HDMI Brands Don't Matter 399
adeelarshad82 writes "I'm sure most of us looking for an HDMI cable have been in a situation where a store clerk sidles up, offers to help and points to some of the most expensive HDMI cables — because apparently these are 'superior cables' which we all absolutely need for the best possible home theater experience. Well, as it turns out the claims are, for the vast majority of home theater users, utter rubbish. According to tests ran on five different HDMI cables, ranging in price from less than $5 up to more than $100, HDMI brands really don't matter."
no (Score:2, Insightful)
shit
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Heh, here was be about to post this exact comment... I don't think really this article can be summed up any better.
Re:no (Score:5, Insightful)
In a very real way, you can consider knowing everything the article talks about as the sort of minimum to even bother coming to Slashdot.
Re: (Score:3)
Most of what gets sold in high-end home video is BS these days.
120 and 240 FPS are invisible to the human eye. More importantly, the source material is either at 20, 24, 29.97, or 60 FPS, so either you have the extra frames showing the same frames again (thus being useless), or you generate extra frames which didn't previously exist and which look a bit plasticky and odd. In test after test, the "Motion Plus" and other BS upframing is rated as adding noise, because that's all it does to the signal.
For tha
Re: (Score:2)
I have yet to figure out the mod system, lets say its sitting at 0 with no mod activity, I come along and mark it funny which then changes to +1 informative, it might as well be random
Re:no (Score:4, Informative)
True, but $5 are still worse... (Score:2)
That all being said, there is never a justification for spending more than perhaps $15 or $20 at absolute most. Gold plating does absolutely not
Re:True, but $5 are still worse... (Score:4, Insightful)
Buy two and keep a spare.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Worse than being a poor conductor it makes the things you plug it into more corruptible ;)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
It's a pity that gold doesn't have a similar effect on our politicians.
Gold a poor conductor, my ass (Score:3)
Bullshit. Gold, silver, copper, and aluminum all have approximately the same extremely low electrical resistivity (high electrical conductivity) for all practical purposes. And when you are talking about plating, the distance through which the current has to travel makes the resistance of the plating material completely negligible. Gold plating is on the order of 1/5000 to 1/2000 mm (0.2 to 0.5 microns) thick.
Heck, mercury switches and contacts were used for a long time; less so now for environmental rea
Re:Gold a poor conductor, my ass (Score:4, Interesting)
P.S., shitty slashdot wouldn't render the omega symbol for ohms. The above figures are all nano ohm-meters.
Re:True, but $5 are still worse... (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, gold plating decreases signal quality (by a tiny bit). The thing is that when current flows over changes in conductor material, noise is added. With gold, you usually have other material below, as copper diffuses though gold layered directly on it. So copper-nickel-gold---gold-nickel-copper is actually worse than copper-nickel---nickel-copper. One of the dirty secrets of audio contacts. Not that you could hear the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Except copper-nickel-tarnish---tarnish-nickel-copper is significantly worse than copper-nickel-gold---gold-nickel-copper. Gold electroplating doesn't add a whole lot to the cost, although it's often used as an excuse to jack up the prices.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, nickel does not tarnish easily, but you are right that gold plating is cheap, easy to do and works well for low-pressure contacts. For higher contact pressure, even tin-plating is reasonable and often used on brass, such as in the pre-SATA PC internal power connectors. Gold plating gets a bit more expensive if it needs to have a higher mechanical strength.
I use this example mainly to illustrate to HiFi Nazis that they do not understand the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
the only time my tv moves is when its going into a u-haul to a new apartment / house, so thanks for the non issue alert
Re: (Score:2)
mine's on a rotating stand that gets rotated daily, so your case is not universal.
Re: (Score:2)
no but I would be willing to bet that its the most common situation
Re: (Score:2)
the only time my tv moves is when its going into a u-haul to a new apartment / house
But how often do you move the devices connected to your TV? And how often does a college student "move" back and forth between on-campus housing while class is in session and home on break?
Re: (Score:2)
I hardly move the devices connected to the tv, and good point about the students, how does that compare to the number of people who have these things bolted to the wall?
preaching to the choir (Score:2)
And anybody who reads slashdot pays them absolutely no mind. Whatever the situation.
I once asked one of them how upscaling on dvd players work.
Answer: "it makes the resolution look higher".
Me: "I meant *how* does it makes the... sigh. never mind."
Re:preaching to the choir (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
To this day, I still don't get that. It stinks of CSI techno-scammery to me...
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Upscaling is just another word for interpolation. If you buy a cheap HD TV, then it will do something like nearest neighbour interpolation when you feed it a signal at below its native resolution. If you scale up a standard definition signal, then each original pixel may overlap with (making the exact numbers up) 9 pixels on the screen, but only completely cover one of them. The interpolator will approximate, and set 4 pixels on the screen for each source pixel, giving an ugly jagged look[1]. If y
Re: (Score:3)
Why? Upscaling is just another word for interpolation
Because I never made that connection before. :) Thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
And anybody who reads slashdot pays them absolutely no mind. Whatever the situation.
Most slashdot readers probably don't frequent those stores in the first place. I can't remember the last time I was in a Best Buy, and I know I've NEVER gone there to look for cables. I either deal with stores where they treat me like a competent adult, or I buy stuff online.
I once asked one of them how upscaling on dvd players work.
I think the proper answer there would have been "it doesn't".
Re:preaching to the choir (Score:5, Informative)
So upsampling is basically just using a technology that is better than nearest neighbour to increase resolution. DVDs are 720x480, and a full HD LCD is 1920x1080. Obviously you have to deal with that difference. If you just stretch the pixels that works fine, but doesn't look that good. What you can do is use more advanced math to try and make the upsampling look better.
A simple example would be bicubic interpolation. You can find that in most 2D graphics programs like Photoshop. Try taking something and playing it up with nearest neighbour, and then with bicubic. While it isn't magic, bicubic looks much better.
For more advanced examples look at 2xSal. hq4x and the like (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_art_scaling_algorithms). These ones are designed for pixel art for things like old video games, but it shows you what I'm talking about. The result is much better than things scaled with straight pixel duplication.
In terms of the specifics for video upsampling, well it varies based on the chip used to do it, and it is all proprietary. They won't release the details. However the idea is the same. They use various algorithms to look at a frame (and sometimes data from surrounding frames) to do a more intelligent upsample.
The result is pretty good when done well. It is amazing how good an upsampled DVD can look. Not as clear as something actually shot in HD, of course, but not bad.
Not Exactly News, But Consider This... (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course then it gets just awesomely ridiculous. [oregondv.com]
I keep asking myself how I can get some of that idiot money.
Re: (Score:2)
I keep asking myself how I can get some of that idiot money.
Unfortunately, if you want cables et al that are not complete junk, you often have no choice except for the "audiophile" stuff. Not everyone who buys that stuff is an idiot, some just want a solid cable that will last for 20 years and will not break during normal use.
Re: (Score:2)
some just want a solid cable that will last for 20 years and will not break during normal use.
Wow, you described some of my Radio Shack cables perfectly (actually, I think they've made it over 20 years)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I keep asking myself how I can get some of that idiot money.
Unfortunately, if you want cables et al that are not complete junk, you often have no choice except for the "audiophile" stuff. Not everyone who buys that stuff is an idiot, some just want a solid cable that will last for 20 years and will not break during normal use.
16 gauge zip cord works just fine... because the only two things that really matter, electrically, for power delivery to a set of speakers properly matched to a similarly rated amp (in terms of power output vs. speaker sensitivity rating) are inductance and capacitance, and these are driven by only two things: the thickness and length of the conductor.
If the 16 AWG zip cord you bought at the hardware store for a few cents a foot breaks, you're not out thousands of dollars. I'm pretty sure I can replace 35
Bluejeans Cable (Score:3)
If you want nice over engineered cable, they are the place to go. They use Belden wire and do a top notch job terminating it. It is professional grade stuff.
So if for whatever reason your installation calls for some over engineered cable, they are the way to go. They do custom lengths and all that jazz too.
For regular stuff, go with Monoprice. I have been extremely satisfied with their stuff. It is well built and does what it says it does. Not super over engineered pro stuff, but then it is cheap as hell so
NO?!?!?! REALLLY?!?!?!?!? (Score:2)
What a huge surprise.
Denon Gets It (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You have to read the instructions carefully. The current wants to flow in the proper direction. Don't hook it up backwards, or the warranty is void! I wonder how many /. readers have their 1000bT cables reversed?
You might also want to look into the pre-charged dielectric cable. It needs a (premium - of course) DC supply to be sure the dielectric is operating in the linear range.
These things really do work. Just ask the users who spend $K on their system wiring!
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forgot that electrons want to flow downhill,. so arrange your components accordingly.
Oh, and black cables transmit faster than lighter cables,.. and you'll get a huge performance boost if you put a "TYPE R" label on each end of the cable.
Re:Denon Gets It (Score:5, Informative)
How can you even refer to that cable without the Amazon page?? ;)
http://www.amazon.com/Denon-AKDL1-Dedicated-Link-Cable/dp/B000I1X6PM [amazon.com]
If you haven't read the user comments, you need to...
Who's surprised ? (Score:2)
Well, as it turns out the claims are, for the vast majority of home theater users, utter rubbish.
And who is really surprised by this?
Brick and Mortar shenanigans (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
TEN dollars at the DOLLAR store??? what a rip off
This type of scam happens again and again (Score:2)
Especially as modern digital signals are transmitted differentially with embedded (implicit per kine) clock, as long as the signal arrives at all, it will be good. There is no degradation at all until the connection breaks down. Now, to transmit these signals, you need twisted-pair, which is very, very cheap as the same stuff has been used in network cables for a long time and is cheap to manufacture in the first place.
The only possible differences are mechanical stability of connector and cable. But unless
ah, HDMI (Score:3, Insightful)
None of the benefits of analogue combined with none of the benefits of digital.
Compression: nope;
Error-checking/correction: nope;
Optical fiber: nope;
Text channel (e.g. for closed captioning): nope;
Content "protection": yep.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He's bitching about HDMI, not the cables.
Re: (Score:2)
Optical HDMI is available via media converters.
http://www.amazon.com/Gefen-HD-1000-Optical-HDMI-Extension/dp/B0013LVJZA [amazon.com]
Compression, yes. DTS-MA and mpeg-4 are indeed compressed formats.
Text channel for close captioning? Maybe net, but what about CEC? Ethernet? etc.
Error-checking/correction: probably not practical given the data rates.
And you didn't mention things like being able to sync multiple data streams like voice and video and needing only one link.
So there are digital advantages
Re: (Score:2)
Optical HDMI is available via media converters.
Everything is optical via a media converter ;-).
Compression, yes. DTS-MA and mpeg-4 are indeed compressed formats.
Sorry, yes, compressed audio in multiple streams may be supported, though I'm unsure what's part of the base standard apart from PCM. MPEG4 / video in general though?
Re: (Score:2)
What's your point? Why would I care if they have compression? So I can watch my movie faster? It's not a general purpose cable. It's got a specific purpose and it fits that purpose perfectly without compression. You can send 8 channel bit-streamed audio + 1080p video (and much higher resolutions, actually) over it without a problem. Error correction? Who cares. I've never seen anybody that had signal problems with it that was caused by the HDMI cabling. And in the absolute rare case that it goes get a glitc
Re: (Score:3)
The output device is better suited to arranging the various streams of data than the decoder. Just as your DVD player doesn't choose where you position your speakers if you can hear, it shouldn't choose how you display your subtitles if you're deaf. They're not inherently part of the video. See also the difference between HTML+CSS+included files and a pre-rendered BMP of everything.
(And it doesn't normally put subtitles onto the picture anyway - although for upconverting players this may be the only option,
Re: (Score:2)
"Last week in EE101 my TA told me..."
Shitty article is shitty (Score:2)
A much better comparison was done months ago here: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-hdmi [eurogamer.net]
It's a digital signal, so with the correct capture equipment, they were able to get a checksum of the image sent from different HDMI cables. And guess what, they were all identical.
NOOOO!!!!!!!!! (Score:3, Funny)
I still have 19 monthly payments left on my HDMI cable!!!!!!!!!
CAT5 to HDMI (Score:5, Interesting)
And someone else mentioned that the length of the cable adds to the delay in the signal. Cable times are measured in nanoseconds, monitor refresh rates are measured in milliseconds. It would be like saying: I dunno if my RAM can handle the speed of my new hard drive. The length of the cable might add a few nanoseconds to your response time, but you cannot see the difference, you are not a robot. Long analog signal cables on the other hand can't run 3 feet without getting signal noise and causing ghosting and all sorts of other weird artifacts. All I can say is thank god all the analog A/V cables are a thing of the past. If I ever have to hear (OR SEE!) a 60hz hum again in my life it will be too soon.
Re: (Score:3)
Technically, signal noise, ghosting, all sorts of weird artifacts, and 60Hz hum happen on the digital lines, too. Good thing they just don't matter, as the 0s and 1s are still distinguishable. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Long analog signal cables on the other hand can't run 3 feet without getting signal noise and causing ghosting and all sorts of other weird artifacts. All I can say is thank god all the analog A/V cables are a thing of the past. If I ever have to hear (OR SEE!) a 60hz hum again in my life it will be too soon.
If you're talking about unbalanced cables with RCA connectors, yeah, they are crap. But most of that 60Hz (or $local_power_frequency) is due to bad grounding. If you use balanced or differential audio
Re: (Score:2)
The propagation delay isn't the reason why length matters. S/N is why length matters. As length increases, noise increases while signal strength drops off. The point where this starts becoming a major problem depends on how noisy the environment is and how good the coupled devices are at dealing with increasingly poor S/N. Digital signaling makes it take much longer before this becomes noticeable - but it's not magic.
But neither are the name-brand cables. Anything with better shielding and a lower gauge wil
Well it needs to be noted (Score:5, Informative)
You can run HDMI over Cat-5 sometimes, depending on the resolution. The thing with HDMI is the bandwidth needed varies with the signal resolution. If you just want to do 1280x720@24Hz the bandwidth (in terms of digital bits) you need is very low and thus the cable bandwidth (in terms of analogue frequency) is also very low. If you want to do 1920x1080@120Hz it is much higher.
It also depends on how noisy your environment is. Your example with power cables is a bad one since that is too low frequency to matter to HDMI. However if you have noise in the 100s of MHz, that is the range of the signal over the cable and thus interference can happen if the run is too long, or if the shield is bad (or non existent as in your case).
So for consumers the easy guide to follow is just to check the cable's certification. Any cable worth buying will tell you if it is certified standard speed or high speed. Standard speed is a certification for 720p or 1080i, high speed is for 1080p. If you get a cable that is certified to the speed you need, you are good to go. All the cables from cheap places like Monoprice are.
Now the certifications are overkill, as is usually the case with this stuff. You'll find that you can usually get a longer "standard speed" cable and run 1080p over it no problem. However the reason for the overkill certifications is that it'll work in more or less any conditions. The farther you go out of the spec, the more likely a problem is.
Same deal with Ethernet. If you try it, you discover that you can indeed have cable runs over 100 meters, sometimes WAY over. Thing is, sometimes you'll have problems if you try. 100 meters is the "going to work almost no matter what" spec.
Thus "just follow the spec" is my advice for regular users. High speed HDMI cables are cheap as hell from Monoprice and you just won't have any trouble.
about digital.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Technically theres no such thing as a digital signal; look at it on an oscilloscope and its a far cry from the impossible squarewave used to represent them.
The receiver has to make a choice when to switch a 0 to a 1, with long slopes, noise and ringing this can cause problems even if its a "digital" signal.
Equipment today is good enough that its "never" a problem, signals get reclocked and cleaned up, crc etc.
So no, you shouldnt buy expensive hdmi cables, but you shouldnt mistake the abstract digital concept for its real, messy electrical representation either.
Re: (Score:3)
So no, you shouldnt buy expensive hdmi cables, but you shouldnt mistake the abstract digital concept for its real, messy electrical representation either.
I don't think anyone here was making that mistake. Do you think it's reasonable to imply that any time someone talks about digital data, that they must also make it clear that they know the digital data is built upon analog technology?
Wait... analog technology? Don't you know there's no such thing? All of the universe is quantum. There are discrete states, and it's impossible to be in between them!
So, sure, digital is just built atop analog, but you shouldn't mistake the abstract analog concept for its real
where i get 'em (Score:4, Informative)
(i promise i'm not a shill)
monoprice.com
they do an awesome job of getting any type of cable i need, at an awesome price.
Receivers should have error counters (Score:2)
HDMI does have some error checking. Each 8-bit byte is sent as 10 bits, to maintain DC balance. The receiving end can detect at least single bit errors. The reaction of most HDMI devices is error concealment, and the error counts are seldom if ever made visible to the user.
Some of the earliest CD players had visible error counters. This was discouraged in consumer devices by industry agreement.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm always amused when audiophiles (pronounced: "scientifically illiterate people with more money than brains") tout the potential for "digital jitter" or "coloration" of the signal when Pohlmann's Principles of Digital Audio had outlined that most DACs in production were manufactured with sufficient sample and hold buffering as well as internal reclocking of the signal and parity checking to eliminate such errors ... by around 1985.
PC and gamer shops (Score:2)
The Secret of The Cable (Score:2)
Here's a secret that isn't concealed very well... Almost all cable distributors get their cable and interconnects from one of a couple vendors. Belden is the primary supplier to all, including Monster Cable. They assemble the cable, interconnects, and then all the reseller does is slap sheaths on the ends that have their brand name on it. This is also why the same suit at Halberstadt's costs $500 more at Marshall Fields (or what is now Macy's)... because the suit comes from the same factory, but has a di
We know already (Score:4, Insightful)
So many stories have been posted about the false claims of expensive HDMI cables that this can hardly be considered news.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
... but the delays in the cable will be governed by the laws of physics, not by the price of the cable!
Re: (Score:3)
The main difference between digital cables is the mechanical properties. A cheap cable may break easier.
Real time? (Score:5, Informative)
The only difference between cables that really matters is dispersion (frequency-dependent losses.) A difference of 1 dB/meter in loss between cables is going to make quite a difference at 30 meters. However, I wouldn't bet one way or the other on which brands have better or worse loss characteristics.
Re: (Score:2)
200 ns (flight time for 100 foot cables) is negligible. HDMI doesn't have critical round-trip timing
HDMI itself may not, but HDCP, used for major-label video sent over HDMI, requires devices to be in at least some semblance of proximity.
Re: (Score:3)
HDCP has nothing to do with the cable but everything to do with the devices at the ends of the cable. It's just a DRM encryption, and HDMI being digital, well, it doesn't make a difference if the signal is delayed by 200ns, as long as the signal gets there and the device supports HDCP it will be decoded.
People seem to find it hard to get their head around low latency digital equipment these days. Maybe it's too many years of dealing with analogue devices.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Data point - A couple years ago I bought a pair of Newegg Nippon 50 footers for $50 each that have been working perfectly running the output of an HDMI switch and hub to a couple of HDTVs. You might pay that for a single monstrous 6 footer at the big box store.
Re: (Score:3)
Try $140 for a monstrous 6' cable. I almost walked out of Beast Buy when the sleazy salescreature said "with this television, you should buy this cable. It really 'improves the red colors'." (Yes, I know I should have walked away from that motherf*cking liar.) As it was, I returned the cable with the package satisfactorily torn open the next day and bought a replacement at Radio Shack for about $40.
I could have bought a Panasony brand DVD player that included a 6' HDMI cable for less money, thrown away
Re:True, for the most part... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
OK, let's stop for a bit (see what i did there?). Digital signals are susceptible to interference. Media is the most important factor in this. Media, be it a cable, wireless, light, or any other medium, is always analog - simply because we live in an analog universe.
Analog signals are more prone to *visible* interference, because you cannot transmit more data than what's going to be displayed. In digital, you can add more data (see FEC), which will be processed at the receiving end, and a better signal migh
Renegotiate at a slower rate (Score:2)
if you are referring to error codes causing degradation, what could possibly be intermittent? It either connects (works) or it doesnt.
In theory, uncorrectable errors caused by degradation of the modulated digital signal could cause a link to renegotiate at a slower data rate, which might mean dropping to 720p or 480p. Think back to dial-up: some phone lines could get 50 kbps; others only 30 kbps.
Re:True, for the most part... (Score:4, Interesting)
Really? You notice the lag in a signal whose speed is measured in "percentage of speed of light" (186,282 miles per second) in a 20 feet cable? When the same cable is transferring both sound (speed 1,126 feet/second in air) and picture? Seriously?
Stop whining about cable quality and start gloating about your superhuman - and, frankly, supernatural - nervous system.
Re: (Score:2)
Ethernet and HDMI are two very different digital standards. HDMI bandwidth is heavily slanted towards transmission, whereas Ethernet is considerably more bidirectional.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
What really ruins Cat5 is how good the shielding wire is. You can get good, cheap cat 5 cable. But if the shielding wire is 28-34ga while the main conductor is 24ga you get what you pay for. That also really makes a difference when they 'stretch' out the twists for shielding. Both twist, and gauge count matter in Cat5.
Re:Cat5 (Score:4, Informative)
You do realize that the vast majority of ethernet cables are unshielded right? And that the shielding actually decreases performance measurably?
Re:Cat5 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Cat5 (Score:4, Funny)
Actually, what ruins Cat5, Cat5e, Cat6, Cat6e, etc., is cutting the cable to the wrong length. There is no "shielding" wire, or a ground line or anything. It's a set of twisted pairs, and the "shielding" comes from having the twisted pair at the right length, just as a twisted pair is what provides the "shielding" for telephone line.
If it's cut to the wrong length, then the twisted pair ends up acting like an antenna, rather than offering a degree of protection, and it will seriously degrade the performance characteristics of the cable. That's why when you buy the cable on a spool to make your own cables, there're usually marks to indicate where you should cut... the correct length (and harmonic lengths) to cut is dependent on how tightly the pair is twisted.
Re:Cat5 (Score:5, Informative)
I used to think the same thing about Ethernet cables. it's all digital right? And yet I've seen speeds increase 10 fold when replacing old one.
Define "old one". Are you referring to a 10/100 cable that does not support gigabit? I've seen quite a few such cables (heck, even being sold today) that only have two pairs and will not negotiate at gigabit speeds. I recently replaced a few at a client's office actually, and they were installed only 5 or so years ago.
I've even found some that have all four pairs - but only two actually crimped into the connector (the other two pairs simply terminate in the plug, uncrimped). Again, no gigabit speeds there.
I make my own ethernet cables from boxed wire bought at Home Depot or Lowes (Cat 5e - or occasionally Cat 6), and they all (even at various lengths, up to and including a few 100+ foot runs) perform just as well as any of the name brand, uber-expensive cables we've got lying around here. Oh - and I'm knowledgeable enough to actually check for things like retransmissions, "collisions" (ie: apparent ones due to echo/crosstalk, as switches shouldnt have such an issue), errors, etc. I can most definitely tell you, that unless you try very very hard to buy a crap cable, the results are generally within the norm regardless of price.
Now, if you MAKE cables, that's different. (1) I've found ones poorly crimped, (2) ones where the pairs have been unwound for feet, (3) ones where they used aluminum core wires for speeds such are not rated for, (4) ones where the wire gauge is not to spec (ie: smaller than it should be), (5) ones where the insulation is stripped off the wire before it's inserted into the plug, and so on.
But that's not a flaw in cheap cables - it's a flaw in having someone who doesn't know what they are doing making cables.
Re: (Score:3)
Ugh, that reminds me of this guy I replaced a long time ago. He would only crimp 2 pairs in cat5 cables because "the other two aren't used". Thankfully I left that place before gige got popular. I wasn't looking forward to re-terminating every cable in that place.
Re: (Score:3)
waitwaitwait. Packet loss might change the speed by random factors. But the GP gives exact "10-fold" which seems very much like a 10-100mbit or 100mbit-gigabit leap. And that's perfectly possible with incorrectly made cables.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, yes it is like that ;)
Re:Not digital like you know it. (Score:4, Informative)
The point of the article being that many people think that a better cable will give them higher quality video... It won't... It'll give them video at all if a lower quality cable will fail. Not only that, but given that all HDMI cable is required to meet a spec, unless the consumer is doing something out of spec (very very rare), all HDMI cables, including the $1 ones will give them a signal.
Re:Not digital like you know it. (Score:5, Informative)
Less interference, higher bitrate (Score:2)
so long as 0 and 1 are different enough for a given situation - it doesn't matter HOW DIFFERENT they are. Making them MORE different does NOT improve signal quality.
I thought making the 0 and 1 more different meant the link could use higher-bitrate modulation, which would improve perceived signal quality: 1080p 3D vs. 1080p vs. 720p.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
None of that mentions error correction. If you look further down that Wikipedia page you'll see:
Both HDMI and DVI use TMDS to send 10-bit characters that are encoded using 8b/10b encoding for the Video Data Period and 2b/10b encoding for the Control Period. HDMI adds the ability to send audio and auxiliary data using 4b/10b encoding for the Data Island Period.[75] Each Data Island Period is 32 pixels in size and contains a 32-bit Packet Header, which includes 8 bits of BCH ECC parity data for error correction.
It explicitly mentions error correction for the Data Island Period (which, among other things transfers audio), but not for the Video Data Period. If you check the actual spec [hdmi.org], you'll see that there is indeed no error correction for the video data.
Re: (Score:2)
While you're right for the most part, there are exceptions. Just yesterday I had to rewire a network drop that was causing some strange connection problems. Apparently, when it was first installed, the individual wires lined up the same way on both sides, but didn't follow either the T568A or T568B standard. Originally it was attached to a 10 megabit hub, and later a 100 megabit hub. It ran fine for years. However, when the hub was upgraded to a gigabit model, it started causing all kinds of problems.
Re: (Score:2)
I knew something was fishy with that blueish pixel. Time for me to go to the store and get me some bit-flipping-resistant cables.
Re: (Score:2)
If they get the job done, it doesn't matter. That's just one of the many 'differences' expensive cables like to point out to make people think they actually get something for paying 10 times or more the price.
Re: (Score:3)