Veej

Does DVI make a big difference vs component input? Some say its just a sceme by Disney and some others so recording can't be done from DVDs and technically it may be better but most can't tell the difference if put side by side.

Is this True? is there a website with photos that compare the 2.

Also I when I was buying the TV the sales guy kept pushing me the 110.00 Monster Component Cables, I settled for the 30.00 monster component cables since some say that there is a difference between the real cheap 10.00 ones and the 30.00 ones but nothing much between the 30 to 100.00 ones, is this true?

X

Depends on whether it's a CRT set or a LCD/DLP/LCOS/plasma set and what resolution you're providing to the set.

The CRT set doesn't care about perfect pixel-to-pixel mapping and DVI shouldn't make much, if any, visual difference. Digital-device displays will benefit more from DVI input if it is presented at the native resolution of the device so they don't have to interpolate it in an attempt to match their pixels. However most DVI signals will not match the display's native resolution unless you use a computer or outboard scalar to do the scaling before the set gets it.

That's why computer LCD displays over 17" benefit greatly (and absolutely require it in my opinion) from DVI input but it isn't necessary even on the largest computer CRT monitor. However if you drive a computer LCD at other than its native resolution the DVI/analog (component) difference is not really noticable since the LCD has to do interpolation of the signal anyway.

Veej

So my rear projection tv would not benefit that much from DVI I guess.

X

Is it a CRT?

Tsar Chasm

For those with RPTVs the only real benefit appears to be freeing up a Component Video slot.

That's why I am doing it.

Brian Shannon

I use my DVI output from the back of my HDTV DSS receiver to preserve the digital signal.

Iron_Giant

One of the advantage to using the DVI cable is that there will be no Digital to Analog conversion. The DVD stays digital all the way with DVI, so there will no "Downgrade" (about 5%) of the signal that comes with the D/A conversion.

And if the DVD player comes with a DVI connection, then it should come with better chip set (Higher quality DVD player) that will produce a better signal.

Something to thing about.

Shannon Nutt

There's a huge difference on my TV between component and DVI...at least through my DVD player. The picture is much sharper with a DVI connection. My TV came with a direct DVI input and my DVD player came with a direct output, so that may be one of the reasons. (Mitsubishi WS-55513)

X

Interesting.

I wonder if that is because your player is scaling (or "upsampling") the video to 1080i and your player has a better scaler than the Mits?

gimmepilotwings

does anyone recommend any dvd players with a DVI player?

I have an old JVC 3 tray that done well for me, but I am looking for an upgrade.

Shannon Nutt

Possibly...it is scaling it to 1080i.

Spyfy

That's correct if you're using a digital display such as a fixed pixel LCD or DLP set. If you're using an analog set such as a CRT RPTV then everything is converted to analog to be displayed thus eliminating the all digital path.

Spyfy

DVI exists for one reason on TV's at this point and one reason alone. That's for copyright protection.

gotapex

How about for those that are non-HDCP compliant?

Iron_Giant

True, but I hope the DVD player will be of higher quality and a better signal for the TV to convert. Garbage in Garbage out, better looking signal better looking picture.

I have the Zenith 32inch HDTV (Analog Screen), and the better DVD (or HD) signal I give it, the better screen looks.

chipmac

This wasn't true of most of the early DVI players. There sole purpose of using DVI was for scaling to 1080i and almost all of them are inferior players as far as AV quality goes. If it wasn't for people hungry for any type of HD content most would have not bought any of these players.

hoyalawya

I disagree. I have both a Bravo D1 and Momitsu V880, two of the early DVI players. AV quality is top notch for DVI player with Sigma Design chip and better than my now defunct Panasonic RP82 (receieved top score for a 480p player from the secret shootout). The build quality is another story. Upconversion is not the sole purpose of DVI players as I could have gotten a LiteOn 2001 for cheap. Upconversion AND keeping signal in digital form until the last minute are the main ponts of DVI players. People who have fixed pixel display should really look into getting a DVI DVD player.

For those who want to get one, I suggest that you watch for a Bravo D2 which is supposed to be released next month. The unit will have a better loader than the D1 and will add picture correction capabiliy (brightness, color, etc) to its DVI output.

chipmac

Yes of course for a person with a fixed pixel display DVI will be a better choice but that has already been established in this thread. What I'm saying is that for people with DVI on a CRT based HDTV that will see no improvement for a pure digital connection; that many of them bought these players primarily for upconversion.

I've read plenty of posts from people who even after seeing the upconversion were still not happy due to quality issues such as the player's inability to pass blacker than black and washed out colors depending on the make and they returned them and wondered what he fuss was about. If these had been standard 480i/p output players with DVI these types of issues and the poor build quality you mentioned would keep most people away. But since they're able to scale to 1080i or 720p many people overlook these shortcomings and bought them anyway. If you're happy with yours then great. I never said they would make everyone sorry they bought one.

excelsior

Now you have totally lost me. How does DVI stop any other form of copying assuming other outputs exist? If you are inferring that eventually DVI will be the ONLY output on the source then I see your point.

gotapex

This, BTW, is specific to only 1 player, the Samsung DVD-HD931. It uses computer spec DVI, which allows levels from 0 to 255, instead of video spec, which is 16-235. Some displays can be set for "expanded black" to compensate.

The Bravo D1 outputs 16-235, so it's correct for the vast majority of consumer displays, the notable excepton being front projectors that are actually business class.

hoyalawya

HDCP is the current preferred copy protection protocol of the studios. If they can have it their way, future HD sources including HD-DVD must incorporate HDCP. The DVI and HDMI inputs of many recent and current display devices have HDCP. Will this screw owners of HDTV display(s) without HDCP? ... Who knows? They may allow analog output through components but any digital output must pass HDCP "handshake" first. Again, who knows? But that is exactly the way my Cox cable box is working now (DVI out requires HDCP in which I luckily have on my DVI input).

Please note that DVI is backward-compatible with HDMI.

Read more about HDCP here

gotapex

You mean HDMI is backwards compatible with DVI.

chipmac

The black level issue might only be specific to the Samsung but from what I'm reading about the others based on the Sigma chipset are not without problems either. People have reported more vibrant colors through 480p output over 1080i, upconversion artifacts that were worse then those inherent to the TVs upconversion and various other A/V glitches depending on the version of firmware they've upgraded to.

Now granted I have not compared these players like other people have. I'm only going by reports I've read but it sounds to me like I'd be happier with my current player and those with TVs that upconvert already might as well stay with what they have. These players from China seem to flakey and made to cheaply to experiment so it seems not worth it unless of course they want to spend the money for a Denon 5900 which scales and has the Faroudja chip plus it has SACD and DVD-A support.