Component or S-Vid?

[Mark4583]

I just purchased a new HT Reciver and DvD, at the moment I am using a a S-Video hookup between the TV , Reciver and DvD, , Would there be a substancial diffrence if I went with a Component Video Cable instead?
also is there much diffrence in the Optical Digital audio cable over the Coaxial Digital audio cable, or are they about the same?
Pro's and con's would be appriciated.
Thanks

[krzywica]

Night and day difference if your tv can handle progressive scan, s-vid is not progressive scan comatible.

As far as audio toslink (optical) Is better IMHO because you don't have to deal with interference, but is not as durable as coax.

[Monstrous Mike]

In general, the difference between S-video and component depends on many factors like the size and type of TV you have, the quality of the source material, etc. And you should know that the improvement that component video delivers is better color saturation. This might not be visually apparent unless you know what you are looking for. In some case, there will be no visual difference at all. In the best case, the visual difference will be subtle.

HOWEVER, you do need component video to get the definite improvements of progressive scan and HDTV. And you don't need to break the bank to buy a component video cable either. I guess my final answer is if you got it, use it.

[krzywica]

True mike, if he only has a 27" tv then the change will be subtle, but anything over 32" and you will be able to tell. Like if I fed my 65" hitachi s-vid instead of dvi or component it would look like total crap.

And yes you can get a great deal ($50 or less) on component nowadays with all the dvi and hdmi compatible sets that are coming out, prices will drop even more.

[hermanv]

S video cables seperate chroma (color) and luminance (black and white brighness). Because they are derived from NTSC color encoding standards, the bandwidth of the two signals is limited by the spec. to about 1 MHz for Chroma and 4 Mhz for the luminance. Never more.

Component has no such limit. Addmittedly many sources are also limited by the same NTSC spec but many are not (DVD or satellite for example). Component has an advantage, but the hassle of three wires and higher cost may not pay off for smaller screens.

If your only sources are "off air" or VHS don't bother, otherwise there will be an improvement, in some cases quite a lot.

Coax is cheaper and better for audio connections.

[royphil345]

I agree. I've done alot of experimenting with digital audio cables. For some reason, (I know... all 1s and 0s) the coaxial always seems to sound better with glass (not plastic) optical cables running a close second.

[hermanv]

For some reason, (I know... all 1s and 0s) the coaxial always seems to sound better with glass (not plastic) optical cables running a close second.
The reason is reasonably straight forward. Plastic cables create time smear, the edges between those 1's and 0's become spread out in time, this is also called jitter.

Good decoders minimize or eliminate jitter so plastic cables will work fine on those designs, helping to lead to the debate about whether one cable does or doesn't sound better than another.

Glass cables have a much better refractive index than plastic so their contribution to time smear is much less, they will sound almost as good as coax (and will eliminate ground loops if any). However since glass cables are expenisve and coax is not , it seems to me the decision is simple.

[royphil345]

Yes, that's what I thought. The plastic cables are just too wide. I noticed that the glass cables are thinner to begin with and are made up of many fine strands, so any light reflected off the sides of the cable will get there at about the same time as light that goes straight through.

I got my glass cable on eBay for for less than $30.00 shipped http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=64594&item=5772279159&rd=1&ssPageName=WD1V
I'm sure it's not the highest quality out there, but it sounds way better than my $30.00 plastic cable.