QED Signature HDMI or Chord Company Active HDMI?

[Andrew Everard]

FrankHarveyHiFi:I'm sure if cables are such a huge lie as some claim there'll be investigations and court cases. Have there been any? Excluding RA of course.

And of course the Russ Andrews adjudication wasn't a court case, but the verdict of a voluntary industry body. No-one's actually gone to law about this yet.

FrankHarveyHiFi:It's a subject I feel people should make their own mind up about.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Anonymous]

well, it's my belief that anyone who "thinks" that they have seen differences between working hdmi cables have indeed done just that, ie they "thought" they seen a difference, they imagined/convinced themselves that they had, i think it's the same with speaker cables and interconnects.

now if it was scientifically proven that there actually were differences then i would say fair enough, but seeing as it isn't, my logic tells me that it's just peoples minds playing tricks on them, just my views

 

[Frank Harvey]

Now interconnects and particularly speaker cables, I'd strongly disagree.....

 

[Anonymous]

FrankHarveyHiFi:Now interconnects and particularly speaker cables, I'd strongly disagree.....

well to be honest i haven't tried out many of either, although i couldn't hear any difference between the ones i have compared, i just can't get my head around how the sound could differ given that your talking about electrical pulses travelling along copper wire..

 

[Frank Harvey]

Maybe you just havent found one to suit your system yet....

 

[Anonymous]

FrankHarveyHiFi:Maybe you just havent found one to suit your system yet....maybe the ones i have suit it fine, maybe not

 

[Frank Harvey]

Or that.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

maxflinn:FrankHarveyHiFi:Maybe you just havent found one to suit your system yet....maybe the ones i have suit it fine, maybe not

Hi maxflinn

The speaker cables you've got are (and i don't say this likely

) state of the art

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Frank Harvey]

Define 'state of the art'.....

 

[professorhat]

maxflinn:now if it was scientifically proven that there actually were differences then i would say fair enough, but seeing as it isn't, my logic tells me that it's just peoples minds playing tricks on them, just my views

Ask any actual scientist to 100% prove anything and they'll tell you it's impossible - we have theories on why things are as they are. A lot of theories are generally accepted as being the way things are, but there's no proof, just evidence that supports the theory. There's no proof that gravity exists, just a lot of evidence to point to it doing so.

 

[Anonymous]

MUSICRAFT:
maxflinn:FrankHarveyHiFi:Maybe you just havent found one to suit your system yet....maybe the ones i have suit it fine, maybe not

Hi maxflinn

The speaker cables you've got are (and i don't say this likely

) state of the art

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

i don't doubt it rick, they are perfect, and i won't be changing them for any other cable

 

[Anonymous]

professorhat:
maxflinn:now if it was scientifically proven that there actually were differences then i would say fair enough, but seeing as it isn't, my logic tells me that it's just peoples minds playing tricks on them, just my views

Ask any actual scientist to 100% prove anything and they'll tell you it's impossible - we have theories on why things are as they are. A lot of theories are generally accepted as being the way things are, but there's no proof, just evidence that supports the theory. There's no proof that gravity exists, just a lot of evidence to point to it doing so.

true, but that's where mathematics come in handy, there is no room for error, 8 x 8 is 64, no matter how many times you run the equation, and maths are at the heart of hdmi cables (as they are most everything), each piece of data is given a numerical value, so whilst it's not exactly tangible, it's pretty easy (and entirely accurate) to measure data loss

a quantified amount of data with an exact numerical value goes in and is measured when it comes out, if it measures the same (which with working hdmi cables it always has) then it has been mathematically proven that there is no data loss, and we all know that no data loss means a hdmi cable cannot be improved upon, simples....

 

[professorhat]

Hmmmm. Firstly...

maxflinn:but that's where mathematics come in handy, there is no room for error, 8 x 8 is 64, no matter how many times you run the equation

Prove to me that 8 x 8 is 64. And if you manage that, prove to me that every time I run this equation in the future, it will always equal 64.

Secondly

maxflinn:a quantified amount of data with an exact numerical value goes in and is measured when it comes out, if it measures the same (which with working hdmi cables it always has) then it has been mathematically proven that there is no data loss, and we all know that no data loss means a hdmi cable cannot be improved upon, simples....

Show me the scientific study which has shown that on all the HDMI cables they tested, there has been proven to be no data loss on each one. I'll be even more impressed if you prove that one.

EDIT - I should point out, I'm doing nothing here to prove the opposite argument, just attempting to show that the arguments you're using to prove that there can be no difference in HDMI cables is flawed.

 

[Anonymous]

your just being silly on the first point prof

on the second one, i didn't say that there was a scientific study like the one you outlined, so how can i prove it?, but any tests that have measured data in and data out that i have read found no data loss, just google it, there are many

oh, and lets not forget that should there be data loss it would have to be random, which would result in random errors, which would result in a random image, which would have been reported, but it never has been??????

 

[professorhat]

maxflinn:your just being silly on the first point prof

I'm not, I'm proving my point that it's impossible to prove anything

maxflinn:on the second one, i didn't say that there was a scientific study like the one you outlined, so how can i prove it?, but any tests that have measured data in and data out that i have read found no data loss, just google it, there are many

Ah, the old "everyone knows it's true, just look it up" argument. Sorry, like David, I'll be the judge of what I trust and don't trust and, at the moment, my eyes and ears still win over what some bloke I don't know on the internet has written.

 

[Anonymous]

Ah, the old "everyone knows it's true, just look it up" argument

not at all, yes everyone has a choice whether or not to believe or indeed trust what they see/hear/read etc, but i can't fathom why some people seem to ignore so much of the information that is readily available regarding the merits of hdmi cables?

and what about the fact that data loss being random would mean random errors that would manifest themselves as a different image on repeat viewing of the same data? what logic can explain the lack of that being reported by those seemingly adept at seeing differences between cables that others can't? it's a huge contradiction.....

 

[professorhat]

As I said, I'm not looking to prove or disprove either theory here. Just explaining why you are never going to get scientific proof of either theory (when you were insisting there was proof of there not being any differences).

Tests have in fact shown that there are data losses when transmitting data over HDMI cables (there has to be, anyone that's stating otherwise is mistaken so I'd instantly dismiss any of your sources who do make that claim). However, they have also apparently shown that the error correction that is used should mean these data losses aren't manifested on the screen. Notice the word should.

They have also shown that any differences in standard audio interconnects shouldn't be audible. A lot of people would dispute that. Double blind testing when done in a scientific manner shows that lots of people can't tell the differences between stereo amplifiers. Does this mean that everyone who is able to accurately detect these differences should cast aside their own experiences and just believe what someone else tells them should be so? Of course not, and I would always challenge anyone that told me to do that, rather than blindly following someone else's commands on what I should or should not see or hear.

As a result, it's always a circular argument that will never be resolved. You just need to face the fact that, the only way to resolve this for yourself is to make your own mind up. Want to dismiss it out of hand and not even try because of what people have told you? That's fine, it's your choice - no one should be disputing this. Not sure if there are differences, so want to try it for yourself? Again, it's your choice - have a look and make your own mind up. It really should be as simple as that.

 

[Anonymous]

professorhat:
As I said, I'm not looking to prove or disprove either theory here. Just explaining why you are never going to get scientific proof of either theory (when you were insisting there was proof of there not being any differences).

Tests have in fact shown that there are data losses when transmitting data over HDMI cables (there has to be, anyone that's stating otherwise is mistaken so I'd instantly dismiss any of your sources who do make that claim). However, they have also apparently shown that the error correction that is used should mean these data losses aren't manifested on the screen. Notice the word should.

They have also shown that any differences in standard audio interconnects shouldn't be audible. A lot of people would dispute that. Double blind testing when done in a scientific manner shows that lots of people can't tell the differences between stereo amplifiers. Does this mean that everyone who is able to accurately detect these differences should cast aside their own experiences and just believe what someone else tells them should be so? Of course not, and I would always challenge anyone that told me to do that, rather than blindly following someone else's commands on what I should or should not see or hear.

As a result, it's always a circular argument that will never be resolved. You just need to face the fact that, the only way to resolve this for yourself is to make your own mind up. Want to dismiss it out of hand and not even try because of what people have told you? That's fine, it's your choice - no one should be disputing this. Not sure if there are differences, so want to try it for yourself? Again, it's your choice - have a look and make your own mind up. It really should be as simple as that.

in which case there would be no visible or audible difference compared to a cable that wasn't losing as much data, and therefore not depending on this apparent error correction, so how can it be possible to see/hear differences as you have stated you have? it's another contradiction..

 

[professorhat]

maxflinn:in which case there would be no visible or audible difference compared to a cable that wasn't losing as much data, and therefore depending on this apparent error correction, so how can it be possible to see/hear differences as you have stated you have?

You're not really reading my posts here are you? Go back and re-read it, paying particular attention to the very first sentence and then the last paragraph.

And with that I'm done.

 

[axman]

maxflinn:

Ah, the old "everyone knows it's true, just look it up" argument

Not at all, yes everyone has a choice whether or not to believe or indeed trust what they see/hear/read etc, but i can't fathom why some people seem to ignore so much of the information that is readily available regarding the merits of hdmi cables?

The problem for me is that the information is contradictory, so I can't trust it. For example:

- it either works or it doesn't. But for longer lengths, it might not work perfectly - so what happened to it works or it doesn't?

- if there is a problem with longer lenghts, surely you can't discount that there might be a problem with shorter lengths too. Oh, it is not noticeable. If it is not noticebale, then there is still a problem, so what about that it works or it doesn't bit?

- how much error connection come into play? Assume I have a long HDMI cable, and may have a problem. But my Kuro is so fantastic at error correction that I don't notice it. But I didn't buy the Kuro to get 95% performance + 5% filled in, I want to get 100% performance! Using the above analogy, how does my Kuro know that it is 8x8=64. It could be 16x4, or 32x2. In fact, it could have received 8x2x? = 64 and is smart enough to correct that error and put a 4 somewhere in there.

This reminds me of what my friend told me about the Millenium Bridge in London. He was an intern at the engineering firm building the bridge, and according to their computers, the bridge is more than strong enough to handle all the predestrian traffic. Once they opened the bridge, everyone complained that it is swaying and therefore dangerous. Do you think that the engineering firm can retort by saying that according to all scientific facts, the bridge is built correctly, therefore the swaying is only in the mind?

 

[Anonymous]

but prof, if error correction can negate the affects of data loss, then how can there be a 3 star hdmi cable? unless one could measure the error correction that was necessary for said cable to successfully transport the data, and stars were awarded for cables that didn't need as much of it, (but that would be pointless and probably impossible) they would all be five stars unless of course price was factored in, in which case the cheapest would get 5 stars and the most expensive probably none.

data loss is the only thing that matters, that's it, nothing else is relevant with hdmi cables in terms of their performance, if there is no data loss there is no problem, if there is enough data loss to degrade the image to the point that its visible, then a random image would be seen on repeat viewing, but it never is???? that's my logic and i'm done too...

 

[MUSICRAFT]

FrankHarveyHiFi:Define 'state of the art'.....

Dear Frank

I am sorry as i was a little unfair to the speaker cables. Instead what i should have said was the speaker cables which maxflinn happily uses redefine the state of the art

Thanks

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Frank Harvey]

MUSICRAFT:
FrankHarveyHiFi:Define 'state of the art'.....

Dear Frank

I am sorry as i was a little unfair to the speaker cables. Instead what i should have said was the speaker cables which maxflinn happily uses redefine the state of the art

Thanks

Rick @ Musicraft

Dear Rohit

Please do elaborate.

Thanks,

David @ Frank Harvey Hi-Fi

 

[the record spot]

chrisr1718:Childs1962, I was once sceptical like you but there's a big difference between a freebie HDMI and a good quality one. I replaced mine HDMI with a Chord and the difference in quality, picture and sound, was quite obvious. Like going from VHS to DVD!!

Guess the stunning picture and colour depth quality I get from my Sony gear must be absolute rubbish with my Tesco 5m HDMI cable (£25)....

 

[idc]

Proof that 8 x 8 is 64......

A lot of arguments that cables can make a difference is based on philosophic ponderings of the science and not the science it self. Then there is the failed link argument of finding minute differences between cables and stating that must be the cause of a difference in sound/vision. Then there is the elephant in the room, which is a belief that cables themselves make a difference whilst ignoring other explanations based on placebo, psychoacoustics etc.

There has been a very large study of HDMI cables, which I cannot link to due to the rules, but it found no difference in measured performance between cables until a certain length was reached. Then lines, sparkles etc would appear. The one difference between the cables tested was the length before failures happened. It did not matter of the cable was cheap or expensive either to the final result.