The UK Home Automation Archive

Archive Home
Group Home
Search Archive


Advanced Search

The UKHA-ARCHIVE IS CEASING OPERATIONS 31 DEC 2024

Latest message you have seen: Re: RG6 vs CT100


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Flight of fantasy



I just _knew_ that Nigel "Copperhead" Orr would state the case
for pullimg
LOTS of cable!  :-)))

But that's fine, I've nothing against cable, but I see some of the big
advantages of not sending the base signal about the place, and generating
it
at the point of use, as being the same as some of the one's he's stated
below:
IE :

Low cost - has anyone costed up a multi-zone amplifier? - I'd be quite
(happily) impressed if a 4-zone one could be got for less than £1000. I
reckon I could put together 4 "adequetly" specc-ed PC's for the
same money,
and by using simple, commodity PC's the implementation can be done in
stages
without having to stump up for that amplifier up front. Also, upgrades -
what happens when you need a 5th zone? - another £1000 amplifier? - tack on
any old spare amplifier you might have, and try to integrate it as best you
can? - the PC based system can be expanded to ANY number of zones for no
more than the cost of a cheap PC per zone.

High reliability? - hmm debatable - with PC's the reliability (or not) is
almost always the fault of the software (read Windows!), PC hardware is (I
would suggest) every bit as reliable as the hardware in an amplifier.....
Also, when PC hardware fails, it's easier (for us non-electronics guru's)
to
fix, because it's all modular - anyone can swap out a soundcard!! and you
don't need to get a soldering iron out!

Complexity? - hmm again possibly not clear cut. - generating the output at
the point of use means that there is no need for centralised switching
&
routing systems. - no need for racks and racks of patch panels with dozens
of cable terminations, relays, boosters, line drivers, multi-zone amps,
noise limiters, gates, mixers, and so on.... I certainly think it can't get
much simpler than 1 PC, with 1 LAN cable at each location. (but that's just
my opinion)

High Capacity? - hmm, not sure about this one. Granted, I'm NOT proposing
to
distribute video over the LAN and deliver that through a PC, in this area,
I
would agree a dedicated cable distribution system would be best. but to
distribute audio over 100MB ethernet? - anyone care to work out how many
zones could be simultaneously pulling an MP3 feed from a jukebox server?
(not so simple if you use variable bitrate encoding as I do!). The other
point I'd make about this is that as each zone would typically be a single
room, how many links would you realistically want active at the same time
in
one room? - Lets say a zone is listening to an audio source from the MP3
jukebox (either streaming or just by playing the file), there's still
plenty
of headroom for the LAN messages required for TTS, VR, and IR commands to
be
sent between that room & the central controller.

Easy interfacing? - the PC is the undisputed KING of easy interfacing! -
all
of the types mentioned in brackets are easily interfaced to a PC.

So, whilst I don't poo-poo the notion and value of pulling dedicated cables
all over the place for every conceivable type of signal, (it's served very
well for a great many years), I'm just trying to "think outside the
box" -
as has been said before, there has to be a better way, and my plan has had
the intended effect of stimulating some debate about what that way might
be!

(I was thinking the list had been a bit quiet lately!)

Cheers.

Paul G.


----- Original Message -----
From: nigel@xxxxxxx
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 7:38 AM
Subject: Re: [ukha_d] Flight of fantasy



> Bang on, - I figured what's the value in running multiple speaker,
> microphone, IR and who-knows-what else cables all over the house,
> just so
> that you can send audio and IR signals all over the place?

To my mind, the value is
Low cost (even if PC parts do come free)
High reliability due to lower complexity
High capacity (for multiple a/v links)
Low/No power consumption
Easy interfacing to new equipment (analogue audio, video, phone
standards are well established)

I can see the appeal of 'going digital', though.

>>There has to be a better way...

Definitely!  I reckon there's _always_ a better way :-)

Nigel

eGroups Sponsor

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Create your business web site your way now at Bigstep.com.
It's the fast, easy way to get online, to promote your business,
and to sell your products and services. Try Bigstep.com now.
http://click.egroups.com/1/9183/3/_/2065/_/974405490/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->





Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Comments to the Webmaster are always welcomed, please use this contact form . Note that as this site is a mailing list archive, the Webmaster has no control over the contents of the messages. Comments about message content should be directed to the relevant mailing list.