Long live component video!
Red, Green and Blue! Red, Green and Blue! Red Green and Blue!We have news for all fo you HDTV-heads out there. HDMI may be great and DVI may be cool, but the reigning king of HDTV is component video. Wait a sec, let us qualify that a bit. Component may not give you better results then HDMI/DVI but it is simply the most used transport medium for high-def. Every HDTV has a component video input and why is this? Well, there is just a massive amount of affordable "HDTV solutions" that rely on component video. Case in point. Walk into any major electronics store with more then 10 HDTVs and take a look behind of 'em. Component video! It is simply the most affordable way to distribute a high-def signal. There are a bunch of 'cheap' component video baluns that sends the Y/Pr/Pb signal across Cat-5 wire. Matrix boxes don't cost that much and there are a good amount of them available. Component video is simply a great way to transport high-def signals. It isn't dead now and we don't see it going away anytime soon.
Now that whole ICT thing is a different story.






















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
BRYAN @ Jun 27th 2006 10:45AM
This should be the standard. HDMI is just to confusing/restrictive/expensive. I don’t see why they cant just let us use these perfectly capable wires to get the HD job done, and let the tech geeks drool over HDMI quality. Forcing HDMI is a real pain, and another reason HD movies will stall.
Why did they choose red? Didn’t anyone else notice that there were already 20 red RCA ports on the back of the receiver/TV/DVD that are not for video?
Tush @ Jun 27th 2006 10:48AM
Most of us early adopters don't have the luxury of HDMI or even DVI.
I agree though, let's give component video it's props.
Ew, I said props.
Mike S @ Jun 27th 2006 11:05AM
Component cables are cheaper than HDMI. They work great for me on my non DVI/HDMI Hitachi TV.
Show me a recorder or capture card than pirate a 720p/1080i signal over component.
bfos @ Jun 27th 2006 11:52AM
Component actually gives me a better picture from my Comcast (Motorola) HD DVR, then the HDMI output.
Not sure why, and not exactly happy about it after spending the money on the cables and the HDMI-DVI converter. I even had an older version of the Motorola with a DVI output, and it was the same poor quality that the HDMI provides.
Maybe it's the cable box, but there's a lot of people with those boxes and no one says anything. But, I'm guessing they are just taking the word that HDMI is better.
Brian
Marc James @ Jun 27th 2006 11:56AM
I also get a significantly better picture with component than HDMI on my brand new Samsung 32" LCD with my TW Scientific Atlantic Explorer 8300HD. The blacks are ghosting and awful with HDMI. I was surprised, too...
Ken @ Jun 27th 2006 1:29PM
And best of all, component video does not literally 'fall out' of the jack!
GhostDoggy @ Jun 27th 2006 4:02PM
I am all about analog video transport. I have a pair of CRT projectors and both are using analog video for transport. But the similarity to this post's premise and what I'm doing ends there, and quickly.
Why would anyone wish an unneccessary transcoding? Video is caputered in RGB (digitally) or RGBHV (analog). My HDTV receivers are both capable of outputting RGBHV to the RGBHV displays.
If one's best analog input device is Component video then, and I am sorry to hear that, that is fine. But a lot of people have RGBHV inputs and using component video is an unneccessary evil. Aside from introducing potential problems you are also open to abusive 4xx compression by the agent you are paying for the content from.
Casey @ Jun 28th 2006 5:39PM
HDMI is not a great idea, or is it really needed for most users.
HDMI is only because the media providers want to force HDCP, which is their great anti piracy idea. If they can get all consumer electronics to use HDCP, then they think they can stop piracy, eliminate copyright expiration, and eliminate the concept that "you bought it and can use it any way you want".
HDMI = bogus DRM, and it should not be this way !