HDMI vs. Component

[Sonnie]

Well my HDMI cable that I got with my Z4 projector finally bit the dust. I guess the cable end was under too much stress and finally croaked. Anyway... I'm still using HDMI from my HD player to my receiver for the audio, but using component for video.

Which brings me to the question... has HDMI been proven better than component for video? Anyone have any thoughts on this?

The component seems to look just as good to me, but of course it's not a side by side comparison. However, before I go and spend $50-60 on a 30' HDMI cable, I'm wondering is it really worth it.

[Otto]

Hi Sonnie,

I just switched to using HDMI/DVI for my Dish box. I moved all my equipment from below my TV to a rack in the corner. I want to have as few cable runs as possible, so I now switch video though my Outlaw preamp. The Dish VIP 622 and Denon DVD-1910 go through the Outlaw. I did a side by side comparison (without the Outlaw in the loop) before switching over. I found very little difference. I think that the HDMI output may have been a little darker, just barely. But other than that, PQ was pretty much the same.

Yeah, just another anecdote... I don't know of any official declaration of which is better. I'd bet you'll be fine either way. I'd also bet that you'll end up with the HDMI cable!!!

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

I saw someone at HTF a while back claim that the only place you can see a difference is with live HD broadcasts. With everything else, component is just as good.

Regards,
Wayne

[Sonnie]

I actually despise the HDMI connection... it has no grip to it and can fall out or get knocked out to easily. I think I'm just gonna use my component connection for now and not have to worry about pulling the HDMI cable through at this time. I'll still use the HDMI for audio since that cable is rather lightweight compared to the 30' cable.

[Sonnie]

Welp... SD DVDs will not play video using the HDMI audio in, so it appears I'll have to get an HDMI cable after all. Not that HDMI audio is any better to my ears. Ugggghhhh.

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

So what you’re saying is that if you use HDMI, all the other video outputs from the player are disabled? That’s pretty strange...

Regards,
Wayne

[Sonnie]

I'm not sure if it's the receiver or the player. I can select HDMI video input on the receiver and watch HD DVDs via component. There is no HDMI going from the receiver to the projector. I shows Multi-In for audio on the receiver, so I know it's reading PCM. However, I cannot watch SD DVDs. If I turn off the HDMI video input, then I can watch HD or SD, but only using bitstream on the HD, no Multi-In PCM.

[nater]

Sonnie wrote:

I actually despise the HDMI connection... it has no grip to it and can fall out or get knocked out to easily. I think I'm just gonna use my component connection for now and not have to worry about pulling the HDMI cable through at this time. I'll still use the HDMI for audio since that cable is rather lightweight compared to the 30' cable.

that is not the only reason to despise the HDMI connections
Your next post talks about some other reasons.
From a functional design standpoint HDMI is . We have not had so much confusion over a "standard" RS232, once heard the comment that RS232 only made it less likely to break when it failed. NOT any help at all when it did not work. Just less smoke than we had with serial line drivers before that.
There is some help with the connections by using a pigtail that is about 6" long. (monoprice I think) I started using them after having a HDMI socket go TU after one too many moves. Now I have the pigtail in the HDMI socket and make most of the changes at the next connection. As it is a digital signal the denigration is not noticeable by me.
I have also had some strange interaction between a DVI out on the HTPC with an HDMI adaptor going into the Sony LCD. My suspicion is the SONY implementation of the HDMI standard is so strict that it often shuts down the connection because it cannot identify the source as "official" HDMI.

some paranoia in me

nater

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

that is not the only reason to despise the HDMI connections
Your next post talks about some other reasons.

A real shame. It’s about time we had some simplification in this hobby, and a single do-all cable is certainly a long-overdue step in the right direction. Too bad it’s plagued with so many glitches,

Regards,
Wayne

[SteveCallas]

When I first got my Motorola HD receiver, I only had component cables on hand. I know this lame description is always used, but there did in fact seem to be a fine layer of noise in the picture - I mostly watched NFL on Sundays in HD and it was noticable. I got the ultra beefy DVI cable from monoprice (which has a cross section the diameter of a dime I might add :raped: ) and that noise went away. If your source is digital and your display is digital, it would make the most sense to keep the signal path digital and avoid any unecessary conversions. I haven't tested component vs HDMI with my upscaling dvd player because it can only upscale over HDMI. But again, I wouldn't have any desire to convert that signal from digital to analog and then back to digital.

You can get a disgustingly thick 25' HDMI cable from monoprice for $38 before shipping. Call me odd, but I still prefer to keep my audio and video seperate, mainly because I don't want to route video through a receiver, so I use HDMI for video only and still use optical for audio.