# POE Filter outside the house?



## hgarber (Dec 30, 2005)

Previous house owner had the cable company split the main coax line outside the house.... and from the splitter, multiple coax cables are traving along the outside of the house separately before coming inside in different places.

Assuming I need to put the MoCA POE Filter before that first splitter outside the house to ensure that i don't cut off any parts of the house from the MoCA signal. 

My question is: Is the MoCA POE Filter built to be outside in cold/rain/snow? Will keeping it outside damage it?

Thanks for your feedback!


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

hgarber said:


> Previous house owner had the cable company split the main coax line outside the house.... and from the splitter, multiple coax cables are traving along the outside of the house separately before coming inside in different places.
> 
> Assuming I need to put the MoCA POE Filter before that first splitter outside the house to ensure that i don't cut off any parts of the house from the MoCA signal.
> 
> ...


I would move the cables inside as your splitter must be at least 1Ghz to work with MoCA.
I think you can get outside rubber booted POS filters.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

lessd said:


> I would move the cables inside as your splitter must be at least 1Ghz to work with MoCA.
> I think you can get outside rubber booted POS filters.


Too bad there aren't really any POS filters to protect us from buying stuff that should never have made it past QC (or in some cases gotten of the drawing board).


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Is the outside splitter in a box? If so the POE filter should be fine. If not you could always wrap it in some electrical tape or duct tape to protect it from the weather.

You want the POE filter before the first splitter to prevent cutting off the signal to rooms in your house.


----------



## hgarber (Dec 30, 2005)

Thanks for the feedback.

Unfortunately the splitter isn't in any type of protective box or covering. I do like the suggestion to wrap the POE Filter in duct/electrical tape to help protect it from the weather.

I know that it should all probably be on the inside of the house. but I'm definitely not looking to create a project out of this. I simply want my TiVo Mini to work via MoCA! The longer I'm in my house, the more i find myself wondering what the previous owners were thinking!


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

I've never seen a POE filter that isn't suitable for outdoor installation.

For example:
http://www.pctstore.com/MoCA_Filter_Ethernet_to_coaxial_p/pctlpf1002.htm
http://www.soontai.com/MoCA-LPF-M3.html
http://www.soontai.com/MoCA-POE-h.htm
http://www.eaglecomtronics.com/pdfs/EZLP Series - MoCA Point of Entry Filter .pdf

OK, I found one:

http://www.hollandelectronics.com/pdf/MoCA-Series-Filters-1.6.pdf

The first of the 3 on that sheet -- notice how it's not a single piece but instead has a turnable nut on one side -- avoid that style, or wrap it in that gooey stuff to waterproof it (http://coaxseal.com/products/ or similar products like duct seal or a sealer that is used where A/C pipes enter the house)


----------



## hgarber (Dec 30, 2005)

dswallow said:


> I've never seen a POE filter that isn't suitable for outdoor installation.
> 
> For example:
> http://www.pctstore.com/MoCA_Filter_Ethernet_to_coaxial_p/pctlpf1002.htm
> ...


Thank you!

I bought the POE filter from TiVo when i bought the Mini...... Can you take a quick look at that one and let me know what you think? -- https://www.tivo.com/shop/detail/moca-poe


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

hgarber said:


> Thank you!
> 
> I bought the POE filter from TiVo when i bought the Mini...... Can you take a quick look at that one and let me know what you think? -- https://www.tivo.com/shop/detail/moca-poe


I can't tell from the photo; if you have it already, or when you get it, just check if the hex-style nut end twirls separately from the body of the filter. If it does, I'd say it'd be safer to wrap it with a bit of the coax seal or similar stuff. If it's all a single piece of metal, then it won't be a problem outside.


----------



## webcrawlr (Mar 4, 2004)

hgarber said:


> Thank you!
> 
> I bought the POE filter from TiVo when i bought the Mini...... Can you take a quick look at that one and let me know what you think? -- https://www.tivo.com/shop/detail/moca-poe


The filters TiVo sell are one solid piece.


----------



## rucheridee (Dec 22, 2010)

I have a POE filter bought from tivo.com. I had 2 cable techs at the house this past month & neither mentioned it would be an issue to have outside. The first tech was even extremely careful & he "tested" the POE filter before installing it. 

It's snowed twice & rained hard once since I've had the filter installed. I guess it's still too soon to tell though (~2 weeks), but no issues yet. Unfortunately I don't have a cable box outside for protection either.


----------



## hgarber (Dec 30, 2005)

rucheridee said:


> I have a POE filter bought from tivo.com. I had 2 cable techs at the house this past month & neither mentioned it would be an issue to have outside. The first tech was even extremely careful & he "tested" the POE filter before installing it.
> 
> It's snowed twice & rained hard once since I've had the filter installed. I guess it's still too soon to tell though (~2 weeks), but no issues yet. Unfortunately I don't have a cable box outside for protection either.


Fantastic.... Thank you for sharing!


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Yeah it's not going to die from a little rain/snow, but it may reduce it's total lifespan and could slowly degrade your signal. I'd still cover it in something just to be safe, or be prepared to replace them every few years.


----------



## ellinj (Feb 26, 2002)

why not just get an outdoor electrical box. you are disconnecting everything to connect the filter, should be easy enough to route it into a box.


----------



## kherr (Aug 1, 2006)

When in doubt, put some rubber tape on it first.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

lessd said:


> I would move the cables inside as your splitter must be at least 1Ghz to work with MoCA.
> I think you can get outside rubber booted POS filters.


BS.. mine is going through a bunch of random splitters I had lying around... they're all 860mhz I think, and I have no POE filter to top it all off.

The filter will be fine outside. They are made to go outside, and are often installed out there...


----------



## tivoboy (Jan 14, 2002)

Anyone have another online link for POE filters. 9$ from tivo isn't bad, but 9$ PLUS 9$ shipping IS bad.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I bought mine on eBay. It was $8 with free shipping.


----------



## tivoboy (Jan 14, 2002)

good call, are they all pretty much the "same"?


----------



## phipsi1237 (Feb 26, 2006)

My understanding is that the POE filter is to keep the signal from going outside your cabling. Therefore, it's correct that it needs to be before the main splitter. Otherwise, it would defeat the purpose.


----------



## nooneuknow (Feb 5, 2011)

Bigg said:


> BS.. mine is going through a bunch of random splitters I had lying around... they're all 860mhz I think, and I have no POE filter to top it all off.
> 
> The filter will be fine outside. They are made to go outside, and are often installed out there...


I'm calling out this BS, as well as calling out that not using a POE filter can cause issues with service to your neighbors, regardless of how things are working for you.

Great, an unsupported configuration (in several contexts), that just begs for causing trouble (like some people who post here), works for you. A true meaning to being a 1%er.

I get a great price (free) by asking Cox techs I spot in the area, or who are out on a ticket of my own, for some various splitters they can spare.

860Mhz splitters, from any brand or any source (even the old ones Cox used to use), won't even work for basic digital cable TV service for me, in my Cox market, and any internet access at all is out-of-the-question.

1. The ONLY way a cableco wouldn't object to those splitters, if if they are in the stone age (analog-only, or early-gen basic digital). If they install PoE filters outside, unprotected from the elements, that also points to stone-age. Many items commonly installed on poles, or in sidewalk boxes, are still exposed to the elements, and require rubber boots in such cases (check with the manufacturer to see if rubber boots are required as part of the "indoor/outdoor" specifications).

2. If a cableco rolls a truck for any issue, and the customer is using splitters not up to their ratings/specifications/requirements, it could become a billable incident, since the customer (customer's equipment) is not acceptable. If they recognize the brand as one they used to use, they may just happily replace them, without charge.

I don't know how good, or bad, all the cable markets are, but mine would replace every non-spec splitter, and (at minimum) note the problem was caused by said splitters, or the customer (regardless of what/who was the cause).

*This post is a courtesy, to protect people who may not know better, and mistakenly interpret your post as a blessing for 860Mhz splitters (or any other under-spec equipment), as something that will work for everybody, everywhere, at any time.*

You have a right to disagree with me. But, I have said all I feel needs to be said, and don't have any obligation to say anything further. [/end of discussion, with you] [not engaging in a debate]


----------



## nooneuknow (Feb 5, 2011)

phipsi1237 said:


> My understanding is that the POE filter is to keep the signal from going outside your cabling. Therefore, it's correct that it needs to be before the main splitter. Otherwise, it would defeat the purpose.


There's more to it than that. I'm done re-re-re-explaining it all, as I already have, in several threads (as well as the countless other people, willing to help others).

PoE filters & MoCA are two subjects that have been beaten to death, thoroughly explained, and even diagrammed-out, in many threads.

I'll repeat this much, again: Just because it's called a "Point-of-Entry" or "PoE" filter, doesn't limit it to only being useful at the point of entry. It's just the one place it was originally specifically designed for. In my cable market with SDV deployed, which requires Tuning Adapters, Cox wants a PoE filter on the input to each Tuning Adapter, to keep the TAs from malfunctioning, as they don't have MoCA PoE filters built-in, and tend to malfunction when exposed to MoCA signals. Other devices can also malfunction if not designed to filter the MoCA frequencies out, or to pass them through, in the case on an "in-line" configuration with IN and OUT ports. I just bought a new cable modem, which specifies that it has a MoCA filter built-in, while my old modem does not.

Since I choose not to use MoCA, I only have to have a PoE filter at the Point-of-Entry, and it simply helps insure my neighbors' MoCA signals don't get into my residence's coax. Without one, my Tuning Adapters tend to lock up, or otherwise malfunction. Technically, I shouldn't need one, but I can't force my neighbors' to put them in. An apartment building/complex or other high-density housing situation can be a real MoCA nightmare.

IMO, there are so many good, pre-existing, questions and complete/thorough answers, that there should be a lock-out for any further threads on those subjects (other than extremely unusual issues, which are new material, and merit another thread).

The "create new thread" process even does an automatic search for threads similar to the subject matter, and prompts the user to be sure a new thread is necessary.

I'm not saying I'm done helping. I'm saying all the basics are out there (here), as well as much of the more advanced parts, often in triplicate, at minimum.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nooneuknow said:


> I'm calling out this BS, as well as calling out that not using a POE filter can cause issues with service to your neighbors, regardless of how things are working for you.
> 
> Great, an unsupported configuration (in several contexts), that just begs for causing trouble (like some people who post here), works for you. A true meaning to being a 1%er.
> 
> ...


I didn't say it would work all the time, I'm just saying that just because a splitter is 860mhz doesn't mean it magically blocks everything above 860mhz. It doesn't. My configuration isn't the greatest, but it works, and Comcast didn't have any PoE filters, so I never bothered to get one. Most "860mhz" splitters will go well north of 1ghz, if not higher.

Very few cable systems go above 860mhz, ours tops out at 650mhz, while most go to 750mhz or 860mhz, so an 860mhz splitter will work fine for almost any system, with the possible exception of the very few 1ghz systems out there. So yes, I can use anything above a 650mhz splitter, and I'd be just fine. Our internet channels are in the 400mhz range, so no worries there. The higher frequencies do lose signal faster than the lower ones, but that's more of a cabling issue than a splitter issue.

WHAT??? Most splitters most people are running are 860mhz splitters. We're on a 650mhz system. They are just fine for what we're doing. We're all digital, with 6 DOCSIS 3 channels. Everything works just splendid with the random splitters I found in the basement.

That's complete BS, as the 860mhz splitters are a full 210mhz ABOVE what the system needs, so they are MORE than adequate. Calling a splitter that can do more than what the system requires "out of spec" is completely incorrect.


----------



## nooneuknow (Feb 5, 2011)

Bigg said:


> I didn't say it would work all the time, I'm just saying that just because a splitter is 860mhz doesn't mean it magically blocks everything above 860mhz. It doesn't. My configuration isn't the greatest, but it works, and Comcast didn't have any PoE filters, so I never bothered to get one. Most "860mhz" splitters will go well north of 1ghz, if not higher.
> 
> Very few cable systems go above 860mhz, ours tops out at 650mhz, while most go to 750mhz or 860mhz, so an 860mhz splitter will work fine for almost any system, with the possible exception of the very few 1ghz systems out there. So yes, I can use anything above a 650mhz splitter, and I'd be just fine. Our internet channels are in the 400mhz range, so no worries there. The higher frequencies do lose signal faster than the lower ones, but that's more of a cabling issue than a splitter issue.
> 
> ...


You are pulling statistics out of the usual place. I knew I should've just kept going, and not taken the bait.

My market, and several around it, went 1Ghz over 5 years ago, likely closer to 10. ~2 years ago, they saturated it, and had to go with SDV, due to insane internet speeds, currently using DOCSIS 3 w/8 DS bonded channels, likely to increase in the future, as cable modems supporting more than 8 are already in their supported list. They even still support analog (they made a promise about keeping analog TVs working, which is now biting them in the rear).

I have channels that begin at 951Mhz, and it takes finding the best of a batch of identical 1Ghz (or 1002Mhz) rated splitters, of five brands, Cox uses here, to tune them reliably. I even had to return a Roamio, because it wouldn't tune those channels, and only those channels, and the replacement did, just like the other two I have (and four Premiers did before them).

I don't know the stats, and I'm not going to make any up. Last time I was reading up on the state and direction of cable markets, it certainly seemed that networks like yours needed to get upgrading, or find somebody to buy them and get upgrading. I do realize that going 1Ghz, keeping analog, then deploying SDV (ands still keeping analog), isn't the usual approach. Usually, the analog would be the first casualty of the times. I wouldn't miss it if it was gone, and often wish it was gone (and might not have to live with SDV, as a result, at least not this soon).

If I have to do trial-and-error to find 1Ghz splitters that will let those 951Mhz channels pass, and an otherwise perfectly tuning Roamio had to be replaced to tune them, it's pretty obvious what will happen with 860Mhz splitters.

Even before my market went 1Ghz, they used 1Ghz-rated splitters. Even though the frequencies were fully within 860Mhz, the reliability took a dive when using anything rated less, and many channels would not tune reliably. For some reason, even retail store-bought 1Ghz-rated splitters caused problems. I don't know what the deal is with that. I can quote a Cox senior tech as stating "Lately we have been having trouble with all splitters". This was when they added TV channels above the cable modem downstreams (which they never used to do).

It's not like they use one brand only, or they have them made to their specs. These 1Ghz splitters are the main-players for cable markets, the ones you don't see in retail stores, but can easily look up in bulk-suppliers.

I can't call my market the majority (1Ghz, w/analog, w/SDV, w/D3HSI). I don't think yours represents some majority, as you represent it to be.

Most know better to step in the posts you leave around here. My personal favorite was the person who said "always talks bigg, but only knows little".

I'm not exactly popular to some folks, either.

I don't believe in ignore lists that only block things in one direction, so I see all the back-and-forth, until every thread you touch has been ruined, when people don't agree with what you post, and dare to say so. Notice how less and less people even try anymore?

What a colossal waste of my time...


----------



## phipsi1237 (Feb 26, 2006)

nooneuknow said:


> Since I choose not to use MoCA, I only have to have a PoE filter at the Point-of-Entry, and it simply helps insure my neighbors' MoCA signals don't get into my residence's coax.


So, for those of us that use MOCA, it is "normally" installed at the demarcation point to keep the MOCA's higher frequencies inside our home. The signals hit the filter and bounces back through the splitter. This is what it was specifically designed for according to mocablog.net.

Don't understand why you took an offensive approach to my reply.


----------



## nooneuknow (Feb 5, 2011)

phipsi1237 said:


> So, for those of us that use MOCA, it is "normally" installed at the demarcation point to keep the MOCA's higher frequencies inside our home. The signals hit the filter and bounces back through the splitter. This is what it was specifically designed for according to mocablog.net.
> 
> Don't understand why you took an offensive approach to my reply.


Yes, absolutely correct. Many don't know that a just because it's called a "filter", doesn't mean it completely absorbs the signals it is meant to contain. It just blocks them, and some bounce back, which can improve MoCA network performance and strength of signal. You obviously did some good research, if you found that info.

You can actually enhance things further by placing them in strategic places, either where MoCA signals have no need to be, and/or install them on things like Cable Modems that lack a built-in filter (most newer ones that aren't MoCA networking capable specify that they have a filter). Cisco (formerly Scientific Atlanta) STA1520 Tuning Adapters are known for having issues if MoCa signals are allowed in, which is why I got a free splitter, filter, and two cables with each TA I was issued.

Of course, if you are happy with how things are working, and nothing started malfunctioning upon introducing MoCA, that one demarcation point filter is the only one you really should need to have (more of a "best practice" requirement, than a necessity). That you know demarcation point and Point of Entry are the same, in this context, is also a sign that you did your homework.

My "offensive approach" wasn't aimed at you, personally, or directly. I have a bad habit of quoting a post, then unloading some general frustrations, without being clear that the person I quoted wasn't a target. I could have, or should have, posted my frustrations as a standalone post, or just waited until I was in a better mood to reply. Sorry about that. I had edited/revised it for too long, and finally just hit post, rather than aborting.

In hindsight, it's not like as if griping about the excessive number of identical subject-matter threads, would have done any good. If the people who are new to MoCA and don't get the concepts actually read existing threads, they'd have no need to make new ones. Right? 

I guess to avoid confusion, I'll specify that my frustration involving another post, by another person, was genuine, and directed where it belonged.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nooneuknow said:


> You are pulling statistics out of the usual place. I knew I should've just kept going, and not taken the bait.


Like what? I'm just using the facts.



> My market, and several around it, went 1Ghz over 5 years ago, likely closer to 10. ~2 years ago, they saturated it, and had to go with SDV, due to insane internet speeds, currently using DOCSIS 3 w/8 DS bonded channels, likely to increase in the future, as cable modems supporting more than 8 are already in their supported list. They even still support analog (they made a promise about keeping analog TVs working, which is now biting them in the rear).


Ok, so in your market, you have a 1ghz plant. There are very few 1ghz plants nationwide, so making a statement that 860mhz splitters won't work with a modern, all-digital cable system is factually wrong in most places. Even the most advanced Comcast systems top out at 860mhz. There might be a 1ghz system on Comcast somewhere, but like all the cable providers nationwide, systems above 860mhz are a tiny minority. So for that tiny minority, then 860mhz splitters are a total crapshoot, but for everyone else, including many all-digital, high-bandwidth systems, 860mhz splitters are just fine.

So they didn't saturate, they just haven't gotten with the times. Comcast finally killed analog a couple of years ago, if they still had analog, we'd be lucky to have 20 HD channels and 10mbps internet.

It sucks that you're on a system with SDV, but you get what you get. I'm on a 650mhz system, not an 860mhz system, so we're missing some channels, including ESPNU HD and Al Jazeera America. The 860mhz systems have those, as they have stuff running up to about 750mhz, with the rest empty at this point. Luckily, Comcast made the right choice and killed analog, instead of using SDV. Unfortunately, they won't do MPEG-4, and they won't finish their 860mhz upgrades, so for now, we're maxed out and stuck with a limited channel lineup compared to other systems.



> I have channels that begin at 951Mhz, and it takes finding the best of a batch of identical 1Ghz (or 1002Mhz) rated splitters, of five brands, Cox uses here, to tune them reliably. I even had to return a Roamio, because it wouldn't tune those channels, and only those channels, and the replacement did, just like the other two I have (and four Premiers did before them).


I wouldn't doubt it. It's tough operating up that high. Even when Comcast went from 650mhz to 860mhz (channels up to about 750mhz), some of the new HDs that were in the 650-750mhz range were really unreliable, so we had to tweak and few things to get the signal levels up.



> I don't know the stats, and I'm not going to make any up. Last time I was reading up on the state and direction of cable markets, it certainly seemed that networks like yours needed to get upgrading, or find somebody to buy them and get upgrading. I do realize that going 1Ghz, keeping analog, then deploying SDV (ands still keeping analog), isn't the usual approach. Usually, the analog would be the first casualty of the times. I wouldn't miss it if it was gone, and often wish it was gone (and might not have to live with SDV, as a result, at least not this soon).


We need an 860mhz upgrade, although they could get the same results, at least for a while, by going to MPEG-4. They went all-digital, which is the first and most basic step, then some combination of system upgrades and MPEG-4 are the next steps. Ideally, they will go to MPEG-4 and upgrade everything to 860mhz, which would allow them to run around 200 HDs. SDV is a horrible kludge.



> If I have to do trial-and-error to find 1Ghz splitters that will let those 951Mhz channels pass, and an otherwise perfectly tuning Roamio had to be replaced to tune them, it's pretty obvious what will happen with 860Mhz splitters.
> 
> Even before my market went 1Ghz, they used 1Ghz-rated splitters. Even though the frequencies were fully within 860Mhz, the reliability took a dive when using anything rated less, and many channels would not tune reliably. For some reason, even retail store-bought 1Ghz-rated splitters caused problems. I don't know what the deal is with that. I can quote a Cox senior tech as stating "Lately we have been having trouble with all splitters". This was when they added TV channels above the cable modem downstreams (which they never used to do).


Probably because they knew 1ghz was on the horizon. I don't think Comcast ever wants to go above 860mhz. Even that is tough, and may be why they aren't actually running anything above 750mhz.

But again, that's an oddball situation, and on the vast majority of cable systems nationwide that are between 650 and 860mhz, 860mhz splitters will work just fine, and will pass MoCA signals at higher frequencies. The dB losses don't really matter much when you're at the high power levels MoCA operates at.



> It's not like they use one brand only, or they have them made to their specs. These 1Ghz splitters are the main-players for cable markets, the ones you don't see in retail stores, but can easily look up in bulk-suppliers.
> 
> I can't call my market the majority (1Ghz, w/analog, w/SDV, w/D3HSI). I don't think yours represents some majority, as you represent it to be.


Around 750mhz is the typical. Many providers are running 750mhz systems, or 750mhz systems overdriven to 770mhz, and most of Comcast's systems top out at 750mhz, whether they were designed for 750mhz or 860mhz.


----------



## nooneuknow (Feb 5, 2011)

Bigg said:


> Like what? I'm just using the facts.
> 
> Ok, so in your market, you have a 1ghz plant. There are very few 1ghz plants nationwide, so making a statement that 860mhz splitters won't work with a modern, all-digital cable system is factually wrong in most places. Even the most advanced Comcast systems top out at 860mhz. There might be a 1ghz system on Comcast somewhere, but like all the cable providers nationwide, systems above 860mhz are a tiny minority. So for that tiny minority, then 860mhz splitters are a total crapshoot, but for everyone else, including many all-digital, high-bandwidth systems, 860mhz splitters are just fine.
> 
> ...


You make some good points, and have made a few in the other posts. I do not 100% agree with everything. But, we have gone Off-Topic now, and I'd rather just bow-out than do endless point-counterpoint. We are both on two very different cable networks (polar opposites), and it's much like comparing apples to bowling balls. To continue on discussing what's appropriate, necessary, and what may work just fine for you, and what may work just fine for me, and either one of us trying to say what's best for (or will work with) the majority, is a bad idea, IMO.

Perhaps if you hadn't started the first post this started with, with "BS", while quoting a knowledgeable member, whom I respect, I would have not even replied.

Take away the claiming "BS" approach that you started with, and you were simply saying that MoCA does not require 1Ghz rated splitters, as lessd said was a requirement. Since MoCA is designed to punch through even 1Ghz splitters to use frequencies higher than 1Ghz, and can even punch all the way to another residence (if neither has a PoE filter at the demarcation point), it is logical that it could punch through 860Mhz ones. I figure the performance may not be all of what it could be, in that scenario, as well as having a reduced range, with every < 1Ghz splitter it has to pass through. I'd still recommend that you acquire a PoE filter, and install it at the demarcation point (PoE), as you are leaving open the possibility that if a neighbor installs/activates a MoCA network, and doesn't use a PoE filter, you could begin having problems, and forget about the lack of a PoE filter being a potential reason why.

It's also a security measure, as well as also being "neighbor friendly", which the latter I can easily see many saying "Who cares, I hate my neighbors".

So, this post at least finds it's way back to being more on-topic, but I would rather not continue the discussion. I do appreciate that you seem to have exercised some restraint, in this last post, which was unexpected.


----------



## tivoboy (Jan 14, 2002)

would this filter work for POE?

There are just so many varieties, are they really all the same?

http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?p=WIPLOCK101&ss=70732


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nooneuknow said:


> You make some good points, and have made a few in the other posts. I do not 100% agree with everything. But, we have gone Off-Topic now, and I'd rather just bow-out than do endless point-counterpoint. We are both on two very different cable networks (polar opposites), and it's much like comparing apples to bowling balls. To continue on discussing what's appropriate, necessary, and what may work just fine for you, and what may work just fine for me, and either one of us trying to say what's best for (or will work with) the majority, is a bad idea, IMO.
> 
> Perhaps if you hadn't started the first post this started with, with "BS", while quoting a knowledgeable member, whom I respect, I would have not even replied.
> 
> ...


The bottom line is that your system is an oddball system, and it is, in fact, extremely sensitive to RF performance, and splitters are a major factor in that, so you're, rightfully so, very sensitive to splitter quality and ratings. However, most systems simply don't have that sensitivity, and that is a factor as to why cable systems aren't going above 750mhz or 860mhz. On a 650mhz system like I have, I just don't have to be. I just find whatever is in the basement or in a drawer somewhere and stack splitters up and do all sorts of other horrible things, and it works fine. Most systems, in reality, are in between those two extremes.

MoCA is far more resilient than the RF from the cable company, as the RF power levels are just that much higher. It's something like 50dB, so it will basically blast through anything other than a filter.


----------



## nooneuknow (Feb 5, 2011)

Bigg said:


> The bottom line is that your system is an oddball system, and it is, in fact, extremely sensitive to RF performance, and splitters are a major factor in that, so you're, rightfully so, very sensitive to splitter quality and ratings. However, most systems simply don't have that sensitivity, and that is a factor as to why cable systems aren't going above 750mhz or 860mhz. On a 650mhz system like I have, I just don't have to be. I just find whatever is in the basement or in a drawer somewhere and stack splitters up and do all sorts of other horrible things, and it works fine. Most systems, in reality, are in between those two extremes.
> 
> MoCA is far more resilient than the RF from the cable company, as the RF power levels are just that much higher. It's something like 50dB, so it will basically blast through anything other than a filter.


Now that the specifics of your cable network have been fully and thoroughly disclosed, as well as most of mine, I can agree with non BS-calling part of the initial post that started this conversation.

Would I ever recommend a <1Ghz rated splitter to anybody, without knowing details they might not even know? Still, no. I'd err on the side of caution. If somebody asked if <1Ghz might work (in a pinch, temporarily, etc), without knowing cable network specifics, I'd say it depends on many factors, and it's just easier (although often at higher cost) to get 1Ghz ones, if they don't know their cable network specifics.

It would be logical to figure that the larger the MoCA network, the larger the house, the longer the coax runs (as well as age/quality/ratings of the coax), an increased number of splitters, and many other factors, could logically make your 860Mhz splitters an issue. The 1Ghz ones *should* marginally produce a better level of signal, SNR, and isolation, if used on a <1Ghz cable network. Your own statements would back this up, theoretically speaking.

Yes, my cable network may be one of very few like it, if there even are any identical to it (Fully-used 1Ghz, w/analog, w/SDV, with DOCSIS 2 & 3 supported). It is an oddball one, very temperamental, and very sensitive to the point of what is "in-spec" can fail to work, due to loose manufacturing tolerances.

Your cable network is over-due for an upgrade, to even use the 860Mhz rating of your splitters. It's where my network was at ~12 years ago (minus analog, which I think you said you no longer have) and mine was using 1Ghz splitters at that time (I swear on that). At the time, finding 1Ghz splitters in retail stores was absurdly cost-prohibitive (when you even could find them), but that was ~12 years ago.

So, yes, my cable network is an oddball. Yes, MoCA is designed to power-through anything except a PoE filter. Yes, it can power-through <1Ghz splitters (to a point). I still think you have a situation where you lucked-out that it all works satisfactorily for you. In the end, you were right, in your original post, since you stated <1Ghz splitters work for you. Like I said initially, I just felt your post could give a false sense of security to some, and leave some wondering why their MoCA network didn't work, or was underperforming/unstable/unreliable. Actually, the more likely scenario could end up being that their MoCA network might work fine, but their Cable TV and/or cable modem reliability could, technically, go south (because of the sheer strength of MoCA signals, pushing past places where the Cable Network signals may not have the strength to do so. MoCA can get past port-to-port isolation, in 1Ghz splitters, which generally have a very high isolation rating (unlike older splitters, which tended to have much less isolation regardless of upper frequency rating).

I'll even take back what I said about your splitters being unacceptable, and what I said about them being out-of-spec (in situations like yours, now that I know your situation).

I think this is pretty much wrapped-up.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nooneuknow said:


> Now that the specifics of your cable network have been fully and thoroughly disclosed, as well as most of mine, I can agree with non BS-calling part of the initial post that started this conversation.
> 
> Would I ever recommend a <1Ghz rated splitter to anybody, without knowing details they might not even know? Still, no. I'd err on the side of caution. If somebody asked if <1Ghz might work (in a pinch, temporarily, etc), without knowing cable network specifics, I'd say it depends on many factors, and it's just easier (although often at higher cost) to get 1Ghz ones, if they don't know their cable network specifics.
> 
> ...


The original post, which wasn't yours, said that you must have 1ghz splitters for MoCA to work. I called BS on that, because it is factually wrong.

Today, it's a good idea to use all 2ghz splitters and 3ghz cabling, but if someone has some 860mhz splitters laying around, no harm in using them unless there are problems.

Yeah, I wish we would get the 860mhz rebuild, although they could do the same thing with MPEG-4. The best would be MPEG-4 AND 860mhz. Luckily, Comcast doesn't use SDV.

Yeah, MoCA is far more resilient than the cable signals, so anything that works with the cable signals should work fine with MoCA, unless there specifically is a filter in the middle somewhere.


----------



## nooneuknow (Feb 5, 2011)

Bigg said:


> The original post, which wasn't yours, said that you must have 1ghz splitters for MoCA to work. I called BS on that, because it is factually wrong.
> 
> Today, it's a good idea to use all 2ghz splitters and 3ghz cabling, but if someone has some 860mhz splitters laying around, no harm in using them unless there are problems.
> 
> ...


I agree.

What I meant when I said "initial post that started this conversation", was the first/initial post *of yours* I quoted, which started *our* conversation, *not* a reference to Original Post or, post #1.

Thanks for being a part in turning things around in our conversation. I have more respect for you after this conversation.

Bonus: We added some details that may actually help other people, when the dust was settling.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nooneuknow said:


> I agree.
> 
> What I meant when I said "initial post that started this conversation", was the first/initial post *of yours* I quoted, which started *our* conversation, *not* a reference to Original Post or, post #1.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure which post that was, but at this point, it doesn't really matter. That conversation got too long to keep track of...

Thanks.

Yeah, there's some useful intformation somewhere in there, if anyone can wade through all the posts.


----------

