Sliced Bread
Well-known member
I've never read the Monster explanation before. While I am a firm believer in quality HDMI I must say that the 'before' and 'after' pictures in their "The Look and Sound of an Inferior Cable" section is a bit OTT. I've seen some poor cables before, but never one that poor.
The_Lhc
Well-known member
pete321: Have What HiFi ever tested the Monster 1000EX or better, the M1000HD (14.9Gbps)? Surely a cable that has been certified to pass data at nearly 15Gbps must be fairly well constructed and futureproof.
Errrm, the requirement for HDMi 1.3a is 14.9Gbps, ALL 1.3a compatible cables can pass that bitrate, they have to in order to BE 1.3a, so it's not much of a selling point really.
Errrm, the requirement for HDMi 1.3a is 14.9Gbps, ALL 1.3a compatible cables can pass that bitrate, they have to in order to BE 1.3a, so it's not much of a selling point really.
Heres another video that has a looooong explanation by a hdmi expert. If you look at 2mins 30 he says "the likelyhood of the picture looking different is null"..also take a look at 4mins 48 upto 5mins 2 secs..seems to sum up the whole arguement:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=H56D2mjztaI
Should the question rather be about reliability than video quality?
im not for or against expensive hdmi's i just trying to figure out like most ppl whether its worth going and spending 50-60 quid on products like the VDH/Chord..by the way are VDH/Chord DPL certified..as they seem to test the integrity of cables?
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=H56D2mjztaI
Should the question rather be about reliability than video quality?
im not for or against expensive hdmi's i just trying to figure out like most ppl whether its worth going and spending 50-60 quid on products like the VDH/Chord..by the way are VDH/Chord DPL certified..as they seem to test the integrity of cables?
Ginder:
im not for or against expensive hdmi's i just trying to figure out like most ppl whether its worth going and spending 50-60 quid on products like the VDH/Chord..by the way are VDH/Chord DPL certified..as they seem to test the integrity of cables?
I would imagine that the VDH/Chord are certified. You can check the list of HDMI adopters at hdmi.org. If they're not listed, it simply means that the cable is manufactured by someone else. This is common with HDMI as 99.9% are made in China and the certification will be held by the manufacturer. I'm sure VDH/Chord HDMI cable owners should be able to clarify where their cable is made. If you have any doubts over HDMI cabling, simply contact the manufacturer.
Bluejeanscables.com are an excellent source of information on HDMI and you can see a copy of their certification on the site:
http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/bjccat2atc.pdf
im not for or against expensive hdmi's i just trying to figure out like most ppl whether its worth going and spending 50-60 quid on products like the VDH/Chord..by the way are VDH/Chord DPL certified..as they seem to test the integrity of cables?
I would imagine that the VDH/Chord are certified. You can check the list of HDMI adopters at hdmi.org. If they're not listed, it simply means that the cable is manufactured by someone else. This is common with HDMI as 99.9% are made in China and the certification will be held by the manufacturer. I'm sure VDH/Chord HDMI cable owners should be able to clarify where their cable is made. If you have any doubts over HDMI cabling, simply contact the manufacturer.
Bluejeanscables.com are an excellent source of information on HDMI and you can see a copy of their certification on the site:
http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/bjccat2atc.pdf
the_lhc:
pete321: Have What HiFi ever tested the Monster 1000EX or better, the M1000HD (14.9Gbps)? Surely a cable that has been certified to pass data at nearly 15Gbps must be fairly well constructed and futureproof.
Errrm, the requirement for HDMi 1.3a is 14.9Gbps, ALL 1.3a compatible cables can pass that bitrate, they have to in order to BE 1.3a, so it's not much of a selling point really.
I thought the specification for HDMI 1.3a was only 10.2Gbps which is what the 1000EX HDMI lead is certified for, whereas the M1000HD exceeds the specification requirement at 14.9Gbps capability and therefore adds a degree of futureproofing.
pete321: Have What HiFi ever tested the Monster 1000EX or better, the M1000HD (14.9Gbps)? Surely a cable that has been certified to pass data at nearly 15Gbps must be fairly well constructed and futureproof.
Errrm, the requirement for HDMi 1.3a is 14.9Gbps, ALL 1.3a compatible cables can pass that bitrate, they have to in order to BE 1.3a, so it's not much of a selling point really.
I thought the specification for HDMI 1.3a was only 10.2Gbps which is what the 1000EX HDMI lead is certified for, whereas the M1000HD exceeds the specification requirement at 14.9Gbps capability and therefore adds a degree of futureproofing.
jerryyeatman
Well-known member
QED's piece on HDMI can be summarised in saying Signature is our 1.3 cat2 cable, Reference is our Deep Colour cable, and Performance is our 1080p cable. Oh, and it's important that the cable is properly designed and manufactured carefully. All pretty much common sense.
I don't think home cinema / hi-fi enthusiasts mind spending say £20 on a HDMI cable rather than £10, for a bit of reassurance that their more expensive cable has a slightly higher built quality. I object to "high-end" manufacturers claiming that their cables costing four or five times as much (same spec/length) actually perform any better than the £20 ones, when the £20 cables (or even £10 ones!) can be repeadedly demonstrated to pass bit for bit perfect data (assuming same lengths and same specification).
I don't think home cinema / hi-fi enthusiasts mind spending say £20 on a HDMI cable rather than £10, for a bit of reassurance that their more expensive cable has a slightly higher built quality. I object to "high-end" manufacturers claiming that their cables costing four or five times as much (same spec/length) actually perform any better than the £20 ones, when the £20 cables (or even £10 ones!) can be repeadedly demonstrated to pass bit for bit perfect data (assuming same lengths and same specification).
One quick question:
Is there a difference between the CHORD Silver Plus with the red plug plastic "terminals" and the one being sold that is all white?
Is the all-white older than the "red" one? Lesser specs?
Is there a difference between the CHORD Silver Plus with the red plug plastic "terminals" and the one being sold that is all white?
Is the all-white older than the "red" one? Lesser specs?
jerryyeatman:I don't think home cinema / hi-fi enthusiasts mind spending say £20 on a HDMI cable rather than £10, for a bit of reassurance that their more expensive cable has a slightly higher built quality. I object to "high-end" manufacturers claiming that their cables costing four or five times as much (same spec/length) actually perform any better than the £20 ones, when the £20 cables (or even £10 ones!) can be repeadedly demonstrated to pass bit for bit perfect data (assuming same lengths and same specification).
I'd go along with that, and I'd like to thank posters for some of the recent links. I know for some people it is just going over old ground, but I feel I know a lot more about hdmi now than I did a week ago. All the technical articles suggest to me that cable reliability may vary, but that a poor cable would manifest its faults in unsubtle ways. Before my aerial upgrade, when the Freeview signal dropped in quality, the manifestations were pixellation, picture freezing, and sound dropouts. This is what I would expect from any fault in digital transmission. I accept that by paying mega-bucks for an hdmi lead you may reduce the chances of this happening, but I can't undrerstand how two digital cables performing to specification could produce results that vary from each other. Yet we read reviews claiming improved picture clarity, sound and motion handling. I just don't understand how this could work. I remain ready to be further educated, but at the moment I remain skeptical.
I'd go along with that, and I'd like to thank posters for some of the recent links. I know for some people it is just going over old ground, but I feel I know a lot more about hdmi now than I did a week ago. All the technical articles suggest to me that cable reliability may vary, but that a poor cable would manifest its faults in unsubtle ways. Before my aerial upgrade, when the Freeview signal dropped in quality, the manifestations were pixellation, picture freezing, and sound dropouts. This is what I would expect from any fault in digital transmission. I accept that by paying mega-bucks for an hdmi lead you may reduce the chances of this happening, but I can't undrerstand how two digital cables performing to specification could produce results that vary from each other. Yet we read reviews claiming improved picture clarity, sound and motion handling. I just don't understand how this could work. I remain ready to be further educated, but at the moment I remain skeptical.
professorhat
Well-known member
smithdom:I can't undrerstand how two digital cables performing to specification could produce results that vary from each other. Yet we read reviews claiming improved picture clarity, sound and motion handling. I just don't understand how this could work. I remain ready to be further educated, but at the moment I remain skeptical.
That's the crux of the issue really. I've witnessed the improvement myself by upgrading cables, as have many others on the forum. I have my own basic theory as to why this, but since I don't have an in depth technical knowledge, I can't explain or argue for that theory, nor can I understand it when someone attempts to explain it to me as it generally starts to go over my head.
Which is why, for me, it still comes down to trying these things out for yourself. I've recommended it to some people who've seen no difference and sent the cable back for a refund. I've recommended it to others who have seen an improvement and have kept the cable. Either way, both sets of people have been happy. For me, that's kind of the most important thing really.
That's the crux of the issue really. I've witnessed the improvement myself by upgrading cables, as have many others on the forum. I have my own basic theory as to why this, but since I don't have an in depth technical knowledge, I can't explain or argue for that theory, nor can I understand it when someone attempts to explain it to me as it generally starts to go over my head.
Which is why, for me, it still comes down to trying these things out for yourself. I've recommended it to some people who've seen no difference and sent the cable back for a refund. I've recommended it to others who have seen an improvement and have kept the cable. Either way, both sets of people have been happy. For me, that's kind of the most important thing really.
RodhasGibson
Well-known member
Well said Prof, a very nice explanation of the word commonsense, and a fitting way to round off this thread. [but i doubt it]
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
I test OLED TVs for a living – and trust me, different sizes perform differently- Started by What Hi-Fi?
- Replies: 1
-
-
Biggest Upgrade Improvement? Rega Aphelion 2 or Aura?
- Started by hybridauth_Google_112692162581130744674
- Replies: 4
-
-
Improve your TV's audio for peanuts with this super-cheap soundbar deal
- Started by What Hi-Fi?
- Replies: 0
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram