HDMI cables - price/quality payoff?

HDMI cables - price/quality payoff?

Author
Discussion

Plotloss

67,280 posts

272 months

Wednesday 4th February 2009
quotequote all
Yes on long runs.

It presents itself by noticeable 'sparkles' due to loss.

Remember also that all HDMI sources and displays are not equal, its an emerging standard and bandwidth requirements are different at every point release. So what might be fine now, may not be fine when HDMI 1.4 hits as the bandwidth requirement will increase.

Its one of the most widely perpetuated myths that digital works or it doesn't, it is quite simply not the case.

My outlook remains exactly as it did at the start of this thread.

Spending pence is madness, spending thousands is madness. Somewhere in between is about right.



JustinP1

13,330 posts

232 months

Wednesday 4th February 2009
quotequote all
Goochie said:
Plotloss said:
Goochie said:
Plotloss said:
:sigh:
Can you offer a good explanation as to why people should spend more than a few quid on an HDMI cable ?
Because construction matters.

Digital signals do not simply work or dont work that is a massively over simplistic view, just as jitter occurs with digital audio interconnects which affects performance the same thing occurs on video, this is particularly acute with high bandwidth HDMI signals such as the latest 1.3a equipment.

The effect is significantly less noticeable on short cable runs than it is on longer ones but the effect is plain using cheap cables on long runs.

I'm sure you'll refute this but such is life.
I'm not going to refute what you say because I cant prove you're wrong wink

Have you ever witnessed faults caused by a poor cable? If so, how do such problems present themselves on screen ?
As Plotloss says it is a very misunderstood area.

People seem to equate a series of ones and noughts into black is black and white is white and thats the end of it and the rest is for 'snake oil' salesmen.

However if this was the case, then of course you would also have to argue that cables, no matter what length or construction carry signal in the same way over an infinite distance.

Also, if you have ever heard of the term 'error correction' with regard to digital gear, this of course wouldn't be needed.

The fact is, in media and also playback devices, they do not expect to receive a perfect signal from the source, because that needs hypothetically perfect materials. The 1's and 0's are sent in batches with further information in case some are missing allowing the device such as a TV or CD player, or digital amp to still play a good signal, even if it is imperfect rather than display a black screen or silence.

Thats why your CD will still play if it is scratched and you will still get a picture from your HDMI TV with a £1 cable.

However, the more imperfect the signal the more the 'error correction' needs to kick in. With audio, you get a loss in 'depth' in the sound for example.

However, with the case of HDMI it does seem that the connection is very tolerant, and cheaper cables fall within the acceptable tolerance unless you start running them over longer distances.



trooperiziz

9,457 posts

254 months

Wednesday 4th February 2009
quotequote all
I bought a £30 HDMI cable which was a reputable make. Plugged it in and no matter what source I used, the TV would lose signal after a few minutes and would only come back if you removed the cable and plugged it back in.
I replaced it with a £10 no-name jobby from Tesco and it works perfectly.

Through my exhaustive testing, I can tell you that cheap HDMI cables are 100% better than more expensive ones.

You're welcome.


neilsfishing

3,502 posts

200 months

Wednesday 4th February 2009
quotequote all
LCOFC (linear crystallized oxygen free copper)silver plated copper cable is required costs lots used by them bods who play them big black disks which pick up background noise
Cat 5+ cable solid core cheep stuf send receves odels of stuf no problem termination is paramount though
Wet string can give you a electrick shock when flying a kite near power lines getmecoat

JustinP1

13,330 posts

232 months

Wednesday 4th February 2009
quotequote all
trooperiziz said:
I bought a £30 HDMI cable which was a reputable make. Plugged it in and no matter what source I used, the TV would lose signal after a few minutes and would only come back if you removed the cable and plugged it back in.
I replaced it with a £10 no-name jobby from Tesco and it works perfectly.

Through my exhaustive testing, I can tell you that cheap HDMI cables are 100% better than more expensive ones.

You're welcome.
I agree, but disagree with the conclusion.

All it proves that with a poor connection your cable gives **** performance.

Also that the 'reputable brand' may not be any different than the 'own brand' cable in terms of quality.

ItsTony

960 posts

219 months

Thursday 5th February 2009
quotequote all
Viper_Larry said:
Today arrived my QED Perfromance HDMI - the latest incarnation of the award winning cable @ £63.
Just ordered from here, cheaper at £40.99 - http://www.qed-cable-shop.co.uk/Video+Interconnect...

Theres also a review too. From what I've read, I think it is a matter of the end picture / sound quality is dependant on the quality/strength of the signal travelling from one end to the other end. As people have stated, the longer the cable, the more room for interference and a weaker end signal so overall, there is a case for more expensive cables. Also, the quality of the conductive material - in most cases copper - will help maintain the original signal from source to the input.

FlossyThePig

4,086 posts

245 months

Thursday 5th February 2009
quotequote all
There was a link to www.audioholics.com on a previous thread. The outcome of objective tests followed by subjective tests makes interesting reading.

Viper_Larry

4,319 posts

258 months

Thursday 5th February 2009
quotequote all
ItsTony said:
Viper_Larry said:
Today arrived my QED Perfromance HDMI - the latest incarnation of the award winning cable @ £63.
Just ordered from here, cheaper at £40.99 - http://www.qed-cable-shop.co.uk/Video+Interconnect...
Mine was a 5m cable from there...

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

257 months

Thursday 5th February 2009
quotequote all
Plotloss said:
Its one of the most widely perpetuated myths that digital works or it doesn't, it is quite simply not the case.
It's maddening, I can't understand why it carries on being perpetuated. Is it possible to have a CD that skips? Yes, so there is a digital device that is working, but not very well. Freeview or Sky picture breaking up? Another digital system succumbing to excessive bit error rate. How about your broadband connection, not getting the full speeds that the ISP claim? How could that be, it either works or it doesn't surely?

Next thing we will have people claiming that signal degradation is down to purity of the copper...

old No 1

362 posts

240 months

Thursday 5th March 2009
quotequote all
It's maddening, I can't understand why it carries on being perpetuated. Is it possible to have a CD that skips? Yes, so there is a digital device that is working, but not very well. Freeview or Sky picture breaking up? Another digital system succumbing to excessive bit error rate. How about your broadband connection, not getting the full speeds that the ISP claim? How could that be, it either works or it doesn't surely?

Erm i think we are talking about point to point (physical) short distance on this topic?
In SKY we are talking something that is affected by weather and dish alignment.
Broadband we are talking transmission of (ever) higher bandwith over long(ish) distances on copper that was installed in the 60/70's LLUB is still the damp string on the end of a hi tech system !

I would concur with over 5m i would go for 'better' 'named' cable but wouldnt be seduced by £80 + HDMI

Toslinks are my fav to go into shops to get as I am a optical fibre/Satellite(not sky!) engineer and getting them to explain how a 1.5m toslink for £5 is not as good as a £40 one is funny ,sad but funny

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

257 months

Friday 6th March 2009
quotequote all
old No 1 said:
Erm i think we are talking about point to point (physical) short distance on this topic?
No, we were talking about the widespread fallacy of "Because it's digital, it either works or it doesn't". It's just blatantly untrue, any digital system could suffer from errors that wouldn't necessarily stop it from working completely.

It doesn't matter whether the transmission path is 36,000km of space and atmosphere, or 10 meters of cable; both can suffer from excessive bit errors that will degrade picture/sound quality whilst still broadly functioning.

old No 1

362 posts

240 months

Friday 6th March 2009
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
old No 1 said:
Erm i think we are talking about point to point (physical) short distance on this topic?
No, we were talking about the widespread fallacy of "Because it's digital, it either works or it doesn't". It's just blatantly untrue, any digital system could suffer from errors that wouldn't necessarily stop it from working completely.

It doesn't matter whether the transmission path is 36,000km of space and atmosphere, or 10 meters of cable; both can suffer from excessive bit errors that will degrade picture/sound quality whilst still broadly functioning.
I agree completely with the above . Just because its digital does not mean it will not cock up and yes it does depend on what bit error rate is acceptable.

topless_mx5

2,763 posts

220 months

Tuesday 10th March 2009
quotequote all
As an aside, I have a HD AV component cable for my Xbox 360. How much better is a HDMI cable? Is it worth getting? Surely they are both HD, so the difference won't be massive?

MikeCR

581 posts

227 months

Wednesday 28th October 2009
quotequote all
topless_mx5 said:
As an aside, I have a HD AV component cable for my Xbox 360. How much better is a HDMI cable? Is it worth getting? Surely they are both HD, so the difference won't be massive?
I would also like to know this ^^

thehawk

9,335 posts

209 months

Wednesday 28th October 2009
quotequote all
MikeCR said:
topless_mx5 said:
As an aside, I have a HD AV component cable for my Xbox 360. How much better is a HDMI cable? Is it worth getting? Surely they are both HD, so the difference won't be massive?
I would also like to know this ^^
Depends who you believe, some even say component is better than HDMI and it varies between the source and what sort of screen you use. Just try both and pick the one that looks best for you.

MikeCR

581 posts

227 months

Wednesday 28th October 2009
quotequote all
thehawk said:
MikeCR said:
topless_mx5 said:
As an aside, I have a HD AV component cable for my Xbox 360. How much better is a HDMI cable? Is it worth getting? Surely they are both HD, so the difference won't be massive?
I would also like to know this ^^
Depends who you believe, some even say component is better than HDMI and it varies between the source and what sort of screen you use. Just try both and pick the one that looks best for you.
I did have a £15 HDMI cable looked good changed back to comp set but IMO the HDMI looks better but wanted to know others thoughts on it really.

Cheers

JustinP1

13,330 posts

232 months

Wednesday 28th October 2009
quotequote all
MikeCR said:
thehawk said:
MikeCR said:
topless_mx5 said:
As an aside, I have a HD AV component cable for my Xbox 360. How much better is a HDMI cable? Is it worth getting? Surely they are both HD, so the difference won't be massive?
I would also like to know this ^^
Depends who you believe, some even say component is better than HDMI and it varies between the source and what sort of screen you use. Just try both and pick the one that looks best for you.
I did have a £15 HDMI cable looked good changed back to comp set but IMO the HDMI looks better but wanted to know others thoughts on it really.

Cheers
If your component input looks better than an HDMI input, then your HDMI input has serious issues.

Converting a signal from digital to analogue, losing part of it down a cable then converting it back to digital again is always going to be inferior under normal conditions.

Graham E

12,739 posts

188 months

Wednesday 28th October 2009
quotequote all
Ahh, the great cable debate.

To all the "naysayers", who claim a wire is a wire, it's all 1's and 0's anyway, you're right. Speaker cable makes no difference whatsoever, either. Just use cat5e and bask in the glory of knowing you saved huge sums of money over muppets like me who has 120 quid a metre speaker cable, and no interconnect in the system (digi coax or analogue) that has an rrp under 100 quid.

Please keep being safe in your assumption that all consumrs such as myself simply belived the hype, and didn't do any back to back testing whatsoever, and if we did, it would just be the placebo effect. There is no such thing as digital signal corruption, or an error correction circuit. In fact, all CD or MP3 data is the same regardless, so as long as you have a dac, the transport is utterly, utterly irrelevent.

Enjoy your knowledge of these matters - the rest of us will "learn" some day.

HRG.

72,857 posts

241 months

Wednesday 28th October 2009
quotequote all
Graham E said:
Ahh, the great cable debate.

To all the "naysayers", who claim a wire is a wire, it's all 1's and 0's anyway, you're right. Speaker cable makes no difference whatsoever, either. Just use cat5e and bask in the glory of knowing you saved huge sums of money over muppets like me who has 120 quid a metre speaker cable, and no interconnect in the system (digi coax or analogue) that has an rrp under 100 quid.

Please keep being safe in your assumption that all consumrs such as myself simply belived the hype, and didn't do any back to back testing whatsoever, and if we did, it would just be the placebo effect. There is no such thing as digital signal corruption, or an error correction circuit. In fact, all CD or MP3 data is the same regardless, so as long as you have a dac, the transport is utterly, utterly irrelevent.

Enjoy your knowledge of these matters - the rest of us will "learn" some day.
Now't wrong with using a few runs of CAT5 to connect your speakers.

Graham E

12,739 posts

188 months

Wednesday 28th October 2009
quotequote all
Exactly HRG. Exactly.