Do different brands of HDMI Cables really make a difference?

Alsone

New member
Jul 21, 2007
68
0
0
Visit site
Hi,

Question for the WHS&V team, do top branded HDMI cables really make a difference?

Over on the High Definition Forums:

http://www.highdefforum.com/showthread.php?t=54425

Most users say that they don't make any visible / audible difference and this guy who is an AV electrical engineer says theres no way a cable can make any difference to a digital signal because unlike analog signals the signal is either on or off, so not subject to waveform interference / noise.

They all recommend monoprice cables instead which seem high specc'd but cost only a fraction of cables such as QED:

http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240

Simple question therefore. Is the Electrical Engineer / all these cinema buffs right in that the brand of cable makes no difference to the picture / sound on a digital HDMI signal provided the cable has sufficient bandwidth?

Al.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Alsone"]Is the Electrical Engineer / all these cinema buffs right in that the brand of cable makes no difference to the picture / sound on a digital HDMI signal provided the cable has sufficient bandwidth?[/quote]

Absolutely.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Zoot Horn Rollo"]

Absolutely.[/quote]

Absolutely "different brands of HDMI Cables really make a difference"?

or

Absolutely "the Electrical Engineer / all these cinema buffs <are> right in that the brand of cable makes no difference to the picture / sound"?
 

Clare Newsome

New member
Jun 4, 2007
1,657
0
0
Visit site
Here we go again.... Do a quick search above and you'll find this has been debated here many, many times, with scientific thoughts being provided on both sides (and relentlessly unhelpful comments added by Mr Rollo).

I'd also urge you to try one and see - the best way of experiencing anything, as we stress all the time!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Clare Newsome"]relentlessly unhelpful comments added by Mr Rollo[/quote]

If you find the truth to be unhelpful then so be it.

[quote user="Clare Newsome"]I'd also urge you to try one and see - the best way of experiencing anything, as we stress all the time![/quote]

By then it's too late, you've already wasted your money and bought it.
 

Clare Newsome

New member
Jun 4, 2007
1,657
0
0
Visit site
Yet again, ZHR, relying on your opinion rather than the facts...

Many retailers and manufacturers offer money-back guarantees. For example, Clearer Audio - who makes some good five-star stuff - offer 60-day home trial on all its cables.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Clare Newsome"]Yet again, ZHR, relying on your opinion rather than the facts...[/quote]

Isn't that what subjectivism, as practised by your reviewers, is all about? The fact is there can be no difference in picture quality between approved HDMI cables yet reviews in your mag categorically state there are. Besides, if you bought a cable would you bother to take it back even if it didn't make a difference?
 

Clare Newsome

New member
Jun 4, 2007
1,657
0
0
Visit site
Look - as said endless times before - we're going to have to agree to differ re cables. What is a fact is that money-back guarantees exist, and people should see and hear for themselves, to make their own minds up - as we (as I say above) repeatedly say.

And yes, I would (and do) take anything back if i'm not happy with it - it's consumer power in action.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Clare Newsome"]
Look - as said endless times before - we're going to have to agree to differ re cables. What is a fact is that money-back guarantees exist, and people should see and hear for themselves, to make their own minds up - as we (as I say above) repeatedly say.

And yes, I would (and do) take anything back if i'm not happy with it - it's consumer power in action.

[/quote]

After spending money it's human nature to imagine an improvement even when there can't be one. I think encouraging people to buy cables they don't actually need is being very unhelpful indeed.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Zoot Horn Rollo"]After spending money it's human nature to imagine an improvement even when there can't be one. I think encouraging people to buy cables they don't actually need is being very unhelpful indeed.[/quote]

Let's try it this way then. Assuming that a percentage of the population cannot see/hear the difference between 2 digital cables, and another percentage can (rightly or wrongly), is it not good enough to suggest that as the possibility exists for us to buy 2 or more cables, try them at home in our own set-ups, decide which one sounds better (if they are the same, take the cheapest) and return the other cables to the supplier, then we should do that. [Yes, I know, the sentence was too long...]
If you cannot be bothered with all that, demo it at the store to confirm you like the sound. Finally, if you aren't bothered with that either, or you simply think all cables are equal, simply choose a 2 quid cable and be done with it.
For the record, I think that cables are not alike. Even if you disagree, please remember a longer cable looses more signal than a shorter cable (analogue or digital). The more expensive cables, due to more capable components, will reduce that loss through lower change in electrical resistance and resisting interference, to name a few methods.
As they like to say on game shows - the choice is yours.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
It would be good to hear a scientific or at least a 'logical' reason from the manufacturers why a premium 'digital' cable will lead to better sound or picture quality than a cheaper cable. As I don't know the specific 'science' here, I'll just try logic instead.

Digital implies signals transmitted with information broken down into either 'on' or 'off' signals (1 or 0) with no intermediary 'shades of grey' like analogue. So it's likely to be far less susceptible to quality issues than analogue.

But does it mean that digital information is always transmitted 'perfectly'?

In theory, of course not... Just because it's digital doesn't mean it can't be distorted. A signal that should be transmitted as 'on' (i.e. 1) can be distorted into an 'off' (i.e. 0) signal somehow. If it can happen it will happen. Just using logic, I'd guess that violently twisting the cable around as light flows through a fibre optic link will lead to distortion of a digital signal as you cause darkness where light should be (and I defer to people with more scientific knowledge than me as long as
they can give me a logically reasoned argument why it's impossible to
distort a digital signal.)

So now that we've deduced that a digital signal "can" be distorted in theory and under extreme conditions, the "real question" is can poor quality cabling cause distortion of digital signals in reality and under normal conditions? Anyone with industry knowledge?

p.s. The reasoning provided by the AV electrical engineer has major gaps. Without knowing anything about EE, just because digital is not waveform,
you cannot make a massive leap in logic and then say because of this, the signal will not be affected. What's the connection between digital not being waveform and signal not being affected? Poorly reasoned out and looks wrong actually. Go and bend an optical cable and see if the digital signal not being waveform really makes it impervious to distortion.
 

Gerrardasnails

Well-known member
Sep 6, 2007
295
1
18,890
Visit site
ZHR (unless you are oldphrt in disguise), why do you bother? Are you that worried about what other people spend their money on? Do you moan about people who buy Fairy Liquid and not Tesco's home brand? If people (like me) want to buy QED, Ixos, Van den Hul etc., then surely it's our decision. I'm sure most of us are aware that marketing is everywhere and we are all duped into buying stuff we don't necessarily need, but I'm sure even you or oldphrt have purchased a two for one in Boots, or Sainsburys and not necessarily needed them. The FACT is that if anyone wants to buy a cable as they believe that it will improve their pleasue of hifi, then so be it. For me, you and oldphrt are the sad ones. You post arguments to feed your egos as you believe you are highly intelligent. However, if you were, you would realise that you are wasting your cyber time.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
When I spend £60 to £80 on really decent (1m) hdmi interconnects after spending over £1700 on a tv, I think I have done pretty well. Try putting on a Hi Fi mac and visiting that crazy world........They used to put their CDs in the freezer don't you know ?!!!
 

Alsone

New member
Jul 21, 2007
68
0
0
Visit site
[quote user="david1997"]

When I spend £60 to £80 on really decent (1m) hdmi interconnects after spending over £1700 on a tv, I think I have done pretty well. Try putting on a Hi Fi mac and visiting that crazy world........They used to put their CDs in the freezer don't you know ?!!!

[/quote]

£80 is all very well when they don't keep changing the standards but HDMI seems to be one standard 1 minute and another 1 another and the trouble is without the latest standard you can get all the benefits of the latest discs.

Also, why would you pay more than you have to?

In the days of analogue, an £80 cable was a good investment but its hard to see how it can offer any improvement with a signal that is either on or off and unaffected by noise or interference.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Does a posh usb cable make you photos look better from your digi cam?????
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
2
0
Visit site
[quote user="garethwd"]

Does a posh usb cable make you photos look better from your digi cam?????

[/quote]

Sort of irrelevant as your photos are static files, transferred then viewed, whereas audio and video are streamed and processed in real time, putting more pressure on error correction and thus making it important that the digital datastream(s) are delivered as accurately as possible.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Maybe true! but as long as there is error correction it any cable except maybe long runs should be ok?? Have youy read the article on this on gizmondo where data was analised realtime by an occilascope or some such contraption (dam my spelling) and the output was found to be identicle except for huge lengths 20m or so???
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Dont think im being a pain for the sake of it, i like yor mag and have found your advice very helpfull in my hi fi / av buys. but this is one area where we will have agree to disagree.
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
2
0
Visit site
To be perfectly frank, I try to avoid writing reviews of cables whenever I can.

Not because I am a non-believer - I can see and hear the benefits good quality cables bring over the riubbish ones that usually come in the box with most products - but because checking and rechecking what can often be very subtle differences takes a very long time indeed.

As does trying to cram the results of all that observation into a piece of copy just 50 words long if you're lucky, and often a lot less than that.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I have spent a fortune on cables in the past (anolog) and think its money well spent and i must confess to buying better than the freebe HDMI cables
emotion-10.gif
becouse the freebe's look poorly made but i couldnt justify a large outlay on HDMI just my opinion!

PS loving my 875
emotion-11.gif
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Andrew Everard"]
To be perfectly frank, I try to avoid writing reviews of cables whenever I can.

Not because I am a non-believer - I can see and hear the benefits good quality cables bring over the riubbish ones that usually come in the box with most products - but because checking and rechecking what can often be very subtle differences takes a very long time indeed.

As does trying to cram the results of all that observation into a piece of copy just 50 words long if you're lucky, and often a lot less than that.

[/quote]

I think that's a feeble excuse. Cables are an integral part of a Hi-Fi system and if you're trying to review and recommend the best in the world of hi-fi then you should absolutely review cables.

It is simply lazy to not review cables. Just as bad is to review cables in a fluffy, subjective manner that makes many emotional claims (i.e. crisp images, bright colours....etc.) but never backs it up with solid test results.

What people care about is the quality of the cable carrying digital signals. Therefore, test the quality of the cable. For example, stress test the cable over a few days varying the conditions. Pass a patterned, repeatable signal through over a few days and measure the output. Identify and let us know the "error rate" for different cables under different conditions. Best cable is the one with the lowest error rate....

Enough of silly theories or soft, fluffy, subjective cable reviews that I can do myself. I want to see test results and expect a lot more from industry leading reviewers with access to the best equipment and whose main job it is to review this kit.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Alsone"]
In the days of analogue, an £80 cable was a good investment but its hard to see how it can offer any improvement with a signal that is either on or off and unaffected by noise or interference.

[/quote]

Can you back up your claim that a digital signal is unaffected by noise or interference? Are you "sure" that out of the billion+ individual digital signals sent every few minutes and the trillion individual digital signals sent every few hours, not one signal that should be "on" is ever received incorrectly as an "off".

An error rate of zero is quite a claim and I'd to understand the reasoning behind it.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts