bigboss:too bad I couldn't make it to the Bristol show this time. I hope to attend the Manchester show later this year.
Same here.
Same here.
Andrew Everard:I think I get it now. But I think you mean incredible, not incredulous, which also added to my confusion. Their claims are incredible to you, whereas you are incredulous regarding them. That, and the lack of quote marks, threw me. It's been a long weekend...
Your dictionary must be different to mine.
"how quickly their willing suspension of disbelief and trust in the claims gives way to incredulity"
incredulity. noun
the quality or state of being incredulous, inability or unwillingness to believe
"Someone is not going to be convinced to try it them self if they think it is incredulous" "I find their claims incredulous"
Incredulous. adjective
incredible, unbelievable, beyond belief or understanding, distrustful.
Your dictionary must be different to mine.
"how quickly their willing suspension of disbelief and trust in the claims gives way to incredulity"
incredulity. noun
the quality or state of being incredulous, inability or unwillingness to believe
"Someone is not going to be convinced to try it them self if they think it is incredulous" "I find their claims incredulous"
Incredulous. adjective
incredible, unbelievable, beyond belief or understanding, distrustful.
bigboss:maxflinn:
hypothetical experiment .....
take 100 people that see a big difference between various hdmi cables.
take 100 people that dont see any difference between the same hdmi cables.
take them all to an optician , for a full eye test.
will the results show that the first group have better eyesight ??
any thoughts ??
Who is going to sponsor such research? Russ Andrews? Any HDMI cable manufacturer??
quite obviously not , and even if they did , the test would have no validity , because of the obvious bias of the sponsors , many many tests have been conducted though , maybe not with the aid of opticians , but stringent tests , by people with no vested interest , the web is full of them , and nearly all conclude there is very little to no difference , those results are the ones that i go on , but hey , everyone has their own brain , and their own money ...
hypothetical experiment .....
take 100 people that see a big difference between various hdmi cables.
take 100 people that dont see any difference between the same hdmi cables.
take them all to an optician , for a full eye test.
will the results show that the first group have better eyesight ??
any thoughts ??
Who is going to sponsor such research? Russ Andrews? Any HDMI cable manufacturer??
quite obviously not , and even if they did , the test would have no validity , because of the obvious bias of the sponsors , many many tests have been conducted though , maybe not with the aid of opticians , but stringent tests , by people with no vested interest , the web is full of them , and nearly all conclude there is very little to no difference , those results are the ones that i go on , but hey , everyone has their own brain , and their own money ...
To save me reading this uber-long thread, can someone who's read the Which report let me know whether they tested the sound as well as the vision? And indeed how they did their visual tests? Just curious.
knightout:Your dictionary must be different to mine.
Yes, I am sure it is. The OED gives incredulous simply as
"adjective unwilling or unable to believe"
But the incredible/incredulous confusion is quite common.
Yes, I am sure it is. The OED gives incredulous simply as
"adjective unwilling or unable to believe"
But the incredible/incredulous confusion is quite common.
Clare Newsome:To save me reading this uber-long thread, can someone who's read the Which report let me know whether they tested the sound as well as the vision? And indeed how they did their visual tests? Just curious.
There was only a very short article. They tested SCART cables and HDMI cables in three price ranges and as far as I can tell concentrated 100% on the picture. They could see no differences with HDMI but they did find small differences with SCART.
The HDMI cables were also tested using a signal generator that passed a signal through the cables at two data rates:
They found no data was lost
There was only a very short article. They tested SCART cables and HDMI cables in three price ranges and as far as I can tell concentrated 100% on the picture. They could see no differences with HDMI but they did find small differences with SCART.
The HDMI cables were also tested using a signal generator that passed a signal through the cables at two data rates:
- 1080p60 (standard color) ~4.5 Gbit/sec
1080p60 (deep color) ~ 6.2 Gbit/sec
They found no data was lost
Andrew Everard:
Ah, I see. In which case quote marks might have helped. Hence my confusion...
BTW, good use of the ARI in that last post, max!
ARI ?? i is baffled
Ah, I see. In which case quote marks might have helped. Hence my confusion...
BTW, good use of the ARI in that last post, max!
ARI ?? i is baffled
im googling , .................,ah , lol , i never even realised , i must have watched too much of neighbours in my youth , do you think mate
hammill:
Clare Newsome:To save me reading this uber-long thread, can someone who's read the Which report let me know whether they tested the sound as well as the vision? And indeed how they did their visual tests? Just curious.
There was only a very short article. They tested SCART cables and HDMI cables in three price ranges and as far as I can tell concentrated 100% on the picture. They could see no differences with HDMI but they did find small differences with SCART.
The HDMI cables were also tested using a signal generator that passed a signal through the cables at two data rates:
They found no data was lost
Thanks. Just like Gadget Show, they didn't test the sound. Interesting.
Clare Newsome:To save me reading this uber-long thread, can someone who's read the Which report let me know whether they tested the sound as well as the vision? And indeed how they did their visual tests? Just curious.
There was only a very short article. They tested SCART cables and HDMI cables in three price ranges and as far as I can tell concentrated 100% on the picture. They could see no differences with HDMI but they did find small differences with SCART.
The HDMI cables were also tested using a signal generator that passed a signal through the cables at two data rates:
- 1080p60 (standard color) ~4.5 Gbit/sec
- 1080p60 (deep color) ~ 6.2 Gbit/sec
They found no data was lost
Thanks. Just like Gadget Show, they didn't test the sound. Interesting.
Clare Newsome:hammill:
Clare Newsome:To save me reading this uber-long thread, can someone who's read the Which report let me know whether they tested the sound as well as the vision? And indeed how they did their visual tests? Just curious.
There was only a very short article. They tested SCART cables and HDMI cables in three price ranges and as far as I can tell concentrated 100% on the picture. They could see no differences with HDMI but they did find small differences with SCART.
The HDMI cables were also tested using a signal generator that passed a signal through the cables at two data rates:
They found no data was lost
Thanks. Just like Gadget Show, they didn't test the sound. Interesting.
Yes, that was annoying. I can only assume it is because a lot of people have reasonable TVs, but very few have reasonable home cinema systems.
Clare Newsome:To save me reading this uber-long thread, can someone who's read the Which report let me know whether they tested the sound as well as the vision? And indeed how they did their visual tests? Just curious.
There was only a very short article. They tested SCART cables and HDMI cables in three price ranges and as far as I can tell concentrated 100% on the picture. They could see no differences with HDMI but they did find small differences with SCART.
The HDMI cables were also tested using a signal generator that passed a signal through the cables at two data rates:
- 1080p60 (standard color) ~4.5 Gbit/sec
- 1080p60 (deep color) ~ 6.2 Gbit/sec
They found no data was lost
Thanks. Just like Gadget Show, they didn't test the sound. Interesting.
Yes, that was annoying. I can only assume it is because a lot of people have reasonable TVs, but very few have reasonable home cinema systems.
And was the signal generator delivering video (as in moving, changing images) or a static picture? Or indeed just a random signal?
Can't believe this thread is still going. Yes I know posting in it just keeps it going.
I think some people, as seems normal, get muddled up between fact and opinion. Why the defence of an opinion should then become so heated is beyond me.
Fact - The published standards for HDMI are on the HDMI web site hdmi.org
Fact - there is a published list of adopters of the Terminated HDMI standard (cables to you and me) on this web site. (makes interesting reading BTW)
Fact - there are 5 standards for HDMI 1.4 - 3 for Std HDMI (automotive has its own in this catagory) and 2 for Hi Speed HDMI (with and without ethernet)
Fact - cables from approved adopters must carry the appropriate logo to indicate which standard they meet.
Fact - approved adopters have 1 year from Nov 2009 to remove all packaging references to old standards from their packaging.
Fact - all HDMI standards are fully backward compatible.
Lots of boring old facts, I know -it's that old f-rt publishing facts again. Well I personally like them better than opinions if I can get them. Facts can inform a buying decision and allow you to weigh the opinions of other (which still have a lot of value) and come to your own conclusions.
Uninformed opinion simply leads to (often heated) argument IMHO.
On my next visit to Tesco I will look at their HDMI cables in the light of the above facts and the Which findings and form an opinion on them.
I think some people, as seems normal, get muddled up between fact and opinion. Why the defence of an opinion should then become so heated is beyond me.
Fact - The published standards for HDMI are on the HDMI web site hdmi.org
Fact - there is a published list of adopters of the Terminated HDMI standard (cables to you and me) on this web site. (makes interesting reading BTW)
Fact - there are 5 standards for HDMI 1.4 - 3 for Std HDMI (automotive has its own in this catagory) and 2 for Hi Speed HDMI (with and without ethernet)
Fact - cables from approved adopters must carry the appropriate logo to indicate which standard they meet.
Fact - approved adopters have 1 year from Nov 2009 to remove all packaging references to old standards from their packaging.
Fact - all HDMI standards are fully backward compatible.
Lots of boring old facts, I know -it's that old f-rt publishing facts again. Well I personally like them better than opinions if I can get them. Facts can inform a buying decision and allow you to weigh the opinions of other (which still have a lot of value) and come to your own conclusions.
Uninformed opinion simply leads to (often heated) argument IMHO.
On my next visit to Tesco I will look at their HDMI cables in the light of the above facts and the Which findings and form an opinion on them.
Andrew Everard:And was the signal generator delivering video (as in moving, changing images) or a static picture? Or indeed just a random signal?
Sorry Andrew, I have provided all of the information that Which have given as regards testing, it does not say what they sent. I would guess from the description that it was a constant signal ( that would not necessarily correspond to a meaningful or even legal transmission), but only because of my vague memories of using a signal generator at school.
Sorry Andrew, I have provided all of the information that Which have given as regards testing, it does not say what they sent. I would guess from the description that it was a constant signal ( that would not necessarily correspond to a meaningful or even legal transmission), but only because of my vague memories of using a signal generator at school.
And we'll get some Tesco cable in - after all, our HDMI cable recommendations start at just a fiver; let's see what a tenner buys you!
Gerrardasnails
Well-known member
Clare Newsome:And we'll get some Tesco cable in - after all, our HDMI cable recommendations start at just a fiver; let's see what a tenner buys you!
Will be interesting but you know that loads of sceptics won't believe you either way!
Will be interesting but you know that loads of sceptics won't believe you either way!
jokerpaulonline
Well-known member
Clare Newsome:And we'll get some Tesco cable in - after all, our HDMI cable recommendations start at just a fiver; let's see what a tenner buys you!
Do you think it unreasonable to expect twice the performance?
Do you think it unreasonable to expect twice the performance?
Ahh the trusted old hdmi cable, mine have come with my xbox 360 elite, asda and qed..no difference here
jokerpaulonline:so when you going to publish the test
clare?
Well, we are currently quite a long way down the line on the May issue, so I suspect it won't be until the June issue. Although it may possibly appear online before that...
clare?
Well, we are currently quite a long way down the line on the May issue, so I suspect it won't be until the June issue. Although it may possibly appear online before that...
Hello,
I would just like to bring my opinion on the topic. I originally use
to purchase HDMI Cables from CPC, because CPC use to be the cheapest place you
can get them until retailers decided to start manufacturing their own. I use to
buy the cheapest ones because as a lot of other people out there I didn't
believe that there would be a difference between a £100 HDMI Cable and a £3
cable, as I have seen many forums and people saying that HDMI is a digital
signal and therefore can not be changed, etc.
I was very wrong. I happened to purchase a QED Signature HDMI. For the
SKY+HD, well... To be fair, I'm not sure that was better... just different. But
when expensive HDMI cables come at their best is when they are used on consoles
such as the Play station 3. Which I will never be using another cheap and nasty
HDMI cable for ever again.
I started to do research on why the pictures are so much better with the more
expensive QED Signature HDMI. The digital signal will always leave the PS3
console at the best it can possibly be, and the only thing that would make the
picture quality less. Is the cable itself. Having a HDMI Cable with features
such as Gold Plated connectors, Triple Shielded cable. And other factors like
those. Make the cable loose less signal...Making the picture quality a lot
better.
Never buying a cheap and nasty HDMI Cable again... The picture quality when
I'm gaming is unbeatable.
I would just like to bring my opinion on the topic. I originally use
to purchase HDMI Cables from CPC, because CPC use to be the cheapest place you
can get them until retailers decided to start manufacturing their own. I use to
buy the cheapest ones because as a lot of other people out there I didn't
believe that there would be a difference between a £100 HDMI Cable and a £3
cable, as I have seen many forums and people saying that HDMI is a digital
signal and therefore can not be changed, etc.
I was very wrong. I happened to purchase a QED Signature HDMI. For the
SKY+HD, well... To be fair, I'm not sure that was better... just different. But
when expensive HDMI cables come at their best is when they are used on consoles
such as the Play station 3. Which I will never be using another cheap and nasty
HDMI cable for ever again.
I started to do research on why the pictures are so much better with the more
expensive QED Signature HDMI. The digital signal will always leave the PS3
console at the best it can possibly be, and the only thing that would make the
picture quality less. Is the cable itself. Having a HDMI Cable with features
such as Gold Plated connectors, Triple Shielded cable. And other factors like
those. Make the cable loose less signal...Making the picture quality a lot
better.
Never buying a cheap and nasty HDMI Cable again... The picture quality when
I'm gaming is unbeatable.
An HDMI cable is just like an ethernet cable. it is designed to carry a digital signal without loss over a specified difference at a specified data rate.
Answer me this: is your web browser experience any more colourful when using a desktop PC connected to the internet using an oygen free super duper hyped up CAT6a cable with gold connectors than when using a bog standard off the shelf CAT5 or CAT6 cable? I suggest the answer is a categorical NO.
The same can be said for HDMI cables. HDMI 1.4 is rated at 340Mhz. A cable is either certified as HDMI1.3, HDMI1.4, etc or it isnt. If it is, it is guaranteed to carry the digital signal across it without introducing data loss. If you introduce data loss in an HDMI signal, this will not make the picture blurry or dull like it would with an analogue signal, it woud be characterised by picture shearing, breakup and noise in the picture. Unless you have a FAULTY cable, no matter what you spend on it, this should never happen with a certified cable, regardless of the costs.
For all you people who think you have noticed a difference in quality when using expensive cables, the only diffence you should be noting is how much lighter your wallet is. It is physically impossible for the picture to appear any brighter, sharper or cleaner by changing cables. A binary signal is 1's and 0's, and a 1 will remain a 1, and a 0 will remain a 0.
Answer me this: is your web browser experience any more colourful when using a desktop PC connected to the internet using an oygen free super duper hyped up CAT6a cable with gold connectors than when using a bog standard off the shelf CAT5 or CAT6 cable? I suggest the answer is a categorical NO.
The same can be said for HDMI cables. HDMI 1.4 is rated at 340Mhz. A cable is either certified as HDMI1.3, HDMI1.4, etc or it isnt. If it is, it is guaranteed to carry the digital signal across it without introducing data loss. If you introduce data loss in an HDMI signal, this will not make the picture blurry or dull like it would with an analogue signal, it woud be characterised by picture shearing, breakup and noise in the picture. Unless you have a FAULTY cable, no matter what you spend on it, this should never happen with a certified cable, regardless of the costs.
For all you people who think you have noticed a difference in quality when using expensive cables, the only diffence you should be noting is how much lighter your wallet is. It is physically impossible for the picture to appear any brighter, sharper or cleaner by changing cables. A binary signal is 1's and 0's, and a 1 will remain a 1, and a 0 will remain a 0.
Petherick
Well-known member
technohippy29uk said:
Perhaps the most repeated incorrect statement of the 21st century, at least as far as this forum is concerned.
Ask yourself how a signal gets from off ('0') to on ('1'). If it's magic then it doesn't need to obey the laws of physics. But if you believe in magic, why don't you believe that cables may make a difference? If it's not magic, then it passes through a number of steps or a transition from '0' to '1' and back again. How does it do this and how long does it take? Will it always do it in the same way and take the same length of time irrespective of what cable or other conduit it's passing through?
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
Apparently, digital is digital - it will work 100% or it won't. Mind you, they said that about digital DAB broadcasts.
How many 1.4 spec cables are guaranteed to carry a 3D signal over its entire length? Most under 5m are, but very few over 5m, and that applies to the same make and model cable. So are all HDMI cables the same?
How many 1.4 spec cables are guaranteed to carry a 3D signal over its entire length? Most under 5m are, but very few over 5m, and that applies to the same make and model cable. So are all HDMI cables the same?
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Anyone from Tokyo willing to help a fellow audiophile?
- Started by El Puerco Volante
- Replies: 4
-
-
-
-
-
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
Streamer with MP3 file storage/ability to connect external storage- Latest: ultraminiature
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram