Which HDMI lead?

kidloco said:
I think I would like to take you up on this point :)
Click to expand...

Sure - i don't have an A/B/X comparator though.

You could always go for James Randi's challenge - he offers £100K. I'd also recommend you try setting up an A/B/X test before this to test yourself in a controlled environment.
 
-Ad- said:
O WOWZERS, got to try them. Do they have an uber helix cryo airtreated weave along with anti-magnetised-grain-aligned shielding cover with black colour to prevent light from entering cable area ??????????????????????

Il take 12 :D
Click to expand...

You forgot to mention the dylithium crystals. :p
 
-Ad- said:
O WOWZERS, got to try them. Do they have an uber helix cryo airtreated weave along with anti-magnetised-grain-aligned shielding cover with black colour to prevent light from entering cable area ??????????????????????

Il take 12 :D
Click to expand...

In the interest of fairness, not everyone claims all cables look/sound the same:

According to What hi-fi, the "VAS Mirage shows a clear improvement over a free HDMI cable <snip> Yet against its contemporaries, the Mirage loses out. Edge definition is shown to be seriously lacking, noise levels aren't acceptable and, worst of all, natural light on the screen takes on a harsh unnatural glare, redolent of an enormous arc lamp. "

http://whathifi.com/Review/VAS-Mirage/

The Chord Company silver plus review, at £83:
"Never judge an HDMI cable by its cover – as nobody in particular said. Otherwise, you could miss out on Chord Company’s stunning lead. This plain-looking item might not be cheap – however, owners of higher-end screens and projectors should consider the extra spend.

Why? Well, you benefit from awesome contrast, masses of sought-after detail, stunning depth of field, plus class-leading ability with rapid movement. "
http://whathifi.com/Review/Chord-Company-Silver-Plus-HDMI/

But apparently the Oehlbach Real Matrix fails to deliver, at £180:

"A new name on cable street, Oehlbach is making moves on the UK flatscreen and projector cabling markets. This well-built offering delivers good video specification, but its underwhelming contrast levels, matched with average quality of detail retrieval, make for a less-than-enthralling viewing experience. On the upside, you get decent ability with movement.

However, that positive isn’t sufficient to provide the company with a more flattering debut. Shame! "

http://whathifi.com/Review/Oehlbach-Real-Matrix-HDMI-75m/
 
Why? Well, you benefit from awesome contrast, masses of sought-after detail, stunning depth of field, plus class-leading ability with rapid movement.
Click to expand...


I love HDMI reviews. I bet the reviewers just sit there in the office negotiating with manufacturers about how much money they will be giving them for adverts. Then they sit down and look at some funky adjectives and write positive things with regard to detail, depth of field, contrast and black levels accordingly.

It is truly horrific, and still people beleive the tripe even though there is no scientific explanation as to why the cable gives all these supposed benefits.
 
Last edited:
-Ad- said:
I love HDMI reviews. I bet the reviewers just sit there in the office negotiating with manufacturers about how much money they will be giving them for adverts. Then they sit down and look at some funky adjectives and write positive things with regard to detail, depth of field, contrast and black levels accordingly.

It is truly horrific, and still people beleive the tripe even though there is no scientific explanation as to why the cable gives all these supposed benefits.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I'm going to make my ethernet comparison again:

"Your word documents will display more effectively, graphics will flow in a synergised motion, and your mouse cursor will be clearer and more defined than evar before!1"
 
-Ad- said:
I love HDMI reviews. I bet the reviewers just sit there in the office negotiating with manufacturers about how much money they will be giving them for adverts. Then they sit down and look at some funky adjectives and write positive things with regard to detail, depth of field, contrast and black levels accordingly.

It is truly horrific, and still people beleive the tripe even though there is no scientific explanation as to why the cable gives all these supposed benefits.
Click to expand...

The history of hi-fi journalism is interesting - back in the 80s there were reviews saying that component x didn't make any difference and then a few years later the same people are singing the praises of it. Anyone ever wondered how the latest thing supposedly sounds so much better than the best of the previous generation? I can't believe that if you compared a high end pair of speakers from 20 years ago to some today that there would be that great a difference!

I think everyone will at least agree that if everything sounded the same magazines wouldn't be in business!
 
oli collett said:
The history of hi-fi journalism is interesting - back in the 80s there were reviews saying that component x didn't make any difference and then a few years later the same people are singing the praises of it. Anyone ever wondered how the latest thing supposedly sounds so much better than the best of the previous generation? I can't believe that if you compared a high end pair of speakers from 20 years ago to some today that there would be that great a difference!

I think everyone will at least agree that if everything sounded the same magazines wouldn't be in business!
Click to expand...

O there are good speakers out there, but there are also massive differences between different parts of the system. Obviously you eventually get into *** area of diminishing returns, and some hi-end audio will have you analysing cymbal crashes over and over rather than just listening to the music.

The thing is with HDMI cables, they all produces the same picture, working, borked (sparklies etc), or no picture (lol dead). But the magazines still make their money from the manufacturers paying them for advert space, plenty of people paying for the mags, and then buying said cables from manufacturers because of reading said glowing review.

There is not real engineering involved with these cables, and a manufacturer can make them look as fancy as possible with different colours and apparent fancy weaves and cable formation, but in the end they will most likely be produced in the same factory as other cables with the same base materials bu with swanky bits added.

And then us lot don't help, debating all these things, and inadvertantly helping the exposure of some of these things. People might see us going on about no difference, then go to a dealership, be won over by the salesmen, and then waste moneis on silly cryo cables. But those people are just numpties how need a falcon punch to the ovaries :D

Il certainly stick with multiple cheap cables for my runs, and spend my money on better speakers, amps and tvs, then of course music and movies, the really important things for these hobbies.
 
Things like speakers, speaker cable and hi-fi equipment containing DACs, can be prone to interference/colouration etc because its an analogue signal were dealing with.

As previously stated, digital is digital, it either works or it dosent, there is no quality, its just binary information.
 
mattyfez said:
Things like speakers, speaker cable and hi-fi equipment containing DACs, can be prone to interference/colouration etc because its an analogue signal were dealing with.

As previously stated, digital is digital, it either works or it dosent, there is no quality, its just binary information.
Click to expand...


The question is not whether interference occurs, it's a question of whether such interference is perceivable by the listener/viewer. Science will tell you that interference will have a lot less of an effect on a digital signal than an analogue one but it does not tell you what constitutes a perceivable difference.
 
Was in Currys today looking at laptops and wandered over to the TV section to see them with 2 screens up, both showing Spiderman 3, one using a £70 Belkin PureAV HDMI lead and one using the Yellow/Red/White leads....

It's hardly a fair comparison seeing as one is HD and the other isn't....
 
oli collett said:
The question is not whether interference occurs, it's a question of whether such interference is perceivable by the listener/viewer. Science will tell you that interference will have a lot less of an effect on a digital signal than an analogue one but it does not tell you what constitutes a perceivable difference.
Click to expand...

Well, in the case of a poorly constucted/terminated (analogue) speaker cable verses a well constructed, well terminated one, or even one made from a different material, yes I'm perfectly happy to accept this can have an audiable effect on the final sound.

However, I dont accept for a second that this applies to a digital signal, its not logical.
If I were to send you "010101" you either recieve it or you don't, if there was a "1" missing from the end, then the transaction is incomplete, and without some kind of fault tollerence or error correction, then its simply a failed communication which wont work.

It dosent matter how I get the data ("010101") to you, copper, silver, twisted shielded pairs, magical pixie dust etc. you either have it, or you dont.
Let me put it another way, here are two lumps of data, can you tell by looking at them, which was broadcast via a cheap thin copper cable, and which was broadcast via £200pm uber cable:

A: "010101"

B: "010101"

Spot the difference :D
 
mattyfez said:
Well, in the case of a poorly constucted/terminated (analogue) speaker cable verses a well constructed, well terminated one, or even one made from a different material, yes I'm perfectly happy to accept this can have an audiable effect on the final sound.
Click to expand...

That's fair enough - but on what basis do you accept this? Magazines base their reviews on subjective tests which are known to be unreliable and i have yet to see a demonstration of a speaker cable making a difference under controlled conditions other than a comparison of bell wire -> thicker cable. The reviews often comment that certain cables bring out characteristics in a sound yet this defies logic.

mattyfez said:
However, I dont accept for a second that this applies to a digital signal, its not logical.
If I were to send you "010101" you either recieve it or you don't, if there was a "1" missing from the end, then the transaction is incomplete, and without some kind of fault tollerence or error correction, then its simply a failed communication which wont work.

It dosent matter how I get the data ("010101") to you, copper, silver, twisted shielded pairs, magical pixie dust etc. you either have it, or you dont.
Let me put it another way, here are two lumps of data, can you tell by looking at them, which was broadcast via a cheap thin copper cable, and which was broadcast via £200pm uber cable:

A: "010101"

B: "010101"

Spot the difference :D
Click to expand...

But the problem is that the signal at some point needs to be converted to analogue. If signal A starts off like:
"010101"
and turns out like:
"011101"
it's not going to be the same - however it should be fairly obvious there's been a mistake somewhere and it's not going to cause the kind of things that the hi-fi mags talk of. But then neither is it in terms of analogue, so...
 
Only in computers is data totally bit accurate, but for hi-fi audio you can get bits that aren't true to the original dataform, Hi-Fi Audiophiles say they can hear it. Perhaps on a really high end system perhaps. Certainly not what most people have. Only valid for PCM data afaik not bitstream of dolby digital or dts.
 
oli collett said:
But the problem is that the signal at some point needs to be converted to analogue. If signal A starts off like:
"010101"
and turns out like:
"011101"
it's not going to be the same - however it should be fairly obvious there's been a mistake somewhere and it's not going to cause the kind of things that the hi-fi mags talk of. But then neither is it in terms of analogue, so...
Click to expand...

If it turns out like 011101 then it'll trip the error correction and reconstructed back into 010101 using CRC.

Digital signals are transmitted as on/off therefore there's no nuances like with analogue. There's sufficient flexibility built in to the spec that even a coathanger would make a decent coaxial digital cable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom