Alec
Well-known member
shreddy: ...thereby causing people to automatically deduce that they are as good as eachother.
If they give the same result, they are.
If they give the same result, they are.
Ginder:smithdom:
I think shreddy summed it up quite nicely.
I can't help feeling that there must be equipment available that can objectively analyse the signal going in one end of a cable and compare it with the signal coming out of the other end. Maybe someone with an electronics engineering background would care to comment?
This video compares cheap vs expensive, watch it at about 5mins and 30 seconds where they take the cables to a hd expert.
What video?
Turned into upper/lower case for obvious house-rules related reasons
- Mods
I think shreddy summed it up quite nicely.
I can't help feeling that there must be equipment available that can objectively analyse the signal going in one end of a cable and compare it with the signal coming out of the other end. Maybe someone with an electronics engineering background would care to comment?
This video compares cheap vs expensive, watch it at about 5mins and 30 seconds where they take the cables to a hd expert.
What video?
Turned into upper/lower case for obvious house-rules related reasons
Murg sorry you have had to put up with these grumpy old farts who moan and think they own this site!
Feel free to ask what you like mate! This is supposed to be a place for help and advice!
Good for you for asking your question so dont be put off
Feel free to ask what you like mate! This is supposed to be a place for help and advice!
Good for you for asking your question so dont be put off
matt41:Ginder:smithdom:
I think shreddy summed it up quite nicely.
I can't help feeling that there must be equipment available that can objectively analyse the signal going in one end of a cable and compare it with the signal coming out of the other end. Maybe someone with an electronics engineering background would care to comment?
This video compares cheap vs expensive, watch it at about 5mins and 30 seconds where they take the cables to a hd expert.
What video?
Turned into upper/lower case for obvious house-rules related reasons
- Mods
LOL this video..the guys not a hd expert but a production engineer if that makes a difference:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=tIf8HLZK6a8&feature=related
I think shreddy summed it up quite nicely.
I can't help feeling that there must be equipment available that can objectively analyse the signal going in one end of a cable and compare it with the signal coming out of the other end. Maybe someone with an electronics engineering background would care to comment?
This video compares cheap vs expensive, watch it at about 5mins and 30 seconds where they take the cables to a hd expert.
What video?
Turned into upper/lower case for obvious house-rules related reasons
LOL this video..the guys not a hd expert but a production engineer if that makes a difference:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=tIf8HLZK6a8&feature=related
Ginder:http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=tIf8HLZK6a8&feature=related
Thanks for the link Ginder. This really seems to set the cat among the pigeons. I look forward to hearing any arguments as to why the test conducted in the video, and the conclusions reached, are flawed. As a regular consumer without any special technical expertise I am persuaded by the video.
Thanks for the link Ginder. This really seems to set the cat among the pigeons. I look forward to hearing any arguments as to why the test conducted in the video, and the conclusions reached, are flawed. As a regular consumer without any special technical expertise I am persuaded by the video.
Clare Newsome:Sigh... how did I know it was going to be Monster cable (see previous comments in this thread).
Clare, are you suggesting the the results and conclusions for this video might have different if any premium brand cable other than Monster had been the subject of comparison?
Clare, are you suggesting the the results and conclusions for this video might have different if any premium brand cable other than Monster had been the subject of comparison?
No, it's just that this video has been knocking around for a getting on for a year now, and just keeps on resurfacing.
Someone will bring up the Amazing Randi any minute now...
Someone will bring up the Amazing Randi any minute now...
But look, Monster have done their own independent tests, and they make much prettier patterns than the rest:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIw6lrghOt0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIw6lrghOt0&feature=related
Andrew Everard:No, it's just that this video has been knocking around for a getting on for a year now, and just keeps on resurfacing.
That may be so, but I hadn't seen it before. The age of the video is not a compelling argument against the conclusions reached. I'm very receptive to cogent arguments explaining why the methods used in the video, and the conclusions reached, are flawed.
That may be so, but I hadn't seen it before. The age of the video is not a compelling argument against the conclusions reached. I'm very receptive to cogent arguments explaining why the methods used in the video, and the conclusions reached, are flawed.
smithdom:
Clare Newsome:Sigh... how did I know it was going to be Monster cable (see previous comments in this thread).
Clare, are you suggesting the the results and conclusions for this video might have different if any premium brand cable other than Monster had been the subject of comparison?
Page two of this thread, near the bottom....
Clare Newsome:Sigh... how did I know it was going to be Monster cable (see previous comments in this thread).
Clare, are you suggesting the the results and conclusions for this video might have different if any premium brand cable other than Monster had been the subject of comparison?
Page two of this thread, near the bottom....
Clare Newsome:Page two of this thread, near the bottom....
OK, re-read that. I think the fact that the video picks on a Monster cable is a distraction. It is the method used to compare cables that is interesting (the admittedly somewhat chaotic user test, and the more scientific test with instruments). If the video picked on, say, the van den Hul Flat and reached the same conclusions what arguments would people put up to explain why those conclusions were flawed?
OK, re-read that. I think the fact that the video picks on a Monster cable is a distraction. It is the method used to compare cables that is interesting (the admittedly somewhat chaotic user test, and the more scientific test with instruments). If the video picked on, say, the van den Hul Flat and reached the same conclusions what arguments would people put up to explain why those conclusions were flawed?
But the fact remains that the video didn't pick a highly rated cable - just a popular one. Not the same thing....
Clare Newsome:But the fact remains that the video didn't pick a highly rated cable - just a popular one. Not the same thing....
But do you think the test method is valid? If not why not, and how does the test method used by WHF differ?
But do you think the test method is valid? If not why not, and how does the test method used by WHF differ?
Please write on one side of the paper, with your candidate number at the top of each page, and show your working...
smithdom:
Clare Newsome:But the fact remains that the video didn't pick a highly rated cable - just a popular one. Not the same thing....
But do you think the test method is valid? If not why not, and how does the test method used by WHF differ?
We use blind ABX testing methodology for cables, with a team of testers, and using different sources and displays (flatscreen up to projector).
We're also in an environment where people truly call it as they see it (or not) - I truly don't think you can say the same about a bunch of blokes watching a brief singular A/B over football (if they'd been asked to anonymously write their verdict down on a checklist, i'd have been at least a little more convinced of its validity - then there's be no fear of saying they did/didn't see a difference: the peer pressure is gone). The agenda of the show was obviously also set from the start, which has yet more influence.
And all of this is without even beginning to discuss the potential sonic differences between HDMI cables - which this report doesn't even begin to investigate or consider. Or indeed the different behaviour over different lengths of cable.
Clare Newsome:But the fact remains that the video didn't pick a highly rated cable - just a popular one. Not the same thing....
But do you think the test method is valid? If not why not, and how does the test method used by WHF differ?
We use blind ABX testing methodology for cables, with a team of testers, and using different sources and displays (flatscreen up to projector).
We're also in an environment where people truly call it as they see it (or not) - I truly don't think you can say the same about a bunch of blokes watching a brief singular A/B over football (if they'd been asked to anonymously write their verdict down on a checklist, i'd have been at least a little more convinced of its validity - then there's be no fear of saying they did/didn't see a difference: the peer pressure is gone). The agenda of the show was obviously also set from the start, which has yet more influence.
And all of this is without even beginning to discuss the potential sonic differences between HDMI cables - which this report doesn't even begin to investigate or consider. Or indeed the different behaviour over different lengths of cable.
QED themselves show their working here:
http://www.qed.co.uk/1/news/hdmi_explained.htm
I bought an HDMI cable for £10 (reduced from £25) from a great shop that was heavily discounting stuff just before Christmas - I think it was called Woolworths...
http://www.qed.co.uk/1/news/hdmi_explained.htm
I bought an HDMI cable for £10 (reduced from £25) from a great shop that was heavily discounting stuff just before Christmas - I think it was called Woolworths...
Clare Newsome:We use blind ABX testing methodology for cables, with a team of testers, and using different sources and displays (flatscreen up to projector).
We're also in an environment where people truly call it as they see it (or not) - I truly don't think you can say the same about a bunch of blokes watching a brief singular A/B over football (if they'd been asked to anonymously write their verdict down on a checklist, i'd have been at least a little more convinced of its validity - then there's be no fear of saying they did/didn't see a difference: the peer pressure is gone). The agenda of the show was obviously also set from the start, which has yet more influence.
And all of this is without even beginning to discuss the potential sonic differences between HDMI cables - which this report doesn't even begin to investigate or consider. Or indeed the different behaviour over different lengths of cable.
A good answer. I did say that the user test part of the video was somewhat chaotic, you just said it better. What about using instrumentation to compare signal in to signal out? I accept what you say about the video having an agenda from the outset, but do you think signal comparison is a valid test?
We're also in an environment where people truly call it as they see it (or not) - I truly don't think you can say the same about a bunch of blokes watching a brief singular A/B over football (if they'd been asked to anonymously write their verdict down on a checklist, i'd have been at least a little more convinced of its validity - then there's be no fear of saying they did/didn't see a difference: the peer pressure is gone). The agenda of the show was obviously also set from the start, which has yet more influence.
And all of this is without even beginning to discuss the potential sonic differences between HDMI cables - which this report doesn't even begin to investigate or consider. Or indeed the different behaviour over different lengths of cable.
A good answer. I did say that the user test part of the video was somewhat chaotic, you just said it better. What about using instrumentation to compare signal in to signal out? I accept what you say about the video having an agenda from the outset, but do you think signal comparison is a valid test?
My feelings on technical measurement of this kind are well known - it's showing you something, but who knows how that actually translates into perceivable sound and vision? For instance, a test could tell you that a TV was on, and showing 1080p video - still wouldn't tell you what it actually looked like, though.
Big Aura
Well-known member
Clare Newsome:Sigh... how did I know it was going to be Monster cable (see previous comments in this thread).
Yippee! What HiFi are helping to make the 1000EX and M1000HD even cheaper!
Yippee! What HiFi are helping to make the 1000EX and M1000HD even cheaper!
rogueelement:
QED themselves show their working here:
http://www.qed.co.uk/1/news/hdmi_explained.htm
At last! Hallelujah (Buckley version)
QED themselves show their working here:
http://www.qed.co.uk/1/news/hdmi_explained.htm
At last! Hallelujah (Buckley version)
Sliced Bread
Well-known member
Clare Newsome:rogueelement:
QED themselves show their working here:
http://www.qed.co.uk/1/news/hdmi_explained.htm
At last! Hallelujah (Buckley version)
Most of this has been discussed before by various posters...but it is nice to finally see it come from a manufacturer.
QED themselves show their working here:
http://www.qed.co.uk/1/news/hdmi_explained.htm
At last! Hallelujah (Buckley version)
Most of this has been discussed before by various posters...but it is nice to finally see it come from a manufacturer.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram