How important or how much of a difference will specially made component video cables make as compared to cheap Radio Shack type interconnects.
BTW it is for a direct view TV, not HDTV.

Thanks

Adam,
Being in the bussiness of custom installation there are a few factors. The first being what the image is being viewed on and the second being how much is your budget? Between Radio Shack cables and lets say Monster I 400 video cables there is a termadous difference, but is it worth it? at $39.00 a cable?

1

Adam,

A better question might be "how much of a difference will component video make vs. S-video on a direct view TV." Probably not much. On my 53" RPTV, when you go from S-video to component there are ever so slightly richer colors (there's a HUGE difference between composite video and S or component, though).

If you want to go component anyway... low end Radio Shack cables often aren't sheilded well or at all, so going to a premium cable can make a difference. But you might try a middle ground - RCA and AR both sell sheilded video cables for just a bit more than Radio Shack stuff. Buy three the same length, and you're set.

-avi

the biggest problem with all the above cables mentioned are they are not 75ohm tip to tip...the wire might be but the connectors are not. when the correct materials are used i.e. canare products the effects are dramatic.

OK guys, here is what the deal is!

FIrst of all WAYNE is correct about the wire from Canare...simply the best video wire made period. Monster cable( no matter which model) is inferrior when it comes to impedence, chroma detail and color bandwidth. DO NOT USE RADIO SHACK no matter what. If you can not find Canare, then use that monster video for component output.

2nd, YES Compnent is superior VS S video , whether it is a RPTV or Tube. FACT, ALL DVDs are written in 480p component video. When any of its video signals have to come out besides component, you have to use very advanced D to A conversion. Except for the very best DVD players( over $1000), they all use single d to a converters to try to figure out how to translate the component to s or comp[osite video. This ALWAYS adds a great deal of Video noise, loss of color and video detail.

If you have to use S video PLEASE use TRIBUTARIES S video cable. EVERY OTHER brand is only 50 ohm MAYBE and you always NEED 75ohm regardless of the format of video, this is a must! Good luck and please use component if you can afford the cables

As my new TV came with component inputs I was scrambling to find a source of cables. Went to one store and saw a pretty nice pair of Monster Cables specifically designed for component input use, however it was WAY too expensive. Went to Radio Shack (yeah, I know - but I was looking at their high end version!) but they only had two 6' cables (of course I need three).

So, I ended up at another store and got three 6' video cables from AR (Acoustic Research) for two-thirds the cost of the Monster. I'm extremely pleased with them. Good shielding, flexible, fantastic platinum-colored metal ends with rubber grips and gold-plated contacts. The picture is great with slightly richer colors than on S-Video. Sharpness is about the same. For the heck of it I also tried the normal composite input and saw how fuzzy and distorted (shadows and other noise) it really is...

None of these cables are 75 ohms tip to tip. This is because the RCA phono plug was never designed to be a constant impedence RF or Video connector (it is a PHONO plug) and there is no standard that defines its impedence.

For the short runs of cable that are normaly run in home video systems, and the low frequencies of the signals involved, the impedence of the actual cable doesn't make too much difference. The only reason to match the impedences in the system are to minimize reflections. In 1 meter of cable the reflection time is less than 5 nanoseconds. I don't think that the eye can distinguish this. I guarantee you you can plumb up your video sustem with good quality 50 ohm coax and you won't see a bit of difference.

My advice to somonne looking for interconnect cables would be to stay away from the cheep Radio Shack stuff because they are built poorly from inferior cable and connectors. I would buy good quality cables like the middle or high end monster cables. Mainly because they are built well and the cable and connectors are of a high quality. I would also keep the runs short, don't use a 3 meter cable if you only need to go 1 meter with it.

For what it is worth, I thought that I would try an expeeriment. I have a spare set of 2 meter Monster Interlink 300 audio cables. These appear to be made from nothing more than what we commonly called shielded, twisted pair, "Microphone Cable" 25 years ago. It is good cable with good connectors but, despite the verbage on their package and web-site, I think it is just plain old wire.

Out of curiosity, I connected these in place of two of the component video feeds running between my SONY XBR 36" TV and my SONY 550 DVD player. The third feed was one section of the 1 meter Monster Video3 triple cable that I normaly use for this function. So I had one coaxial video cable (75 ohms) with a length of 1 meter and two (600 ohm ?) audio cables with a length of 2 meters. I tried all three combinations (connecting the shorter 75 ohm cable in all three possible places) and I saw no noticable picture degradation in any of the cases.

I think that the performance improvements promised by the higher end (and higher priced) interconnect products are over-rated. In interconnects I would look for quality of materials and construction rather than promised sonic and visual improvements that may or may not manifest themselves your particular set-up or with your particular viewing and listening material.

Right. Unless you using pretty crappy cable (which I have in the past) a $50 cable and a $250 cable will probably look alike. I do agree that Radio Shack, particularly their mid-low end (thick black cable with gold colored connectors and a little spring-style bit) are cheap. I've had two solder connections break and three of the threaded covers come off perminantly. Monster Cable's 100 series is well, a bit overpriced. I don't really like their 100% plastic connectors, I've had more loose connections because of them.

There was a post by rick earlier about D to A conversion in DVD players. He is correct in that the raw MPEG data stream that comes off of the DVD contains the component signals in digital form. This data is passed to a transport chip which buffers the data, seperates the audio and the video, handles error correction etc. The transport delivers the video in the form of three digital component video signals. For component outputs these are routed to three 24 bit DACs (actualy a triple 24 bit DAC) for output to the TV. These three digital signals are also routed to a video encoder IC such as the Conexant (formerly BrookTree) Bt867 which produces composite video and the Y and C signals that make up the S-Video. The encoder contains three DACs one for Y, one for C and one for the composite output. This scheme is pretty much consistant across all DVD players regardless of the cost.

If anyone wants to have a more in-depth look at the type of devices that are used in the output of DVD players, look in the multimedia section of www.conexant.com under video encoders. Phillips makes a fine line of encoders as well. I believe that Sony makes their own.

Yes, I work for Conexant, but not on encoders.

To all,
DVD's are all 480p natively. the new progressive scan dvd players will be out next week!!! as for a difference in the 3 types of video connections, the reason we chose SVideo and component video is because our standard NTSC (the standard video transmission that we're all used to since 1931) really sucks!! Its based on technology that was devised over 68 years ago!! Composite signals carry all color and brigtness/contrast signals in one smeared cable. The tv that you own has a filter that must separate the color and the brigtness/contrast. No matter how much you spent on your tv ($8k, $10k, $20k, the color decoder in that tv sucks!!!) SVideo, separates these two aspects of video inside one cable, but at the tv, it still has to pass through that NTSC decoder (2D, 3line, 3D, 3DYC, sound familiar to you all???) but it has an easier time to separate the color and brigtness/contrast. Component, on the other hand, completely bypasses the crappy filter in your tv and goes directly (well, almost) to the guts and out onto your screen. As for cables, you guys think monster cable is expensive?? try takin a look at companies such as Cardas, MIT, Kimber Kable check their prices out first, after you wake up from shock, run to the local moster cable dealer and pick up the good stuff.. As you guys probably figured by now, i do a lot of testing of equipment, and as some of you might of figured out.. i work for Sound Advice, a mid-high end audio chain in FL. Having a relatively high-end system (all this stuff bought before i started working there), it's easy to decipher the differences in what cables can do.. well, if you have a basic dvd and tv, no you won't justify spending $200 on cables to connect them just to see a picture!! you will see a difference, but the equipment is not up to par with the cables!! When makin an audio/video system purchase, factor in about 15-20 of your budget for better cables and surge/line conditioners. Remember all: Your system will only look and sound as good as the cables that you connect it with!!!!!!!!!
leave me an email for more info!!

John