DVI vs. Component video

[feelingfine]

Could anyone tell me if there's a major difference in picture

quality between a DVI vs. component video when viewing HD

material? I bought my Toshiba RPTV a year before they started

putting in DVI and was considering purchasing one with it.

[John Sides]

I would like to know this also.

[Kagato]

According to Home Theater Mag there is a difference, and it's big. Crystal clear, no analog artifacts, etc.

This is very similar findings to the Home Theater PC crowd. The only downside is the cables cost an arm and a leg, and the longest DVI cable you can get your hands on easily is 30 ft and it's a three figure cable. $$$

Your millage may vary depending on how much your HDTV can actually display as only a handful of sets on the market actually do true 1920X1080i.

[dwforslund]

DVI is digital and component video
is analog. Therein lies the difference.

[jgoggan]

Yes, we realize that one is digital and one is analog -- the question was about quality. It is not a "given" that digital is always better than analog in quality. Therefore, "therein lies the difference" doesn't cut it. :-)

In any case, if you check any Home Theater forums, you'll see that this is a fairly hotly debated topic. Some argue that there is no visible difference -- others argue that DVi is better because of the "digital" input.

However, when you get down to it, my understanding/belief is that, with most TVs, it doesn't matter. Simply because most HDTVs are CRT based -- and therefore are driven by analog signals. Therefore, even with DVI input, there must be a D/A conversion to drive the CRTs. So, either you use component and have D/A at the source -- or DVI and have D/A at the TV.

Now, if you had a high-end plasma or LCD display -- where a digital signal could pssibly be used directly -- then maybe DVI would be a better source. (Although some still argue it doesn't matter even then.)

So -- long story short... Depending on your TV type, it likely doesn't matter. And, regardless of your TV type, it might not matter at all! :-)

- John...

[Mike123abc]

I think it would depend on which device had the better D to A converter. With HDTV you are likely to need scaling too -- from 720p to 1080i or 1080i to 720p, etc. Maybe the TV does a better job, maybe the reciever. I think it would be hard to say one connection is always better than the other.

[Bill D]

Does the DVI connection carry anything else besides video (audio or any kind of control)

[Mike123abc]

The new DVI standard HDMI will carry the extra stuff like audio and control.

[DoyleS]

DVI is an interface standard and although it stands for digital video interface, there are actually 3 separate DVI interfaces. DVI-A for Analog signals, DVI-D for Digital (common on many new computer Video Cards) and DVI-I which is Integrated and handles both Digital and Analog. The advantage of DVI is strong when the native resolution of the Digital projector/monitor (LCD, DLP or DVI) is the same as the signal being sent. Each pixel is directly translated to its corresponding screen position. With a non DVI digital monitor there is circuitry to decode which pixel is illuminated. With an analog monitor (CRT) then analog voltages are sent and they give a corresponding response on the screen that depends on the accuracy of that monitor. High grade computer CRT monitors capable of high resolution signals (1600x1200) are typically more accurate than an LCD monitor that might be limited to 1024x768. Video cards often have a limitation on the maximum resolution of DVI at 1600x1200. It is not just the interface but the actual monitor and its resolution that will determine the best picture. RGB resolutions are currently much higher than available video signal materials. Component clearly handles the current High Definition signals, DVI is capable of high resolution again depending on the native resolution of the panel. One of the big factors in getting a box with DVI is that there are now entertainment sources that connect with DVI and component and fewer that connecting with RGB or VGA. If the connections don't match you are stuck with a transcoder for a couple hundred dollars. So, in summary the answer is ......it depends.
..Doyle

[tontomono]

Or you could use Mitsubishi's Fire Wire Connect :-D go Serial!

[BobMurdoch]

Originally posted by Mike123abc
The new DVI standard HDMI will carry the extra stuff like audio and control.

Note that HDMI WILL be backwards compatible with vanilla DVI so there is no danger of obsolescence on that item unles they get rid of separate audio outputs (don't held your breath for that to happen for a LONG time)

[cnsf]

Another TV to consider is the LCD projection TV. This will definitely benefit with DVI vs. Analog just like a standard LCD...significantly better.

As the LCD projections are smaller and better quality than the CRT projections, you'll see CRT fade away very quickly.... Plasma won't win yet because of price and maintenance issues.

[BobMurdoch]

I'm not sure of that. Computer Game players have kept the CRT from obselescence as LCD screens don't handle rapid image refreshes as well as their CRT counterparts. (Otherwise, LCDs would have killed the CRT computer market by now). So allof those Bruce Willis movies will look just a little bit off.

Also, the images are not as good when outside of their native resolution. With 1080i, 720p, and 480i and p all jockeying for supremacy, I still think that LCDs are not ready for prime time yet.

[cnsf]

Originally posted by BobMurdoch
I'm not sure of that. Computer Game players have kept the CRT from obselescence as LCD screens don't handle rapid image refreshes as well as their CRT counterparts. (Otherwise, LCDs would have killed the CRT computer market by now). So allof those Bruce Willis movies will look just a little bit off.

Also, the images are not as good when outside of their native resolution. With 1080i, 720p, and 480i and p all jockeying for supremacy, I still think that LCDs are not ready for prime time yet.

Keep in mind, it's LCD projection vs. straight LCD. Also, the response rates are coming down pretty quickly. Hop over to a local CC, BB, Fry's etc. and take a look. I was impressed so far. Sony also has an LCD projection WEGA worth looking at.

[Kagato]

The quality of pannels in an LCD projector is very different from the $299 15" LCD you see advertised each week at your discount store.

I'm not sure what native resolution has to do with it either. Almost none of the CRT based TVs in the retail chanel can actually resolve 1920X1080i. Even the Pioneer "true 1080" series can do about 1200x1080i.

Now a high end CRT projector, or DLP, sure, much better than LCD, but I think you'll have a hard time finding something in the $5000 range that will look better than my Boxlight 20HD.

[BobMurdoch]

OK. I've been hearing people bash LCD and Plasma because they could not produce true blacks well as well as the other items I've mentioned. If they have corrected this then I stand corrected.

[cnsf]

Kagato, I actually don't know much about DLP. Can you shed some "light" on it? (pun intended.... :D )

[Nick]

I like LCD front projectors, but a serious limitation for home use is bulb life - typically 1.000-1,500 hrs - and the expense of replacement - typically $400-$500 a pop (NPI). I have over 7,500 hours on my 32" direct-view. That many hours on an LCD translates into at least four bulb replacements.

[Martyva]

Also, not mentioned, Uncompressed 1080i is 1.2Gb per second. DVI is capable of handling above 5 GB per second, which is why it will work better than firewire for dispays and vc versy on recording.

[cnsf]

Originally posted by Nick
I like LCD front projectors, but a serious limitation for home use is bulb life - typically 1.000-1,500 hrs - and the expense of replacement - typically $400-$500 a pop (NPI). I have over 7,500 hours on my 32" direct-view. That many hours on an LCD translates into at least four bulb replacements.

What about the pricey plasma refills needed? How long can they go and how much is the maintenance?

[Martyva]

A good front HD front projector could have a $300 bulb good for 3000hrs. CRTs, typically start burning at about 4000 hours. If you replace your tubes when you should, the CRT doesn't have an advantage.

[Martyva]

The advantage CRT's currently have over LCD/DLP is the ability to show 1080i, much better black level display, and in most cases much better jackpacks. A new LCD technology is promising 1080i native and 3000 to 1 contrast ratio in consumer products before the end of the year. This may be the beginning of the end of the CRT.

[Mike123abc]

When LCDs get to 3840x2160p then they will be ideal... At that resolution they will be able to scale 1920x1080 (2x) and 1280x720 (3x) perfectly without artifacts. In a couple years they should be able to do this resolution.

[Kagato]

Martyva I wouldn't call CRT's king of the hill yet. Most of the CRT rear projection sets you find at your local discount eletronic retailer are scaling that 1080i signal to 700-800 lines. It's not until recently that you've been seeing CRT tvs that could actualyl resolve the 1080i signal truely.

As much as I like my LCD projector, I really don't think the consumer is ready to go that direction. I'm sure Sony would love to have you buy a new bulb every 2000 hours. I just don't think consumers will go for it. While this bulb replacement does have a great benifit of your picture never fading or burning in, the 350-500 dollar cost is exsessive.

By next year I think every technology will have 1920x1080i sets in the channel though. The question will be the cost. If CRT makers can't figure out how to get that set within 1500 of panasonics rear projection LCD the bulb cost won't matter.

[Martyva]

I'm not sure I called CRT's king of the hill, but they currently have several advantages over LCD/DLP/LCOS/light valve.
http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/Pioneer/CDA/HomeProducts/HomeAlbum/0,1420,50~5020~5020100,00.html

[Kagato]

The elites are nice sets. Don't get me wrong. Certainly better contrast than LCD and LCOS. But none of those Pioneers can resolve 1920x1080i. At most 1400x1080i. Of course the real fun will start when you get better video processors that will take a 1080i signal and convert it to a 1080p.

[Martyva]

If they're doing 1080ix1400 does that mean the sets aspect is 14X9?

[Mike123abc]

Originally posted by Martyva
If they're doing 1080ix1400 does that mean the sets aspect is 14X9?

No actually it just means that with overscan and lack of pixels that is the effective resolution of the image. With CRTs you can scan 1920 pulses across the line but if you do not have enough individual phosphor dots (or triads or stripes depending on your set) you will not actually resolve all 1920 dots. Many "1080i" CRTs dont actually resolve 1920 across. Essentially 2 pixels end up being averaged into one.

[Martyva]

Are any of those sets called HD moniters or HDTVs, or are they called Hi Scan or Hi res or something else? How many CRT s(including rear and front projectors) do not have enough phosphers to create 1920 pixels?

[Kagato]

Each vendor has a different name for it. It gives me a headache. Some are more truthful about it than others. Of the RPTVs that do a true 1920X1080i few are allowed to be sold at a discount chain (Your Best Buy, Circuit City, etc.) This is also because those chains tend not to see Front Projectors. And of the ones that do (Your Audio Kings) they only sell LCDs/DLPs. Currently a much larger part of the front PJ market will resolve the full 1080i resolution.

The problem is the CRT makers are trying to do something with a 6 or 7 inch CRT that is usually done with 8-9 inch CRT. Sony's top of the line front projector actually does 1920X1080P (Yes that's a P). Of course you pay as much as you would for a car.

Cutting horizontal resolution is a good quick fix though. The human eye will pick up vertical compression much easier than horizontal. Dish does the same thing to save bandwidth.

Pioneer is at least truthful about it in their specs. Although they bury it somewhat. The sales drones at most discount chains are freak'n clueless though.