Is it true that Home Theater Magazine says "s-video is better than component video"

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by AlbertH, Aug 27, 2002.

  1. AlbertH

    AlbertH Stunt Coordinator

    Oct 11, 2000
    Likes Received:
    This customer at the best buy i work at "SWEARS UP AND DOWN" that home theater magazine says that S-Video is better than Component video. MY question is, even it is for a single type of source, has Home Theater magazine EVER said that S-video is better than Component video. I did not want to waste my time with this moron, but he had a holier than thou attitude and I really wanted to shut him up.
  2. Brian OK

    Brian OK Supporting Actor

    Aug 29, 2000
    Likes Received:

    lol :0!

    You are a salesman (that is my living too) so "the customer is always right".

    Hey, smile, agree .. (hell, sell him your best s-video cable in the store if he is so adamant) but do not piss him off. He might buy a WS from you next month!

    If you need to vent, do it here (oh, you have) and forget it. Not a big deal at all.
    You have a wealth of info here at HTF..... I know you already have the answer.

  3. Peter Apruzzese

    Peter Apruzzese Producer

    Dec 20, 1999
    Likes Received:
    Real Name:
    Peter Apruzzese
    I don't read the magazine, but perhaps your customer is simply confusing "component" with "composite", in which case he'd be correct (most of the time): s-video is usually preferred over composite; component is usually preferred over s-video. I've overheard people in stores that were clearly confusing the two similar-sounding terms.
  4. Mark Fitzsimmons

    Mark Fitzsimmons Supporting Actor

    Aug 18, 2001
    Likes Received:
    I read that when using an interlaced source with some projectors S video is preferred over component because when the projector recieves a component input it is expecting it to be progressive.

    Just something I read...

    But actually, the customer is probably confusing component with composite.
  5. Dan Pawlowski

    Dan Pawlowski Stunt Coordinator

    Aug 12, 2002
    Likes Received:
    " S-Video is better than Component video"

    I think the word your friend is mis-quoting is Composite Video.

    Composite - 1 wire

    Anything more than 1 wire is Component ie:
    Blue-Y 2 wire
    Red-Y 2 wire
    Y/C (Marketing guys use the the term S-Video) 2 wire
    RGB Red Green Blue (3 wire)
    RGB Red Green Blue Sync (4 wire)- This is the fundemental to which TVs/Monitors ultimatly require.

    Where Y is Black and White and C is Color

  6. Bob McElfresh

    Bob McElfresh Producer

    May 22, 1999
    Likes Received:
    In the March 98 issue, Home Theater Magazine did a comparison of all 3 types on a 50" reference TV. They found:

    Composite: baseline
    SVideo: 20% better than Composite
    Component: 25% better than Composite

    But here is the subtile trick: A DVD player carries it's signal already separated.

    There are cases where the internal comb filter of a TV will do a better job with the video than the internal filter on a CATV or DSS box where the source material is not high quality. (I'm thinking of something like a local TV station with a made-for-tv movie).

    So SVideo CAN look better than Component - but not because of any inherent issue with the cable. It's the exception rather than the rule.

    And I do recall a review a few months back in HT magazine where some TV or projector seemed to look better with an SVideo feed. But I dont have my back-issues handy to look it up.
  7. John Royster

    John Royster Screenwriter

    Oct 14, 2001
    Likes Received:
    Good post Bob. That's been my experience as well, specifically with cable and a poor comb filter in the cable box.

    So "Is s-video better than component?"

    Hardly ever, but in some rare cases - yes.
  8. Rich H

    Rich H Second Unit

    May 22, 2001
    Likes Received:
    This is timely for me. I'm going a bit nuts with an S-Video vs Component comparison. Here's the scoop:

    I own a Panasonic 4UY 42" plasma. Component input from DVD has always looked a little better than S-Video input (and certainly smoother in terms of artifacts, given that the component feed is progressive scan from my DVD player).

    I borrowed a Nordost Optix S-Video cable for the heck of it.
    Wow. I was surprised at the increase in clarity, color depth
    and three-dimensionality.

    I decide to try the Nordost Component cables (which are virtually the same used for the S-Video). That way I get all that wonderful clarity AND the benefits of smoother progressive scan signal. Right?

    Wrong. The (Nordost) component signal looks excellent - I believe better than my cheaper Ultralink component cables.
    BUT...the it does not reach the amazing performance of the S-Video signal. Despite my trying to match calibration between the two inputs as best I can, the S-Video signal just looks cleaner, sharper, richer and more three-dimensional than the component signal.

    What gives? Can anyone offer an opinion? I did read an article by Mr. Kane in the recent Widescreen Review mag, in which he states that component *should* look better than S-Video. However, he says that many devices - TVs and DVD players etc. - actually don't pass a component signal properly. Maybe this is the case. However, virtually everyone seems to report that their component signal looks better than their S-Video signal.

    Whatcha think?

    Rich H.

Share This Page