Component vs. HDMI Video?

What is the difference between using Component video over an HDMI cable?

I just bought a sony that is 1080p capable. If I use component video, am I using the televisions full capacity?

Dominick

Dominick22 said:

What is the difference between using Component video over an HDMI cable?

I just bought a sony that is 1080p capable. If I use component video, am I using the televisions full capacity?

Dominick

Click to expand...

I'm not one of the video experts here, but I believe that in order to utilize the full 1080P capability of your set it will require the use of the HDMI interface.

I'm sure one of the members who are heaviliy into the A/V side will correct me if I am wrong.

Resolution is not everything to take into account. Depending on the source device, the scaler in the display, and anything in between, you can have varying results.

Of course, theoretically, a digital transfer of a native 1080P signal to a native 1080P display should be ideal. But this is not always the case. Try each method of connection, and pick which one looks best to you.

With HDMI 1.3a out now, and later versions on their way, it will become more and more standard hopefully and there will be a time, when a single cable is all you will need (we hope....or no wires), but for now, its still a crap-shoot.

Tim is right however that in order to send 1080P signals, you will need HDMI....simply because of content protection, these signals are not allowed to be output over analog connections (component video), and most displays will not accept a 1080P signal on their component inputs anyway.

What are you connecting to the display out of curiosity?

i run into this question all the time at work. myself, i prefer the comp route with a good coax. digital audio cable. true, a 1080p (native or upconverted) is not '''likely''' possible with a comp cable, however i feel the difference at normal viewing distances is almost not noticable. (infact, my boss said he would pay for your TV if you could pick out a 1080p vs. 720p picture at appropriate distances.
***disclaimer, this is not an official challenge, i dont want every eagle eye calling my boss to take him up on this***

back to the lack of 1080p with comp: manufactures of DVD players heard that comp inputs on a TV couldnt handle 1080p. Then TV's could, but only after DVD players stoped being able to output 1080p with comp. and this trade happened a couple times. this is my understanding of why comp. doesnt send 1080p. i do believe some players can upconvert to 1080p over a comp cable, but i dont know any displays that can handle that...

combine that lack of real obvious difference, with the lack (little amount and pirce comapaired to SD DVD's) of 1080p media (currently) and the fact that hdmi comunication issues (between devices) exist, and the artifacts in some hdmi applications, and the whole hdcp idea, though i understand the reason behind it, will ultimately ruin HD media, and the continuing change in hdmi standards for my reasons behind using component video cables. besides, 1080i is still attainable via comp on some products.

and i will publish my view on the HD/BRD here: i dont think either format will win out. call me crazy. even though HD is quite ahead in the current market, the over all high def media market is around 1%...not to sound like an a$$, but can say SACD/DVD-A? sure they are still around, and might be for a few years, but would you really say they are big players in the overall market...but who knows, with the amount of people who buy things for the latest and greatest factor, and the huge advertisement campaign behind 1080p, my thoughts may be totaly off. hell look at bose.

okay im done ranting, sorry about that.

differences: max res transmitted, number of cables, no audio in comp. (which reminds me the audio transmitted over hdmi....meh, i still think digital audio (coax not fiber optic -- which i a whole nother topic) sounds better.
and just to sound like im covering my a$$, if you dont plan on ever buying another reciever/prepro and/or display, and the firmware for hdmi versions is easily upgraded,, buying hdmi ready gear would be the way to go for future proofing.

I think Greg slo summed it up nicely. I have a 1080P capable Blu Ray (the Panasonic) and a 1080i capable HDDVD player (1st gen RCA). I am using the Panasonic in my bedroom with my new Sharp 42" 1080P Aquos LCD and it looks great! I am using my RCA in the living room with my 65" Mitsubishi and it also looks great. I experimented with both HDMI and component with both setups. With the Mits I cannot tell a difference between the 2 connections. With the Sharp I can tell a slight difference between the Panasonic set for 1080P thru the HDMI and set for 1080i thru the component. The HDMI is slightly more Sharp (pardon the pun). When I use the Sharp with the Mits set for 1080i (the Mits will not do 1080P and has only one DVI input-I have to use an adaptor) I cannot tell a difference between the panasonic and the RCA. Unless you have a front projector and a big screen I think the difference between HDMI and component is in convenience rather than performance-the difference is not great enough to be a big deal. Just my .02.

tonyc said:

I think Greg slo summed it up nicely. I have a 1080P capable Blu Ray (the Panasonic) and a 1080i capable HDDVD player (1st gen RCA). I am using the Panasonic in my bedroom with my new Sharp 42" 1080P Aquos LCD and it looks great! I am using my RCA in the living room with my 65" Mitsubishi and it also looks great. I experimented with both HDMI and component with both setups. With the Mits I cannot tell a difference between the 2 connections. With the Sharp I can tell a slight difference between the Panasonic set for 1080P thru the HDMI and set for 1080i thru the component. The HDMI is slightly more Sharp (pardon the pun). When I use the Sharp with the Mits set for 1080i (the Mits will not do 1080P and has only one DVI input-I have to use an adaptor) I cannot tell a difference between the panasonic and the RCA. Unless you have a front projector and a big screen I think the difference between HDMI and component is in convenience rather than performance-the difference is not great enough to be a big deal. Just my .02.

Click to expand...

The biggest difference I have noticed in using HDMI on a 720P projector and 123" diagonal screen is there was a very small improvement in shapness, but the biggest difference for me was the obvious improvement in the black level.

Dominick22 said:

What is the difference between using Component video over an HDMI cable?

I just bought a sony that is 1080p capable. If I use component video, am I using the televisions full capacity?

Dominick

Click to expand...

Dominick, use HDMI if you have the option, as there are fewer DA, A/D conversions as compared to component (which is analog).

Using HDMI from a DVD or BD/HD-DVD to your Sony, the image info will remain 100% in the digital domain right up until the display (assuming you have an SXRD or LCD display). Never actually seeing the analog world, which is a big plus in my book.
Using 1080i is no problem, as your TV should be able to deinterlace to 1080p with few to no artifacts.

As for the audio side of thing, new receivers are quickly adopting full HDMI 1.2 / 1.3 specs. Witness the new Denon and Onkyo receivers and Pre’s. They support 1.3, which means full resolution 8ch PCM audio from the players and support for things like DeepColor for when displays support that.

If your receiver or Pre supports HDMI 1.1, it should (but some don’t) support 8ch PCM audio, so try and configure your DVD/HD player to send PCM over HDMI. Again, keeps the audio in as high a bit-rate and resolution as possible until the D/A’s at the output of the Pre.

Cheers,

Every time I have compared the two, HDMI/DVI has won hands down with better contrast and shadow detail.

Just my few cents

Another vote for HDMI. I made the switch back and forth between quality cables and there was a noticeable improvement in color and detail with the HDMI cable. I've had a few component cables actually go bad as well (in my case added alot more green and red into the picture). Nice to have just one cable carrying sound and video, although I can't use it with my Krell lol.

For a good quality HDMI cable, try Elementcable.com. Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service.

I've switched between DVI, HDMI, and component from my HD cable box and the component was so much poorer that I'm surprised to see the question come up. I can't tell between DVI and HDMI except that my old box used DVI and the new one uses HDMI. That's just for a cable box and I don't know how its outputs may differ from a DVD player's outputs.

I need to check my component cables coming out of my Rotel processor because my picture through that system has never been good w/ my new Sony TV. The HDMI direct into the TV is GREAT! I really noted how bad the pic through component was just the other day when I ran a composite cable direct from a VCR/DVD-R into the TV and it looked BETTER than that component input! That is just WRONG! Either the Rotel is screwing something up, or my switcher (more likely) is screwing something up, OR the cables are not good... I am certain that it is NOT the TV (since all the other inputs I have tried have been GREAT) and I don't believe it to be the Rotel as it was GREAT w/ the other TV...the Vampire cables are pretty expensive cables too so I am putting my money on the switcher being CRAP!

people are really seeing that much of a difference using HDMI??
guess i have never used a really great cable (for HDMI). audio quest HDMI-x (third best of 4 from aq), tributaries direct (mid ground), and denon's entry cable is what i have used to do most of my compairing to tributaries silver tri-vid (top comp cable from trib -- each primary color a dif cable). also the regular tri-vid. from AQ: yiq-g and x (entry comp cables). to me comparing the entry/mid ground cables hold there own just as good (if not better) than = qualtiy hdmi. havent seen a real high quality hdmi cable to compair with a high comp...so maybe thats what i need to do.

i should note, the compairing is on the 61" JVC hdila (pro) set, calibrated with the DVD essential disk (great disk btw).

also wanted to ask, if you dont mind, how much people were spending on their hdmi cables, and if a cheap cable yielded hdmi beeing still better than comp.

maybe im just hung up on the lack of defined standards for hdmi, and lack of true 1080p source (thats worth a darn). and i cant forget the compatability issues that i come across week after week -- either do to 1.1 -1.3 or hdcp getting in the way (which is a WHOLE other issue i have); oh and the hdmi only audio codecs that are really not being taken advantage of (and wont be able to for a while)....perhaps im getting to involved on a thread from someone who just wanted an opinion of what cableto use

if anyone wanted to get into more detail about this p.m. away!

~greg

Greg, the difference people are seeing is between HDMI and Component.
Since one (HDMI) is all digital, serialized data streams, and the other (Component) is an Analog three channel color/luma thing, they are quite different, so performance differences should be expected.

For todays all digital sources, processors and heck, even displays, an all digital signal path is preferred.

As for cables, sigh, I hate to get into a cable discussion, as they typically degrade quicker than a signal through a Bose speaker, so I’ll just link you to the Blue Jeans Cable FAQ on HDMI cables. Lots of great info there.

My personal experience is that one does not need megabuck HDMI cables, as any decent or better quality cable that meets specs can deliver the signals well. My 35’ HDMI cable is the $66 Monoprice unit, which has worked flawlessly for over a year. Image quality is excellent and no synch errors, ever.

Final editorial comment on HDMI: While not perfect, it is the wave of the future, as it’s the best bet to achieve the elusive ‘one cable between boxes’ goal of transporting signal and control information.

JonFo said:

As for cables, sigh, I hate to get into a cable discussion, as they typically degrade quicker than a signal through a Bose speaker

Click to expand...

JonFo, welcome to my sig line! Best quote ever.

lol, love the crack at bose. lol

ill start by agreing 100%, hdmi = future. but currently, i just cant get behind it for the reason i mentioned in my other posts...call me stuborn, but i just cant. and without stuborn consumers, the product wont get better -- and it NEEDS to. my problems with it are far from minor for visual nirvana (to borrow worlds from other members at this forum), IMHO.

you also mentioned spec calbes. as of a few months ago...only 4 or 5 cable manufactures actually met hdmi true specs. denon, sony, radio shack brand, audio quest, and i cant remember the other. what did you mean by spec cable.

side note. does any one else think the all digital argument for hdmi is a bit (no pun intended) funny. how many TT people do we have in this forum?? dont get me wrong i love vinyl, but, its just kinda humorous. hehe

~greg

p.s. the article made me happy to read. it appears that even to cable companies see at least a part of my side.

greg_slo said:

lol, love the crack at bose. lol

ill start by agreing 100%, hdmi = future. but currently, i just cant get behind it for the reason i mentioned in my other posts...call me stuborn, but i just cant. and without stuborn consumers, the product wont get better -- and it NEEDS to. my problems with it are far from minor for visual nirvana (to borrow worlds from other members at this forum), IMHO.

you also mentioned spec calbes. as of a few months ago...only 4 or 5 cable manufactures actually met hdmi true specs. denon, sony, radio shack brand, audio quest, and i cant remember the other. what did you mean by spec cable.

side note. does any one else think the all digital argument for hdmi is a bit (no pun intended) funny. how many TT people do we have in this forum?? dont get me wrong i love vinyl, but, its just kinda humorous. hehe

~greg

p.s. the article made me happy to read. it appears that even to cable companies see at least a part of my side.

Click to expand...

I guess when it starts digital and ends digital people don't want any analog in between

I run HDMI to my set for aesthetics only. I have a 720p plasma so it really makes no difference. I am thoroughly annoyed at the HDMI standard though.

Does anyone know if Denons with RS-232 ports can be upgraded to support 1.3?

MotorToad said:

JonFo, welcome to my sig line! Best quote ever.

Click to expand...

:haha1: LOL, thanks man, glad you liked it.

greg_slo, the spec cable meant that a cable meets published HDMI requirements specs for signal and physical parameters.
As far as I know, there isn't a 'certification' program for HDMI (but one is sure needed).

Cheers,