HDMI cables, does the quality of the cable really matter?

[Anonymous]

professorhat:
All of WHF's tests are standard double blind tests to ensure things like placebo effect or whatever don't affect the outcome of the test.ÿ

Doing a blind test does not stop the placebo effect. Our eyes could still deceive us when blind testing two identical cables (without the tester knowing they are identical) because you will imagine there will be a difference even when there isn't. What it does is rule out favoritism.

 

[jase fox]

avnut:
i've just posted the same answer on another thread but here goes.......

spent £60 on vdh flat and its no improvement on the one i already had from tesco £20.. conclusion, buy an unbranded one and your laughing.
Very intersting result, did you do a blind side by side comparison?

 

[professorhat]

Okay, fair point, rules out favoritism (you knew what I meant!)

 

[Anonymous]

professorhat:
Okay, fair point, rules out favoritism (you knew what I meant!)

Yeh, just thought it was important to make that particular point clear with HDMI cables.ÿ

 

[Big Aura]

double blind? Deal me in, Prof!

I don't know - maybe I'm just not sophisticated enough - I couldn't tell the difference between my mate's £30 playstation cable and my QED Performance... I think there was a difference with the freebie cable that came with my freesat box, but again, I couldn't be sure... Perhaps I was just too excited about getting it all delivered on the same day. It was the best Christmas ever. In November.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Big Aura:I hereby challenge What Hi-Fi to do a blind test (not actually blind, that would be pointless, but without being able to see the cable in use) and see what your testing team really rate...

Hereby Rides Again? It's what our testers do all the time...

 

[Anonymous]

I'm doing my own 'blind' test soon as i get my new Qed performance cable from amazon and test it against Tesco's finest £4.99 cable....should be interesting...

 

[Andrew Everard]

Ah but is Tesco's Finest HDMI better than Tesco's standard one...?

 

[Big Aura]

heh. Sorry for questioning the integrity of the chosen few!

In other news, I bought a Sainsbury's taste-the-difference powerblock - it gave me a really subtle and refined shock.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Were you questioning integrity?

Subtle and refined is so 2008 - the new black is Sainsbury's Basics Switch and Save.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't know what's worse; my naivety at checking if these products exist or my excitement when I find out they do.

 

[Big Aura]

absolutely.

But I'm newish.

In any case, as I've still got a job (which I'm heading home from in about 15 seconds), I'll stick to buying Tesco finest / Sainsbury's taste-the-difference/ What hi-fi products of the year for now.

 

[The_Lhc]

JohnNewman:randydevilad:
I think its more helpful than telling people this >>>>

I don't think anyone really wants to get involved in yet another thread on the subject. No offence meant...

you get me drift lol

I think that he is just saying that this debate is going on in several other threads at the moment.

Zigackly.

 

[avnut]

jase fox:avnut:

i've just posted the same answer on another thread but here goes.......

spent £60 on vdh flat and its no improvement on the one i already had from tesco £20.. conclusion, buy an unbranded one and your laughing.

Very intersting result, did you do a blind side by side comparison?actually i've done a blind test with the vdh flat,the tesco £20 cable and the freebie cable.

myself and a few trusted friends,each time the pana bd55 was set up direct to th50pz80 by my girlfriend while nobody there and we watched the first 10mins of dark knight on three occasions.

out of the four of us watching there was no discernable difference although there was one vote for the freebie cable. cant say for sound as we havnt got 2 of each cable. i say again save your money and spend it on more discs or just blow it down the pub!

 

[Anonymous]

It does matter and by large.

Compared no name 1.5 m cable against Monster 400 series non 1.3 profile not 1080p certified 1m and 0.5 Chord silver plus 1.3/1080p.

Had them connected one end to Everio HD camcorder and the other to Pana 32 LXD 700.

Did not compare the sound on my receiver, the picture was enough for me to go for a more expensive cable even my girl friend noticed the difference the colours were gone it looked like tape recorder record from 1970s with a no name cable.

There is only tiny difference with the Monster and Chord towards a better overall picture with Chord.

Then again it may depend on the source you use with and the lenth you need.I'd pick the Chord longer then 3 m for sure.

I'm replacing no name with Monster 400 series 1080p certified 4m ,you can pick one up cheep on ebay from Australia.

There was one sold for a mere 15.50$ AUS.The cable had 5 stars 2006 december issue.

 

[pete321]

Yes, I think better HDMI cables do make a difference. I know all the arguments as to why they shouldn't, basically they're just carrying digital data which either gets where it's going or it doesn't. But I can only go by my own experience, e.g. I recently bought a TViX HD M-6500a and commandeered the Monster 1000EX HDMI lead which was connecting my V+ box. The V+ box was then relegated to using the out-of-the-box HDMI supplied by Virgin. When I got round to replacing it with an AudioQuest HDMI-3 lead I immediately noticed less noise and deeper colour from V+ picture. I don't know why that should be and I'm sure I wasn't imagining it just because I'd wanted to see a difference with the HDMI lead I paid for.

If the pass through of digital data is either there or it isn't, why should the sound for instance on the pass through from a Sony BDP-S350 be superior in bass to that of the Panny DMP-BD35 (as reported by What HiFi), the players are only sending the digital data from the disc to your amp.

I for one can notice an improvement in better quality HDMI's and that's the reason I buy them. In addition, they're more futureproof because most can already handle higher bandwidths than 1.3a currently requires, e.g. Monster 1000EX can handle over 10gbps (just don't pay through the nose for it from Comet, check out eBay).

 

[nads]

just to through in my 1/2p

I am using the same cables between the HD sources and the Amp and then the Amp to the TV.

Now I could not really spot any difference between the freebies or the ones i use but. that could be down to many things.

what i find strange is that one company can make a lot of expensive different HDMI cables. I was in PC world and they had a range of cables in the 80 to 90 quid range from the same maker but as the priceses were not that different i find it hard to belive that the materials could be that different and give that much of a different look/sound.

I would sugest any cable from a certified adopter and that is certified up to 1080p for the length you require will do the job very well.

 

[pete321]

nads:

just to through in my 1/2p

I am using the same cables between the HD sources and the Amp and then the Amp to the TV.

Now I could not really spot any difference between the freebies or the ones i use but. that could be down to many things.

what i find strange is that one company can make a lot of expensive different HDMI cables. I was in PC world and they had a range of cables in the 80 to 90 quid range from the same maker but as the priceses were not that different i find it hard to belive that the materials could be that different and give that much of a different look/sound.

I would sugest any cable from a certified adopter and that is certified up to 1080p for the length you require will do the job very well.

Don't buy them in the shop!

You can get the very good Monster 1000EX for about half the Comet retail price on eBay and a 1.0m AudioQuest HDMI-3 for £22!

 

[jerryyeatman]

Provided the cable is used WITHIN SPECIFICATION and is not faulty, there is categorically no difference in picture or sound. It has been demonstrated many times that bits out exactly match bits in on both reasonably priced cables as well as expensive cables.

It may be arguable that a more extensively sheilded cable is better able to protect from interference, but the interference is really the issue in that situation.

The people pushing the theory that it does make a difference are cable manufacturers, shops and journalists, because it's in their interest to.

All the "deeper colours, sharper edges, tighter bass" descriptions that we endlessly read should be taken within several kilograms of salt. If there was a loss of data it would not manifest itself in that way anyway, it would most likely be closer to the clicks you hear on a dirty or damaged CD.

 

[professorhat]

Damn journalists and their "interests"

 

[TKratz]

Octopo:Doing a blind test does not stop the placebo effect. Our eyes could still deceive us when blind testing two identical cables (without the tester knowing they are identical) because you will imagine there will be a difference even when there isn't. What it does is rule out favoritism.

Well, I disagree. You can prove for instance that some placebo tablets 'works' better than others if the one tablet looks more fancy than the other. This is clear favoritism between two none working (placebo) tablets, but it is also an example of inappropriate setup.

A properly set up double blind test is designed to rule out the placebo effect. That is the exact purpose of such a test. Your eyes may play tricks on you, but as the next test person may be tricked to think the opposite (if there is clearly no difference) this all falls under statistical uncertainties. As said, it is all about appropriate design.

 

[Anonymous]

"A properly set up double blind test is designed to rule out the placebo effect"

How does it rule it out? The placebo effect can still occur and will only be lessened by more tests on more people from the time it is introduced.

Like I said, if 100 people are told there is a difference between two identical pills, most of them will buy an expensive HDMI cable.

 

[jase fox]

The best blind test to do is when you have no idea the test is being done.

For eg i was at a friends house once & we were talking about different various HDMI cables & how much diff there was between high end ones & cheapo ones etc so one night when i went round to watch a couple of blurays i swapped his QED silver reference for one that comes with your player ( a very basic cheap one) without him knowing & as we were watching the film 3;10 to yuma he did notice he looked really puzzled & said that it doesnt look as sharp as it has been, he started looking at his amp settings & then i told him what id done.

I could even tell that it wasnt as sharp as the QED cable, but at least my test proved there is a difference between cables.

Doing a blind test when you know your doing one, i believe that yes your eyes play tricks with you as your looking for the change.

 

[Sliced Bread]

Soon we won't have to worry about it

http://whathifi.com/News/CES-2009-Wireless-HD-transmission-ready-for-testing/

 

[Andrew Everard]

You'll still need cables to connect your devices to the wireless sender in the current versions we've seen, which use a 'media box' to switch sources and stream a single HDMI signal wirelessly to the display.

Mind you, might not be long before products appear with built-in wireless, and the display will allow you to choose which stream to watch. Then it could get really cool...