Topic: Component Vs S-video (Read 211 times)

ltheONEl · « **on:** January 07, 2004, 10:51:00 AM »

OK video signals 101.

Composite
S-Video
Component
RGB

Composite:
Basically this is the form of video that is used in the analogue domain to tranmit pictures from TV terestial transmitter to your TV in your home. The colour information is modulated onto the baseband Luminance signal (Black and White info in the video signal) There are various forms world wide PAL variants for Europe, NTSC for America's and others.

The colour info is very low resolution and delayed with respect to the Luminance, thus if you look closely at a compposite signal you will see that every coloured edge has two edges, one where luma start and and one where colour info starts, gives a fuzzy edge. Also the subcarrier inormation used to modulate the colour info can be seen as a faint mush over the entire image. The quality of your TV receiver is very important with regard the removal of this info.

S-Video, based on the same theory as betacam. All though basically the same as composite, there is no modulation of colur information, instead the compressed colour info is sent down a different wire in the cable from the Luma signal. (So its a litle bit better)

Component is virtually the same as S-Video, except there are two colour channels Y, U and V. U = Y - Blue signal V = Y-Red signal. If you can be arsed you will notice that Green signal can be derived.

Leading nicely to RGB. This is also a component signal, since componant implies multiple signal paths to the same end.

RGB suffers no modulation no compression or loss of information it's as good as it gets. Simply the only way to connect your XBOX, video player DVD player. RGB is TV equivalent of Primary colours.

I hope this helps.

J.

fin1581 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 08, 2004, 01:36:00 PM »

ItheOne,
It's nice to see that somebody knows what they are talking about on this thread. Some people didn't even know there was a difference between composite and component. Thanks a lot and I think you made this thread a little more clear for everyone.

shanafan · « **Reply #2 on:** October 20, 2003, 08:03:00 PM »

I have a flat screen 27" Sony Wega television.

Is there a difference between component and s-video in this setup? I read that, since my TV screen is flat, that there isn't that much of a difference. I compared a DVD playing in my DVD player (component in use) with a DVD playing on my Xbox (s-video in use), and didn't really notice a major difference.

Thoughts?

DermicSavage · « **Reply #3 on:** October 20, 2003, 08:05:00 PM »

there is a quality change, as it spearates some of the color wires(i think its just the black & white wires)

but it does increas equality, but youll have to get real close to notice...

Senates684 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 20, 2003, 08:06:00 PM »

Flat screens are nice...if you want REALLY good quality get moster cables...

shanafan · « **Reply #5 on:** October 20, 2003, 08:07:00 PM »

QUOTE (Senates684 @ Oct 21 2003, 12:06 AM)

Flat screens are nice...if you want REALLY good quality get moster cables...

Got those for my Xbox

MorfiusX · « **Reply #6 on:** October 20, 2003, 08:07:00 PM »

Component is supposed to be a better signal quality becuase it seperates the signal more than S-Vid. The biggest difference you will see without going Hi-Def is in color. Then color, IMO, w/ component is better, brighter, crisper, etc. The BIG/HUGE difference is when you go Hi-Def. You'll need the component to play 720p. (progressive scan) Progressive scan can make a big difference in high-action scenes. But, with a 27" TV, you might see a big difference either. Personally, I prefer component if I can have it, but if not, it's not a big deal.

Aron Parsons · « **Reply #7 on:** October 21, 2003, 08:14:00 AM »

I have a 27" Sony WEGA as well and to my eye, the component cables make a large difference from S-video (and of course composite). The crispness is unparalleled. I say use the component cables because you/we are lucky enough to have component inputs on our TVs; most people I know lack these inputs and is one of the first things I notice when watching their TVs. My criticalness of this comes from a few years of video encoding/DVD ripping, so I've gotten to know many aspects of the AV world in this time; these cables do make a difference (plus they're only $20 for the Hi-Def AV pack). Go for it.

Alpha-Omega · « **Reply #8 on:** October 21, 2003, 08:52:00 AM »

Aron, those 27" Sony's are friggin nice, 2 of my friends have them, and they are amazing. The picture is awesome and its got a shat load of connections on the back. I was going to get a 20" Sony, but the 20" Philips was cheaper and had the same amount of connections.

Bravo · « **Reply #9 on:** October 21, 2003, 10:06:00 AM »

If your TV has component inputs then your TV probabely supports 480i, or interlanced video I have both s-video and component running from my xbox's to my tv's and while the sharpness from text is deninetley apparent , in game still looks pretty much the same, it's really just a user prefernace. Do you wanna spend mo money on sharper text. If you have HDTV then you should get the component so you can take advantage of high resolutions on certain games.

sulfur · « **Reply #10 on:** October 21, 2003, 10:37:00 AM »

hmm.. i always thought S-video was better. then why do videos cards have S-video and not composite?

Alpha-Omega · « **Reply #11 on:** October 21, 2003, 11:34:00 AM »

I don't think converting a picture to S-Video is as hard as converting it to Component. S-Video just seperates the picture and sound, Component seperates the video from audio, then breaks up the picture into the base colors Red, Green and Blue. That, and I most TV's today don't have component. I think S-Video is catching on a lot quicker than Component so more TV's have S-Video than Component.

boxorox · « **Reply #12 on:** October 21, 2003, 11:42:00 AM »

QUOTE (Alpha-Omega @ Oct 21 2003, 08:34 PM)

I don't think converting a picture to S-Video is as hard as converting it to Component. S-Video just seperates the picture and sound, Component seperates the video from audio, then breaks up the picture into the base colors Red, Green and Blue. That, and I most TV's today don't have component. I think S-Video is catching on a lot quicker than Component so more TV's have S-Video than Component.

You do not recieve a High Def signal through the S-video.
S-video has been around along time. That is why most tvs have it. I have a 12-year old tv with it. RGB(component) is becoming more mainstream becuase of the availability of the High Definition signal.

sparkac · « **Reply #13 on:** October 21, 2003, 12:28:00 PM »

QUOTE (Alpha-Omega @ Oct 21 2003, 03:34 PM)

I don't think converting a picture to S-Video is as hard as converting it to Component. S-Video just seperates the picture and sound, Component seperates the video from audio, then breaks up the picture into the base colors Red, Green and Blue. That, and I most TV's today don't have component. I think S-Video is catching on a lot quicker than Component so more TV's have S-Video than Component.

component doesn't do anything to the audio, same with s-video, and they both take the same amount of work, component seperates the colors and s-video seperates the chrominance (color) from the luminance (brightness)

and to answer the video card question- most video cards these days have composite and svideo built into the same port, all you need is a special adapter that usually comes with the card

Mr Ed · « **Reply #14 on:** October 21, 2003, 12:37:00 PM »

QUOTE (Alpha-Omega @ Oct 21 2003, 12:34 PM)

I think S-Video is catching on a lot quicker than Component so more TV's have S-Video than Component.

That's funny. I think S-Video is dying and component video is catching on. My TVs, VCRs, LaserDisc Player, etc. have all had S-Video connections for like 10 years now. Now it's time to retire S-Video for Component for those HDTV signals (actually I'd prefer that everyone when to FireWire or DVI, although I like FireWire better than DVI).

Author Topic: Component Vs S-video (Read 211 times)