Using Active and Passive Baluns together

[CraigVM62 0]

In the past I have had decent results with Passive baluns, but no runs exceeded 450 feet. I now have a project where distances may be in the 500 to 600 foot range. I am thinking that I should go ahead and utilize Active Baluns. Some of the Active I saw being sold "via the web" state they can be used in conjunction with a passive balun on the opposing end. It looks like they suggest the active balun be at the Monitor / DVR end. I would have guessed you would have wanted the Active Balun at the camera end.

Wondering what experience and thoughts you may have on this.

 

Thanks

[InNorthernWeTrust 0]

Not sure of the technical reasoning behind it, it always seemed backwards to me as well. However Passive(camera) to Active(headend) is indeed the correct way to do it. It will dramatically increase your distance.

 

However the vast majority of video baluns can be used passive to passive at 750ft with no to minimal degradation of video quality. 500-600ft should not need an active receiver.

[InNorthernWeTrust 0]

http://www.vigitron.com/application6.htm

 

application diagram for passive to active.

[CollinR 0]

Your logic is correct an active reciever is not as effective as an active transmitter or a midspan active transciever.

 

Gargage in garbage out rule effects just about everything.

 

I have gone farther then you are talking about with no name passive baluns and a couple few splices in the middle for good measure.

[InNorthernWeTrust 0]

Your logic is correct an active reciever is not as effective as an active transmitter or a midspan active transciever.

 

Gargage in garbage out rule effects just about everything.

 

I have gone farther then you are talking about with no name passive baluns and a couple few splices in the middle for good measure.

 

Just to clarify, are you stating that a active TX to passive RX solution will work better than the reverse? Because every manufacturer of UTP equipment I have seen suggests the following configurations.

 

passive tx to passive rx

passive tx to active rx

active tx to active rx

[CollinR 0]

Think about it the active reciever has no control over anything that occured before it's UTP connection. The reason it's marketed as it is, is just marketing. You don't put amplifers at your speakers in home theater world, you amplify near the source. Same goes for everything else if the source is screwy the end result will be screwy. The greater the distance between the source and the conditioner/amplifier the greater the odds of it getting screwy.

[survtech 0]

Although there are some advantages to using active transmitters rather than active receivers for hybrid needs, there are also some huge disadvantages. Two key considerations for this are space and power. Active units, either receivers or transmitters, require much more physical space than passive. They also require a power source. Passive units require no power and far less physical space.

 

In many installations, the space required for active transmitters is just not there without adding a separate enclosure. Also, the power requirements for active transmitters can require beefing up power supplies and running either heavier power cable or separate cables for the camera and the active transmitter.

 

That is why it is usually more cost effective to put the active unit at the receive end, where power is usually easily available and space is far less of a problem. Since passive-active is usually capable of sending signals up to 2000', active transmitters only become necessary for greater distances; up to 4000'.

[rory 0]

i would use active for anything over 150'

[survtech 0]

So you have said .

 

I have used passive-passive up to nearly 1000 ft. with no major problems except a slight color "fringing" on bright white objects. But even I recommend active for runs longer than 750 ft.

[survtech 0]

Think about it the active reciever has no control over anything that occured before it's UTP connection. The reason it's marketed as it is, is just marketing. You don't put amplifers at your speakers in home theater world, you amplify near the source. Same goes for everything else if the source is screwy the end result will be screwy. The greater the distance between the source and the conditioner/amplifier the greater the odds of it getting screwy.

One thing you didn't mention is that active anything - tx or rx - often requires calibration to supply the correct signal level to the monitoring / recording equipment. Adjusting that level is a Royal PITA on active receivers and is best done with an oscilloscope or a high-quality meter.

 

The adjustments become far more complex if you are adjusting the transmitter, since the measuring equipment has to be located at the receiving end.

 

Some active receivers have AGC and can automatically compensate for cable length and condition. That is impossible with active transmitters since they have no way of measuring the signal at the other end.

[rory 0]

So you have said .

 

I have used passive-passive up to nearly 1000 ft. with no major problems except a slight color "fringing" on bright white objects. But even I recommend active for runs longer than 750 ft.

 

Yep, I never lost video, just had that bright object issue.

I dont have the $$ to test out various other baluns though, so I would just spend the extra couple $ and get the active one time, as then you also get Ground Loop Isolation and Interference Rejection, at least with NVT products; dont think the passive units have that.

[CCTV_Suppliers 0]

Yep, I never lost video, just had that bright object issue.

I dont have the $$ to test out various other baluns though, so I would just spend the extra couple $ and get the active one time, as then you also get Ground Loop Isolation and Interference Rejection, at least with NVT products; dont think the passive units have that.

 

Rory, the passive baluns come with or without surge protectors and in some cases, manufacturers like to charge higher price with baluns with surge protectors...

 

I am not sure breaking 1,000' CAT5E run using a passive baluns is so sticky... for many at least...

 

NVT states that their passive baluns are good up to 750'... most of everyone follow the same distance restriction.. However...

 

I stated before in different posts and I will state again that there is at least one manufacturer that we used quite of few years that makes passive baluns that work perfectly over 1,000' without any of the above mishaps on video quality...

 

The company is called http://videobaluns.com/ and the make only (4) products - three of which are passive baluns and one is passive 16 channel video hub...

 

After going through close over 10K+ of this company's baluns, we have enough evidence and proof that these baluns surpass the industry specific balun specs.. and in some cases, we were able to run close to 2,000' and no visible change in the picture quality... You have to make sure to use quality CAT5E cable of course, but even then, the pricing between cheap cable and more expensive cable is marginal...

 

Now, what makes this company's products any better??? They do take their design very seriously and add top notch components that always make the difference... Also, the surge protectors are inclusive with each balun, thus no cost difference at all... and compare that with NVT and others...

 

Pricing is very reasonable.. averaging around $30.00 per pair of these baluns and they work exceptionally good.. very easy to install and with no tools requirements...

 

I will say that anything over 2,000' distance or project specific requirements, we do mix both passive and active baluns.. and they work very well side by side.. However, to undermine how passive baluns work vs. opinions based on what NVT and others interject, all it does is that it creates opportunities for such companies to sell more of their more expensive solutions, including active baluns...

 

If you need more info, please let me know.

[CCTV_Suppliers 0]

So you have said .

 

I have used passive-passive up to nearly 1000 ft. with no major problems except a slight color "fringing" on bright white objects. But even I recommend active for runs longer than 750 ft.

 

Survtech, who is the maker and the model number of the baluns that you use and what is the average cost you paid for pair of such baluns??

 

Just curious what people use mainly.. and is the cost of such baluns is the driving force or is it something else?

 

We all understand limitations of such technology and stick with what works for us.. but what makes our days go by even faster is when you have a chance to use some new gadget that surpasses limitations on what currently is on hand.. and my recommendation is to try what http://videobaluns.com/ produce... If you want, I can send you samples for your own test and evaluation... and let us know what you think.

 

Let me know and thanks.

[rory 0]

 

Rory, the passive baluns come with or without surge protectors and in some cases, manufacturers like to charge higher price with baluns with surge protectors...

 

Never mentioned Surge Protection - Ground Loop Isolation and Interference Rejection.

 

Surge Protection doesnt work in the Bahamas, has to be Voltage Regulation. We got some of that 3rd world Government Electricity Monopoly going on here.

 

Out of 2 name brand baluns I used the image quality was bad over 150'.

Never said it did not give a video signal over that amount, just the quality was bad, or at least degraded

Edited February 19, 2008 by Guest

[survtech 0]

We are running A-B tests between the videobaluns.com BL3265 passive baluns versus GVI and Vigitron passive baluns and Pelco TW3001AR active receivers for long runs (1000' plus) from a parking structure. We can not see any difference in performance between the three passive baluns. And neither works as well in that application as the Pelco active receivers.

 

This is with cameras with containing internal baluns (Pelco Spectra IV PTZ's with their own built-in balun and Ganz ZCD-2550NHAT and ZCDN-3039NHAT, which contain NVT passive baluns).

 

We typically pay $25 to $30 each for passive baluns.

 

Also, I don't see how any balun can contain useful surge protection. In order to provide that function, there should be a direct path to ground and I have not seen a balun with an attachment point for #8 ground wire. Just incorporating an MOV or other protection circuit across the 2 legs of the twisted-pair serves little purpose since lightning will travel down both wires of a pair with devastating effect.

[CCTV_Suppliers 0]

We are running A-B tests between the videobaluns.com BL3265 passive baluns versus GVI and Vigitron passive baluns and Pelco TW3001AR active receivers for long runs (1000' plus) from a parking structure. We can not see any difference in performance between the three passive baluns. And neither works as well in that application as the Pelco active receivers.

 

We typically pay $25 to $30 each for passive baluns.

 

 

Great... However, if your are paying the above price, you are paying too much..

 

As long as you are not comparing these passive baluns performance with any, including Pelco version, then the results are exactly what we stipulated.

 

I can tell you that once you buy CAT5E cable with continuous 1,500 or close to 2,000', then you will see the obvious differences...

 

From my perspective, any CAT5E wire that needs reaching more than 1,500' will require active baluns, as such project always have multiple runs exceeding more than 2,000'...

[rory 0]

We are running A-B tests between the videobaluns.com BL3265 passive baluns versus GVI and Vigitron passive baluns and Pelco TW3001AR active receivers for long runs (1000' plus) from a parking structure. We can not see any difference in performance between the three passive baluns. And neither works as well in that application as the Pelco active receivers.

 

We typically pay $25 to $30 each for passive baluns.

 

 

Great... However, if your are paying the above price, you are paying too much..

 

thats cheap for retail

[survtech 0]

As long as you are not comparing these passive baluns performance with any, including Pelco version, then the results are exactly what we stipulated.

I thought you said they performed better for long cable runs?

 

I can tell you that once you buy CAT5E cable with continuous 1,500 or close to 2,000', then you will see the obvious differences...

??? I don't understand what you are saying ???

 

We are using high-quality CAT-5E. The runs to the parking structure are at least 1000' and the structure is 500' long so we have some runs that are probably longer than 1500'.

 

I have found a 4th balun brand among our miscellaneous parts so I will do a side-by-side comparison, including measurements taken with an o'scope and a Camera Master and will post the results here.

 

By the way, I just did a comparison between a Videobaluns Unlimited BL3265 balun and a GVI VB59SP balun and they are exactly the same. Not just the outside case but the internal guts as well:

* The same circuit board.

* The same coil/choke.

* The same diode or cap or whatever part is mounted vertically behind the BNC.

* The same IDC connector for the twisted-pair.

* The same color wires (red & green) connecting the BNC connector to the PC Board and routed exactly the same way.

* The same resistances between connectors.

* Even the same UL listing.

[CCTV_Suppliers 0]

Performance is better in a longer run using these PASSIVE baluns that I used in so many years... I know you misread what I said about Pelco - If you read your own words, you were referring to Pelco ACTIVE baluns and not the passive baluns... and that is why my statement read "

 

As long as you are not comparing these passive baluns performance with any, including Pelco version, then the results are exactly what we stipulated.

 

I am sure you have access for the best cables, but most do not... Most use the cheapest CAT5E available... With our tests and going with cheaper ones, we were not able to get decent picture quality in more than 800' vs. 1,500'+ easy stretch for cables made by West Penn and similar caliber manufacturers.

 

Well, I am not sure who copied who's design and obviously that is what you are referring to... I never used GVI, so I am not going to make any comments. However, if the design is the same, is GVI using the same identical components and are you able to stretch such cables more than 1,000', lets say 1,500' in length or more? By performing stress test, you can tell the difference, if any... If they are identical, then I am sure you will choose the cheaper of both

 

Is the pricing from GVI around $30.00 per PAIR of these baluns, less or more??

[rory 0]

maybe it was the cat5 cable I used then?

Cable was just whatever blue cat5 cable they had at the local electrical store, same stuff we use for networking.

 

Is that $30 retail, cause if it is (and should be wink wink) then darn that is cheap

[CCTV_Suppliers 0]

maybe it was the cat5 cable I used then?

Cable was just whatever blue cat5 cable they had at the local electrical store, same stuff we use for networking.

 

Is that $30 retail, cause if it is (and should be wink wink) then darn that is cheap

 

Rory, I can tell you stories about bad or poor quality cables...

 

In order to achieve over 1,000'+ distances, baluns alone will not do the trick, rather quality of the cable... I understand that if we shift our focus on active baluns, some of this cheaper cables could perform, but will still short change the distance of such cable.

 

It is very possible that your cable could have been the cause... or type of baluns you used... or combination of both.

 

We have conclusively done many tests with various manufacturer cables and baluns and we end up selecting the ones that gave us the maximum return, rather a cheap solution that may work for lower distance apps... This way we were able to reduce overall costs to our end users for their installs... passing major savings in cable and labor usage...

[rory 0]

Yeap but the whole idea is to use existing cable, at least in many cases ..

[survtech 0]

No, I was comparing a Video Baluns Unlimited passive balun to GVI, Vigitron and an old VideoEase passive balun and to Pelco active receivers. The comparisons are to cable lengths that are both within and outside of distances you claim the VBU baluns will handle.

 

Performance is better in a longer run using these PASSIVE baluns that I used in so many years... I know you misread what I said about Pelco - If you read your own words, you were referring to Pelco ACTIVE baluns and not the passive baluns... and that is why my statement read "

 

As long as you are not comparing these passive baluns performance with any, including Pelco version, then the results are exactly what we stipulated.

 

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 6:36 pm

 

"After going through close over 10K+ of this company's baluns, we have enough evidence and proof that these baluns surpass the industry specific balun specs.. and in some cases, we were able to run close to 2,000' and no visible change in the picture quality... You have to make sure to use quality CAT5E cable of course, but even then, the pricing between cheap cable and more expensive cable is marginal...

 

Now, what makes this company's products any better??? They do take their design very seriously and add top notch components that always make the difference... Also, the surge protectors are inclusive with each balun, thus no cost difference at all... and compare that with NVT and others..."

[CCTV_Suppliers 0]

Survtech, is this mean that we are cool about this subject?

 

Or should we take it to the next level? You already know what I think of anything Pelco, so I will not comment on them or on any of their products, regardless that Pelco is owned by someone else now. We tested Pelco's passive baluns before against VU's baluns and we conclusively (without any bias) seen that VU provided better performance and much more cost effective price.

 

As I stated before, I am not familiar with GVI and I can not make any comments, regardless if their design is identical with VU or not... We did however tested Vigitron and several others, including NVT and even American Fibertek and the final conclusion was that performance was better overall and yet VU provided much more cost effective price for pair of baluns ($30.00 per pair of baluns and that is a price is difficult to match comparatively speaking).

 

We even tested baluns from China ranging price of $3.00 to $10.00 and they all were junk and not worth the money. These type of baluns were probably good for short distances, less than 500', but not useful for our apps.

 

You have a very unique uses for such technology gadgets and I respect your opinion on your findings. You yourself stated that VU baluns were as good as the other manufacturer offerings. If you do not believe my statements on cable lengths, then that is fine too.. I am not here to impress anyone, rather passing real data and useful information and it is up to you to decide if you want to take it or not.

 

Video baluns technology came along and evolved very well in the past at least 10 years and it is here to stay. By being positive above VU is no way that I am trying to endorse their products - we did have some batch of baluns that were not up to snuff and the company replaced them without any problems at all.... However... unless someone can give me real time data that will challenge our information, I will stand firm on my assessment! After all, we are using these baluns everyday and no problems.

[survtech 0]

What does this discussion have to do with your dislike of Pelco? Unless you want to stretch the point to say that the passive device in the Spectra IV is a problem, then we still have the point that we are also testing the baluns on receive only with the transmitter being the NVT balun built into the Ganz ZCD domes. It would be like me stating that I hate AD in a conversation about sports cars. And believe me I dislike AD, but I wouldn't normally bring that into this discussion.

 

Still, in a previous discussion about baluns, I stated that the VBU balun looked exactly like the GVI on the outside and someone stated that many balun manufacturers use the same case. Apparently, at least two also use the same guts. You stressed the point that VBU makes only baluns and that theirs are unique. Obviously, that is not the case.

 

I'll concede the point that at $30 a pair, if they do perform as well as the GVI's, they are an excellent bargain.