Sadly because my satellite dish wont allow output of SD channels in there native res over hdmi I am planning on running another cable besides hdmi to the upcoming gefen scaler realta chip. I read up on S-video being a bit better according to this website.

http://www.lyberty.com/encyc/articles/svideo.html


Since I dont have S-video on my bell 9200, does s-video advantages mean anything when the composite is sending the signal going directly to a scaler? Would S-video to the scaler provide a better picture?


And if so can I just purchase component to S-Video cable so component goes from my receiver to the S-video of my tv and get the same quality as i would s-video-svideo.


SOrry this is a simple question thats bothering me I havent even looked at s-video in ages, and have no clue.

ANyone?

not sure how much of an improvement you will get due to the scaler, but s-video is a superior connection than composite, so i would try to go with the s-video.

If you've got a component output, why wouldn't you use that to get an interlaced signal to the scaler? Or does the Gefen not accept it?

If I do component it will output 480p, 720p, or 1080i, from what the manual says.

Would component to s-video cable be just as good.

Murilo, this may sound strange but use composite, Satellite signals are composite in nature and form, so when using Svideo output from them you are using a very sub standard comb filter inside the receiver for svideo output(meaning a conversion), use composite for this source and the comb filter in your outboard scaling device will be much better, I would almost be certain of it

component is converted from composite signal inside the receiver as well ;)

-Gary

Thanks gary, I did not try with the scaler, just with my regular tv. I have a samsung LNT2653H and i noticed scaling with 480i over Composite was the same as the receiver outputting 1080i over hdmi, the only difference was deinterlacing was alot better. I have compared deinterlacing on my projector via hdmi from both, and the projector deinterlacing over hdmi is way better. Is composite deinterlacing not as good? Or is my tv just have problems with it.

Any help would be appreciated.

Murilo, this may sound strange but use composite, Satellite signals are composite in nature and form, so when using Svideo output from them you are using a very sub standard comb filter inside the receiver for svideo output(meaning a conversion), use composite for this source and the comb filter in your outboard scaling device will be much better, I would almost be certain of it

component is converted from composite signal inside the receiver as well ;)

-Gary

This doesn't sound right to me. They're usually mpeg2 or mpeg4 I believe, which have their own artifacts for sure, but not composite problems like dot crawl or rainbows on thin lines. On Directv I only see those problems once in a while, when they must be in the signal from the original broadcaster. I'd try to use s-video, if I could.

I think the scaler converts it to HDMI anyway, so again Im not sure if that matters, but sadly my satellite does not have s-video out.

Just found out my tv i was experimenting on does not even have a comb filter! You would think a new tv would.

I know my plasma does, but again since the scaler would be doing it and converting it to hdmi, I hope it has ones.

So there is very little information about comb filters on this forum.

Im curious now if 480i broadcast material is best used with composite and 3d motion adaptive comb filter in a good scaler?

I know with hdmi there would be no digital to analog conversion but you would be bypassing the the 3d digital comb filter, and same with component. So if your scaler or processor has a top notch comb filter, is it the best choice for 480i material?

What I have found out is very interesting.

If your tv or video processor has a high end comb filter its better to use composite then s-video. The comb filter removes dot crawl and stuff like that.

So there is very little information about comb filters on this forum.

Im curious now if 480i broadcast material is best used with composite and 3d motion adaptive comb filter in a good scaler?

I know with hdmi there would be no digital to analog conversion but you would be bypassing the the 3d digital comb filter, and same with component and s-video. So if your scaler or processor has a top notch comb filter, is it the best choice for 480i material to use composite?

It does not matter where composite video is separated; what matters is which component doing it has the better comb filter. It always puzzles me when I see absolute statements such as "s-video is always better". Not if the source of the separated video has a crappy comb filter (such as my Series 2 TiVo, compared to the one is my Sharp display). You will get a better picture when the video is separated by the better comb filter, regardless if it is located in the source or the display (or scaler or whatever). Try it both ways and see which looks best.

I don't get it. Where are you all reading that digital satellite is inherently composite? They are mpeg2 or mpeg4 signals. Why would you have your reciever decode mpeg, combine the luminance channel with color channels to create a composite signal, just so you could use your television's comb filter which may be better at getting rid of the composite artifacts which you have just created, and weren't in the original signal?

Now maybe there's something I don't know about digital satellite's signal. If so, please point me to the information. But I have been watching Directv for a long time, and it doesn't looke composite to me. Not to mention I don't understand how a signal could be composite and mpeg encoded at the same time.

Sure, composite video signal could be encoded into mpeg. But at that point the signal is no longer composite; and the composite artifacts are now pretty much built into the signal. Perhaps creating a new composite signal out of the mpeg decode and running it through a better comb filter than was initially used may work; I don't know, but it sounds iffy to me.

And nowadays, a professional broadcast workflow that's not some cheap local channel doesn't include composite. I really don't believe that digital satellite broadcasters are running all their video signals composite into their mpeg encoders.

Do a search on a comb filter, it will explain it. If my satellite going to my tv has the better comb filter i would use s-video. Your looking at it wrong, S-video just does it from the satellite receiver right away to the tv. It still a signal that needs to be seperated, your not creating anything. Its still there. S-video just seperates it right from the receiver before going to my tv.

But if my tv has the better comb filter I would use composite to seperate it.

Your not creating anything, its all there, it just depends which comb filter you want to use, the S-video from a receiver is still utilizing a comb filter the s-video is just seperating it from the receiver right away instead of the tv.

It just depends which has the better comb filter. All you do is do a quick search on comb filters and you will find the answer.

If my satellite has a basic comb filter and I use S-video, Its not as good seperating it going to my tv. If my tv has 3d motion adaptive comb filter, I will use composite so that comb filter can do it.

A comb filter is used when separating the luminance from the color channels in a composite signal. Nothing else. Not used on an s-video or component signal (because they are already separate). If your signal already has this separation than using a composite signal means you are combining the luminance into the colors, giving you problems that weren't in the original signal, which you would then be trying to get rid of with the comb filter in your TV. Best to just not create those problems in the first place.

Digital Satellite is mpeg compressed. That is not a composite signal. It is a compressed digital file with three already separated channels. So you'd be taking these three separate channels and combining them into one, just so you could use your TV's comb filter. Which you didn't need in the first place, because the original signal didn't contain any composite signal artifacts which is what you would want a superior comb filter to help with.

DVD is also mpeg. Are you telling me that if your TV has a superior comb filter than your player's, you should use composite instead of component? Try explaining that in the DVD Players forum and see what response you get.

VHS and LD have a signal that is composite on the tape or disc itself. This is when using a composite output might be beneficial and you will hear the composite output argument. However, I have read something interesting that I can't promise is correct, but I certainly believe it: within almost all VHS and LD players, the player is taking the original composite signal and separating the luminance channel to do it's own filtration or add its on-screen display, which is then recombined for the composite output. This means that even if you are using the composite output, you are still using the player's inferior comb filter and the damage is already done. In that case, you're better off using the now separated signal with the s-video outputs; otherwise, you're taking a combined signal, separating it, recombining it, then separating it again (compounding the problems with a composite signal).

There is a reason everybody says it's better to use s-video than composite. That is because practically all of the time it does look better. If you have a LD or VHS player with a pure composite output that doesn't separate the signal internally, and your TV's comb filter is better than the player's (and my guess is a player that outputs an untouched composite signal is high end enough to have a pretty good comb filter anyways), then you have a valid case for composite over s-video. Otherwise, if your composite output looks better, your player or your TV just must have a crappy s-video connection that's not up to par. I think your just trying to justify being stuck without s-video, but it's creating a lot of misinformation in this thread.