HDMI vs Component?

[Dari]

Virtual Dynamics: Just think! We only have to sell one!
Monster Cable: Dude, there are millions out there with no sense. That's our business model.
Virtual Dynamics: Hmmm...

 

[zerocool84]

Maybe they are playing on 20" monitors? Otherwise I don't understand either. Component devices are soft and fuzzy compared to the crispness of HDMI. My PS3 looks gloriously crisp over HDMI and this is immediately apparent on the XMB. My component 360 is soft and fuzzy and not as impressive.

So you comparing HDMI PS3 to a 360 over component is the defacto standard??? Sorry but it doesn't work that way.

 

[BenSkywalker]

You know what's funny, is my wife will be watching like food channel or whatever in SD on our 42" HDTV. And I'll go to her "why aren't you watching this in HD?" Her reply: "I thought this was HD" And the whole time, I'm like you can't be serious. I always wonder if she plays it up now on purpose...

I like using this comparison-

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Braveheart/4438769a.png

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Braveheart/0ee01be1.png

The DVD looks as good as BluRay camp tends to dodge at that point, even with bad eyes it isn't like it is close.

So you comparing HDMI PS3 to a 360 over component is the defacto standard??? Sorry but it doesn't work that way.

I have component and HDMI cables for my PS3s and can toggle between them on the same display, it really is very clear when swapping particularly for BluRay use.

 

[R Nilla]

So you comparing HDMI PS3 to a 360 over component is the defacto standard??? Sorry but it doesn't work that way.

Oh, so there's no difference even if I see it because you claim to know that 99% of people can't tell? I have used plenty of devices with both component and HDMI (as well as composite and S-Video) to know the differences between the cables. Sure it's not night and day like SD vs HD but there is a difference to the discerning eye and it's pretty clear to mine.

And [defacto] standard? I was merely presenting my personal experience to illustrate that there is a difference and it can be seen, even if I gave a bad example of two different sources.

 

[ZimZum]

Seriously people are saying this in this forum? Really?

HDMI, it is nothing remotely close to comparable.

1080p on your BluRays? Gone with component.

Upscaling DVDs? Not on component.

Signal quality differences you aren't going to notice unless you have some higher end gear with some decent internal optical hardware(ie- your eyes don't suck).



Lots of people say BluRay and DVD look the same too. Some people are borderline blind, doesn't mean everyone is(btw- I've tried the bottled water test, I could tell what brand it was ).

I gotta go with Ben here.



If you ever run Component cables over 6ft you will definitely see the difference. One of the other benefits of a digital signal is that interference is not an issue. Either the signal gets there or it doesn't.

Component - Digital source, converted to analog, converted back to digital in the display.

HDMI - Digital

 

[zerocool84]

I gotta go with Ben here.



If you ever run Component cables over 6ft you will definitely see the difference. One of the other benefits of a digital signal is that interference is not an issue. Either the signal gets there or it doesn't.

Component - Digital source, converted to analog, converted back to digital in the display.

HDMI - Digital

You forget that Digital loses data also and when it's gone it's gone. HDMI is just as much able to lose information as Component is.

Read this:

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/34579/122868.html

 

[MStele]

You forget that Digital loses data also and when it's gone it's gone. HDMI is just as much able to lose information as Component is.

Read this:

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/34579/122868.html

Its no secret that all cables can suffer from interference, but the whole cable talk was about monster cables and if they were necessary, and it is pretty straight forward that all signal types benefit from better cables when dealing with longer runs and for short runs a digital connection is far less susceptible to degradation than analog. Remember that the wave shape is very different between the two. Analog signals requiring sampling and conversion whereas digital signals can be ready used 1:1, thus proper error correction can pretty much remove any minor degradation problems.

The real key to this whole post is that most of the component versus HDMI/DVI comparison arguments took place during the early stages of HD mainstream switchover when many televisions were still produced to show optimized video with component inputs. Today, televisions are designed for digital inputs from the ground up and are optimized as such. It is true that perceived differences would be slight in some cases, but perception and reality are two different things. Techs like superwhite don't exist in analog form. You'll find that as digital tech matures the benefits will become more and more apparent.

 

[zinfamous]

the last time I compared the difference was when hooking up an HD DVD player. the component signal had very noticeable differences in color tone than HDMI (inaccurate).

I didn't check with my PS3, though.

My biggest gripe with HDMI is that it's such a shitty connection--easily broken and never feels like a solid hookup, especially when you need to bend cables at sharp angles.

 

[fatpat268]

I like using this comparison-

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Braveheart/4438769a.png

http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u98/adzez/Braveheart/0ee01be1.png

The DVD looks as good as BluRay camp tends to dodge at that point, even with bad eyes it isn't like it is close.

I'm kinda in that camp. Yes, the video does look better (a lot better in this comparison), but the truth of the matter is, once you start watching the movie, you don't even notice the difference.

I mean, you don't notice the black bars at the top and bottom of a widescreen movie after 2 minutes in... same principle. I'm not saying that there is not a difference between blu-ray and dvd, there is.

Even so, my blu-ray collection is bigger than my dvd collection ever was.

 

[Saga]

Something does not add up at all about this story when someone states they went out and bought the cheapest HDMI cable they could find.. from Radio Shack.

Wasn't their markup 250% in some consumer reports? Not considering they were selling $1.99 1/8th cables for $20-30.

 

[zeruty]

(btw- I've tried the bottled water test, I could tell what brand it was ).

I could tell Dasani no problem... it's disgusting & salty

 

[BenSkywalker]

I'm kinda in that camp. Yes, the video does look better (a lot better in this comparison), but the truth of the matter is, once you start watching the movie, you don't even notice the difference.

I do, constantly. Not only the clarity, but film imperfections and the very muted colors of DVD versus BRD. I'm not saying that is the norm, but spending thousands of hours looking at renders making sure there weren't any imperfections likely had lingering effects for me

I could tell Dasani no problem... it's disgusting & salty

Nestle tastes like distilled(ever since they went to 'Purified'), my wife drinks Aquafina all the time and that one is easy for me to pick out(and what I think of when someone mentions water). Around here the bottled water test isn't something people fail unless they are going up against well water(town water tastes very close to a public pool ).