question about cables in the back of my DVD player

[Johnny Rico]

Scrooge4747 said:

But they do work, generally.

So if you've got the composite/audio cables lying around, it's certainly worth trying them out for a component video connection and as long as the audio cables aren't too cheap, it'll most likely work.

"Work generally."
"Most likely work."
"As long as they're not too cheap."

Snerk.

Yes, they'll "work", but "work well" is a whole other matter.

For best picture quality buy a good set of component cables, as said it dosen't cost more than $5 - $10. Or, I guess, at the very least pull the yellow off of three seperate RCA cables.

Don't hinge your picture qulaity on "most likely will work" and "work, generally."

Thank you.

The real question here is...are you a cheap-skate enough to try to use cables that aren't really intended to do what you're trying to use them for, and then later coming on a BBS complaining about the shitty picture you're getting.

Do yourself a favor and buy the appropriate cable(s) for what you're trying to do. Because if you're going to buy or have bought an HDTV for X number of dollars, what's another $20 for the correct cables?

 

[Johnny Rico]

YYZ said:
it says hdtv on it, but its a 19 inch digital lcd tv from emerson
resolution: 1440 x 900 (wxga+)
brightness: 250 cd/m
contrast ratio 800/ 1

Well, my bolded highlight is your problem.

I wouldn't take an Emerson product if given to me. They're junk...always have been. I remember that at stores (Rural Kings) that take Wal-Mart rejects used to have whole walls full of Emerson VCRs back in the day.

That bad video quality is most probably the TV itself. Try a different brand, like Samsung, Sharp, Phillips, Sony, etc.

 

[Hofner]

I don't know much about the video side but for very high-end sound systems the patch cables can cost quite a lot. By high-end sound systems I'm talking about ones that cost thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars. The recommended cables for these systems cost hundreds of dollars.

I'm not sure how much difference it makes but yeah, for an HDTV that costs a thousand I'd certainly spend $20 for a component video cable. I'd even spend more if I knew for sure it makes a difference, it does for the ultra-expensive stereo equipment.

Robert

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

i know Emerson doesnt make the best... but it was only 200 dollars on sale

 

[TerriO]

Johnny Rico said:

YYZ said:
it says hdtv on it, but its a 19 inch digital lcd tv from emerson
resolution: 1440 x 900 (wxga+)
brightness: 250 cd/m
contrast ratio 800/ 1

Well, my bolded highlight is your problem.

I wouldn't take an Emerson product if given to me. They're junk...always have been. I remember that at stores (Rural Kings) that take Wal-Mart rejects used to have whole walls full of Emerson VCRs back in the day.

That bad video quality is most probably the TV itself. Try a different brand, like Samsung, Sharp, Phillips, Sony, etc.

Actually, I'd wonder if that's subjective bad luck, to be honest.

I've always had horrible experiences with Sony equipment, for instance, going back to the very first Walkmans in the 80s. Always breaking, never any good, and I refuse to buy the brand.

But a lot of people would say Sony makes fantastic equipment. I'd say about the same things you've said about Emerson, Johnny.

 

[Noname Given]

YYZ said:
i know Emerson doesnt make the best... but it was only 200 dollars on sale

Wait? You bought a $200.00 HDTV; and you wonder why the picture and certain levels of color reproduction isn't good? You get what you pay for.

 

[Johnny Rico]

Noel Given said:

YYZ said:
i know Emerson doesnt make the best... but it was only 200 dollars on sale

Wait? You bought a $200.00 HDTV; and you wonder why the picture and certain levels of color reproduction isn't good? You get what you pay for.

Well, to his defense, it was only a 19", so a $200 price tag is certainly understandable, but still....an Emerson???

They should call them El-Cheapo.

 

[Johnny Rico]

YYZ said:
it says hdtv on it, but its a 19 inch digital lcd tv from emerson
resolution: 1440 x 900 (wxga+)
brightness: 250 cd/m
contrast ratio 800/ 1

OK, from these stats, the first question I have is why just a 19"?

Budget? Location limitations (entertainment center, kitchen monitor, bedroom TV)?

Because 16:9 TVs are not as tall as the old 4:3 ones, a larger inch size will be acceptable in most areas.

For example, I had a 32" Sony WEGA flatscreen 4:3 TV in my bedroom. The thing was huge and freakin' heavy and it was the biggest set that my cubby hole(1) could take. I replaced it this past summer with a 42" Sharp AQUOS. Not only did I gain about 2" in 4:3 format (it's equivalent to a 34" 4:3 set), but I also gained 10" in horizontal picture. And this is in my bedroom!

Sometime in the next year or so, we'll probably replace our 36" WEGA in the family room with a 46" AQUOS. A 46" 16:9 is equivalent to a 36" 4:3.

Viewing distance is still an issue, even with HDTVs. The general rule of thumb is about size (in inches) of TV * 2 to 2.5 for minimal viewing distances for anything less than true 1080p sources. So for example, for a 42" * 2.5 is 105" or 8.75 feet which is right on my bed. I have a 1080p up-converting DVD player and the picture really looks good if I'm sitting or laying on my bed. Any closer, however, I can see the "pixel dance" of the upconverting algorithms.

I was thinking about getting a 46" but it wouldn't have fit in my cubby hole, and now that the 42" still needs a good amount of viewing distance, a 46" would have been too big (and too close!) as it would have had to be mounted on a rack on the outside of the cubby hole.

--------------------------
1. cubby hole: A built-into-the-wall entertainment center between two wall studs. Has a 43.5" horizontal clearance.

42" AQUOS measures at just under 40" wide. So I have about 1.75" clearance on each side.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I bought it on Black friday as one of two TV's for sale. The other was 32 inches and was 400 but I didn't have the money. Of course I'd like it bigger but the size itself is fine, I have it sitting on my desk next to my computer. It's also not as bulky as a regular TV