DVI vs. HDMI vs. Component Video -- Which is Better?
First, to clear away one element that can be confusing: DVI and HDMI are exactly the same as one another, image-quality-wise. The principal differences are that HDMI carries audio as well as video, and uses a different type of connector, but both use the same encoding scheme, and that's why a DVI source can be connected to an HDMI monitor, or vice versa, with a DVI/HDMI cable, with no intervening converter box. The upshot of this article--in case you're not inclined to read all the details--is that it's very hard to predict whether a digital DVI or HDMI connection will produce a better or worse image than an analog component video connection. There will often be significant differences between the digital and the analog signals, but those differences are not inherent in the connection type and instead depend upon the characteristics of the source device (e.g., your DVD player) and the display device (e.g., your TV set). Why that is, however, requires a bit more discussion. What are DVI, HDMI and Component Video? DVI/HDMI and Component Video are all video standards which support a variety of resolutions, but which deliver the signal from the source to the display in very different ways. The principal important difference is that DVI/HDMI deliver the signal in a digital format, much the same way that a file is delivered from one computer to another along a network, while Component Video is an analog format, delivering the signal not as a bitstream, but as a set of continuously varying voltages representing (albeit indirectly, as we'll get to in a moment) the red, green and blue components of the signal. Both DVI/HDMI and Component Video deliver signals as discrete red, green, and blue color components, together with sync information which allows the display to determine when a new line, or a new frame, begins. The DVI/HDMI standard delivers these along three data channels in a format called T.M.D.S., which stands for "Transmission Minimized Differential Signaling." Big words aside, the T.M.D.S. format basically involves a blue channel to which horizontal and vertical sync are added, and separate green and red channels. Component Video is delivered, similarly, with the color information split up three ways. However, component video uses a "color-difference" type signal, which consists of Luminance (the "Y", or "green," channel, representing the total brightness of the image), Red Minus Luminance (the "Pr," or "Red," channel), and Blue Minus Luminance (the "Pb," or "Blue," channel). The sync pulses for both horizontal and vertical are delivered on the Y channel. The display calculates the values of red, green and blue from the Y, Pb, and Pr signals. Both signal types, then, are fundamentally quite similar; they break up the image in similar ways, and deliver the same type of information to the display, albeit in different forms. How they differ, as we'll see, will depend to a great extent upon the particular characteristics of the source and display devices, and can depend upon cabling as well. Isn't Digital Just Better? It is often supposed by writers on this subject that "digital is better." Digital signal transfer, it is assumed, is error-free, while analog signals are always subject to some amount of degradation and information loss. There is an element of truth to this argument, but it tends to fly in the face of real-world considerations. First, there is no reason why any perceptible degradation of an analog component video signal should occur even over rather substantial distances; the maximum runs in home theater installations do not present a challenge for analog cabling built to professional standards. Second, it is a flawed assumption to suppose that digital signal handling is always error-free. DVI and HDMI signals aren't subject to error correction; once information is lost, it's lost for good. That is not a consideration with well-made cable over short distances, but can easily become a factor at distance. So What Does Determine Image Quality? Video doesn't just translate directly from source material to displays, for a variety of reasons. Very few displays operate at the native resolutions of common source material, so when you're viewing material in 480p, 720p, or 1080i, there is, of necessity, some scaling going on. Meanwhile, the signals representing colors have to be accurately rendered, which is dependent on black level and "delta," the relationship between signal level and actual as-rendered color level. Original signal formats don't correspond well to display hardware; for example, DVD recordings have 480 lines, but non-square pixels. What all of this means is that there is signal processing to go on along the signal chain. The argument often made for the DVI or HDMI signal formats is the "pure digital" argument--that by taking a digital recording, such as a DVD or a digital satellite signal, and rendering it straight into digital form as a DVI or HDMI signal, and then delivering that digital signal straight to the display, there is a sort of a perfect no-loss-and-no-alteration-of-information signal chain. If the display itself is a native digital display (e.g. an LCD or Plasma display), the argument goes, the signal never has to undergo digital-to-analog conversion and therefore is less altered along the way. That might be true, were it not for the fact that digital signals are encoded in different ways and have to be converted, and that these signals have to be scaled and processed to be displayed. Consequently, there are always conversions going on, and these conversions aren't always easy going. "Digital to digital" conversion is no more a guarantee of signal quality than "digital to analog," and in practice may be substantially worse. Whether it's better or worse will depend upon the circuitry involved--and that is something which isn't usually practical to figure out. As a general rule, with consumer equipment, one simply doesn't know how signals are processed, and one doesn't know how that processing varies by input. Analog and digital inputs must either be scaled through separate circuits, or one must be converted to the other to use the same scaler. How is that done? In general, you won't find an answer to that anywhere in your instruction manual, and even if you did, it'd be hard to judge which is the better scaler without viewing the actual video output. It's fair to say, in general, that even in very high-end consumer gear, the quality of circuits for signal processing and scaling is quite variable. Additionally, it's not uncommon to find that the display characteristics of different inputs have been set up differently. Black level, for example, may vary considerably from the digital to the analog inputs, and depending on how sophisticated your setup options on your display are, that may not be an easy thing to recalibrate. The Role of Cable and Connection Quality Cable quality, in general, should not be a significant factor in the DVI/HDMI versus Component Video comparison, as long as the cables in question are of high quality. There are, however, ways in which cable quality issues can come into play. Analog component video is an extremely robust signal type; we have had our customers run analog component, without any need for boosters, relays or other special equipment, up to 200 feet without any signal quality issues at all. However, at long lengths, cable quality can be a consideration--in particular, impedance needs to be strictly controlled to a tight tolerance (ideally, 75 +/- 1.5 ohms) to prevent problems with signal reflection which can cause ghosting or ringing. DVI and HDMI, unfortunately, are not so robust. The problem here is the same as the virtue of analog component: tight control over impedance. When the professional video industry went to digital signals, it settled upon a standard--SDI, serial digital video--which was designed to be run in coaxial cables, where impedance can be controlled very tightly, and consequently, uncompressed, full-blown HD signals can be run hundreds of feet with no loss of information in SDI. For reasons known only to the designers of the DVI and HDMI standards, this very sound design principle was ignored; instead of coaxial cable, the DVI and HDMI signals are run balanced, through twisted-pair cable. The best twisted pair cables control impedance to about +/- 10%. When a digital signal is run through a cable, the edges of the bits (represented by sudden transitions in voltage) round off, and the rounding increases dramatically with distance. Meanwhile, poor control over impedance results in signal reflections--portions of the signal bounce off of the display end of the line, propagate back down the cable, and return, interfering with later information in the same bitstream. At some point, the data become unrecoverable, and with no error correction available, there's no way to restore the lost information. DVI and HDMI connections, for this reason, are subject to the "digital cliff" phenomenon. Up to some length, a DVI or HDMI cable will perform just fine; the rounding and reflections will not compromise the ability of the display device to reconstruct the original bitstream, and no information will be lost. As we make the cable longer and longer, the difficulty of reconstructing the bitstream increases. At some point, unrecoverable bit errors start to occur; these are colloquially described in the home theater community as "sparklies," because the bit errors manifest themselves as pixel dropouts which make the image sparkle. If we make the cable just a bit longer, so much information is lost that the display becomes unable to reconstitute enough information to even render an image; the bitstream has fallen off the digital cliff, so called because of the abruptness of the failure. A cable design that works perfectly at 20 feet may get "sparkly" at 25, and stop working entirely at 30. In practice, it's very hard to say when a DVI or HDMI signal will fail. We have found well-made DVI cables to be quite reliable up to 50 feet, but HDMI cable, with its smaller profile, is a bit more of a puzzle. Because the ability to reconstitute the bitstream varies depending on the quality of the circuitry in the source and display devices, it's not uncommon for a cable to work fine at 30, 40, or 50 feet on one source/display combination, and not work at all on another. The Upshot: It Depends So, which is better, DVI or component? HDMI or component? The answer--unsatisfying, perhaps, but true--is that it depends. It depends upon your source and display devices, and there's no good way, in principle, to say in advance whether the digital or the analog connection will render a better picture. You may even find, say, that your DVD player looks better through its DVI or HDMI output, while your satellite or cable box looks better through its component output, on the same display. In this case, there's no real substitute for simply plugging it in and giving it a try both ways. by Blue Jeans Cable (reprinted with permission) |
||||
| Relevant Product Info | ||||
| Author | Comments | |||
     Unregistered guest |
Your point is well-taken. We must experiment. Very well-written and informative article. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
Here's my problem, I have the "the dish network" and its HD service. I have a sony HD TV (KV-32HS510) and I am using the DVI connection to connect to the "the dish network" HD receiver. And well the image quality is awesome on the HD channels at 1080i, but at that resolution the display has diagonal lines, as if it's refreshing it's self. Okay, at first I thought it was the cable, so I went through four different DVI-D cables, same effect each time. Okay, so then I requested a new HD receiver, unfortunately it had the same effect. I then had a good guy's technician examine my TV, he said it must be the HD receiver. So now I am living with the effect, nothing else I can think of doing. Does anyone have any suggestions? |
|||
|
RWPL Unregistered guest |
I have an Arcam DV79 and Pioneer plasma. Both support HDMI, which was one of the reasons i choose these particular models. I was quite amazed that the HDMI picture is no different to the component one. Having read so much in the media at the time, I was sure that HDMI picture quality would be better. It wasn't! I am now using component. |
|||
|
Anonymous |
HDMI isn't necessarily about a superior picture. Among other things its flexible enough to enable someone to pay tolls to literally buy hi def dvd disc copies of various movies -from home Play-only hi def dvd starts in Fall 2005, however the more complicated issue is the record hi def dvd disc question. NOTE STUDIOS WILL NEVER PERMIT W/O PAYMENT ANY HI DEF PORTABLE DVD COPIES TO BE MADE, otherwise they w/b crazy - as one copy could mean 1000 copies. Their copyrights would in essence be worthless This technology is a bit away and the studios and munufacturers are still trying to figure it all out, however it will arrive some day, and HDMI gives them that flexibility Meanwhile note that fortunately the studios deem making copies onto a hard drive (e.g. Motorola DCT6400 avail via Comcast, plus various other units for the SATS)as de facto valid under the "fair use" exception, meaning they can be and normally only will be used within a household in practical terms Ideally we could use some larger hard drives and everyone would be happy |
|||
|
tainted Unregistered guest |
In regard to higher capacity discs and burning, it will come in time. We will have the burners, and there will be programs to copy movies the same as we have now. To think that the owners of any media will ever eliminate the reproduction of their works is just being naieve, just as it is to think that everyone who makes copies of media is distributing them. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
I am so glad I read this first, along with the comments. I am upgrading to a LCD television that has the HDMI compatibility, but my year old DVD and Receiver/Amp do not. I was thinking about dumping the $200 into a new DVD player and hooking it strait to the TV, bypassing the Surround sound. The cable price is also about an additional $100. What a mistake that would have been?! |
|||
|
Anonymous |
I have to disagree a little with this subject. I currently have a Pioneer Elite Pro1110HD and a Elite DV-59AVI. I can not output 1920x1080 through the component video connections. I can acheive this through the HDMI cable. And it looks awesome. I think the consumer needs to be more educated and match the native resolution of there devices. Also, even the best serial digitial coax cable are sweep tested at 3 GHz bandwidths and HDMI cables are getting 5 GHz bandwidth. |
|||
|
New member Username: MailmanPaarl, Western Cape South Africa Post Number: 7 Registered: Nov-04 |
Purely from the Audio quality point of view is there anything clearly pointing in the direction of one of the two ? |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
i have a samsung dlp 50in, the pedestal type, hooked up to bravo d2 through dvi cable 15ft, the display is AWESOME!!!! except for the d2's remote, it interferes with the rec and vice versa, anybody?? please advice...i know this question is not in this article, but i need ur input, thx... btw, grt article so much information taken...thx again!!!! |
|||
|
RussV Unregistered guest |
HDMI/DVI versus Component in terms of Upscaling. I have had several debates with so-claimed audio/video experts on the use of HDMI/DVI versus Component and around the subject of upscaling. Most HDTV LCD/Plasma have a native resolution of 720p. Only the newer 45" LCD have a 1080p native resolution. Those TVs will adapt most signals to it's native resolution. So - there are some DVD players that will also do their own up-conversion to 720p or 1080i (Denon, Sony, Samsung.....) and they can only be effective when using a HDMI/DVI cable....so my question is would it be better for your DVD player to up-convert and transfer the digital signal via HDMI/DVI....or would it be better to use component cables to transer the signal to the TV and have it up-convert.......or even yet - would it be better to trasnfer the signal digitally from the DVD player to the TV at 480p and have the TV upconvert it to 720p? The warning for the latter is that some digital TVs will also support 480p meaning no up-conversion will take place......there doesn't seem to be a text-book answer on which is better. |
|||
|
Silver Member Username: VindslPost Number: 125 Registered: Jul-04 |
Component is best! That's why 'they' use it in professional video equipment... What more can you say?  |
|||
|
Silver Member Username: VindslPost Number: 126 Registered: Jul-04 |
It is often supposed by writers on this subject that "digital is better." That's true! However, the only 'true' digital connection is a 'light sword', e.g. fiber optics, so... |
|||
|
Silver Member Username: VindslPost Number: 127 Registered: Jul-04 |
A cable design that works perfectly at 20 feet may get "sparkly" at 25, and stop working entirely at 30. If you have long cable runs, go s-video. That's the only reason it's still around - that and use with high-end digital camcorders and such - things that have a better DAC than your TV. It's good for 50-60 ft. DVI usually starts crapping out around 16 ft. Dittos for HDMI... |
|||
|
Silver Member Username: VindslPost Number: 128 Registered: Jul-04 |
My question is would it be better for your DVD player to up-convert and transfer the digital signal via HDMI/DVI? If your player has a Farouja chipset, let it do the upscaling. Otherwise, pass it off to the TV... |
|||
|
m green Unregistered guest |
thanks very much, helpful and well written |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
I have a DELL W4200HD Plasma, connected via PureAV Belkin HDMI cable to a Samsung H10 receiver, I am experiencing issues with the picture going out occasionally and as of yesterday I am also having issue with the sound only when viewing HD broacast. A support tech at BestBuy mentioned to me that he has been told that there are issues with HDMI cables. Can anyone shed light on the subject? Thanks, E.R. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
Ok let’s see if anyone has a solution for this. I do HDV editing via my pc, I have the new Z1u HDV camera by Sony. I just got the Sony xbr960 34-inch tube HDTV for one major reason. FIRE WIRE. I would much rather see and know that my digital HD video is being monitored, as it should be instead of doing a conversion from hdv to svideo. When I first got the TV I plugged my z1u into it via fire wire immediately and pressed play. I was stunned at the picture. Never have I ever seen such a picture. I felt as if I could reach through the glass into this world. I could see incredible detail in the footage I shot. At this point I am really happy, the fire wire connection was very impressive as compared to video and SD. Now for hooking up my fire wire out of my editing pc to my Sony HDTV which has fire wire inputs. I assumed that because while editing you can go out your fire wire into a dv or hdv camera to view the signal then the same would be true for the fire wire equipped TV. My result was that the pc recognized the TV and its model but it wanted a driver interact with it. So in the end no picture on the TV. Sony officially says it was not designed for that. So my best option unless you guys have another is to go out of my pc via fire wire >into my HDV camera>out of my camera via component rgb and into >my TV. I was hoping there were a fire wire to dvi/hdmi converter but no such luck. I think what will end up happening in the near future is that graphics cards/editing cards for pc or Mac will have an extra dvi/hdmi out for your TV and the software will understand to put the program signal out that port. But for right now if you have to LCD DVI monitors and your editing I cant think of a better solution than what I have just proposed. Its true when I am done with ruff or final cuts of my project I could unplug one of my monitors dvi cables and plug it into the HDTV via an dvi/hdmi adapter then play the final peace in full screen from a player like Nero or something. Well guys give me some answers J |
|||
|
nismo240 Unregistered guest |
I have a Sony KV-30HS510 and I'm currently using the DVI connection from my motorola HD-box, but back to back test using the DVI and component resulted in a brighter picture with the component connection, which surprised me, it that normal? I use the DVE dvd to calibrate my system, but my dvd only has component connects, I thinking because of that my settings are only optimize for component inputs, but even so you would think that you would think that the DVI would produce a brighter picture than the component. I must add though that I still use the DVI connection because I feel that other than a darker picture, you do get better colors and much deeper blacks or it could just be the "digital to digital" factor swaying me...hmmm |
|||
|
ogbuehi Unregistered guest |
For Jason1569, if you want to connect your pc directly to your tv, they have video cards that have a DVI output for your tv. Just be aware that to get a card that outputs full 1080i, you are going to spend about $300. For nismo240, I don't know if this is an option for you but you could buy an upconverting DVD player that outputs 720p or 1080i through HDMI or DVI. If you want the best picture possible from your dvd's this is definetly a worthwhile investment. I've been reading a lot of comments on people getting not too hot results for viewing non-hd material through DVI/HDMI. |
|||
|
coyote Unregistered guest |
jason1569 said; "I think what will end up happening in the near future is that graphics cards/editing cards for pc or Mac will have an extra dvi/hdmi out for your TV and the software will understand to put the program signal out that port." Asus makes a PC with an onboard DVI output. My question: Shouldn't that PC be able to skip any videocard processing, and simply put the digital stream directly out the DVI? And if paired with an HD capture card (such as Air2PC or MyHD130) which captures the stream directly to hard disk, wouldn't it obviate the need for a high-end video card such as the Raedon? |
|||
|
New member Username: StormPost Number: 1 Registered: Mar-05 |
I recently bought an LGDVB416 DVD player. It should upconvert to 1080i. However, the manual states that when using component cables it will upconvert to 480p only; when playing copy protected material (which is all rental DVD's). Are all DVD players that upconvert and using component cables limited in this way? |
|||
|
Anonymous |
Great discussion. So, if I connect my TEAC HD STB DVI out to Pioneer HDMI using a DVI to HDMI cable, will it work? |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
For copy protection, read up on HDPC. If you are buying a cable for DVI, understand there are SIX different configurations, some with analog video, some two way etc. There are DVI analog to VGA adaptors, there are very expensive DVI digital to analog adaptors and best of all is the fiber optics (noted in an earlier post) requiring power and some which does not require external power. Installer beware! |
|||
|
jmtdhurst Unregistered guest |
I have a Pioneer PDP-5010HD. It doesn't appear to have the DVI or HDMI inputs (only component or RGB(whatever that is)). Will a DVD player that upconverts to 1080i or 720p using component cables be any better than a 480p with component cables? |
|||
|
Anonymous |
Think twice before investing into DVI/HDMI solutions! One of the major reasons the studios are pushing DVI/HDMI interfaces in upcoming players is because those interfaces provide COPYRIGHT PROTECTION!!! Component output, on the other hand, provides no way to protect the content transmitted over it. Quality-wise, I can't tell the difference between component and DVI in any of my systems, so I always use component. Be careful if you decide to go the DVI/HDMI route, though, because if you go that way, you will NOT be able to record the content (unless you hack HDCP, which will take a while). With component, though, it is very veasible to build a simple box that will take a unversal component in (1080i/1080p/720p/480p/480i), encode it into MPEG-2 and ship digital out to firewire. There are already boxes coming to the market that do that. I, personally, only buy equipment that has component output. And preferably, ONLY component output - watch out for some of the BlueRay players that have both component and HDMI, but disable component when high-definition content is being played - don't buy such players! Just my 2 cents. |
|||
|
tallrussian Unregistered guest |
I recently bought AVeL LinkPlayer 2 that converts all DVDs to 1080i output on the component. Before that I had a Pioneer player that played everything in 480p. I have Sony KDF-42WE655 TV that upconverts everything to its native 1080 resolution automatically. To tell you the truth, I don't see much difference between rental DVDs played at 480p (with my old Pioneer) or at 1080i (with my new AVeL LinkPlayer). They all look fabulous (maybe just a bit better with the AVeL). Of course, the best part of AVeL is its network playback capabilities (plays files from your harddrive/PC), and the ability to play high-def 1080i and 1080p (!) content from AVI/WMV/TS/MP2, etc files either from the network or from its local CD/DVD drive, that's the biggest reason I bought it. jmtdhurst wrote: > I have a Pioneer PDP-5010HD. It doesn't appear > to have the DVI or HDMI inputs (only component > or RGB(whatever that is)). Will a DVD player > that upconverts to 1080i or 720p using component > cables be any better than a 480p with component > cables? |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
I believe the issue is #1 the frequency response of component video averages out to about 13mhz. #2 The frequency response of dvi/hdmi averages out past 18mhz. In conclusion if you want to push 1080 or 720 you will need cable to reach past 18mhz and that is dvi/hdmi. Component video is best at 480 peaking at 13mhz. |
|||
|
Auburnsnapper Unregistered guest |
Distance Issue. Between display and rack have about 20-25 ft. Connecting new DVD player with DVI connection. Should I place it in the rack and run the DVI the 20-25 ft or should I put player by the TV running the audio connnection(toslink or Composite)the distance? Which would maximize the video and the sound? |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
Dear Sir/Madam, I have recently purchased a Panasonic TH-50PV30 Plasma "High Defifinition" set. The picture using Standard definition broadcasts are exceptionally impressive on this set, but the question mark remains as to weather it can display true HD television pictures, as there is no information in the instruction leaflet about High definition reception,although the set is described as "High definiton" on the front cover of the manual. There is no sign of any HDMI or DVI connections, and Panasonic have told me much to my dissappointment that The component video inputs at the back of the set will not provide true High definition pictures. I have asked Panasonic if these component video inputs are of a wide bandwidth, but they do not seem to know the answer, and there are no specifications about the component inputs in the instructions. Could you please resolve this problem for me, and try to find out if my receiver can indeed provide High definition pictures, using the component video connections? |
|||
|
AlanComponent Unregistered guest |
If your TV has only one set of component video inputs available, can you put a "Y" connector on each of the three inputs to allow for two units: DVD and computer media D-Link DSM-320 to be attached at a time)? |
|||
|
Dubya Unregistered guest |
Dear Sir/Madam, I have recently purchased a Panasonic TH-50PV30 Plasma "High Defifinition" set. The picture using Standard definition broadcasts are exceptionally impressive on this set, but the question mark remains as to weather it can display true HD television pictures, as there is no information in the instruction leaflet about High definition reception,although the set is described as "High definiton" on the front cover of the manual. There is no sign of any HDMI or DVI connections, and Panasonic have told me much to my dissappointment that The component video inputs at the back of the set will not provide true High definition pictures. I have asked Panasonic if these component video inputs are of a wide bandwidth, but they do not seem to know the answer, and there are no specifications about the component inputs in the instructions. Could you please resolve this problem for me, and try to find out if my receiver can indeed provide High definition pictures, using the component video connections? Ivor Nicholas, you should check to see if your TV is "HD Ready" or "HD Compatable". If this is the case, then it does not have an HD Tuner in it, and you have to get one separately. If it's a tru HD TV, then most likely, that "exceptionally impressive" picture is probably only a taste of what you would get if you had a true HD Signal hooked up to your Component Inputs. |
|||
|
troy heagy Unregistered guest |
DVI = ~25 feet max Component = ~200 feet I think it's obvious which I'd choose - the one with longer line length & less signal loss. |
|||
|
pjm2120 Unregistered guest |
I have a TV with HDMI Input as the only available source for HDTV input (even though it has component, but it doesn't recognize those as HD) and my cable box only has component outputs, as does my DVD player. Anyone know of any component to HDMI adaptors? I tried to look but they all seem to show up only as DVI to HDMI adaptors. Please provide a store name or just where to look. Thanks |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
Dear Troy Heagy,Or anyone who can solve My question) Many thanks for Your reply to My enquiry about My Plsma HD Television! However, Your comments do not answer My question: What I really meant was: Can a HD Tuner be connected to My telly via My component video inputs, as I do not have any other inputs such as DVI or HDMI? I should mention that I live in the United Kingdom, where We do not have HD Television as yet, and which is due to be launched by "Sky Satellite" next Year, i.e. 2006. I am aware that My Television does not have a built in HD tuner, but the question I am trying to find the answer to is; will My component inputs be usable in the UK (To connect to a "sky" HD Tuner to convert to HD,) or might they turn out to be obsolete in My Country? Regards, Ivor Nicholas. |
|||
|
New member Username: AsterixPost Number: 1 Registered: May-05 |
I thoroughly enjoyed reading about the differences between component and DVI/HDMI video standards as well as their real world/theoretical limits and quality issues. I own a Mitsubishi WD-62525 and an awesome DVD player RJ1500DVXII http://www.rjtech.net/desc_RJ-1500DVXII.htm The dvd player is capable of displaying 480p which is acceptable and I am happy with the output (component). This particular dvd player (available on eBay) supports a great variety of formats including DiVX and XViD. I highly recommend reading about it on: http://www.videohelp.com/dvdplayers.php?DVDname=RJTech+1500&Search=Search&chipse t=&country=&orderby=Name&hits=25 I too, like some of you, got sucked into trying the DVI/HDMI connection for my high definition cable box. I ran into a major problem of not being able to run it using MonLink in the TV setup. Essentially I got an error message on the TV screen saying that my TV does not support HDCP. Mitsubishi tech support assured me that the TV does support HDCP and that the issue should be addressed with my cable provider (TimeWarner). After two hours of frustration (trying every possible solution, searching the web and talking to some semi ignorant cable tech support people) trying to get the digital cable to work, I gave up. I also felt that paying $150 for the ultimate HDMI/DVI cable from Monster cables was borderline insane. After reading this discussion I went back to using component cables which provide me with awesome 1080p picture quality... I believe the old saying: If you can't see the difference, why pay a difference. It is true that I was not able to see the DVI/HDMI output on my TV but after a lot of research on the web it seems that the bottom line is that your picture quality essentially rests on the quality of your display and the capabilities of your periferals (DVD player, cable box). I would like to see what my DVD movies would look like in 720p with a newer DVD player but I am quite happy with the existing setup. What are your thoughts on my experience? |
|||
|
Anonymous |
Have I goofed? Can someone put my mind at rest!. I have installed but yet to fire up in anger a Screenplay 4805 with a Yamaha 750 receiver (which upscales)and have a denon 1910 which has DVI output. Q. I have used component leads to the projector and basically ignore the Screenplays DVI connector.have I missed an opportunity to get a better picture out of my denon/screenplay combination? Thanks Jon |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
I need help! I recently purchased a Mitsubishi 55" HDTV compatible televsion (model WS-55315). I am running a regular DirectTV receiver and system on the tv using an s-video hook-up. I am not concerned about HD channels. My concern is with the regular channels. I get a strong signal from the dish (85-90) but the picture still appears grainy and blurry, especially during sporting events. I do have a long cable run and have hooked-up a satellite in-line amplifier that is self powered. I have been on the phone with DirectTV many times and can not get an answer as to why the picture is not better. The picture when watching a DVD seems better than the one I am getting from the dish. What else could I try or get to receive a more clear picture. Is the tv just not good and I will have to live with it? It didn't look near this poor in the store or I wouldn't have bought it. The picture on the tv shouldn't be that bad should it? I have tried using rca and s-video cables, several different kinds. The receiver does not have any component of dvi outputs. Is there a problem with the installation? Help! Thanks. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
I am planning to buy a 50 inch Panansonic TH-50 PHD7UY HD TV monitor; the TV comes standard with Component input and extra for HDMI input. I plan also to use DIRECT-TV for HD service. DIRECT-TV offers both HDMI and component output in their HD receiver. I also plan to take sound directly from the DIRECT-TV receiver and input it directly in to my Sony HT-DDW750 home theater system. Since HDMI carries both video and audio, is it worth it to buy the HDMI input capability in my TV. My Toshiba SD3960 DVD player has only component output. Is the HDMI TV input worth the extra $145? |
|||
|
Petchal Unregistered guest |
i would get HDMI anyway, you'll need to get it in a few years.... quick vote: http://site.voila.fr/hdmi/index.htm |
|||
|
Bronze Member Username: VideobruceBuffalo , NY Post Number: 13 Registered: Nov-04 |
HDMI is a cheaper to produce connector with a larger price tag! GPM (Gross Profit Monster). |
|||
|
irishfan007 Unregistered guest |
I went to American Electronics yesterday and looked at both DVI and HDMI compared to Component Video. You cannot tell a difference. The sales man tried to convice me and a colleague to no avail. The DVD player was a DENON 1910 that he used it had HDMI plugins and component. It also had the Farouji chip. I could not tell a differnece compared to my Panasonic player at home. Bottom Line: There is always a new "Technology" to try and replace the old. In the case of HDMI it may make more sense but it is not necessarily better. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
Here is my situation, i have a plus V1080 projector and I am quite happy with it , HD TV looks great. I am upgrading my computer, and want to play DVD's using it and get rid of my very old pioneer dvd player. So what will give me the better quality picture DVI or VGA? If i go with the IMac i will have VGA output at 8X read speed. If i get the Mac Mini it will read at 8X also BUT it will have DVI out! I am not in need of a G5 processor, the Imac is pretty cool though... if DVI out of MacMini will give me a better image than the VGA out of the IMac then i would get the MacMini and a 20" screen for my computer screen, and use a DVI switch to direct signal to screen or projector. Thanks in advance. |
|||
|
richard n. Unregistered guest |
I have Dish network HDTV receiver with DVI output and regular red/white AV audio wire. If I buy a HDTV with HDMI input, where does the AV audio go? Can I still get audio if I select HDMI source? |
|||
|
alan morris Unregistered guest |
RF is the best and you know it! |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
Is there a DVD player that can push 720P/1080P over component cable? Richard |
|||
|
Anonymous |
hi, i am planning to buy a hdtv/hd ready tv. i have two models in mind which one do you recommend. samsung 40" LNR408D and Benq 37" DV3750 (is this a good brand to go for...) rathin_kumar@hotmail.com thanks in advance Rathin |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
This is for richard n. I just bought a Samsung HL-P4663W and it has an HDMI connector on the back, but it also has a dedicated audio connector just for the HDMI connection. I'm getting ready to get the Dish Network 811 receiver for my TV, I have the standard DP310 receiver now. I'm planning on using the HDMI connection for that, as it stands now, I'm using the regular RCA cables for my receiver and component cables for my (cheap) dvd player. Hope this helps. |
|||
|
Unregistered guest |
This is for richard n. Forget everything I just said, | |||
