Once again...RG6 vs RG59/u

[sahihai]

Hi All,
Sorry for asking this old question once more...but i wanted to know, for a purely DVD player use, do I need to use RG6 or RG59 component cable?
I recently had to send my upconverting player back due to image quality issues. So now I am back with my old DVD player which has component outputs. But based on my new HT arrangement, I will need about 35 ft component cable. Since this is going to be a temporary arrangement, I wanted to buy something which is reasonably cheap and not an overkill.
I looked through a lot of posts online and my understanding is that RG6 component cables with Quad shielding etc are required for Sat TV and so on. But all I want to do is use the component cable for my Optoma HD70 which is about 35 ft away. My receiver does not have HDMI input or output.

I have been looking at the component cables at monoprice and not sure if the Premium RG6 cable would be approriate or an overkill or if I should simply buy the RG59 cable.

Any suggestions?

Thanks.

 

[snickelfritz]

RG6 is required for reliable digital connections; the bandwidth is wider with RG6.
Satellite dish connections must use RG6 cable.
I would also use RG6 for digital coax audio connections.

RG59 is perfectly adequate for analog video connections and subwoofers.
Shielding is the main issue with analog component video, and it will be virtually identical within the same brand and grade of RG6 and RG59 cables.

 

[sahihai]

Snickelfritz,
If I understand you correctly, you are saying that RG59 should be fine for my analog video component output. I will be using this over a distance of 35 ft, so hopefully that should not be an issue. Let me know.

Thanks.

 

[mtrycrafts]

RG6 is required for reliable digital connections; the bandwidth is wider with RG6.
Satellite dish connections must use RG6 cable.
I would also use RG6 for digital coax audio connections.

RG59 is perfectly adequate for analog video connections and subwoofers.
Shielding is the main issue with analog component video, and it will be virtually identical within the same brand and grade of RG6 and RG59 cables.

Belden tests both to 3gHz. Certainly the rg6 has thicker center conductors and less loss over distance.
Why does digital audio need rg6 when a coat hanger will pass digital audio without loss with short distances involved in some home audio.

 

[snickelfritz]

Belden tests both to 3gHz. Certainly the rg6 has thicker center conductors and less loss over distance.
Why does digital audio need rg6 when a coat hanger will pass digital audio without loss with short distances involved in some home audio.

It probably doesn't matter much for a CD/DVD connection.

 

[mtrycrafts]

It probably doesn't matter much for a CD/DVD connection.

RG6 is required for reliable digital connections; the bandwidth is wider with RG6.
Satellite dish connections must use RG6 cable.


Why does the satellite need a rg6 unless it is a long run, perhaps? What frequency is it passing down?
Why is it needed for digital connections? 3gHz not enough?

 

[snickelfritz]

Why does the satellite need a rg6 unless it is a long run, perhaps? What frequency is it passing down?
Why is it needed for digital connections? 3gHz not enough?

Mainly because most satellite companies will not warranty an RG59 installation (even if the cable is of high quality), and some techs will not bother to install the equipment at all on this grade of wiring.
Signal strength is key to reliable satellite installations, and you WILL lose some signal strength in RG59 vs RG6.
It's simply not worth the long-term hassle.

Another possible issue is the recent emergence of backfeeds that provide DBS/DVR services to multiple televisions over a single cable from a dual/quad-tuner DVR.
RG59 is not adequate for this type of service and should not be used.
Some power conditioners will not correctly pass these bi-directional signals either, so if you've had reliability problems with your dual-tuner-crown-quadio-quadra-qwerk-3000-DVR connected to your old monster-power-station, this might be the cause.

RG59 is fine for LF analog connections (component video etc...); it's thinner and a bit easier to work with in a cramped cabinet, but it's not intended for HF digital transmissions.
It's probably cheaper and simpler to just buy generic RG6 at Home Depot and use it for all of your coax needs.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Mainly because most satellite companies will not warranty an RG59 installation (even if the cable is of high quality), and some techs will not bother to install the equipment at all on this grade of wiring.
Signal strength is key to reliable satellite installations, and you WILL lose some signal strength in RG59 vs RG6.
It's simply not worth the long-term hassle.

Another possible issue is the recent emergence of backfeeds that provide DBS/DVR services to multiple televisions over a single cable from a dual/quad-tuner DVR.
RG59 is not adequate for this type of service and should not be used.
Some power conditioners will not correctly pass these bi-directional signals either, so if you've had reliability problems with your dual-tuner-crown-quadio-quadra-qwerk-3000-DVR connected to your old monster-power-station, this might be the cause.

RG59 is fine for LF analog connections (component video etc...); it's thinner and a bit easier to work with in a cramped cabinet, but it's not intended for HF digital transmissions.
It's probably cheaper and simpler to just buy generic RG6 at Home Depot and use it for all of your coax needs.

Well, I cannot argue about the greater signal loss on an RG59 with cable lengths, Belden's data certainly shows this, but then, both cables are still speced to 3gHz.

 

[snickelfritz]

3ghz is not the issue. Signal level is the issue.
DBS techs will often not have an inventory of obsolete RG59 connectors or cabling on their truck. Nor will they usually entertain the notion of including this type of cable within the circuit on a new account setup.

The fact that RG59 may work acceptably under certain circumstances is not the issue; the fact that it may not work under certain circumstances is.

Unfortunately, the original RG spec is not detailed enough to preclude ALL brands/grades of RG59 cable from use in digital networks. However, the basic RG6 spec includes all cable marked as such, since the bandwidth and signal retention properties (the relevant issues) are based solely on the basic configuration of the cable, and do not rely on additional shielding or exotic construction.
Thicker sticker and larger shielded dielectric equals more reliable performance in HF digital networks.
It's as simple as that.

 

[AverageJoe]

3ghz is not the issue. Signal level is the issue.
...

...the basic RG6 spec includes all cable marked as such, since the bandwidth and signal retention properties (the relevant issues) are based solely on the basic configuration of the cable, and do not rely on additional shielding or exotic construction.
Thicker sticker and larger shielded dielectric equals more reliable performance in HF digital networks.
It's as simple as that.

I'd agree that RG6 is usually more desirable in most coax applications, and many points you make are valid. It's your first post that probably generated some comments because it seemed to fall into the same false generalizations that are often made about the differences between RG6 and RG59:

"RG6 is required for reliable digital connections; the bandwidth is wider with RG6. Satellite dish connections must use RG6 cable".

As already mentioned, many brands sweep test their cables to 3GHz - whether RG6, RG59, RG7, RG11, etc. - so bandwidth is not an issue.

It may be true that "satellite companies will not warranty an RG59 installation (even if the cable is of high quality), and some techs will not bother to install the equipment at all on this grade of wiring.", but that does not mean you MUST use RG6 (advisable-yes, Must use-no).

When our new house was under construction, I prewired RG6 for cable and satellite service. When we moved, I used a 5' piece of high-quality RG59 cable from the wall to the satellite receiver. When the installer came out, he replaced it with RG6 - Fine, except he used a 20' piece he had. So, any and all advantages to using RG6 were lost due to the increased length (not by much, it still worked fine, but I replaced it when he left).

As far as Digital connections (or any other coax application), there is no difference in performance between RG6 and comparable RG59 except loss/ft. You correctly stated "Shielding is the main issue with analog component video, and it will be virtually identical within the same brand and grade of RG6 and RG59 cables". All other characteristics are also identical except relative size which is why the loss is greater.

It seems the common view (no offence - not necessarily yours) holds that RG59 is some outdated, obsolete, never-to-be-used cable to be avoided at all costs, and it just isn't true. Belden, CommScope, Times Fiber, and others still make it (in fact, look at their Headend Cable section - all RG59).

 

[mtrycrafts]

... It's your first post that probably generated some comments because it seemed to fall into the same false generalizations that are often made about the differences between RG6 and RG59:
"RG6 is required for reliable digital connections; the bandwidth is wider with RG6. Satellite dish connections must use RG6 cable".

Yep, that is what I was driving at and the other points you added so well
And a past test has shown that even a coat hanger will work in some digital applications

 

[sahihai]

Thanks to all for the inputs. I more or less understand that RG6 is the way to go from a long term perspective (if I ever intend to use the same cable for Sat etc)

I think I am ready to get the RG6 component cable. THe question lingering in my mind is that whether this will create any issues for "Baseband" applications. In one of the other posts I read that RG6 dual or quad shield should not be used for base band applications. It seems that these are made of foil shields and the effective operation of foil shields is above 50 MHz and hence they are great of HF applications, but not for base applications such as my DVD player which has a 27 MHz signal (I think).

I am going to post a question to monoprice support to clarify this.

 

[snickelfritz]

At the end of the day, most of the differences are theoretical; people often successfully mix RG59 and RG6 in their systems.
However, the advantages of RG6 are measurable and the cost differential is so small, that choosing RG59 in preference to RG6 for any application seems a bit questionable.
(the fore-mentioned space saving properties of RG59 that make it well suited to 6' system video connections in cramped cabinets, would be an example of what I consider to be a practical reason to choose RG59 over RG6)

Also, I would not under any circumstances, use RG59 at all for prewiring a house for anything, regardless of the purported quality, bandwidth, or "RG6 equivalence" of a particular brand of RG59.
There simply is no electrical or significant economic reason to use it.

BTW, I'm not still convinced that RG59 is functionally equivalent to RG6 in a "bi-directional" satellite system, or for internet/phone hookups.
I would use RG6 throughout the entire circuit.
Connecting a DVD player to an AVR is probably not going to be a real issue.
Unless you happen to be out of coat hangers.

 

[AverageJoe]

...the advantages of RG6 are measurable and the cost differential is so small, that choosing RG59 in preference to RG6 for any application seems a bit questionable.

...Also, I would not under any circumstances, use RG59 at all for prewiring a house for anything, regardless of the purported quality, bandwidth, or "RG6 equivalence" of a particular brand of RG59.
There simply is no electrical or significant economic reason to use it...

Agreed. In almost every application, RG6 would be the prefered size of coax to use. I don't think there is anything in the above posts that attempt to dispute this.

Unfortunately, the mistaken belief that RG59 is a "Grade" of coax as opposed to simply a smaller size has become so widespread that it's commonly thought of as inferior and obsolete - in Home Theater/Audio circles anyway.

As you mentioned, the space-saving feature of RG59 is what makes it desirable in commercial headends and small cabinets (Not to mention it comes in lots of different colors).

For the OP (sorry about ignoring your question), I bought Monoprice RG6 component cables in 35' and 50' lengths and am completely happy with 'em. Usually I make my own (yeah, I use RG59 for the short ones and RG6 for the long one's), but the price and quality was hard to beat.

 

[sahihai]

Thanks Joe. I definitely see that there isnt a "final, ultimatum" on one over the other. The reasons are pretty understandable too.

For my setup, I have gone ahead and ordered the 35ft RG6 cable.

FYI...I have been using the 6ft Phillips PXT1000 component cables bought from *allmart and its been working pretty well so far. No idea what the specs are. In fact, those are the cables I used while comparing the signals from SD-2800 and Oppo 981HD. I could see the difference between the 480i and 720p output, but it wasnt exactly the end of the world.

I will still be using one of the 6ft PXT1000 cable from my DVD player to the receiver and using the 35ft cable from receiver to PJ. I am expecting to see same results as before, if nothing better.