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


??? 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.

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 :D

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

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 :D

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

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... :D

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

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.

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

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.

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.

Ok, so someone send me some Pelco and AD PTZs, some Baluns, Cat5 (that expensive stuff now), and oh, well, okay a couple DVRs too .. then I will test it in a Bahamian scenario for yah :lol: :lol:

(oh yeah, need to pay Customs Duty too cause they will eat me alive!!)

On its way Rory :D May be I will send you Pelco and Survtech will send you AD :idea:

Survtech, your misinterpreting what this post is about and rather focusing on my dislike of a company?... I do not care which company you use and whose products you like... that isn't the point of this post... rather facts pertinent to video baluns...

If you want to get technical, then lets do that... Lets bring top guns in this process and lets go into the design and results available using spectrum analyzers, type of signal generators used and validation of data... and lets bring both manufacturers in this process for them to validate their claims... I know that I can bring VU in this discussion (by the way, they already are a member) and you can bring GVI and let them battle... and then we can compare our notes based on the facts... Is this what you want?

Your insinuation that I am pro-AD is also totally inaccurate... If you really have to know, my preference always have been and always will be Bosch... and I mean everything Bosch. Nothing out there can come close to the complete selection of solutions available from Bosch... and I do not think anyone, including your Pelco, is capable doing what Bosch has to offer.

If the purpose of this post is video baluns, then lets stay with video baluns.. If I do not wish to comment on a product from a manufacturer, you can interpret it whatever you want - like or dislike of a company.

May be we should have a separate post just for this topic alone, what do you think? May be we can lay down our cards and show the world what these companies are made of and who actually is doing a good job and who is just screwing people. This way we can clarify and probably bring forward information that is not very well known in this industry... If you do want this post to appear, then you and I will have yet another problem - you are an end user, we are integrators and distributors... so chances are very good that our opinions will clash again and again, as you are exposed only on what manufacturers want you to see... In our case, nothing will pass by us without scrutiny of any product they offer and we can and will stop them on their tracks, if they are out of line or state facts that may not be true... and trust me, I have caught too many pre-mediated incidents in my 29 years in this industry from various manufacturers, including your Pelco, that was headed to screw people...

Hey, you started the Pelco thing, not me. :roll: And all I said was that I dislike AD, no inferrence about your feelings about them was either stated or implied.

I would prefer to limit the thread to discussions of baluns and active devices.

Lets do that... :D

SEE BELOW!

You are fast man...

I guess if all of them fall in same performance category, then the only question is whose pricing is the best??

Can you share this info? I know the pricing for VU is $30.00 for PAIR of their baluns...

The Vigitron VB1001M cost us $xx.xx each. The GVI VB-59 and VideoEase cost $xx.xx each. I don't have pricing on the VBU baluns yet because they were "loaners". I'll post their price when received from our distributor.

Im not picky, Pelco or AD, heck, even Everfocus. I dont mind :D

VU pricing that I can get for you is $30.00 for PAIR - $15.00 each!

[quote:4e0789ed68="CCTV_Suppliers"]

VU pricing that I can get for you is $30.00 for PAIR - $15.00 each!

Isn't that a moderator's job :shock:?

"rory


Moderator & Founding Member


Posts: 13526
Joined: 10 Nov 2003
Location: Bahamas"

[quote:6caf4a5055="survtech"]
Isn't that a moderator's job :shock:?

"rory


Moderator & Founding Member


Posts: 13526
Joined: 10 Nov 2003
Location: Bahamas"

Rory, I am not welcome in Dealers section remember? :D

ok so it seems we are probably talking retail prices anyway so yall just ignore me yah hear .. :D

(contact the admin he might let you guys in :D )

WOW!!! :o :shock: :(

That is what I said too...

Here are the first results of our tests of passive baluns:


Source: Ganz ZC-DN3039NHAT with built-in NVT passive balun.

Cable Length: Approximately 1,500 ft. total CAT-5E consisting of:
** Camera to Punchdown - Approx. 270 ft. West Penn CC2418 (Siamese 2-pair CAT-5E plus 18/2 power)
** Punchdown to Punchdown - Approx. 1,200 ft. Berk-Tek 25-pair Cat-5E Trunk Cable
** Punchdown to DVR/Monitor - Approx. 30 ft. ARM Electronics CAT5E1G (Cat-5E 4-pair)

Measuring Device: FM Systems CM-1 Camera Master

Vigitron VB1001M
Sync level 023 IRE
Luminance 070 IRE
Composite 093 IRE
Color Burst 001 IRE

VideoEase
Sync level 023 IRE
Luminance 069 IRE
Composite 092 IRE
Color Burst 001 IRE

Video Baluns Unlimited BL3265
Sync level 023 IRE
Luminance 070 IRE
Composite 093 IRE
Color Burst 001 IRE

GVI VB59SP
Sync level 023 IRE
Luminance 069 IRE
Composite 093 IRE
Color Burst 001 IRE

For reference, here is the data from the same camera using a Pelco TW3004AR active receiver:
Sync level 039 IRE
Luminance 147 IRE
Composite 187 IRE
Color Burst 027 IRE

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are the second results of our tests of passive baluns:


Source: Ganz ZC-DN3039NHAT with built-in NVT passive balun.

Cable Length: Approximately 1,000 ft. total CAT-5E consisting of:
** Camera to Punchdown - Approx. 70 ft. West Penn CC2418 (Siamese 2-pair CAT-5E plus 18/2 power)
** Punchdown to Punchdown - Approx. 900 ft. Berk-Tek 25-pair Cat-5E Trunk Cable
** Punchdown to DVR/Monitor - Approx. 30 ft. ARM Electronics CAT5E1G (Cat-5E 4-pair)

Measuring Device: FM Systems CM-1 Camera Master

Vigitron VB1001M
Sync level 026 IRE
Luminance 088 IRE
Composite 115 IRE
Color Burst 007 IRE

VideoEase
Sync level 026 IRE
Luminance 087 IRE
Composite 115 IRE
Color Burst 007 IRE

Video Baluns Unlimited BL3265
Sync level 026 IRE
Luminance 088 IRE
Composite 115 IRE
Color Burst 007 IRE

GVI VB59SP
Sync level 027 IRE
Luminance 088 IRE
Composite 115 IRE
Color Burst 007 IRE

For reference, here is the data from the same camera using a Pelco TW3004AR active receiver:
Sync level 036 IRE
Luminance 150 IRE
Composite 187 IRE
Color Burst 024 IRE

Notes:
As you may have surmised, there are literally no measurable differences between the four baluns, since +/- 001IRE is basically the meter's resolution limits. Also, the picture on a high resolution JVC 21" color monitor shows no discernible differences between the four passive devices.

On another note:
On the first test at 1,500 ft., there were very obvious defects in the passive-passive video quality as compared to the passive-active. The picture was "washed out" and high brightness areas showed color fringing (rainbows of color) in them. The signal was strong enough to record a useable picture on our DVR system (Honeywell Enterprise).

On the second test at 1,000 ft., the defects were far more subtle. The color fringing nearly disappeared; the washed out contrast improved immensely and the recorded video was nearly perfect.

Conclusions:
* There are no practical differences between the baluns listed and likely few differences in any reasonably well-made passive baluns.
* Since the picture quality at 1,000 ft. was very good, I would say that the generally accepted limit of 750 ft. passive-passive is both valid and practical and at 500 ft. (the longest run inside the casino) it is comparable to RG-59 coax.
* Since we did not test using other cable types, our findings only apply to the above listed cable types.
* We have also used the following CAT-5E cables inside the casino with similar results:
** Arrow Wire 09LR-350EA4-6 CAT-5E 4-pair
** Arrow Wire 09-E5EA25-8 Cat-5E 25-pair

Survtech, I think you bottleneck is the NVT passive balun that came with CBC minidome... Even though this model from CBC is been obsolete, the data is still there...

Will you be able to use the pairs of each model of baluns for the entire test purposes, instead of mixing them with NVT at the minidome side and different balun from another manufacturer at the termination side?

Your numbers are very impressive. Even when all come close to what you have observed, then the only question that you need to ask of course is the cost per pair of such hardware...

Unfortunately, that may not be possible. Although we do have multiple quantities of each balun in stock, the Ganz ZCD series don't have space to install an external balun and the way they are mounted (pendant) makes it very difficult to put a balun outside the dome. Plus they are in quite heavily-travelled areas of our parking structure. Maybe we could just perform the experiment on our bench with a 1000 ft. box of CAT-5E. I'll try it when we have the time.

I have been thinking about measuring the cameras directly at the source as a yardstick. I also believe we can adapt one of the NVT transmitters to be a receiver (they are a block module on a PC Board). We bought a batch with the baluns, used some with twisted-pair and removed the baluns from the ones we used with coax. Then we bought a bunch without baluns and installed the baluns in them when needed.

We still have quite a few balun boards. We could test them as receivers to see if they exhibit different attenuations from the other 4. If they do, we can assume that the NVT transmitters are limiting the signal. If they don't, it is likely, but not certain, that they are not.

Perhaps I should do this whole thing in a separate thread. Moderator / Admin - are you listening?

My guess is that the NVT's will show almost exactly the same characteristics as the rest of them. Considering the relatively wide range of baluns in the test (the VideoEase baluns are at least 6 years old), I strongly suspect that balun design is pretty much a standardized item and there is little, if any, variation from manufacturer to manufacturer - despite sales hype to the contrary.

By the way, GVI is touting their built-in surge protection:
http://www.gviss.com/Portals/0/GVIProductImages/352/GV-VB59SP%20Spec%20Sheet.pdf
Small world, eh!

Well, my question was answered. I especially liked the discussion about cable quality. I confess I more often than not stock up on what ever Cat-5e is on special for the cheapest price

Thanks

Enjoying this ongoing post on Baluns, wonder how many people realize that we can thank Geanelli Guanella back in 1944 (Bell Labs) for the video Balun technology of today being discussed (application was radio broadcast) His balun was a 16:1 matching transformer constructed of coiled transmission lines.
-just a little history break

Survtech, great ideas man... As long as your control the test for the optimum results...

I do not think NVT will measure up with your tests... Very close observation on their spec sheets reveals that they do not recommend stretch of the cable more than 750 and I concur with them. When we run tests while back, NVT did come short on the test results and yet their baluns were the most expensive. Further research found many other manufacturers, which also brought VU in the picture and the rest became a history.

I think we can start another thread just for baluns alone. I am not sure why admin or the moderators may mind... afterall, this is real info for everyone to observe and comment and more importantly, sharpen everyones knowledge.

Yes, perhaps start a new thread, if not done already. :)