Component to HDMI converters

[John-Del]

I have an old customer who has a 32" Panasonic CRT HD TV he wants to keep. He bought a Roku and discovered the TV doesn't have an HDMI input. I told him to pick up an Component to HDMI converter from Amazon and an HDMI and component cable. He called and said he couldn't get it to work, so I took the ride to his town and brought component cables, HDMI cables, and a blu ray player.

Sure enough, there's no picture. When I plug my Blu Ray into the TV via component jacks, it has picture and sound so the component jacks are working as is the HD section of the TV. When I tried connecting the blu ray player through the HDMI adapter, it had sound but no picture, so neither the blu ray nor Roku was working through the adapter. I thought the adapter was bad but took it back to my shop to try and was surprised to find it works on a newer Samsung.

Is it possible the older Panasonic could get a blu ray HD through the component jacks but not work with an HDMI to component adapter?

[Mike S]

Is it possible the component to HDMI converter have a max resolution
that the player is exceeding?

[bilou]

On 01/06/2020 21:07, John-Del wrote:
> I told him to pick up an Component to HDMI converter from Amazon

If the TV has no HDMI input a component to HDMI converter is exactly the
opposite of what could be expected to work.

[b...@ripco.com]

John-Del <ohg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is it possible the older Panasonic could get a blu ray HD through the
> component jacks but not work with an HDMI to component adapter?

What about HDCP getting in the way?

I think when a output device (the player or Roku) is hooked up to a monitor,
there is a bunch of handshaking going on via the HDMI port between the two.

If the HDCP isn't satisfied the display is compliant, the video blanks on
the device.

The component is analog, so either doesn't care.

I know that there is a "black box" fix, rather than a cable, there is a box
that mimics the HDCP handshaking with the HDMI. Usually has some dip
switches to set for the monitors max resolution.

I haven't seen one in 5 or 6 years but I'd guess amazon or ebay may be your
freind. Sort of a fringe product.

Personally I'd give the guy a clue stick and just replace the set. A 32"
flat screen is $100 or less these days.

-bruce
b...@ripco.com

[John-Del]

Well, yeah.. an HDMI to component converter was what I was inaccurately describing. Fox got me good, but he did it by email... He's now out of my will but I don't think that's actually a punishment at all. I think I'll send him some nudes of Rosie O'Donnell..

[John-Del]

On Tuesday, June 2, 2020 at 6:35:06 AM UTC-4, b...@ripco.com wrote:
> John-Del <ohg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is it possible the older Panasonic could get a blu ray HD through the
> > component jacks but not work with an HDMI to component adapter?
>
> What about HDCP getting in the way?
>
> I think when a output device (the player or Roku) is hooked up to a monitor,
> there is a bunch of handshaking going on via the HDMI port between the two.
>
> If the HDCP isn't satisfied the display is compliant, the video blanks on
> the device.
>
> The component is analog, so either doesn't care.

But that's why it's weird. My blu ray DVD plays HD through his Panasonic's component jacks directly. I would think the problem would have been between the HDMI source (either the blu ray or Roku device) and the adapter, except that the same blu ray player worked with the same HDMI to component adapter on a bit newer TV back at my shop.

>
> I know that there is a "black box" fix, rather than a cable, there is a box
> that mimics the HDCP handshaking with the HDMI. Usually has some dip
> switches to set for the monitors max resolution.
>
> I haven't seen one in 5 or 6 years but I'd guess amazon or ebay may be your
> freind. Sort of a fringe product.
>
> Personally I'd give the guy a clue stick and just replace the set. A 32"
> flat screen is $100 or less these days.
>
> -bruce
> b...@ripco.com

That's true, but a 32" 4:3 is much larger than a 32" 16:9, but he has several flats in his house elsewhere that have given him a lot more trouble than his Panasonic CRT, which has never had a single problem and, well, he likes it. I also think it cost something like $1800 when he bought it. Older people don't like disposable.

In addition, a $100 32" TV has a lifespan measured in hundreds of hours.

I'm going to try a different brand of HDMI to component adapter and see if it works for him.

Thanks.

[Tim R]

Might there be a simpler answer?

don't most DVD players have an HDMI input somewhere and component output?

If you could find one like that, you'd probably be out less money than buying the converter, and you'd have the advantage of being able to play videos through your CRT.

Or, is there a chance that a Firestick would work where a Roku doesn't?

[John-Del]

On Tuesday, June 2, 2020 at 9:48:14 AM UTC-4, Tim R wrote:
> Might there be a simpler answer?
>
> don't most DVD players have an HDMI input somewhere and component output?
>
> If you could find one like that, you'd probably be out less money than buying the converter, and you'd have the advantage of being able to play videos through your CRT.

The adapter was like $25 from Amazon from what he told me. And I don't know of any DVD players that have an HDMI input.

>
> Or, is there a chance that a Firestick would work where a Roku doesn't?

Possibly. I have two Firesticks - when I go back with another adapter, I'll bring a Firestick to try. Still, the blu ray connected fine to the TV via the components inputs, but the blu ray also refused to work with the adapter through the HDMI in the same way as the Roku. Makes no sense. I'll pick up different adapter than he has and try it.

[abrsvc]

I would expect that the Bluray should work since the HDMI in this case is just an output. I would NOT expect the Roku to work since this requires the conversation to work and the adapter won't allow for that. If the Panasonic Bluray still fails, it may be from the first generation that IRRC required HDMI-HDMI connections only.

[Tim R]

On Tuesday, June 2, 2020 at 10:09:30 AM UTC-4, John-Del wrote:
>

> The adapter was like $25 from Amazon from what he told me. And I don't know of any DVD players that have an HDMI input.
>
>

Maybe a small TV or computer monitor? Some have HDMI in and components out, I think. My cable box has a choice of HDMI or components out. I'm not sure what inputs. When I replaced our CRT with a flat screen I used the component cables as they were already in place. Later I discovered the slightly fuzzy picture was due to resolution mismatch and went to HDMI, the picture is much better now.

We were given a Fire Stick and it works better than our old Roku, but neither gets used much. -

[Michael Terrell]

Did you just admit to owing WMD?

[Michael Terrell]

I use a Roku Express with a sevenn inch HDMI security monitor. They talk to each other, and they didn't work the first try. I had to have the LCD monitor on first, to get them to communicate. After that it has worked OK. If the monitor gets turned off, it will display a 'Do you want to continue watching ????' when it is turned back on. The Roku also has a menu setting to turn off a display or TV. This is the low end version, and I use it in my bedroom, next to my computer. It was bought at Best Buy about six months ago for $30. It only has a USB port for power, and a HDMI port. The OEM power supply is crap. It is too close to the actual current draw of the Roku, so I power it from my main computer. So far, it has worked well. It is on 24/7 to help mask my Tinnitus.

[John-Del]

Well, the destruction would only be considered "mass" in the way it's deployed, no? If I send them to Jeff, it's a direct (and particularly nasty) assault certainly, but I think I'm OK as far as WMD go.

[Michael Terrell]

Did you stop to think that Jeff might actually enjoy them?

[John-Del]

Crap. I did not consider that possibility but clearly I should. You're a spoilsport Michael.

[Bennett]

You can search on EBay for 1st or 2nd generation Roku boxes; they have
analog outputs

[John-Del]

H
Thanks, that's a good idea. I ordered a different brand HDMI adapter which should be in Saturday. If that doesn't work, I'm done. He'll either have to do without or replace the TV. The guy is like 40 minutes each way away from me. Not to mention I spent about two hours with him when he was asking about Rokus, terrestrial antennas, etc. to get away from cable. No matter what happens, this was a loss. I've done other stuff for him so I don't mind giving him the time, but I'll give it one more shot with the new HDMI adapter.

If that doesn't work, I'll give him your info and see if he wants to try that (by himself!)

[b...@ripco.com]

Bennett <bjp...@cal.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> You can search on EBay for 1st or 2nd generation Roku boxes; they have
> analog outputs

Those aren't supported anymore and don't get software updates.

Most of the apps already on them don't run these days either.

-bruce
b...@ripco.com

[Michael Terrell]

Do you really want him bugging you for more photos?

[John-Del]

LOL!!

[Charles Lucas]

Turn off the Progressive scan on the blu ray player. The TV is only most likely useable for Interlaced scan. On the other video out to converted HDMI device, I would suggest a good RF Modulator with HDMI input and than outputs to composite or to
component video and audio outs. Of course, if you get a picture after following the first instruction, nix the RF modulator,
unless you want HDMI, as the problem is basically solved.

[Peter W.]

You are answering increasingly older posts....

[Freethinker]

On 10.07.22 23:11, Peter W. wrote:
> You are answering increasingly older posts....

And dumping a lot of BS at that!

[Charles Lucas]

The Post is older. I saw the date. RF Modulators are not BS! Since you are recalcitrant and bellicose
in your comments about me (and you ticked me off), I will spoon feed you the RF modulator
information, since you want to be confrontational and a jerk! You are being verbally abusive
"Freethinker" and your verbal abuse is an attempt to "cost" me since your thinking is free. I
guess you have to be aware of what's free these days. Click on the link or copy and
paste the link below:

https://thorbroadcast.com/t/rf-modulator

It explains also what a modulator does, for your information. Regardless of how old the original
post is, the answer is still relevant today because we use it TODAY! The reason why they are needed
is to generate a carrier signal as well as to make sure the signal has proper impedance and voltage and/or
proper impedance matching to aid in the proper conversion of the signal. I am telling you about a device
that is an external intermediary to any other onboard device previously spoken of.

Once again...I READ THE DATES! These answers are to benefit posterity and can be archived. The
BS you accuse me of 'dishing out' is being stored somewhere in the Smithsonian too. BEFORE YOU
RUN YOUR MOUTH (via the keyboard), YOU NEED TO REALLY THINK BEFORE you speak! I am actually
here to serve people and give them viable answers, or I would not bother to waste my time. Also, the
original poster had a valid question. Yet, you want to discredit me over what a modulator (RF or otherwise)
or a signal convertor is... as though I know nothing at all. Please! I am not here to make the situation
hotter or to cause trouble, but I will not be bullied by players like you who act like they know stuff and
spend time attempting to discredit others that do know something. I think you could be more productive
in spending your time on something else. Yes, there are many kinds of modulation. Would you like me
to spoon feed you that information and name you several forms of modulation (also, since you judged
me about not knowing about modulation and dishing out BS)?

Since you're so darn perfect, let's see you walk on water, dude; especially since you think you have the right
to come off judging me. Yet, even though we're at loggerheads right now, I will still pray for you. Have a
great day and God Bless You. In spite of the curtness on my part in this response, I still hope to those of
you others who read this post, that you will find the straight information useful.

[Freethinker]

OK, fair enough, and sorry if I have offended you.

Let me try to move this to a more reasonable and civilized conversation:

You stated "On the other video out to converted HDMI device, I would

suggest a good RF Modulator with HDMI input and than outputs to
composite or to
component video and audio outs."

Here there are a couple of things that are not clear to me:

1) By "On the other video out to converted HDMI device" do you mean the
HDMI to composite or component video and audio converter the OP mentioned?

2) If that's the case, would you please explain how you intend to use an
RF modulator (yes, I know what it is) in this case? As far as I
understand, HDMI is a digital signal, so in order to convert that to an
analog signal (and split it between video and audio before doing that)
you have to use more than just an RF modulator: there's a lot of
processing to be done. Or am I missing something?
Or did you mean, once the digital to analog conversion is done, use the
RF modulator "to generate a carrier signal as well as to make sure the
signal has proper impedance and voltage" to then feed to the TV input?

[Charles Lucas]

Charles Lucas <charles...@gmail.com>
4:33 PM (6 minutes ago)
to sci.electronics.repair

I accept your apology. I apologize for my reaction too. I bristle when in a technical
forum some people act like "typical" customers, although I do not mind being questioned,
for I do not fear being skewered by the nasty words that follow if I am wrong, but
I do like a great conversation as it relates to a field I love and enjoy very much. I
especially love doing my best to serve others while having been given some ability
to do good work and make a living at what I do. I am very passionate about delivering good
quality service and advice that is given. I also refer to other volumes before I state the
information, even though at times, I will indicate an opinion based upon my experience.

Yes, I prefer civilized conversation also and talking done
with reasoning rather than insults, falsehoods, or games. Perhaps, I was not clear.
Actually, you hit on a little bit of both conditions to clarify further- just in different
stages. Let me further explain.

Actually, component video (and audio derived from it is one of those quasi-digital
forms of media, such as S-video) is actually what I consider still analog (although a
higher caliber due to the slightly higher video resolution). So, I call it high resolution
analog signals. The audio is still analog. Coaxial Digital is a low functioning digital signal
for audio signals. This is different from the coax that will be referred to later on in the
explanation because that coax referred to is for audio and video signals with 75 ohm impedance.
So the high functioning analog signal (component video, in this case) actually has to
be combined and upconverted to digital from the analog input sourcing to the modulator
upon input and as accurate to how the audio/video or synced, etc... (and perhaps other
factors not mentioned). After the signal is amplified slightly via a signal amplifier (provided
the impedance is matched) a digital carrier signal had to be introduced (this is a form of digital
modulation) and this is performed following the conversion and these steps to modulate the
wave digitally.

In this process, there is bound to be some loss in the conversion of the signal, which is why
it is suggested that interlaced scan be played (and progressive be turned off) as most devices
cannot support the refresh rate, unless you are dumping the signal into a computer monitor,
which can (as TV's and computer monitors have different forms of horizontal and vertical
deflection, by design). The other thing to keep in mind s that in the upconversion, due to
limits on the signal compression, you can have artifacts or other video output errors, however
if the signal compression achieves the under limit criteria, you'll have a relatively decent video
output.

The signal in this case is converted to HDMI. From the output of the modulator/convertor, you
now have a digital to digital signal transfer. The TV will follow the signal from there and process
it as a digital (converted signal), although the modulator performed the step already but the
electronics inside the TV are doing the processing once again (however, this time through the
digital inputs- HDMI).

You can elect to go through other ways, There's analog to analog (hi level res) to low res. Examples
are component video (RGB) to composite (Y) and then RCA audio to RCA audio- presumed stereo (although
mono or hi-fi will work). Then there is RGB to S-Video, or you can do any of these sources and go to coax.
You can also down-convert from DMI to ay of the above listed media, following the similar rules already
mentioned, except there will be a digital to analog conversion, then the modulation and processing on
the old school analog. In analog, depending on what you do, the signal will be combined for audio video
or you can keep the signals altogether separate. It is how you treat the signals, how they come in, how they
go out, what you do with them- all of these things tie in and factor in to the processing of electronics signals
as previously indicated. Everything matters, even the packaging, the "folds" in the paper, compressed, or
uncompressed in the new world of signal processing.

Additionally, you have to follow special rules with the internet or when transmitting any signal to the
general public. We already talked about most of the rules on receiving signals. I sincerely hope this
discourse clears up any confusion. The signal is still modulated and processed- depending upon what
scheme and method one chooses to use. It is how you treat the signal throughout the path of travel
that is going to result in what you produce in the end as your outcome.

God Bless. Have a great day.