PS2@ RGB to Component Video ?

[FireGod]

Hi.

I have a PS2 connected to a Sony Wega 480i flastscreen via component cables.
The TV has been professionaly calibrated to the PS2's DVD player and the picture quality is excellent.

But, I'd love to make it better if I can... *Awaiting the Tekken 5 release*


I don't know how the PS2 works the component output, but I figure if I can atleast use the RGB option in the PS2 it would offer, theoretically, better quality. Only problem with this I can see is that to get it to the component connector of my TV I would need a transcoder device and that would take the signal back down to it's compressed form right? Or would a transcoder do a better job at creating the component output than the PS2?

Is there another way?

Could I take the Monitor Cable Adaptor for the PS2 Linux Kit and get some kind of cable that would adapt it for Component.

Any other options, or should I just buy a higher quality component cable like Monster and be happy?

[NFG]

1. Monster cables are way overrated.  Most people will not ever notice a difference.  Spend the money on more games.

2. Transcoding, converting RGB to component, is usually better done by the original hardware.  Using an outboard encoder instead of the PS2 will probably result in poorer quality, but of course it depends on the quality of the transcoder.

[FireGod]

Thanks.
So better quality cables like Monster or some other high end brand will make a difference?
Cause I'm not most people, if there is a difference I will see it!!!

Also, I would assume the PS2 doesn't use military spec components in its RGB to Component process so, theoritically atleast, a high quality transcoder would be better. But I guess you are right, and besides the cost would be outragous. Man, it sucks I don't live in Japan. Maybe I'll import a Sony Wega HS 420 with D-Terminal or RGB Scart connectors someday.

Looks like I'll order some better quality Component cables for now anyway.

Thanks for the reply.

Nice site too btw!

[NFG]

So better quality cables like Monster or some other high end brand will make a difference?

I started gamesx.com 'cause I was fighting for RGB.  I can see the difference.  I would never waste money on monster cables, that's something neogeo fans would do so they can brag about it in their sigs.  It's a waste.

I don't think the military does a lot of RGB-component transcoding.  If you can find a military spec transcoder I'd like to see it.

[FireGod]

I don't think the military does a lot of RGB-component transcoding.  If you can find a military spec transcoder I'd like to see it.

You should be able to buy any transcoder and simply order Military Spec *Highest Grade* replacement parts. My friend does this with guitar amplifiers and it makes a difference in sound. I see no reason why it wouldn't  also make a difference in video. From what I understand, the transcoder is doing the conversion with a mathematical equation via resistors, capacitors, etc, etc... So if you buy higher spec parts you should get a higher quality conversion and a higher quality signal. I could be wrong, and probably am, since I don't know much about the electronics inside a transcoder or a video display.


So I shouldn't buy Monster Cable then? Well, I have a set of Mad Catz that seem fine but I would assume there are better cables. I just can't seem to find anything other than Monster that offer a higher quality.

[Aidan]

I don't get why anyone would want to convert RGB into component video.

Think about this carefully. Using component video might be the choice forDVDs for good reason. DVDs are MPEG2 encoded, which typically uses component video. The component video on the disc is then sent to the TV in component form. What does the TV do? Well, it has red, green and blue phosphors, so it converts that component signal into RGB so it can display it.

A device like a PC or a console (such as the PS2 and XBox) already work in RGB space. Their graphics processors encode R, G and B data in memory into R, G and B channels for display. If you connect the RGB from such a device to the RGB input on a TV, it doesn't have to do much processing.

Now, you come along and transcode that RGB signal into component signal. Then, when the component signal get to the TV, the TV transcodes it back into RGB so that it can display it.

You tell me which gives a better quality picture! A signal that's been transcoded from RGB into component and then back again, or a signal that's remained natively RGB?

Someone tell me if I'm barking up the wrong tree, or if there seems to be little reason to take the signal out of the RGB domain. Obviously if the display device *only* accepted component video, then it would be an acceptable workaround.

[NFG]

I don't get why anyone would want to convert RGB into component video.

It's a matter of availability.  Most people have a much better chance of owning a component-ready TV than an RGB one.  Sure, in the search for purity there's no better step than getting an RGB monitor, but within reasonable costs you'll be getting a far better picture with a brand new component TV than a decade-old RGB monitor.

[atom]

In the United States if you have a Big Lots you can pick up monster cables for $3.99. I notice the difference between a monster cable and a cheap unshielded cable. I dont however notice the difference between a monster cable and a cheap shielded cable, because there is none. And Aidan, you are completley right about the silly factor of component video. The thing is like lawrence said, you arent going to have a bigscreen widescreen rgb monitor, but you are going to have a bigscreen widescreen component television with just as good quality picture.

[ilesj]

Ok, this surprised me! Because in Europe (or at least here in Finland) RGB is everyday. Basically every TV or display sold here accepts RGB. So having a RGB capable monitor isn't issue at all.

[Endymion]

As has been said many times in this forum and elsewhere, much of the rest of the world (not just the USA) does not have RGB Televisions in their respective markets. Film and Television studios do have uses for RGB however, and that's why you can still find (very expensive) RGB "monitors" of varying sizes from tiny 8 inch broadcast monitors to large 45" preview screens. To answer Aidan's question, the Film and TV production companies strangle the electronics companies (or in sony's case, the other way around) in order to get them to continue to leave RGB out of consumer sets so they have an easier time enforcing macrovision and other broadcast copy deterrents.