Is there a cable made (HDMI to RGB) for a DIG box (brighthouse provider)?

[inlinedon]

Need to find if available a cable from HDMI (out) to RGB (In). I tried a cable I bought on Amazon which did not work.

 

[markw]

You're looking for a cable that will convert HDMI to RGB component? Ain't gonna happen. They are two totally different formats. For starters, HDMI is digital and RGB is analog.

That's like asking if there's a cable that will convert an RF cable signal to composite or RGB video. There's a bit of manipulation that has to be done via some sophisticated electronics.

 

[agarwalro]

Need to find if available a cable from HDMI (out) to RGB (In).

When you say RGB In do you mean the connectors that look like RCA plugs. I assume your cable looks something like this,

Or do you mean RGB Color Space? HDMI devices like DVD and BluRay players output YCbCr Color Space by default and you will need to find the setting to change it. This might do the trick.

I tried a cable I bought on Amazon which did not work.

Defective cable? Can you test it on a different HDMI out to RGB in?

 

[TLS Guy]

When you say RGB In do you mean the connectors that look like RCA plugs. I assume your cable looks something like this,

Or do you mean RGB Color Space? HDMI devices like DVD and BluRay players output YCbCr Color Space by default and you will need to find the setting to change it. This might do the trick.

Defective cable? Can you test it on a different HDMI out to RGB in?

That cable you posted is a fraud. There are no HDMI conversions except DVI and they are problematic and don't pass video and audio. HDMI is a two way digital AV connection. It is a two way communication by code. For an end device there has to be an initial handshake. For devices that receive and transmit HDMI there must be continuous to and fro handshakes. Any cable you see with an HDMI connector on one end and component video connections on the other end, is bogus and a fraud. It will not work.

 

[agarwalro]

That cable you posted is a fraud. There are no HDMI conversions except DVI and they are problematic and don't pass video and audio. HDMI is a two way digital AV connection. It is a two way communication by code. For an end device there has to be an initial handshake. For devices that receive and transmit HDMI there must be continuous to and fro handshakes. Any cable you see with an HDMI connector on one end and component video connections on the other end, is bogus and a fraud. It will not work.

Well... OP, there you have it.

You might need a converter like this, Amazon.com: Loftek® HDfuryproTwo Input HDMI to RGB Component YPbPr / VGA 2x1 Switch Converter Support 5.1CH Surround Sound: Electronics

I have never used a product like this, so caveat emptor.

 

[TLS Guy]

Well... OP, there you have it.

You might need a converter like this, Amazon.com: Loftek® HDfuryproTwo Input HDMI to RGB Component YPbPr / VGA 2x1 Switch Converter Support 5.1CH Surround Sound: Electronics

I have never used a product like this, so caveat emptor.

That will still not help him out, at least not much.

Everyone must understand that we are now past the legal analog sunset.

As you know BD and DVD players no longer have component outputs.

Consumer devices are no longer allowed to convert HDCP protected program to analog.

HD Fury have been fighting legal battles for many years. Now their device does not strip codes. So the OP will only get a picture if the program is not HDCP protected. Most program is HDCP protected so that device will not be very useful, unless it is an old one.

eBay has banned their sale and Monoprice has agreed not to sell them. Amazon has also agreed not to sell them. Buy I see an Amazon seller has got though the drag net.

Despite the fact that HD fury is HDCP compliant now, they are still being pursued by the lawyers from DCP.

The bottom line is this. We reached the point some time ago, that if you want to watch HD, HDCP protected material, you must use a display that has at least one HDCP compliant HDMI input.

So the OP needs to understand he must purchase an HDCP compliant display with HDMI inputs.

Displays that do not meet that criterion, are now worthless, and even the thrifts won't take them.

 

[BMXTRIX]

That said, there are still tons of pieces of gear which have component video HD outputs that work just fine including cable tuners and better media players. It's the cheap stuff that just has component, and current BD players, but it is a pain to deal with and leaves millions upon millions of TVs out in the cold. I accept this as reality, but it's still about the stupidest thing in existence. Component HD looks great and works well and was fairly inexpensive to implement.

Whatever... I would pick up the linked product from Amazon and call it a day. But, the other posters are correct in saying that the HDMI to VGA/5-wire/component 'cables' sold all over are nothing more than a fraudulent scam. They are garbage and you got duped. HDMI is digital, you need analog, there MUST be an active converter between the two. As well, there is HDCP to deal with on many sources, and you must deal with that as well.

EDIT: Ah, Brighthouse is your cable television provider.

It's required by law that cable providers make available cable television tuners with component video HD outputs on them still upon request from users. Call them up and let them know that you want a cable box with component video outputs on it. They are supposed to have these available for at least a few more years.

The Analog Sunset has nothing to do with anything related to the CATV industry, and was part of the AACS fiction of Blu-ray Disc....

Analog Sunset” is NOT sanctioned by FCC and it does not impact Satellite/Cable-delivered content. FCC Section 76.1903 explicitly prohibits the disabling of analog outputs on satellite receivers, cable set-top boxes, and ATSC tuners intended to decode the over-the-air digital ATSC signals broadcast by local television stations.

I have seen a few cable tuners without component video outputs, but the cable companies still have tuners with component video outputs.

You don't need to buy a fix, you should just be able to get it from your local cable company.

To that end, there is a link on the Brighthouse website on how to hook up to your TV using the component video connections which are on your cable box:
http://support.brighthouse.com/Article/Hook-Up-Converter-Component-Cables-3182

You are jumping through hoops you shouldn't need to jump through.

 

[TLS Guy]

That said, there are still tons of pieces of gear which have component video HD outputs that work just fine including cable tuners and better media players. It's the cheap stuff that just has component, and current BD players, but it is a pain to deal with and leaves millions upon millions of TVs out in the cold. I accept this as reality, but it's still about the stupidest thing in existence. Component HD looks great and works well and was fairly inexpensive to implement.

Whatever... I would pick up the linked product from Amazon and call it a day. But, the other posters are correct in saying that the HDMI to VGA/5-wire/component 'cables' sold all over are nothing more than a fraudulent scam. They are garbage and you got duped. HDMI is digital, you need analog, there MUST be an active converter between the two. As well, there is HDCP to deal with on many sources, and you must deal with that as well.

EDIT: Ah, Brighthouse is your cable television provider.

It's required by law that cable providers make available cable television tuners with component video HD outputs on them still upon request from users. Call them up and let them know that you want a cable box with component video outputs on it. They are supposed to have these available for at least a few more years.

The Analog Sunset has nothing to do with anything related to the CATV industry, and was part of the AACS fiction of Blu-ray Disc....



I have seen a few cable tuners without component video outputs, but the cable companies still have tuners with component video outputs.

You don't need to buy a fix, you should just be able to get it from your local cable company.

To that end, there is a link on the Brighthouse website on how to hook up to your TV using the component video connections which are on your cable box:
Hook Up Converter Component Cables - Bright House Networks Support

You are jumping through hoops you shouldn't need to jump through.

You probably have better information that I have. But as I understand it the requirement to provide an analog connections sun sets next month, which will be five years since the mandatory digital connection.

In Eagan I have Comcast and have had a lot of trouble with the DVRs and set top boxes. In six years three DVRs have failed and one set top box. On the last recent failure, Comcast said there older boxes are hard to replace and also the DVRs, so they converted me to Xfinity X-1. The DVR has component outs, but the set top box does not. They will soon go to Xfinity-2, it remains to be seen if any of those boxes have component outs. The DCP lawyers are fighting every possible way they can to force HDMI and not allow analog outputs from HDCP protected program. By the way this system requires very high bandwidth. A very nice and competent tech spent four hours tracing down all the splitters from the 30 year old construction to minimize signal loss. I guess their new system tolerates very little splitting, only once as far as I can tell.

The other issue in this, even if the cable companies want to offer analog outs, I think going forward manufacturers will avoid building boards that allow this, for fear of being tied up in court by very aggressive DCP lawyers.

I suspect that we are fast approaching the point where screens without HDMI are useless. What irks me is that DRM does not work. They have failed to shut down illegal copying and conversions.

I will post later about the new Berlin Philharmonic record label. They get it, and purchase of a digital package allows the buyer to conveniently use what they pay for over pretty much any digital platform in the home. There is absolutely no incentive or benefit making copies unless you are up to no good. However it does not allow for analog program, although you can purchase program on heavy grade vinyl at extra charge. The real problem is that the music critics have zero understanding of what this is about and how the BPO are innovative and going about this issue the right way.

I think the horses are well out of the barn now and resistance is futile. So my advice to anyone with a screen without HDMI inputs is to take it to the recycling center.

 

[slipperybidness]

What irks me is that DRM does not work. They have failed to shut down illegal copying and conversions.

+1. All the DRM does is make huge hassles and headaches for all of us honest users!

If they would take all the time and $ used to try to develop DRM and use that to create QUALITY PROGRAMMING THAT PEOPLE WILL PAY FOR, then they would find that the DRM isn't useful or needed nearly as much as they think it is now.

And, if a person wants to defeat DRM, it is pretty simple to do!

 

[markw]

If they would take all the time and $ used to try to develop DRM and use that to create QUALITY PROGRAMMING THAT PEOPLE WILL PAY FOR, then they would find that the DRM isn't useful or needed nearly as much as they think it is now.

I respectfully disagree.

MAybe I'm just a crotchety old man but theft of intellectual property has been going on since day one. Bavk in my day, they worried about peoplestealing music vis cassettes, which was truly a pain in the arse and time consuming and still one wound up with an inferior copy.

When digital hit, and the young 'uns found out how they could make virtually identical copies almost instantly via the net and file sharing, all hades broke loose.

Do you think movies are any different?

sorry, but it it's simple and easy, many people will take what they can get. Maybe not everyone, but enough to make a significant dent in any remaining profits. HAd it been this easy in the days of cassettes or even R2R, this issue would have surfaced decades ago.

Yes, it's a PITS but it does serve a purpose. Would you leave your car unlocked with the keys in it or leave a laptop in plain sight on the seat in most big cities?

 

[rojo]

Yes, it's a PITS but it does serve a purpose. Would you leave your car unlocked with the keys in it or leave a laptop in plain sight on the seat in most big cities?

Not quite the same thing. Most people who acquire content by sharing wouldn't necessarily be customers if DRM were more effective, and sharing doesn't cause any physical property to disappear from record companies' inventory. Riaa / MPAA haven't lost as much income as they claim. The problem is that elderly executives have resisted tech advancement and put more focus on profit-by-litigation and lobbying for laws skewed in their favor, rather than on providing a cheaper, more convenient product to increase their customer base. But that ship has sailed, I'm afraid. Too much has been invested in DRM and litigation to start over now.

 

[slipperybidness]

I respectfully disagree.

MAybe I'm just a crotchety old man but theft of intellectual property has been going on since day one. Bavk in my day, they worried about peoplestealing music vis cassettes, which was truly a pain in the arse and time consuming and still one wound up with an inferior copy.

When digital hit, and the young 'uns found out how they could make virtually identical copies almost instantly via the net and file sharing, all hades broke loose.

Do you think movies are any different?

sorry, but many people will take what they can get. Maybe not everyone, but enough to make a significant dent in any remaining profits.

Yes, it's a PITS but it does serve a purpose. Would you leave your car unlocked with the keys in it or leave a laptop in plain sight on the seat in most big cities?

BUUUUUUT: The people that are making copies of DRM material STILL make copies of the DRM material! It slows them down for maybe 30 seconds to defeat the DRM. DRM is just a big ole pain for the honest people and DOES NOT STOP the illegal copying.

IF the DRM stopped the illegal copies, then I might agree with you here, but the fact is that is does not!

I'm very interested in the "Pay What You Want" model. There have been a few social experiments with this model that look very promising. If I watch a movie and it sucks, then I pay $0. If it's the greatest movie ever, then I pay what I think that is worth to me. In the limited experiments that I have seen on this, it has worked out very well. Obviously, more data is needed here. But, this model could feasibly solve the whole DRM debacle, and get better quality material released to boot.

Seriously, if there are 4 movies per year that I'm excited about, then it is a good year.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Haven't you heard that $1/song model of digital distribution has almost entirely killed audio piracy? And Whatever left was killed by Spotify. Something to think about for MPAA/Hollywood...
Paying $40 for a movie disk is simply not sustainable. This is the reason cheap streaming videos works - aka Netflix and Amazon - they had figured it out.

I do mostly agree with what BMX said, but ymmv with your local cable provider

 

[TLS Guy]

I respectfully disagree.

MAybe I'm just a crotchety old man but theft of intellectual property has been going on since day one. Bavk in my day, they worried about peoplestealing music vis cassettes, which was truly a pain in the arse and time consuming and still one wound up with an inferior copy.

When digital hit, and the young 'uns found out how they could make virtually identical copies almost instantly via the net and file sharing, all hades broke loose.

Do you think movies are any different?

sorry, but it it's simple and easy, many people will take what they can get. Maybe not everyone, but enough to make a significant dent in any remaining profits. HAd it been this easy in the days of cassettes or even R2R, this issue would have surfaced decades ago.

Yes, it's a PITS but it does serve a purpose. Would you leave your car unlocked with the keys in it or leave a laptop in plain sight on the seat in most big cities?

I largely agree with you.

However, the DRM is far from water tight. It seems very difficult to close vendors of HDCP code stripping software. Until that is done people are being put to expense and inconvenience and not achieving what you and I think is reasonable and desirable.

What we don't want is another standard, that makes HDMI obsolete and another cycle of good gear going to the recycling center.

I think there should be severe penalties for selling and distributing HDCP code stripping software, as well as for people who make and distribute illegal copies in any format and for having stripping software on any if your devices.

The problem is the owners of program want protection now, but legacy equipment often lasts 20 years or more.

So if there is need for a new system beyond HDMI, then a lead time of at least 20 years needs to exists. In other words all devices sold would have to have HDMI and a new format for 20 years before HDMI was retired.

HDMI with HDCP codes were introduced in I think 2006. That was when I bought my first screen and few at that time had HDCP code compliant HDMI inputs. Mine did, but it was hard to find in 2005 when I was researching my equipment list. So here we are eight to nine years on, and we are having posts like this related to the inability to use legacy equipment. We have to make sure this does not happen again.

I bet the post about this are going to tick upwards in the coming months. Two this week already.

 

[markw]

Haven't you heard that $1/song model of digital distribution has almost entirely killed audio piracy? And Whatever left was killed by Spotify. Something to think about for MPAA/Hollywood...

...and so it did, but that was only used as an example of how many people DID steal when it was easy and unchecked. That's called a "crime of convenience". It simply shows that there's more larceny in many than you want to admit. If not, we wouldn't need locks or burglar alarms. ...aren't you from NYC?

Paying $40 for a movie disk is simply not sustainable.

Who pays $40 for a movie? Maybe Gramma nad Grandpa for the grandbabies really, really want a Disney movie for Christmas. But, when a movie is first released the big box stores usually offer it for around $20 for those that "just gotta have it". And then it goes up to a higher price. And then, in a year or so, most wind up in the WalMart $7.88 Blu-Ray bins. And I'm not even talking about Amazon.

This is the reason cheap streaming videos works - aka Netflix and Amazon - they had figured it out. I do mostly agree with what BMX said, but ymmv with your local cable provider

And so they have. Why worry about all this copy protection if you can get it there, or even get a disc (on loan) from Netflix or Blockbuster? You just don't own the firmware.

 

[markw]

Not quite the same thing. Most people who acquire content by sharing wouldn't necessarily be customers if DRM were more effective, and sharing doesn't cause any physical property to disappear from record companies' inventory. Riaa / MPAA haven't lost as much income as they claim. The problem is that elderly executives have resisted tech advancement and put more focus on profit-by-litigation and lobbying for laws skewed in their favor, rather than on providing a cheaper, more convenient product to increase their customer base. But that ship has sailed, I'm afraid. Too much has been invested in DRM and litigation to start over now.

dude, all I have to say to you is to look up "intellectual property".

 

[rojo]

Oh, IP is another dubious idea as well. At its fundamental intention of allowing people to make a living from their ideas, it makes sense. But copyright law has greatly swayed for the benefit of the profit by litigation thing I mentioned earlier.

[video=youtube;coGpmA4saEk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coGpmA4saEk[/video]

How much income does the copyright owner of "Happy Birthday" make per year, I wonder? (Spoiler: about $2 million.) Is this person even the original composer of the song?

Sent from my LG-VS980 using Tapatalk

 

[TLS Guy]

This really is a difficult issue. For the classical arts especially symphony orchestras and opera companies this is a huge issue. They need to replace the 30% of the revenue they used to get from recordings. The BPO used to get 50% of their income in the Karajan years. The scene is difficult as these organizations are very expensive. The Minnesota Orchestra costs around 33 million dollars a year. The scene is evident all around the globe, proportion of revenue from ticket sales down, expenses up and dependence on wealthy donors up. The latter are starting to walk. If they are going to invest in setting up recording companies, then they have to be ale to protect their intellectual property and rights to their performances.

We have just suffered though a 16 month lockout of the MSO, the longest ever. There is still plenty of acrimony, especially among the oligarchs (banksters), as they lost. However some have walked.

The BPO who already have started the Digital Concert Hall have now added a label, but very non traditional. Conceiving it to reduce piracy I think was front and center. I will post about this in another thread I will start. I think any of these organizations that want to survive are going to have to generate 15 to 20 million a year in music sales, and more if possible.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Who pays $40 for a movie? Maybe Gramma nad Grandpa for the grandbabies really, really want a Disney movie for Christmas. But, when a movie is first released the big box stores usually offer it for around $20 for those that "just gotta have it". And then it goes up to a higher price. And then, in a year or so, most wind up in the WalMart $7.88 Blu-Ray bins. And I'm not even talking about Amazon.

Well, least the MSRP price is over $40 for some movies - Amazon.com: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (Blu-ray 3D + Blu-ray + DVD + Digital HD UltraViolet Combo Pack): Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Ian McKellen, Benedict Cumberbatch, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lilly, Lee Pace, Luke Evans, Stephen Fry

 

[markw]

Well, least the MSRP price is over $40 for some movies - Amazon.com: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (Blu-ray 3D + Blu-ray + DVD + Digital HD UltraViolet Combo Pack): Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Ian McKellen, Benedict Cumberbatch, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lilly, Lee Pace, Luke Evans, Stephen Fry

Are you implying that since it costs so much copying it is fine? You make it sound like a staple of life one cannot live without.

Well, when it first came out I picked up "The Desolation of Smaug" Blu-Ray, non-3D version, but a DVD and UV for something like $20, or max $22. He who hesitates is lost.

But, you can buy all three of the original Ring Trilogy on Blu-Ray (three discs in one box) for $20. Patience is a virtue.