S-video or composite video?

[Gomer]

What are the differences between the two? If you use an S-video to composite converter is quality lost? Reason I am asking is I just ordered the new Pioneer 16X DVD drive with REALMagic Hollywood Plus DVD/MPEG-2 decoder for $155 and change. I have plenty of patch cable for the composite out and would have to shell out some more $$ for an S-video cable. The TV does have S-video in so if there is a noticeable difference I will go that route. I am looking forward to this. Gotta buy Saving Private Ryan first thing. =)

[Roy]

S-video is somewhat better. It keeps some signal components separate, and the TV delivers them more directly to the screen.

Composite is just that ~ the components are combined and must be split back out to the RGB guns in the tube. This entails passing through filters that are imperfect.

DVD probably is the first really good source for S-video reproduction, assuming you have a good TV. A place where you can see the difference is on the color bar test signal that TV stations transmit in the wee hours between the regular broadcast times. Look at the place where two bars touch. There is an effect called "chroma crawl" where there seems to be vertical movement. Keeping the components separate minimizes this.

The sharpness of a video picture is dependent on high frequency response. Again, filters compromise HF linearity.

Maybe you can borrow a cable to compare. I suspect you'll end up buying one. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/wink.gif

[Axel]

so you spent $155 on a DVD, but you can't scare up another $25 for an S-Video cable? - Something wrong there....

[Gomer]

Never hurts to ask =) Mainly I just wanted to know the difference between the two. It sounds like there is indeed $25 worht of difference in the two so S-video is the route I will go.