Home Theater Forum  ›  Forums  ›  Home Theater  ›  Basics  ›  Cheap vs Expensive HDMI vs Component
Forum Nav

Cheap vs Expensive HDMI vs Component

#1
Rating: 0
Hi,

I need to connect my DVD Player and TV Tuner to a ceiling mounted Projector. I need 10 metres of cabling. The projector is 720P hi definition. What is the difference in performance between expensive HDMI cable (e.g. Monster Cable - would cost about $500 in Australia) to less expensive HDMI cable (say costing about $140 for 10 metres)? Also, is Component a better option?

Would like to hear from anyone with experience with these options.

Regards Matthew
Reply to this Post Quote Multi-Quote Export to Wiki
#2
Rating: 0

Re: Cheap vs Expensive HDMI vs Component

HDMI is required for HDCP. This is a copy protection scheme that disables upconversion of DVD via component. If you wish to upconvert SD DVD's to HD, HDMI is required. Also, if you wish to use HD DVD or Blu-Ray, HDMI is required to pass the HD audio to an HDMI audio capable receiver. Otherwise, there is little to no difference between the video quality over component vs. HDMI.

As far as the difference between an $500 HDMI cable and a $150 HDMI cable? HDMI is pure digital and the cable is either going to work or it isn't. Any degradation will be of the "no picture" or "massive pixellation/sparkling" type. So to sum it up - What's the difference between an $500 HDMI cable and a $150 HDMI cable? About $350.
Reply to this Post Quote Multi-Quote Export to Wiki
#3
Rating: 0

Re: Cheap vs Expensive HDMI vs Component

Matt,
Welcome to HTF!
Here are links to other similar threads on this topic. I think they will answer your questions:
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...questions.html
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...mi-cables.html
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...mi-cables.html

I hope that helps
www.cavecountryweather.com/index.php 
Reply to this Post Quote Multi-Quote Export to Wiki
#4
Rating: 0

Re: Cheap vs Expensive HDMI vs Component

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie
HDMI is required for HDCP. This is a copy protection scheme that disables upconversion of DVD via component. If you wish to upconvert SD DVD's to HD, HDMI is required. Also, if you wish to use HD DVD or Blu-Ray, HDMI is required to pass the HD audio to an HDMI audio capable receiver. Otherwise, there is little to no difference between the video quality over component vs. HDMI.

As far as the difference between an $500 HDMI cable and a $150 HDMI cable? HDMI is pure digital and the cable is either going to work or it isn't. Any degradation will be of the "no picture" or "massive pixellation/sparkling" type. So to sum it up - What's the difference between an $500 HDMI cable and a $150 HDMI cable? About $350.


Hi Jeff,

Thanks for the information. I have gone with the cheaper HDMI cable to connect my DVD player to the projector. I have also compared this with Component Cable, and the results look much the same. With HDMI cable I seem to get the best picture with the 560i output on the DVD player. It does not look as good either as 560p, or even up-converted to 720p, which is the native rate for the projector. Funny?

Connecting the TV tuner, though, did not seem to work well with HDMI. The size and position of the picture varied between DVD and the tuner, when switching between them, and the size even varied when switching between standard and high definition TV, and the picture did not look quite right. I have connected the tuner with Component and it looks great. I am looking forward to the availability of Wireless HDMI so I do not have to rely on cables.

Thanks

Regards Matthew
Reply to this Post Quote Multi-Quote Export to Wiki