HDMI questions

[mike c]

1) so aside from video, will HDMI take the place of optical cables for audio?
2) if i just want better video, can i skip buying an HDMI capable receiver and just connect the player to the TV?
3) will having this HDMI capable equipment and connections benefit the picture quality of watching ordinary DVD's? (will i have better picture quality?)

 

[mtrycrafts]

1) so aside from video, will HDMI take the place of optical cables for audio?
2) if i just want better video, can i skip buying an HDMI capable receiver and just connect the player to the TV?
3) will having this HDMI capable equipment and connections benefit the picture quality of watching ordinary DVD's? (will i have better picture quality?)

Yes, it can take the place of an audio cable.
2, depends on what video signal you are sending to the what TV input
3, it can if you have a Tv without scanning lines, LCD, DLP , etc. It sends the digital video without processing I believe, no loss or minute.

 

[driver]

Better picture quality Yes ! better sound ,well that all depends on how you look at it . If you did not consider buying a hdmi capable reciever then optical would be fine . If you did want a hdmi equipped reciever As far as I know Hdmi is only able to support 5.1 tracks ( someone feel free to correct me .) So the few titles out now that are able to be heard in 6.1 dts ex for example would not be carried . I have a Denon 1910 (last years model ) dvi not hdmi and the avr 985 and run optical to the recievr and dvi-hdmi to my plasma it looks and sounds great .

 

[mike c]

thanks everyone ...

im weighing buying an hdmi capable player (this would also affect my tv choice)

 

[BMXTRIX]

1) so aside from video, will HDMI take the place of optical cables for audio?

In the future, that is definitely the goal. Like coaxial cable for television brings you a nice easy connection on one cable, HDMI is being touted as a single cable solution. So, the goal is for it to be the ONLY cable you need to connect to your receiver, then to your television.

2) if i just want better video, can i skip buying an HDMI capable receiver and just connect the player to the TV?

Absolutely! Many plasmas include HDMI inputs with audio, so you can just use that single HDMI connection and send it straight to your plasma (w/speakers) and be able to see and hear what is going on without an external receiver at all. If you do have an external receiver, then use a digital connection - either optical or coaxial for your sound.

3) will having this HDMI capable equipment and connections benefit the picture quality of watching ordinary DVD's? (will i have better picture quality?)

This is a BIG - that depends. HDMI is not gravy yet. It is good, but component video is sometimes better. It very often looks almost identical, and sometimes looks worse. It is a roll of the dice it seems as to when HDMI will outperform component and vice-versa. IMO, now is not yet the time to get HDMI receivers, etc. While the video side seems to be taken care of, HDMI most definitely offers more than 5.1 audio. Something like 11 channels of audio or something are available. But, the standard hasn't been implemented yet and old receivers won't be able to be upgraded to the new standard when it comes out.

Just run it direct to your display for now and call it a day. (IMO)

 

[mike c]

This is a BIG - that depends. HDMI is not gravy yet. It is good, but component video is sometimes better. It very often looks almost identical, and sometimes looks worse. It is a roll of the dice it seems as to when HDMI will outperform component and vice-versa. IMO, now is not yet the time to get HDMI receivers, etc. While the video side seems to be taken care of, HDMI most definitely offers more than 5.1 audio. Something like 11 channels of audio or something are available. But, the standard hasn't been implemented yet and old receivers won't be able to be upgraded to the new standard when it comes out.

Just run it direct to your display for now and call it a day. (IMO)

hmm, if its not that big of a difference ... maybe i shouldnt let this HDMI input influence my tv decision. and i can save on the player : pioneer 969 is 750USD and the pioneer 686 is just 153USD.

 

[BMXTRIX]

hmm, if its not that big of a difference ... maybe i shouldnt let this HDMI input influence my tv decision. and i can save on the player : pioneer 969 is 750USD and the pioneer 686 is just 153USD.

Well, this is where things get tricky again. The best possible image on your display occurs when the best possible image processors are used inside the display. If that display doesn't use good image processing, than a top notch DVD player with good processing may be the way to go to get the most of your image.

It is a very tricky time to get the 'absolute best'. A Panasonic 50" plasma in HD? Sure! But, how good is the internal processing? Would it look better with a Panasonic S77 DVD player w/HDMI connection? Would it looks really close with a $100.00 Sony DVD player via component?

My opinion? Is that buying a decent ($200 ish) DVD player w/HDMI output is a good way to go - then hook it up HDMI to your display. The better DVD players often have processing inside that rivals most televisions and will give you a superior image via HDMI than you will achieve via a component video connection.

Once again... ALWAYS? No. But, often enough to make it worthwhile.

Plus, that HDMI cable should still be good a few years from now with HD discs and 9.3 audio.