|
|
Component vs SCART
Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection
and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. |
Component vs SCART
Scott wrote:
Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? RGB scart is equivalent quality to component, except scart cannot handle more than SD resolution. Composite scart is lower quality then RGB scart or component. |
Component vs SCART
"Scott" wrote in message ... Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. The Y Pb Pr Component interface will be compatable with progressive scan signals from your DVD player -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
Component vs SCART
"Scott" wrote in message ... Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. main difference is component can carry a progressive scan signal unlike scart - if your device isn't progressive, you'll probably not see a difference. -- Gareth. that fly...... is your magic wand.... http://dsbdsb.mybrute.com you fight better when you have a bear! |
Component vs SCART
In message , Andy
Burns writes Scott wrote: Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? RGB scart is equivalent quality to component, except scart cannot handle more than SD resolution. Composite scart is lower quality then RGB scart or component. In my limited experience with lower-priced TV equipment, what 'the book' says about the relative picture quality 'ain't necessarily so'. I suspect it varies from setup to setup. For example, I've got three TV sets and, with all of them, a composite video input seems to be a bit sharper than RGB. I have no idea why. It's probably best to try things. For example, with a hard disc recorder, I get the impression that TV scart RGB or the composite video is slightly better than interlaced component, but it is worse than progressive component (which is sharper and seems less 'jerky'). From what I remember, there is a disadvantage in that the TV set doesn't auto-detect the picture aspect ratio with the component input, but 'tries to' with the scart input (but I might be wrong about this). -- Ian |
Component vs SCART
In message , The dog from that film you
saw wrote "Scott" wrote in message .. . Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. main difference is component can carry a progressive scan signal unlike scart - if your device isn't progressive, you'll probably not see a difference. There can be a difference () dependant on how the TV processes the signal after it has been received. On another forum I read opinion seems to divided 50:50 to which is best. This is probably a combination due to personal taste and the make of the equipment supplying and receiving the signals. On my set-up the RGB output from my SD PVR gives a more pleasing picture than the component output. The component output gives an unnatural sharper picture resulting in a more "noisy" image that shows more of the digital compression artefacts. -- Alan news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk |
Component vs SCART
"Scott" wrote in message ... Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Are you using RGB through the scart, or just composite video? If it's the latter then component will be better. If it's the former then there won't be much in it. -- Alex |
Component vs SCART
"Scott" wrote in message
... Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. The important thing is to use good quality cables particularly SCART ones. I don't mean the ridiculously priced ones that make even more ridiculous claims about their performance. The ones supplied by Solent Cables are top quality and in my experience the company gives excellent service.. http://www.solentcables.co.uk/acatal...art-Cable.html Peter Crosland |
Component vs SCART
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 09:33:40 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
wrote: "Scott" wrote in message .. . Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Are you using RGB through the scart, or just composite video? If it's the latter then component will be better. If it's the former then there won't be much in it. It depends. I need to investigate more. I've got a PVR (Humax), hard disc recorder and VHS recorder. I only have two scart sockets on my new TV. I wondered about connecting one of these using a component lead. From what people are saying (except Alan) this should either make no difference or be an improvement. I am puzzled about the distinction between RGB and component. I though RGB was component and composite was the alternative (and not as good). |
Component vs SCART
"Brian Gaff" wrote:
A lot of the problem is that you are in the hands of the circuit designers. all things being equal, rgb should look better, the fact that many say its not is rather a sad inditement of the designs in the various interfacing components. The TV circuit often converts RGB internally to something like "component" so that the brightness and saturation can be adjusted by user controls, before re-converting it back to RGB. |
Component vs SCART
In article , Scott wrote:
I am puzzled about the distinction between RGB and component. I though RGB was component and composite was the alternative (and not as good). "Component" on a piece of domestic video equipment means YUV, in other words luminance and the usual two colour difference signals, fed through phono connectors. They're really both just different types of component signals, but the name seems to have stuck, in the same way that "PAL" now seems to mean 625 lines even if there's no PAL coding involved, and people talk about "filming" with video cameras. That's what common usage amongst the ignorant can do to a language. Rod. -- Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/ |
Component vs SCART
In message en.co.uk,
Roderick Stewart writes In article , Scott wrote: I am puzzled about the distinction between RGB and component. I though RGB was component and composite was the alternative (and not as good). "Component" on a piece of domestic video equipment means YUV, in other words luminance and the usual two colour difference signals, fed through phono connectors. They're really both just different types of component signals, but the name seems to have stuck, in the same way that "PAL" now seems to mean 625 lines even if there's no PAL coding involved, and people talk about "filming" with video cameras. That's what common usage amongst the ignorant can do to a language. "Filming" is arguably better than "videoing"!! -- Ian |
Component vs SCART
Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. The important thing is to use good quality cables particularly SCART ones. I don't mean the ridiculously priced ones that make even more ridiculous claims about their performance. The ones supplied by Solent Cables are top quality and in my experience the company gives excellent service.. http://www.solentcables.co.uk/acatal...art-Cable.html Peter Crosland You were doing so well... ....Then spoilt it by linking to an oxygen free cable at about twice that I would feel comfortable paying for a 1m cable. I like the flat ribbon type SCART's particularly when the connecter is horizontally orientated as they are lighter, and such weight they possess is more evenly distributed. Also it is evident that each signal wire is individually screened which, by far, is the most important factor. -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
Component vs SCART
On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 10:50:56 +0100, Roderick Stewart
wrote: In article , Scott wrote: I am puzzled about the distinction between RGB and component. I though RGB was component and composite was the alternative (and not as good). "Component" on a piece of domestic video equipment means YUV, in other words luminance and the usual two colour difference signals, fed through phono connectors. They're really both just different types of component signals, but the name seems to have stuck, in the same way that "PAL" now seems to mean 625 lines even if there's no PAL coding involved, and people talk about "filming" with video cameras. That's what common usage amongst the ignorant can do to a language. Rod. I know language can live on. People still talk about dialling phone numbers and having a 'bad line' on a mobile phone. What I am getting at is the menu on my Sony Bravia TV refers to a component input. If I use this because I have run out of SCART will I get the same quality as I would using the SCART input. If its better quality I will put my 'best' equipment into this input. If it is worse quality I will put my 'worst' equipment into the input. |
Component vs SCART
"Scott" wrote in message ... What I am getting at is the menu on my Sony Bravia TV refers to a component input. If I use this because I have run out of SCART will I get the same quality as I would using the SCART input. If its better quality I will put my 'best' equipment into this input. If it is worse quality I will put my 'worst' equipment into the input. it depends what you are connecting. at worst you'll probably not spot a difference, at best it could be better. -- Gareth. that fly...... is your magic wand.... http://dsbdsb.mybrute.com you fight better when you have a bear! |
Component vs SCART
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 15:49:12 +0100, "The dog from that film you saw"
wrote: "Scott" wrote in message .. . What I am getting at is the menu on my Sony Bravia TV refers to a component input. If I use this because I have run out of SCART will I get the same quality as I would using the SCART input. If its better quality I will put my 'best' equipment into this input. If it is worse quality I will put my 'worst' equipment into the input. it depends what you are connecting. at worst you'll probably not spot a difference, at best it could be better. OK, thanks. Sounds like I should be putting the preferred piece of equipment into the 'component' input. At least it means each bit of kit will have its own input. |
Component vs SCART
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Scott saying something like: Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. According to what I've read, the Sky (standard SD) RGB on SCART should be equal to component, but it ain't so on my boxes. The component input from the DVD is most definitely inferior, but that may be an illustration of crappy componentry/processing in the player. That said, the Sky RGB is of much better quality than I ever expected it to be, and it's really noticeable how much better on an LCD telly than it ever was on CRT. |
Component vs SCART
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Scott saying something like: OK, thanks. Sounds like I should be putting the preferred piece of equipment into the 'component' input. Best to try it each way round and see for yourself, imo. As pointed out above, various bits of kit (and the telly) have their own characteristics. Fwiw, my box has only one SCART input, so I was forced to go component for the DVD - previously, its SCART output was better, but I prefer keeping the telly SCART input for the Sky box. |
Component vs SCART
On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 16:12:19 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote: We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Scott saying something like: OK, thanks. Sounds like I should be putting the preferred piece of equipment into the 'component' input. Best to try it each way round and see for yourself, imo. As pointed out above, various bits of kit (and the telly) have their own characteristics. Fwiw, my box has only one SCART input, so I was forced to go component for the DVD - previously, its SCART output was better, but I prefer keeping the telly SCART input for the Sky box. I think that is the massage, and thanks to everyone for their comments. Another factor may be that the TV may only auto-detect from SCART (and HDMI), so maybe the most used equipment should be SCART connected. |
Component vs SCART
On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 16:04:26 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote: We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Scott saying something like: Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. According to what I've read, the Sky (standard SD) RGB on SCART should be equal to component, but it ain't so on my boxes. The component input from the DVD is most definitely inferior, but that may be an illustration of crappy componentry/processing in the player. That said, the Sky RGB is of much better quality than I ever expected it to be, and it's really noticeable how much better on an LCD telly than it ever was on CRT. Thanks |
Component vs SCART
"Scott" wrote in message ... On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 16:12:19 +0100, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote: We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Scott saying something like: OK, thanks. Sounds like I should be putting the preferred piece of equipment into the 'component' input. Best to try it each way round and see for yourself, imo. As pointed out above, various bits of kit (and the telly) have their own characteristics. Fwiw, my box has only one SCART input, so I was forced to go component for the DVD - previously, its SCART output was better, but I prefer keeping the telly SCART input for the Sky box. I think that is the massage, and thanks to everyone for their comments. Another factor may be that the TV may only auto-detect from SCART (and HDMI), so maybe the most used equipment should be SCART connected. This is true, I have to step though with the AV source button on my TV control to select the component connected DVD recorder. The SCART inputs helpfully assert themselves -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
Component vs SCART
"Grimly Curmudgeon" wrote in message ... We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Scott saying something like: OK, thanks. Sounds like I should be putting the preferred piece of equipment into the 'component' input. Best to try it each way round and see for yourself, imo. As pointed out above, various bits of kit (and the telly) have their own characteristics. Fwiw, my box has only one SCART input, so I was forced to go component for the DVD - previously, its SCART output was better, but I prefer keeping the telly SCART input for the Sky box. Actually you could have connected the DVD to the VCR input of the Sky box. It isn't always appreciated that when the Sky box is in standby the VCR SCART has full RGB pass-through to the TV SCART -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
Component vs SCART
"Graham." wrote in message ... Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. The important thing is to use good quality cables particularly SCART ones. I don't mean the ridiculously priced ones that make even more ridiculous claims about their performance. The ones supplied by Solent Cables are top quality and in my experience the company gives excellent service.. http://www.solentcables.co.uk/acatal...art-Cable.html Peter Crosland You were doing so well... ...Then spoilt it by linking to an oxygen free cable at about twice that I would feel comfortable paying for a 1m cable. Double - double and then some. A 1m RGB shielded cable from CPC is er one pound (£1). http://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/ps...-1m/dp/AV18605 Scarts from under 50p, but that is 100+, 0.75m and might not be shielded. I like the flat ribbon type SCART's particularly when the connecter is horizontally orientated as they are lighter, and such weight they possess is more evenly distributed. Also it is evident that each signal wire is individually screened which, by far, is the most important factor. -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
Component vs SCART
"Scott" wrote in message
... On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 15:49:12 +0100, "The dog from that film you saw" wrote: "Scott" wrote in message . .. What I am getting at is the menu on my Sony Bravia TV refers to a component input. If I use this because I have run out of SCART will I get the same quality as I would using the SCART input. If its better quality I will put my 'best' equipment into this input. If it is worse quality I will put my 'worst' equipment into the input. it depends what you are connecting. at worst you'll probably not spot a difference, at best it could be better. OK, thanks. Sounds like I should be putting the preferred piece of equipment into the 'component' input. At least it means each bit of kit will have its own input. It'd probably be a waste to put the VHS on the Component input. The PVR has somewhat unknown status, it depends exactly what source(s) it records and, maybe, how it's connected to them. I'd probably go for the DVD on the composite input myself. Also do you know if the two SCARTS are identical, I've known TV's that only accept RGB via SCART on one of the SCART sockets; the other only accepting Composite. (You don't necessarily notice this unless you inspect the display closely since most devices output both Composite and RGB on the SCART when set to output RGB) -- Brian Gregory. (In the UK) To email me remove the letter vee. |
Component vs SCART
On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 22:46:19 +0100, Scott
wrote: Is there any difference in picture quality between a SCART connection and a component connection? I'm running out of SCART sockets on my TV and I am wondering whether to connect my best device or worst device using a component lead. (I know to use HDMI if the device will support it.) Any help appreciated. Have you considered using a device such as the BLUE DELTA - SMART-SCART - SCART SWITCHER, AUTO. It allows the Scart outputs from 4 devices to be connected to a single TV Scart input. (Only one active at a time, of course!) http://cpc.farnell.com/blue-delta/sm...uto/dp/AV13264 I have one on each of 3 TVs. I haven't done any systematic tests to see whether the switch box degrades the signals at all. -- Peter Duncanson (in uk.tech.digital-tv) |
Component vs SCART
What I am getting at is the menu on my Sony Bravia TV refers to a component input. If I use this because I have run out of SCART will I get the same quality as I would using the SCART input. If its better quality I will put my 'best' equipment into this input. If it is worse quality I will put my 'worst' equipment into the input. it depends what you are connecting. at worst you'll probably not spot a difference, at best it could be better. OK, thanks. Sounds like I should be putting the preferred piece of equipment into the 'component' input. At least it means each bit of kit will have its own input. It'd probably be a waste to put the VHS on the Component input. How would you do that without signal conversion? I've never seen anything but composite on a VHS, and additionally Y/C (or S-Video) on an S-VHS machine The PVR has somewhat unknown status, it depends exactly what source(s) it records and, maybe, how it's connected to them. I'd probably go for the DVD on the composite input myself. Surely you mean component not composite Also do you know if the two SCARTS are identical, I've known TV's that only accept RGB via SCART on one of the SCART sockets; the other only accepting Composite. (You don't necessarily notice this unless you inspect the display closely since most devices output both Composite and RGB on the SCART when set to output RGB) -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
Component vs SCART
On Oct 3, 7:38*pm, Bob Latham wrote:
In article , * *Graham. wrote: This is true, I have to step though with the AV source button on my TV control to select the component connected DVD recorder. The SCART inputs helpfully assert themselves One man's meat. I find it most irritating and have gone to great lengths to kill this feature. Great lengths? What were they? Twenty seconds with a pair of cutters does it for me. It makes two ridiculous assumptions, firstly that you intend to watch the device and secondly that you will watch it on a scart connected TV. One or the other is usually wrong in my house. Grrrrrrrr hate it. Oh, but the vast majority find it helpful. It's great to say to the customer, "Now, when you turn the receiver on, the telly will switch to it by itself." A lot of tellys aren't very well thought out when it comes to selecting AV sources, and having to tell some old dear to press AV then press red for satellite, blue for DVD, etc (without pausing too long), is not good news. Bill |
Component vs SCART
On Oct 3, 9:06*pm, "R. Mark Clayton"
wrote: "Graham." wrote in message A 1m RGB shielded cable from CPC is er one pound (£1).http://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/ps...-lead-1m/dp/AV... Scarts from under 50p, but that is 100+, 0.75m and might not be shielded. As a matter of interest I wanted some compartmentalised dado trunking t'other day and CPC's price was double that of QVS. Bill |
Component vs SCART
"P. G." wrote in message ... On Oct 3, 7:38 pm, Bob Latham wrote: In article , Graham. wrote: This is true, I have to step though with the AV source button on my TV control to select the component connected DVD recorder. The SCART inputs helpfully assert themselves One man's meat. I find it most irritating and have gone to great lengths to kill this feature. Great lengths? What were they? Twenty seconds with a pair of cutters does it for me. Yet another Pikey Bill Bodge (or YaPBB - this would become a common acronym if the group's users were more enlightened). On the vast majority of sets, snipping pin 8 of the SCART connector with a pair of cutters to disable automatic input selection causes them to also ignore the RGB blanking signal, rendering all content viewed through the sabotaged SCART connector composite only. You need to be replaced if you haven't noticed this. Oh, but the vast majority find it helpful. It's great to say to the customer, "Now, when you turn the receiver on, the telly will switch to it by itself." A lot of tellys aren't very well thought out when it comes to selecting AV sources, and having to tell some old dear to press AV then press red for satellite, blue for DVD, etc (without pausing too long), is not good news. Good job the below-average-IQ customers you so love to mock (with their unusually eccentric AV setups) are nearly all fictional, then. jamie. -- |
Component vs SCART
"Paul Heslop" wrote in message ... " wrote: On Oct 3, 9:06 pm, "R. Mark Clayton" wrote: "Graham." wrote in message A 1m RGB shielded cable from CPC is er one pound (£1).http://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/ps...-lead-1m/dp/AV... Scarts from under 50p, but that is 100+, 0.75m and might not be shielded. As a matter of interest I wanted some compartmentalised dado trunking t'other day and CPC's price was double that of QVS. Bill did it hurt? Is it legal? -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
Component vs SCART
In article , Ian Jackson wrote:
"Filming" is arguably better than "videoing"!! What's wrong with "recording"? Years ago in the BBC studios, the command from the gallery to the videotape operator to start recording was (wait for it ...) "start recording", and you can probably guess the corresponding command to stop. Those were the days when Plain English had a higher value than it does now. The last time I had any involvement with the making of television programmes, the Floor Managers (sorry, "Assistant Directors") were calling things like "turn over", or "roll up", or occasionally "roll tape", even though by that time it was mostly being recorded by ethernet straight into a central server and there was no tape involved. The industry seemed to have been invaded by film cameramen and young upstarts with "Media" training and an aspiration to work in the movies, so I daresay they were using the language they thought appropriate to that. The practice of copying a tape into the server by the way, seems to be not just "copying" as you'd expect if you spoke Plain English, but "ingestion", which immediately suggests to me a wonderfully appropriate term for playing it back. Rod. -- Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/ |
Component vs SCART
"Filming" is arguably better than "videoing"!!
What's wrong with "recording"? Years ago in the BBC studios, the command from the gallery to the videotape operator to start recording was (wait for it ...) "start recording", and you can probably guess the corresponding command to stop. Those were the days when Plain English had a higher value than it does now. The last time I had any involvement with the making of television programmes, the Floor Managers (sorry, "Assistant Directors") were calling things like "turn over", or "roll up", or occasionally "roll tape", even though by that time it was mostly being recorded by ethernet straight into a central server and there was no tape involved. The industry seemed to have been invaded by film cameramen and young upstarts with "Media" training and an aspiration to work in the movies, so I daresay they were using the language they thought appropriate to that. The practice of copying a tape into the server by the way, seems to be not just "copying" as you'd expect if you spoke Plain English, but "ingestion", which immediately suggests to me a wonderfully appropriate term for playing it back. The command I seem to remember hearing on my regular visits to Granada was an unequivocal "Roll VT to record". Google is aware of only one instance of that exact phrase, from the US. -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
Component vs SCART
On Oct 4, 7:51*am, Bob Latham wrote:
In article , * wrote: Despite a number of people saying that HDMI doesn't suffer this fate, I have actually got a Sony DVD/HD recorder that whilst it is in standby and starts a recording sends a signal via HDMI to my 5 in 2 out HDMI switch box and would you believe it, it switches. So I'm watching Sky via HDMI and the Sony starts a timed recording and the HDMI switch box responds and flips my TV to the Sony box which because its in standby gives no picture or sound. In effect, my tv goes blank suddenly and for no obvious reason at the time. Utterly, utterly ridiculous. Well that is just stupid isn't it? Really that's a fault on the Sony. Does anyone know what the true situation is re auto-switching of HDMI? I know that it seems a backward step when I have to tell people that they have to select their new HD box manually, when they've been used to the old SD one appearing automatically. Bob's post suggests that HDMI does include auto-switching and that his Sony includes it, which makes me wonder if TV sets are simply ignoring the signal. I've never seen one that auto-stiches, but most tellys seems to come back on from a power-off or standby already on the HDMI input they were last used on. Incidentally, last week I installed two Humax Freesat HD boxes in the same dwelling. One was for a soon-to-be replaced SD set; the other was for a brand new HD set that actually didn't have a visible brand name, and since I wasn't very interested I never found out what make it was. However, it looked cheap and it performed cheap, and the customer confirmed that it had been, indeed, exceeding cheap. She was pleased at her bargain, but when I was showing her how to work the new box and I landed on the BBC HD channel I could see very little difference in the picture. I normally say, with a theatrical flourish, "And there's your HD!" but this time I was stuck for words. My helper, stood drinking his tea, caught my eye. His expression was inscrutable. Picture quality on SD had that indefinable 'cheap' look, but the HD simply wasn't much better! The customer must have sensed something (that's the trouble with woman, they sense things) because she suddenly said, "So is it alright then?" "Err yes, fine." She pressed on, "Is it what you'd call a good picture?" (this was in a lousy area for terrestrial reception and she'd always had snowy analogue reception.) I chose my words carefully. "Well you see, as far as reception's concerned, satellite either works or it doesn't. The thing with digital TV is that the final picture quality depends quite a lot on the TV set itself. Now if you'd spend more on the telly the fact is, the picture would be better. When you buy the TV set for the bedroom, if I were you I'd get a well-known make like Sony or Panasonic or something." "But that would mean that I'd have a better picture in the bedroom than in the living room. That's ridiculous! I'll just get another cheap one I think." Well you can't argue with logic of that calibre. She had one final question. "Can I get Channel Five now?" The last time I was at that little group of dwellings was years ago, and the customer had a telly with satellite built in. The only thing was, the satellite appeared on the screen as composite rather than RGB. No amount of fiddling about would alter this. Bill |
Component vs SCART
On Oct 4, 9:08*am, "Graham." wrote:
"Paul Heslop" wrote in ... " wrote: On Oct 3, 9:06 pm, "R. Mark Clayton" wrote: "Graham." wrote in message A 1m RGB shielded cable from CPC is er one pound (£1).http://cpc.farnell.com/pro-signal/ps...-lead-1m/dp/AV... Scarts from under 50p, but that is 100+, 0.75m and might not be shielded. As a matter of interest I wanted some compartmentalised dado trunking t'other day and CPC's price was double that of QVS. Bill did it hurt? Is it legal? -- Graham. %Profound_observation% 'Dado' not 'dildo' you fools! You'd be all right shoving a 3m length of trunking up your arse! Ohh, I saw that film about Vlad the Impaler a while ago and I still think about it sometimes! Bill |
Component vs SCART
" wrote in message ... On Oct 4, 7:51 am, Bob Latham wrote: In article , wrote: Despite a number of people saying that HDMI doesn't suffer this fate, I have actually got a Sony DVD/HD recorder that whilst it is in standby and starts a recording sends a signal via HDMI to my 5 in 2 out HDMI switch box and would you believe it, it switches. So I'm watching Sky via HDMI and the Sony starts a timed recording and the HDMI switch box responds and flips my TV to the Sony box which because its in standby gives no picture or sound. In effect, my tv goes blank suddenly and for no obvious reason at the time. Utterly, utterly ridiculous. Well that is just stupid isn't it? Really that's a fault on the Sony. Does anyone know what the true situation is re auto-switching of HDMI? I know that it seems a backward step when I have to tell people that they have to select their new HD box manually, when they've been used to the old SD one appearing automatically. Bob's post suggests that HDMI does include auto-switching and that his Sony includes it, which makes me wonder if TV sets are simply ignoring the signal. I've never seen one that auto-stiches, but most tellys seems to come back on from a power-off or standby already on the HDMI input they were last used on. Incidentally, last week I installed two Humax Freesat HD boxes in the same dwelling. One was for a soon-to-be replaced SD set; the other was for a brand new HD set that actually didn't have a visible brand name, and since I wasn't very interested I never found out what make it was. However, it looked cheap and it performed cheap, and the customer confirmed that it had been, indeed, exceeding cheap. She was pleased at her bargain, but when I was showing her how to work the new box and I landed on the BBC HD channel I could see very little difference in the picture. I normally say, with a theatrical flourish, "And there's your HD!" but this time I was stuck for words. My helper, stood drinking his tea, caught my eye. His expression was inscrutable. Picture quality on SD had that indefinable 'cheap' look, but the HD simply wasn't much better! The customer must have sensed something (that's the trouble with woman, they sense things) because she suddenly said, "So is it alright then?" "Err yes, fine." She pressed on, "Is it what you'd call a good picture?" (this was in a lousy area for terrestrial reception and she'd always had snowy analogue reception.) I chose my words carefully. "Well you see, as far as reception's concerned, satellite either works or it doesn't. The thing with digital TV is that the final picture quality depends quite a lot on the TV set itself. Now if you'd spend more on the telly the fact is, the picture would be better. When you buy the TV set for the bedroom, if I were you I'd get a well-known make like Sony or Panasonic or something." "But that would mean that I'd have a better picture in the bedroom than in the living room. That's ridiculous! I'll just get another cheap one I think." Well you can't argue with logic of that calibre. She had one final question. "Can I get Channel Five now?" The last time I was at that little group of dwellings was years ago, and the customer had a telly with satellite built in. The only thing was, the satellite appeared on the screen as composite rather than RGB. No amount of fiddling about would alter this. Bill There is a projector on eBay that insisted it is HD and it is cheap but the display is 470x whatever it is pixels BUT it has HDMI input and will handle 1080P signal. If you read the description it insists it is HD Viewing and uses the HD logo etc. I did report it to eBay but nothing happened. The point is people will happily buy anything .Just tell them what they want to hear. Gary |
Component vs SCART
"Graham." wrote in message
... What I am getting at is the menu on my Sony Bravia TV refers to a component input. If I use this because I have run out of SCART will I get the same quality as I would using the SCART input. If its better quality I will put my 'best' equipment into this input. If it is worse quality I will put my 'worst' equipment into the input. it depends what you are connecting. at worst you'll probably not spot a difference, at best it could be better. OK, thanks. Sounds like I should be putting the preferred piece of equipment into the 'component' input. At least it means each bit of kit will have its own input. It'd probably be a waste to put the VHS on the Component input. How would you do that without signal conversion? I've never seen anything but composite on a VHS, and additionally Y/C (or S-Video) on an S-VHS machine The PVR has somewhat unknown status, it depends exactly what source(s) it records and, maybe, how it's connected to them. I'd probably go for the DVD on the composite input myself. Surely you mean component not composite Yes sorry. Also do you know if the two SCARTS are identical, I've known TV's that only accept RGB via SCART on one of the SCART sockets; the other only accepting Composite. (You don't necessarily notice this unless you inspect the display closely since most devices output both Composite and RGB on the SCART when set to output RGB) -- Graham. %Profound_observation% |
Component vs SCART
"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message .myzen.co.uk... The last time I had any involvement with the making of television programmes, the Floor Managers (sorry, "Assistant Directors") were calling things like "turn over", or "roll up", or occasionally "roll tape", even though by that time it was mostly being recorded by ethernet straight into a central server and there was no tape involved. Ethernet? I'm guessing the 100mbps variety, in which case it can't have been uncompressed SD video you were recording, as this requires more bandwidth. What sort of compression scheme was in use, out of interest? jamie. -- |
Component vs SCART
On 4 Oct, 17:53, "j r powell" wrote:
"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message .myzen.co.uk... The last time I had any involvement with the making of television programmes, the Floor Managers (sorry, "Assistant Directors") were calling things like "turn over", or "roll up", or occasionally "roll tape", even though by that time it was mostly being recorded by ethernet straight into a central server and there was no tape involved. Ethernet? I'm guessing the 100mbps variety, in which case it can't have been uncompressed SD video you were recording, as this requires more bandwidth. What sort of compression scheme was in use, out of interest? Gigabit more likely. Given that it's more or less a consumer item now with decent home routers having it...... |
Component vs SCART
In article , J r powell wrote:
The last time I had any involvement with the making of television programmes, the Floor Managers (sorry, "Assistant Directors") were calling things like "turn over", or "roll up", or occasionally "roll tape", even though by that time it was mostly being recorded by ethernet straight into a central server and there was no tape involved. Ethernet? I'm guessing the 100mbps variety, in which case it can't have been uncompressed SD video you were recording, as this requires more bandwidth. What sort of compression scheme was in use, out of interest? I think it ended up as AVI files with a bit rate of 48Mb/s, which is approximately the same rate as Digital Betacam. Presumably they're now working in HD, so goodness knows how they're handling that, and frankly I no longer need to care. As a "civilian", I no longer watch waveforms, but programmes, and precious few of those. Rod. -- Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:06 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com