Which Coax cable for SKy HD?

[Rich6826]

As the title says, can any of you Sky experts point me in the right direction for which type of coax, and any particular brands that are of high quality. I figure if I'm spending all this money on equipment, a bit more cash on the coax that carries the Sky HD signal has got to be worthwhile...

 

[neilmcl]

http://www.satcure.co.uk/accs/page8.htm

and

http://www.your-book.co.uk/cable.htm

WF100 and WF100 twin (shotgun type) is recommended.

 

[SuperSeven]

http://www.screwfix.com/app/sfd/cat/pro.jsp?id=10633&ts=64702

100m for £21.79 seems to work well enough

 

[neilmcl]

You can get the WF100 cheaper than satcure here: http://www.dastv.co.uk/ProductSearch.aspx?Category=122

 

[Rich6826]

Thanks guys

I read the article on the different types of coax, and now I'm fully "geeked up" on my coax knowledge!

 

[mo]

hi rich,

i agree with your trail of thought.
i have been using pf125 or the raydex ct125 in foam.
the raydex stuff is considered the king ,the webro one is cheaper as is the belden brand and i have found that there is little to from them.
this stuff is a little thicker than the''ct100'' and i have nearly always found a worthy difference in picture.
getting the stuff at a good wholesale price also swayed me to the 125 stuff.
good luck

 

[Rich6826]

Cheers for that Mo. I'll probably go with some 125 stuff then...

 

[neilmcl]

this stuff is a little thicker than the''ct100'' and i have nearly always found a worthy difference in picture.

Don't forget we're talking about digital TV here. As long as you've initially got a working picture you're not going to start seeing improvements, so explain what you mean by seeing a "worthy difference in picture". Analogue maybe, but not over a digital output.

 

[neilmcl]

Rich, I'm assuming you're installing Sky HD yourself then otherwise what's wrong with the coax that the installer will supply.

 

[Rich6826]

Hi Niel

The only reason I'm looking to install the cable myself, is that:

a) I don't know what cable (good or bad) the engineer will use

b) I want the cable to run through the house in a certain route, which may be too time consuming for the engineer.

I haven't had any previous experience with Sky engineers, as the guys who came round to fit Sky for me 5 years ago, didn't need to put up a dish or run cables (was already there). They just handed me a box which I connected!

 

[suniil]

i've recently replaced ct100 with ct63 shotgun cable, as there was no way to hide 2 ct100 in skirting / floorboard

 

[neilmcl]

Hi Niel

The only reason I'm looking to install the cable myself, is that:

a) I don't know what cable (good or bad) the engineer will use

b) I want the cable to run through the house in a certain route, which may be too time consuming for the engineer.

I haven't had any previous experience with Sky engineers, as the guys who came round to fit Sky for me 5 years ago, didn't need to put up a dish or run cables (was already there). They just handed me a box which I connected!

The installer will run the required cable to get your system up and running, I think they use WF100 twin cable now or something similar. Once its installed and working no "better" cable is going to improve your picture quality. There really is no need to worry about what type of cable is going to be used, it will be sufficient for your Sky HD installation, simple as as that.

How many cable feed to you currently have? If you have two then chances are, as long as its still in good nick, he wont need to reinstall the cable anyway.

 

[mo]

a few months back we changed a ct100 to the webro ct125 for sky.
we found the picture a little better in every way.
noise being first thing noticed then you start to notice other things too .
this now has been done in a number of friends homes and we are all content.
besides, when your paying around £55 per 100 metre drum for me its a no contest.
as for digital or analogue , yep yes you can, as i said earlier, all my friends and i are content in buying ct125

 

[neilmcl]

a few months back we changed a ct100 to the webro ct125 for sky.
we found the picture a little better in every way.
noise being first thing noticed then you start to notice other things too .
this now has been done in a number of friends homes and we are all content.
besides, when your paying around £55 per 100 metre drum for me its a no contest.
as for digital or analogue , yep yes you can, as i said earlier, all my friends and i are content in buying ct125

A digital signal doesn't degrade the same way as analogue, once a stable picture is achieved you can't improve on it buy buying more expensive cabling, it just doesn't work that way.

 

[Rich6826]

I do agree with you Niel, but What Hi Fi just had an article about which HDMI lead gave the best picture. Surely being digital the same rule would apply? i.e It's all just 0's and 1's and makes no difference to quality. But they still said some cables were better than others...

Rich

 

[Tony Hoyle]

Lol. What hifi. Nuff said.

 

[neilmcl]

I do agree with you Niel, but What Hi Fi just had an article about which HDMI lead gave the best picture. Surely being digital the same rule would apply? i.e It's all just 0's and 1's and makes no difference to quality. But they still said some cables were better than others...

Rich

There are differences in HDMI cable true, but this only comes apparent under certain circumstances. Under 5m, for example, you'd be hard pressed to see any difference between an HDMI cable costing a £5 to one ten times as much, but over longer distances the more expensive cables start come into their own.

The fact remains, if you you can achieve a stable, working picture with no signal dropouts or picture breakup with cheaper cable then no amount of expensive upgrading will improve the picture quality and this applies to coax handling a digital signal. I wouldn't even consider CT125/WF125 for anything less than a 50m cable run.

Unless you like throwing your money away then just accept the cable that the Sky installer provides, it will be perfectly adequate, it'll be more than apparent to you and the installer if its not.

 

[mo]

niel mcl

im not here to argue with you nor do i disagree on the whole.
im only telling you what is seen through my eyes.
if there was no difference i would just say so.
i get the drum at wholesale cost so why not make the most of it.
if the cost is one side of the coin im already on a winner.

i must also tell that in every case we've changed the lnb too to an invacom 0.3 which also helped the overall picture

 

[Rich6826]

I think for the cable runs I'm doing, Niel's advice is probably correct. I've found some good WF100 cable from one of the above links so I'll think I'll get some of that. Then again, if the Sky installer will be happy with the cable route I want to take, I guess I may as well let him do it. Makes it easy!

Rich

 

[Dave911]

With the transmission of any electrical signal there is a thing called loss - put in basic terms this is either through the poor resistance of the cable or it leaks out through its shielding. What you also have to remember is - if it can leak out - then other things can get in.

I agree that digital is either on or off (it works or it doesn't) however there is still a degree of not quite there and all there - this is normally presented in the digital domain as pixillation on pictures or sound drop out in audio.

Sky will probably provide cable which is up to the job - but it will definately not be the best by far!! Each installation is different and lots of things can affect the end signal ie length of run, other equipment, other cables, transformers (a bugger for causing Radio Frequency Interference) and so on. So I am firmly in the camp of get the better stuff - it will serve you well. It will have better screening, be less prone to RFI, use better quality copper and should hopefully keep the weather out.

Thats my ten penneth worth - pobably a load of tosh - but that is why I buy good quality connects.

 

[neilmcl]

Well aware for how different cables handle signal loss but the fact remains if the standard cable is up to the job and gives you stable digital picture without any breakups, sparklies, sound breakup etc, then no amount of upgrading will improve the situation.

 

[Dave911]

Well aware for how different cables handle signal loss but the fact remains if the standard cable is up to the job and gives you stable digital picture without any breakups, sparklies, sound breakup etc, then no amount of upgrading will improve the situation.

I do not disagree with you Neil, it really is a matter of personal choice, however there is always the fact that it looks better and has a nice fancy expensive name on it and costs a bomb