Component video compared to hdmi

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Hey guys, does HDMI offer a noticeable improvement in image quality over
component video (not theoretical - noticeable to most people)

Thanks

Bob

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bob Robertson <brobertson@aol.com> wrote in message news:<PZXfd.10542$233.5687@okepread05>...
> Hey guys, does HDMI offer a noticeable improvement in image quality over
> component video (not theoretical - noticeable to most people)
>
> Thanks
>
> Bob

Based on discussions on the avs forum, some actually think the
component video quality is better than HDMI / DVI. I plan to use
component cables initially, until eventually upgrading in the future
to a HDMI switching receiver. My only long term concern with
component is if future HDMI devices were to only allow 1080i via HDMI
and limit 480P to component. This may (or may not happen) for
protecting content.



JCPZero

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"sailor409" <marir@olypen.com> wrote in message
news:10o2gg07epjk974@corp.supernews.com...
> I see a noticeable improvement in HD picture quality using the HDMI
> output from my satellite receiver. I have tried both component and HDMI
> outputs to my tv, and HD programming definitely looks better to me when
> connected via the HDMI output. However, I think this may be somewhat
> dependent on other factors in the equipment being used. I am connected
> to the DVI input on a Mitsubishi 65813 (Diamond, 65", 9" CRTs) At least
> on this set, the HDMI to DVI digital connection looks superior to the
> component connection. I was initially skeptical that I would see any
> difference. I would suggest testing the digital interface on your
> equipment before settling on the component connection.

Just curious, what exactly do you see that you consider to be an
improvement?

Leonard

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

The difference is subtle, but on my setup, the picture via the
component connection appears slightly softer and less well defined than
when connected via the HDMI-DVI interface. I had a Hughes HD PVR that
suffered a failure of the HDMI output after about 6 weeks. I went from 6
weeks of viewing over the HDMI output, followed by 3 weeks of viewing
via the component connections. I am now back to using the HDMI
connection with the replacement HD PVR. Also, when I first installed the
HD PVR, I connected using the component outputs to be able to display a
picture before adding the new receiver and enabling the DVI port in the
Netcommand menu on the Mits.
To my eyes, the displayed picture looks more realistic over the
HDMI-DVI interface. I notice a difference in scenes of things like
moving water with reflected light from the surface. An (admittedly poor)
analogy would be a photo printed on gloss paper vs. the same photo
printed on paper with a slight matte finish. Which one looks better to
you may be a matter of personal taste.
The only explanation I can think of is that the D/A conversion in the
Mits gives a different look to the picture than the conversion in the HD
sat receiver. Someone else may look at the set and prefer the look via
component, or see no difference. My perception after several weeks of
viewing both is that the HDMI-DVI connection provides a more "realistic"
HD picture.