2. home-theater
  3. 1141008370

HDMI vs Component

Last week helped a friend set-up his new Sony LCD XBR 40" TV and Sony $200 DVD player. Enquired at 3 different stores about which worked better, component or HDMI, and got evasive answers but everbody was willing to sell $200 +/- $100 hookup cables. I had previously found that my home-made from bulk cable Ultron 5 conductor was much superior to Monster Cable $100 component set. Audio quality in this case is not an issue as he has a cochlear implant which cuts off low freq at 270HZ. I volunteered to make him a component/audio hookup for just the cost of 10 RCA connectors (about $50 for good quality). Meantime he used a spare Ultron 16 ft. I had with Radioshack audio cables. At the electronics store (Metro, Sacramento) I noticed a Calrad brand HDMI cable, very light weight, for $20. I purchased the Calrad cable only and we tried it out today. Guys, this works just as good as the Ultron cable component with separate audio cables...........is this normal? or is this just a case of cheaper DVD player working with any ol' thing?
Thanks, Mike.
cheapmike

Showing 1 response by chipman

chipman
54 posts
 
I use both HDMI and componant with my Marantz DVD and Philips Plasma.
I agree HDMI usually gives the better picture but you have no or limited choice on aspect ratio which is chosen by the componants talking to each other.
This sometimes is set wrong with no manual override, then I use the componant input.
I much prefer a slightly reduced quality to a distorted picture.
More to discover