Re: Cable splitter's effect on cable speed

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by DevilsPGD, Dec 9, 2009.

  1. DevilsPGD

    DevilsPGD Guest

    In message <2009120812272316807-cdtyrrell@mchsicom> Chris
    <> was claimed to have wrote:

    >Mediacom cable enters house and is split 4 ways: Cable Modem/Phone, HD
    >DVR, HD TV, and SDTV. Would I find better performance if inserted a
    >two-way splitter with one output going to the modem and the other going
    >to the second splitter that feeds three TVs?


    Maybe. Big maybe. It really depends on the signal strength to begin
    with, but at the end of the day, what you need is a signal hitting the
    modem that isn't too weak, isn't too strong, and isn't too degraded.

    In general this means a 2 or 3 way digital tap, splitting the modem (and
    possibly phone) off first, then splitting the remainder of the signal
    across your televisions and other services.

    However, if the signal hitting the modem is too strong, it will actually
    degrade your speed, so in this case going with a 4-way splitter straight
    off the main line is actually beneficial (although you'll degrade the
    signal more this way, a better solution is a 2-way splitter and an
    attenuator)

    The other big factor is whether or not the splitter is properly passing
    all of the frequency needed for two way digital communication, a ton of
    the cheaper junk out there does a piss-poor job.

    The above applies to cables too, even a sharp 90+ degree bend can cause
    performance drops, especially if the line happens to be near AC wire.

    I don't know about your carrier, but my carrier will dispatch a tech
    with equipment capable of identifying these types of problems rather
    than guessing wildly.
     
    DevilsPGD, Dec 9, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. DevilsPGD

    Buffalo Guest

    DevilsPGD wrote:
    [snip]

    > I don't know about your carrier, but my carrier will dispatch a tech
    > with equipment capable of identifying these types of problems rather
    > than guessing wildly.


    Obviously you don't have Comcast!!!!!!!! :)
    Buffalo
     
    Buffalo, Dec 9, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. DevilsPGD

    Top Guest

    In article <>, says...
    >
    > In message <2009120812272316807-cdtyrrell@mchsicom> Chris
    > <> was claimed to have wrote:
    >
    > >Mediacom cable enters house and is split 4 ways: Cable Modem/Phone, HD
    > >DVR, HD TV, and SDTV. Would I find better performance if inserted a
    > >two-way splitter with one output going to the modem and the other going
    > >to the second splitter that feeds three TVs?

    >
    > Maybe. Big maybe. It really depends on the signal strength to begin
    > with, but at the end of the day, what you need is a signal hitting the
    > modem that isn't too weak, isn't too strong, and isn't too degraded.
    >
    > In general this means a 2 or 3 way digital tap, splitting the modem (and
    > possibly phone) off first, then splitting the remainder of the signal
    > across your televisions and other services.
    >
    > However, if the signal hitting the modem is too strong, it will actually
    > degrade your speed, so in this case going with a 4-way splitter straight
    > off the main line is actually beneficial (although you'll degrade the
    > signal more this way, a better solution is a 2-way splitter and an
    > attenuator)
    >
    > The other big factor is whether or not the splitter is properly passing
    > all of the frequency needed for two way digital communication, a ton of
    > the cheaper junk out there does a piss-poor job.
    >
    > The above applies to cables too, even a sharp 90+ degree bend can cause
    > performance drops, especially if the line happens to be near AC wire.
    >
    > I don't know about your carrier, but my carrier will dispatch a tech
    > with equipment capable of identifying these types of problems rather
    > than guessing wildly.


    One problem with some attenuators is that they are not bi-directional. Something to
    consider.
     
    Top, Dec 9, 2009
    #3
  4. DevilsPGD

    DevilsPGD Guest

    In message <> Top <>
    was claimed to have wrote:

    >In article <>, says...
    >>
    >> In message <2009120812272316807-cdtyrrell@mchsicom> Chris
    >> <> was claimed to have wrote:
    >>
    >> >Mediacom cable enters house and is split 4 ways: Cable Modem/Phone, HD
    >> >DVR, HD TV, and SDTV. Would I find better performance if inserted a
    >> >two-way splitter with one output going to the modem and the other going
    >> >to the second splitter that feeds three TVs?

    >>
    >> Maybe. Big maybe. It really depends on the signal strength to begin
    >> with, but at the end of the day, what you need is a signal hitting the
    >> modem that isn't too weak, isn't too strong, and isn't too degraded.
    >>
    >> In general this means a 2 or 3 way digital tap, splitting the modem (and
    >> possibly phone) off first, then splitting the remainder of the signal
    >> across your televisions and other services.
    >>
    >> However, if the signal hitting the modem is too strong, it will actually
    >> degrade your speed, so in this case going with a 4-way splitter straight
    >> off the main line is actually beneficial (although you'll degrade the
    >> signal more this way, a better solution is a 2-way splitter and an
    >> attenuator)
    >>
    >> The other big factor is whether or not the splitter is properly passing
    >> all of the frequency needed for two way digital communication, a ton of
    >> the cheaper junk out there does a piss-poor job.
    >>
    >> The above applies to cables too, even a sharp 90+ degree bend can cause
    >> performance drops, especially if the line happens to be near AC wire.
    >>
    >> I don't know about your carrier, but my carrier will dispatch a tech
    >> with equipment capable of identifying these types of problems rather
    >> than guessing wildly.

    >
    >One problem with some attenuators is that they are not bi-directional. Something to
    >consider.


    Attenuators, splitters, etc. Everything needs to be bi-directional, and
    include a larger-than-analog-only frequency range too.

    In general, avoiding the cheap stuff will help.
     
    DevilsPGD, Dec 9, 2009
    #4
  5. DevilsPGD

    DevilsPGD Guest

    In message <hfmqs2$hj7$-september.org> "Buffalo"
    <> was claimed to have wrote:

    >
    >
    >DevilsPGD wrote:
    >[snip]
    >
    >> I don't know about your carrier, but my carrier will dispatch a tech
    >> with equipment capable of identifying these types of problems rather
    >> than guessing wildly.

    >
    >Obviously you don't have Comcast!!!!!!!! :)


    No. I'd expect Comcast would be more than willing to do the same
    though, although quite possibly with a cost associated with it.
     
    DevilsPGD, Dec 9, 2009
    #5
  6. DevilsPGD

    Buffalo Guest

    DevilsPGD wrote:
    > In message <hfmqs2$hj7$-september.org> "Buffalo"
    > <> was claimed to have wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> DevilsPGD wrote:
    >> [snip]
    >>
    >>> I don't know about your carrier, but my carrier will dispatch a tech
    >>> with equipment capable of identifying these types of problems rather
    >>> than guessing wildly.

    >>
    >> Obviously you don't have Comcast!!!!!!!! :)

    >
    > No. I'd expect Comcast would be more than willing to do the same
    > though, although quite possibly with a cost associated with it.


    They would be more than willing and they have the proper test equipment, but
    the service people they include with that package are not usually very well
    trained, at least when they come to my house. :(
    Buffalo
     
    Buffalo, Dec 9, 2009
    #6
  7. DevilsPGD

    Buffalo Guest

    §nühw¤£f wrote:
    > "Buffalo" <> clouded the waters of pure thought
    > with news:hfojn8$b34$-september.org:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> DevilsPGD wrote:
    >>> In message <hfmqs2$hj7$-september.org> "Buffalo"
    >>> <> was claimed to have wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> DevilsPGD wrote:
    >>>> [snip]
    >>>>
    >>>>> I don't know about your carrier, but my carrier will dispatch a
    >>>>> tech with equipment capable of identifying these types of
    >>>>> problems rather than guessing wildly.
    >>>>
    >>>> Obviously you don't have Comcast!!!!!!!! :)
    >>>
    >>> No. I'd expect Comcast would be more than willing to do the same
    >>> though, although quite possibly with a cost associated with it.

    >>
    >> They would be more than willing and they have the proper test
    >> equipment, but the service people they include with that package
    >> are not usually very well trained, at least when they come to my
    >> house. :( Buffalo
    >>

    > Thats because you didnt offer them *beer*.
    > Try that, service people just lurve teh beer.


    Actually I did. :)
    Buffalo
     
    Buffalo, Dec 9, 2009
    #7
  8. DevilsPGD

    DevilsPGD Guest

    In message <> Evan Platt
    <> was claimed to have wrote:

    >On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:26:18 -0600, DevilsPGD
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>No. I'd expect Comcast would be more than willing to do the same
    >>though, although quite possibly with a cost associated with it.

    >
    >I believe the rule of thumb is your problem, you pay (ie if it ends up
    >being your computer). But if the equipment on their end is the issue,
    >there's no charge.


    I'd imagine that would be fair. I'd also imagine that even if the
    problem is on their end, they'll find a thing or two wrong on your side
    just to bill you for their trouble.

    I might be wrong though, I've never personally used Comcast, my cable
    provider doesn't bill unless the damage was caused by the subscriber (in
    other words, you cut a cables and call them, they bill you. Splitter
    gets flaky due to age, no charge)
     
    DevilsPGD, Dec 9, 2009
    #8
  9. DevilsPGD

    Aardvark Guest

    On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 13:54:04 -0700, Buffalo wrote:

    > §nühw€£f wrote:
    >> "Buffalo" <> clouded the waters of pure thought
    >> with news:hfojn8$b34$-september.org:
    >>
    >>
    >>>
    >>> DevilsPGD wrote:
    >>>> In message <hfmqs2$hj7$-september.org> "Buffalo"
    >>>> <> was claimed to have wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> DevilsPGD wrote:
    >>>>> [snip]
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> I don't know about your carrier, but my carrier will dispatch a
    >>>>>> tech with equipment capable of identifying these types of problems
    >>>>>> rather than guessing wildly.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Obviously you don't have Comcast!!!!!!!! :)
    >>>>
    >>>> No. I'd expect Comcast would be more than willing to do the same
    >>>> though, although quite possibly with a cost associated with it.
    >>>
    >>> They would be more than willing and they have the proper test
    >>> equipment, but the service people they include with that package are
    >>> not usually very well trained, at least when they come to my house.
    >>> :( Buffalo
    >>>

    >> Thats because you didnt offer them *beer*. Try that, service people
    >> just lurve teh beer.

    >
    > Actually I did. :)
    > Buffalo


    Now you know not to offer them Michelob.



    --
    Like one that on a lonesome road Doth walk in fear and dread,
    And having once turned round walks on, And turns no more his head,
    Because he knows some frightful fiend Doth close behind him tread.
    -Samuel Taylor Coleridge 'The Rime of the Ancient Mariner', 1797
     
    Aardvark, Dec 10, 2009
    #9
  10. DevilsPGD

    Buffalo Guest

    §nühw¤£f wrote:
    > "Buffalo" <> clouded the waters of pure thought
    > with news:hfp2o5$ggi$-september.org:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >>> "Buffalo" <> clouded the waters of pure thought
    >>> with news:hfojn8$b34$-september.org:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> DevilsPGD wrote:
    >>>>> In message <hfmqs2$hj7$-september.org> "Buffalo"
    >>>>> <> was claimed to have wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> DevilsPGD wrote:
    >>>>>> [snip]
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I don't know about your carrier, but my carrier will dispatch a
    >>>>>>> tech with equipment capable of identifying these types of
    >>>>>>> problems rather than guessing wildly.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Obviously you don't have Comcast!!!!!!!! :)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> No. I'd expect Comcast would be more than willing to do the same
    >>>>> though, although quite possibly with a cost associated with it.
    >>>>
    >>>> They would be more than willing and they have the proper test
    >>>> equipment, but the service people they include with that package
    >>>> are not usually very well trained, at least when they come to my
    >>>> house. :( Buffalo
    >>>>
    >>> Thats because you didnt offer them *beer*.
    >>> Try that, service people just lurve teh beer.

    >>
    >> Actually I did. :)
    >> Buffalo
    >>

    > Hmmmm...
    >
    > <IDEA>
    >
    > Next time...show em yer tits, mate!



    No, just nipples, as I am a male.
    Comcast doesn't really try to keep your Internet or TV going to their
    'promised' quality, just enough to keep you from unsuscribing.
    Since I dl so little from the Internet, I'm thinking of going with DSL and
    Sat TV. It will be much cheaper with better TV reception and a wider choice
    of channels. The big downside is that I will probably experience a higher
    ping when I play Q3Arena online.
    But hell, I can live that.
    Buffalo
     
    Buffalo, Dec 10, 2009
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. why?

    Re: Cable splitter's effect on cable speed

    why?, Dec 8, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    518
  2. richard

    Re: Cable splitter's effect on cable speed

    richard, Dec 8, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    492
    DevilsPGD
    Dec 9, 2009
  3. Beauregard T. Shagnasty

    Re: Cable splitter's effect on cable speed

    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Dec 8, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    393
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty
    Dec 8, 2009
  4. Leythos

    Re: Cable splitter's effect on cable speed

    Leythos, Dec 8, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    543
    Leythos
    Dec 8, 2009
  5. Leythos

    Re: Cable splitter's effect on cable speed

    Leythos, Dec 8, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    429
    Leythos
    Dec 9, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page