DVI-HDMI? Better than SVGA?

[Mike Rivers]

Obligatory rec.audio.pro content: I sometimes use my
computer monitor with a DAW.

I have a computer with a graphic card that I think has a DVI
output connector. It's rectangular and a little bigger than
a VGA connector. It came with a breakout cable with two VGAs
on the other end. I'm using one to connect to the VGA input
on my monitor, one of those wide, short-screen LCD thingys
that I never thought looked any better than the CRT that it
replaced.

I know these LCD monitors have a specific aspect ratio that
they work best with, and I've fooled with that and seem to
have the best compromise between decent looking text and
image size. I don't remember what it is. Should I care, as
long as it's the best I can do?

The monitor also has an HDMI input.

So, in the vein or "let's keep it all digital for as long as
we can," do you suppose (or know) that it'll look better if
I get a DVI-HDMI adapter or cable and hook it up that way?
I don't have any other HDMI stuff around here, so I don't
particularly want to buy a cable if I don't think it'll get
me a better picture.

Does everybody who keeps up with computer stuff do the
computer DVI-HDMI thing? Or is that just for people who want
to use the monitor to watch DVDs?


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge
of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[Arny Krueger]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> Obligatory rec.audio.pro content: I sometimes use my computer monitor
> with a DAW.
>
> I have a computer with a graphic card that I think has a DVI output
> connector. It's rectangular and a little bigger than a VGA connector. It
> came with a breakout cable with two VGAs on the other end. I'm using one
> to connect to the VGA input on my monitor, one of those wide, short-screen
> LCD thingys that I never thought looked any better than the CRT that it
> replaced.
>
> I know these LCD monitors have a specific aspect ratio that they work best
> with, and I've fooled with that and seem to have the best compromise
> between decent looking text and image size. I don't remember what it is.
> Should I care, as long as it's the best I can do?

Look up the LCD display's native resolution on the web.

> The monitor also has an HDMI input.

> So, in the vein or "let's keep it all digital for as long as we can," do
> you suppose (or know) that it'll look better if I get a DVI-HDMI adapter
> or cable and hook it up that way?

Not quite perfectly true, but OK to think about in your situation: HDMI is a
superset of DVI. There are $6 passive adaptors that bridge the gap.


> I don't have any other HDMI stuff around here, so I don't particularly
> want to buy a cable if I don't think it'll get me a better picture.

If you drive a monitor with a digital input from a digital output at its
native resolution, you will be in all liklihood get a better picture than
you with an analog connection.

> Does everybody who keeps up with computer stuff do the computer DVI-HDMI
> thing?

I've been doing it for years. As long as I have had display adaptors and
monitors with digital I/o>

>Or is that just for people who want to use the monitor to watch DVDs?

IME desktop icons and pages of text and stuff like that benefit more from
digital than regular entertainment video.