# Component or S-Video for D-Tivo & Plasma?



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

I'm getting a new Panasonic plasma and I won't be subscribing to DirecTVs HD service (at least not for a while) and my DirecTiVo unit is non-HD. The only HD channels I'll be getting are OTA, so I imagine I won't need to use the HDMI input on my TV for a while. However, I don't know if I should connect my DirecTiVo box via a Component video or an S-Video cable.


----------



## kschauwe (Sep 17, 2003)

S-Video


----------



## Budget_HT (Jan 2, 2001)

Dnamertz said:


> I'm getting a new Panasonic plasma and I won't be subscribing to DirecTVs HD service (at least not for a while) and my DirecTiVo unit is non-HD. The only HD channels I'll be getting are OTA, so I imagine I won't need to use the HDMI input on my TV for a while. However, I don't know if I should connect my DirecTiVo box via a Component video or an S-Video cable.


Your DirecTiVo unit does not have component video outputs, only s-video and composite video (yellow RCA jack). Perhaps you confused component with composite (as many folks have also confused them).

As stated above, s-video will be your best choice.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

Budget_HT said:


> Your DirecTiVo unit does not have component video outputs, only s-video and composite video (yellow RCA jack). Perhaps you confused component with composite (as many folks have also confused them).
> 
> As stated above, s-video will be your best choice.


You're right, it doesn't have component outputs, so S-video it is.

What about connecting my DVD player to my the new plasma? The DVD player and the TV both have component and S-video connections...is s-video better for DVDs too?

I thought I read that component is better for HD signals, but is s-video always better for non-HD signals?


----------



## RonP (Oct 16, 2003)

Cable type from least to best quality of signal: Coax (modulated on channel 3/4), Composite (yellow), S-Video (4-pin), Component (3-cables), HDMI (digital)
Only Component and HDMI can carry HD signal.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

Dnamertz said:


> You're right, it doesn't have component outputs, so S-video it is.
> 
> What about connecting my DVD player to my the new plasma? The DVD player and the TV both have component and S-video connections...is s-video better for DVDs too?
> 
> I thought I read that component is better for HD signals, but is s-video always better for non-HD signals?


Use the s-video for the DVR and component for the DVD. If you have signal problems, be sure to use quality cables.


----------



## beanpoppa (Jan 7, 2004)

Not necessarily. S-Video and composite are NTSC only (not HD, or even progressive/EDTV). If you connect your DVD player to your TV using the composite or s-video, then your TV's internal scalar will up-convert from the DVD's NTSC resolution to your TV's native resolution. If your DVD player is a progressive scan DVD player, and you connect it using the COMPONENT cables, your DVD player will up-convert from NTSC (SDTV, interlaced video) to EDTV resolution. Then, your TV will upconvert that to its native resolution. In many cases, the scalar in the TV does a better job doing the upconversion (and it's better to only do it once) so it's often better to hook up a DVD player to the TV with S-Video, even though component is otherwise a better connection.

You really need to try them both, and see which offers the better picture. Check out avsforum as well to see what others with your model TV have experienced.



tbeckner said:


> Use the s-video for the DVR and component for the DVD. If you have signal problems, be sure to use quality cables.


----------



## Martin Tupper (Dec 18, 2003)

beanpoppa said:


> Not necessarily. S-Video and composite are NTSC only (not HD, or even progressive/EDTV). If you connect your DVD player to your TV using the composite or s-video, then your TV's internal scalar will up-convert from the DVD's NTSC resolution to your TV's native resolution. If your DVD player is a progressive scan DVD player, and you connect it using the COMPONENT cables, your DVD player will up-convert from NTSC (SDTV, interlaced video) to EDTV resolution. Then, your TV will upconvert that to its native resolution. In many cases, the scalar in the TV does a better job doing the upconversion (and it's better to only do it once) so it's often better to hook up a DVD player to the TV with S-Video, even though component is otherwise a better connection.
> 
> You really need to try them both, and see which offers the better picture. Check out avsforum as well to see what others with your model TV have experienced.


It would still be better to use component connections, and set your DVD player for an interlaced display. That way your set would handle all of the de-interlacing, but you would still get the benefit of the superior component connection.


----------



## darthrsg (Jul 25, 2005)

Martin Tupper said:


> It would still be better to use component connections, and set your DVD player for an interlaced display. That way your set would handle all of the de-interlacing, but you would still get the benefit of the superior component connection.


ditto.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

Martin Tupper said:


> It would still be better to use component connections, and set your DVD player for an interlaced display. That way your set would handle all of the de-interlacing, but you would still get the benefit of the superior component connection.


How do I set my DVD player to "interlaced display"? And how do I know if my DVD player is a Progessive Scan? Its a 5 year old Panasonic DVD-CV50.


----------



## n8. (Feb 26, 2006)

Instruction Manual


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

n8. said:


> Instruction Manual


Instruction manaul does not say anything about either feature. I got the DVD player just under 5 years ago and it was a pretty advanced unit at that time with lots of features...how long has Progressive Scan been a common feature on DVD players?

Interlaced Display is also not mentioned in the manual...in fact, I've never heard of it.

Is it likely that this DVD player doesn't have either of these features?


----------



## Budget_HT (Jan 2, 2001)

The only reference I could find on the web (Amazon product description) listed this unit as NOT offering progressive scan output. That might explain why there is no mention in the instruction manual.

Interlaced is the standard for analog TVs. It appears that your DVD player only offers interlaced output at 480i (i=interlaced).


----------



## MighTiVo (Oct 26, 2000)

Interlaced is standard, if it doesn't have or you don't enable progressive then you are using interlaced.
And I too agree you would be hard pressed to get Svideo to outperform component.


----------



## Dnamertz (Jan 30, 2005)

Budget_HT said:


> The only reference I could find on the web (Amazon product description) listed this unit as NOT offering progressive scan output. That might explain why there is no mention in the instruction manual.
> 
> Interlaced is the standard for analog TVs. It appears that your DVD player only offers interlaced output at 480i (i=interlaced).


I've heard a lot about Progressive Scan being a must-have in a DVD player. How much is the quality going to suffer using this DVD player without Progressive Scan (especially when I get my new plasma)?


----------



## MighTiVo (Oct 26, 2000)

Dnamertz said:


> I've heard a lot about Progressive Scan being a must-have in a DVD player. How much is the quality going to suffer using this DVD player without Progressive Scan (especially when I get my new plasma)?


More info here:

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_7_4/dvd-benchmark-part-5-progressive-10-2000.html

Personally I don't think you will see much, the conversion in the TV should do a fine job.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Just to amplify what others have said...though technically it may be true that component > s-video > composite, your results can vary widely depending on your TV's scalars, the electronics in the player device, etc. My cheap DVD player looks much better in component/interlaced than in component/progressive. Another DVD player I had looked better in composite than either S-Video or component.

Bottom line: try 'em all, see what you think.


----------



## MighTiVo (Oct 26, 2000)

cheer said:


> Another DVD player I had looked better in composite than either S-Video or component.


That would be a neat trick...
Something else was going on there.


----------



## Yog-Sothoth (Jun 14, 2005)

Get a Sony DVPNS70H. It upscales movies from 480p to 720p or 1080i (provided you use the HDMI output). Don't waste money on a MonsterCable HDMI cable; you can find them much cheaper if you look around.

Just to warn you, your DirecTV may look _worse_ on your new TV. That is a common problem with HDTV sets - 480i just looks better on a standard television.

As for your current DVD player, you must use component cables, else you won't be able to use 480p (progressive scan mode).


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

MighTiVo said:


> That would be a neat trick...
> Something else was going on there.


The TV in question was a 720p HDTV. SD material was, of course, scaled up. Most of what I was watching was DVDs of Tivo'd SD material.

The compressed material's flaws were exacerbated by the upscaling. On S-Video, the effect was obvious. On composite, believe it or not, it looked better -- in other words, the flaws of composite were hiding the flaws of overcompressed SD material.

C'est la vie.


----------



## MighTiVo (Oct 26, 2000)

cheer said:


> The TV in question was a 720p HDTV. SD material was, of course, scaled up. Most of what I was watching was DVDs of Tivo'd SD material.
> 
> The compressed material's flaws were exacerbated by the upscaling. On S-Video, the effect was obvious. On composite, believe it or not, it looked better -- in other words, the flaws of composite were hiding the flaws of overcompressed SD material.
> 
> C'est la vie.


I'll accept that you preferred the softer image blending in the compression artifacts of low quality recordings.

I'd still have a hard time believing that a DVD player "looked better in composite than either S-Video or component"
Just curious, have you set up the TV using test signals for black level, white level, color and sharpness?


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

MighTiVo said:


> I'll accept that you preferred the softer image blending in the compression artifacts of low quality recordings.
> 
> I'd still have a hard time believing that a DVD player "looked better in composite than either S-Video or component"
> Just curious, have you set up the TV using test signals for black level, white level, color and sharpness?


Yep. It was a flaky DVD player, to be sure.

I don't dispute that, all else being equal, S-Video should always look better than composite. My point was simply that one should eyeball things for oneself, as all sorts of variables come into play -- including personal preferences about how poor source material is handled. And in my case, I've found that with nearly all DVD players that I've tried, the best image is DVD player in interlaced mode with component cabling. (The nice Pioneer Elite DVD player I had in my house for a week put out a very nice progressive image that looked as good or better than interlaced, which simply told me that my TV's electronics were superior to cheap DVD players but not necessarily superior to better-quality gear.)


----------

