Since your source is digital it makes sense to keep the information digital as long as you can. So DVI and HDMI make the most sense unless you are using a high-end external scaler at which you will want to take that (now) analog signal and sent it to your display. I have an NEC 50XM5 plasma and it's internal processors are rated as good or better than almost all external processors. It has a DVI connection which is fine by me as I loop the audio through my Audio Aero Capitole DAC. It is interesting that I can run the same feed to my plasma and split the screen and compare component and DVI at the same time. The DVI has more detail and the High Definition picture quality seems more three dimensional than component. the colors are also a bit more red which i think I can address when I get around to it.
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.
Thanks, Mike.
5 responses Add your response
