HDMI cables - myths and hype?

[admin_exported]

I suspect this is an old chestnut on this forum - for which I apologise - but I haven't noticed or been interested before.

I am struck by the seriousness of Which HiFi reviews and listings of HDMI cables when, except for long cable runs and reliable build, the quality of the picture or sound should be unaltered since HDMI cables simply deliver digital 0 and 1s. Yet the reviews in the magazine suggest serious differences in video quality. I would be happy to be persuaded that these differences are real. But if they are not, as I suspect, then it brings into disrepute all the reviews in the publication, which I will therefore have to stop buying.

Comments?

 

[Clare Newsome]

It is about as hoary a chestnut as you can get - do a Forum search for HDMI and you've got hours of reading ahead of you.

Needless to say, the best answer is for you to try a range of cables yourself. We can see - and just as importantly hear - differences between some cables, and report our findings as such, regardless of brand or price (which is why our Best Buys for HDMI cables start at a fiver, with a cable sold via eBay).

On a related note, we've just conducted one of our 'Big Question' features, where we've given readers the chance to come into our test rooms and experience a range of HDMI cables and assess them for sound and vision (without knowing the brands/prices involved, or indeed even whether they were experiencing a change in cable) . You'll be able to read the fascinating results in our next issue.

 

[proffski]

EDITED BY MODS for House Rules violation

 

[fayeanddavid]

Always contentious, as are mains cables, speaker cables, speaker links, speaker connecting,stereo interconnects, digital coaxial, digital optical, types of connectors to TV/amp/speakers etc etc

My assertion is that if you accept any of the above have an effect/influence on your listening/visual perception then it is so..............there is no argument!

Think on, have you or any one out there tinkered/changed any of the above because it will "enhance" your system, if the answer is Yes (as I am sure it is) then accept that there are differences...........tangible or not.

 

[Anonymous]

fayeanddavid:
Always contentious, as are mains cables, speaker cables, speaker links, speaker connecting,stereo interconnects, digital coaxial, digital optical, types of connectors to TV/amp/speakers etc etc

My assertion is that if you accept any of the above have an effect/influence on your listening/visual perception then it is so..............there is no argument!

Think on, have you or any one out there tinkered/changed any of the above because it will "enhance" your system, if the answer is Yes (as I am sure it is) then accept that there are differences...........tangible or not.But I haven't, so the answer is No and I do accept there are no differences!

 

[Anonymous]

fayeanddavid:
Always contentious, as are mains cables, speaker cables, speaker links, speaker connecting,stereo interconnects, digital coaxial, digital optical, types of connectors to TV/amp/speakers etc etc

My assertion is that if you accept any of the above have an effect/influence on your listening/visual perception then it is so..............there is no argument!

Think on, have you or any one out there tinkered/changed any of the above because it will "enhance" your system, if the answer is Yes (as I am sure it is) then accept that there are differences...........tangible or not.But I haven't, so the answer is No and I do accept there are no differences!

 

[Anonymous]

dmart7:

I suspect this is an old chestnut on this forum - for which I apologise - but I haven't noticed or been interested before.

I am struck by the seriousness of Which HiFi reviews and listings of HDMI cables when, except for long cable runs and reliable build, the quality of the picture or sound should be unaltered since HDMI cables simply deliver digital 0 and 1s. Yet the reviews in the magazine suggest serious differences in video quality. I would be happy to be persuaded that these differences are real. But if they are not, as I suspect, then it brings into disrepute all the reviews in the publication, which I will therefore have to stop buying.

Comments?

Follow these simple rules and you won't go far wrong:

If you own entry level kit, you wouldn't spend £100 on a cable.

Likewise if you own high end kit a £5 cable will not do it justice.

Simples.

 

[Garth Man]

EDITED BY MODS for House Rules violation

 

[Anonymous]

I am sorry to challenge the comments of the magazine's Editor, but I am disappointed by the response, which had nothing of substance. Any punter can claim what is written by Clare Newsome but there should be something more from such an authoritative source. To bolster any subjective perceptions, this should probably include any or all of the following:

• a clear technical explanation about whether and how 0s and 1s might fail to travel through an HDMI cable, and how such losses would affect the result
• a technical measurement of those losses, if there are any, including technical evidence if some HDMI cables are affected more than others by adjacent cables and equipment
• technical measurement of variations in the quality of video or sound

Surely, 'What HiFi' should address these fundamentals? We as individuals can't. Another study did so and found no losses on any HDMI cables at all prices.

Without better analysis and evidence, I can only believe that What HiFi reviews on HDMI cables, and those of its upcoming reader panel, are not only subjective (which I hasten to say is not a sin) but spurious (which is).

There are technical reasons why other types of cables and hardware may vary in performance. However, if What HiFi can make differences out of something which (pending the evidence) can't be different, how can we regard as credible its advice on other equipment?

 

[The_Lhc]

dmart7: a clear technical explanation about whether and how 0s and 1s might fail to travel through an HDMI cable,

Well, you sat there and wrote that, so why don't you describe exactly how you get a "0" and "1" down a cable in the first place. I mean, do you actually believe that there are lots of little 0s and 1s travelling down the cable or perhaps they're actually represented by different voltage levels within a waveform, a waveform which is fluctuating at an astonishingly rapid rate.

Now, I'm not saying that HDMI cables do or don't make a difference, I hold no opinion on the subject as I've done almost no testing on the matter, but I do get a little narked when people repeat this mantra "it's just 1s and 0s" without giving any thought whatsoever as to what they're actually saying or to what is actually travelling down the cable.

 

[Clare Newsome]

dmart7:

I am sorry to challenge the comments of the
magazine's Editor, but I am disappointed by the response, which had
nothing of substance. Any punter can claim what is written by Clare
Newsome but there should be something more from such an authoritative
source. To bolster any subjective perceptions, this should probably
include any or all of the following:

• a clear technical explanation about whether and how 0s and 1s might
  fail to travel through an HDMI cable, and how such losses would affect
  the result
• a technical measurement of those losses, if there are any,
  including technical evidence if some HDMI cables are affected more than
  others by adjacent cables and equipment
• technical measurement of variations in the quality of video or sound

Surely, 'What HiFi' should address these fundamentals? We as
individuals can't. Another study did so and found no losses on any
HDMI cables at all prices.

Without better analysis and evidence, I can only believe that What
HiFi reviews on HDMI cables, and those of its upcoming reader panel,
are not only subjective (which I hasten to say is not a sin) but
spurious (which is).

There are technical reasons why other types of cables and hardware
may vary in performance. However, if What HiFi can make differences
out of something which (pending the evidence) can't be different, how
can we regard as credible its advice on other equipment?

I'm sorry you were disappointed in my response, but I did direct you to the threads where there are many hours of reading - a lot of it highly technical, for and against - on the subject, which you seem to have overlooked (along with my correct job title).

Here's what one cable manufacturer has to say on HDMI, which argues that simplle 'data in, data out' arguments are only the start, especially where longer lengths of cable are concerned. Yes, it's a manufacturer viewpoint, which you can choose to ignore, but it's easy to read/understand.

People enjoy movies/TV with their ears/eyes - not technical measuring equipment - and that's how we test equipment, which we clearly state.

There is nothing spurious about our testing, I can assure you - it's your allegations that are spurious, and do not bear repeating.

 

[Anonymous]

The HDMI cable and other digital interfaces, carry digital information that is true, but many forget the way this is transmitted. Electical transmission through a metallic contuctor may be a conductor of interferences, so if it is not properly shielded, it will effect the overall perfornece in a way or another, so it is not a matter of spending 200pounds on an HDMI cable but to buy a decent one, one of the most poular cables on this forum is the Thatcable Hdmi cable which cost just 5pounds and recieved 5 stars. So I see no way the Magazine or website are inducing anyone to spend a lot on cables, they are inducing and helping spending the money wisely, i had a cheap Hdmi cable that was in no way adequetly shielded, and had cheap cables all around.

Then started buy buying the Tacima 6 way, and my girlfriend which is a total dumb in the matter told me, what have you done to the tv the image is much better, and after that i upgraded the hdmi cables all around togheter with the pseaker cable and the difference in sound was jaw dropping to say the least.

So my view is forget digital, it is still an electic signal, and the cabe is still copper i.e an antenna for RFI, so why take the risk, take a good advise and help your self and spend 5 pounds on a decent cable instead of 5 pounds on a rubbish one, there is nothing to lose for sure. Its better to have a durable, well made cable anyway.

 

[landzw]

I've played around with a couple of cables now , That cable , 2 other unknown make of ebay which i started with , silver chord + and not to mention the freebies you get .

I currently have a L40B550 and to be honest apart from the cheap cables none of the cables made much of a noticeable difference to picture quality , Though i have had a That Cable fail on me and one cable of ebay suffers motion blur .

But the biggest difference when i had me old TV one of the first Samsung LE40 ( Rome ) HD ready Tv's it had awesome sound , which makes new Tv's sound so dull and when i changed the cables around on that T'v the difference was BIG with the silver chord+ .

So i may have not tested some of the big names but its clear to me you do get more from the more expensive cables e.g. Better construction so less chance of failing , Better shielding and apart from picture quality the sound quality which to many people is very important when using a home cinema system .

Thats just my opinion but i know if i'm looking to improve the sound from the standard Tv speakers using an external AV system then i would buy a better quality HDMI lead

 

[proffski]

This can be resolved quite easily! The advocates of high end cables put £1000 into the kitty; they choose any cables cheap & expensive and any combination of equipment they like. The advocates then sit back whilst completely independent assistants change the cables, the advocates of expensive cables then have to tell the difference between the sub £5, sub £10, and very expensive with no upper limit. Then their choice of material is played and they have to determine which are the cheap and which are the expensive cables without knowing (obviously) as to which cables are being assessed. If they get it wrong the money goes to a UK charity...

Me? I have expensive cables but only because they look cool!

 

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why this keeps going round and round. It seems simple to me , digitising a signal - it itself - does nothing for data integrity. However by representing it in numeric form ( and it is only a representation , by the time the signal is on the wire it is not nice crisp 1's and 0's , but a wave form ) you can overlay an error correction protocol to alert the receiver if the signal it has interpreted may have an error in it ( note the use of 'interpreted' and 'may' , those waveforms do need to be reinterpreted as 1's and 0's after all ).

However , and this is the important part , video/audio signals carried over HDMI have no error correction.

The receiver will make the best interpretation it can of the signal it receives and go with it whether it is what the transmitter put on the wire or not. If no sensible interpretation can be made of the received signal then at that point the receiver may abruptly fail all together, but up until that point other artefacts will have been being introduced (anything from speckles, or perhaps something as subtle as a green pixel that isn't quite as green as it should be , maybe it should have been blue - who knows and without an error correction protocol that is the point.)

Cables are entirely passive in all this, all they can do is take the signal it receives at one end and put it out at the other and the only 'weapons' that they can deploy in this is the design of the cable , the materials it is constructed from , the care with which it was manufactured , the quality control tests it has been subjected to - like it or not all of these things cost money and you have the choice of whether or not you want to pay for it.

Cables do vary in all of these things - surely even common sense tells you that - some manufactures use lasers to weld the terminator to the cable , others use compression fixing, auto welders, even manual welding ( yes ! manual welding - if that is not a stunning illustration of how cheap even skilled workers are in china I don't know what is ) the varying heat stresses this can induce into the cables should be obvious. Cables are made with varying purity levels of copper or other materials and even cable diameter all of which cost money and have provenly different electrical properties. How many different ways are there to say that not all cables are the same.
I am not saying that you should be spending huge amounts on your cables regardless, I am saying that since it will be carrying all the signals between your devices, and as a consequence they will never be better than the cable allows them to be, then you should pay it some attention. My general rule of thumb this is that you should spend 5% of the combined values of the equipment you are joining together i.e if you spent £150 on a blu-ray player and £350 on your TV then £25 on a 1m cable is perfectly fine if you spent £600 on a blu-ray player and £2000 on a TV , then if you really want to give £2600 worth of your money every chance then spending £130 on you cable may not seem such a bad investment. But if you feel otherwise and are determined to only spend £5 on your cable you go right ahead, I'm not going to stop you.

 

[Andrew Everard]

dmart7:I am struck by the seriousness of Which HiFi reviews and listings of HDMI cables when, except for long cable runs and reliable build, the quality of the picture or sound should be unaltered since HDMI cables simply deliver digital 0 and 1s. Yet the reviews in the magazine suggest serious differences in video quality. I would be happy to be persuaded that these differences are real. But if they are not, as I suspect, then it brings into disrepute all the reviews in the publication, which I will therefore have to stop buying.

Comments?

I suggest if you are so suspicious, you should stop buying Which? immediately.

 

[proffski]

I find it interesting that 'Canford' who supply the BBC, brodcast stations and film studios, sell some of their HDMI cables at under £10. They have an excellent international reputation to maintain so I douubt if they will sell inferior pruducts. Here is a quote from their description HDMI section for a cable selling at £6.30 +VAT...

HDMI v1.3 cables have a bandwidth of 340MHz (10.2Gbits/s), which supports 1080p signals including those at increased colour depths and/or increased refresh rates. High-Speed cables are also able to accommodate higher resolution displays, such as WQXGA 'cinema' monitors (resolution 2560 x 1600). £6:30! http://www.canford.co.uk/Products/38-8913_HDMI-CABLE-2-metres

For Full HDMI Specification & Standards look no further than here: http://www.hdmi.org./

 

[bigboss]

....Trying hard to resist commenting anymore on this issue. My posts here.

 

[Anonymous]

same here , ive no interest in cables , my mind is made up on their merits , each to their own ...