does using a $20 Belkin HDMI 1.3 cable make any difference in picture and sound quality versus a $115 Audioquest HDMI cable (the ones sold by Tweeter)? I have a 37 inch 1080p LCD and connecting a pioneer receiver and blu-ray player to the TV.
andygupta2...@gmail.com writes: > Hi - > does using a $20 Belkin HDMI 1.3 cable make any difference in picture > and sound quality versus a $115 Audioquest HDMI cable (the ones sold > by Tweeter)? I have a 37 inch 1080p LCD and connecting a pioneer > receiver and blu-ray player to the TV.
Should not have any difference when everythign works properly.
HDMI is digital signal that normally goes through the cable without any alternation. If the thign get so bad that the bits start changing (broken cable, loo long cable, strong interference etc..) then you will definately see that something is wrong.
At normal short few meter logn HDMI cables the data should go smoothly no matter which HSMI cable you use. When trying to make very long cable runs then with some equipment combinations some cheaper cables might nor work but with some other equipment they work without problems.
The more expensive HDMI cable could be marginally better (but there is no guaratee that it is) in electrical characteristics than some cheaper cable. The better electrical characteristics might have some effect in case you are making so long cable run that the HDMI data transfer will barely work (just in the edge the recevier will get 0 and 1 bits right from cable). When you are in "safe operating zone" (few meters long cables are definately this) then the data will transfer nicely to other end of cable without any alternation no matter if the cable is normal quality or marginally better. So cable differences have practically no difference in normal uses.
All audio and video carrried over HDMI is in digital format. Since it's a digital signal, it will not make ANY difference at all what kind of properties the cable has as long bits get right from one end to other end of cable.
http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/2006/08/hdmi_part_8_-_c.php says: "As with many other products, there are better-constructed cables with better materials and better plugs, but this industry that offers a cable for $20 while other company sells a similar application cable for $300, has certainly created a lot of uncertainty among consumers, and when quality in a cable performance is not easy to detect those consumers become skeptical."
> does using a $20 Belkin HDMI 1.3 cable make any difference in picture > and sound quality versus a $115 Audioquest HDMI cable (the ones sold > by Tweeter)? I have a 37 inch 1080p LCD and connecting a pioneer > receiver and blu-ray player to the TV.
And why do you think there would be a difference ?
It's one of the oldest scams in the business. Buy the cheap one. Any *ultra-minute* difference is going to be inaudible or invisible.
>> does using a $20 Belkin HDMI 1.3 cable make any difference in picture >> and sound quality versus a $115 Audioquest HDMI cable (the ones sold by >> Tweeter)? I have a 37 inch 1080p LCD and connecting a pioneer receiver >> and blu-ray player to the TV.
> And why do you think there would be a difference ?
> It's one of the oldest scams in the business. Buy the cheap one. Any > *ultra-minute* difference is going to be inaudible or invisible.
There's cheapo, industry standard, premium and ABS, for Audiophool Bullshit. Paying for premium cable gets you more rugged connectors, better strain reliefs, and thicker jackets. If you are doing convention and tradeshow work, reconnecting your equipment a dozen times a year, it's worth the price, but you will never see the difference in the signal and the price isn't dramatically higher than standard. $115 for a short HDMI cable puts it solidly in the ABS bin, along with the infamous $480 wooden volume-control knob and those little "cable elevators" that keep the speaker signal from leaking into the floor.
> >> does using a $20 Belkin HDMI 1.3 cable make any difference in picture > >> and sound quality versus a $115 Audioquest HDMI cable (the ones sold by > >> Tweeter)? I have a 37 inch 1080p LCD and connecting a pioneer receiver > >> and blu-ray player to the TV.
> > And why do you think there would be a difference ?
> > It's one of the oldest scams in the business. Buy the cheap one. Any > > *ultra-minute* difference is going to be inaudible or invisible.
> There's cheapo, industry standard, premium and ABS, for Audiophool > Bullshit. Paying for premium cable gets you more rugged connectors, > better strain reliefs, and thicker jackets.
Not always. In fact I've seen the exact reverse on occasions.
> If you are doing convention > and tradeshow work, reconnecting your equipment a dozen times a year, > it's worth the price, but you will never see the difference in the signal > and the price isn't dramatically higher than standard. $115 for a short > HDMI cable puts it solidly in the ABS bin, along with the infamous $480 > wooden volume-control knob and those little "cable elevators" that keep > the speaker signal from leaking into the floor.
Disgusting pieces of crap. You forgot Skakti stones and the Tice Clock btw.
> andygupta2...@gmail.com writes: > > Hi - > > does using a $20 Belkin HDMI 1.3 cable make any difference in picture > > and sound quality versus a $115 Audioquest HDMI cable (the ones sold > > by Tweeter)? I have a 37 inch 1080p LCD and connecting a pioneer > > receiver and blu-ray player to the TV.
> Should not have any difference when everythign works properly.
> HDMI is digital signal that normally goes through the cable without > any alternation. If the thign get so bad that the bits start > changing (broken cable, loo long cable, strong interference etc..) > then you will definately see that something is wrong.
> At normal short few meter logn HDMI cables the data should go smoothly > no matter which HSMI cable you use. When trying to make very long cable > runs then with some equipment combinations some cheaper cables > might nor work but with some other equipment they work without problems.
> The more expensive HDMI cable could be marginally better (but there > is no guaratee that it is) in electrical characteristics than some > cheaper cable. The better electrical characteristics might have > some effect in case you are making so long cable run that the > HDMI data transfer will barely work (just in the edge the > recevier will get 0 and 1 bits right from cable). When you > are in "safe operating zone" (few meters long cables are definately this) > then the data will transfer nicely to other end of cable without > any alternation no matter if the cable is normal quality or marginally better. > So cable differences have practically no difference in normal uses.
> All audio and video carrried over HDMI is in digital format. > Since it's a digital signal, it will not make ANY difference at all > what kind of properties the cable has as long bits get right from > one end to other end of cable.
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/2006/08/hdmi_part_8_-_c.phpsays: > "As with many other products, there are better-constructed cables with > better materials and better plugs, but this industry that offers a > cable for $20 while other company sells a similar application cable > for $300, has certainly created a lot of uncertainty among consumers, > and when quality in a cable performance is not easy to detect those > consumers become skeptical."
> Some links:
> Is there any difference between a cheap (i.e. $10 HDMI cable) > and an expensive (i.e. $150 HDMI cable)?http://www.theps3faq.com/?q=node/10
Tomi and others, thank you for your message. This is very helpful.
I received my Belkin cables today. They have a warning on them about lead content. Do all HDMI cables have lead content? Should I be concerned about this?
On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:33:52 -0700, andygupta2007 wrote: > I received my Belkin cables today. They have a warning on them about > lead content. Do all HDMI cables have lead content? Should I be > concerned about this?
many small multiconductor cables have tinned (solder-plated) conductors. The connectors might even be soldered instead of crimped, but I don't see how the lead could get out unless there was a fire, and then you wouldn't be worrying about traces of lead fumes. Because of the Restrictions on Hazardous Substances laws, we're seeing these warnings (I call 'em "lawyer droppings") all over the place. Any day now I expect to see a notice on a bottle of spring water warning me that the product can be deadly if inhaled.
> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:33:52 -0700, andygupta2007 wrote:
> > I received my Belkin cables today. They have a warning on them about > > lead content. Do all HDMI cables have lead content? Should I be > > concerned about this?
> many small multiconductor cables have tinned (solder-plated) conductors. > The connectors might even be soldered instead of crimped, but I don't see > how the lead could get out unless there was a fire, and then you wouldn't > be worrying about traces of lead fumes. Because of the Restrictions on > Hazardous Substances laws, we're seeing these warnings (I call 'em > "lawyer droppings") all over the place. Any day now I expect to see a > notice on a bottle of spring water warning me that the product can be > deadly if inhaled.
There are trace amounts of lead in the plastic jacket.
andygupta2...@gmail.com wrote: > I received my Belkin cables today. They have a warning on them about > lead content. Do all HDMI cables have lead content? Should I be > concerned about this?
> does using a $20 Belkin HDMI 1.3 cable make any difference in picture > and sound quality versus a $115 Audioquest HDMI cable (the ones sold > by Tweeter)? I have a 37 inch 1080p LCD and connecting a pioneer > receiver and blu-ray player to the TV.
> Thanks!
My son had the loan of a PS3 a few weeks ago and it came with an HDMI cable (not supplied by Sony). It refused to work at 1080p on my Samsung LCD TV, but was ok at 1080i. I changed cables to one of mine and it was fine at 1080p. The "bad" cable had one of those ferrite noise suppressors on each end (black plastic moulded blobs about 35mm long and 20mm dia).
So all cables are not the same. The ferrite suppressors are of course pretty obvious, and whilst maybe necessary for a unit to pass its C-Tick certification, may cause problems with some TVs.
> My son had the loan of a PS3 a few weeks ago and it came with an HDMI cable > (not supplied by Sony). It refused to work at 1080p on my Samsung LCD TV, > but was ok at 1080i. I changed cables to one of mine and it was fine at > 1080p. The "bad" cable had one of those ferrite noise suppressors on each > end (black plastic moulded blobs about 35mm long and 20mm dia).
> So all cables are not the same. The ferrite suppressors are of course > pretty obvious, and whilst maybe necessary for a unit to pass its C-Tick > certification, may cause problems with some TVs.
I can't see how ferrites can cause signal degradation in an HDMI cable. It's more likely the cable itself was poorly shielded and the ferrites were to mask that.
