HDMI versus COMPONENT what looks better ?

[earwit]

There has been much Hoopla about Hdmi , as far as it being a straight
digital to digital transmission and being the future of video transmission
for HD-DVD and Blue Ray via the upcoming 1.3 HDMI interface..
Is it just me, or does HDMI video source not look as good as
as a component source.

I have been using a Comcast series III hdmi cable box and
a Poineer 79avi hdmi Dvd player, going into a Panny Plasma and
projector. Since both sources are outputting simultaneously in hdmi
and comp, is easy to make side by side comparisons, Component
always looks clearer, with more detail, regardless if I use 480i,480p,
720p, or 1080i . <Cable brand deleted by admin, no relevence to topic>

It makes me think the only real purpose of HDMI was copyright control..


Bob

[jonathanb3478]

I went to UT back in March. The reason was to help my friend out there setup his HT, since he bought a Sanyo Z3 LCD projector and a powered 101" screen. The two of us installed and setup everything.

When we got it all setup we used the Moto 6412 III from Comcast and compared 25ft runs of HDMI and Component off the box to the projector. There was effectively no difference, until you were with in 5ft of the 101" (diagonal) screen.

At that point you could clearly see certain image pixels "dance" together in clumps with the component interface. With the HDMI, all image pixels seemed to know their place and did not "dance" around eachother on the screen. Obviously, this was only visable on a static image. If the image showed movement, none of this effect was visable.

For that reason, my friend used the HDMI interface for the cable box.

This experience (with a 25ft cable run length, where you would think there would be a quite striking difference between digital vs analog interfaces) tells me HDMI is not "needed" for image quality issues. I was pretty sure before it was copy protection that drove the creation of HDMI, now I am sure of it.

I will say that video/audio all in one cable (with out any degredation, even if it has no real quality benefit) is pretty cool. I will grant HDMI that much. No more, however. Unfortunately, it doesn't help me at all. My digital audio goes to a different place than my digital video, since my receiver does not support digital video switching. Still, this aspect is an improvement for those who can use it.

[aud19]

Depends on quality of the sources output, the cables and the displays input. So neither and both Chances are HDMI "should" look better, particularly on fixed pixel displays but not always.

[Ovation]

I've read several reviews of the Sony SXRD TVs (from Nov 2005) and they each state that the TV has very good video processing so they recommend sending a 480i signal to it for best performance (I'm assuming this is true up to a point--an external processor or some high end players like the Denon 5910 probably outperform the TV) and as relatively few players will output 480i over HDMI (and the low-cost Pioneer that does so is not a good interlaced player, according to Secrets), then the best option for DVD, at any rate, might be component inputs, despite the D/A/D conversion.

[Audiophiliac]

As aud19 said, it depends on everything. Keep in mind that a fixed pixel display must scale any input signal to its native resolution.

When I was at Runco, they were showing us the ins and outs of their DHD controller/scalar. They had tested hundreds of DVD players and found that 480i component provided the better picture in all but a few cases. When we asked about HDMI and DVI, they said only a $10k Linn Unidisk, and the Krell DVD Standard, could they say there was a slight advantage to using the digital outputs.

Of course this only applies to a Runco display using the DHD scalar, but you get the idea. You have to try all options and find which one works best for you. Good luck!

[PewterTA]

HDMI I have always found to have a slightly crisper image, little more detailed. Enough that if you hook up (just about) any component and go between component and HDMI, the HDMI 99.9% of the time, shows a difference and looks better.

I've done the comparison with both good and cheap cables on DVD players and HD cable boxes on plasma, lcd, and dlp tvs.

It's almost like getting that last bit of focus in on the picture...I'm guessing it's due to the digital to analog switching of it all.

[comeup]

I find that HDMI is sharper but is that good or bad I tend to like component better most of the time and find that HDMI is too sharp it makes the picture look unreal especially around the edges.

With the upconverting dvd players I believe HDMI is a must on most players.


Must admit the single cable is nice.

[bigburner]

I have just spent the weekend rearranging my system to accommodate a new OPPO 971 DVD and a new Samsung 42" HD plasma. During the course of the installation I experimented with DVI, component and composite (for interest sake). Predictably composite was very ordinary. The difference between component and DVI was smaller but without a doubt DVI was superior. Of course that could be a feature of the OPPO. [Note: for those who don't know about DVI, it is the same as the video part of HDMI.]

[misterdoggy]

I'm using a DVDO (latest) upscaler and Panny 50 inch Plasma.

I have several sources 480i, and 576i that are upscaled in the DVDO to 720p or 1080i.

The DVDO and Plasma let you use either HDMI, Component or PC as connections.

I tried all 3 connections using top quality cables.

My Results were:

The 2 best were HDMI and component. Although HDMI had a sharper image, it was more "muted", Component was overall more colorful and brighter.

This is considering that I played with HDMI to get the best possible picture on the Plasma's settings and DVDO's settings.

Component won and that is what I use. :T

[EastCoaster]

The 2 best were HDMI and component. Although HDMI had a sharper image, it was more "muted", Component was overall more colorful and brighter.

Component won and that is what I use. :T

I agree wholeheartedly. HDMI has the sharper image, but colours are better on component. I use component.

[Snap]

I freeking HATE HDMI! Nothing but a major pain in the balls! Waste of bloody money!

I have used Pure AV, Ultra Link, Monster, and several other cable companies. And the last 3 homes that I have done, the HDMI sucks! DVD, Cable it does not matter..... it just does not work as good as component video.

Not to mention the fact that a MAJORITY of the cable/Sat companies use CHEAP stuff in making their HDMI stuff. Just burns me up. We will not even install HDMI any more. 2 runs of Comp video is all we will do!

:rant: just pisses me off!

Untill they fix the problems with HDMI I will never use it again. Comp video is also cheaper!

[Vinny]

I have just spent the weekend rearranging my system to accommodate a new OPPO 971 DVD and a new Samsung 42" HD plasma. During the course of the installation I experimented with DVI, component and composite (for interest sake). Predictably composite was very ordinary. The difference between component and DVI was smaller but without a doubt DVI was superior. Of course that could be a feature of the OPPO. [Note: for those who don't know about DVI, it is the same as the video part of HDMI.]

Oppo only allowed component to have 480i as its maximum resolution. Only HDMI/DVI can do 720p/1080i on it. For the price of Oppo, it make sense put extra stuff to increase the cost(which I appreciate for not spending extra money on useless features)

There are barely products can compare equally for HDMI/Component. Some TVs/DVD players perform better on HDMI/Comp and vice versa. But I would say the biggest factor is how the TV performs, as well as its scaler(or external) :B

[Lex]

I will point out that Snap never used CAT's new HDMI. But as far as component, few get better imagery than the CAT Tigress. Silver does make a difference-

Doug
CATCables.com

[dyazdani]

I've been wanting to do a good test on this, but I've only had time to calibrate my HDMI input. Maybe I'll get a chance to do the component and see what's what.

[PewterTA]

Doug,

How about using silver in your HDMI cables. hee hee.

[misterdoggy]

I just read an interesting article by Geoffrey Morrison of Home Theater Magazine the the difference between 1080p (hdmi HiDef) and 1080i (what most of your Plasmas can do) is null.

It says from 50 inch down your eyes can't see the difference, and that even if many of the Plasma's out there say they can produce 1080p they can only do 1080i.

http://blog.hometheatermag.com/geoffreymorrison/

Of course the more definition the better for projectors.

[Snap]

I will point out that Snap never used CAT's new HDMI. But as far as component, few get better imagery than the CAT Tigress. Silver does make a difference-

Doug
CATCables.com

TRUE TRUE.... but that still does not rule out the simple fact, that the cable Co. Mass produced box, with their CHEAP HDMI connections is still going to be the week link.
And even higher end gear. Love Yammy to death but 3 different 950 DVD players and every time the HDMI sucks! Heck on my last one it would not even go progressive scan with HDMI. Yeah I know it was Yammy's fault.... but it worked just fine with comp video!

Congrats Lex.... did not know that you had added HDMI!


I might.....key work MIGHT..... give HDMI 1.3 or what ever it is a try......

MAYBE!