TiVo Community Forums Archives

TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like Google.

Pages:1

RG59 vs RG6
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: zwheeloc

What are the main differences between RG59 coax and RG6 coax? Does one offer more shielding than the other?

Posted by: Javaman

Yep. RG6 usually has a larger center core along with thicker foam protecting it. I'm not sure if it is standard with all RG6, but mine also has braided wires around the outside of the foil layer.

Posted by: zwheeloc

Is there a reason to use RG6 over RG59. When would you use RG59 for vs RG6?

Posted by: Trent Bates

There's plenty of information about this posted already. Search for RG59 and you'll find out much more than anyone is going to repeat in this thread.

RG-59 was designed for lower frequency RF. RG-6 is better for higher frequencies.

P.S. - Many of your posted questions so far have already been covered extensively. Try searching first with a single word instead of 2 or 3 words. :)

Posted by: zwheeloc

Oops. Sorry about that.

Posted by: Trent Bates

And I'm sorry if that came across as rude. I just meant to direct you in the direction of all the info and suggest a good way to find other info quickly! It takes a while to get used to how this forum works. :)

Posted by: captain_video

RG6 should be used exclusively for satellite hookups and digital CATV. RG59 is fine for analog CATV signals but will not support the higher bandwidth used for satellite signals. Quad-shield RG6 is the best to use as it provides higher isolation from noise, especially in longer cable runs.

Posted by: bud57

I'm sure all of that is true, but I've got RG59 in my house with 6 satellite boxes, and they all work perfectly.

Posted by: Trent Bates

That may be true bud57, but given the option of which to use if you were going to the store to get some cable, which would you buy?

I'd rather get something that's got more space between the conductors and more outer sheilding! :)

Posted by: Want1394

The primary reason to prefer RG6 over RG59 is signal attenuation for the satellite signal from the LNB to the receiver - it's in the 1.0GHz to 1.4GHz range and the attenuation on RG6 cable is much less per foot at that frequency than RG59. Actually, most tables for attenuation for RG59 stop at 1GHz.

Good quality RG59 cable with good connectors will work just fine if the runs are not too long. And since it is lighter weight, that means it's easier to work with and less stiff. Not recommended to use, though, unless you really know what you are doing and the downsides.

If you're really interested in this subject, there are lots of white papers on related topics on the Belden web site, as well as detailed specs on hundreds of different varieties of RG59 and RG6 type cables used in the broadcast industry.

Posted by: ShiningBengal

quote:
Originally posted by captain_video
RG6 should be used exclusively for satellite hookups and digital CATV. RG59 is fine for analog CATV signals but will not support the higher bandwidth used for satellite signals. Quad-shield RG6 is the best to use as it provides higher isolation from noise, especially in longer cable runs.

I agree that RG6 is the coaxial cable of choice to use with DBS systems. However, RG59 generally will work fine, particularly in shorter runs. The problems people usually run into when trying to redeploy existing RG59 runs is that there are often splitters used in such systems, which definitely will render the wiring useless (unless you first remove them) for DBS.

But if I had my whole house wired with RG59, I would probably give it a try before replacing it with RG6. If it works, it works.

Posted by: captain_video

RG59 will work with satellite signals but any signals at the limits of the supported bandwidth will suffer. Heck, I could probably get some cheap microphone cable from Rat Shack and make it work but I sure as hell wouldn't want to. The bottom line is that RG59 is not meant for higher bandwidth signals from a satellite. If you're in an area where your signal strength is marginal on some transponders, it's a good bet that those channels may drop out sporadically if not altogether if using RG59 instead of RG6. A good comparison would be using a set of cheap rabbit ears on your TV vs. a properly designed rooftop antenna with high gain and an antenna rotor for aiming it. If you're in an area where you get a strong signal on all channels then the rabbit ears may be all you need. However, if you're not in an ideal location and can't get strong signals on all channels then the high gain antenna is a necessity. Using RG59 for satellite hookups is a crapshoot at best. It will work to some degree, but not as well as RG6. Splitters used for CATV systems will definitely NOT work for DSS signals.

I prewired my house with RG59 before I moved into it 16 years ago. I rewired it for RG6 five years ago when I got DTV. I had to run additional coax because I was using the cable feeds for my locals to supplement DTV. The thought of using the existing RG59 didn't even enter my mind because I knew better.

Posted by: zwheeloc

Thanks for your answers on this. I figured it had to do with the different signals and now I know better. I am going to check to see if I have RG6 installed for my dish/receivers. If not, I am going to rerun them. It has been a very informative thread.
Zeff Wheelock

Posted by: ShiningBengal

quote:
Originally posted by captain_video
A good comparison would be using a set of cheap rabbit ears on your TV vs. a properly designed rooftop antenna with high gain and an antenna rotor for aiming it. If you're in an area where you get a strong signal on all channels then the rabbit ears may be all you need. However, if you're not in an ideal location and can't get strong signals on all channels then the high gain antenna is a necessity. Using RG59 for satellite hookups is a crapshoot at best. It will work to some degree, but not as well as RG6. Splitters used for CATV systems will definitely NOT work for DSS signals.

Gee. I use rabbit ears with my SIR150 Samsung OTA digital receiver. I live in a very bad reception area--can't get analog that is watchable. Rabbit ears are in the basement of my house. Picture is absolutely perfect.

The problem with your analogy is you are comparing analog with digital. Analog is much more sensitive not only to signal strength, but also signal quality. Too much mulitpath will overload the error correction circuitry in a digital receiver, but if you have a good receiver, it can deal with a pretty crappy signal.

That's the magic of digital. It's an either/or thing. Either the picture is unwatchable (pixelated or blank) or it's great!

All kinds of reasons why RG59 shouldn't work well, but the fact of the matter is, it usually works just fine. Let your signal strength meters be your guide. If you get a strength of 60 or more, you will get a great picture. You may get rain fade a little sooner and for a little longer than if you had a stronger signal--say in the 80's.

I have seen perfectly satisfactory systems with RG59 in place. My brother has 100 feet of it run underground, and even with Dish Network (ugh!) the picture is perfectly satisfactory.

So put in RG6, because its better. But don't worry if you have RG59 in your system and you are getting satisfactory reception.

Posted by: aciurczak

ShiningBengal - You're spot on.

One other addition is that the signal strength meter is not displaying voltage, or any other electrical measurement. It is a measure of the error correction necessary to reconstruct the reference/perfect data stream. So a signal strength of 70 and a signal strength of 100 look absolutely, totally, identical coming out of the receiver. The only time that the picture would look different is if the signal strength dropped to much, much lower, quite often. So even a 50 or 60 would hypothetically be fine, but if it dropped to the teens for even a second or two, that could mean dropouts in the picture. To sum up, 80 isn't better than 60 because there's a better picture coming out of the TV. It just minimizes the chance of a severe glitch that would overrun the error-correction ability of the receiver to reconstruct the stream. So if you always are 70 - 80, and you have never seen any dropouts, there's absolutely no reason to lift a finger and try for 85-90-95. Not a single pixel will change.

Posted by: steuert

IMO the preceding two posts tell the tale. If you can get good signal strength with RG-59, don't fix something that ain't broke. My DTV installer (who was one of the few who really knew what he was talking about) said he would leave existing RG-59 in an installation if it provided a signal strength of around 80 or more. I would modify that to say, leave it alone even at a lower signal strength IF your picture is OK and rain fade is not a significant problem in your location.

It probably makes sense to use RG-6 for a new installation - it doesn't cost much more - but IMHO it is foolish to go through the time and expense involved in replacing the wires in an existing setup if they will do the job perfectly well.