What's new

Will this convert composite to s-video? (1 Viewer)

Brad Newton

Second Unit
Joined
Aug 14, 2001
Messages
382
Converting composit to S-Video
Under Hot New Products, choose C2SX

RCA to S-Video
Here’s a $30 way to solve the complexity of switching multiple format video sources through an audio/video receiver. the C2SX converts each video source’s composite output, usually the yellow RCA connector, to S-video. When all of the sources into your A/V receiver are S-video, the only connection you need to your TV or monitor is the single S-video cable. C2SX is a passive unit (no external power) that splits the composite signal into the two parts, luminance (lightness and darkness) and chrominance (color), which make up the S-video signal.



I saw this advertisement last night. Will it work without any signal degradation? IF it does, then would this eliminate the need for receivers with "up conversion" capabilities?
 

Geoff L

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
1,693
Real Name
Geoff
I didn't look at your link cause it's PDF and I can't get at that with web-tv.
But I assume it's design is like all other Compsite to S-vid adapters.

www.PartsExpress.com sells both types.
part # 180-140 RCA to S-Vid
part # 180-141 S-Vid to RCA

Many brands are out their and some may be of better grade than others, but no matter how good they are, the Composite signal being converted to a S-vid signal will (only be as good as the "Original Composite signal") to begin with. This assuming your using that way.
If used the other way, downcovert S-vid to RCA than some signal degrading would occur I would think.

I think it would not eliminate that nice feature on some receivers. We have been living with out it for many years untill recently. It's a nice extra bonas feature in some receivers that have that capability along with bandwidth.

If this is something different, I apoligize.

Regards
Geoff
 

John_F

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Apr 21, 1999
Messages
126
Brad,

Hopefully more people will reply. I was under the impression that if you use the composite connection on the TV, the TV's comb filter would be used. So I would guess that no comb filter would be used (and you would see a lot of dot crawl) if you used the adapter. I am no expert here (I may be wrong), so hopefully someone more knowledgable will reply.

Given my above statement, do receivers that up convert composite signals use a comb filter?

Thanks,
John Flegert
 

Geoff L

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
1,693
Real Name
Geoff
Brad

What exactly are you looking to use it for?

From Johns post, it leads me to belive, to possibly feed the TV, RPT, 4.3, 16.9 HD?

More information would be needed as I am kinda lost at what your looking at doing or investagating.

Damn no PDF Web-Tv anyway, urrrgg

Regards
Geoff
 

Brad Newton

Second Unit
Joined
Aug 14, 2001
Messages
382
Maybe eliminate was the wrong choice of words, but it would certainly help in choosing a receiver. In my case, I am trying to decide between the Denon 3803 & the Pioneer 45. The Pioneer does not have the upconversion feature, but if this "product" works effectively, it would still allow you to run only (1) cord from the receiver to the tv, instead of several, which basically what the up coversion does any way.........right?????
 

Geoff L

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
1,693
Real Name
Geoff
Yes you can make it work but I would not use it.
Your using the worst picture source to feed the conversion box and the ~{S-Vid signal to the TV is only going to be as good as the composite feed it comes from}~. This is my personal opinion and I am sure others may take my side on this.

There are other boxes that do this but they give you a choice to feed S-vid, composite, and some even component,,, and then send one S-vid to the set. Also some sences which source needs to pass automaticly instead of having to select it on the box.
Sorry I can't help with alternatives.

Others would have to tell you who and where to find them, but I am sure their not 30.00.

Regards
Geoff
 

Stephen Tu

Screenwriter
Joined
Apr 26, 1999
Messages
1,572
Most TV's comb filters will do a better job converting than either this device or AV receivers that do it. Least degradation almost certainly is running composite sources unconverted to the TV.

Using this or an AV receiver to do the conversion is strictly a convenience thing; you can then leave the TV on one input all the time, since you only have S-video sources. Personally I would rather use a good universal remote with macro capabilities to switch the TV to the proper input depending on the source, if I still had any composite sources in my system.
 

JohnnyG

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 18, 2000
Messages
1,522
I used one of the Parts Express units on my VCRs ouput and input for a while (until I upgraded to an S-VHS deck). I used it so that all the devices going into my A/V receiver at the time were s-video and I wouldn't have to worry about switching inputs on the TV.

I think it actually made the image slightly worse, but since I hardly ever used the VCR anyway, it didn't bother me. These things are for convenience and definitely not picture quality.
 

AaronBatiuk

Second Unit
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
333
That is a simple cheap passive comb filter. You will not be happy with the picture quality out of this thing.

By comparison, the Sony 4ES and 7ES receivers use a Toshiba TC90A45F 2-line Digital Y/C seperator IC. There is an entire circuit board inside the receiver dedicated to composite to S-video upconversion. This will be superior to the Y/C separation in most low- to mid-end TV sets, although the best big-screen and high-def sets will use 3-line motion adaptive Y/C separators which will be better yet. I have read (in another thread here) that Denon uses a simple passive comb filter in at least some of their receivers.

I stress again that you will not get good results from a passive in-line comb filter.
 

Ken Chan

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 11, 1999
Messages
3,301
Aren't there some test patterns in Video Essentials or Avia that you can use to check the filter? Ideally, something where you can objectively see the difference.

//Ken
 

Bob McElfresh

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 22, 1999
Messages
5,182
I'm with JohnnyG on this one.

If the source is a low-quality/seldom used device like the VCR, the little converter is fine.

I find it's very important for spousal acceptance is to make the HT system easy to use. Having all sources be SVideo through the receiver, then to the TV is one way to do this.

The kids wont care if their favorite "Vegi Tales" tape is a bit off in color/focus.
 

Jesse Skeen

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 24, 1999
Messages
4,922
This is a stupid question and I'm embarrassed to even be asking it as I should already know the answer, but is there ANYTHING that will give you closer to S-Video quality on non-S-Video sources? I'd like to have S-Video on my Sega Genesis game system, which as far as I know never had an S-Video cable available, and also on my Sega Saturn which did have one but is now hard to find.
 

Allan Jayne

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 1, 1998
Messages
2,405
To test the comb filter, connect a DVD player using composite cable and look at the resolution pattern with a big circle in the middle and 4 little circles at the corners (VE) or the 200 TVL pattern (AVIA). Observe the upright wedges. If you see a big rainbowy starburst centered around 300 on the scale, or if the thin lines in the wedge are completely blurred out by around 250 on the scale, you have a poor filter. Next go to the color bar pattern with the six bright color bars at the top going down only halfway (or view a sportscast with a red and blue stripe with names or scores down at the bottom of the screen, but no thin yellow dividing lines). If you see a zipper effect going from side to side (dot crawl) at the color boundaries you have a poor filter. For the color bars on VE or AVIA, if you see a very prominent dot crawl going up and down particularly on the sides of the green bar, you have a poor filter. With a poor comb filter you will soon be able to recognize dot crawl in lots of places during ordinary TV shows. Only a 3d comb filter will have no rainbow swirls (Snell & Willcox zone plate on VE, zone plates on AVAI) and then only during times when nothing is moving.

Some TV sets have a setting called "notch". Turned on, it reduces the dot crawl to make text look clearer but also blurs out part of the resolution wedge. It's there because the comb filter itself is not so good.

If your video game has an S-video output, use it or otherwise you will never get S-video quality. Video games are inherently (natively) component video or RGB and their composite output might be severely compromised, short of the full composite video standards and capabilities.

If you TV has a 3d comb filter, composite sources will look their best. Good composite material such as laserdisk and some broadcasts will come out close to S-video quality.

A 3 line digital comb filter, even if not 3d, is a lot better than a 2 line filter, digital or not. (A 3d comb filter is really a 4 or 5 line filter* although never advertised as such.)

Video hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/vidcomb.htm

* The 3d filter sizes up the current scan line, the scan line above in the same 480i field, the scan line below, and either or both of the corresponding scan lines 525 lines away in the preceding and succeeding fields of the same even/odd polarity
 

Seth Paxton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 1998
Messages
7,585
I'm not even sure if it's a comb filter...might just be a notch filter.
I agree too.

There is a misunderstanding about these signal formats that naturally pops up among newbies to the area, which is that the "good" ones are always better and that the sooner you convert up to a "good" one the better.


While it's true that if your system outputs in a better level (going from RGB, to component (YPbPr), to S-Vid (luma and color), to composite (luma/chromo smashed onto the same signal)), once you are in a lower signal type it's best not to alter it except at the best convertor.

Often that is the TV on the high-end models. It's understandable to convert sooner if you want to reduce a long cable run down to one, just don't feel you need to do this to get the best picture.


And just to touch up Allan's explanation about the 3D filter, for the less technical people out there he is saying that the filter will consider not only the lines above and below it in the picture, but also the same line from the frame before and after (in time, or "what was just there" and "what will be there").



A simple way for people to think about these conversions is taking peanuts, cashews, and some other nut and mixing them all together so you can ship them in one can. Then use a machine to automatically sift them back apart when they get there. What happens is that you don't get all of them apart from each other and now your peanut can has some cashews in it too.

The sifter in terms of video are these filters, and they certainly vary in quality of methods. It takes more math to do the more sophisticated ones, which means a better processor and more memory generally speaking, thus more cost. That's why all convertors are not the same, it's not just a case of rerouting wires or something.


The errors then results when some of that chromo remains stuck with the luma signal, and vice versa.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
349,067
Messages
4,867,499
Members
142,471
Latest member
HDDVD Hunter
Recent bookmarks
0
Top