HDMI vs Component

[rdinkel]

I have a VIP622 on order that should arrive this week. I will be connecting it to a new LCD HDTV in the living room as our second HDTV. My older HDTV does not have HDMI connection, but this new one does.

I have heard about problems with the HDMI output on Dish HD receivers, but I have a different question: If I were to try the HDMI connection, would the VIP622 pass SD content via HDMI as upconverted to 720P or 1080i--or would it just pass along the original SD digital signal?

 

[Sharper]

It will automatically upconvert it for any of the HD-output capable connections.

That doesn't necessarily mean it will upconvert it better than your TV or Receiver would from the S-Video connection, but using strictly HDMI or Component may end up being your best picture choice.

 

[Eric_C]

My 622 looks like poo poo on HDMI to my Samsung 61" 1080p DLP.

I went back to component which is excellent quality.

The newest isn't always best

 

[Mike_H]

I was told by the installer that for my 1080p Samsung unit it would be best to use component for the SD channels, and HDMI for the HD channels. That was his experience with the 622 he had at home.

This apparently due to the way things are delt with when moving 480i stuff up to 1080i out the HDMI port vs the Component ports. I sit back far enough I live with SD stuff through HDMI.

 

[lakebum431]

I have 2 622s hooked up to 1 TV (1 with HDMI/DVI and 1 with component). After adjusting the set I notice no difference between the two at all.

 

[whatchel1]

Different set

Different set-ups different effects. Some set look better w/HDMI some better w/component. Also in some cases it is personal preference.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

On my set, if I have all of the TV's settings optimized for the best picture possible on component and then switch to HDMI, the picture is lousy.

However if I then re-optimize for the HDMI input, the result is a picture that is a bit better than the best I can do with the component.

Typically, the newer the TV, the better the HDMI picture is. Early implementations of HDMI were all over the map. They are more consistent now and usually implemented correctly.

 

[AlexTheOne]

Few weeks ago I got my 622 and 1000 combo, installer used component cables to hook me up, now after 4+ weeks I got my HDMI cable this weekend (kudos to www.monoprice.com) I plugged it in and liked what I saw, while difference is subtile I think in my setup and with my TV the HDMI picture and sound is better. Do not expect a miracle as well as others said this really should be personally checked as some users report just opposite experience. In my case I liked swapping 5 thick cables with only 1 and that my TV using HDMI auto adjusted its settings to really nice picture. I will keep my component cables as the backup given to unfortunate possibility that my HDMI port ever goes out as widely reported in these forums.

 

[manypalms]

Hdmi

Stick to the components for now. The VIP line was rushed to market with HDMI issues. My 211 developed a serious stutter between channels and one day just went blank. DN switched it out and said it's the most common problem with both VIP receivers.

 

[Julien]

1) HDMI "as is" unaltered 100% digital signal all the way.

2) Component requires unnecessary and picture degrading digital to analog conversion (D/A) and analog signal passed through analog cables then another unnecessary and picture degrading analog back to digital conversion (A/D) for display.

Anyone with a digital display that sees #2 as a better picture has calibration or perception issues.

 

[Eric_C]

I've calibrated my TV, its no perception issue.

HDMI out of the 622 is terrible on some sets.

I have no problem with HDMI out of my Yamaha C950 DVD player either direct or being upconverted with my RX-V2600.

I recalibrated with the HDMI and the PQ is inferior. Its quite a large complaint about the new MPEG4 recievers that HDMI PQ is bad.

I've had 5 seperate recievers of various type that always have put out superior PQ with HDMI/DVI, this one does not, how is that a perception issue?

 

[sprintcarcrazy]

I aggree, my Sharp Aquos looks better with HDMI, but the JVC looks much better using component.

In fact, the JVC has a better overall picture than the Sharp.

 

[primetimeguy]

But keep in mind unless your TV has had all of its inputs calibrated the same by a true ISF calibrator (not something like DVE) a lot of the difference you are seeing is how the different inputs are setup on the TV and not the difference in the actual source (tuner, DVD player, etc.). That is why it is often difficult to do a side by side comparison since you would need the same source to feed two differernt inputs on the TV, ideally at the same time.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

I had to change both my picture and brightness settings by 5 to 10 points when I switched from component to HDMI. The HDMI outputs were much brighter and washed out my picture. I was really surprised by how different the two were ... but perhaps the difference was in my TV's inputs or it's analog to digital processing on the component side???

But, as I said before, after tweaking both a lot, in the end I found the HDMI picture to be sharper and have better color saturation.

From monitoring several of the HDMI threads here, it is my take that about 75%-80% prefer the HDMI connection. That's one of the reasons why so many people groan when their HDMI output fails and they have to go back to component.

 

[primetimeguy]

I would normally recommend people with digital displays to use the HDMI connection, but with the problems with the 622 you may want to use component. Using HDMI you avoid the D/A and A/D conversion which can cause PQ degredation. But that being said, if your set is properly calibrated you would have a very hard time telling a difference with most material. Test patterns may be another story. So try what works best, but just because HDMI does not look better does not mean it is the tuner. Afterall, HDMI is pure digital and theoretically nothing about the PQ should be touched until it hits your TV.