Technical Response: Componet, DVI or HDMI?

JoeSp

Supporting Founder
Original poster
Supporting Founder
Oct 11, 2003
2,284
0
First let me say that I consider myself a high-end abuser of HD product. So, please take the following with a grain of salt and if you disagree please feel free to do your own research as I have for the last 5 years.

The main differance between using Componet cables for viewing HD material and using DVI or HDMI (henceforth to be refered to as Digital Cables) is that when you use your DVI or HDMI port you bypass the video processor in your HDTV. That was the main purpose of a Digital cable system to begin with. To provide the picture and sound that the director and producer of movies and High Def material wanted you to see. Soon after the introduction the MPAA jumped on board and started requiring security be hardwired into the Digital system in order to copy protect High Def material.

In addition to this, both E*, D* and other manufacturers of High Def equipment have meantioned that their products will downrez High Def signals to protect the High Def enviroment when sending out a signal over componet. Settop manufacturer's have introduced a feature into all setop boxes that will allow downrezzing to happen at the throw of a switch. No one to my knowledge has started downrezzing yet. However, this is why you will only see DVD players capable of uprezing a picture to a 720p or 1080i enviroment or HD-VHS players only producing those higher resolutions thru their digital port and not over componet.

Before anyone jumps in here, only the HD-VHS output can be considered High Def. Any upconverting processes do not produce a true High Def picture. But lets move on.

Another differance is the original signal to begin with. No $300 or for that fact $1000 settop will process a video signal better than your HDTV's own video processor. Especially when that signal is not a true High Def signal. There are not many High Def signals out there. Even High Def OTA channels are being downrezed because of limited bandwith by everyone including OTA digital stations. There is a very good article on this in the latest Digital TV and Sound magazine.

What this means is that you will probably not notice any differance between using Componet or Digital inputs unless that signal is indeed a full bandwith High Def signal delivering to you a filmed based converted to High Definition or High Def recorded on a High Def Camera product. Notice that I stated a filmed based converted and not upconverted to High Def. Some astute video buffs believe that film will always be superior to digital conversion. Some folks believe that about analog and digital music. I am in the group that digital can not yet acheive the same as film and analog for video and music. We are not there yet -- but we are getting close.

Last thing I want to talk about is cables. We all will agree about the huge differance in the analog world between okay cables and really good ones. What are the differances? Shielding, copper content, size, connector stablility and composistion. I once had silver cables that I used for stereo back in the 70's that I got when the military was tearing down a communication site - another story another time - but man, did those cables deliver!!

I have read where some of you say that a digital signal makes purchasing a high quality cable moot. Well, you are wrong again. Improper sheilding, low sheilding, bad connector stablity will bring you to a new level of problems. One is macroblocking. For those who do not know, this is when parts of your video go missing. Another is poor sound reproduction. A dull reproduction of the sound field. Some of you blame bad signals -- oh sure, this is not from a bad cable. In digital cable you have complete seperation of the video signal (and audio with HDMI). Interuption of that signal will cause poor video and audio response from your equipment.

These new products we are buying do a very good job of reproducing the video and audio we are trying to send them. However, there are times when we see a poor picture or hear sound that sounds dead and sometimes that is the signal, sometimes the end product conversion, and sometimes it is the cable. New HDTVs are giving you more control over the Digital input to adjust for your viewing pleasure but as I have stated there are many reasons why you might not be viewing the best your HDTV can produce.

If you feed your High Def tv a diet of low rez (Standard Def Content) or HD-Lite (low bandwith) signals then you will probably not notice very much differance between Componet or Digital cables. I would even say that using Componet and allowing the entire video signal to be processed by your HDTV's video circuitry will probably look better than using the Digital cables. But, given a true High Def product both in the video and audio , a Digital cable will give you the better end product. Better picture and better sound will result from the Digital input. Now if you have a high end DVD that allows for Analog Audio transfer from the DVD you will get better seperation of the sound environment. Otherwise your best result will be from Digital. Eventually that Digital Output (DVI/HDMI) will be the only way to get your High Def fix.

As for the cables, how many of you can see purchansing a $40,000 auto and putting $50 tires on it when it comes time to replace them? Think you will be able to get the same performance then? You do not have to buy Monster Cables but 'any cable will do' is a poor way to treat your new HD equipment. If you are going to view High Def and you want to get the most your new HDTV investment can give you then always buy good cables! And sooner than later those cables will be Digital (DVI and/or HDMI) ;)

ps: My HDTV setup -- Pioneer Elite 630HD 58" - calibrated, Denon 3910 DVD player using DVI out for upconverting and Analog out for complete seperation of sound field to speakers--DVD player does 32bit sound processing, E* 811 settop using DVI soon to be replaced by a VIP622. Yamaha 5.1 matched speakers with matched Yamaha Power sub-woofer- plus PolkAudio surround sound rear speakers, Denon 989 audio/video receiver (weakest link -- looking to replace). All my cables are Accoustical Reseach and Monster. I have three Monster cables -- 2 componet cables for my Playstation 2 and Xbox systems and one SVHS for the 811 just for grins!:devil:
 
Last edited:
Joe, heres a question for you. Do you think SD quality is better through HDMI port or Component? Or no diffrence? I currently run through HDMI to a HDMI/DVI Cable that I had to buy an addapter to make one end HDMI. They are all Monster quality. My question is will component help my SD picture look any better? (VIP211- Toshiba 65" high def projection TV)
 
JoeSp said:
Last thing I want to talk about is cables. We all will agree about the huge differance in the analog world between okay cables and really good ones.

You clearly have not read the extensive reports and debates on this topic in forums like Audio Asylum, Audioholics, and AVSForum's audio section. If you had, there is no way you would be saying that we all agree on this premise.
 
JoeSp said:
As for the cables, how many of you can see purchansing a $40,000 auto and putting $50 tires on it when it comes time to replace them? Think you will be able to get the same performance then? You do not have to buy Monster Cables but 'any cable will do' is a poor way to treat your new HD equipment. If you are going to view High Def and you want to get the most your new HDTV investment can give you then always buy good cables!

I agree, one should use good digital cables. And not "every" cable will do. Some cables aren't made right.

Fortunately, one can get perfectly good digital cables for $5-$10.

The tire analogy is a very poor one. Tires are actually measurably different, in ways that affect on the road performance.
 
Stanlee , SD quality is better thru componet than my DVI. I have more control over the video signal processing thru the componet port.

Tom, I have read alot of "debates" but I have also been to alot of "demostrations" of differant product lines. I have read extensively on the internet and magazines. I have been fortunate to have extensive conversations with HD Calibrators. What I have stated as I said is what I have learned.

I believe that you are taking to task my statement on audio reproduction. My statement was "some folks". My statement was not meant to include 'everyone".
There are those who take up the banner for digital reproduction and in some ways digital can seem to be superior --- but it has yet been able to reproduce completely the many nuances of a specific note played on a musical instrument. Once again, that is my opinion and you are free to disagree.
 
JoeSp

A word of advice, don't bet money on your ability to distinguish between cables on a properly set up double blind comparison.

I have some experience in this, having conducted more than a dozen of them. So far, no audiophile or videophile has ever passed one that I've participated in. Despite valiant efforts and many boastful statements prior to the test.
 
Are you refering to Componet versus Digital? If so there can be a visual differance with a HD RPTV. Now if we are talking about digital HDTVs then the differance is so minute that it would very possibly be hard to tell.

Also, what video source are you using -- what is the constant and what is it you are trying to see or not see? Also is the HDTV calibrated and if so are both the componet and digital ports calibrated?

Once again, what I have done is try to simply and state the major differances between componet vs digital, analog vs digital , true HD signals and watered down ones. If you cannot discern between these than what I have tried to explain will not make sense to you.

I have held several conversations with folks who believe that their HD sets are providing them with wonderful picutures -- for them yes and for me no. I have had calibrators share there experances with individuals who so not see the complete colour spectrum and the calibration of their HDTV was done in a way that would satisfy the customer and might drive you and me crazy.

As for betting money -- maybe you should keep yours. I can tell the differance between digital reproduction of both video and audio in comparison with analog and film reproduction. And I can tell when video and audio system is not performing to its max. There are so many variables that must folks do not even want to try. But, the proof is in the beholder and where you might find no differance in a $10 cable and a $40 cable and a $100 cable while listening or viewing, as always that is a very subjective posistion. If you are happy with the $10 cables -- buy them. :)
 
Wow, such a good technical review of everything. You're obviously really into your TV. I'm from the school of thought, that I care more about what I'm watching (content) than what it looks like (really can't see why it matters). So the current HD setup I have is great for me! Good work, though.
 
JoeSp said:
The main differance between using Componet cables for viewing HD material and using DVI or HDMI (henceforth to be refered to as Digital Cables) is that when you use your DVI or HDMI port you bypass the video processor in your HDTV.

The video processor must still convert to the native resolutuion of your display so you are not bypassing it. Most LCD and plasma displays are 1366x768 so 720P and 1080i signals from your components must still be processed.

I believe their is a minimum needed cable quality but many high priced cable's performance can only be seen on a scope not by our eyes or ears.
 
IMO, I really feel that most of what you talk about isn't so much about what looks and sounds the best, but what "they" tell you is the best. They being someone who has an invested interest in what you are buying or not buying. It is like now, I am starting to hear more and more about HD antennas, what the ___ is an HD antenna? OTA signal is broadcast how? Through the freaking air, and there is only one way to receive it, with an antenna. Now perhaps, when they say "HD antenna" they mean, high quality material and top of the line connectors and/or coax cable(s), however, if that was the case, they should say that in their advertisements.

You did say something worth mentioning, what looks good to me, may or may not look good to you (or sound) and vice-versa. That is true, and as such, no one can say for sure what is best or what is simply a waste of money. Then you pile onto that, the fact that at least Dish Network and Directv, don't even give their customers what they--the distributor--receive, and many of the movies or programs that are supposed to be "HD" are really nothing more than up-converted SD (which is better than SD, but really, IMO it should be called USD-up-converted standard definition.) No one really has anything that is completely reliable to compare what looks best. IMO, for instance, I like the picture that a LCD TV gives (Projection LCD TVs IMO look the best of all, but again that is in my opinion), better than CRT or plasma. Why is this? I have NO idea, perhaps it is softer, lighter, or some other way of it being different that causes me to like it best, but I do. I would say most feel CRT based TVs are best, so when you think about it, no one can agree on which TV produces the best picture, let alone which cable, or whatever. And even if the majority could agree on which was best or worse, i.e. everyone first decide which TV, all providers and distributors give their customers TRUE HD, and the lighting in test area is EXACTLY the same for ALL those that have to decide which is best, and ALL of those people have the EXACT same eye sight, maybe, there can be a consensus on which is best and which isn't.

Your information, while very informative, doesn't make the fact that everyone is different, go away. It is only YOUR point of view, and it doesn't change that others will not agree with you and may have a different point of view. You think more expensive means best when it comes to TVs, cables, STBs, etc. and for some things I'd agree with that, however, expensive doesn't make something automatically right, it can still be an expensive piece of crap that reproduces a picture that may not be the best it can be.
 
Last edited:
With what appears to be renewed interest in HD on Dish there have been many questions on this subject. JoeSp was simply providing his answer.
 
There are alot of folks who are new to the HD arena. I am only sharing facts on what the differances are between Componet and Digital inputs. I also share some but not all of the parts that go into getting the most out of your HDTV.

Some folks want to know if there is a need for a DVI or HDMI cable. Some want to know if SD looks better over Componet than Digital inputs (it does.) Maybe even some new HD customers would like to know that both E* and D* have in their HD settops the ablility to turn off the HD output of the Componet and have that output downrez.

Why do you not want them to have this information? And where did I say the more you spend the more you get with HD? Some of you are putting things out there that I did not say, did not imply and did not discuss. What are you mad about?

I thought the begining qualifier was that I was sharing information and that if you disagreed -- okay and that you could go and do your own research. Guess that didn't work.
 
I was talking about digital cables, be they DVI or HDMI.

A perfectly capable DVI or HDMI cable can be purchased for less than $10. You can spend $1000 on one, but it will not better or improve your picture in any way. The $1000 cable could yield a better picture if the $10 cable was improperly made. Some cheap cables are, but many are excellent.

Now digital vs component is very dependent upon the electronics. There is no set answer to which will be better for any particular combination. If both HDMI and component are implemented correctly on both the source and the TV, then digital should be better, or at least no worse. In actual practice, using some of Dish's receivers as sources, the component connection is frequently better. I suspect this is due to Dish's implementation of DVI and HDMI.

However you did not limit your comments to digital vs component/analog in your first post. You made a sweeping statement that people know there are big differences in quality on analog cables, and stated that expensive gear deserved expensive cables, using an ill-conceived automotive tire analogy.

I agree that this is a relevant topic in an HD forum, as we are discussing how to make one's HD picture better.
 
Last edited:
ride525 said:
I like it right here. I want to know what cables and outputs to use with my Dish HD 811 receiver. I use digital output (I think it's DVI on the 811)

Use what looks best to you (digital or component) in your setup watching whatever it is you care most about watching. There is no holy grail. There are too many other variables.

As to cables, digital cables are either adequate or inadequate. There isn't any degree of goodness with them save the durability of the connector (particularly important w/ HDMI connectors). There isn't any "shielding" from RF, electromagnetic, X-ray, gamma ray, Ray Charles, necessary with these cables.

Component cables OTOH do need to have a reasonable amount of quality shielding. With component cables, buying the cheapest available may not be prudent. However, you don't need to buy Monster cables to get adequately shielded cables. The rest of the stuff about oxygen free copper and such is just hype. I recently stumbled across an excellent piece on the physics of hard wire transmission at the electron level. It debunked all the oxygen-free copper, silver content, and other commercial claims. If I can find the link I'll post it in this thread soon.
 
One source of well-made, low-priced component cables is Parts Express, their Dayton Audio cable line. These have good shielding and good connectors.

http://www.partsexpress.com/webpage...&&DID=7&CATID=34&ObjectGroup_ID=600&sm=0&so=0

A 6' set is $24.53 plus shipping.

I've seen others, like sales on the AR Pro series in that price ranges.

Even a cable like this one:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...f=pd_bbs_5/104-7833497-4570343?_encoding=UTF8
would likely be just as good.

Because it really isn't hard to make a perfectly good component video cable for low bucks too.
 
TOM , That is what I paided for my AR componet and digital cables. The company I purchased them from were closing down their local on site salesroom to do online sales only. I was very happy to get them for that price.
 

Known HDMI Video Out Problem with 942

129° NBC-HD sound lag still present?

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts