Am I being brave to offer my opinion here? [:O]
In my opinion they do make a difference, however, like the blind test panel, its more in the audio than the picture.
Digital audio is not well transmitted via twisted pair, the wave forms of digital audio will be subject to timing issues : the hifi fraternity is well versed in the subject of jitter by now surely? If a good square wave is not transmitted or received audio differences will be perceived.
I compared the internal freesat on my panasonic G15 against my Humax FoxSat HDR, to see what difference HDMI has on the video/audio quality. Using a sample from the BBC HD preview Nick Drake sessions : Way to Blue, I could clearly hear a sound improvement on the internal freesat tuner, against the Supra HF100 HDMI cable I use. The sound had much greater clarity and purity when not transmitted via HDMI! [
]
I had been previously using a MarkGrant Cables G1080 HDMI, that sounded much better than the Supra : it is triple screened and uses silver wiring like the Chord and QED cables you used. The Supra sounds OK, neutral and so on, but not quite to my taste for audio.
Often we are limited for alternative means of transmitting digital audio : optical is sometimes the only option provided. The problem there being plastic/toslink is not ideal for digital audio either, the bandwidth is too limited and rounding of waveforms occurs. Coaxial/wired is the best means of transporting digital audio when the likes of glass fibre (ST optical) are not available! [:^)]
As for picture quality, I think that could well be more an issue with shielding and localised RF. I happen to live in a particularly bad area for that, I have a TV relay transmitter quite near to me on a hill. So I did actually see a performance lift moving from the cheap cables to MarkGrant's and even better again moving to the Supra.If you live in a "good" area with respect to RF, perhaps the differences are very small.
However, how good is the HDMI interface? One only has to look at the horrible plugs and sockets to realise there may be short comings! Hardly a good fit are they? [6] Jenving who make Supra, say that DVI is a much better transmission interface than HDMI !
Is it any wonder when the DVI connector has bolts to secure it, and pins that make a good connection with its socket.
We need to be seeing a completely new connector, and coaxial lines throughout before we can really see the benefits of an all digital connection.
I'm not surprised that the average consumer feels they are being ripped off with respect to cables : different versions, different claims for function etc etc We can do without this sort of nonsense, a redesign that saw the end of cable snake oil would be just the ticket!
Am I talking out of my hat?[]
In my opinion they do make a difference, however, like the blind test panel, its more in the audio than the picture.
Digital audio is not well transmitted via twisted pair, the wave forms of digital audio will be subject to timing issues : the hifi fraternity is well versed in the subject of jitter by now surely? If a good square wave is not transmitted or received audio differences will be perceived.
I compared the internal freesat on my panasonic G15 against my Humax FoxSat HDR, to see what difference HDMI has on the video/audio quality. Using a sample from the BBC HD preview Nick Drake sessions : Way to Blue, I could clearly hear a sound improvement on the internal freesat tuner, against the Supra HF100 HDMI cable I use. The sound had much greater clarity and purity when not transmitted via HDMI! [
]I had been previously using a MarkGrant Cables G1080 HDMI, that sounded much better than the Supra : it is triple screened and uses silver wiring like the Chord and QED cables you used. The Supra sounds OK, neutral and so on, but not quite to my taste for audio.
Often we are limited for alternative means of transmitting digital audio : optical is sometimes the only option provided. The problem there being plastic/toslink is not ideal for digital audio either, the bandwidth is too limited and rounding of waveforms occurs. Coaxial/wired is the best means of transporting digital audio when the likes of glass fibre (ST optical) are not available! [:^)]
As for picture quality, I think that could well be more an issue with shielding and localised RF. I happen to live in a particularly bad area for that, I have a TV relay transmitter quite near to me on a hill. So I did actually see a performance lift moving from the cheap cables to MarkGrant's and even better again moving to the Supra.If you live in a "good" area with respect to RF, perhaps the differences are very small.
However, how good is the HDMI interface? One only has to look at the horrible plugs and sockets to realise there may be short comings! Hardly a good fit are they? [6] Jenving who make Supra, say that DVI is a much better transmission interface than HDMI !
Is it any wonder when the DVI connector has bolts to secure it, and pins that make a good connection with its socket.
We need to be seeing a completely new connector, and coaxial lines throughout before we can really see the benefits of an all digital connection.
I'm not surprised that the average consumer feels they are being ripped off with respect to cables : different versions, different claims for function etc etc We can do without this sort of nonsense, a redesign that saw the end of cable snake oil would be just the ticket!
Am I talking out of my hat?[
]
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram