Video Connection Question

[dennismurphy]

Crossovers, I kind of get. Video? Not so much. My Niece just wrote me with the following question:

"So, my dvd player died. And I bought a new one that up-something or others, to increase the pixels to 1080 x something and resemble HD. But when I run it through my onkyo receiver it’s highly pixilated and black and white. I’m just using the standard red-white-yellow cable (with the infrared for audio), so do you think an S cable would solve the problem? I can jack the dvd player directly into the tv and get a normal image. Or do you think the onkyo receiver is incompatible with the newer dvd video thing? I can set the dvd player to a “normal” (non-pseudo-HD) setting, but it still didn’t work with the receiver."

Can any of you give Uncle Dennis something intelligent to say? Thank You!

[daryl]

Hi Dennis,

She is talking of the new upconverting DVD players which feature and HDMI output with the signal being converted in the DVD player to an HD resolution.

To make use of this feature you need an HDMI cord (probably included) and a video display with an HDMI input.

If she is routing this through her reciever it needs to have HDMI routing capability.

HDMI and HD video equipment is very problematic at this point due to the engineers being incompetent and most of the recouces being expended toward copy protection and pleasing movie studios and music studios greed.

As a result you somtimes encounter incompatibility problem where one componet just wont work with another even though it should.

HDMI is the only way to get the out of the componet in digital form which in theory is lossless but in reality problematic because the level of number crunching required to scale HD video is so extreme that most processors take short-cuts here and there for practicality resulting in flawed conversion.

Usually there will be certain resolutions where a devices scaler work excellent and others where it's performance is poor so you have to figure out the best way to setup your system.

What I am talking about is that nowadays you are likely to have a scaler built into your source, your reciever and your video monitor.

This gives you a zillion ways to set up the system.

Which scaler is best? and at which resolution?

You want as few conversions as possible since you there will be an anti-aliasing filter and dither with each conversion costing you resolution.

You likely will want to set the DVD player to the native resolution of your monitor if that's even possible.

The short answer is that using an S-video or componet video connection is (or should be) better than the composite cable she is using now.

> Crossovers, I kind of get. Video? Not so
> much. My Niece just wrote me with the
> following question:

> "So, my dvd player died. And I bought a
> new one that up-something or others, to
> increase the pixels to 1080 x something and
> resemble HD. But when I run it through my
> onkyo receiver it’s highly pixilated and
> black and white. I’m just using the standard
> red-white-yellow cable (with the infrared
> for audio), so do you think an S cable would
> solve the problem? I can jack the dvd player
> directly into the tv and get a normal image.
> Or do you think the onkyo receiver is
> incompatible with the newer dvd video thing?
> I can set the dvd player to a “normal”
> (non-pseudo-HD) setting, but it still didn’t
> work with the receiver."

> Can any of you give Uncle Dennis something
> intelligent to say? Thank You!

[dori_s]

I' think that the tuner or her television is set to RGB mode for the input and needs a s-video cable to fix the black/white "semi colour" problem or set the composite in to YUV.
(often called input mode in the setup menu on the recievers and tv's)

But this might be a setting in the dvd- player also... if she has been using the composite on the reciever for long without problems till she bought this dvd player than that is most likely the case....
Best,
Dóri
> Hi Dennis,

> She is talking of the new upconverting DVD
> players which feature and HDMI output with
> the signal being converted in the DVD player
> to an HD resolution.

> To make use of this feature you need an HDMI
> cord (probably included) and a video display
> with an HDMI input.

> If she is routing this through her reciever
> it needs to have HDMI routing capability.

> HDMI and HD video equipment is very
> problematic at this point due to the
> engineers being incompetent and most of the
> recouces being expended toward copy
> protection and pleasing movie studios and
> music studios greed.

> As a result you somtimes encounter
> incompatibility problem where one componet
> just wont work with another even though it
> should.

> HDMI is the only way to get the out of the
> componet in digital form which in theory is
> lossless but in reality problematic because
> the level of number crunching required to
> scale HD video is so extreme that most
> processors take short-cuts here and there
> for practicality resulting in flawed
> conversion.

> Usually there will be certain resolutions
> where a devices scaler work excellent and
> others where it's performance is poor so you
> have to figure out the best way to setup
> your system.

> What I am talking about is that nowadays you
> are likely to have a scaler built into your
> source, your reciever and your video
> monitor.

> This gives you a zillion ways to set up the
> system.

> Which scaler is best? and at which
> resolution?

> You want as few conversions as possible
> since you there will be an anti-aliasing
> filter and dither with each conversion
> costing you resolution.

> You likely will want to set the DVD player
> to the native resolution of your monitor if
> that's even possible.

> The short answer is that using an S-video or
> componet video connection is (or should be)
> better than the composite cable she is using
> now.

[unknownuser]

I’m just using the standard
> red-white-yellow cable (with the infrared
> for audio),

Sounds like composite video, but could be component. I don't know what "infrared for audio" means.

I can jack the dvd player
> directly into the tv and get a normal image.

Then that is what I would do. Bypass the receiver. It must be processing something...doing the upscaling...wrong.


(Originally posted by: BFB)

[dori_s]

> I’m just using the standard

> Sounds like composite video, but could be
> component. I don't know what "infrared
> for audio" means.

most likely talking about "optical"

> I can jack the dvd player

> Then that is what I would do. Bypass the
> receiver. It must be processing
> something...doing the upscaling...wrong.

upscaling only happens through HDMI and she isn't using that...

[ericy]

> Crossovers, I kind of get. Video? Not so
> much. My Niece just wrote me with the
> following question:

> "So, my dvd player died. And I bought a
> new one that up-something or others, to
> increase the pixels to 1080 x something and
> resemble HD. But when I run it through my
> onkyo receiver it’s highly pixilated and
> black and white. I’m just using the standard
> red-white-yellow cable (with the infrared
> for audio), so do you think an S cable would
> solve the problem? I can jack the dvd player
> directly into the tv and get a normal image.
> Or do you think the onkyo receiver is
> incompatible with the newer dvd video thing?
> I can set the dvd player to a “normal”
> (non-pseudo-HD) setting, but it still didn’t
> work with the receiver."

> Crossovers, I kind of get. Video? Not so
> much. My Niece just wrote me with the
> following question:

> "So, my dvd player died. And I bought a
> new one that up-something or others, to
> increase the pixels to 1080 x something and
> resemble HD. But when I run it through my
> onkyo receiver it’s highly pixilated and
> black and white. I’m just using the standard
> red-white-yellow cable (with the infrared
> for audio), so do you think an S cable would
> solve the problem? I can jack the dvd player
> directly into the tv and get a normal image.
> Or do you think the onkyo receiver is
> incompatible with the newer dvd video thing?
> I can set the dvd player to a “normal”
> (non-pseudo-HD) setting, but it still didn’t
> work with the receiver."

> Can any of you give Uncle Dennis something
> intelligent to say? Thank You!

This may also depend on what kind of tv she has.

480i or 480p (interlaced and progressive) are the common resolutions given by normal dvd players.
Old televisions might not be able to take progressive scan signals and are limited to 480i, in which case s-video would probably be as high quality in picture as you might be able to get. S-video is much better than composite (red yellow white) video because it separates the brightness and color signal, unlike composite which has it all within the one yellow cable signal.
Progressive scan requires component video (red, green, blue) or HDMI.

Newer tvs can accept more resolutions including 720p, 1080i, and possibly even 1080p. Upconverting dvd players upscale the dvd's picture into one or more of those resolutions in order to obtain a clearer picture than 480p.
My upconverting dvd player can do this with either component video input OR HDMI. Maybe this is not true for some of the other upconverting DVD players.
She would have to read the manual to see how to change the resolution of the dvd player to get the best picture for the tv as possible. Usually the higher the resolution the better unless the deinterlacing in the tv is poor.

As some of the others have said, I would send the video directly to the TV (through HDMI or component video if the tv accepts) and send the audio (optical or digital coaxial) to the receiver.

> Can any of you give Uncle Dennis something
> intelligent to say? Thank You!

[ericy]

> This may also depend on what kind of tv she
> has.

> 480i or 480p (interlaced and progressive)
> are the common resolutions given by normal
> dvd players.
> Old televisions might not be able to take
> progressive scan signals and are limited to
> 480i, in which case s-video would probably
> be as high quality in picture as you might
> be able to get. S-video is much better than
> composite (red yellow white) video because
> it separates the brightness and color
> signal, unlike composite which has it all
> within the one yellow cable signal.
> Progressive scan requires component video
> (red, green, blue) or HDMI.

> Newer tvs can accept more resolutions
> including 720p, 1080i, and possibly even
> 1080p. Upconverting dvd players upscale the
> dvd's picture into one or more of those
> resolutions in order to obtain a clearer
> picture than 480p.
> My upconverting dvd player can do this with
> either component video input OR HDMI. Maybe
> this is not true for some of the other
> upconverting DVD players.
> She would have to read the manual to see how
> to change the resolution of the dvd player
> to get the best picture for the tv as
> possible. Usually the higher the resolution
> the better unless the deinterlacing in the
> tv is poor.

> As some of the others have said, I would
> send the video directly to the TV (through
> HDMI or component video if the tv accepts)
> and send the audio (optical or digital
> coaxial) to the receiver.

Also, there's no need to buy new cables or anything if you plan on using component video and don't have the right "component video cable."
Just use the Red, White, Yellow composite cable and treat them as Red, Green, Blue, just making sure they connect to the same colors on the other end. They are all basically the same cables.

I have also used a normal composite cable (in this case you only need one of the three) for my digital coaxial cable as well and it works exactly the same.

Eric

[dennismurphy]

She has an old clunker TV, and as you've pointed out all she really needs is a separate audio feed to the receiver (so she can listen through the speakers I built for her.) So I'll just tell her to connect the video to the TV, and her optical cable (she has one) to the receiver. Thanks for helping me maintain credibility with the younger generation.

[kene]

> Also, there's no need to buy new cables or
> anything if you plan on using component
> video and don't have the right
> "component video cable."
> Just use the Red, White, Yellow composite
> cable and treat them as Red, Green, Blue,
> just making sure they connect to the same
> colors on the other end. They are all
> basically the same cables.

No offense, but have you actually done this? Because *most* of the time audio interconnects SHOULD be constructed differently from video interconnects, the reason being that video frequencies are substantially higher where RF noise and capacitance become much bigger factors.

I have actually used audio interconnects as temporary component video cables (for troubleshooting purposes) once and the colors weren't even remotely normal-looking. I imagine some audio interconnects could possibly have enough bandwidth to work adequately but I think it would usually be by accident.

> I have also used a normal composite cable
> (in this case you only need one of the
> three) for my digital coaxial cable as well
> and it works exactly the same.

This second part is perfectly functional though, as video and digital cables are operating over similar frequencies and are therefore designed virtually identically. Even the most expensive boutique cable companies will use the same design for both their video and digital cables.