Once a HDMI cable has been endorsed by the relevant body, it works 100%. It is capable of doing what it needs to do. Every HDMI cable review that What Hifi has published has been of a fully working, fully endorsed cable.
The question is not what do 1s and 0s do, what form do they take, or anything else technical, industry standards take care of all that on behalf of the public, it shouldn't concern anyone.
The question is, IMO of course, why do some reviewers find varying performance in HDMI cables that have been endorsed as fit for sale by the relevant governing body?
Somebody has to be wrong, are the people that endorse these products incapable of doing so correctly? Do they just use their eyes and ears to test these cables? If so is that acceptable? Or do they have equipment that is capable of testing cables before they sign them off as 100% fit for purpose?
Perhaps we should turn our attention to the validity of the industry standards testing of these cables?
Maybe What Hifi could contact the body that signs these cables off, and ask them why it is that so many cables that are substandard are slipping through the net and onto the shelves of high street stores and the wharehouses of online sellers?
The question is not what do 1s and 0s do, what form do they take, or anything else technical, industry standards take care of all that on behalf of the public, it shouldn't concern anyone.
The question is, IMO of course, why do some reviewers find varying performance in HDMI cables that have been endorsed as fit for sale by the relevant governing body?
Somebody has to be wrong, are the people that endorse these products incapable of doing so correctly? Do they just use their eyes and ears to test these cables? If so is that acceptable? Or do they have equipment that is capable of testing cables before they sign them off as 100% fit for purpose?
Perhaps we should turn our attention to the validity of the industry standards testing of these cables?
Maybe What Hifi could contact the body that signs these cables off, and ask them why it is that so many cables that are substandard are slipping through the net and onto the shelves of high street stores and the wharehouses of online sellers?
There used to be a sign in my local pub that banned the discussion of religion and politics. Who knew in the 21st Century that would become cables and bit-rate 
Does anyone know who is responsible for signing off these cables as fit for purpose in the UK? I would like to email them asking why it is that so many substandard HDMI cables are finding their way into the What Hifi review facilities. Thank you.
diversityfg said:
You're not getting it are you.? In the opinion of the reviewer, sometimes cable A is better than cable B. Nobody said anything was sub-standard
I'm sorry but i don't follow. If cable B is not as good as cable A, but both have been endorsed as 100% fit for purpose by the relevant authority, then there is a contradiction. Either B is as good as A , or B is not as good as A, and was therefore endorsed even though it wasn't 100% fit for purpose.Lee H said:
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
- Jun 27, 2008
- 567
- 1
- 18,890
Lee H said:There used to be a sign in my local pub that banned the discussion of religion and politics. Who knew in the 21st Century that would become cables and bit-rate
Understandable. Political and religious discussions lead to wars - cable discussions just lead to handbags and thread closures.
diversityfg said:
From the HDMI website:
"As a result, HDMI strongly recommends that consumers look for products with the features they want, rather than the version number of the HDMI components. Version numbers reflect capabilities, but do not correspond to product features. For example, if you want the new video features called Deep Color, look for Deep Color in the feature set rather than HDMI 1.3, the version of the specification that enabled Deep Color. Why? Because the version of the specification that enables Deep Color (1.3) does not mandate that Deep Color functionality be implemented."
So, 2 cables that match the required specification (minimum standard) could produce different results.
That just explains why people should look for the features they need in a HDMI cable, rather than assume they are present based on their version numbers.Lee H said:
But your assertion is that all cables that pass a specification process should be the same. Clearly they're not.
diversityfg said:
Why? Several manufacturers don't supply interconnects with their hi-fi separates...
My assertion? Isn't it the assertion of those that endorse the cables? I'm obviously not talking about different features, that cables differ in that area isn't in dispute by anybody.Lee H said:
I'm talking about image and sound quality, any cable that is passed as fit for purpose should have no characteristics of it's own, it should have no affect on image or sound quality. But either many do, in which case they should have not been endorsed, or they do not, in which case review findings are questionable
Care to provide a link? Because for as far as I have understood (granted, haven't checked in the last two months), the HDMI spec for components does not include wiring. Components (in the HDMI spec) are the devices making up a video system (source, amplifier, tv), not the cables in between.Lee H said:
Last time I checked, HDMI only had two specs for wiring: standard (up to 1080i) and high-speed (1080p, 3d, 4k), and a separate connector for automotive use. I would be very confused if they would now be claiming that a wire can have features too.
Excitable Boy
Well-known member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 30
- 0
- 18,540
diversityfg
Your logic seems quite perverse to me. Isn't that like saying all cars that pass an MOT should all have to have the same fuel consumption and accelerate the same speed ?
Your logic seems quite perverse to me. Isn't that like saying all cars that pass an MOT should all have to have the same fuel consumption and accelerate the same speed ?
diversityfg said:
That'll be the features then.
I'm not suggesting that the wildly different prices can always be justified, but you asked what could be different about 2 cables that match the same specification...
Lee H said:
There's also the point that only a cable constructed to the highest quality will work beyond a certain length, cheaper cables are fine up to about 5m but beyond that will start to fail due to signal attenuation. A higher quality cable will be good for up to 15m and yet both would pass the testing criteria (otherwise they wouldn't be on sale). And of course the tests themselves will categorise the cable into one of two types, standard or high-speed. So they're most definitely not all the same.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram