"Will using a £5,000 USB cable make your printer better?" asks Chris Pinder, Managing Director at HDcable.co.uk, rhetorically. "I've been selling HDMI cables for years and I can say 100% that the technology, and specifically the price of an HDMI cable will not affect the picture quality by one pixel."
I have never paid more than a fiver and my kit is worth a few grand.
And the result of this precise manufacture? Stunning images and crystal-clear sound. We've seen clear improvements in image quality, with less noise and finer colour detail; sound was also more detailed and has better three-dimensional resolution.
These clowns should either back-up their claims with credible evidence or be forced to carry a legal disclaimer saying that claims made during their sales pitches are made "for entertainment purposes only". Just like Psychics, Astrologers and other blatant charlatans.
Not true, Digital Component (YCbCr) is identical to RGB (and losslessly convertible in either direction) unless you utilise the capability to reduce the bandwidth allocated to luminance to reduce the band width requirement. Afaik all broadcast digital TV utilises this to reduce bandwidth requirements. When you convert broadcast TV (transmitted in component colour space) to RGB the data loss is already made at source.
Watchdog really needs to go to Russ Andrews for some premium bulls**t. From a listing for a £162 HDMI lead:
These clowns should either back-up their claims with credible evidence or be forced to carry a legal disclaimer saying that claims made during their sales pitches are made "for entertainment purposes only". Just like Psychics, Astrologers and other blatant charlatans.
I do have to wonder reading some of the batshit crazy descriptions of stuff on that site whether Russ Andrews is taking the pi55 out of the lunatic fringe of the AV fraternity or really believes the crap written on the site.
I mean what person with half a functioning brain cell is going to be stupid enough to part with three grand for a bloody mains lead!
I do have to wonder reading some of the batshit crazy descriptions of stuff on that site whether Russ Andrews is taking the pi55 out of the lunatic fringe of the AV fraternity or really believes the crap written on the site.
I mean what person with half a functioning brain cell is going to be stupid enough to part with three grand for a bloody mains lead!
Well, a three grand kettle lead may not make a scrap of difference to picture and sound quality on your AV equipment, but stick it on your kettle and you'll soon be enjoying greatly enhanced tea with a deep brown hue and a rich, vibrant taste.
Well, a three grand kettle lead may not make a scrap of difference to picture and sound quality on your AV equipment, but stick it on your kettle and you'll soon be enjoying greatly enhanced tea with a deep brown hue and a rich, vibrant taste.
Are they readily available? Where can I get one?
I have pieces of foil stuck to the kettle, and a piece of paper under one foot and it certain;y sounds more lifelike when boiling (Thanks to Peter Belt)
Haven't found an alternate use for the hi-fi brick yet.
unlesss of course the cable was not constructed to ARC spec. ARC uses two connections that were unspecified in the original cable spec. So possible they were not wired properly in a cable not specifically designed to the ARC spec.
On a more serious note I SUSPECT this to be the case (in which case I stand by my original comment that not all HDMI cables are created equally - an age thing, rather than quality)
However I now think darker forces are at play. I only had a couple of older cables to have and one HDMI 1.4.
Dolby Digital (DD) was passing from the Sky Box via HDMI (I plugged it direct to the processor - but obviously at that point wasn't connected to the TV so couldn't play with the on screen settings). However on reconnecting it to the TV, then using the ARC from TV to processor no DD just stereo. I did swap the cables around but the same effect happened, which proves nothing if one of the older cables can't pass the DD signal via the ARC chain.
I have a (cheap) HDMI 1.4 cable on order, which will be here for the weekend so I can see if it is a cable problem.
Though - hence the darker forces comment - I am becoming mindful that it may be a variance of the whole HDMI spec as applied to the equipment by various manufacturers. I have read reports that Panasonic do not allow pass through of DD information via ARC, whereas Samsung (for example) do on SOME of their TVs.
This is worrying, only in that surely a connection like HDMI should be universal. If not and it is applied in different ways by different manufacturers plays into the hands of the snake oil merchants.
Though I will put my hand up to having some pretty exotic analogue cables. (but I suspect we have to agree to differ here)
Yes, Panasonics only send dolby digital down the hdmi ARC from internal sources (the tuner, USB media function if available). Anything plugged in via the hdmi leads will be converted to stereo only. Why they don't just send back what it recieves is beyond me. Like you say, some Samsungs aren't restricted in this way.
On a more serious note I SUSPECT this to be the case (in which case I stand by my original comment that not all HDMI cables are created equally - an age thing, rather than quality)
However I now think darker forces are at play. I only had a couple of older cables to have and one HDMI 1.4.
Dolby Digital (DD) was passing from the Sky Box via HDMI (I plugged it direct to the processor - but obviously at that point wasn't connected to the TV so couldn't play with the on screen settings). However on reconnecting it to the TV, then using the ARC from TV to processor no DD just stereo. I did swap the cables around but the same effect happened, which proves nothing if one of the older cables can't pass the DD signal via the ARC chain.
I have a (cheap) HDMI 1.4 cable on order, which will be here for the weekend so I can see if it is a cable problem.
Though - hence the darker forces comment - I am becoming mindful that it may be a variance of the whole HDMI spec as applied to the equipment by various manufacturers. I have read reports that Panasonic do not allow pass through of DD information via ARC, whereas Samsung (for example) do on SOME of their TVs.
This is worrying, only in that surely a connection like HDMI should be universal. If not and it is applied in different ways by different manufacturers plays into the hands of the snake oil merchants.
Though I will put my hand up to having some pretty exotic analogue cables. (but I suspect we have to agree to differ here)
The pass through of audio from HDMI to an optical digital output has nothing to do with the HDMI spec. That is solely the preserve of the TV manufacturers. Though you do have to question why if they can handle DD on the HDMI inputs they don't pass it on unmolested to the digital out.
There is also the possibility that the TV is telling the Sky box that it cannot accept Dolby Digital in the first place so the Sky box is auto switching to Stereo. That sort of negotiation of capabilities is part of the HDMI spec.
Yes, Panasonics only send dolby digital down the hdmi ARC from internal sources (the tuner, USB media function if available). Anything plugged in via the hdmi leads will be converted to stereo only. Why they don't just send back what it recieves is beyond me. Like you say, some Samsungs aren't restricted in this way.
Most sets work in that way, interesting you mention that Samsung (or at least some Samsung's) don't.
i'm a scientist. i subscribe to this model. i understand that saying an expensive HDMI lead gives a better picture is like saying an expensive USB lead will give me better print quality.
that was until i saw what happened when my mate hooked up his three grand 50 inch panasonic to his onkyo receiver with a few hdmi leads and blind test you could tell the difference. presumably it was some rf interference picked up in the lead making it to the screen.
What exactly were the differences you saw? Were some of the leads faulty?
If the fabled "deeper blacks, richer reds, truer skin tones and almost three-dimensional sharpness" really could be achieved using more expensive HDMI cables, why aren't cable manufacturers proving themselves time and again in double-blind trials and then quoting these conclusive results on packaging and promotional materials?
Obvious answer: Because no such results exist or are ever likely to exist.
What exactly were the differences you saw? Were some of the leads faulty?
If the fabled "deeper blacks, richer reds, truer skin tones and almost three-dimensional sharpness" really could be achieved using more expensive HDMI cables, why aren't cable manufacturers proving themselves time and again in double-blind trials and then quoting these conclusive results on packaging and promotional materials?
Obvious answer: Because no such results exist or are ever likely to exist.
You're not listening to me Nigel. I saw it with my own eyes, with several leads.
As I have said I believe it was rf noise, not affecting the signal itself, but being let in to the system via the HDMI.
A bit confused, why would RF affect a digital signal ?. It would either be within the inbuilt error correction that will ignore analogue interference, or be instantly obvious.
The cable and system is designed to deliver a simple stream of zeros and ones. The inbuilt error checking would reject any deviation. The problem is far more likely to be related to lack of screening on the hdmi cable affecting the TV, possibly due to poorly screened coax interconnects affecting the TV (did the test disconnect all other inputs to the TV rf or scart ?). A problem that strangely affects more expensive hdmi connections, or more likely cheap coax rf leads.
Basically the issue is more than likely TV and rf coax cable related. Can you replicate with just a single hdmi link box to TV ?
Not exactly a very scientific test, the results could be affected by simply the routing of cables.
A bit confused, why would RF affect a digital signal ?. It would either be within the inbuilt error correction that will ignore analogue interference, or be instantly obvious.
The cable and system is designed to deliver a simple stream of zeros and ones. The inbuilt error checking would reject any deviation. The problem is far more likely to be related to lack of screening on the hdmi cable affecting the TV, possibly due to poorly screened coax interconnects affecting the TV (did the test disconnect all other inputs to the TV rf or scart ?). A problem that strangely affects more expensive hdmi connections, or more likely cheap coax rf leads.
Basically the issue is more than likely TV and rf coax cable related. Can you replicate with just a single hdmi link box to TV ?
Not exactly a very scientific test, the results could be affected by simply the routing of cables.
Rf noise would not affect the digital signal.
I'm not suggesting it does. But at some point at the display that digital signal becomes an analogue voltage. I think maybe it's noise that is causing a kind of dither.
I'm not suggesting it does. But at some point at the display that digital signal becomes an analogue voltage. I think maybe it's noise that is causing a kind of dither.
As people keep saying - down to one part of the system being faulty.
You're not listening to me Nigel. I saw it with my own eyes, with several leads.
As I have said I believe it was rf noise, not affecting the signal itself, but being let in to the system via the HDMI.
More data required. How was this "blind" test conducted? Which leads were used? Was the noise exclusive to the cheaper leads, but absent from the more expensive ones? Was the noise present using the same faulty/poor leads on other devices?
Like I said, faulty leads - or quite possible a scam of some kind.
If you were truly getting RF noise in that way, perhaps you should move as you're obviously slowly getting cooked at such levels of RF
No manufacturer, or laboratory, has been able to show any such effect - and you appear to be the only person to claim it exists.
Excuse me, are you a scientist? Do you even own a white labcoat and some test tubes? How dare you doubt the unlikely-sounding anecdotal evidence of someone who says he has something or other to do with science?!
Any unsubstantiated claim becomes more credible when it's preceded by the words "I'm a scientist" and an avowal of prior scepticism.
I find that most cables of the appropriate type, e.g 1.4, work much the same.
It is only when you get long runs of cable that problems arise. I bought a couple of ten metre HDMI leads and one didn't work and the other would only transmit lower quality resolutions.
Hi-speed cables work fine at ten metres though. Any longer and you need an amp or use converters and cat 5 wiring.
Great to see Currys continuing what Comets always did, although a lot of them went there after Comet went bust, suppose they want to sell as many as possible so they don't go tits up as well:D:D
Comments
Which probably explains the enormous height of some latter surround processors / amplifiers.
http://www.techradar.com/news/video/why-you-don-t-need-to-spend-more-than-2-on-an-hdmi-cable-1071343
Especially the quote below.
"Will using a £5,000 USB cable make your printer better?" asks Chris Pinder, Managing Director at HDcable.co.uk, rhetorically. "I've been selling HDMI cables for years and I can say 100% that the technology, and specifically the price of an HDMI cable will not affect the picture quality by one pixel."
I have never paid more than a fiver and my kit is worth a few grand.
These clowns should either back-up their claims with credible evidence or be forced to carry a legal disclaimer saying that claims made during their sales pitches are made "for entertainment purposes only". Just like Psychics, Astrologers and other blatant charlatans.
Not true, Digital Component (YCbCr) is identical to RGB (and losslessly convertible in either direction) unless you utilise the capability to reduce the bandwidth allocated to luminance to reduce the band width requirement. Afaik all broadcast digital TV utilises this to reduce bandwidth requirements. When you convert broadcast TV (transmitted in component colour space) to RGB the data loss is already made at source.
I do have to wonder reading some of the batshit crazy descriptions of stuff on that site whether Russ Andrews is taking the pi55 out of the lunatic fringe of the AV fraternity or really believes the crap written on the site.
I mean what person with half a functioning brain cell is going to be stupid enough to part with three grand for a bloody mains lead!
Are they readily available? Where can I get one?
I have pieces of foil stuck to the kettle, and a piece of paper under one foot and it certain;y sounds more lifelike when boiling (Thanks to Peter Belt)
Haven't found an alternate use for the hi-fi brick yet.
On a more serious note I SUSPECT this to be the case (in which case I stand by my original comment that not all HDMI cables are created equally - an age thing, rather than quality)
However I now think darker forces are at play. I only had a couple of older cables to have and one HDMI 1.4.
Dolby Digital (DD) was passing from the Sky Box via HDMI (I plugged it direct to the processor - but obviously at that point wasn't connected to the TV so couldn't play with the on screen settings). However on reconnecting it to the TV, then using the ARC from TV to processor no DD just stereo. I did swap the cables around but the same effect happened, which proves nothing if one of the older cables can't pass the DD signal via the ARC chain.
I have a (cheap) HDMI 1.4 cable on order, which will be here for the weekend so I can see if it is a cable problem.
Though - hence the darker forces comment - I am becoming mindful that it may be a variance of the whole HDMI spec as applied to the equipment by various manufacturers. I have read reports that Panasonic do not allow pass through of DD information via ARC, whereas Samsung (for example) do on SOME of their TVs.
This is worrying, only in that surely a connection like HDMI should be universal. If not and it is applied in different ways by different manufacturers plays into the hands of the snake oil merchants.
Though I will put my hand up to having some pretty exotic analogue cables. (but I suspect we have to agree to differ here)
There is also the possibility that the TV is telling the Sky box that it cannot accept Dolby Digital in the first place so the Sky box is auto switching to Stereo. That sort of negotiation of capabilities is part of the HDMI spec.
Most sets work in that way, interesting you mention that Samsung (or at least some Samsung's) don't.
If the fabled "deeper blacks, richer reds, truer skin tones and almost three-dimensional sharpness" really could be achieved using more expensive HDMI cables, why aren't cable manufacturers proving themselves time and again in double-blind trials and then quoting these conclusive results on packaging and promotional materials?
Obvious answer: Because no such results exist or are ever likely to exist.
no it wasn't any of that shit. it was like noise.
In which case the lead was faulty - any lead which meets the required HDMI spec will give exactly the same picture as any other.
You're not listening to me Nigel. I saw it with my own eyes, with several leads.
As I have said I believe it was rf noise, not affecting the signal itself, but being let in to the system via the HDMI.
A bit confused, why would RF affect a digital signal ?. It would either be within the inbuilt error correction that will ignore analogue interference, or be instantly obvious.
The cable and system is designed to deliver a simple stream of zeros and ones. The inbuilt error checking would reject any deviation. The problem is far more likely to be related to lack of screening on the hdmi cable affecting the TV, possibly due to poorly screened coax interconnects affecting the TV (did the test disconnect all other inputs to the TV rf or scart ?). A problem that strangely affects more expensive hdmi connections, or more likely cheap coax rf leads.
Basically the issue is more than likely TV and rf coax cable related. Can you replicate with just a single hdmi link box to TV ?
Not exactly a very scientific test, the results could be affected by simply the routing of cables.
Rf noise would not affect the digital signal.
I'm not suggesting it does. But at some point at the display that digital signal becomes an analogue voltage. I think maybe it's noise that is causing a kind of dither.
I upgraded to a nano HDMI to connect my tablet - from Poundland.
As people keep saying - down to one part of the system being faulty.
One part of your post that really sets alarm bells ringing is the use of this device: http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/05/at-first-i-was-skeptical-is-a-convincing-ploy-unless-you-are-wise-to-it/
Like I said, faulty leads - or quite possible a scam of some kind.
If you were truly getting RF noise in that way, perhaps you should move as you're obviously slowly getting cooked at such levels of RF
No manufacturer, or laboratory, has been able to show any such effect - and you appear to be the only person to claim it exists.
Any unsubstantiated claim becomes more credible when it's preceded by the words "I'm a scientist" and an avowal of prior scepticism.
Mine cost £1 from poundland
It is only when you get long runs of cable that problems arise. I bought a couple of ten metre HDMI leads and one didn't work and the other would only transmit lower quality resolutions.
Hi-speed cables work fine at ten metres though. Any longer and you need an amp or use converters and cat 5 wiring.