Composite verses S-Video

BillyBoy wrote on 5/21/2002, 11:57 AM
Since I made my first DVD disc about a week ago I've been meaning to upgrade my connnections between my DVD player and TV, and just thought I mention the difference between cabling choices.

I admit it, I don't really enjoy crawling around and messing with the spaghetti like maze of wires behind my home theater anymore then I do messing with a similar tangle behind my PC. So in my rush to see how well a DVD disc I burned would play I took the lazy way out and just plugged in my DVD set top player to the 2nd input (composite) easily reached on the front of my TV. Bad choice.

Newer TV's, and almost all DVD players have a S-Video connector. Unlike the yellow video cable which feeds a composite signal, using the S-Video option the video signal instead of being combined keeps the luminance and color signals seperate almost always resulting in a superior picture. This is another one of those subjuctive things, but I immediately saw an improvement with the image appearing crisper and the colors a little richer. Don't forget you still have to feed the audio signal for left and right channels as before and probably will need to change some switch that controls video output on your DVD player and maybe make a minor change on your TV also. My setup is fairly typical with both the DVD player and TV having female S-Video connectors, requiring a male S-Video cable to connect them. If you don't have one laying around, larger electronics stores should have them. Just thought I'd pass it along.

Comments

tserface wrote on 5/21/2002, 1:20 PM
My experience has been that even the cheapest S-Video cable is better than the best "Monster" composite cable. If you have a S-video input, imo, use it even when going camera to VHS. Of course, it's tough to beat IEEE 1394... :)

Tom
Naughtybird wrote on 5/21/2002, 2:21 PM
Yes, 1394 is good, but component/mpeg-2/RGB is better.

Naughtybird
Erk wrote on 5/21/2002, 4:19 PM
I'll second the S-video recommendation. I was horrified by my first VHS dubs I made from camera to VCR with a composite connnection. The first thing I noticed were that white titles on a dark screen were significantly degraded (pretty choppy where the 2 colors met).

I went out and dumped some money on a JVC VHS with S-video inputs, and saw a definite difference. Worth the extra money for the S input.
Naughtybird wrote on 5/21/2002, 5:06 PM
FBAS is pure preview, S-VHS is the minimum to enjoy. But even S-VHS isn´t good enough for program material with severe red content.

Naughtybird
Stiffler wrote on 5/23/2002, 3:09 AM
I had to replace my 27" TV...I did pay a little more to get the 'component' inputs for my DVD.

The salesman told me component is better than S-video because the colors don't bleed. I don't know...I took his advice because it made sense at the time...
BillyBoy wrote on 5/23/2002, 9:20 AM
Component video is different then composite or S-Video. Color "bleeding" usually is the result of cranking up adjustment controls beyond NTSC specs. The cheaper your TV the more likely the system won't be able to handle the higher voltage and, bleeding and blooming are the typical result.

Here's a interesting page: http://www.prillaman.net/ht_dvd_index.html
SonyDennis wrote on 5/23/2002, 10:42 AM
Component offers more color bandwidth than s-video, but the visual difference, although noticable in many cases, is not nearly as noticable as the jump (OK, huge leap) from composite to s-video. The next step past component is pure digital, which many new projectors have (e.g., DVI).
///d@
tserface wrote on 5/23/2002, 12:46 PM
I love it when I see people spend $500 for a DVD player and then hook it up to their really expensive TV with a composite cable. It's better than VHS, but not so much.

:)

Tom