Hi,
On a Pronto-equipped system with discretes one can set a client's system for any audio input and any video input. With no Pronto and composite, S-vid, and component video sources, he could be hitting his TV/Video button all night long and continually getting picture and sound out of sync.
On many systems not Pronto equipped I have run all the sources into the receiver with composite (VCR and cable box) and S-video (DVD and satellite). The Integra receivers I usually use convert the composite so it will exit on the S-video output. I can leave the client's TV on Video 1 all the time, and he only has to switch the receiver's input.
Obviously we lose something by using S instead of component. What is the level of performance lost? A magnitude equivalent to the difference between S and composite would be unacceptable. But there doesn't seem to be a great *VISIBLE* difference between S and component.
What do you think of the tradeoff here?
=Tom

I think the difference between composite and S is not much...but between S and Component is a great difference.

Tom, I also use Integra, and am happy with the composite to S. Like you, for my customers ease of use I run everything through S video unless they have a Pronto or other easy remote. I have noticed in another thread that some Denon receivers up convert everything to component, I would like to know if it improves the S and composite signal or passes it unchanged to the component output. Personally, on most TV's I dont see alot of differance either
Deco

if you are doing a system without a pronto then you are probably using very low end equipment, TV included. There are alot of TV manufacturers out there that are not using "true" component inputs in their televisions, that is, they are taking the three rca inputs and passivly converting them to S in order to save money. Joe Kane addressed this in one of his seminars at CEDIA this year. If you are unfortunate enough to be using one of "those" televisions then there will be no visible difference between component and S, infact you probably will notice that S looks better! I think this will start to become a much bigger issue as more and more people start to realize it. That said, if you are using a worthy display device (in which case you probably would have a pronto any way) then most people notice some difference, especially in the color saturation, and overall deffinition and depth to the picture.

I never ever sacrafice picture or sound for ease of operation (i understand primarily only picture). If a Pronto adds too much to the budget then the Pronto will make a great holiday gift.
Or use the macro capabilities of the integra remote and charge a fee for the programming.
We use Prontos with every system. The client can come home after a long day at work and enjoy their "entertainment system" and our referral rate is high. It's in both the client and the installers best interest.
Hope this is helpful,
CMack

Hmmm, a few comments on the replies here:

Matt, you must have a typo and switched component and composite?? No difference between composite and S?

Deco, the new Integra DTR8.3 is going to convert all the incoming video to component. It won't make lower resolution higher res but will ease hookups.

vts1134, not every client is low budget on equipment that declines a $500 remote. A pronto would be great for *every* customer, but it can't always happen.

cmack, I'd rather not make a sacrifice either. Did you mention the quality difference that you see between s-vid and component?

Thanks for the input, everyone!
=Tom

No, I do not see much difference in S-Video and Composite video. Especially in short runs. I've worked on many high end televisions and I just don't see it. Sure, it gets rid of the Moire patterns, but that's about it. So it DOES improve the picture. BUT, there is a HUGE difference between S / composite compared to component video.

If your gear has the ability to display component video, you would be doing your customer a great dis-service by NOT using component video. IMHO

S-Video, or by the right name YC, seperates the Color and Brightness signals.

Composite video, has all video information on one connection. (the most common consumer connection)

Component video (It carries the color and brightness portions of the video signal as separate signals, and it further segregates the color signal into two signals (blue and red).)

This message was edited by Matt on 11/15/02 18:37.01.

Tom a customer who spends a large budget on a system and declines the ONE thing that can single handedly make or break the installation is a fool and customer that I don't want, or the salesmen is a fool. The company I used to work for sold touch screens to less than 10% of the clients we did custom work for, now that I have edjucated them on how to sell them they sell them 95%+ of the time. The referals we get are the ones that say I saw how easy it was to use so and so's system and I want one of those, we even get a lot of people that have had systems put in by other companies that call us so I can go and program a touchscreen because they have no idea how to use it.

There is actually likely to be little difference between a good S video signal and an interlaced 480i component signal in consumer units.

Component really shines when the signal is progressive scan.

Can composite look as good as S? I have not only seen that, I have actually seen a channel 3 output look better on a TV than the S! No typos!

A composite signal is separated into Y and C inside of a monitor. An S signal either never was combined, or is a separated composite signal (as in laserdiscs, which were recorded with composite). So when you are figuring out which should look better, S or composite, you have to ask

a. was this signal ever composite? If not, S should absolutely look better.

b. if it was ever composite, does the device in the TV that separates it into Y and C do a better job than the device in your source item (again, such as a laserdisc)(or S vide VCR that recorded a composite signal onto tape as an S signal)? This is very hard to check, because you have to do real time comparisons of the device's composite and S outputs. And are many of us good enough to know exactly what to look for?

feel sorry for us in the uk ! more products are coming through with component inputs and out puts but most have RGB via Scart which is miles better than S video and yes i think s video is miles better than composite but Ernies right you have to know what your looking for but once you see it ,it will bug you for ever RGB vs component well heres a tough one yes component is better on a US dvd via progressive out put to a capable display device but i have not personally seen the difference on a UK DVD RGB vs Component apart from the fact that you can get better cables for component even compared to the best scart leads.

OK, well... Let me say it this way, when comparing composite with S-video.

We are speaking of differences that have an impact that cause us to install one over the other. If I have a DVD playing, the switch from composite to S-vid is unmistakably better in S-vid. The moire effect alone in composite is disgusting. I suppose other sources could be more difficult to distinguish, but at installation time, I would never go with composite only.

Interesting that there's a difference of opinion on whether you can see a difference between S and component.

If the client had a progressive DVD, I would likely hook up both S and component. The S connection would allow him to leave it on say, Video 1 if he wished, letting the receiver do all switching, but if he wanted to get the best performance, he could switch to the component input.

If I could sell him the Pronto (I'll work on 50% sell rate, VTS, and work my way up to 95%) then it would be a non-issue.

bob griffiths,

I have some spares for ya; save 'em for future use:

..............................................................................................................

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

the ? and ! will cost 'ya.

Personally, I think there is a great difference between S and Component. Especially on a 'nicer' television like a Sony Wega or something.

what you on about Ernie check out my post in the sensible forums i dont tend to over use the punctuation marks thats for silly bob

Tom,
Didn't mean to ignore the question. It seems its all relevant. I've seen S make a major difference over composite and I've seen component not so impressively better than composite, Progressive not so musch better than non progressive and vise versa. My experience is that it is all relevant to the quality of the gear. I simply use the best available connection or at least what is supposed to be the "best". The client feels better knowing we are getting the most out of their investment and so do I.
I hear you about the budget issue with the Pronto and had to overcome it myself. I haven't done a system in the past 6 months that didn't "include" a Pronto. Not that I recall.
I recently had a conversation with someone about s-video conversion in the Onkyo's. This someone know's A/v very well and was saying that it's not always wise to utilize the feature and in some cases will hinder your picture quality. Most of what he said went over my head but I got the point. I've yet to take the time to look at the difference.
CMack