K
keithl1967
Enthusiast
Which is better to use for HD programming?
jcPanny said:In most cases the video quality of component and HDMI is comparable. It is also much more difficult to build a quality copper HDMI cables that are long distances. The current crop of HDTVs, receivers, and set top boxes that support HDMI 1.1 are also prone to compatibility issues.
... meaning HDMI with HDCP version 1.1that support HDMI 1.1
mfabien said:... meaning HDMI with HDCP version 1.1
I say this because some posts are starting to make people believe that the hardware connection, HDMI, comes in version 1.1, which is not the case.
I stand corrected, there are versions to the physical HDMI connection:ironlung said:I don't understand it this way. The physical plug is the same for HDMI 1.1 thru version whatever. The version releases have different information flowing over them not just related to content protection. 1.1 does not support hi res audio of the future(nor SACD) and although 1.1 spec claims to handle 1080p most recievers with HDMI do not.
I have tried it both ways, using the component and the HDMI outputs from my SA8300HD cable box into my Toshiba plasma TV (720p). I found that I needed to recalibrate the picture settings on the TV differently for HDMI versus component connection, using the Avia disc and a Denon 3910 DVD player. Once I did that and applied the optimum picture settings to each of the cable box's inputs, I noticed that the HDMI picture was much sharper than the component video. However, how much can someone generalize my results to their own setup? There are so many variables that might be different, such as the quality of the cables used, whether your HD source has a better D/A decoder on its component output than your TV, etc, etc.keithl1967 said:Which is better to use for HD programming?