Component Cable vs. HDMI

[tylerbonezjonez]

I currently have a R22 receiver and it is currently connected to my HDTV with a component cable, I am receving 480p on my receiver although it has the ability for 1080i ( I can only get 1080i if i download a movie from on demand, or some other way) Would it make a difference if I connected and used an HDMI cable on the 480p or not?

 

[Liquidforce88]

99.9% of people can not see a difference. the other .01% just think they can ..

 

[Mr Tony]

unless you subscribe to HD through D* which allows the R22 to be set to do HD (you do need another HD receiver on the account) you'll only stay at 480p. I have just a R22 so no HD and use a AM21 for OTA. Yeah its 720p or 1080i on OTA but the R22 downconverts it to 480

(yes I use a HDMI cable for simplicity and why waste a good port on the TV)

 

[truckracer]

i can see no difference in HDMI or componet video....HDMI is nice because it does audio too. One cable vs 5 cables

 

[joed32]

99.9% of people can not see a difference. the other .01% just think they can ..

Excellent!

 

[MattJ2124]

Agreed, I used a combination of both cables for my system (comp for Xbox, HDMI for Direct etc) and I see no difference in picture, they both look great. I am one of the idiots that have purchased $100 cables and havent seen the difference between those and the $20 cables either. I know some have, I havent.

 

[marquitos306]

I use the component cables for my HR24-100 and HDMI for my blue ray player, got just one HDMI input on my tv. no difference.

 

[Tampa8]

Glad to see it's not me. I couldn't see a difference between the two. I use HDMI for the simple one cable connection, and because my audio receiver seems to sync the sound perfectly if I use it. (Not on a Direct Receiver, Dish.)

 

[Jimbo]

You really should not see any difference between the two unless you can "see" the difference between a analog and a digital signal.

Biggest difference is the convenience of 1 cable vs 2 sets (Component and Sound (rca)).

However, to answer a question that the OP had, not sure if anyone did or not yet....

The 1080p issue ... 1080p can only be viewed with a HDMI cable, however, theres not much in 1080p at this point anyways.

 

[Big]

I agree 100% with everyone that there is no difference in PQ or AQ between using component or hdmi cables. HDMI is good as far as cable management goes! regards!

 

[johns70]

You really should not see any difference between the two unless you can "see" the difference between a analog and a digital signal.

Biggest difference is the convenience of 1 cable vs 2 sets (Component and Sound (rca)).

However, to answer a question that the OP had, not sure if anyone did or not yet....

The 1080p issue ... 1080p can only be viewed with a HDMI cable, however, theres not much in 1080p at this point anyways.

There's lots of 1080p movies available from DIRECTV at this point anyways.

 

[kovach]

Interesting article on HDMI vs. Component: DVI vs. HDMI vs. Component Video -- Which is Better? - eCoustics.com

 

[The Fat Man]

Jimbo stole my thunder. No difference for 1080i, component can't do 1080p. However, I've only seen this once before, but watch out for sound quality with HDMI. My aunt and uncle use HDMI for their cable receiver to an LG hdtv. They have a big problem with the sound being static like when switching between SD and HD channels. I've never seen it anywhere else, just in their house with their receiver/tv setup. I also use component (dish doesn't have 1080p on my receiver).

 

[charper1]

That happens when Dolby Digital is ON and the TV's audio can't resolve or has issues since its not multi-channel sound. Turn DD off.

 

[JerseyMatt]

Agreed, I used a combination of both cables for my system (comp for Xbox, HDMI for Direct etc) and I see no difference in picture, they both look great. I am one of the idiots that have purchased $100 cables and havent seen the difference between those and the $20 cables either. I know some have, I havent.

With component cables, since it is an analog signal the more expensive quad shield cables are better to a degree (whether it's $100 worth of difference is a whole other story). Believe it or not, those people who pay huge bucks for a component cable usually do see a difference, but there's a catch.. It's usually because they have their cables very neat and organized and bundled together. Running audio and video lines parallel to power lines like that can introduce interference and noise in a cheap, poorly shielded cable. Neatly coiling up the extra cable basically makes it into an antenna, which picks up even more. So there is actually an advantage to having a rats nest behind the TV - you can use cheaper cables!

HDMI is a whole other animal. There's the people who can't see a difference between a $100 cable and a $10 cable, and then there's the people who can't see a difference but insist they can. HDMI is a digital signal. It is either there or it's not. There is nothing between 0 and 1 in digital, so you can't have interference degrading the picture. Interference that bad would knock out the picture entirely.

 

[Liquidforce88]

This debate always makes me laugh.

I used to work in the VERY HIGH END audio business. Those guys will spend stupid money on cables, and swear that they can hear a difference. But your also talking about guy's that will only listen to vinyl, on a $20,000. pair of single point source speakers, with a 20 watt tube amplifier.

 

[cband]

What's been said above. HDMI is one wire and less in this case is better. It's your choice btw, but if you can try out the HDMI. DON'T buy into the Monster myth. Monoprice has excellent cables for WAY less.

Jeff

 

[JerseyMatt]

If you want the bestest component cables, get some RG6 and put RCA compression ends on it. Cost you what, call it $1 a foot for the set of 5 cables if you're slicing it off a roll?

 

[Jimbo]

There's lots of 1080p movies available from DIRECTV at this point anyways.

There is downloadable stuff, but nothing from everyday channels, or network.

 

[JerseyMatt]

Well, not just downloadable, half of the regular PPV comes in 1080p too. But you're right, there is absolutely nothing else outside of 3D. With all the money the broadcasters have spent to upgrade to 720p/1080i, it'll be a looooong time before they go to 1080p (by that time we'll have 1440p/2160p holographic discs and laser displays). Hell, there's still news shows that don't even use HD yet. The little bit of extra you get out of 1080p (and the relatively small number of 1080p sets out there vs 720p/1080i sets) doesn't justify the massive cost of extra satellite bandwidth and upgrading the (relatively new) broadcast equipment. I'd say for probably the next 5-7 years, 1080p will be a movie-only format (not counting 3D) . When it does happen, it'll start with premium movie channels. You won't find any commercial channel in 1080p (again, excluding 3D channels) until long after that.