I understand the technological differences between these standards and why, in theory, the images should be improved as you go from composite to svideo and svideo to RGB. But Im beginning to think I am blind as no matter how hard I try I can only see marginal improvements on my 29 inch Sony Trinitron. I use the RGB setting for Sky, used to use it for DVD which has now been relegated to the Svideo socket. I cant see that much difference in quality (except maybe on menus which are hardly the focus of what Sky and DVD players are for). At most I would say that there was only a 1-5% improvement from composite to either svideo and RGB and its so marginal that if I used the composite image instead of RGB that II wouldnt really notice. If these were optional upgrades to the TV then I would find it hard to justify the extra expense. So can some one tell me: a) Am I blind b) Have I neglected some tweak somewhere c) Is RGB/Svid/Composite obsession just another stream of av upgraditis d) Is there really not that significant a difference when you are sat watching a movie or soap which afterall is what the TV is good at. What I really suspect is that a general bulk standard TV isnt really going to show any difference but the higher spec/bigger screen you go more significant it becomes.