PDA

View Full Version : HDTV/Audio-Video Megathread (Need Help!)



Half Japanese
01-31-2007, 12:00 AM
We've had tons of topics started with relatively simple questions in mind regarding A/V or HDTV questions, so I figured that between us all we could compile all of this knowledge into one gigantic thread that encompasses almost all the information any one could ever want to know about current consoles and their video/audio capabilities. The thing is, I'm no expert. I certainly have interest and have a bit more than a passing knowledge about these matters, but many of your guys know way more than I do or things that I forgot or neglected, so contribute. I've got a few things here as a starter, but we need much more. Feel free to contribute information where it is missing or incorrect or to suggest questions or write Q&A's of your very own to be included here. I have chosen to go with the Dreamcast and work forward, but we can work backwards too if anyone is interested and would like to contribute that information (everyone that contributes will be credited for their contributions). Here's my very basic starter info that hopefully we can build upon:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

What kind of cables should I use?

This all depends on your connection, your budget and your tolerance level. The basic breakdown is this (from worst to roughly best, though the last 3 are very comparable):

- RF: This one plugs into the coax connection on the back of your television (where the cable/antenna plugs in). This was pretty standard fare in the 8 and 16-bit days, but has been growing increasingly long in the tooth since then. Picture quality is pretty blah with an RF connection and sound is mono, meaning you'll want to upgrade your TV/cables before delving into any next-gen system.

- Composite: Your standard video cable consisting of 3 wires: yellow (video), red and white (audio). This is what many consoles come packed with. You'll notice a nice increase in quality going from an RF connection to these, but this one's getting outmoded fast. The picture quality isn't as blurry as an RF connection and sound is in stereo (unless your TV is mono).

- S-Video: S-Video is a nice step up from composite and really began to gain popularity in the era of the Playstation, N64 and Dreamcast. Picture quality is noticeably sharper than composite and colors stay within their borders giving a cleaner picture all-around. Generally these cables are stereo as far as audio is concerned, but in rare cases they can provide optical audio as well (see: Xbox Advanced A/V Pack).

- Component: This is where video will really start to shine. Composite splits the video signal into three wires, color-coded as green, blue and red. Component is also the first level of cable at which you will be able to experience progressive scan (more on that later), offering higher resolutions and making your games look drastically better than any other cable is capable of. The audio on most component cables is generally stereo and/or optical.

- VGA: A standard connection method on PCs, VGA is the top- tier connection method for the Dreamcast and the 360 (well, unless Microsoft releases an HDMI enabled 360...) and can carry video signals at 480p and up. While technically superior to component video, actual performance is similar. VGA is the only connection method that allows Dreamcast games to be played in 480p/ progressive scan, which poses a problem since many HDTVs do not have a VGA connection. VGA can be converted to component video via a transcoder such as this Audio Authority box. For the 360, VGA may be good connection chioce if you have a VGA- equipped TV, or if you need to conect the 360 to a PC monitor. However, some users have reported a lighter and more "washed out" picture using VGA. So, for most users, using the stock component cables with the 360 should be more than adequate.


- HDMI: The "latest and greatest" connection standard, HDMI stands out from the rest of the pack because, unlike compenent, VGA, s-video, composite, etc, it carries a digital (rather than analog) signal for a theoretically cleaner picture. The PS3 is the only console that supports this standard. While companies like monster take advantage of general consumer ignorance and charge a ton of cash for HDMI cables, they can can be had cheaply if you know were to look (http://www.monoprice.com/products/search.asp?spcDB=10240&spcWord=Video%20Cable%20-%20%3Cb%3EHDMI%3C/b%3E&keyword=HDMI).

(thanks to mario2butts for VGA and HDMI descriptions)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm looking to buy a new TV and get into this HD gaming goodness...what are my options?

This all depends on your preference, your budget and your living space/lifestyle. Here's a quick rundown of some popular HDTV formats:

- CRT: The same tech as the boob tube you grew up with. Fewer and fewer new HDTVs are CRTs. Despite their massive size and weight, CRTs boast excellent picture quality, and are generally under $1k but max out at 34”. Be aware that some (older) CRT HDTVs do not support 720p resolution, which poses a problem for some PS3 games as the PS3, unlike the 360, has no scaling capabilities. When buying a CRT, be sure that it supports 480p, 1080i, AND 720p. No CRTs support 1080p, the upper-tier resolution for 360 and PS3.

- LCD: LCDs are an attractive choice; they are reliable, offer an excellent picture, and are dropping in price: sub- 30” sets are less than or around $1k. LCDs have traditionally been weak in contrast and pixel response time, but these limitations are beginning to dissapear with recent models. LCDs by their nature have one fixed resolution, and must scale the image if it does not match that resolution. For the 360 and its scaling options, this isn't a problem at all. Pretty much any LCD HDTV on the market today can accept and scale the most common resolutions (480i,480p,720p,1080i). Only some of the newest LCDs can display 1080p, so look for that capability if you want the absolute best picture from your 360/PS3. The only real problem is when you feed an LCD a 480i (or lower) resolution (read: any classic console, most PS2, some DC, GC, Xbox, Wii). In these instances the TV has to do some serious processing to scale up the picture, introducing blurring and lag. The only true fix is to stick with your SDTV for 480i or get an upscan converter, such as the XRGB-3, which at $300 is a pricey box, but well worth it (as I can personally attest ). Some LCDs can handle 480i better than others, (indeed, the lag may in some cases be unnoticeable) so it would be prudent to test games in store before you buy. Guitar Hero II for PS2 has a lag test in the game that you can use.

- Plasma: Expensive but beautiful looking. However, Plasmas have had problems with static images (like videogames) burning into the screen. Manufacturers have claimed that burn- in issues have been solved, and some users report no problems. You should avoid displaying non-widescreen games in their original aspect ratio (with black bars on the sides) and use the TV’s stretch mode instead, as this so-called “pillarboxing” is a common cause of burn-in. The same resolution and scaling caveats mentioned for LCDs apply to Plasmas. Plasmas are creeping down in price to around $1k for 42” 480p sets, closer to $2k for 720p. Prices rise dramatically with screen size/ resolution.

- Projection: Projection-based HDTVs work by magnifying a small screen that sits in the back of the unit, allowing a cost effective means of producing large images. CRT-based Projection TVs are cheap but nearly defunct, massively large, and not recommended as they are susceptible to burn-in. Remember that warning in most 90’s game instruction manuals advising against using “projection televisions”? They were talking about these bad boys.
LCD Projection HDTVs work like standard LCDs, they’re just fatter and cheaper by the inch. DLP Projection HDTVs are similar to LCD projection HDTVs, but offer better contrast. They work by spinning a color wheel in front of a tiny screen made with spinning mirrors. This technology offers a great picture, but can generate distracting streaks of “rainbows” caused by the color wheel. The rainbows are only really apparent when a bright object moves across a dark background very quickly. Some are more distracted by DLP rainbows than others, so try before you buy. I for one occasionally notice but am never bothered by DLP rainbows. Note that both LCD and DLP projection sets have lamps in them that must occasionally be replaced, and have the same resolution and scaling caveats as standard LCDs and plasmas. Projection sets range in price from $1,500 to $5,000: that’s from a 42” 720p to a 70” 1080p.

Projector: Projectors, morseso than other HDTV technologies, require the user to jump through many hoops to enjoy. Firstly, they must be properly installed in your room (usually they are hung on the ceiling with a separately purchased mount), require a separately purchased screen to project onto (a white wall, while not the best solution, still gives a good picture, though), and do not have built in TV tuners or audio output, meaning you’ll need a separate VCR or cable box to watch TV and a stereo system for sound. Expect to pay more for cables as the projector will likely be far away from your AV rack/shelf. Projectors work optimally in total darkness, like a movie theater. Ambient light washes out the picture. And lastly, their bulbs must be occasionally replaced, at considerable cost. So clearly, projectors are not for everyone. BUT (and this is a big “but”), IF you can jump through said hoops, you’ll be rewarded with a massive, stunning, and surprisingly cheap picture.
Like projectION sets, projectORs come in three flavors. CRT projectors do exist, but they are massive, expensive, and rare. LCD and DLP projectors offer similar performance to each other, with LCDs immune to the dreaded “rainbow effect” and DLPs offering higher contrast and black levels. Projectors are plummeting in price and becoming a great value; 720p projectors like the popular Optoma HD-70 are creeping into the sub-$1k range. 480p projectors are currently being phased out, but are ridiculously cheap. The Infocus SP4805 and IN72 can be had for nearly $500 on ebay. 1080p projectors still demand a premium, with the cheapest being the Sony “Pearl” at $5,000. Lamp costs should be considered, though: most projectors offer a lamp life in the 2,000 to 4,000 hour range with replacement bulbs costing $300-400. If you used a standard 3,000- hour bulb 8 hours a day, you’d be buying a new bulb every year. Still, considering the cost of similarly sized plasmas and LCDs, projectors are still a bargain. Of course, the same resolution/scaling caveats for LCD, plasma, and projection sets also apply to projectors.

(thanks to mario2butts for this entire section!)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

What kinds of cables are available for the current systems?

For 'current,' we're going to go with everything from the Dreamcast forward (unless someone else would like to add information before the DC). “*” will denote the stock cable(s) that comes with the system. Here we go:

- Dreamcast: RF, composite*, S-video, VGA (select games)

- Playstation 2: RF, composite*, S-video, component

- Gamecube: RF, composite*, S-video, component (earlier models)

- Xbox: RF, composite*, S-video, component

- Xbox 360: RF, composite*, S-video, component*, VGA

- Playstation 3: -PS3: RF, composite*, S-Video, component, HDMI (with the exception of HDMI, uses same cables as PS2)

- Wii: RF, composite*, S-Video, component (incompatible with Gamecube cables)

(thanks to mario2butts for ps3 & Wii descriptions)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Links

Great places to head for information as well as a few places to check out if you're in the market for cables and other AV goods:

HDTV Arcade (www.hdtvarcade.com)
Great, constantly updated list of which games support which resolutions and features (online, surround sound, etc.). Any HD gamer should have this in their bookmarks.

MonoPrice (www.monoprice.com)
One of the best places to buy cables online. DO NOT buy HDMI cables (or most others for that matter) in a store when they can be had here for often less than 1/4 the price you'd pay at any of the big-box retailers. They also sell KVM switches and computer cables.

Got a link? Feel free to post it in a reply or shoot me a PM with it and I'll add it here. Please include a brief description of the link!

mario2butts
01-31-2007, 03:02 AM
EDIT: since all my info has been merged into the first post I got rid of this one to save space.

Here's a link to an old thread to which I contributed that has a lot of info on audio options for the modern consoles: Audio (http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=82186).

Candycab
01-31-2007, 04:02 AM
Well I can add that for the last two years I have been extremely happy with my DLP Infocus X1a Projector. Mine is definitly on the low end of the projector spectrum but its really inexpensive and is a really good performer for the dough.

Actually when compared to my neighbors brand new $3000.00 60' Sony LCD based set I have him beat hands down for image quality vs size even at the same size my colors are more true looking than his,[ my yellow is more of a true yellow where his his a more greenish, which says alot about Sony "quality" no real suprise there though ] though he can do 1080P where I cant and even though my 720P isnt true its close enough so that it rivals his easilly and I can go to about 130' before the image starts to get really cruddy looking, the sweet spot is about 85' to 105' with my unit. Im usually running between 86' 16x9 and 98' 4x3 [ mostly 4x3 for PC use, excelent for gaming :) ]



Keep in mind we calibrated both his set and my projector with Video Essentials and the Avia discs prior to comparring, im also using curtain backer as a screen material, which suprisingly has very close properties to a $1200.00 Da-Lite 100' screen and easilly loooks as good or better than the cheaper screens I have seen on the market, much better than a bare wall for sure.

Personally I think LCD tech is cheap crap when comparred to any comperable DLP based tech, DLP seems to produce an image that is alot closer to true film with reliability that so far LCD cant match, not too mention how cheap a DLP Lamp is comparred to the TFT panel when they die in an LCD based set/projector

You should go checkout the HDTV area of theAVS & AfterDawn forums, [ avsforum, forums.afterdawn ] there are alot of people on both who know their stuff and are always glad to help someone learn about new tech :)

If you have the room you should seriously look at the projector market for large quality images and a ton of flexability, money goes alot further in the projector world these days than the HDTV set arena. You can really get alot for you money, just pay attention to Lamp cost and lifespan before you decide. Infocus and Optima make some very nice units in every price range.

If youre a cheap bastard then dont even bother as mine is on the low end of lamp cost at $300.00 for a 4000 hour lamp, so about once a year I buy a new one and too me its very worth it when you consider I paid all of $805.00 after taxes for my projecyor two years ago and now it can be had for about $500.00 before taxes. It keeps me as happy as any $3 to 7K TV would and its going to take quite a while before I have that much money tied up in it, which also makes me very happy... More dough for other toys :)


Which ever way you decide to go make sure you buy whatever it is that makes you happy and that you feel good about spending the money on, not what someone else tells you is better etc. These technologies are all very good in their own right and very affordable and easilly accessable, so go learn as much as possible and play with all of them then buy one and have a blast with it ;)

Half Japanese
01-31-2007, 11:10 AM
Big thanks to Mario2butts, I updated with all the info you gave me and you're credited at the bottom of each respective section. I'll also add your sound info later on!

Candycab, I'll probably add a good chunk of your info later when we eventually get into 'buying guides' for TVs/projectors.


Now, anyone else have things they'd like to contribute? This thing should work similar to wikipedia, if you see incorrect info (probably mine) or would like to expand on something already there, feel free to do so.

Flack
01-31-2007, 11:35 AM
Couple of notes:

HDMI: Might add that HDMI cables carry audio as well as video.

CRT Section: It states the largest CRT is 34"? I have a 35". I'm pretty sure they topped out around 40" or 42".

[EDIT] You might also add a brief section explaining the difference between 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p.

agbulls
01-31-2007, 11:40 AM
I didn't see anything about RGB. That would probably be a good add--as I'm totally unclear on how that could look better than component. Or does it not?

veronica_marsfan
01-31-2007, 12:25 PM
I didn't see anything about RGB. That would probably be a good add--as I'm totally unclear on how that could look better than component. Or does it not?

RGB *is* Component video. There's no difference in quality between RGB and YPbPr, since both are lossless formats.

Radio Frequency (RF) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RF_connector
Composite - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_video
S-video - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-Video
YPbPr (component) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YPbPr
RGB (component) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Component_video

:villagepeople:

Half Japanese
01-31-2007, 12:54 PM
Couple of notes:

HDMI: Might add that HDMI cables carry audio as well as video.

CRT Section: It states the largest CRT is 34"? I have a 35". I'm pretty sure they topped out around 40" or 42".

[EDIT] You might also add a brief section explaining the difference between 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p.

I think he was referring to 34" being the size that an HD CRT maxes out at. SD CRT go up further than that, but I haven't personally seen an HD CRT larger than that. If anyone can verify a larger TV, I'll add the info.

I will add the note to the HDMI section and work on a resolution section a little later (though in the meantime, if someone wants to help out with a primer, by all means).

I didn't include info on RGB yet because I just don't think it's a format that most people are going to be using with modern consoles. From what I understand RGB falls somewhere between s-video and progressive-scan component in terms of quality. If someone (you know who you are) would like to whip up an RGB section as it applies to modern consoles, I'll gladly add it.

mario2butts
01-31-2007, 01:09 PM
@Flack

Forgot to mention HDMI's ability to carry audio! I'm not an expert on the PS3's audio options so I'll leave that to someone else.

I should have clarified that WIDESCREEN CRT's max out @ 34". Indeed, 4:3 36" HD CRTs have been made, but are pretty much extinct now. Sony did make a 40" CRT, but it was so incredibly huge, heavy, and had bad geometry issues, so it was very short-lived.

I might write up a piece comparing resolutions later.

@agbulls and veronica_marsfan on RGB

RGB is a very confusing catch-all phrase. Technically, any video signal that carries Red, Green, and Blue color data separately is RGB. VGA originally referred to the 640x480 PC resolution standard, but now can also refer to the cable itself that carries analog RGB video at resolutions 480p and up. When we gamers refer to "RGB", however, we usually refer to a 480i (or lower resolution) RGB video signal, for which there is no universal connection method. Europe had SCART and Japan had the similar JRGB or J-SCART cable, but the US has no "RGB cable" so to speak. Thus, US TV's do not have (low-resolution) RGB inputs. The XRGB-2+ and 3, which convert RGB via a JRGB input, as well as composite, S-Video, and component, to VGA, provide the best workarund. SCART to component transcoders also exist.

Component video (YPbPr) is NOT RGB. Rather, it carries a black and white (lumianance, Y) signal along with the color difference signals for blue and red (Pb and Pr). Green is extrapolated from this information. So, technically, RGB is superior to component. However, component cables can support HD resolutions, while low- res RGB maxes out at 480i. Remember, of course, that there is such a thing as higher-res (480p and up) analog RGB, we just call it VGA :). Confusing, ain't it? At the same resolution, an RGB image and component video image should look about the same, with RGB showing more accurate color, especially greens (component's achilles heel). But really, both look very good; both are a substantial step up from S-Video and especially composite. Some users have even reported that the 360 looks better in component than VGA, while others insist otherwise, so they're very close anyway.

HDMI originally only carried digital component video. With revision 1.2, it was given support for digital RGB as well. I'm not sure which flavor the PS3 outputs via its HDMI port, probably digital component.

More links:

www.crutchfield.com

Not too many deals, but their site has detailed spec sheets, pictures and reviews of HDTVs. A helpful resource.

www.gamesx.com

Gets into the nitty- gritty of getting RGB out your classic consoles, among other things.

EDIT just remembered... the mother lode...

www.avsforum.com

Lots (and I mean LOTS) of AV tech info here, if you're willing to sift through the massive threads.

veronica_marsfan
01-31-2007, 03:16 PM
Component video (YPbPr) is NOT RGB. Rather, carries a full-resolution black and white (lumianance) signal along with half-resolution color signals for red and blue. And S-video represents one-quarter the color resolution.


Resolution comparisons:
(Note: The Electronics Industry Alliance (EIA) uses a unique standard... they put a giant circle in the middle of the screen, count the number of visible pixels across, and arrive at a number like "425 for laserdisc" or "540 for dvd". It seems counterintuitive, but that's how it's done.)

Format - EIA specification (circle method)
240 - VHS (ditto Betamax)
330 - NTSC broadcast
425 - laserdisc (ditto S-VHS)
540 - DVD


Format - Actual (from edge-to-edge)
VHS - 321 (and Betamax)
NTSC - 440
laserdisc - 565 (ditto S-VHS)
DVD - 720

If the DVD is severely compressed, the quality will drop much lower than 540 (just as a VHS tape recorded in super-slow mode is only ~120 across). 540 is the ideal, not the norm.


http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/bandwid.htm

DreamTR
01-31-2007, 03:44 PM
Just a quick note about those cables, anyone can make them, but unless they are HDMI optimized, and say it on the package, they might screw up and not work the way they are supposed to. They are definitely lower quality and not optimized. TO get an HDMI optimized cable, it will cost more from the factories than those guys are selling.

slip81
01-31-2007, 09:54 PM
I think he was referring to 34" being the size that an HD CRT maxes out at. SD CRT go up further than that, but I haven't personally seen an HD CRT larger than that. If anyone can verify a larger TV, I'll add the info.

not the best source, but,

Sony 40" HD CRT (http://cgi.ebay.com/Sony-FD-Trinitron-WEGA-XBRKV-40XBR800-40-HDTV_W0QQitemZ190077772026QQihZ009QQcategoryZ11072 QQcmdZViewItem)

Anthony1
02-01-2007, 12:23 AM
RGB *is* Component video. There's no difference in quality between RGB and YPbPr, since both are lossless formats.




In the interlaced world, RGB is superior to component. RGB has full bandwidth for all three colors. Component does not. When it comes to consoles that are capable of progressive scan games, then RGB becomes a moot point, and component is the more ideal scenario. Of course, assuming you are using it with a HDTV that has a wide-band component input.

shertz
02-01-2007, 12:24 AM
I bought this DLP HDTV...

http://www.mitsubishi-tv.com/j/i/18326/TelevisionDetails/WD65831.html?cid=524

and I couldnt be happier. I have my PS3 and Nintendo Wii hooked up to it and they look great. Of course the PS3 stands out at 1080P when watching Blu-Ray movies. Resistance looks awesome even at 720P. Its too bad the Wii only goes up to 480P because the video does look grainy. Even though the PS3 video looks great, I still play the Wii more then the PS3 cause the games for the Wii are awesome. Gameplay > souped up grafix ;)

Anthony1
02-01-2007, 12:34 AM
At the same resolution, an RGB image and component video image should look about the same, with RGB showing more accurate color, especially greens (component's achilles heel). But really, both look very good; both are a substantial step up from S-Video and especially composite. Some users have even reported that the 360 looks better in component than VGA, while others insist otherwise, so they're very close anyway.




mario2butts: I apologize for not reading your post before doing my first post, because you basically hit the nail on the head. Only thing I have to say about what you posted above, is that on paper, RGB and component should be nearly identical, but in practice I can notice an immediate difference, of course, I'm well known as a videophile, so that might just be me. I do distinctly remember playing various Playstation 2 games in native RGB, and playing the same games in component, and seeing more details on the RGB monitor. I wouldn't go as far to say it was a night and day difference, but the difference was definitely noticeable. I especially remember it with San Andreas. Lots of little details in the background were much more noticeable.

I know that from a technical standpoint, I really shouldn't be seeing any extra details, but I all I can say is what I've seen with my own eyes. Of course, once 480p enters the picture, then the whole RGB thing becomes pretty much moot. As for the Xbox 360 and VGA, one thing about VGA is that it was designed for computer resolutions and not regular video resolutions, so many times people will explain that when viewing High Def material via VGA rather than component, they lose a bit of the "pop" in the colors and that things are a bit "muted" and washed out. Supposedly Microsoft fixed this via a recent update, but I don't use VGA with my 360, so I don't really know. I do know that the Dreamcast has always looked outstanding via VGA as far as I was concerned. I have a regular RGB cable for my Dreamcast, and for the very few DC games that aren't 480p, that cable comes in handy, but for all the 480p games, it's much better to use the VGA box.


To make a long story short, if the game isn't 480p or better, then 9 times out of 10 you will get the best image with analog RGB. This means all systems prior to the Dreamcast that are capable of analog RGB will look the best via that route. Also, for all the PS2 and GameCube games that don't offer 480p support, those will look better via analog RGB as well, although I must admit that I haven't tried the HDxPloder thing that can allow all non 480p games on the PS2 to work in 480p. So maybe with the PS2, using that boot disk is a better idea than using analog RGB, but I don't know from personal experience.

Oh, one thing I forgot to mention that I think is really important is to also remember that there are two worlds in terms of aspect ratio. 4:3 and 16:9. The vast majority of video games prior to Xbox 360 are native 4:3, and if you play them on a widescreen TV you are going to have to accept the ramifications of that. That means you are either going to distort the image, or live with sidebar letterboxing. Thus, for gamers that enjoy the classic games as well as the most modern next-gen games, you really can't have the best of both worlds with one display. You pretty much need two seperate displays to get the most bang for your buck from both aspect ratios. This is why I think having a smaller RGB monitor in a bedroom, is a great idea. You get the correct 4:3 ratio, and you also get the best video signal that those systems were capable of. The best of both worlds for Retro Gaming. Then for the living room, have your big widescreen HDTV. For the bedroom RGB monitor, I highly recommend the largest Sony PVM monitor that will work in that room comfortably. I prefer the Sony PVM 2530 myself, but there are lots of various Sony PVM's that will fit the bill. If you need a very small monitor you can't beat the Commodore 1084S-D1 even though it's incredibly old and only 13 inches. For the large widescreen HDTV, there are so many factors that affect that, that I can't give a one size fits all recomendation. I will say however that I think that 1080p is dramatically overrated. So don't pay an extra grand for 1080p. Don't pay an extra $800 for 1080p. If you can get 1080p for like $400 extra, then maybe it becomes a serious consideration, but right now 1080p is primarily marketing hocus pocus. On paper, you would think that 2 million pixels would make a night and day difference, but I've seen it in action, and I'm a hardcore videophile and it's very difficult to see any significant differances from a 1080p set and a very good 720p set. Once 1080p comes way down in price and isn't this big marketing thing, then it might be worth it to go 1080p, but I just want people to understand that 1080p isn't the Holy Grail from a video standpoint. Originally I thought 1080p would be the Holy Grail, and I must say I was suprised to find out otherwise, but unfortunately, it's the God's honest truth.

diskoboy
02-01-2007, 01:52 AM
Just throwing this in -

Resolutions and their explinations:

480i is a normal standard-defenition TV signal. 640x480 30fps
480p (Extended defenition) - 640x480 60fps.
720p (High Defenition) - 1280x720 60fps.
1080i - 1920x1080 30fps.
1080p - same as 1080i, but running at 60fps.

P = Progressive format
I = Interlaced format

Most HD networks (In the US) broadcast in 1080i. Except for FOX which is in 720p. Absolutely no channel broadcasts in 1080p - yet, anyway..

BTW - anyone have an opinion on any of these LCoS (Liquid Crystal on Silicon) tv's? I'm saving up for HD #2.

nebrazca78
02-01-2007, 01:44 PM
@Flack


I should have clarified that WIDESCREEN CRT's max out @ 34". Indeed, 4:3 36" HD CRTs have been made, but are pretty much extinct now. Sony did make a 40" CRT, but it was so incredibly huge, heavy, and had bad geometry issues, so it was very short-lived.


Mitsubishi has been making 40" SDTVs for many years as well.

agbulls
02-01-2007, 02:00 PM
On paper, you would think that 2 million pixels would make a night and day difference, but I've seen it in action, and I'm a hardcore videophile and it's very difficult to see any significant differances from a 1080p set and a very good 720p set. Once 1080p comes way down in price and isn't this big marketing thing, then it might be worth it to go 1080p, but I just want people to understand that 1080p isn't the Holy Grail from a video standpoint. Originally I thought 1080p would be the Holy Grail, and I must say I was suprised to find out otherwise, but unfortunately, it's the God's honest truth.


Anthony, this is really interesting. I have a Sony KDF-E50A10 3LCD (720p, 1080i) that I love. I'm personally disappointed that I can't run my PS3 in 1080p because I have this feeling that I must be missing part of the "1080p experience." However, I've read numerous posts on the AV forums that people claim it is almost impossible to tell the difference on a TV that is 50" or smaller. Mine is 50"--and 720p/1080i both look great. I think it has become a huge Sony marketing ploy that other companies have felt the need to grasp onto. After all, how much better are things really going to look than they already do? So, I have accepted my TV (and still love it). I work in a corporate marketing department---so I should know how this shit works better than most people.

I still do wonder though if I should bother hooking up my PS3 via hdmi to my TV. I have the available input, but can't run 1080p. Is this worth it over component? The picture is pretty damn good right now. Can anyone say for sure if it will be better?

Ed Oscuro
02-01-2007, 02:12 PM
As Spacey says, RGB is component, although not all component is RGB. Component is defined as a video signal that has been split into different signals (to polish up Wiki's definition a bit; they use "components" in place of signals, and all of us who have passed grade school know that you shouldn't use a word to define the word).

I would not say that S-video represents "one quarter" resolution; rather it carries all color on one signal, and luminosity on another (compared to composite video, which has them lumped together on the same signal).

Something else, which I would like imput on, is whether one should connect the yellow composite video wire when using S-Video. My DAC-200's documentation says you shouldn't, and it stands to reason. The composite video signal going in will at best be useless, and at worst will be noise your set will have to compensate for.

It's also worth noting that I'm doing a bit of research on CRTs, LCDs, and some other stuff not related to gaming (e-Paper/e-Ink displays for example), and from what I can tell CRTs are still not to be underestimated. They don't die or suffer at high altitudes like plasma screens, and they have better refresh rates than LCDs last I checked (plus no chance of dead pixels). There are also differences between shadow mask and Trinitron screens, with Trinitron screens doing better for luminosity (and heat generated, as a result), but Trinitron screens have a wire (or two, as mine does) that may be seen on high contrast light backgrounds (if you look real closely).

It's also odd to mention that composite uses the yellow wire for video - this is true, of course - but many of the cables you will find for plugging into a system with mono audio (i.e. the NES, with its red and yellow jacks) are only red and white - must be for audio applications.

Trebuken
02-01-2007, 03:02 PM
Anthony, this is really interesting. I have a Sony KDF-E50A10 3LCD (720p, 1080i) that I love. I'm personally disappointed that I can't run my PS3 in 1080p because I have this feeling that I must be missing part of the "1080p experience." However, I've read numerous posts on the AV forums that people claim it is almost impossible to tell the difference on a TV that is 50" or smaller. Mine is 50"--and 720p/1080i both look great. I think it has become a huge Sony marketing ploy that other companies have felt the need to grasp onto. After all, how much better are things really going to look than they already do? So, I have accepted my TV (and still love it). I work in a corporate marketing department---so I should know how this shit works better than most people.

I still do wonder though if I should bother hooking up my PS3 via hdmi to my TV. I have the available input, but can't run 1080p. Is this worth it over component? The picture is pretty damn good right now. Can anyone say for sure if it will be better?

I believe component cables are analog while HDMI are digital. HDMI has a greater bandwidth and can carry audio. I do not believe the PS3 is outputting anything that exceeds components bandwidth it is likely you would not see any difference. Having the audio integrated reduces the number of cables. I do not believe the PS3 has a game that can do 1080p yet so can't tell you what you are missing there, though 1080p may be more effective over HDMI. Most 1080p sets will deinterlace a 1080i signal from the PS3 to give you a 1080p image. The 1080P makes a huge difference on my set but it may be because it is larger than 50".

Be aware though that Quad HDTV and SED technologies are coming; meaning that are current displays will need upgrading at some point. TV's today aren't meant to last decadees like the CRT's of old.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The displays section does not include traditional computer monitors (CRT's?)?

Should probably add that the dreamcast needs extra hardware to do VGA or component.

I am sure our European couterparts would want SCART added.

SaturnFan
02-01-2007, 07:01 PM
Just a quick note about those cables, anyone can make them, but unless they are HDMI optimized, and say it on the package, they might screw up and not work the way they are supposed to. They are definitely lower quality and not optimized. TO get an HDMI optimized cable, it will cost more from the factories than those guys are selling.

Good point. I'm getting tired of people saying that all HDMI cables are the same. I've heard of a lot of people with thier $10 Wal-Mart HDMI cable that has messed up thier tv and/or thier PS3. If you can spend $1000+ for an HDTV and $600 for a PS3 then why do some many people get cheap and buy a cheap Wal-Mart cable?

mario2butts
02-01-2007, 09:42 PM
I edited my description of component video in post #9 based on everyone's comments.


As Spacey says, RGB is component, although not all component is RGB. Component is defined as a video signal that has been split into different signals

Good point. Still, when someone says "component video", nine times out of ten they're referring to YPbPr. I think it's safe enough to use the terms compenent video and YPbPr synonymously.


Good point. I'm getting tired of people saying that all HDMI cables are the same. I've heard of a lot of people with thier $10 Wal-Mart HDMI cable that has messed up thier tv and/or thier PS3.

Interesting, I was unaware such dramatic quality differences were present with HDMI. Anyone else have horror stories/ insights about crap HDMI cables?

Ed Oscuro
02-01-2007, 10:03 PM
I edited my description of component video in post #9 based on everyone's comments.

Good point. Still, when someone says "component video", nine times out of ten they're referring to YPbPr. I think it's safe enough to use the terms compenent video and YPbPr synonymously.
I thought we were trying to educate people. Guess that wasn't the point of this thread, then.


Interesting, I was unaware such dramatic quality differences were present with HDMI. Anyone else have horror stories/ insights about crap HDMI cables?
As far as I'm aware, there is no such thing - at least with the current batch. You can solder a coat hanger into the middle of a metal HDMI cable and it will still work.

I think I know what SaturnFan is referring to, and if so they really need to pay better attention. This was Sony's rationale for taking people's PS3s off warranty - hook, line, and sinker.

Look HERE (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=789061) for the original thread on that matter.

ALSO of interest to readers of this thread:

Windows Vista, DRM, HDMI, and Mickey Mouse security (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html) - the fruit of thousands (at least) of engineering man-hours (and I do mean fruity, as in insane).

mario2butts
02-01-2007, 10:25 PM
I thought we were trying to educate people. Guess that wasn't the point of this thread, then.

um, ok...

Shall we replace references to "component video" with "YPbPr" or "component YPbPr" to clear up any confusion, then?

Ed Oscuro
02-01-2007, 10:48 PM
All that needs to be done is mention that component represents a wide variety of types of video connection. If you want to throw in YPbPr, be my guest, although it would be nice to have it explained.

also, some random stuff about DVI versus HDMI, for your 'enjoyment' (http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/34579/122868.html)

Anthony1
02-02-2007, 02:23 AM
I have a couple of quick comments in regards to HDMI and 1080p


HDMI - In regards to the quality of a HDMI cable, the only thing you have to worry about with HDMI cables, is the fact that if you have a really long run (more than 25 feet), you can get a degredation in the signal. Also, there are issues in regards to the HDMI handshake with various equipment. The HDMI handshake issues have nothing to do with how expensive or inexpensive the HDMI cable is. Monoprice HDMI cables work absolutely fine for runs 25 feet and under. Most of the people that claim that certain places cheap HDMI cables aren't any good, are people that didn't know that cheap HDMI cables existed, and then unfortunately purchased a HDMI cable for a huge amount of money, and they have tremendous buyer's remorse over it, so they have to justify it somehow, and they think to themselves that the cheap HDMI cables must have some problem with them. It's unfortunate, but understandable. Had I paid $100 or more for a freaking HDMI cable, and then later found out I could have spent $15 at monoprice, you can better believe that I would have some buyers remorse as well. It's amazing to me how many people to this day, still have no idea that one can get a $10 or $15 HDMI cable, and that this cable will work perfectly fine, assuming their gear doesn't have HDMI handshake issues. If the gear does have HDMI handshake issues, then it won't matter if it's a $10 monoprice HDMI cable or a $100 monster cable HDMI cable, the handshake issues will exist either way. The only way to resolve that is with a firmware update from either, or both pieces of equipment.


1080p - There are a couple of fundamental problems with 1080p and noticing any kind of meaninful difference with 1080p. The first problem is that it's very difficult to notice any improvement on HDTV's under 56 inches. Note, that I didn't say 50 inches, because 56 is a better cutoff point, and to be honest, you would really like to be considerably larger than 56 inches to really see the appreciable differences. The second problem is that even if you do have a 56 inch or larger 1080p set, you need to be sitting very close to that set. Much closer than most people sit. Would you believe that you need to be like 7 feet away from a 56 inch 1080p set to really see the improvement? Most people sit around 11 feet from a 56 inch set, if not more. Beyond 7 or 8 feet, you really aren't going to see the extra resolution, so you are basically completely wasting the whole 1080p factor if you sit too far away. There is actually a mathmatical equation that can tell you the exact distance to sit from a set in regards to various resolutions and at which distance the increased resolution won't matter. When I first discovered this, I was trully dissapointed, because I actually had my mind set on a 1080p display, but in my living room, I have my couch against the back wall, and there isn't any way that the couch is going to be moved closer. It's going to remain backed up against the back wall. I'm a good 11 or 12 feet from the screen, which means a 1080p set would be a complete waste of money, because at that distance my eyes wouldn't be able to discern the extra resolution. The third problem has to do with content. There really isn't much in the way of true 1080p content, and there won't be for a very long time. HD-DVD and Blu Ray are both encoded in 1080p, but because they are film based sources, there honestly isn't any benefit for them being in 1080p. They really won't look any different in 1080i compared to 1080p. Video games are supposed to be the big benefactor of 1080p, but the problem with that, is that the current hardware that we have (PS3 & XBOX 360), have to make visual sacrifices in other areas to achieve 1080p. Resistance: Fall of Man was supposed to be 1080p, but was changed because the tradeoffs ultimately weren't worth it. The drop in frame rate and special effects, just wasn't worth the upgrade in resolution. Most developers agree that a 720p game with all effects turned on, and a high frame rate, will look better than a 1080p game with certain effects sacrificed and a frame rate that is lower and unstable.