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
Watchdog BBC1 Tonight (20140604) HDMI leads
3 of 4
Originally Posted by be more pacific:
“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?
One part of your post that really sets alarm bells ringing is the use of this device: http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/05/at-f...re-wise-to-it/”
“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?
One part of your post that really sets alarm bells ringing is the use of this device: http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/05/at-f...re-wise-to-it/”
Read your link. You are basically saying I'm lying. Balls to that.
Originally Posted by flagpole:
“Read your link. You are basically saying I'm lying. Balls to that.”
“Read your link. You are basically saying I'm lying. Balls to that.”
Not at all. Merely that your post lacked even the basic scientific tests required for any sort of conclusion.
If you presented this information to any sort of scientific institution it would rightly be dismissed as worthless. Have you also experienced Cold Fusion ?
It's a bit like the perpetual motion claims made over many years, all of which were false because an unrecognised energy input was actually present.
In this case the solution is really simple, how hard was it actually compare the digital data stream input to the one that was actually output. If you had evidence that even a single bit was different you may have a case.
Even if you had this data, without actually checking the reasons for the difference (screening/hdmi cable routing/external rf source) it wouldn't prove anything.
http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/home-...absolute-proof
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/why-all-...-are-the-same/
In fact it seems almost every such test comes to much the same conclusion, absolutely no difference in picture and sound quality, but where more expensive cables "may" be better is in their construction, meaning possibly better shielding and they "may" be better for longer cable runs.
But more expensive does not mean better, there are some very well shielded and solidly constructed cheaper cables readily available that will work perfectly and will last for years. For the average consumer in the average home installation there is absolutely NO need to spend more than a few pounds on a 1 or 2m cable, and anyone in the retail industry who says otherwise IS lying.
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/why-all-...-are-the-same/
In fact it seems almost every such test comes to much the same conclusion, absolutely no difference in picture and sound quality, but where more expensive cables "may" be better is in their construction, meaning possibly better shielding and they "may" be better for longer cable runs.
But more expensive does not mean better, there are some very well shielded and solidly constructed cheaper cables readily available that will work perfectly and will last for years. For the average consumer in the average home installation there is absolutely NO need to spend more than a few pounds on a 1 or 2m cable, and anyone in the retail industry who says otherwise IS lying.
Originally Posted by The Wulfrunian:
“Why is this debate still happening, it was put to bed years ago?”
“Why is this debate still happening, it was put to bed years ago?”
There still appears to be the occasional person who believes they know better than everyone else and all scientific fact
Originally Posted by The Wulfrunian:
“Why is this debate still happening, it was put to bed years ago?”
“Why is this debate still happening, it was put to bed years ago?”
Because the lunatic fringe of the AV fraternity who buy into this BS can't bring themselves to admit that the three grand HDMI lead, three grand mains lead and two grand CD/DVD demagnetiser (yes there is such a beast!) do sod all that something costing 1/1000th of what they paid does equally well.
Or in the case of the demagnetiser it's snake oil of the finest variety and does nothing at all apart from reduce your bank balance.
Originally Posted by barbeler:
“I've changed to gold plated mains wiring and I'm convinced that I'm getting better electricity.”
“I've changed to gold plated mains wiring and I'm convinced that I'm getting better electricity.”
Did the man in C***ys tell you to do that. They tried to flog me a £40 hdmi 1m cable and you will note I did say "tried"
Originally Posted by call100:
“The pound shop ones are 1.4 anyway, so your 99p one may also be.
http://www.poundland.co.uk/signalex-hdmi-cable-1m”
“The pound shop ones are 1.4 anyway, so your 99p one may also be.
http://www.poundland.co.uk/signalex-hdmi-cable-1m”
Hmmm might see if I can get a spare one
Originally Posted by Caxton:
“Did the man in C***ys tell you to do that. They tried to flog me a £40 hdmi 1m cable and you will note I did say "tried"”
“Did the man in C***ys tell you to do that. They tried to flog me a £40 hdmi 1m cable and you will note I did say "tried"
”
I'm always impressed that it's Currys people slate for this, implying they're the only offenders - how about this from a supplier many on this board consider "reputable"
£ 15 for a standard 3m aerial lead:
http://www.richersounds.com/product/...camb-vid100-3m
£20 for a 1.5m HDMI lead (though reduced to £9.99 for VIP members.....)
http://www.richersounds.com/product/...innov-hdmi-new
£30 for a 1.5m Optical cable
http://www.richersounds.com/product/...orest-opt-1.5m
Or how about this outlet:
£18 for a 1.8m HDMI lead
http://www.johnlewis.com/belkin-ultr...-8m/p231761006
or better still £ 100 for a 3m HDMI lead (but you can get 50% off if you but it with a TV)
http://www.johnlewis.com/monster-900...-3m/p231743939
Have to say the last time I bought an HDMI cable on the high street it was from Tesco - whilst it wasn't as cheap as the cheapest e-Bay or Amazon suppliers, it was certainly less than £ 10 and has performed without problem.
Originally Posted by AlanO:
“I'm always impressed that it's Currys people slate for this, implying they're the only offenders - how about this from a supplier many on this board consider "reputable"...”
“I'm always impressed that it's Currys people slate for this, implying they're the only offenders - how about this from a supplier many on this board consider "reputable"...”
That those retailers have the expensive option available or listed on their website, is not the same as lying to get the customer to choose one over a cheaper item, or becoming upset if the customer declines to purchase one with their new device.
Originally Posted by AlanO:
“Have to say the last time I bought an HDMI cable on the high street it was from Tesco - whilst it wasn't as cheap as the cheapest e-Bay or Amazon suppliers, it was certainly less than £ 10 and has performed without problem.”
“Have to say the last time I bought an HDMI cable on the high street it was from Tesco - whilst it wasn't as cheap as the cheapest e-Bay or Amazon suppliers, it was certainly less than £ 10 and has performed without problem.”
I bought a pack of three from very good ones from Aldi and that was certainly cheaper than £10. The heads were even gold-plated... well gold coloured anyway
They work perfectly.
Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin:
“There still appears to be the occasional person who believes they know better than everyone else and all scientific fact”
“There still appears to be the occasional person who believes they know better than everyone else and all scientific fact
”
Possibly because there is a very (apparently) knowledgeable person called Paul Miller who 30 years ago wanted to know WHY cables could sound different and has spent the last couple of decades running tests on them in his lab and publishing the results.
I beleive this is a continuaton of the work done by Prof Malcolm Hawksford. (though it may be independant)
QED have a paper or two on cables (analogue and hdmi) - under the qed academy tab on their website, They say that their more expensive hdmi cables measure better than their cheap ones, but I expect that their cheap ones are good enough to pass the signals through without causing any issues.
Originally Posted by Dan Sette:
“Possibly because there is a very (apparently) knowledgeable person called Paul Miller who 30 years ago wanted to know WHY cables could sound different and has spent the last couple of decades running tests on them in his lab and publishing the results.
I beleive this is a continuaton of the work done by Prof Malcolm Hawksford. (though it may be independant)”
“Possibly because there is a very (apparently) knowledgeable person called Paul Miller who 30 years ago wanted to know WHY cables could sound different and has spent the last couple of decades running tests on them in his lab and publishing the results.
I beleive this is a continuaton of the work done by Prof Malcolm Hawksford. (though it may be independant)”
You mean in the pre digital era before the information was transmitted as data?
Originally Posted by barbeler:
“You mean in the pre digital era before the information was transmitted as data?”
“You mean in the pre digital era before the information was transmitted as data?”
Most of the work has been published about analogue cables.
But I was surprised to see in the current Hi Fi News a comparison of 10 USB cables.
They did say that it would cause controversy but they did find differences between the cables (and the most expensive didn't necessarily come out on top and they highly recommended the cheapest). They were measured both subjectively (using Hi Fi golden ears) and objectively (on a test rig in the lab) with the graphs reproduced to try to quantify the reasons for the differences they were hearing.
I don't have the scientific knowledge to defend or refute, but it is a pretty august magazine whose opinions I do trust.
I saw it and thought of this debate.
Originally Posted by Dan Sette:
“I don't have the scientific knowledge to defend or refute, but it is a pretty august magazine whose opinions I do trust.”
“I don't have the scientific knowledge to defend or refute, but it is a pretty august magazine whose opinions I do trust.”
I don't know why you'd think that
It's reviews are a 'figure of fun' in the trade
Trying to 'hear' differences with USB cables just makes them look even more ludicrous.
The data stream on an HDMI cable is real-time, so is not considered to be 'reliable' delivery.
As a result, error correction (as opposed to error detection and retransmission as would be the case with a typical USB communication) takes place. Error correction does not always mean a complete rebuilding of the exact stream -- it could mean replacing small parts with approximations, for example.
It is therefore theoretically possible that a signal traversing an HDMI cable could be partially lost, to the point where a corrected signal is deliverable without the complete stream being present. Under these conditions sound/video quality degradation could take place.
In practice, though, and especially across short lengths, this is highly unlikely to be a problem in the real world.
Wherever you get such a theoretical chance of degradation though, the snake-oil merchants will take advantage.
As long as the cable is up to spec, it's probably fine -- and in a marginal situation a £90 cable is just as likely to be on the edge as a 99p one.
I have had situations where, for example, an old HDMI cable will work in 1080i but is intermittent with a 1080p signal (due to losses in the cable). Sometimes it worked, sometimes there were dropouts, and when the picture was being displayed, there was occasional degradation (weird artefacts, "sparklies" etc).
As a result, error correction (as opposed to error detection and retransmission as would be the case with a typical USB communication) takes place. Error correction does not always mean a complete rebuilding of the exact stream -- it could mean replacing small parts with approximations, for example.
It is therefore theoretically possible that a signal traversing an HDMI cable could be partially lost, to the point where a corrected signal is deliverable without the complete stream being present. Under these conditions sound/video quality degradation could take place.
In practice, though, and especially across short lengths, this is highly unlikely to be a problem in the real world.
Wherever you get such a theoretical chance of degradation though, the snake-oil merchants will take advantage.
As long as the cable is up to spec, it's probably fine -- and in a marginal situation a £90 cable is just as likely to be on the edge as a 99p one.
I have had situations where, for example, an old HDMI cable will work in 1080i but is intermittent with a 1080p signal (due to losses in the cable). Sometimes it worked, sometimes there were dropouts, and when the picture was being displayed, there was occasional degradation (weird artefacts, "sparklies" etc).
Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin:
“I don't know why you'd think that
It's reviews are a 'figure of fun' in the trade
Trying to 'hear' differences with USB cables just makes them look even more ludicrous.”
“I don't know why you'd think that
It's reviews are a 'figure of fun' in the trade
Trying to 'hear' differences with USB cables just makes them look even more ludicrous.”
What HI FI, possibly. But Hi Fi News? Always was respected when I was in the trade.
HI Fi Choice used to be top of the heap, but I haven't read one of those in ages.
There is an extract from the HiFi News USB cable review on the Chord website.
This bit of total nonsense caught my eye.
http://www.chord.co.uk/blog/wp-conte...T_Chord-Co.pdf
Good job I wasn't having a coffee at the time otherwise the keyboard would not be in a fit state to type this post
What complete and absolute bull manure. Loudness in a digital signal is decided solely by the numerical value of the samples in the data stream. If a cable really is altering the loudness of a digital signal then it is either randomly changing bit values (in which case the results will not be subtle!) or it is performing a mathematical operation on the samples to change the values.
The former I can believe in a poor cable (and have heard myself). The latter is impossible. Or if it were why bother investing in expensive digital signal processors in digital equipment when all you need is a simple bit of copper wire.
Priceless.
This bit of total nonsense caught my eye.
Quote:
“As the only change to the system was its USB cable, our listening tests were necessarily performed at a fixed level. Any perceived change in ‘loudness’ was therefore a direct reflection of the ‘sound’ of the USB cable itself.”
“As the only change to the system was its USB cable, our listening tests were necessarily performed at a fixed level. Any perceived change in ‘loudness’ was therefore a direct reflection of the ‘sound’ of the USB cable itself.”
http://www.chord.co.uk/blog/wp-conte...T_Chord-Co.pdf
Good job I wasn't having a coffee at the time otherwise the keyboard would not be in a fit state to type this post
What complete and absolute bull manure. Loudness in a digital signal is decided solely by the numerical value of the samples in the data stream. If a cable really is altering the loudness of a digital signal then it is either randomly changing bit values (in which case the results will not be subtle!) or it is performing a mathematical operation on the samples to change the values.
The former I can believe in a poor cable (and have heard myself). The latter is impossible. Or if it were why bother investing in expensive digital signal processors in digital equipment when all you need is a simple bit of copper wire.
Priceless.
Originally Posted by Dan Sette:
“What HI FI, possibly. But Hi Fi News? Always was respected when I was in the trade.”
“What HI FI, possibly. But Hi Fi News? Always was respected when I was in the trade.”
I've been in the trade over 40 years, it's never been respected in that time
Certainly the ludicrous quotes mentioned on here prove it's completely useless
Originally Posted by barbeler:
“I bought a pack of three from very good ones from Aldi and that was certainly cheaper than £10. The heads were even gold-plated... well gold coloured anyway
They work perfectly.”
“I bought a pack of three from very good ones from Aldi and that was certainly cheaper than £10. The heads were even gold-plated... well gold coloured anyway
They work perfectly.”
The last time I bought a "pack of three", it was from the hairdressers and they didn't have gold tips
Originally Posted by chrisjr:
“Because the lunatic fringe of the AV fraternity who buy into this BS can't bring themselves to admit that the three grand HDMI lead, three grand mains lead and two grand CD/DVD demagnetiser (yes there is such a beast!) do sod all that something costing 1/1000th of what they paid does equally well.
Or in the case of the demagnetiser it's snake oil of the finest variety and does nothing at all apart from reduce your bank balance.”
“Because the lunatic fringe of the AV fraternity who buy into this BS can't bring themselves to admit that the three grand HDMI lead, three grand mains lead and two grand CD/DVD demagnetiser (yes there is such a beast!) do sod all that something costing 1/1000th of what they paid does equally well.
Or in the case of the demagnetiser it's snake oil of the finest variety and does nothing at all apart from reduce your bank balance.”
I think it is relative, though.
If you are in the fortunate position of buying a system costing hundreds of thousands of pounds you're probably not going to worry that a mains lead costs £3000 or whatever.
However for the rest of us in the real world it does matter.
Originally Posted by barbeler:
“I bought a pack of three from very good ones from Aldi and that was certainly cheaper than £10. The heads were even gold-plated... well gold coloured anyway
They work perfectly.”
“I bought a pack of three from very good ones from Aldi and that was certainly cheaper than £10. The heads were even gold-plated... well gold coloured anyway
They work perfectly.”
I have never understood why so many on this forum have an issue with gold or silver plated connectors.
The one problem with copper is that when exposed to the air it tanishes and corrodes. Gold and silver don't.
Therefore for any electrical equipment connector it is eminently more sensible to use a thin coating of gold or silver as it prevents any problems in the future due to corrosion of the copper wires.
3 of 4
