How much better is an S-Video Cable for TV than RCA Jacks?

Answer 1

I don't know where you got your information Pedro but you are right on the money!

If you want to see how much better S is than composite, just hook up your S cable and bump your brightness 3 levels. You will see how washed out composite looks by comparison.

Hey Flap. Am I the only one that thinks George Bush looks like Maxwell Smart? BTW, I've A-B tested S against composite, back in the dark ages of course, and I found a substantial difference between the two. I would always choose S over composite.

Answer 2

Your speaking approximately RCA audio vs RCA for ingredient video, they are fairly plenty the comparable ingredient yet no longer precisely, the resistance spec are different for audio and video, additionally in case you're attempting to bypass a 720 P sign you will possibly desire a much better cable, extraordinarily over an prolonged distance; greater interior of your potential audio cables have 2 conductors on a similar time as the greater beneficial ingredient cable cautioned for HD (720p) has 3 conductors advantageous unfavorable and floor, its such as the version between 3 prong electric powered plugs and 2 prong electric powered plugs they're going to the two paintings yet for heavy duty paintings you desire a three prong plug, so for 480i indicators any RCA cable will do yet for HD 720P and longer distance runs you desire a shielded grounded cable...

Answer 3

20% better:

Home Theater magazine did a comparison of all 3 video connection types from a DVD player:

Composite (single Yellow RCA Cable): Baseline
SVideo: 20% improvement over composite
Component (3 RCA Cables): 25% improvement over Composite

But component cables tend to be a lot more expensive than a SVideo cable for only a 5% improvement in quality. So SVideo tends to be the good choice.

Answer 4

It's in the filtering.

With a regular composite connection your TV will need to demodulate the chroma and separate into three different colors, as well as decode the luminance information as well, with the color sync burst, etc.. to create an interlaced frame of video.

S-video separates the chroma from the luminance information, in most cases it never gets modulated together.
Since the process to separate these is not exact there can be color bled, edge loss, etc.. to the image.

The difference will most likely be slight, and compared to component, is by the same margin worse. So you have to decide if the better connection warrants the additional expense in cables. But always use my 10% rule to be safe.

Answer 5

A picture is worth a 1000 words .... see the link and scroll down to the S-video vs composite picture. Holding the mouse over the picture changes brings up the other format.. Your results may vary slightly, but you get the idea.

That all said, if you have the choice upgrade to component (or DVI/HDMI) it's better than either.

Answer 6

S-Video Cable provides a better video connection than RCA Jacks. You'll see slight improvement in sharpness.

Answer 7

It's better for video, if you're comparing

composite video with S-Video formats.

Answer 8

Short for Super-VHS, a technology for transmitting video signals over a cable by dividing the video information into two separate signals: one for color (chrominance), and the other for brightness (luminance). When sent to a television, this produces sharper images than composite video , where the video information is transmitted as a single signal over one wire. This is because televisions are designed to display separate Luminance (Y) and Chrominance (C) signals. (The terms Y/C video and S-Video are the same.)

Answer 9

it made a very noticeable difference to me on a directv receiver through a non hd crt toshiba tv.
they are reasonably priced and well worth it in my opinion.

Answer 10

They are digital cables. Better processing.