 IllIlIlllIllEliteDataPremium
join:2003-07-06
Lindenhurst, NY
kudos:7 | reply to Scilicet
Re: HDMI Switch That Works? said by Scilicet:I have no choice at the sacrifice in HD quality. I was led to believe that HDMI was the standard in HD, but it would seem that having a standard and adhering to it differs between HDMI interface manufacturers. It was my intention to simplify the hook up with my 3 HDMI devices with an automatic switch. Things just went downhill from there.
$949 used? Is that what it takes for switch that actually works? Looks like I will be waiting for a while or until I win the lottery.  Yet, if it was discontinued I wonder if it was price or the same device sensitive problems that I experienced with the 3 devices that I tried out.
P.S. Notice that there wasn't one user/owner review on the Oppo switch.
i did a google search for "hdcp compliant hdmi switch" and that was one of the results.
--
Suffolk County NY Police Feed - »www.scpdny.com
PS3 Gaming Feed - »www.livestream.com/elitedata |
|
 ScilicetPremium
join:2005-04-11
Aurora, CO
 ·Comcast
 ·Vonage
1 edit | Why should a switch be HDCP compliant, anyway? It seems reasonable to me, at any rate, that a switch should merely passthrough the output device to the input device and let the HDCP handshaking, etc. take place between those devices. Requiring the intermediate switching device to be involved in this scheme only serves to complicate the connections. All the HDCP info that I have read in the last few weeks describes the interaction between output device and input device in order to preserve copyright issues with encryption. I cannot find any info on switching requirements, if there are any. After all, TV's with several HDMI inputs obviously don't suffer from this. I would really like to get to the bottom of this. |
|
|
|
ScilicetPremium
join:2005-04-11
Aurora, CO Reviews:
·Comcast
·Vonage
| reply to IllIlIlllIll
said by IllIlIlllIll:however, there is a difference in the quality of a 1080i/p picture when using HDMI versus component cables with the latter (component cables) quality significantly changing depending on the quality of the cable and the length of the cable.
there is less of a quality difference between HDMI and component with lower resolutions like 480i/p.
Not necessarily:
--
If you won't stand behind our troops... Try standing in front of them. |
|
IllIlIlllIllEliteDataPremium
join:2003-07-06
Lindenhurst, NY
kudos:7 | said by Scilicet:said by IllIlIlllIll:however, there is a difference in the quality of a 1080i/p picture when using HDMI versus component cables with the latter (component cables) quality significantly changing depending on the quality of the cable and the length of the cable.
there is less of a quality difference between HDMI and component with lower resolutions like 480i/p.
Not necessarily: i came up with the theory of difference after testing component versus HDMI @ 1920x1080p using a desktop PC with various test fine patterns and small white text on a black background.
while the loss difference was minimal, it was there.
what was mostly seen was soft luminance "ghosting" or "echoing" using component, the same thing typically seen when using VGA on a PC monitor at very high resolutions.
testing at a lower resolution of 640x480p proved the difference between the two types was nearly non-existent.
since horizontal frequencies climb higher in frequency with higher resolutions, you will get loss on poorly conducting and poorly shielded cables, its virtually the same thing as RF, the higher the frequency, the more loss there is on a poor cable type, RF engineers generally wouldnt use more than 10 feet of RG8 type RF cable for 900Mhz, not unless the RF loss is intentional.
--
Suffolk County NY Police Feed - »www.scpdny.com
PS3 Gaming Feed - »www.livestream.com/elitedata |
|
