# HDMI or Component??



## lifterguy (Dec 22, 2003)

I'm looking for some input as I try to decide how to feed HD to a second TV in my house. Currently I have an older HD set in the living room connected through component connections to my VIP622. I use the RF output to feed four other sets throughout the house. Since there are only two of us, we usually operate in single mode, with the same programing on every set. 
For Christmas, I'm replacing the bedroom TV with a new LCD flat panel. I would like to be able to view HD on the bedroom TV, without getting another HD receiver (and paying the monthly fee.) The cable run from the 622 in the living room to the bedroom would be about 100 feet. I'm considering two options:

1) Get a component video distributor ($50 at Radio Shack) and then get a 100-foot component cable from monoprice and feed component video to both TV's.
Advantages of this idea include: -Component is reliable over long distances. -The distributor has additional connections for upgrading other TV's in the house later.
Disadvantages: -Component cable is bulky and may be too big to feed through some of the openings along the path I would use to get it from the living room to the bedroom. -DRM may eventually mean that some HD programming may be available only via HDMI.

2) Get a 100-foot HDMI cable with a booster/equalizer, and connect it to the unused HDMI port on the 622.
Advantages: -No distributor required. -Smaller cable should be easier to feed through house. -Best quality video and audio (if it works.)
Disadvantages: -No expansion options for future growth. -HDMI is more finicky and the long run may not work - even with an equalizer. 

Finally - I got my 622 in March of 2006 - so I think it's a fairly early model. I've heard about the problems with the HDMI connector on the early 622's, but since I've never used HDMI, I don't know whether my connector will have a problem or not. If I do go with HDMI and end up having a problem, will Dish do anything to fix it (my 622 is a lease, but I don't currently have the protection plan)?

So what do you think? Any input would be appreciated.


----------



## brol (Jan 13, 2006)

You're missing another disadvantage with running component - no audio. 100' run is long, but I know other people in forums have done that with a repeater somewhere in the line. Check monoprice for reasonable HDMI prices.


----------



## lifterguy (Dec 22, 2003)

brol said:


> You're missing another disadvantage with running component - no audio. 100' run is long, but I know other people in forums have done that with a repeater somewhere in the line. Check monoprice for reasonable HDMI prices.


I'm looking at the component cables at monoprice that also have the rca audio cables bound together - part of the reason that option would be so bulky and difficult to feed through the house. Either way I go, I'll be buying from monoprice - unfortunately they are currently out of stock on some of the longer cables in both component and HDMI.


----------



## Hound (Mar 20, 2005)

lifterguy said:


> I'm looking at the component cables at monoprice that also have the rca audio cables bound together - part of the reason that option would be so bulky and difficult to feed through the house. Either way I go, I'll be buying from monoprice - unfortunately they are currently out of stock on some of the longer cables in both component and HDMI.


I have the Radio Shack Component Video Distributor and use your proposed
setup on two of my HDTVs downstairs. Works Fine. Both older HDTVs. Running component video and analog audio about 75 feet with one 622.

Upstairs I have a newer HDTV and it is hooked up to a 722 receiver HDMI.
Difference is I have two receivers.


----------



## cclement (Mar 22, 2004)

I did this exact same thing about 2 years ago with my 942 and a new LCD in the bedroom, I have since updated the receiver to the 622 and now, just last week to a 722. As for the HDMI run, I bought a 20 meter (about 65 feet) from lindy.com for about $150, and it has worked great since. I've been hearing great things about a local, well it's local for me, company here in the Twin Cities called: http://www.mycablemart.com/

They seem to have great HDMI cables, even long ones- in stock.

But I totally agree, running one HDMI cable it much easier than running 5 analog cables.


----------



## aloishus27 (Aug 8, 2006)

Is there any PQ difference with component vs. HDMI?


----------



## lifterguy (Dec 22, 2003)

aloishus27 said:


> Is there any PG difference with component vs. HDMI?


From what I've heard, this can vary from set to set. But most people who have tried both report better picture quality from HDMI - although usally the differences are minor. I think this may be another case where it's easier to see the difference if you have a large screen (40" or larger) and more difficult to discern on smaller screens.


----------



## TechnoCat (Sep 4, 2005)

There are another few factors too.

I had an early 622. The HDMI simply didn't work. Dish had no problem switching it out last month.

I have a set of 30-ft (monoprice) HDMI and Component cables run under the house to my AV stack. Technically both Component and HDMI have more than sufficient bandwidth to be theoretically identical. But the combination of the Dish 622 and my Panasonic plasma likes the Component better; SD is decent and HD is (of course) perfect. The Dish HDMI outputs the HD fine (in 1080i mode, which is what the Panny likes), but the SD isn't nearly as good as from Component. The oddest problem is it's sometimes a lot darker.

I'm using HDMI anyhow currently, because I've moved over to using my Denon AVR3808ci to switch sources via universal remote, making the whole system wife-friendly again, but SD on it is hit-or-miss.

For audio, HDMI vs optical TosLinc is moot because Dish recompresses down pretty much everything for bandwidth and no Dish is HDMI 1.3 anyhow. For a DVD player, it more depends on what the player can handle, your receiver and what you watch; optical can pass data that the DVD player cannot decode to the receiver (which might do a better job anyhow if you have a good one like I do), while HDMI requires the DVD player decode it. 

HD-DVD (and Blu-Ray) can have too much data for the raw bitstream to pass over TosLinc, but it can pass over HDMI 1.3 (not earlier HDMI though.) Except that the other features of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray mean pretty much that the player has to decode the audio anyhow, and in the case of Blu-Ray, allowing passing the bitstream out isn't mandatory. (This is a huge advantage of HD-DVD if you care about such things.) So TosLink is definitely behind HDMI 1.3 in effective functionality for HD-DVD, but at the same level for most other purposes and ahead if your AV receiver has better/newer codecs for 5.1 and lower streams than your source device. Your Dish is firmly in the "lower" category; not HDMI 1.3, no fancy codecs, so it doesn't really matter which you use.


----------



## JeffChap (Feb 10, 2007)

aloishus27 said:


> Is there any PG difference with component vs. HDMI?


Well, I got the HDMI cable in and connected the Dish 622 with it, replacing my component cables. There are some subtle differences in the picture as shown below.

The first thing I noticed was while watching ESPN HD, there was a scroll running across the bottom of the screen. With HDMI, it was jerky and distorted, whereas with component it had been perfectly smooth. This only happened with a fast scroll, the slower ones like on Fox News don't have any problem. I had my 622 set up to output a 1080i signal, and I suspected the conversion from interlaced to progressive might be at fault, so I switched the 622 back to 720p and the distortion disappeared. It seems like the 622 may do a better job on downconversion than the Samsung. I've never really decided whether 1080i or 720p looks better anyway, so it wouldn't be a big deal for me to continue to use 720p. But with my setup, this is one point in favor of component over HDMI.

The second difference I noticed was that the blacks are not as black and the lights not as light with HDMI. There's not as much dynamic contrast as with component. That's not necessarily a bad thing for me, as I've tried to set my picture settings to get a more even, natural look. I don't like extremely bright, garish colors next to deep inky blacks. It looks cartoonish to me.

There's also less red push, especially on skintones. The colors actually look better to me with HDMI. I suspect that using the HDMI connection lessens or bypasses the affect of DNIe, which cannot otherwise be disabled on the 4051. So I'll consider this a point in favor of HDMI.

Here are some shots to help explain what I'm seeing. In all of these shots, component is on the left and HDMI is on the right.

In this first shot, notice how you see more detail in the shadows and less redness in the leaves on the ground in the HDMI side:










In this one, you can see the difference in the black level in the background:










This shows the difference in the brightness of the whites side by side:










And this one again shows more detail in the shadow (look at the inside of the piano's top) as well as the reduction in the red level:










As for the difference in SD picture quality, I have not noticed anything other than what I've mentioned here, which affects SD and HD equally.


----------



## racermurray (Mar 21, 2007)

Ranks as one of the most impressive posts I have ever seen on this forum....great research my friend.

Murray


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

Of course we have to remember that this only applies to his TV using the settings that he uses. Others with a different TV or use different settings on the same TV, the results may be different.


----------



## aloishus27 (Aug 8, 2006)

HobbyTalk said:


> Of course we have to remember that this only applies to his TV using the settings that he uses. Others with a different TV or use different settings on the same TV, the results may be different.


Thats true, but when is the last time we've seen a detailed and researched response to a simple question like the one I posed.

Thanks very much Jeff.


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

TechnoCat said:


> There are another few factors too.
> 
> For audio, HDMI vs optical TosLinc is moot because Dish recompresses down pretty much everything for bandwidth and no Dish is HDMI 1.3 anyhow.
> ...
> Your Dish is firmly in the "lower" category; not HDMI 1.3, no fancy codecs, so it doesn't really matter which you use.


I don't quite understand what point you're making here, but there are no codecs involved on the 622 side; the audio bitstream is passed through as-received, and it's 5.1 Dolby (assuming the source is, of course).

The major reason for using HDMI audio, in my opinion, is it's just one cable for everything; the audio will be the same whether you use optical or HDMI from the 622. Assuming, that is, that 1) your 622's HDMI port actually works, and 2) your receiver/TV's HDMI implementation works with the 622's implementation.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

aloishus27 said:


> Thats true, but when is the last time we've seen a detailed and researched response to a simple question like the one I posed.
> 
> Thanks very much Jeff.


I agree, he went through a lot of effort and it is really informative for his setup.

I guess the real issue is that each input was not optimized using the color/contrast/etc. controls on the TV. It was optimized for one of the inputs and you see what the other input looks like with those tweaks. You very well could have gotten each input to look the same with a bit of tweaking but you can't tweak each input independently so you can only compare side-by-side (PIP) using one set of adjustments that will not be optimized for the other input. It's pretty well known that the HDMI/Component outputs from any device will have different color/contrast/chroma/etc. levels and your TV will have to be tweaked depending on the output or the STB and the brand/model of the TV.

I am not trying to degrade his efforts but it is only really useful for his exact setup. Someone using a different setup might have exactly the opposite results. In my case, with optimizing the TV settings on each input separately, I can not tell a difference.... but then it is impossible to display the pictures side-by-side to do a direct comparison.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

For use with the 622/722 there should be not difference in audio quality because of limitations in the feed it is getting. HDMI does have more bandwidth and can carry 8-channel uncompressed digital audio at 192 kHz sample rate with 24 bits/sample. TosLink is pretty much maxed out with Dolby 5.1


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

Another concern about using HDMI over Component is DRM (Digital Rights Management) and if it gets turned on at the request of the Content Owners.

If DRM does get turned on all the Channels that requested DRM will only allow 480i over Component connections.

Dish is now asking all installers to use a HDMI connections for all newly installed HD receivers.

John


----------



## JeffChap (Feb 10, 2007)

HobbyTalk said:


> Of course we have to remember that this only applies to his TV using the settings that he uses. Others with a different TV or use different settings on the same TV, the results may be different.


You are exactly correct. In fact, I pulled this entire post from one I posted about a year ago on www.avsforum.com in response to someone who was asking about component vs. HDMI with my particular model, a Samsung LN-S4051D.

I should have posted a disclaimer to that point, but at least I thought it would be informative to show what differences one *might* see between the two connections.

But as you correctly pointed out, every model of TV will react differently.


----------



## FogCutter (Nov 6, 2006)

Great discussion. I just went to HDMI from component on a 35 ft run, terminating into an Octavia 4 port switch with TOS switching. With all of the standards in flux, I want to run my old Denon receiver another year or two.

I noticed on HD that detail levels were about the same, but that HDMI gave better contrast and color saturation -- right in there with HD-DVD. Some programs on component had almost a white haze which I figured was incident to running a sat into a projector. Not the case, it was my connection. 

I have no trouble with the 35 foot run, but I am converting my TOS to coax and back again at the switch. monoprice has nice converters for $11.

IMHO, HDMI does render better images than component. I am delighted that HDMI cables are no longer $300 investments. Does anyone need a 35 ft component cable set?


----------



## wreck (Oct 27, 2007)

Is it possible to split the one HDMI port on a ViP222 into 2 HDMI cables (one to the TV1 and another using a 100 ft HDMI run to a HDTV in another room? 
(I currently use a HDMI to TV1 and run coax cable to a SDTV in the other room via a 100' run) (Thinking about upgrading to a second HDTV)


----------



## wreck (Oct 27, 2007)

wreck said:


> Is it possible to split the one HDMI port on a ViP222 into 2 HDMI cables (one to the TV1 and another using a 100 ft HDMI run to a HDTV in another room?
> (I currently use a HDMI to TV1 and run coax cable to a SDTV in the other room via a 100' run) (Thinking about upgrading to a second HDTV)


This is least expensive method I have found so far:

http://www.firefold.com/Products/1X2-HDMI-Splitter__HDMI-2SPLITTER.aspx

--- any opinions on this? Thanks


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

wreck said:


> Is it possible to split the one HDMI port on a ViP222 into 2 HDMI cables (one to the TV1 and another using a 100 ft HDMI run to a HDTV in another room?
> (I currently use a HDMI to TV1 and run coax cable to a SDTV in the other room via a 100' run) (Thinking about upgrading to a second HDTV)


Wreck,

The answer is no, not really. The reason is that HDMI is two way connection. Both connected devices must "TALK" to each other or "Handshake" for the connection to work.

This won't work with three devices connected over the same connection.

John


----------



## wreck (Oct 27, 2007)

JohnL said:


> Wreck,
> 
> The answer is no, not really. The reason is that HDMI is two way connection. Both connected devices must "TALK" to each other or "Handshake" for the connection to work.
> 
> ...


I understand what you are saying (I meant that I would REPLACE the SDTV with a HDTV - so only *2* devices.) 2 devices with one being 100' foot away is STILL quite a challenge! I guess the best solution is to use component cabes to one and the HDMI for the other.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

JeffChap said:


> You are exactly correct.


Thanks.... I was in no way trying to diminish the work you put into your post, just that there is no way anyone can say if HDMI or componant will look better on their system. The only way for someone to tell is to try it for themselves.


----------



## TechnoCat (Sep 4, 2005)

wje said:


> I don't quite understand what point you're making here, but there are no codecs involved on the 622 side; the audio bitstream is passed through as-received, and it's 5.1 Dolby (assuming the source is, of course).
> 
> The major reason for using HDMI audio, in my opinion, is it's just one cable for everything; the audio will be the same whether you use optical or HDMI from the 622. Assuming, that is, that 1) your 622's HDMI port actually works, and 2) your receiver/TV's HDMI implementation works with the 622's implementation.


My point was that there is no real advantage, wrt Dish, between the general HDMI vs TosLink, but that superior audio DSP code on the AVR could make a difference.

So (1) Yes, HDMI on Dish makes one rather than two cables, yet (2) some AVR DSPs/CODECs may result in TosLink being the better combination.

Pathetically, for most people, playing through a single 1975 Emerson clock-radio would be sufficient. :nono2:


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

Ah, that makes sense. And yes, it's amazing how many people can't tell the difference between high-quality audio and a tin can and string, or between streched SD and true HD, for that matter. Sad.


----------



## fredinva (May 10, 2006)

JeffChap said:


> Well, I got the HDMI cable in and connected the Dish 622 with it, replacing my component cables. There are some subtle differences in the picture as shown below.
> 
> The first thing I noticed was while watching ESPN HD, there was a scroll running across the bottom of the screen. With HDMI, it was jerky and distorted, whereas with component it had been perfectly smooth. This only happened with a fast scroll, the slower ones like on Fox News don't have any problem. I had my 622 set up to output a 1080i signal, and I suspected the conversion from interlaced to progressive might be at fault, so I switched the 622 back to 720p and the distortion disappeared. It seems like the 622 may do a better job on downconversion than the Samsung. I've never really decided whether 1080i or 720p looks better anyway, so it wouldn't be a big deal for me to continue to use 720p. But with my setup, this is one point in favor of component over HDMI.
> 
> ...


Are you saying/showing that your Sammy PIP shows HD on both sides?
Sony will only show HD on one side.

fred


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

My Panny (not Sammy like Jeff's) will show HD on both sides of a PIP.


----------



## msmith198025 (Jun 28, 2007)

HobbyTalk said:


> My Panny (not Sammy like Jeff's) will show HD on both sides of a PIP.


Ditto for my sammy


----------



## JeffChap (Feb 10, 2007)

fredinva said:


> Are you saying/showing that your Sammy PIP shows HD on both sides?
> Sony will only show HD on one side.
> 
> fred


Yes, indeedy!


----------



## BaldEagle (Jun 19, 2006)

I've got extra Cat5e & Cat 6 pulled in the walls of some rooms. Any way to get HD signal with those wires?


----------



## emathis (Mar 19, 2003)

BaldEagle said:


> I've got extra Cat5e & Cat 6 pulled in the walls of some rooms. Any way to get HD signal with those wires?


Someone has just come out with a HDMI over Cat5 device. Do a search over at Engadget.


----------



## BaldEagle (Jun 19, 2006)

emathis said:


> Someone has just come out with a HDMI over Cat5 device. Do a search over at Engadget.


Thanks for the tip. Just checked and it's not cheap but they have a one HDMI input to 8 cat5 sender unit.

May work for me when I go to HD. Will probably have 2 722's, one in a central location where I have wires (cat5e, cat6, 2 rg6) homerun from rooms all over the house. If I understand correctly HDMI does not have audio? If so I also have speaker wires to all rooms from the location where I will put the 2nd receiver.


----------



## FogCutter (Nov 6, 2006)

HDMI is supposed to have audio, but not all switches, splitters, amps seem to support it. But anything up to spec has audio, video, and support for SACD, DVD-Audio, etc..


----------



## lifterguy (Dec 22, 2003)

I started this thread, and I appreciate all the input and discussion it generated. I'm at the point now where I wanted to post an update on what I ended up doing. 
I decided to first give HDMI a try for my new HDTV in the bedroom. So I ordered the 131-foot HDMI cable with built in Equalizer from Monoprice.com ($136.85). The cable was even thicker and heavier than I expected. Before trying to snake it from the living room, through the basement, to the bedroom, I decided to try just running it through the house and test it. I'm glad I did - the test was a failure. When I ran it with the equalizer on the TV end of the cord (as monoprice recommends), the TV showed no input - it didn't even recognize that there was an HDMI cable plugged in. When I reversed the cable, the TV showed the HDMI jack as in use, but reported no signal. I'm not sure if if the problem is with the HDMI jack on my VIP622, with the length of the cable, or a compatibility issue between the box and the TV. Regardless, I decided to abandon that route and go with component. I returned the cable to monoprice (soaking up the shipping charges) and ordered two 100-foot component cables. The component cables were only $41.59 each, and getting two allows me to run one to the bedroom and a second to the family room (for future use.) I also got a component video amplifier / distributor from Radio Shack ($50). It has one input and 4 outputs. 
Once the cables arrived, the next challenge was feeding them from the living room to their appropriate destinations in the house. A 2-inch hole in the floor behind the living room entertainment center gave enough room for the two component video/audio cables (5 RCA plugs on each), along with a coax, Ethernet and phone line that were already there. The toughest part was getting through a sill-plate above a concrete block wall, and then feeding through above a dropped ceiling. Finally after 4 or 5 hours of work, I got the component cable into the bedroom and I now have a clear HD signal straight from the 622. I diplexed my 622's TV2 modulated output with my over-the-air antenna, so I have the flexibility of also watching OTA channels on the bedroom set, using the built in tuner, or watching TV2 in SD if I decide to operate the 622 in dual mode. So far I'm pretty happy with the setup.


----------

