# New wiring



## MisterTim (Apr 14, 2010)

I have the opportunity this summer to put in the wiring we need from booth to stage. Our booth is in the balcony 100' away from the stage and running wire is, to put it nicely, a huge pain in the butt. Imagine 50' of crawling on 90 year old chickenwire plaster and another 10' of inchworming, all the while trying to drag wires. And hoping that the ceiling holds up, as you're 40' in the air. So I have one shot at this, and basically a clean slate from my boss as to what wiring I put in. 

550 seat high school auditorium. Mostly the usual concerts, musicals, and dance recitals common to high schools. Occasionally a touring gig comes through, but not often. 

We currently have: 
25 mic inputs
5 mic inputs into the automatic mixing system
2 aux returns, both powered for monitors

What I plan to add:
3 RG59
2 HDMI
2 VGA 
3 mic inputs (to max out the 28-channel snake)
3 auto mic inputs (to max out the auto mixer)
2 aux returns, unpowered

The video lines are for giving presentations from the stage and sending camera feeds backstage, both of which we've previously been unable to do effectively. The HDMI and VGA will be run over CAT5e/6. 

So what else should/could I put in?


----------



## Studio (Apr 14, 2010)

Pull as much cat 5 or 6 as you can. It's useful for everything.


----------



## MisterTim (Apr 14, 2010)

Studio said:


> Pull as much cat 5 or 6 as you can. It's useful for everything.



I could pull 50 lines if I wanted to, it's like $0.08/foot for Cat5e, but what would I use it for?


----------



## Footer (Apr 14, 2010)

I would do an 8 pull of cat6. It could be used for DMX, lighting data, audio data, who knows what will be rolling out in the next 10 years.


----------



## erosing (Apr 14, 2010)

Agreed, you should put cat6 in now as long as your running lines, someone will thank you later, if not yourself.


----------



## MisterTim (Apr 15, 2010)

cat6 as opposed to cat5e? 6 is like double the price, iirc.


----------



## Footer (Apr 15, 2010)

MisterTim said:


> cat6 as opposed to cat5e? 6 is like double the price, iirc.



Its not that bad. It is a pain in the rear to terminate and that is where a lot of the expense goes on the install market. However, anymore it is what is specked if you are going to pull anything in walls. Might as well bite the bullet now in an attempt to future proof yourself. You can get 100' ft on amazon for a hundred bucks, and that is not shopping around.


----------



## MisterTim (Apr 15, 2010)

Footer said:


> Its not that bad. It is a pain in the rear to terminate and that is where a lot of the expense goes on the install market. However, anymore it is what is specked if you are going to pull anything in walls. Might as well bite the bullet now in an attempt to future proof yourself. You can get 100' ft on amazon for a hundred bucks, and that is not shopping around.



Ah hell that's a horrible price, we get 1000' for $150. Even Belden cat6 is only $250. I ran a few miles of cat6 when we renovated the building, I know what it's like to terminate, I just didn't know if there was any benefit in this situation. 

Meh I'll just go with cat6. 8 extra lines it is. 

On a related note, is there any benefit to running the video lines over RG59 instead of cat6? Besides cost, which may or may not be more with the associated baluns (I haven't looked).


----------



## venuetech (Apr 15, 2010)

consider creating a ring chase to support these cables


it would be best to keep data separate from analog 
leave a pull string in the chase so you only need to access each end when you need to add a cable.

a wiring fish pole would come in handy in a tight space like that.


----------



## Footer (Apr 15, 2010)

MisterTim said:


> Ah hell that's a horrible price, we get 1000' for $150. Even Belden cat6 is only $250. I ran a few miles of cat6 when we renovated the building, I know what it's like to terminate, I just didn't know if there was any benefit in this situation.
> 
> Meh I'll just go with cat6. 8 extra lines it is.
> 
> On a related note, is there any benefit to running the video lines over RG59 instead of cat6? Besides cost, which may or may not be more with the associated baluns (I haven't looked).



Sorry, that was actually a 1000' for $106. 
Amazon.com: CAT6, UTP, Bulk Cable, Solid, 500MHz, 23 AWG, Gray, 1000 ft: Electronics


----------



## epimetheus (Apr 15, 2010)

I'd run RG6 rather than RG59. I know RG59 is frowned upon in the cable tv business these days, and when it comes to running video down coax, the cable tv business is a pretty good metric.


----------



## Sean (Apr 15, 2010)

It depends on the scale of the wiring project, and if you have the expected gear coming in that would use it, but fiber would be good.

We have clients asking for fiber patches though our facility. Now, to be fair, these clients are television production companies, and larger corporate clients. But, if you're doing a decent amount of mid-scale rentals, and you expect the facility to be used for 20 more years w/o a large-scale renovation, it may well be worth it.

Other than fiber, as pretty much everyone has said, run as much Cat-5/6 as you can reasonably afford. Because of how much of it is out in the world, more and more things are being adapted to be able to run over it.

--Sean


----------



## jwl868 (Apr 15, 2010)

MisterTim said:


> ...Imagine 50' of crawling on 90 year old chickenwire plaster and another 10' of inchworming, all the while trying to drag wires. And hoping that the ceiling holds up, as you're 40' in the air...



That can’t be a good idea. I didn’t think that type of ceiling could support (or was meant to support) a person. Surely there’s an alternative method.

Joe


----------



## museav (Apr 15, 2010)

Terms like mic input, auto mixer input, aux returns, etc. relate to the use and not to the cable. Would the lines run for the automixer be physically different cable than the other mic lines? Would mic and line runs use the same or different cable?

Would it be better to do something like use the existing automixer lines for other use and run a dedicated multi-pair for the automixer? How about using AES compatible cable for the new mic and/or line runs so that it could also be used for AES digital audio?

Don't run just enough, always run more. If you need 28 mic lines run 32 or so. If you need 4 UTP lines for video run 6 or 8. Leave spares of sufficient length that they could be used to replace any lines you normally use without having to pull new cable. And don't necessarily limit yourself to your current gear. What happens if you decide in a year or two to get a new console that supports more inputs and monitor mixes? Before you start pulling cable you might want to do some long term planning and invest now in the infrastructure to support any envisioned future growth.

Think about cable routing, for example does it make more sense to pull everything for the stage though one common point rather than via multiple paths? Does it make sense to pass though some intermediate junction boxes, providing a place to potentially splice, reroute or terminate the cables in the future?

Watch code issues. Details such as independently supporting the cable, using plenum or riser rated cable where appropriate, etc. should be followed. Also keep practical issues such as cable separation and how/where you run relative to power and lights in mind


----------



## MisterTim (Apr 17, 2010)

venuetech said:


> consider creating a ring chase to support these cable
> it would be best to keep data separate from analog
> leave a pull string in the chase so you only need to access each end when you need to add a cable.
> 
> a wiring fish pole would come in handy in a tight space like that.


Wiring is my job, so I do know how to do this, thanks. I have a fish pole and fish tape, and fortunately the previous installers left a pull string in the part I can't reach. 


Sean said:


> We have clients asking for fiber patches though our facility. Now, to be fair, these clients are television production companies, and larger corporate clients. But, if you're doing a decent amount of mid-scale rentals, and you expect the facility to be used for 20 more years w/o a large-scale renovation, it may well be worth it.


We do rarely any rentals, and I can't see any possible use for this any time in the future.


jwl868 said:


> That can’t be a good idea. I didn’t think that type of ceiling could support (or was meant to support) a person. Surely there’s an alternative method.


 The alternative method would involve many feet of concrete, 150' of new conduit, and a rather roundabout method. The ceiling is fine as long as I stay on the supports. I'm laying 2x10 as I go, there are plenty left up there from the last time people were in the crawlspace. 


museav said:


> Terms like mic input, auto mixer input, aux returns, etc. relate to the use and not to the cable. Would the lines run for the automixer be physically different cable than the other mic lines?


Yes they are physically different. 


> Would mic and line runs use the same or different cable?


Same, unless there's some reason to do otherwise?


> Would it be better to do something like use the existing automixer lines for other use and run a dedicated multi-pair for the automixer? How about using AES compatible cable for the new mic and/or line runs so that it could also be used for AES digital audio?


To the first part, no, because of the different locations of the jacks onstage. To the second, it would be a lot cheaper to run AES over cat6; is there any benefit to using AES cable? 


> Watch code issues. Details such as independently supporting the cable, using plenum or riser rated cable where appropriate, etc. should be followed. Also keep practical issues such as cable separation and how/where you run relative to power and lights in mind



If you saw how the existing cables are run, you'd probably have a fit. 24 channel and 12 channel audio snakes, powered speaker lines, ethernet, coax (TV), intercom, and digital clock sync are all just tossed on top of the ceiling over the power and lights. I am REALLY surprised we have never had noise issues through that huge mess. If there is enough slack I will be fixing this as I put in the new lines. 

My coworkers think I'm crazy, but I love being the one in the crawlspace distorting my body into strange positions to pull wire through old buildings. 

As usual, thanks for all your help guys


----------



## Chris15 (Apr 17, 2010)

Install the fibre, ethernet will most likely want it within the next 10 years, who know what else will. You may choose to leave it unterminated, but fibre is cheap. You may even need to use it now to run your HDMI depending on the distances involved and the resolution desired. Likewise Cat 6 or 6A will give more options in the next few years versus 5e.

You've said the mixer lines are/ will be physically different cables, how are they different?

If you are going to install audio multipair, just make it AES grade. You can't run a phantom powered mic on Cat5 easily, you can do it on AES cable. You will also get better noise immunity from AES cable, the reason why an AES multipair has individual shields...

The segregation rules are there for the safety of people working both in the spaces and those who are exposed to the ends of those cables under fault conditions.

I'm sure your chiropractor will also love you contorting your body all the time...


----------



## museav (Apr 17, 2010)

I'm not sure you really got my point. What makes a run a mic run or a line run? It's the signal, not the cable, and the same cable could be used for either application. So don't limit yourself to looking at runs, including existing lines, as being specifically mic or line level, they are more likely simply a run from point A to point B and could be used for either signal type. That can open up more possibilities. For example, if a termination point currently has four mic and two line level connections on a single multipair cable and you want to add two mics, it might make more sense to use the two pairs currently serving the line level connections for the added mic connections and run new lines to the existing line level connections, thus providing greater separation of the two signal levels. 

I have a little different take than some of the others regarding CAT5/5e/6. For Ethernet communications I would agree with CAT6 but for audio and video over UTP (actual audio and video and not networked such as CobraNet, DANTE, EtherSound, etc.) CAT5 is preferable. Part of the higher specs for CAT6 involves greater variation in twist rates between the individual pairs which in turn relates to greater skew. Especially for video, skew can become a problem for long runs, requiring the use of interfaces with skew compensation. So maybe run both CAT5 and CAT6.


----------



## MisterTim (Apr 17, 2010)

Chris15 said:


> Install the fibre, ethernet will most likely want it within the next 10 years, who know what else will. You may choose to leave it unterminated, but fibre is cheap.


 According to the makers of the HDMI baluns, I can run 1080p 100 feet over 2 cat5e cables, 1080i 165 feet, and 720p 200 feet. So if I want actual 1080p, which is probably a good idea, I can't just use cat5/6. 

None of our usual suppliers have bulk fiber, do you have any recommendations for where to get it? 


> You've said the mixer lines are/ will be physically different cables, how are they different?


 The automixer lines go straight from the stage to the automixer (through the terminal strip); the rest of the inputs go from the stage through the terminal strip to the split 28ch snake, and from there to the mixer. I could theoretically just use the same inputs, but this is how it's currently wired, and in a school it's hard enough to make people understand things, so I'm leaving the inputs separate. 


museav said:


> Part of the higher specs for CAT6 involves greater variation in twist rates between the individual pairs which in turn relates to greater skew. Especially for video, skew can become a problem for long runs, requiring the use of interfaces with skew compensation. So maybe run both CAT5 and CAT6.


Googling this seems to show a consensus that 200 feet is the limit without using low-skew cable. I'm not going to be above 200 feet (probably around 150-160), so is this worth it for the extra PITA installing both cat5e and 6?


> I'm not sure you really got my point. What makes a run a mic run or a line run? It's the signal, not the cable, and the same cable could be used for either application. So don't limit yourself to looking at runs, including existing lines, as being specifically mic or line level, they are more likely simply a run from point A to point B and could be used for either signal type.


I do understand your point, I was 'naming' the connections for clarity.


----------



## museav (Apr 18, 2010)

MisterTim said:


> According to the makers of the HDMI baluns, I can run 1080p 100 feet over 2 cat5e cables, 1080i 165 feet, and 720p 200 feet. So if I want actual 1080p, which is probably a good idea, I can't just use cat5/6.
> 
> > MisterTim said:
> >
> ...


----------



## Chris15 (Apr 24, 2010)

MisterTim said:


> None of our usual suppliers have bulk fiber, do you have any recommendations for where to get it?



Sorry, wouldn't have a clue where to get such things in the States. Try electrical wholesalers or find a data cabler and ask them who their supplier is.

Skip the step of running signals over Cat5 and just jump into running it on IP, it really has stopped being the future and now represents the present, except perhaps in video... Audio has Dante amongst others, DMX has Artnet, again amongst others, etc. etc.


----------



## Footer (Apr 24, 2010)

Chris15 said:


> Sorry, wouldn't have a clue where to get such things in the States. Try electrical wholesalers or find a data cabler and ask them who their supplier is.


I used to work for a large scale fiber installer. There are two ways you can go. You can get pre-terminated runs and simply pull that. Fiber does have very special considerations when it is pulled and terminated. It is possible to terminate yourself but that requires a great deal of skill. Nearly everyone uses a fusion splicer to do their terminations. You could pull the cable and then have a company come in and do the terminations. They can also test the lines for you and give you a cert of the quality of the lines if you so desire. I would highly suggest that you go this route and have them install hard termination points that are sealed on both ends. With fiber, it needs to be a bit more robust then just a cable coming out of the wall.


----------



## MisterTim (Apr 24, 2010)

Footer said:


> I used to work for a large scale fiber installer. There are two ways you can go. You can get pre-terminated runs and simply pull that. Fiber does have very special considerations when it is pulled and terminated. It is possible to terminate yourself but that requires a great deal of skill. Nearly everyone uses a fusion splicer to do their terminations. You could pull the cable and then have a company come in and do the terminations. They can also test the lines for you and give you a cert of the quality of the lines if you so desire. I would highly suggest that you go this route and have them install hard termination points that are sealed on both ends. With fiber, it needs to be a bit more robust then just a cable coming out of the wall.



I do realise this, but I don't think I'm going to go with fiber. Too much PITA just to have uncompressed 1080p. 


Should I be using shielded cat6? I know I'll need to separate the A/V lines and the cat6 lines in the ceiling, but considering I will be potentially sending data and A/V both over cat6, do I need to go with FTP?


----------



## EricE (May 30, 2011)

Another old thread, but I think this is worth pointing out for anyone else that may be reading:


Sean said:


> Other than fiber, as pretty much everyone has said, run as much Cat-5/6 as you can reasonably afford. Because of how much of it is out in the world, more and more things are being adapted to be able to run over it.


 
I just want to point out something that a cable installer pointed out for us when I was with a different organization and we were building out a new building. With fiber (and with cat5/6 to a lesser extent) the bulk of the expense is with termination. If you are going to go through all that effort to pull a cable bundle, throwing in a couple strands of fiber with some large loops at either end can possibly come in handy at some point - for example, DVI extenders for video are limited in the distance they can go over copper (even cat6), but DVI can go much farther on optical.

And if the space above is that hard to work with, it might be worth investigating putting in some conduit. If you are pretty certain this will be the last time you have to pull cable, then it may not be worth it - but we all know how that goes


----------



## EricE (May 30, 2011)

MisterTim said:


> Should I be using shielded cat6? I know I'll need to separate the A/V lines and the cat6 lines in the ceiling, but considering I will be potentially sending data and A/V both over cat6, do I need to go with FTP?


 
Not automatically. Any A/V sent over the cat6 will be converted to low-voltage digital and be very similar to data signaling like Ethernet (what it is basically).


----------



## museav (May 31, 2011)

EricE said:


> Not automatically. Any A/V sent over the cat6 will be converted to low-voltage digital and be very similar to data signaling like Ethernet (what it is basically).


There seems to possibly be some lack of differentiation between streaming or networked media and audio/video over UTP. Streaming media is converted to network data and run over a network. However, with a few exceptions audio and video over UTP approaches are not Ethernet and cannot be run through Ethernet devices and most audio and video over UTP devices are simply adapting to the the cabling, they are not doing any A/D or anything like that. So many/most VGA, component video, analog audio, etc. over UTP devices and applications have nothing to do with digital signals or Ethernet.


----------



## EricE (Jun 3, 2011)

museav said:


> most audio and video over UTP devices are simply adapting to the the cabling, they are not doing any A/D or anything like that. So many/most VGA, component video, analog audio, etc. over UTP devices and applications have nothing to do with digital signals or Ethernet.


 
True, they are not related to ethernet as far as "speaking" ethernet, but they do packetize (digitize) the data and use the same physical layer principles in their signaling. That's how they get the distance. Well, the better units anyway. Here is one of the best explanations I found in a few moments of googling:

http://www.zektor.com/support/downloads/ClearingUpTheHDBaseTTechnicalFUD-1.pdf 

That HDBaseT is interesting technology since it claims to co-exist with 100MB ethernet on the same cable - could be really handy for running signals where you have existing network cable. They also have a multiplexing function with their switch which, as they point out, would be very handy for digital signage. We have been contemplating more digital signage and I was looking at these splitters since they have the extenders and audio integrated: Network Technologies HDTV Digital Audio Splitter Component Video Distribution Amplifier. I have an 8 input x 4 output video matrix switch and a few extenders from them and I am very pleased with the quality and pricing of their gear.

I will have to read up on this HDBaseT more - daisy chaining would be far easier than home running each connection back to a traditional splitter.

Anyway, I could have been a little more clear that the fundamentals of the techniques are the same but unrelated to ethernet or TCP/IP (although there are, of course, units that will do video over TCP/IP - pricy tho!)


----------



## Chris15 (Jun 4, 2011)

EricE said:


> True, they are not related to ethernet as far as "speaking" ethernet, but they do packetize (digitize) the data and use the same physical layer principles in their signaling. That's how they get the distance. Well, the better units anyway. Here is one of the best explanations I found in a few moments of googling:
> 
> http://www.zektor.com/support/downloads/ClearingUpTheHDBaseTTechnicalFUD-1.pdf
> 
> ...


 
HUH?!?!

Only the very few transmission systems at the pointy end of the market are digitising signals that are not already digital. The VAST majority are essentially unbalanced to balanced converters (either transformers or active equivalents) at the transmitter end and balanced to unbalanced at the receiving end. You may then have the "extra" signals - DDC, the Sync lines depending on video format and specific implementation being multiplexed.

HDBaseT, based on the white paper you linked to, is ONLY relevant to digital signals a la HDMI. The description of coexistence with ethernet is misleading. Ethernet is being tunnelled just like the TMDS signals for HDMI. There is an ethernet fallback mode implemented, but that activates only when a HDBaseT connection cannot be negotiated.

I certainly did not get the impression that HDBaseT could do a daisy chain topology, it's point to point like Ethernet based on what I read.

Is it set to be a really cool technology? Absolutely! Especially the PoE esque properties, but at this stage it's not widely enough implemented to have seen the price point come down to what us mere mortals can afford...


----------



## museav (Jun 6, 2011)

EricE said:


> True, they are not related to ethernet as far as "speaking" ethernet, but they do packetize (digitize) the data and use the same physical layer principles in their signaling. That's how they get the distance. Well, the better units anyway. Here is one of the best explanations I found in a few moments of googling:
> 
> http://www.zektor.com/support/downloads/ClearingUpTheHDBaseTTechnicalFUD-1.pdf


HDBaseT and AVB are becoming increasingly common and may be much more relevant in the future, but audio and video over UTP still often only involves the transmission of the signal over a different type of cable and it is very common that audio and video sent over the CAT5/5e/6 is not converted to low-voltage digital signals or similar to data signaling like Ethernet.

I have a current project that uses RJ jacks and UTP cable for six different forms of audio and video signal transmission (over UTP, CobraNet, HDBaseT, network streaming, analog phone (POTS) interface and IP based conferencing), in some cases with all of them used in a single room (and in some rooms also with CAT7 connectivity for whatever the future may hold). Combine that with three separate related networks (data, AV control and streaming rich media) and while it may be great to have everything using one type of cable and connector, there seems to be more potential confusion than ever regarding what can or cannot connect to a jack. Until we truly get to where anything can plug into any jack, I almost wish that HDBaseT and AVB would look at application specific connectors to help differentiate the use.


EricE said:


> That HDBaseT is interesting technology since it claims to co-exist with 100MB ethernet on the same cable - could be really handy for running signals where you have existing network cable.


Yes, but I think that may stem from the fact that HDBaseT is at least currently based on compatibility with HDMI and HDMI v1.4 incorporates 100Mbps Ethernet. I personally find the high power PoE capability interesting, the idea of one cable carrying everything including power presents some interesting options.


----------



## chausman (Jun 6, 2011)

museav said:


> ... the idea of one cable carrying everything including power presents some interesting options.


 
But then again, there is the possibility that someone will not realize what all is in that one cable and cause some horrible problem because something is getting power that it doesn't need.

I do like the idea though. Much neater then a power cable, an audio cable, a video cable, and a network cable.


----------



## Chris15 (Jun 7, 2011)

chausman said:


> But then again, there is the possibility that someone will not realize what all is in that one cable and cause some horrible problem because something is getting power that it doesn't need.


 
Chase, can you please elborate on what you mean here?


----------



## Edrick (Jun 7, 2011)

Chris15 said:


> Chase, can you please elborate on what you mean here?


 
My guess would be he's saying if you sent a powered signal down 1/4 from an amp or something and connected a device that didn't need or want a powered signal you could end up in a situation.


----------



## museav (Jun 7, 2011)

I think the concept with HDBaseT is much like PoE+, just scaled up to potentially support up to 100W. I don't know enough about the details to know if/how the 'PoE' source device would know that power should be sent to the connected device or what would happen if it was sent to a non-HDBaseT device.


----------



## Chris15 (Jun 7, 2011)

IEEE 802.3af, the standardised form of PoE, has a mechanism in place to prevent the application of power to a non PoE device.
It looks for a signature resistance of about 25k across the powered pairs and without it will not apply power.
802.3at operates in exactly the same manner.

If we take a look at Crestron's HDBaseT implementation, DigitalMedia 8G+, they are providing the PoE by tacking a standard 802.3af power supply through a secondary port on the switcher cards.
I thus conclude that HDBaseT is using 802.3af / 802.3at as the power technology unmodified. af had no data layer communication, though at has added that in as a layer 2 LLDP communication. I anticipate adding that functionality to the HDBaseT protocol stack is a trivial thing.

The other reason why it would make sense to use standard PoE for HDBaseT relates to it's ethernet fallback mode. If the device is fundamentally PoE, then it can operate as a PoE device when operating under fallback mode.

Say you have a BluRay player that's HDBaseT enabled and you don't want to use HDBaseT, using HDMI say instead. You can connect it to ethernet for control or to stream YouTube or whatever and still have what's now the LAN connection powering the whole unit up...

When this gets deployed into say security cameras things will get fun, especially if they are IP streaming concurrent with HDBaseT output, use in "fallback mode" for a more conventional use or connect HDBaseT for a more AV use... Or use both concurrently...


----------



## chausman (Jun 8, 2011)

Chris15 said:


> Chase, can you please elborate on what you mean here?


 
Go and plug the output from an amp into your mixer. Things might get a little interesting!

I'm saying that is that while it may look great to have everything in one cable for onstage, I wouldn't want to have someone not realize that "the internet cable over there" was also carrying power for something, and connect their old Compaq laptop in it that couldn't handle the "extra stuff". People will assume "I have those all over my house, it does...". Better yet, you may know about the PoE type connections throughout the space, but what if you don't work there until the building is condemned, or the wiring is re-done.

Thanks, Museav! I know I read most of the above from one(or more) of your posts from somewhere else!


----------

