dvi or component

[chaz1965]

I'd like opinions on what is the preference. I just bought a samsung 50 inch dlp and use component video to connect my hdtv cable box to my tv (what is the benefit of connectingmy component video through my receiver?).

Also should I use a dvi connection from my cable box to the tv?

Thanks for input.

[Wireworm5]

Okay, I am by no means an expert. I'm not even certain what a DLP tv is, but I just bought an HDTV myself so I learned a little bit. Anyways from what I know you want to use the DVI cable. This keeps the signal digital for an HD picture. The component cable is analog, so your HD cable will convert the digital signal to analog defeating the higher resolution that the digital offers for your HDTV.

[woodman]

Wireworm says:

Okay, I am by no means an expert. I'm not even certain what a DLP tv is, but I just bought an HDTV myself so I learned a little bit. Anyways from what I know you want to use the DVI cable. This keeps the signal digital for an HD picture. The component cable is analog, so your HD cable will convert the digital signal to analog defeating the higher resolution that the digital offers for your HDTV.

You "learned a little bit" did you? Just enough to give an inquiring newbie an incorrect answer to his question. While it is true that the DVI connection keeps the video signal in the digital domain when being transferred between components in a system, it does not provide any greater "resolution" than the component-video interconnect does. The only real difference between the two is where the conversion (from digital to analog) takes place. With the component-video connection the conversion is performed by the video DAC in the cable (or satellite) "box". When the DVI interconnect is employed, the conversion takes place by the video DAC in the display device (TV set).

To chaz1965:
You asked - I'd like opinions on what is the preference. I just bought a samsung 50 inch dlp and use component video to connect my hdtv cable box to my tv (what is the benefit of connectingmy component video through my receiver?).

Also should I use a dvi connection from my cable box to the tv?

There really is no valid reason for a preference as to which interconnect to use. As you learned in the paragraph above, the only difference between the two is what component does the converting of the digital video into analog form so that the display device can show you the pictures. Chances of the video DAC in the TV set being "better" than the equivalent device in the "cable box" are about halfway between slim and none. If there was indeed a superiority of some sort, the difference would likely be so damned minimal and subtle as to make being concerned about the matter a big, fat joke.

Connecting video signals through your A/V receiver offers convenience in switching signal sources ... that's all.

Hope this clears your mind -

[Wireworm5]

Correct me if I'm wrong Woodman. But reading my tv manual an HDMI and DVI interface allows for an uncompressed High-bandwidth digital signal from a source such as HD cable to tv without any conversion. Component video interface is fine for standard digital signal or DVD player, but wouldn't this compress the HD signal?

[woodman]

Correct me if I'm wrong Woodman. But reading my tv manual an HDMI and DVI interface allows for an uncompressed High-bandwidth digital signal from a source such as HD cable to tv without any conversion. Component video interface is fine for standard digital signal or DVD player, but wouldn't this compress the HD signal?

No, Mr.Worm ... you're not wrong. You're just reading a misleading statement in your TV manual and inferring something that isn't true. The component-video interconnect does not "compress" the signal - or alter it in any way - nor does it restrict the video bandwidth. It transmits to the display device every last pixel that is contained within the HDTV (Hi-Def) video signal.

The mfg. of your new TV set should be forgiven for their statement however. They're simply taking advantage of a possibility that would take place in the unlikely (one would hope) event that the motion picture industry would be successful in their attempt in get the federal government to mandate that HiDef video will only be allowed to be transmitted between components in a home theater system by way of a digital interconnect, and the analog interconnect would have to be "down-rezzed" to a lesser "resolution". This they feel (incorrectly, I might add) would give them some protection against the video "pirates" of this world that are taking profits out of the pockets of the poor movie studios. WRONG! It would do no such thing. The only thing it would do, would be to deprive the consumer of that last bit of "resolution" he has every right to expect from his HDTV set when he views a movie on it ... that's all. This is the entire reason (and the only reason) why the TV mfgs. are including DVI and HDMI connections on their sets.

Hope this makes the whole issue perfectly clear now

[Wireworm5]

Are you telling me I spent $200 on an HDMI cable for nothing when my component cable would have done the job?

[woodman]

Are you telling me I spent $200 on an HDMI cable for nothing when my component cable would have done the job?

Chances are ... yes, you did! The only reason why you would not have wasted your cash would be if the motion picture industry was successful in getting the government to go along with their paranoia and misguided belief that what they're trying to force down the throats of the public will actually thwart the piracy that they're so vehement about (it won't stop the pirates - even though they fervently believe that it will).

Should the campaign to force digital interconnects on everybody fail, then there will be no apparent difference in pic quality between your HDMI cable and a component video one (for a fraction of the price) and you would have wasted your money. Sorry 'bout that. I really didn't want to spoil your day.

[cam]

Chances are ... yes, you did! The only reason why you would not have wasted your cash would be if the motion picture industry was successful in getting the government to go along with their paranoia and misguided belief that what they're trying to force down the throats of the public will actually thwart the piracy that they're so vehement about (it won't stop the pirates - even though they fervently believe that it will).

Should the campaign to force digital interconnects on everybody fail, then there will be no apparent difference in pic quality between your HDMI cable and a component video one (for a fraction of the price) and you would have wasted your money. Sorry 'bout that. I really didn't want to spoil your day.

Hey Mr. Woodman, forget about HD cable, what about the advantages of having a dvd player with HDMI and a monitor with one aswell. You can send a 480i or 480p from your dvd player through your HDMI cable where it will be upconverted to 720p or 1080i depending on which one your tv can produce whereas through your component cables the limit is 480p or 540p on some tv's.

[woodman]

Hey Mr. Woodman, forget about HD cable, what about the advantages of having a dvd player with HDMI and a monitor with one aswell. You can send a 480i or 480p from your dvd player through your HDMI cable where it will be upconverted to 720p or 1080i depending on which one your tv can produce whereas through your component cables the limit is 480p or 540p on some tv's.

Hey cam:
No, there is no advantage there either, since the TV set is doing the format conversion (which virtually every HDTV-capable set does), it matters not what scanning format is sent from the DVD player to the set. It will be up-converted to 720p or 1080i (whichever is the set's "native" scanning format) regardless of what's being fed to it from the DVD player. Sounds to me like you're confusing scan formats (480i, 480p, 540p, 720p, 1080i etc.) with "resolution" ... they're not the same thing at all. But you're not alone if that's the case - it's a very common misunderstanding.

[ericl]

Wireworm and Chaz

You guys could always just try both cables and see if you see a difference. You can return the more expensive cable if you see no difference.

-Eric

[cam]

Hey cam:
No, there is no advantage there either, since the TV set is doing the format conversion (which virtually every HDTV-capable set does), it matters not what scanning format is sent from the DVD player to the set. It will be up-converted to 720p or 1080i (whichever is the set's "native" scanning format) regardless of what's being fed to it from the DVD player. Sounds to me like you're confusing scan formats (480i, 480p, 540p, 720p, 1080i etc.) with "resolution" ... they're not the same thing at all. But you're not alone if that's the case - it's a very common misunderstanding.

So correct me if I am wrong, from what you are saying, as long as I have a recent tv capable of 720p or 1080i, all I need is a non progressive scan dvd player with component video outs and everything there after ( progressive scan player and HDMI out) is all redundent. And thank you for sharing your expertise.

[woodman]

So correct me if I am wrong, from what you are saying, as long as I have a recent tv capable of 720p or 1080i, all I need is a non progressive scan dvd player with component video outs and everything there after ( progressive scan player and HDMI out) is all redundent. And thank you for sharing your expertise.

Yep Cam - that pretty much sums it all up. Except that progressive scan in the DVD player is probably beneficial (as well as becoming nearly universal in almost all of the players in the marketplace right now). You have to look hard to find a player that lacks this feature, and it seems to have no effect whatsoever on the pricetag of the player. It's my understanding that the video on a DVD is in the progressive scan format (480p), so there would be one less processing conversion to take place within the TV set when the "native" scan rate is 720p. This is the case with just about all of the "fixed pixel" display types out there at present. That includes everything other than CRT-based displays, such as DLP, LCD, LCoS, D-ILA, and plasma.

In any event, the HDMI interconnect is pretty much a waste of money - at least until and unless the movie moguls succeed in conning our government into mandating the requirement of a digital I-C between HiDef signal sources and video displays as I explained in an earlier post here on this thread. I'm hoping (and really expecting) that this will never happen to us. You should be hoping so right along with me.

All clear now?

[HT BUFF]

Yep Cam - that pretty much sums it all up. Except that progressive scan in the DVD player is probably beneficial (as well as becoming nearly universal in almost all of the players in the marketplace right now). You have to look hard to find a player that lacks this feature, and it seems to have no effect whatsoever on the pricetag of the player. It's my understanding that the video on a DVD is in the progressive scan format (480p), so there would be one less processing conversion to take place within the TV set when the "native" scan rate is 720p. This is the case with just about all of the "fixed pixel" display types out there at present. That includes everything other than CRT-based displays, such as DLP, LCD, LCoS, D-ILA, and plasma.

In any event, the HDMI interconnect is pretty much a waste of money - at least until and unless the movie moguls succeed in conning our government into mandating the requirement of a digital I-C between HiDef signal sources and video displays as I explained in an earlier post here on this thread. I'm hoping (and really expecting) that this will never happen to us. You should be hoping so right along with me.

All clear now?

I have an HD satellite box with DVI output & a DVD player with DVI output but only
one DVI input on my HDTV, which one would you use the DVI output with & which
one would you use component video output with?

[cjtalbot]

Hey chaz1965,

I think in light of the info above, that it may not matter a bit of difference which.

On another note:


woodman -

Thanks much for the info. I'm looking around at HDTVs right now and I was locked into the mind-set that I absolutly NEEDED to get a set with HDMI input, not even thinking that DVI would be acceptable. (although I do know that HDMI just bundles the digital sound cable with the video, where DVI is just digital video).

Do you happen to have a link, or at least know of a site that I could research this further? I'd just like to have some more facts in regard to video reproduction based on HDMI/DVI vs. Component cables. Though now that I think about it, I guess the real question is:

What makes the DAC in componets better/worse than others?

In my case I guess I'm wondering if there are any HDTVs out there that have a better DAC than my Scientific Atlanta 8300HD cable box (which seems pretty damn good...and it has both HDMI and component outputs).

If there are better DACs in some HDTVs, than perhaps the HDMI/DVI connection is still valid (in those cases) if the DACs are all pretty much the same, than you're right, it doesn't make any difference.

[cjtalbot]

Actually...I'd like to take this one step further.

If I'm using the Sci Atl 8300HD cable STB, that means I can output at 480i, 480p, 720p, or 1080i. And I know that I can have the STB output at any of those rates via the component cables.

Right now for HDTVs I was looking at the Sony KDF-50WE655 (though I'm open to other ideas...) which has a resolution of 1386 x 788 pixels and hence it displays at a native 788p.

Now...if I'm running component cables between my 8300HD and the Sony HDTV what would give me the best PQ?

1) 8300HD set to output at 720p and let the Sony upscale to 788p?

2) 8300HD set to output at 1080i and let the Sony down-scale to 788p? (is that even really a down-scale? or would the fact that you're moving from interlaced to progressive more than make up for the drop in scan rate?)

3) try them both fool and let us know?


PS - Hey woodman, I see now that you replied to one of my posts over at HDTVoice.com ( http://www.hdtvoice.com/voice/showthread.php?t=14472 ) and told me to forget all about the sony..

Thanks, I'll go check the Mits and Toshiba out one more time.



Thanks,

C

[woodman]

I have an HD satellite box with DVI output & a DVD player with DVI output but only
one DVI input on my HDTV, which one would you use the DVI output with & which
one would you use component video output with?

It would make very little (if any) difference at all which I-C you use with which signal source - but if I were faced with that decision, I'd opt for the DVI connection from the satellite receiver, and the component-video connection from the DVD player. But like I said to begin with, the difference in performance would most likely be so small and inconsequential as to not be worth worrying over for even a minute.

[woodman]

Thanks much for the info. I'm looking around at HDTVs right now and I was locked into the mind-set that I absolutly NEEDED to get a set with HDMI input, not even thinking that DVI would be acceptable.

In order to take advantage of, and enjoy, the wonders of HiDefTV, you don't NEED either one. All that you DO need is component-video connections to give you all of the picture quality that HDTV has to offer. If the set that you choose to buy also supports HDMI or DVI connections, so much the better ... just in case the unspeakable should happen as I mentioned earlier. But NEEDING either one in order to get the best possible pictures - a big, fat NO!

Do you happen to have a link, or at least know of a site that I could research this further? I'd just like to have some more facts in regard to video reproduction based on HDMI/DVI vs. Component cables. Though now that I think about it, I guess the real question is:

What makes the DAC in componets better/worse than others?

In my case I guess I'm wondering if there are any HDTVs out there that have a better DAC than my Scientific Atlanta 8300HD cable box (which seems pretty damn good...and it has both HDMI and component outputs).

If there are better DACs in some HDTVs, than perhaps the HDMI/DVI connection is still valid (in those cases) if the DACs are all pretty much the same, than you're right, it doesn't make any difference.

No - I would not want to send you to any site on the internet to get more info on this subject, since there is a TON of misinformation out there masquerading as "The Truth" that would only serve to confuse you further and probably lead you down a primrose path leading to nowhere.

Whether or not there are TV sets with "better" video DACs than what your cable box contains is a difficult question at best. There are video DACs that are superior and which outperform others, but here again - the differences are gonna be subtle and inconsequential. Certainly not anything to base a decision upon regarding which set to buy.

Right now for HDTVs I was looking at the Sony KDF-50WE655 (though I'm open to other ideas...) which has a resolution of 1386 x 788 pixels and hence it displays at a native 788p.

Now...if I'm running component cables between my 8300HD and the Sony HDTV what would give me the best PQ?

1) 8300HD set to output at 720p and let the Sony upscale to 788p?

2) 8300HD set to output at 1080i and let the Sony down-scale to 788p? (is that even really a down-scale? or would the fact that you're moving from interlaced to progressive more than make up for the drop in scan rate?)

3) try them both fool and let us know?

Here again is a classic case of who cares? What for? The simple fact that the Sony has a "native scan rate" of 788 (which is different from any and all of the scan rates provided by your cable STB) would make for a more difficult conversion than would be had from a different set that had a "native" rate of 720 or 1080. In any case, you already acknowledged that I had (successfully, I hope) steered you away from the Sony beast altogether. Congrats!

Hope I've helped you further -

[drseid]

Actually...I'd like to take this one step further.

If I'm using the Sci Atl 8300HD cable STB, that means I can output at 480i, 480p, 720p, or 1080i. And I know that I can have the STB output at any of those rates via the component cables.

Right now for HDTVs I was looking at the Sony KDF-50WE655 (though I'm open to other ideas...) which has a resolution of 1386 x 788 pixels and hence it displays at a native 788p.

Now...if I'm running component cables between my 8300HD and the Sony HDTV what would give me the best PQ?

1) 8300HD set to output at 720p and let the Sony upscale to 788p?

2) 8300HD set to output at 1080i and let the Sony down-scale to 788p? (is that even really a down-scale? or would the fact that you're moving from interlaced to progressive more than make up for the drop in scan rate?)

3) try them both fool and let us know?


PS - Hey woodman, I see now that you replied to one of my posts over at HDTVoice.com ( http://www.hdtvoice.com/voice/showthread.php?t=14472 ) and told me to forget all about the sony..

Thanks, I'll go check the Mits and Toshiba out one more time.



Thanks,

C

I am using the 610 version of that Sony set (the one that does not have the HD tuner included) with the Scientific Atlanta HD8000 box. I looked at both the 1080i and 720p outputs through the component cables and I confess I did not notice any difference between the 2 (although I chose the 720p, less for it being a better picture to my eyes, but moreso that I thought it closer to the set's native resolution).

I did not try the DVI output, as an ISF technition that calibrated my TV warned me off using it (I forget the reason behind it).

---Dave

[Javier]

Let me jump in the thread with more question Woodman, i just received a digital receiver from voom the technician tried to conecct with dvi but mi set ( a rear projection set from phillips din not have a dvi connector but a 15 pin vga ( DB15) so we connected via component , but currently the signal that i'm getting is at 480, so i tought that i will be stuck with that display, so that means that if my set is capable of displaying 1080 resolution i can have it via component cable.

In order to take advantage of, and enjoy, the wonders of HiDefTV, you don't NEED either one. All that you DO need is component-video connections to give you all of the picture quality that HDTV has to offer. If the set that you choose to buy also supports HDMI or DVI connections, so much the better ... just in case the unspeakable should happen as I mentioned earlier. But NEEDING either one in order to get the best possible pictures - a big, fat NO!



No - I would not want to send you to any site on the internet to get more info on this subject, since there is a TON of misinformation out there masquerading as "The Truth" that would only serve to confuse you further and probably lead you down a primrose path leading to nowhere.

Whether or not there are TV sets with "better" video DACs than what your cable box contains is a difficult question at best. There are video DACs that are superior and which outperform others, but here again - the differences are gonna be subtle and inconsequential. Certainly not anything to base a decision upon regarding which set to buy.



Here again is a classic case of who cares? What for? The simple fact that the Sony has a "native scan rate" of 788 (which is different from any and all of the scan rates provided by your cable STB) would make for a more difficult conversion than would be had from a different set that had a "native" rate of 720 or 1080. In any case, you already acknowledged that I had (successfully, I hope) steered you away from the Sony beast altogether. Congrats!

Hope I've helped you further -

[woodman]

Let me jump in the thread with more question Woodman, i just received a digital receiver from voom the technician tried to conecct with dvi but mi set ( a rear projection set from phillips din not have a dvi connector but a 15 pin vga ( DB15) so we connected via component , but currently the signal that i'm getting is at 480, so i tought that i will be stuck with that display, so that means that if my set is capable of displaying 1080 resolution i can have it via component cable.

I'm having trouble understanding just what your question actually is - but here are a few things I can say that might help you.

1. 1080i, 480i, 480p, 720p etc. are not "resolution" ... they are the terms that are used to describe the "scanning format" that determines how the picture is created on the screen.

2. Your TV set most likely will convert all incoming signals to 1080i (if that is what's called its "native scanning rate"). So what is sent from the Voom satellite receiver is pretty much irrelevant.

3. Do not regret not having a DVI input on your set. Having one would not give you any "better" picture than the component-video connection you ended up having to use.

Hope this helps you

[cjtalbot]

Let me jump in the thread with more question Woodman, i just received a digital receiver from voom the technician tried to conecct with dvi but mi set ( a rear projection set from phillips din not have a dvi connector but a 15 pin vga ( DB15) so we connected via component , but currently the signal that i'm getting is at 480, so i tought that i will be stuck with that display, so that means that if my set is capable of displaying 1080 resolution i can have it via component cable.

Hey -

So it sounds like to me -

Your Voom STB is outputing at a 480i scan rate via the component cables and you're feeling that the picture quality is not as good as it could be ("...that i will be stuck with that display...").

And your HDTV is capable of a 1080i scan rate and you're wondering if perhaps the component cables are the limiting step that is keeping the Voom STB from outputing a 1080i scan rate vs. the 480i is outputing now?

Which would make the question:

Is the Voom STB box capable of outputing at a 1080i scan rate when the only output solution is the component cables? I guess you'll have to research that specific STB and find out. In light of the past discussion, this would be reletive to the DAC being used in that STB I believe.



woodman - Thanks for all the specific info, I really appreciate it.

cj