Component input verus composit on a non-hd tv

[Ustauk]

My brother has a non-hd tv with component input available.  He's using composite video input now for his XBox.  Would he notice a difference if he switched to component video?

[Mr. Analog]

First of all, unless you mean Digital Component Video, both signals would be analog. If you meant Digital Component Video then yes, component would be better.



Component video (known to some of us as RCA video) would be preferable over Composite as it separates the audio and video signals on different channels (whereas Composite Analog combines audio and video on the same cable).



Of course, I beleive the XBox has a "Seperate Video" (S-Video) port on it, which is probably the best signal you're going to get next to DVI.

[Cova]

Mr. A - you were just wrong on so many different levels...



1. Component video is ALWAYS analog - there is no such thing as digital component video.



2. Component video is NOT known as RCA video (composite is sometimes called RCA by people who don't know the proper terms).



3. Composite video uses a 3-RCA cable - yellow to carry video, red and white for stereo audio.  Component video uses either a 5-RCA cable, or a 3-RCA with digital audio on a separate cable.  The 3 RCAs used for the video portion will be labeled either R G B or Y pB pR - one cable for each color.  In the case of a 5-RCA, you'll also have red and white for stereo audio, but it's more common to run a toslink cable for optical digital audio along with the 3 RCAs for video.



4. S-Video is Super-Video, and is inferior to component, but better than composite.



From lowest to highest quality for video cabling, your options are:

Composite, S-Video, Component, DVI/HDMI

Of those, only DVI or HDMI (electrically the same, but HDMI has more pins and also carries a digital audio signal) are digital.



For the X-Box, I would recommend getting the HD output dongle, which will give you component video and toslink audio outputs.

[Ustauk]

Thanks.  Would difference in quality on a 30" widescreen non-hd TV be worth the $29 for the HD kit?  Alternatively, I got a $20 Mad Catz av kit that included the optical cable a while back, but Future Shop no longer seems to carry it.  Does anyone know a place where you can still find it?

[Mr. Analog]

Umm... what the hell are you talking about?



Component video

Most "RCA" cables include a component video cable, hence the slang (RCA connector really means the type of jack being used). There is a digital component video standard which uses inerpolation, in fact if you don't have your DVD player hooked up via S-Video you probably have it connected via digital Compenent.



Composite Video

Is analog only baby.



Seperate Video

Super Video or S-VHS was a tape recording standard.



[/url]

[Mr. Analog]

Here's a good question: does having a better picture make the games any better?



If the answer is yes, then upgrade. Otherwise why bother?



I have my PS2 hooked up via Digital Component and Optical and it's great, I hook up my GameCube via Analog Component and it's great too. The games are still fun, the PS2 just has better picture and sound (playing games that have 5.1 in 5.1 is pretty nice).

[Shayne]

does having a better picture make the games any better?

Yes.  Immerision factor.

[Thorin]

Umm, I think Mr. A. meant to ask if the game was engineered for the higher quality video or not.  If it was engineered to look perfect on composite video (single co-axial cable, such as an RCA cable), then it probably won't look any better on component video (triple co-axial cable, such as a 3-RCA cable).  If it was engineered to look perfect on component video, then you probably would see an improvement in the image and therefore you might be more fully immersed.



So basically, depends on the game you're playing.  

[Ustauk]

Thanks for the help guys.  I've asked my brother to get an A/V kit, not so much because of the red-green-blue or s-video output, but because it'll give him the option to have surround sound when he gets a receiver later.  I think the kits are going to be harder to come by, since the XBox has been discontinued, so it makes sense to get one now.

[Mags]

Ok so.. My take is that yest Composite is often refered to as RCA cable, and is almost always anolog (theoretically you could "push" digital through it's just never done for the most part).



And yes it is generally accepted that Composite, S-Video, Component, DVI/HDMI  is the way to go for better picture quality. (Although I have heard of different types of interfence can cause you to go down the scale for better quality.)



Since his TV is non-HD, DVI is out and he may or may not notice much of a difference between S-video and Component video depending on the quality of his picture tube. If it's a farely recent TV then yes Component is the way to go, but if it's one of the first TV's to have Component video their conections were often not good or just switched internally to the same quality as S-video so he may notice little to no difference.

[Ustauk]

The TV is a JVC my brother bought new last June.  I don't think they'll be much difference between s-video and RGB on it, but hopfully they'll be a quality increase over the yellow RCA/composite/whatever the hell you want to call it default video cable.

[Cova]

Umm... what the hell are you talking about?



Component video

Most "RCA" cables include a component video cable, hence the slang (RCA connector really means the type of jack being used). There is a digital component video standard which uses inerpolation, in fact if you don't have your DVD player hooked up via S-Video you probably have it connected via digital Compenent.

Since most uninformed people refer to a red/white/yellow 3-RCA cable as an "RCA cable", you could argue that such an RCA cable includes a composite video signal.  The very article you linked to tells us that you need 3 cables (or 3 2-conductor wires bundled together, whatever) to carry a component video signal, so at a minimum a "RCA cable" wouldn't include component video, it would BE component video.



That entire section on there about digital component video does not apply to this discussion.  It refers to the fact that stored digital video is saved with that number of bits allocated to the various color components.  While I can find a reference to a digital video signal being sent over a 3-RCA cable at http://www.interfacebus.com/Design_Connector_Video.html you won't find such an interface on any consumer-grade electronics.



If you have your DVD player hooked up with a red/white/yellow 3-RCA cable, you have composite video.

If you have your DVD player hooked up with a S-Video and either red/white or digital audio, you have S-Video

If you have your DVD player hooked up with 3 RCA's for video, and either 2 more RCA's or a digital cable for audio, you have analog component video.

I would not make the assumption either way on composite/component for people not using S-Video - both are very common.

Composite Video

Is analog only baby.

I never claimed it was digital.  In fact, I specifically said it was analog.

Seperate Video

Super Video or S-VHS was a tape recording standard.

Before today, I've never seen S-Video refered to as "separate video", and the fact that a Wikipedia article does is nowhere near enough evidence for me to change my mind.  The link I posted above to interfacebus.com defines S-Video as Super-Video.  I've seen both names used on a few other sites I came across while doing a bit of research before posting this.  Suffice it to say, we could both post long lists of links to back up our positions, and we'd still have not gotten anywhere.  I don't really care what S-Video stands for, the fact remains that composite video combines everything into 1 signal, S-Video uses 2, and component uses 3, and hence quality improves as you upgrade from composite, to S-Video, to component.



Yes - some devices may have crappy implementations of component video and look better on S-Video.  There are a lot of crappy implentations of a lot of things out there - my parents old set-top box from Shaw had something funky with its S-Video output and looked much better over coax (even though that involved taking the video, RF-modulating it, tuning the TV to channel 4, and then re-building the video signal from the RF signal).





And as for your picture - I could care less what "the internet" says - its wrong, and here's another picture explaining why.

[Mr. Analog]

Would you like a cookie?

[Tom]

I'd like a cookie.

[Mr. Analog]

You know what else is good? Porn.