CHORD HDMI SUPERSHIELD HDMI (Awards 2009) vs. VAN DEN HUL HDMI FLAT HDMI (Awards 2008)vs. QED PERFORMANCE HDMI (Awards 2006)

[rana_kirti]

Hi to everyone...

This is my first post here... I have recently purchased a Denon Dvd 1940 and a Panasonic 37 LX80C & intend on purchasing the

Panasonic AE4000 projectors in a few months.

I have decided to purchase a 5 meter Hdmi cable to connect from my dvd player to the projector and i got the following prices for the 3 mentioned Hdmi cables...

1.CHORD HDMI SUPERSHIELD HDMI (Awards 2009) - £ 80.96 to £ 89.95

2.VAN DEN HUL HDMI FLAT HDMI (Awards 2008) - £ 97.87 to £ 104

3.QED PERFORMANCE HDMI (Awards 2006) - £ 66.00 to £ 82.50

All the 3 cables are rated 5 Stars at What Hifi. I've not included the 2007 winner Chord Silver Plus coz now it has only 4 stars. Though i dont quite understand if it won the award in 2007 than how come the QED PERFORMANCE HDMI which won the award in 2006 still has 5 stars.... Even the Older QED QUNEX still has 5 Stars. Am i missing something here....???

I would request Andrew & Claire to give me their expert comments as to which Hdmi Cable i should buy...?

All are similarly priced and all are award winners.Which is the Best amongst them...?

Thanks in Anticipation...

Rana.

 

[Andrew Everard]

The Chord would be the one we'd go for, excellent though the other two still are.

 

[rana_kirti]

Hi Andrew,

thanks for a prompt reply... very helpful & professional ...

cheers..

Rana

 

[Clare Newsome]

And to clarify further, the older HDMI retains five stars due to price cuts (as your comparison shows). Both Chords and the VdH are better cables, but the QED is still a superb option, and terrific value - on performance-per-pound terms, it's a five-star bargain.

 

[Sc00bied00]

probably a bit late in reply, I use the QED performance and its a decent cable, I also have a Chord HDMI and there is a difference in the picture quality from this in comparison to the QED.

Laptop running a blu-ray player not the best of transports but certainly visually notable differences from the 2 cables.

 

[lastcoyote]

andrew, just wanted to ask if you feel the chord 'supershield' gives better picture results than the van den hul flat? i know you've kind of already answered that above but could you clarify picture improvements? i have no doubt the chord 'active' is better that the vdh considering the price and the actual visible results that i've seen in use. i'm going to use the 1.5m active that i've got from my av amp to tv and then purchase a 0.75m one to go between my blu-ray and av amp.
i'm currently using a vdh flat between skyhd to tv. would i get better results using a chord supershield between the skyhd and tv then?

 

[Anonymous]

The will be no differnce in picture quality.

Its HDMI, have a look for some technical research on the subject on the net.

This must be put to bed, technical people have assesed cables with calibrated test equipement and no differences are noted.

Just like psycho acoustics, there may be similar placebo affects to vision.

Its not to say if you spend more you may get better build quality.

Don't be lead to believe that being a 5m cable, that any great losses are involved.

If all this nonsense held any water, what do you think communications specialists would use.

Its a shame because all this is damaging some peoples reputations in the 'HiFi' world.

Now for some vitriolic comments, probably to my spelling or grammer.

Many people are cured each year by a placebo operation, they actually cut them open leave a scar and 80% are cured, now thats weird, Not that relavent, but weird!!

 

[VoodooDoctor]

Eddy41:
Many people are cured each year by a placebo operation, they actually cut them open leave a scar and 80% are cured, now thats weird, Not that relavent, but weird!!

Can you provide a link or reference for that? I've never heard of it and would be curious to see where they managed to get away with such unethical practice.

As for cables, each to their own.

 

[Anonymous]

It was on a radio 4 programme. It was in the UK too, I am not sure why it is 'ethically' allowed either.

In the UK we are not really meant to give 'sugar' pills but Scandanavian countries still do. With great results.

If you done some searches on the web the placebo studies talked about on this prog, may be there. I'm going to check as well.

Slightly off topic but interesting though eh!!

Matt

 

[Anonymous]

whf editors won't justify earlier comments about cable difference by responding.

I have a VDH flat and would like to know advantages of supershield over the VDH please WHF?

 

[Anonymous]

I just seen the following video:

LINK (AGAIN) REMOVED due to house rules violation

It's an interview speaking about HDMI quality. The interviewed is Jeff Boccaccio from the Digital Performance Level program, who fully test and certify HDMI cables.

He says that if a cable works it's good enough. Two cables that work properly will not have less or better quality picture-wise. Quality on an HDMI means it will work with a specific equipment or not. Quality of an HDMI cable has nothing to do with image or sound quality.

I guess the huge prices of HDMI cables are nonsense. Not to say they're not good, but probably they contain stuff that isn't needed and do not increase the quality of either image or sound since we are talking about a digital signal. They can be made with the best technology available with the best materials and cost a premium, but will not make your TV have better image than with a cheaper cable.

That video is the first of a series. But from that one you can actually hear the guy saying:

"... it upsets me when I see people spending more and more money with them thinking they're gonna get a better picture. They really won't..."

 

[Anonymous]

thats like saying all car engines are the same, produce the same amount of power, are equally smooth, use the same amount of fuel etc etc etc. Its quite simple and non-scientific ... take an out-of-the-box hdmi cable supplied with the PS3 and compare it with an hdmi cable costing c£20 ... if u cant see any difference then u really do need yours eyes tested.

 

[Sc00bied00]

Back to the usual subjectivity, if you personally dont see / hear any difference between any cables then buying is easy, pick the cheapest or use the freebie supplied.

 

[Anonymous]

exactly sc00bied00, no further debate required!!

 

[Anonymous]

As others have said, as long as the cable carries a digital signal, it makes no difference whatsoever to the quality of the picture or sound. You either get the picture or you don't. No don't bother mentioning picture break-up. if the cable works, it works.

Taking that to its logical conclusion, if you use a digital source (CD, DVD or BD player) and supply your amp and TV via HDMI or other digital interconnects, then the quality (or cost) of the source equipment is irrelevant.

Similarly, you get nonsensical reviews of CD or DVD recorders. The source is digital. The copy is digital and (barring read or write errors) identical.

In the old analogue days, the quality of all the components mattered but What HiFi used to emphasise the importance of the speakers. Now its the speaker and the TV. That was the whole point of ADD or DDD on the CD info. The digital chain meant a pristine signal.

I used to buy What HiFi, even when they published stuff about writing round the edge of CDs with green felt pens. (Yeah, yeah. Special, expensive felt pens.) Not now. Emperor's new clothes...

 

[bigboss]

Brabantia:thats like saying all car engines are the same, produce the same amount of power, are equally smooth, use the same amount of fuel etc etc etc. Its quite simple and non-scientific ... take an out-of-the-box hdmi cable supplied with the PS3 and compare it with an hdmi cable costing c£20 ... if u cant see any difference then u really do need yours eyes tested.

On the contrary, objective scientific tests have shown no difference between HDMI cables at lengths of up to 5m. Car engines are completely different. HDMI cables are digital.

There are 2 ways of testing: subjective & objective. Subjective
testing is prone to bias & other elements like fatigue etc. because
it depends on the tester's eyes (and assuming that the tester has a
perfect 6/6 vision & no colour blindness). Objective testing is
more scientific and produces consistent results, regardless of the
tester.

There are a few objective tests online if you do a
google search. They all say that there's no difference in picture &
audio quality with different HDMI cables, cheap or expensive at shorter
lengths (up to 4m). At longer lengths (10m or more), the cost of cable
does not automatically translate to better quality, but it's better to
stick with reputable manufacturers.

One of the objective
testers used more than $200000 worth of equipment to objectively test
the HDMI cables. They used a Digital Serial Analyzer, TDT/TDR Sampling
Modules, Pulse Pattern Generator, Digital Serial Waveform Analysis
Software, HDMI Test Fixture Calibration Kit, HDMI Test Fixture TPA-R
adaptors, RF Coaxial test cables with SMA connectors, SMA 75-ohm
Terminations, & GPIB/USB Interface. Every single step of the
testing process is well explained.

Also search Jeff Boccaccio's interview on google & youtube.

 

[aliEnRIK]

Bigboss ~

Ive had a bit of a look on the net and have found the following ~

'Digital' cables in an experiment were found to be 'directional' and even though they were short lengths actually had so much jitter that it affected the point at which the signal went into the DAC

HDMI cables were tested to 'measureably' have errors in the signal although no 'obvious' signs were onscreen

ALL digital cables have a 'cliff edge' (The point at which they completely fail)

All experiments are done in 'lab' conditions with no concern for EMI, Mains RFI, equipment used, strength of signal etc etc etc which 'could' be found in 'real world' conditions

Ive known even 1m cheapie cables fail

Add in the fact that everyones eyes are different and we get the following ~

Errors DO happen but are virtually imperceivable to begin with. But at the 'cliff edge' the signal completely fails and there is no picture. INBETWEEN the 2 we get all sorts of problems ranging from 'snow' onscreen to 'sparklies' to parts of the picture failing etc

The experiments you mention are ALL using pretty decent quality HDMI cables (Even the cheap ones are well known to be pretty decent in yanky land)

Ive known loads of cheapie cables to fail on other forums even though theyre between 1m and 2m in length (FAR shorther than what you claim).

To sum up, not all HDMI cables are the same.............

 

[RodhasGibson]

aliEnRIK:

Bigboss ~

Ive had a bit of a look on the net and have found the following ~

'Digital' cables in an experiment were found to be 'directional' and even though they were short lengths actually had so much jitter that it affected the point at which the signal went into the DAC

HDMI cables were tested to 'measureably' have errors in the signal although no 'obvious' signs were onscreen

ALL digital cables have a 'cliff edge' (The point at which they completely fail)

All experiments are done in 'lab' conditions with no concern for EMI, Mains RFI, equipment used, strength of signal etc etc etc which 'could' be found in 'real world' conditions

Ive known even 1m cheapie cables fail

Add in the fact that everyones eyes are different and we get the following ~

Errors DO happen but are virtually imperceivable to begin with. But at the 'cliff edge' the signal completely fails and there is no picture. INBETWEEN the 2 we get all sorts of problems ranging from 'snow' onscreen to 'sparklies' to parts of the picture failing etc

The experiments you mention are ALL using pretty decent quality HDMI cables (Even the cheap ones are well known to be pretty decent in yanky land)

Ive known loads of cheapie cables to fail on other forums even though theyre between 1m and 2m in length (FAR shorther than what you claim).

To sum up, not all HDMI cables are the same.............
Totally Agree.Furthermore after many hours of comparison testing the Chord is the one to go for.Definite step up in PQ AND SQ.Build Quality also excellent.

 

[bigboss]

AliEnRIK, the reports you're referring to, are all from HDMI cable manufacturers, not independent reports.

Check this article from a Senior Member of IEEE.

 

[Anonymous]

I've just ordered a Onkyo surround setup and was researching HDMI cables to go with it.

Now I've been to a few big name stores and also one very big brand name electronic manufacturer shop and have seen cables from £29.99 to over £100. One sales person told me I needed to spend at least £40 - £50 to get the most out of my equipment, "It's because you are sending a lot of data", he said "just like the internet".

Now I've always had my doubts that expensive HDMI cables would give better image and sound quailities over a cheaper alternative. After all they carry a digital signal the same way a ethernet cable sends data and I've been using an inexpensive ethernet cable since 512mb broadband and my connection is now nearly 20x faster with no connection problems.

I currently use a £5.00 cable from a very popular online retailer on my Sony Blu-Ray and I see no artifacts or ghosting, the image looks sharp.

Could the reviewers of the HDMI cable tests (1m - 5m) explain how one digital cable can give better PQ and SQ than another?

 

[Anonymous]

the only difference cables will make will be down to the hdmi version the cable is, for eg if you use version 1.2/1.2a you wont get the deep colour protocol if your devices support it, 1.3 for dolby true hd, 1.4 for 10/100/1000 ethernet and so on.

bad construction (sloppy shielding, poorly fitting plugs) may create corrupted or missing packets and these could be retransmitted if the data bus on your devices are smart enought to support this. gold contacts pfff, maybe at nanovolt or megavolt levels but only a cosmetic feature at the voltages will use.

another con i,av noticed when in shops and attemping to sell you these cables is that they often have tweaked the colour gamet on the enginners menu sets so on the user menu the options appear to seem the same, also the years old trick they used when compairing plasma to crt is turn only turn on the screen so it appears darker because the lamps havent warmed up

 

[Anonymous]

I've been reading up over the last few days on HDMI cable and found an interesting bench test for HDMI cables on another online magazine.

Thier conclusion for cables up to 4m in lenght:

"At lengths less than 4 meters you can just about use silly string (OK, not really) and get HDMI to pass at any current resolution. At less than 3 meters you'll even extend that to 12-bit color and possibly the next crazy idea HDMI Licensing decides to throw at consumers. Don't spend a lot on these cables and if you want to save money you won't let anyone at a big box store talk you into buying from them."

 

[Petherick]

All this debate about 'objectively proving' that all cables are the same takes no account of humans being able to discern differences and effects that machines can't. If you want to believe there's no difference, that's fine, but don't believe it's fact or that others can't possibly see / hear differences. I recently swapped the HDMI cables on both my Sky HD and Blu-Ray. Everyone that's seen the before and after has commented that it looks better - without knowing what, if anything, had been changed. Or maybe it's that some cables are capable of inciting mass-hysteria - and try disproving that!! By the way, it's not 'ones and zeros' that are being transmitted - it's a digital signal which has leading and trailing edges subject to distortion by any component in the system.

 

[Anonymous]

Petherick: By the way, it's not 'ones and zeros' that are being transmitted - it's a digital signal which has leading and trailing edges subject to distortion by any component in the system.You mean the bits are like the wings of an aeroplane?

Interesting, didn't know that. I presume you're talking about some kind of a wave form?

 

[Petherick]

Grottyash:

I presume you're talking about some kind of a wave form?

Indeed! A digital waveform, not just 'on' or 'off' or 1s and 0s.

A bit like an aeroplane, only cheaper, unless you really are going to extremes...