HDMI cable? would i be correct in saying that you do not need a hdmi cable for hd output but it

Question

would i be correct in saying that you do not need a hdmi cable for hd output but it enhances the output further if you do have one?

There is just loads of information and frankly i'm a little confused!

Thanks!!!

Answer 1

yeah pretty much. more and more products are coming out with hdmi like the PS3 and hd dvd players. i love hdmi because it removes the clutter that you would normally have with 3 standard or 5 RGB cables. so pretty much if you have a product that supports hdmi definitely get it. on the other hand it can be expensive.

Answer 2

Yes you would be correct unless your cables where on the extremely long side in which case the analogue rgb signal would suffer.for true h.d though you would need either rgb or hdmi.

hope this helps

Answer 3

One of the answers is wrong.

For truly long runs of cable, you would want analogue rather than HDMI, assuming you're not running a repeater.  At about 200feet, the signal on the HDMI cable suddenly drops off.  So for >200 feet you will want a well shielded component (5 cable thing) cable.

Both HDMI and Component support 1080p picture, although for some devices, component is limited to 1080i, because the device makers would like you to use HDMI, which supports HDCP (sort of a DRM for signals).  HDMI also supports up to 7.1 lossless audio because it has a higher bandwidth than component cables.

Answer 4

I concur with tuaamin1 but let me just add: Bluray has been stating since their inception that they will eventually lock down everything but HDMI to 480p. Now that HD-DVD is going bye-bye, they are likely to implement the stricter policy.

If, by chance, you need to make a long HDMI run, there are adaptors that will take you thousands of feet without a loss of signal fidelity. Look for HDMI fiber optic adaptors.

Answer 5

I just hooked up my second HD TV with an HDMI cable to my TiVo HD and a whole bunch of wires for component video and audio to an old DVD player.

I have to tell you it was simply just more convenient to use the single HDMI cable rather than the other cables and it made much less of a visual mess.

I have used both component video hookup and hdmi hookups in the past and, side-by-side, I liked the HDMI picture better.

Another reason to use HDMI cables with a Blu-ray, HD-DVD, or upscaling DVD player is that they can acheive the best upscaling picture through an HDMI cable.  (I'm not sure they will send upscaled images out a component cable).  These players can do a better job of upscaling and smoothing the blocks because they have the original digital bits in the circuitry.

And, yes, as others have pointed out, cable companies, satellite providers, and Blu-ray and HD-DVD companies have all reserved the right to send out downscaled video (480p rather than 720p or 1080i) to devices that don't have copy protection.  HDMI provides HDCP copy protection where as

Another reason to go with HDMI cables is that you really don't need expensive cables to get accurate video transmission.

I have $15 3-foot cables from Optimized Cable and I cannot see any artifacting or digital noise (blocks or pixel tearing).  And I'm really pretty picky about my video.  For my purposes, these cables are just as good as $60-$100 HDMI cables.

If you have longer runs, you may need a repeater.  Optimized sells 50-ft length cables and repeaters.  I have no direct experience with them.