video distribution?

[jfournier69]

I plan on distributing video throughout the house, but only from one source as I don't have any digital media except audio, and that will be stored on my HC1000. I was thinking of using this product... http://www.hdtvsupply.com/at-hd14ss.html Have a sony super changer plugged right into my HC800 via rs232, and split the HD out of the changer to each tv. Yes, you will only be able to watch one dvd at a time, and if someone is watching a dvd on one tv, you'd be stuck watching the same show, but I'm willing to live with that. Therefore if I only have one video source ( I have the dish hopper system and each tv already has a joey), is there really any need for a video matrix switch?

[diamonddesign]

No a splitter would work but if you add new sources you'd regret not going matrix.

[AceOfSpades]

I think this is more of a personal decision.

I must say that I purchased a 4x4 Matrix Switch with the ideal that I would leave the Dish Network Receivers at each TV and only distribute sources like the 2 x Windows Media Center, PS3 and C4 Navigator.

Basically, if you have no plans of adding any other source devices (which isn't likely), then you don't need a Matrix Switch. Now regretting not going with an 8x8 Matrix and ask for forgiveness from the wife later. My 2 cents.

[jfournier69]

I suppose, but I could always add a matrix switch at a later point if I decide to add another source right? One more question. I was originally planning on using sony's mega blueray/dvd changer as my video source for the system. I have an HC-1000 which will take care of the music, and I can always add a CD changer into the mix for music. Just for videos, what if I go a different route and add a NAS to my network, rip all of my dvd's and put them on there? Lets hypothetically say I did this. So in my storage closet, I will have the following equipment:

HC-800

HC-1000

Control4 8 zone amp

control4 tuner

NAS storage device.

What would I need at each tv to be able to tap into the NAS and pull up a movie. HC-250? Control4 media player? Both? Each closet where any equipment will be will have internet access and be connected to the network, as will each tv itself. I'd like to avoid any equipment at the tvs themselves if at all possible. Ie, in the spare bedroom, the tv is on the wall. In the closet nearby, I will have the dish network joey, HC-250 (if that is what I need, or the control4 media player). From the closet, they will be connected to the tv via HDMI cable already in the walls ( I got to it before the drywall was up.) I have 2 HDMI cables from each closet to each tv, as well as several dead cat6 cables for future use. I noticed that the control4 media player does not have an HDMI out, so what about using the HC-200 or HC-250.

[wappinghigh]

I saw an implementation the other day that used WMC (as the main library source) and little players that streamed via XBMC out at each TV. Can't remember the specific's though..

It just depend's on what quality of video you want and what library solution as the source.

Have you seen DD's Media server (based on WHS). Couldn't go wrong there. I don't know how small devices you can get, which can take a stream from that. Maybe James can chirp in. So maybe you could get a Popcorn or Dune for the main family room/Home theatre (where quality and speed are paramount), and smaller "players" to put behind the flat panels elsewhere. Don't know. Welcome to the quest

(The HC200/250 doesn't stream video BTW.) But you would need them out in the periphery to have navigator up on the screen and "control" the Tv inputs/on/off. That is unless the TV's had IP drivers, or you had some way of running IR or serial commands out via the cat5..

[DawnGordon]

ZeeVee would be a very good alternative.

http://www.zeevee.com/products/zvbox

[RyanE]

Isn't ZeeVee pretty expensive?

Not saying it couldn't necessarily be a good alternative, but I think there are certainly cheaper alternatives...

RyanE

[jfournier69]

So, to distribute my NAS stored videos, I need my NAS drive hooked up to the network. I need a media player at each tv, and I also need a controller, such as the HC200 or HC250 at each tv for the IR ports and on screen navigator correct?

[ichbinbose]

Isn't ZeeVee pretty expensive?

Not saying it couldn't necessarily be a good alternative, but I think there are certainly cheaper alternatives...

RyanE

zeevee is a bit pricey and not really practical in a new construction situation, however in a retrofit situation it can be a life saver. Also great in certain commercial situations

[wappinghigh]

So, to distribute my NAS stored videos, I need my NAS drive hooked up to the network. I need a media player at each tv, and I also need a controller, such as the HC200 or HC250 at each tv for the IR ports and on screen navigator correct?

The short answer:

Well, yes, this is basically correct,

The long version:

....particularly if you can't control the TV's and media player(out at each TV) via IP commands. There are many media players you can control via IP commands: (like the Dune and Popcorn, and AppleTV MK1, and XBMC say playing on a Boxee box etc).. It's the IP TV control that is a bit of a problem right now. It's coming, but by no means perfect..depends on the actual TV set's you have and whether or not anybody has written a Control4 IP driver for that TV. Many folk on this forum believe IP drivers are the future. That is they wouldn't buy an electronic device from now on, without the ability to control it via IP (and a C4 IP driver).

The trouble with driver development...particularly in the past.., is often it has been the "early adopters" who end up paying for the dealers (via salary time) to basically "test" driver development. They are the "guiney pigs" if you like. Of course dealers often say they spend way more time on this sort of thing than they charge. So essentially both early adopter users *and* dealers end up paying, because what essentially happens is these "drivers" end up free on the control4 database, or other places.

Then you have a few third party driver developers out there, who sell their drivers to other dealers. Fair enough. They need to get back money for driver development....and it seems IP drivers take way more developing. Of course it would be near on impossible for them to develop IP drivers for every networkable TV set out there!! But some of the bigger makes would sure help . However, to complicate matters further, it seems many TV manufactures and media player makers are *removing* serial and IR control from equipment!! And going to wifi, or even weirder stuff like hand movements and voice (eg note the new Samsung TV's) So then we have a problem if there is no IP driver, or it's flaky, we can't switch back to simple IR.

Also, the mother ship isn't prepared to setup and test and certify EVERY driver. Again fair enough, They argue this would be impossible. I mean see how many drivers are on the C4 driver database!! As a consequence they largely leave it up to third party dealers and the end users. This has pretty much been the model for all universal remote companies for years, if you think about things: Even Harmony (who use the end user 100% to field test.) So we are left with a bit of a mish-match I am afraid.

So understood? If you use IR or serial control, this (may) be a more tried and tested driver. Particularly if your equipment is older. There is a better chance it will work first time without any tweeking, because the driver has been out along time. I say *may*, because the above "testing on the public" scenario applies to IR and serial drivers of course as well: if the equipment is brand new and/or there are significant control changes from previous models. In any case, If you go down this path of video distribution, then get the newer HC250, because it is faster, smaller and has POE.

The alternative video distribution solution:

There is an alternative to the distribution model we are talking about. That is using a video matrix. I noted you want a "clean" instal out at the TV's. Well you can get this using say an HDMI matrix and carrying the IR signals to the TV's +/- via the matrix (if it is built in) or another way via cat5. I don't do it this way, but many members of this blog do. You'd need to search on this. The problem with matrix's is you pay for what you get. There is talk right now of the snapAV as the best in terms of price/value/bang for buck. Always though individual setup's will vary because of HDMI handshake issues, length of cable runs etc. And again, C4 driver issues are important because you will still need those. Including for the matrix.

The sensible solution:

....GET A GOOD DEALER

I'm sorry for the rather long winded answer , but there is no way of summing up the situation any clearer.

[wappinghigh]

^ Like I said. Welcome to the quest