Off-topic Talk Where overpaid, underworked S2000 owners waste the worst part of their days before the drive home. This forum is for general chit chat and discussions not covered by the other off-topic forums.

HDMI vs Component

Thread Tools
 
Old Dec 15, 2005 | 12:21 PM
  #1  
Rickjames's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
From: Anderson, SC
Default HDMI vs Component

Just wondering what everyone's opinion was on these two types of connections. I just got my hdtv on monday and got my new cable box today and the guy used their crappy component cables. I've read lots of different opinions on this and was just wondering what everyone thinks before I go out and buy this stuff.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2005 | 12:25 PM
  #2  
UnkieTrunkie's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 109,425
Likes: 1,648
From: SJC
Default

If you have the connection, go for it.
Here's the thing - there aren't a lot of hi-end cable companies doing HDMI cables yet, so versus hi-end component, it's a wash, IMHO. Free up the component connections for your DVD player.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2005 | 12:28 PM
  #3  
Rickjames's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
From: Anderson, SC
Default

Well the cable guy said my box supported hdmi, but I've got two component video inputs on my tv--so I already have my dvd player running thru that.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2005 | 12:36 PM
  #4  
Nishant's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
From: Philly
Default

If both your box and TV support it, buy the cable and use it. Its worth it
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2005 | 12:48 PM
  #5  
UnkieTrunkie's Avatar
Moderator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 109,425
Likes: 1,648
From: SJC
Default

Yeah - so. . . if you already have hi-end component cables available for your cable box, then go ahead and use them. If you don't then go ahead and get a hi-end (Audioquest makes them, among others) HDMI cable.

I tend to look at these things from a bit of a cost perspective:
- good compenent cables I alread have are cheaper than buying new cables esp. if they deliver comparable (or better) performance.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2005 | 12:59 PM
  #6  
specialque's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,245
Likes: 0
From: Fairfield CT
Default

Don't forget HDMI carries more than just video...

If you connect your DVD player to your reciever to your TV, all you would have to do is press play on your DVD player, it would power up your receiver, set it to the correct settings, and turn on your TV to the correct settings. It really is the future of cabling.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2005 | 02:03 PM
  #7  
jasonw's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 16,702
Likes: 0
From: █ SF, CA █
Default

FYI people. DVI is a digital signal unlike component. The cable either works or it doesn't. No point spending $100.

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,a...77,pg,2,00.asp#

Once you get a good HDMI connection, our tests indicate, you can expect flawless performance from any 4-meter cable, regardless of price. "That is what I would expect from the HDMI cables," says Maxim's Nelson. "It is not too difficult to make them work perfectly at 4 meters."
Digital cables are inherently more dependable than analog ones. Both transmit data by controlling the voltage levels in an electrical signal. With analog, slight shifts in voltage correspond to precise values in the final picture. Thus, if the signal carrying blue color information loses voltage as it travels down the cable, the blue objects on screen will appear weaker than intended. (Think faded skies.)
For its part, digital carries just ones and zeros. In HDMI, if the signal voltage is high, it encodes a one; if low, a zero. The voltage encoded as a one can drop a fair amount and still be distinguishable from voltage encoded as a zero. After a certain point, however, the signal voltage drops so low that ones and zeros look alike, and the TV's receiver chip attempts to guess their value. So rather than gradually diminishing in accuracy, the way an analog signal does, a digital signal may remain perfect up to a critical level and then fail catastrophically. According to the experts, such problems are likelier to occur with an 8- to 12-meter copper cable (which is significantly longer than most users need) than with a 4-meter cable of the same type.
Reply

Trending Topics

Old Dec 15, 2005 | 03:12 PM
  #8  
steven975's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 5,094
Likes: 6
From: Vienna, VA
Default

FYI, hdmi and dvi are the same thing video wise.

if you have dvi, you have compatability with hdmi and vice versa.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2005 | 03:24 PM
  #9  
jasonw's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 16,702
Likes: 0
From: █ SF, CA █
Default

And Monster Cable should be unnecessary in either case.
Reply
Old Dec 15, 2005 | 04:50 PM
  #10  
03_AP1's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,951
Likes: 0
From: Pembroke
Default

if you're an avg joe who wants a nice picture....you probably won't be able to tell the difference between a nice component connection and HDMI.

I've read a few things on the net regarding color problems with HDMI, as well as sound/picture syncronization problems - many of which are fixed by firmware upgrades.

Here's my question though -

say you go from DVD to TV via HDMI - how do you get sound to your amp/receiver for 5.1 or DTS? Do you go optical/coax out of the TV to the amp/receiver?

If that's the case, what's the point of a singular cable for both picture and sound, if you end up running an extra sound cable anyway? IF that's the case, save your money and use component.

Only a super-critical nerdy videophile will be able to tell the difference.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:43 PM.