think it is actually HDMI-over-Cat5. I hope the IR injection gets through the baluns!
 
Quite right BH, my bad. HDMI over Ethernet is not 100% a correct description. BALUNS do connect to RJ45 connectors and use a direct point to point Cat5e cable. I do believe, however, that the signal can pass through a couple of switches. No IP address is assigned.
 
You still need impedance matching to achieve proper signal transfer between the cable types. Regardless of what they might contain, the adapters for transferring a signal from one cable type to another are commonly referred to as baluns (and for all I know are baluns).
 
But surely, most twisted pair cables have a Zo somewhere in the region of 100 ohms, and unless you were talking about highly critical applications would need no matching?
But by definition, a balun matches the impedance (Zo) of balanced lines such as twisted pair (nominally 100 ohms Zo etc.) or twin feeders (nominally 600 ohms Zo etc.) to unbalanced transmission lines such as co-axial cable (nominally 50 or 75 ohms Zo)
I suppose that the word Balun should be the subject of a post in AvP?
 
I knew that was coming. Unfortunately these things seem to be called baluns, and I don't know of an alternative.
 
The units don't just impedance match, they contain active electronics in both the sender and receiver. I assume they are some form of protocol converter. Interesting discussion. Whatever they are called, they just work. Very well too.
 
Why, when HMDI was invented, I wonder, did they come up with another connector and cable type then, if a bog-standard RJ45 was already capable of doing the job. They could have just built the correct interface into each end of the link and be done with it.
 
Wallace said:
The units don't just impedance match, they contain active electronics in both the sender and receiver. I assume they are some form of protocol converter. Interesting discussion. Whatever they are called, they just work. Very well too.
Click to expand...
I'm bated breath waiting to hear if the IR inject works through that.
 
I am not optimistic either! But it's worth a punt. I currently use the WebIf IR function which does work, but it would be better if we could use the Harmony remote. I have had notification of potential delivery tomorrow, so I will know soon enough.
 
I must say I misunderstood this HDMI-over-Catx thing at first. I thought it would be a way to route from hdmi to hdmi over my LAN so that sender and receiver thought they were directly connected. Sadly, it isn't anything of the sort. Here is a comment on a NEET FAQ:

"The HD source is transmitted along all 16 of the cores in the two cat5/cat6 cables required to enable it to stay HiDef using these Neet baluns."

Not an elegant solution, really, and it excludes using either cable for a LAN.
 
My HDMI via Cat5e units use a single Cat5x cable AND can go end-to-end via a switch if desired. Although I have'nt try that as I have a direct Cat5e cable between the two rooms in question.
 
Mike0001 said:
I must say I misunderstood this HDMI-over-Catx thing...

Not an elegant solution, really, and it excludes using either cable for a LAN.
Click to expand...
AFAIK it was never meant to operate over a network. What this provides is a means to use cheap networking cable and extend the distance HDMI is supposed to operate over. I am very surprised it is supposed to work through an Ethernet switch - I can't imagine how.
 
HDMI via Cat5e.jpg
Black Hole said:
.... I am very surprised it is supposed to work through an Ethernet switch - I can't imagine how.
Click to expand...

Neither can I, but is supposed to be able to. When I have some free time to 'play', I will experiment and report back. On a side note. the IR 'dongle's' are delayed, but I am told due to be delivered tomorrow, Wednesday.

Apologies to the OP, this thread seems to have been hijacked! Mods feel free to split and place wherever you deem appropriate.

EDITED to add copy of instruction leaflet...
 
Last edited:
Okay, so instead of just matching the HDMI signals onto the conductors of a Cat5, it must be actually converting the HDMI data into proper Ethernet packets for distribution. To quote Eddie (the Heart of Gold shipboard computer): Golly!

Expensive?
 
£59 from Amazon. As far as I am concerned value for money. You can add extra receiver units if you wish too.
 
I received the HDMI IR Injectors today, as expected, they do not work over my HDMI over Cat5e connection. Well, it was a bit of a long shot.
 
Yes, they work well. I am slightly disappointed that the IR injectors don't work, but not really surprised. As I said, it was a bit of a punt anyway. I am sure that they will come in useful some time in the future. It is no big deal for me, the priority was picture quality. I was getting complaints from SWMBO that she couldn't see the detail in 'her' recordings. To be fare, it was very poor when I used the RF converters, t was spoiling the programmes. That isn't an issue anymore. I use the IR facility of the WebIf to control the remote HDRs.

Having done a little more research, I have found that you can get HDMI over Catx converters that have a built in IR facility. My criteria was to get a unit that used a single Catx cable though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top